Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation: An advanced reader for PhD students

THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON HIGHER EDUCATION MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFORMATION Edited by Elias Pekkola, Jussi Kivistö, Vuokko Kohtamäki, Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation An advanced reader for PhD students Layout Sirpa Randell ISBN 978-952-03-0842-1 (print) ISBN 978-952-03-0843-8 (pdf) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License Copyright ©2018 Tampere University Press and authors SUPPORTED BY OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT AID FROM THE MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF FINLAND Suomen Yliopistopaino Oy – Juvenes Print Tampere 2018 Contents Introduction 7 I Methodological Approaches: Examples for early career researchers Discourse analysis in higher education research. Theory and method 13 Terhi Nokkala & Taina Saarinen What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? 29 Yuzhuo Cai Researching social stratification in higher education: Methodology and paradigms 51 James Anyan II Conceptual Approaches Utilised to Understanding University Transformation Policy transfer in higher education policy formation 67 Johanna Moisio A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa 87 Pascal Doh The concept of the entrepreneurial university for analysing the organisational transformation of higher education institutions 105 Anu Lyytinen III Scholarly Traditions Applied to Understand Universities and Academic Work The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession 121 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Information on efficiency as an aspect of self-regulation in university departments 151 Timo Näppilä Understanding academic leadership using the four-frame model 167 Johanna Vuori University autonomy. From past to present 179 Vuokko Kohtamäki & Elizabeth Balbachevsky The advent of managerialism in the Ethiopian higher education system and organisational responses through the lens of neoinstitutional and resource dependence theories 195 Yohannes Mehari Closing words: Theory, methodology and the future of higher education research 213 Authors 217 7 Introduction Research in higher education constitutes an interdisciplinary field of study. For this reason, it lacks solid methodological and theoretical foundations and borrows from various fields of research. This is often an advantage for new creative interdisciplinary research designs, but it also represents a challenge for theory development. New researchers entering the field from their own disciplinary backgrounds often spend their first years of inception acknowledging themselves within the existing body of literature on higher education management and leadership. Thereafter, they conduct empirical investigations of some kind and only then do they start thinking about the theoretical contributions of their work. Often, empirical findings, familiar to all academics by virtue of the fact that they work in universities, surpass theoretical and methodological discussions. Research on higher education thus becomes a quasi-conceptual discussion of “our work” and “their policies” as well as of the “importance and uniqueness of universities”. The only way of overcoming this bias is through rigorous methodological and theoretical work. Higher education research has its own body of knowledge as well as small but active forums of academic interaction and dissemination. However, the theory development in the field has often been neglected. At the very least, this is often the impression which early career researchers run into, following their “honeymoon” with higher education research. This feeling of disappointment 14 Terhi Nokkala & Taina Saarinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) discourse analyses that illuminate the discursive constitution and construction of power relations and societal structures, such as critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 1992; 2003). Higher education policy research and the “linguistic turn” The “linguistic turn” in the social sciences focused on the socially constructed nature of “reality” (Berger & Luckmann 1979). With this turn, the focus was on the role of language as both describing and construing our understanding of what takes place in society. This means that we cannot assume that language (such as it is produced, for instance, in policy documents, legislation, parliamentary debates, interviews, etc.) merely describes reality; it also construes the ways in which we understand and conceptualise that (social) reality. Another implication of the linguistic turn in the social sciences is that policy texts cannot and should not be dismissed as “mere rhetoric”, with little to do with “real policy” (Saarinen 2008). While higher education studies typically use textual data (in the forms described above), textual methods have been used surprisingly sparingly (see Tight 2003; Saarinen 2007). Tight (2003) argues (2003, 188) that one (quite paradoxical) reason for the lack of textual methodologies in a textually heavy field may be that it is easily assumed that no particular guidance or methodology is needed for the apparently everyday activity of “reading the documents”. In the second edition of his Researching Higher Education, Tight (2012, 184) points out that while discourse analysis and similar approaches have gained ground, there still seems to be little direction in the policy analysis literature regarding how to analyse document data. We have conducted what we have described as “discourse analysis” in our respective doctoral studies (Nokkala 2007a; Saarinen 2007), later broadening our perspective on discourse analytical work in our post-doctoral research. Nokkala’s (2007) approach to discourse analysis employed a critical realist ontology, combined with an emancipatory interest in knowledge. Her research sought to highlight how power works through language to create hegemonic 15 Discourse analysis in higher education research Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation discourses and hegemonic understandings of the world, consequently legitimating itself. Focusing on the discursive construction and legitimation of the internationalisation of higher education and the university as an institution, Nokkala’s dissertation illuminated the manner in which discourses can act as tools for neoliberal governmentality. Through discourse, both individuals and organisations assume subjectivities of ideal ways of being and acting in the competitive knowledge society, which can be called the dominant political rationality of our time. Saarinen’s (2007) goal was to introduce not only ontological approaches to discourses that construe (social) reality in higher education policy studies, but also to test different textual methods for