Shaping European universities

Abstract

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Understanding organizational identity in universities: Unravelling autonomy, governance and leadership in the case of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

“…At the same time, this would allow universities to develop more distinctive profiles. The HOAK paper has been characterized as a watershed in the history of higher education in the Netherlands and Europe, as the document was the first governmental declaration ‘that the traditional strategy of command and control, which had characterised higher education for the previous century, had to be abandoned in favour of a steering‐at‐a‐distance strategy’ (Van Galen, 2019, 87). This may be true, but it should be realized, that the paper did not come out of the blue, as actors within universities had striven for more institutional autonomy for a longer period.…”

“…Subsequently, in 2011 the institutional audit was introduced, which focused more on the content of study programmes and student outcomes (the initial accreditation system focused for a large part on procedures). Also, the so‐called performance agreements, which tied seven percent of the funding of universities to specific targets formulated by the institutions themselves, are an example of the increased accountability that came along with the expansion of institutional autonomy (Van Galen, 2019, 89–91). Another important element of the new governance approach was the emphasis on competition.…”

“…This Act followed the model of Dutch businesses: a two‐tier model consisting of an executive board and a supervisory board (De Boer, 2003; Van Berckel Smit & Flipse, 2020). Van Galen (2019, 88) characterizes the MUB as ‘a further step towards more flexibility and autonomy for Universities’. However, the supervisory boards of public universities were still appointed by the Minister.…”