Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice: A Departmental Perspective

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport/konference proceedingBidrag til bog/antologiForskningpeer review

Resumé

The article reveals how university autonomy may in practice prove to be restrictive for units within the university. The need to implement and interpret external regulations and protect the institution may, argued in the paper, lead to a risk averse, conservative approach which is experienced by departments as bureaucratic and hampering effective research. Thus autonomy has produced new internal tensions between the central management/administration and the departments which it is argued is counter-productive and not beneficial for research and could be seen as a perverse aspect of greater autonomy. Indeed because university policy and ‘interference’ is much closer to the researcher than in former less autonomous times and the university may now exercise other direct incentives through resource allocation, promotion and salary enhancement, the department and the individual may view autonomy as a mixed blessing. Future research is needed to explore the extent to which highly successful research units may exploit their situation in an autonomous institution and bring pressure to bear which changes institutional policy and to what extent good governance checks and balance can limit or restrain such developments. Further case studies on the interface between the university and academic units and the way in which the two interact and change each other would make a valuable contribution to an understanding of the power relations operating in autonomous universities.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
Titel(Re)Discovering University Autonomy : The Global Market Paradox of Stakeholder and Educational Values in Higher Education
RedaktørerRomeo V. Turcan, John E. Reilly, Larisa Bugaian
Antal sider16
Vol/bindIII
Udgivelses stedNew York City
ForlagPalgrave Macmillan
Publikationsdato2016
Udgave1
Sider107-122
Kapitel8
ISBN (Trykt)978-1-349-55212-2
ISBN (Elektronisk)978-1-137-38872-8
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2016

Fingerprint

autonomy
university
university policy
good governance
institutional change
salary
interference
promotion
incentive
regulation
management
resources

Citer dette

Szwebs, W. (2016). Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice: A Departmental Perspective. I R. V. Turcan, J. E. Reilly, & L. Bugaian (red.), (Re)Discovering University Autonomy: The Global Market Paradox of Stakeholder and Educational Values in Higher Education (1 udg., Bind III, s. 107-122). New York City: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137388728_8
Szwebs, Witold. / Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice : A Departmental Perspective. (Re)Discovering University Autonomy: The Global Market Paradox of Stakeholder and Educational Values in Higher Education. red. / Romeo V. Turcan ; John E. Reilly ; Larisa Bugaian. Bind III 1. udg. New York City : Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. s. 107-122
@inbook{a26177a0486c4f6e99a7d36bf9f9d27c,
title = "Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice: A Departmental Perspective",
abstract = "The article reveals how university autonomy may in practice prove to be restrictive for units within the university. The need to implement and interpret external regulations and protect the institution may, argued in the paper, lead to a risk averse, conservative approach which is experienced by departments as bureaucratic and hampering effective research. Thus autonomy has produced new internal tensions between the central management/administration and the departments which it is argued is counter-productive and not beneficial for research and could be seen as a perverse aspect of greater autonomy. Indeed because university policy and ‘interference’ is much closer to the researcher than in former less autonomous times and the university may now exercise other direct incentives through resource allocation, promotion and salary enhancement, the department and the individual may view autonomy as a mixed blessing. Future research is needed to explore the extent to which highly successful research units may exploit their situation in an autonomous institution and bring pressure to bear which changes institutional policy and to what extent good governance checks and balance can limit or restrain such developments. Further case studies on the interface between the university and academic units and the way in which the two interact and change each other would make a valuable contribution to an understanding of the power relations operating in autonomous universities.",
author = "Witold Szwebs",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1057/9781137388728_8",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-1-349-55212-2",
volume = "III",
pages = "107--122",
editor = "Turcan, {Romeo V.} and Reilly, {John E. } and Larisa Bugaian",
booktitle = "(Re)Discovering University Autonomy",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan",
edition = "1",

}

Szwebs, W 2016, Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice: A Departmental Perspective. i RV Turcan, JE Reilly & L Bugaian (red), (Re)Discovering University Autonomy: The Global Market Paradox of Stakeholder and Educational Values in Higher Education. 1 udg, bind III, Palgrave Macmillan, New York City, s. 107-122. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137388728_8

Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice : A Departmental Perspective. / Szwebs, Witold.

(Re)Discovering University Autonomy: The Global Market Paradox of Stakeholder and Educational Values in Higher Education. red. / Romeo V. Turcan; John E. Reilly; Larisa Bugaian. Bind III 1. udg. New York City : Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. s. 107-122.

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport/konference proceedingBidrag til bog/antologiForskningpeer review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice

T2 - A Departmental Perspective

AU - Szwebs, Witold

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - The article reveals how university autonomy may in practice prove to be restrictive for units within the university. The need to implement and interpret external regulations and protect the institution may, argued in the paper, lead to a risk averse, conservative approach which is experienced by departments as bureaucratic and hampering effective research. Thus autonomy has produced new internal tensions between the central management/administration and the departments which it is argued is counter-productive and not beneficial for research and could be seen as a perverse aspect of greater autonomy. Indeed because university policy and ‘interference’ is much closer to the researcher than in former less autonomous times and the university may now exercise other direct incentives through resource allocation, promotion and salary enhancement, the department and the individual may view autonomy as a mixed blessing. Future research is needed to explore the extent to which highly successful research units may exploit their situation in an autonomous institution and bring pressure to bear which changes institutional policy and to what extent good governance checks and balance can limit or restrain such developments. Further case studies on the interface between the university and academic units and the way in which the two interact and change each other would make a valuable contribution to an understanding of the power relations operating in autonomous universities.

AB - The article reveals how university autonomy may in practice prove to be restrictive for units within the university. The need to implement and interpret external regulations and protect the institution may, argued in the paper, lead to a risk averse, conservative approach which is experienced by departments as bureaucratic and hampering effective research. Thus autonomy has produced new internal tensions between the central management/administration and the departments which it is argued is counter-productive and not beneficial for research and could be seen as a perverse aspect of greater autonomy. Indeed because university policy and ‘interference’ is much closer to the researcher than in former less autonomous times and the university may now exercise other direct incentives through resource allocation, promotion and salary enhancement, the department and the individual may view autonomy as a mixed blessing. Future research is needed to explore the extent to which highly successful research units may exploit their situation in an autonomous institution and bring pressure to bear which changes institutional policy and to what extent good governance checks and balance can limit or restrain such developments. Further case studies on the interface between the university and academic units and the way in which the two interact and change each other would make a valuable contribution to an understanding of the power relations operating in autonomous universities.

U2 - 10.1057/9781137388728_8

DO - 10.1057/9781137388728_8

M3 - Book chapter

SN - 978-1-349-55212-2

VL - III

SP - 107

EP - 122

BT - (Re)Discovering University Autonomy

A2 - Turcan, Romeo V.

A2 - Reilly, John E.

A2 - Bugaian, Larisa

PB - Palgrave Macmillan

CY - New York City

ER -

Szwebs W. Institutional Financial Autonomy in Practice: A Departmental Perspective. I Turcan RV, Reilly JE, Bugaian L, red., (Re)Discovering University Autonomy: The Global Market Paradox of Stakeholder and Educational Values in Higher Education. 1 udg. Bind III. New York City: Palgrave Macmillan. 2016. s. 107-122 https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137388728_8