the analysis of policy documents and, thus (epistemologically), to help understand the ways in which we can understand the role of “language” in policy-making. Thus, Saarinen’s PhD dissertation introduced textual discourse analysis in the field of higher education studies, suggesting that when policy documents are used as data, as is often the case in higher education policy research, textual analytical tools should be applied more systematically than they have been (see also Tight 2003 for a discussion of methodologies in higher education studies). She concluded that the uses of policy texts lead to a chain of operationalisations that have a real policy effect, and thus, textual discourse analysis can (both methodologically and theoretically) help identify, understand and explain higher education policies and the ideologies embedded in the debates that appear to be textual (see also Saarinen 2008a). Ontologically, therefore, the socio-constructivist premise in our respective work was similar, but our methods of analysis were somewhat different, with Saarinen emphasising the linguistic and textual and Nokkala the political elements of discourse in their analyses. 16 Terhi Nokkala & Taina Saarinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Theoretical and methodological approaches to discourse analysis in higher education research The conceptual mishmash regarding discourse analysis can be confusing. Describing a study as discourse analytical does not say anything about its actual approach or orientation to discourse, whether theoretically, empirically or methodologically. Similarly, the term discourse and its related concepts, such as text, need to be defined, as they may refer to different things depending on the theoretical or methodological approach being applied. Gee (2015) has illustrated the basic types of discourse analysis by talking about “small d” discourse analysis (“language-in-use”) and “big D” Discourse analysis (the enactment of socially and historically significant identities and social structures). Another line of division in discourse analysis would be to conceptualise discourse as linguistic and textual vs. conceptualising discourse as socio-historical knowledge construction (see, e.g. Fairclough 2003; Foucault 2002). Fairclough (2003) separates the abstract “discourse” as meaning the particular dual property of discourse in construing and describing social life, while the count noun “discourse/discourses” refers to different ways of representing social reality or different views on a particular issue. While there are many different approaches and traditions in discourse analysis (Fairclough 1992; Wodak 2001; van Dijk 2002), in this chapter, we focus on the tradition of critical discourse analysis, which we both used in our dissertations. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is often referred to in studies dealing with policies and politics, gender or institutional settings; and thus, it offers a helpful starting point for analysing higher education policy and practice. CDA, like discourse analysis in general, represents a broad set of viewpoints, often characterised by pragmatism, problem orientation and linguistic orientation. The three most common approaches are Wodak’s discourse-historical approach (2001), van Dijk’s (2002) work on discourse and cognition and Fairclough’s (1992) work on language use and social structures. In CDA, texts are seen as constructing, reproducing and transforming social structures, relations and processes; thus, the analysis of texts can reveal how social control and domination are exercised, negotiated and resisted in society. 17 Discourse analysis in higher education research Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation As CDA often addresses “political” and contentious subjects, it has also been open to criticism for having coincidental or ideologically motivated research settings and data (Titscher et al. 2000, 163). The process of CDA is often presented in a three-dimensional model (Figure 1), which comprises the description of the text and its linguistic features, the interpretation of the production and consumption of the texts in discursive practices and, finally, an explanation of the social context in which these discursive practices take place. The analysis process is iterative, and the analyst moves back and forth between the dimensions. Applying discourse analysis in higher education research Discourse analysis, as a broad set of theoretical, methodological and analytical approaches, can be used to analyse a wide variety of issues. These include assumptions about the existing and preferred state of the world; the agents, or lack thereof, in what is or should be the state of the world; interactions Figure 1. Three-dimensional conception of discourse (Fairclough 1992, 73) SOCIAL PRACTICE DISCURSIVE PRACTICE: PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMPTION OF DISCOURSE TEXT 18 Terhi Nokkala & Taina Saarinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) between people and reproducing or changing power relations between actors or strategies used to persuade multiple audiences of the above points. Phenomena that can be studied through discourse analytical tools may take place at the micro, meso and macro levels of higher education, including in the cross-sections of these levels. Discourse analytical traditions seek to highlight how higher education systems and institutions are constituted and how they change. Discourse analysis can be used to analyse and unfold the key phenomena and relations in higher education research, such as Clark’s (1983) famed heuristics of academe: the triangle of coordination comprising the state, market and academic oligarchy as the three sites of power; the institutional-disciplinary matrix comprising an organisational dimension and a disciplinary dimension describing the sites and tensions of academic work and the makings of entrepreneurial universities (Clark 1998). Discourse analytical studies on higher education policy have gradually increased during the 2000s (see Saarinen & Ursin 2012; Ursin & Saarinen 2013 for reviews). In most cases, the concept of discourse was not particularly problematised and was used primarily in an informal and general sense to refer to a particular “discourse” as a condensation of policy or as a “way of talking about something”. Gradually, however, the concept began to be problematised more systematically. Often, a Foucauldian or critical view of discourse as a system of organising knowledge was taken (see, e.g. Robertson & Bond 2005), and discourse analysis was used in conjunction with Foucault’s governmentality theory (Foucault 1991; Mulderrig 2011; Suspitsyna 2010; 2012), which was used to conceptualise how individuals, organisations and societies are governed through internalised subjectivities produced in discourse. Sometimes, the concept