The effects of university mergers in China since 1990s

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to discover and better understand the efficiency of university mergers from the perspective of knowledge production, with the research capability as the point of contact. Design/methodology/approach -In total, 20 colleges and universities directly under the central ministries that merged in 2000 were taken as the research samples. Factor analysis methods are adopted to calculate the public factor scores, which were taken as the basis of the time series analysis and similar comparative analysis. Findings -The results indicated that, by the end of 2005, the reform of universities merger has a positive impact on the universities' knowledge production, but there was a "short-term prosperity" after the merger happened, especially in the aspect of scientific research funding efficiency and the transformation of knowledge production outcomes. Originality/value -Few if any mergers are painless and in the literature on mergers it is generally agreed that it can take up to ten years for the wounds to heal and for the new institution forged from previously autonomous identities to operate as a cohesive and well integrated whole.

Transforming finnish higher education: institutional mergers and conflicting academic identities

“…In the Finnish context it seems, however, that the actual changes in education, teaching and learning are to be adopted quite slowly, although the structural framework will be changing more rapidly (Ursin, Aittola, Henderson & Välimaa, 2010). This finding is congruent with those of several international studies, since systemic transformations in education are usually fairly slow processes (see Mao, Du & Lia, 2009). conclude that although the results indicate that the merger processes have largely been similar as to their starting points and aims in different universities, the issues and implications of the merger were primarily connected to the institutions' own culture and history.…”

“…However, a university merger is a complicated and long-lasting process encompassing several aspects and phases (Mao et al 2009). Previous studies have indicated that a successful merger of universities requires strong leadership especially in the implementation phase (e.g.…”

Are mergers a win-win strategic model? A content analysis of inter-institutional collaboration between higher education institutions

“…Aalto University's approach is similar, in that it seeks to create something new which is not merely the sum of its predecessors (Aula & Tienari, 2011). However, although in general it is arguable that there may be a long-term improvement in teaching and research outcomes (Skodvin, 1999), the specific results of mergers in higher education are fairly uncertain (Mao et al, 2009), including many cases in which they simply have not got better (Kyvik & Skodvin, 2003). Yet improvements in academic results as a consequence of a merger also take time to be achieved (Goedegebuure et al, 1992;Harman & Meek, 2002;Skodvin, 1999), as they are affected by administrative and cultural problems that arise in the new institution.…”

“…This is because, in most cases, it is teaching institutions with little research engagement that merge (Fazackerley & Chant, 2009). Mao, Du, and Lia (2009) measure the impact on research outcomes of single-sector mergers between research universities in China, comparing before and after the merger. The indicators (scientific productivity: number of publications in impact journals, number of publications per researcher, number of research projects or number of books published) barely changed compared to those achieved by the originating institutions.…”

Mergers and Alliances in Context

“…University mergers lack a counterfactual and hence can only really be judged in terms of longitudinal changes in performance (with all the controversy that institutional performance assessment entails). Mao et al (2009) provided a rare example of an attempt to evaluate quantitatively the research performance of merged universities (in China) and found that after a post-merger improvement for a couple of years, performance then declined through loss of cohesion in merged administrations. They echoed earlier work by Harman and Meek that it can take up to 10 years for newly merged institutions to operate as a cohesive whole (2000).…”