22 SES 12 B, Old and New Dilemmas for a New Management in Higher Education
Discussant: Susan Wright
There is a wide consensus about the idea that knowledge societies call for new management of one of the main institutions that are in charge of knowledge production and dissemination: the University. What raises less consensus is what new management should mean.
The so called “new managerialism” –presented under the more politically correct label of New Public Management- has exerted a great influence on both the theory and the practice of management in higher education institutions in the past decade. Along with an emphasis on results, effectiveness and performance it brought about the adoption by public sector organizations –universities included- of practices and values characteristics of private firms (Ferlie, Musselin y Andresani, 2008). Deem and Brehony (2005) have criticized the colonization of Britain universities by the ideological principles of new managerialism and the generalized adoption by the university managers of such principles and the associated discourses. On the other hand, Lucas (2006) pointed out some of the consequences of this zeitgeist on the new research game in the academic life: marketization, elitization, resources concentration and hierarquization.
Is there any other alternative to meet a true new management for knowledge organizations? The debate has to take into account that universities are special organizations where many of its managers also perform academic tasks. It leads to the necessity of distinguishing between management and leadership (Taylor Machado, 2006; Bush, 2008) as much as the idea that both terms are synonymous has been challenged by a large number of authors (remarkably by Kotter, 1990). It also calls for exploring the perspective of governance and its possibilities in educational contexts (Altrichter, 2010).
This symposium intends to contribute to such debate presenting and discussing four research studies carried out in four countries -Australia, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom- including topics as: the impact of new managerialism in four Australian universities and one Irish university; the leadership styles exerted by managers of Spanish universities from a gender perspective; and the principal dilemmas facing governance at public universities in Spain.
ALTRICHTER, H. (2010) Theory and Evidence on Governance: conceptual and empirical strategies of research on governance in education. European Educational Research Journal, 9 (2), 147-158.
BLACKMAN, D. y KENNEDY, M. (2009) Knowledge management and effective university governance, Journal of Knowledge Management, 13 (6), 547-563.
BUSH, T. (2008) From Management to Leadership, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36 (2), 271–288.
DEEM, R. and BREHONY, K. (2005) Management as ideology: the case of ‘new managerialism’ in higher education. Oxford Review of Education, 31(2), 217-235.
FERLIE, E., MUSSELIN, C., y ANDRESANI, G. (2008). The steering of higher education systems: A public management perspective, Higher Education, 56(3), 325–348.
KOTTER, J. (1990) What leaders do?, Harvard Business Review, Mayo-Junio, 103-111.
LUCAS, L. (2006) The research game in academic life. London: Open University Press.
TAYLOR, J. y MACHADO, M.L. (2006) Higher Education Leadership and Management: from Conflict to Interdependence through Strategic Planning, Tertiary Education and Management, 12, 137-160.
- 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.