Session Information
32 SES 06 B, Human Resource Development by Higher Education Mergers and Town Meetings
Paper Session
Contribution
Traditionally characterized as decentralized “loosely coupled organizations” (Weik, 1976), higher education institutions over the globe have been challenged by accountability and efficiency policies during the last decades (Clark, 1983), leading to substantial changes in the higher education landscape. They have been transformed to “hybrid organizations” arising with plural logics and actor identities, relating to an erosion of boundaries between public and private purposes (e.g., Skelcher & Smith, 2015; Tuunainen, 2005). This trend of mergers, including different types of organizations, i.e., universities, university colleges and research institutes, has been mainly motivated by arguments of efficiency and economics of scale (Harman & Harman, 2003) and quality enhancement (Frølich et al. 2016).
Most of the literature investigates motivational factors of merger decisions at the organizational level, including financial issues and branding (e.g., Harman & Harman 2003). Fewer studies, however, look at the impact of merger decisions on micro organizational processes, comprising staff (academic and administrative) and disciplines. These studies show ambiguous results depending on organization and merger type, discipline and seniority of staff. (e.g., Becker et al., 2004; Cai, 2006; Dasborough et al. 2015; Evans, 2017; Gleibs et al. 2013; Liu, et al. 2018).
Objective
To get an unbiased picture on the impact of mergers in higher education on micro organizational processes, this paper objects to systematically map and review the research on the topic. The aim of is to synthesis research by capturing similarities and differences, identifying themes across studies and to identify knowledge gaps to provide implications for further research.
Theoretical perspective
Mergers of higher education institutions differ from each other in several dimensions as “merger of equals” are rather the exception (Rocha, et al. 2018). Mergers can be categorized on dimensions such as voluntary vs. forced, vertical vs. horizontal, consolidations vs. take-overs and two-partner vs. multi-partner (Harman & Harman, 2003). We assume that these categories - in addition to “institutional logics” of different types of higher education institutions - have an impact on micro organizational processes. Here, we focus on the categories voluntary vs. forces and vertical vs horizontal.
Method
We apply a method informed by systematic reviews. Focusing on micro organizational processes, we expect to find a small sample of rigorous studies, most studies being qualitative case studies.
Studies published between 1999 and 2018 are retrieved in three electronic databases (Web of Sciences, ERIC, Google Scholar). The search strategy includes key terms such as merger, higher education, university, college, culture, micro and staff that are truncated and combined by AND and OR.
Qualitative studies are less well-indexed in electronic databases than quantitative studies. We combine the search in databases with a search in selected publications and snowball-technique by screening references of core articles. So far, we identified 35 -/+ eligible studies addressing the review question.
For selection of eligible studies first, titles and abstracts are read by the authors; if eligible, second, full-text articles are screened by at least one of the authors.
Studies are coded according to country of origin, publication year, form of higher education organization and merger. For micro organization processes, themes are identified and compared across studies. In further analyses we will link themes with merger type.
Preliminary results
We identified most studies for the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland, and South Africa. Few studies were identified for France and Germany. Most studies addressed vertical/forced, only few investigated horizontal/voluntary mergers. For themes across studies, e.g., we find differences in perceptions between academic and administrative staff. For most academics the merger implied only minor changes, associated with opportunities. For administrative staff, the merger led to large adjustments and was perceived as threatening for career and job security.
Method
We apply a method informed by systematic reviews. Focusing on micro organizational processes, we expect to find a small sample of rigorous studies and most studies rather to be qualitative case studies. Data collection Studies published between 1999 and 2018 are retrieved in three electronic databases (Web of Sciences, ERIC, Google Scholar). The search strategy includes key terms were such as merger, higher education, university, college, culture, micro and staff. These terms are truncated and combined by AND and OR. Qualitative studies are not well-indexed in electronic databases as quantitative studies. Thus, we combine the search in databases with search in selected publications and snowball-technique by screening references of core articles. So far, we identified 35 -/+ eligible studies addressing the review question. For data selection first, titles and abstracts are read by the authors; if eligible, second, full-text articles are retrieved and screened by at least one of the authors. Coding scheme For analyses, we developed a coding scheme with the following categories: first author (year of publication); title; source; country; original research question; theoretical perspective; merger type (horizontal/voluntary; horizontal/forced, vertical/ voluntary; vertical/ forced); discipline; study design; main themes; main conclusion. For micro organizational processes, themes were identified and compared across studies. This process implied a simplification and presentation of the data by grouping and coding raw text in relevant categories, combining an inductive and deductive strategy (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In our analyses we will link these themes with merger type.
