2019
DOI: 10.1080/13538322.2019.1685656
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

‘Skipping the quality abracadabra’: academic resistance to quality management in Finnish higher education institutions and quality managers’ strategies to handle it

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
9
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, it seems useful to define our understanding of quality management in advance. This understanding includes any quality-related activity as quality management, regardless of how it is implemented in a specific higher education institution or whether the purpose is explicitly framed as quality assurance or as quality enhancement (Csizmadia, Enders, & Westerheijden, 2008;Overberg, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, it seems useful to define our understanding of quality management in advance. This understanding includes any quality-related activity as quality management, regardless of how it is implemented in a specific higher education institution or whether the purpose is explicitly framed as quality assurance or as quality enhancement (Csizmadia, Enders, & Westerheijden, 2008;Overberg, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quality assurance is perceived to be strongly related to control, conformity, bureaucratic, and therefore, burdensome (Cardoso et al, 2013;Overberg, 2019;Vettori & Loukkola, 2014) since its framework is always externally imposed by regulatory authorities such as HEC (Cheng, 2010;Gallagher, 2014). Faculty are not given enough time and space for adaptation; instead, immediate compliance is expected.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Faculty is still a little apprehensive of the methods used for quality assurance attributing it to neoliberal managerial agenda (Seyfried, 2018) despite all advocacy efforts to prove QA a motivational strategy for developing a quality culture and endorsing the willingness of faculty to use empirical evidence (produced by quality control authority during evaluations) for creating an innovative teaching and learning environment. The purpose and cause of QA activities is a much-debated phenomenon among the stakeholders of higher education, government agencies, the faculty, and the governing body of the universities (Overberg, 2019). The Significance of the Study…”
Section: Leadership Effectiveness and Implementation Of Qamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, there is a growing body of literature on various topics concerning QM, mostly focusing on its effects (Cameron & Whetten, 1996;Seyfried & Pohlenz, 2018) or impact (Bejan et al, 2015;Leiber, 2018;Makhoul, 2019). However, particularly organizational researchers have shown that the implicit assumptions about the impact of QM require careful scrutiny (Stensaker & Leiber, 2015) due to several unintended consequences, such as formalization, standardization, and resistance (Overberg, 2019;Worthington & Hodgson, 2005). Unsurprisingly, research on QM needs a broad evidence base starting at the initial implementation phase.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both sectors have admittedly been changed substantially by reforms in the tradition of New Public Management over the past 20 years. Specifically, QM as a systemic management tool has been introduced and widely studied in the two fields (Leiber, 2018;Lucas, 2014;Overberg, 2019;Short, 1995;Shortell, 1995;Wardhani et al, 2009). However, no study to the best of our knowledge has provided comparative data to examine similarities and differences in the diffusion process of this management tool.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%