ror.org/0349y2q65
Abstracts
Abstract
European universities traditionally embedded in the institutional logics of academic professionalism as well as democratization and regulation face the emergence of a new managerial logic generating conflicting demands and triggering hybrid organizational responses. This article investigates hybridization processes by analyzing how multiple institutional logics play out among organizational attributes (strategic positioning, organizational design, governance systems and identity) over long periods. The longitudinal cross-case analysis reveals different hybrid responses made of various forms of segmentation and blending. Furthermore, it informs the debate on the stability of hybrid responses by tracking various hybrid response paths.
Keywords:
- Institutional logics,
- institutional complexity,
- hybridization,
- managerial logic,
- university
Résumé
Les universités européennes, traditionnellement inscrites dans des logiques institutionnelles de professionnalisme académique et de démocratisation bureaucratique, font face à une nouvelle logique managériale générant des demandes contradictoires et des réponses organisationnelles hybrides. Cet article explore les processus d’hybridation en analysant sur une longue période la manière dont les logiques s’expriment à travers les attributs organisationnels (positionnement stratégique, design organisationnel, systèmes de gouvernance et identité). L’étude comparative des cas met en lumière différentes réponses hybrides, segmentant ou unifiant l’organisation. Les résultats contribuent également à la connaissance des conditions de stabilité des réponses organisationnelles hybrides en soulignant différents chemins d’hybridation.
Mots-clés :
- Logiques institutionnelles,
- complexité institutionnelle,
- hybridation,
- logique managériale,
- université
Resumen
Las universidades europeas, con tradición enraizada en las lógicas institucionales del profesionalismo académico y en la democratización burocrática, se enfrentan a una nueva lógica gerencial que produce demandas contradictorias y respuestas organizacionales híbridas. Para entender los procesos de hibridación, este artículo investiga cómo, durante largos períodos, se desarrollan múltiples lógicas institucionales a través de los atributos organizacionales (posicionamiento estratégico, diseño organizacional, sistemas de gobierno e identidad). El estudio de caso comparativo destaca diferentes respuestas híbridas, segmentando o unificando la organización. Además, los resultados contribuyen al conocimiento de las condiciones de estabilidad de respuestas organizacionales híbridas siguiendo diferentes derroteros de hibridación.
Palabras clave:
- lógica institucional,
- complejidad institucional,
- hibridación,
- lógica gerencial,
- universidad
Appendices
Bibliography
- Arman, Rebecka; Liff, Roy; Wikström, Ewa (2014). “The hierarchization of competing logics in psychiatric care in Sweden”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 30, N° 3, p. 282-291.
- Barrier, Julien (2011). “La science en projets: Financements sur projet, autonomie professionnelle et transformations du travail des chercheurs académiques”, Sociologie du Travail, Vol. 53, n° 4, p. 515-536.
- Battilana, Julie; Besharov, Marya; Mitzinnec, Bjoern (2017). “On hybrids and hybrid organizing: A review and roadmap for future research”, in R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence and R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, Los Angeles: Sage, p. 122-162.
- Battilana, Julie; Dorado, Silvia (2010). “Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53, N° 6, p. 1419-1440.
- Battilana, Julie; Lee, Matthew (2014). “Advancing research on hybrid organizing: Insights from the study of social enterprises”, Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 8, N° 1, p. 397-441.
- Besharov, Marya; Smith, Wendy K (2014). “Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 39, N° 3, p. 364-381.
- Boitier, Marie; Rivière, Anne (2013a). “Are French universities under control?”, Public Money & Management, Vol. 33, N° 2, p. 105-110.
- Boitier, Marie; Rivière, Anne (2013b). “Freedom and responsibility for French universities: From global steering to local management”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 26, N° 4, p. 616-649.
- Boitier, Marie, Rivière, Anne (2016). “Les systèmes de contrôle de gestion, vecteurs d’une logique gestionnaire: changement institutionnel et conflits de logiques à l’université.” Comptabilité Contrôle Audit, Vol. 22, n° 3, p. 47-79.