Expected Outcomes
In terms of merger categories, we identified most studies addressing vertical/forced merger patterns, followed by studies addressing horizontal/forced merger patterns. For voluntary mergers, we find few studies. It appears that different merger patterns affect organizational changes on the micro organizational level. For themes identified across studies, e.g., we show differences in perceptions between academic and administrative staff. For academics the merger seems to imply only minor changes associated with opportunities, e.g., a larger research network and better administrative support. In addition, we also found that academics with permanent contracts and higher status positions appeared to be more positive to mergers than their counterparts with non-permanent contracts and in lower status positions. For administrative staff, however, the merger appears to lead to larger adjustments, e.g., in terms of working tasks and roles, and was perceived to some degree as threatening for career and job security. Mergers in higher education institutions have changed the organizational landscape in higher education over the globe on different levels, which might have long-lasting implications for plural logics and actor identities on the micro level. According to our assumption, we found only few studies with robust methodological design addressing our review question on the impact of mergers on micro organizational processes in higher education; most studies applied a qualitative case study design and were highly contextualized. In addition, we identified very few longitudinal studies on how merger affect changes over time on the micro level of the new organization. Thus, we need more longitudinal studies investigating the impact of mergers on the “inner life” of higher education institutions including academic and administrative staff and students. The well-being of staff in the organization is crucial for the outcome and we know far too little about long-term consequences of mergers.
References
Becker, L. R., Beukes, L. D., Botha, A., Botha, A. C., Botha, J. J., Botha, M., . . . Vorster, A. (2004). The impact of university incorporation on college lecturers. Higher Education, 48(2), 153-172. Cai, Y.. (2006). A case study of academic staff integration in a post-merger Chinese university. Tertiary Education Management, 12(3), 215-226. Clark, B. R. (1983). The Higher Education System. Berkeley: The University of California Press. Dasborough, M., Lamb, P., & Suseno, Y. (2015). Understanding emotions in higher education change management. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(4), 579-590. Evans, L. (2017). The worst of times? A tale of two higher education institutions in France: their merger and its impact on staff working lives. Studies in Higher Education, 42(9), 1699-1717. Frølich, N., Trondal, J., Caspersen, J., Reymert, I., &. (2016). Managing mergers–governancing institutional integration. Tertiary Education Management, 22(3), 231-248. Gleibs, I. H., Tauber, S., Viki, G. T., & Giessner, S. R. (2013). When What We Get Is Not What We Want The Role of Implemented Versus Desired Merger Patterns in Support for Mergers. Social Psychology, 44(3), 177-190. Harman, G., & Harman, K. (2003). Institutional mergers in higher education: Lessons from international experience. Tertiary Education Management, 9(1), 29-44. Liu, Q., Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2018). Do university mergers create academic synergy? Evidence from China and the Nordic Countries. Research Policy, 47(1), 98-107. Rocha, V., Teixeira, P. N., & Biscaia, R. (2018). Mergers in European Higher Education: Financial Issues and Multiple Rationales. Higher Education Policy. Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. R. (2015). THEORIZING HYBRIDITY: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS, AND ACTOR IDENTITIES: THE CASE OF NONPROFITS. Public Administration, 93(2), 433-448. doi:10.1111/padm.12105 Tuunainen, J. (2005). Hybrid practices? Contributions to the debate on the mutation of science and university. Higher Education, 50(2), 275-298. Weick, K.E. (1976) ‘Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems’, Administrative Science Quarterly 21: 1–19.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.