- Capano, Giliberto (2011). “Government continues to do its job. A comparative study of governance shifts in the higher education sector”, Public Administration, Vol. 89, N° 4, p. 1622-1642.
- Clark, Burton R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective, Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Clark, Burton R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation, Oxford: Pergamon Press.
- Cyert, Richard Michael; March, James G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
- Dalpiaz, Elena; Rindova, Violina; Ravasi, Davide (2016). “Combining logics to transform organizational agency”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 61, N° 3, p. 347-392.
- Denis, Jean-Louis; Ferlie, Ewan; Van Gestel, Nicolette (2015). “Understanding hybridity in public organizations”, Public Administration, Vol. 93, N° 2, p. 273–289.
- Denis, Jean-Louis; Lamothe, Lise; Langley, Ann (2001). “The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, N° 4, p. 809-837.
- Denis, Jean-Louis; Langley, Ann; Rouleau, Linda (2007). “Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames”, Human Relations, Vol. 60, N° 1, p. 179-215.
- Eisenhardt, Kathleen M (1989). “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, N° 4, p. 532-550.
- Eisenhardt, Kathleen M; Graebner, Melissa E (2007). “Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50, N° 1, p. 25-32.
- Engwall, Lars (2007). “Universities, the state and the market”, Higher Education Management and Policy, Vol. 19, N° 3, p. 1-18.
- Freidson, Eliot (2001). Professionalism: The third logic, Cambridge: Polity.
- Glynn, Mary Ann (2008). “Beyond constraint: How institutions enable organizational identities”, in R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin and R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, Los Angeles: Sage, p. 413-430.
- Goodrick, Elizabeth; Reay, Trish (2011). “Constellations of institutional logics changes in the professional work of pharmacists”, Work and Occupations, Vol. 38, N° 3, p. 372-416.
- Greenwood, Royston; Hinings, C. R. (1988). “Organizational design types, tracks and the dynamics of strategic change”, Organization Studies, Vol. 9, N° 3, p. 293-316.
- Greenwood, Royston; Hinings, C. R. (1993). “Understanding strategic change: The contribution of archetypes”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36, N° 5, p. 1052-1081.
- Greenwood, Royston; Raynard, Mia; Kodeih, Farah; Micelotta, Evelyn R.; Lounsbury, Michael (2011). “Institutional complexity and organizational responses”, Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 5, N° 1, p. 317-371.
- Hattke, Fabian; Blaschke, Steffen; Frost, Jetta (2014). “Governance logics in universities. Organizational change as oscillating conversations”, in A. Pettigrew, E. Cornuel and U. Hommel (Eds.), The institutional development of business schools: Oxford University Press, p. 69-94.
- Hattke, Fabian; Vogel, Rick; Woiwode, Hendrik (2016). “When professional and organizational logics collide: Balancing invisible and visible colleges in institutional complexity”, in J. Frost, F. Hattke and M. Reihlen (Eds.), Multi-level governance in universities: Strategies, structure, control, Cham: Springer, p. 235-256.
- Kallio, Kirsi-Mari; Kallio, Tomi J; Tienari, Janne; Hyvönen, Timo (2016). “Ethos at stake: Performance management and academic work in universities”, Human Relations, Vol. 69, N° 3, p. 685-709.
- Kraatz, Matthew S.; Block, Emily S. (2017). “Institutional pluralism revisted”, in R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence and R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 2 ed., Los Angeles: Sage, p. 532-557.
- Krücken, Georg; Meier, Frank (2006). “Turning the university into an organizational actor”, in G. S. Drori, J. W. Meyer and H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 241-257.
- Kurunmäki, Liisa (2004). “A hybrid profession – the acquisition of management accounting expertise by medical professionals”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 29, N° 3, p. 327-347.
- Kwiek, Marek (2013). Knowledge production in European universities: States, markets, and academic entrepreneurialism, Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang.
- Langley, Ann (1999). “Strategies for theorizing from process data”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, N° 4, p. 691-710.
- Martin, Graham; Currie, Graeme; Weaver, Simon; Finn, Rachael; McDonald, Ruth (2016). “Institutional complexity and individual responses: Delineating the boundaries of partial autonomy”, Organization Studies, Vol. 38, N° 1, p. 1-25.
- Mazouz, Bachir (2004). “La transformation de l’état et de ses organisations: Une perspective managériale internationale”, Management International, Vol. 9, n° 1, p. 9-16.
- Mazouz, Bachir; Rousseau, Anne; Sponem, Samuel (2015). “Le gestionnaire public en question – La difficile conciliation des logiques bureaucratique et managériale”, Revue Française de Gestion, Vol. 41, n° 250, p. 89-104.
- McPherson, Chad Michael; Sauder, Michael (2013). “Logics in action managing institutional complexity in a drug court”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 58, N° 2, p. 165-196.
- Meier, Frank; Schimank, Uwe (2010). “Mission now possible: Profile building and leadership in German universities”, in R. Whitley, J. Gläser and L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 211-236.
- Merton, Robert K (1942). “A note on science and democracy”, Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, Vol. October, N° 1-2, p. 115–126.
- Meyer, John W.; Rowan, Brian (1977). “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 83, N° 2, p. 340-363.
- Münch, Richard (2014). Academic capitalism: Universities in the global struggle for excellence, New York: Routledge.
- Musselin, Christine (2017). La grande course des universités, Paris: Les presses de Sciences Po.
- Olsen, Johan P. (2007). “The institutional dynamics of the European university”, in P. Maassen and J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University dynamics and European integration, Dordrecht: Springer, p. 25–53.
- Ouchi, William G. (1979). “A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms”, Management Science, Vol. 25, N° 9, p. 833.
- Pache, Anne-Claire; Santos, Filipe (2013). “Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56, N° 4, p. 972-1001.
- Paradeise, Catherine (2007). “Défis mondiaux et traditions universitaires. Comparaisons européennes”, Esprit, Vol. 2007, n° 12, p. 82-95.
- Paradeise, Catherine; Reale, Emanuela; Bleiklie, Ivar; Ferlie, Ewan (Eds.) (2009) University governance. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Peterson, Marvin W. (2007). “The study of colleges and universities as organizations”, in P. J. Gumport (Ed.), Sociologoy of higher education, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, p. 147–184.
- Pettigrew, Andrew (1990). “Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice”, Organization Science, Vol. 1, N° 3, p. 267-292.
- Raynard, Mia (2016). “Deconstructing complexity: Configurations of institutional complexity and structural hybridity”, Strategic Organization, Vol. 14, N° 4, p. 310-335.
- Reay, Trish; Hinings, C. Robert (2009). “Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics”, Organization Studies, Vol. 30, N° 6, p. 629-652.
- Reihlen, Markus; Wenzlaff, Ferdinand (2014). “Institutional change of the German higher education system: From professional dominance to managed education”, in A. Fayolle and D. Redford (Eds.), Handbook on the entrepreneurial university, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, p. 112-135.
- Schimank, Ute; Lange, Stefan (2009). “Germany: A latecomer to new public management”, in C. Paradeise, E. Reale, I. Bleiklie and E. Ferlie (Eds.), University governance, Dordrecht: Springer, p. 51-75.
- Smets, Michael; Morris, Tim; Greenwood, Royston (2012). “From practice to field: A multi-level model of practice driven institutional change”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 55, N° 4, p. 877-904.
- Teelken, Christine (2015). “Hybridity, coping mechanisms, and academic performance management: Comparing three countries”, Public Administration, Vol. 93, N° 2, p. 307-323.
- Ter Bogt, Henk J.; Scapens, Robert W. (2012). “Performance management in universities: Effects of the transition to more quantitative measurement systems”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 21, N° 3, p. 451-497.
- Thornton, Patricia H.; Ocasio, William; Lounsbury, Michael (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Townley, Barbara (1997). “The institutional logic of performance appraisal”, Organization Studies, Vol. 18, N° 2, p. 261-285.
- Weick, Karl E. (1976). “Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 21, N° 1, p. 1-19.
- Yin, Robert K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3 ed.), Thousand Oaks: Sage.