of discourse was utilised to describe and enable the juxtaposition of two opposing policy arguments or views (see, e.g. Välimaa & Westerheijden 1995). Uses of CDA have been rarer, possibly because of the heavy textual analysis required. In highlighting the different ways in which discourse analysis can be used in the study of higher education policy and administration, we draw in more 19 Discourse analysis in higher education research Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation detail from our own work conducted over the past ten years. The chosen examples illustrate the multiple applications of discourse analysis, with more linguisticallyand politically-oriented studies. Nokkala’s (2007a) dissertation, which was also published as a monograph, addressed the discourses of the internationalisation of higher education in Finland and Europe, including in relation to the discursive construction of the role of the university in the competitive knowledge society. The discourse analytical approach of the study relied on Fairclough’s CDA and Foucault’s governmentality theory. Thus, it focussed especially on the third dimension of discourse, namely the ways in which discourse constitutes non-discursive structures and practices. drawing from an analysis of international, national and university level higher education policy documents as well as interviews with higher education leaders and practitioners, Nokkala identified three discourses that support the internationalisation of higher education: internationalisation as individual growth, the rethinking of the university and the opening up of the country, respectively. Similarly, Nokkala identified three discourses that construct the legitimacy of the university as an institution: science and knowledge, civilisation and well-being and competition and competitiveness, respectively. Through these discourses, the image of an ideal university in the context of a competitive knowledge society is constructed. Nokkala’s study was also interested in the way in which discourses contribute to the upholding and changing of power relations. The spin-off articles resulting from the dissertation addressed the discourses and narratives of the Bologna Process (Nokkala 2007b) and Finland (Nokkala 2008) in the context of the knowledge society. Upon completing the dissertation, Nokkala’s discourse analytical work (Nokkala 2012; 2014; 2016a; 2016b) moved beyond the Finnish context, though retaining a focus on the mostly European framework. In her postdoctoral work, Nokkala expanded on the mechanisms through which discourse works on policy, focusing especially on how the state of no alternatives in policy is discursively created through, for example, persuasive genres of language, knowledge production or local translations of global discourses. Discourse 20 Terhi Nokkala & Taina Saarinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) works to colonise policy solutions so that only a given course of action seems feasible. In the context of neoliberal political rationality, market-based, commodified and competition-oriented solutions are often favoured. Thus, Nokkala’s work has taken a critical and emancipatory turn. For example, in their discourse theoretical article, Nokkala and Bacevic (2014) studied the way in which the European University Association has contributed to the construction of knowledge on university autonomy and the resulting emergence of a hegemonic discourse. Through this knowledge construction, they have similarly constructed their own agency in the European Higher Education Area. Nokkala (2016a) has also analysed policy discourse from a rhetorical perspective, focusing on the discursive elements used in policy texts to make policy persuasive, to construe it as rational and logical and to create a sense of urgency in bringing it about. Drawing from Martin’s (1989) work on genre analysis, Nokkala uses the notions of the analytical and hortatory register to study how, first, policy discourse presents what the world is like and, second, what should be done, and how, to achieve the desired state of affairs. Analysing 60 higher education and science and technology policy documents from five countries, Nokkala illustrates how policy discourse constructs a “state of no alternatives”, in which the state of affairs, as described by the discourse, becomes an immutable fact and charts the only logical course forward. Finally, Nokkala (2016b) has also focused on the construction and longterm evolution of national and global policy narratives concerning the link between the knowledge society and higher education in different types of knowledge societies: Finland, Portugal, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. The analysis highlights both convergent and divergent elements across the higher education and science and technology policy discourse in the five countries, spelling out the corresponding globalised and localised discursive practices. Saarinen’s (2007) dissertation employed a critical discourse analysis starting point to the study of quality as a higher education policy concept and, consequently, to higher education assessment as a higher education policy 21 Discourse analysis in higher education research Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation phenomenon. The main question was: What kind of higher education policy is produced and supported in the name of “quality”? The article format of the dissertation made it possible to test different kinds of textual tools. The first article (Saarinen 2005a) looks into the value assumptions assigned to quality in European-level policy documents, showing the gradual mainstreaming of the concept of quality. The second article (2005b) analyses the metaphors and actions that are discursively connected with the words “quality” and “assessment”, particularly in the Finnish context, showing the development of quality from a policy problem to a policy solution and problematising the ways in which action is discursively construed. The third article (Saarinen 2008b) analyses persuasiveness, particularly persuasive presuppositions in higher education policy documents, in understanding the ways in which a particular policy is construed as self-evident and uncontested. The fourth article (Saarinen 2008c) develops the discursive analysis of actors and action, resulting in the problematisation of active or passive inclusion or exclusion in higher education policy, while the fifth article (Saarinen & AlaVähälä 2007), which was developed from ideas in the fourth article, discusses the intended meanings vs. actual uses of accreditation, resulting in an analysis of transnational differences in the conceptualisation of accreditation. Following the completion of the dissertation, Saarinen continued to examine the internationalisation of higher education, particularly from the point of view of implicitness, i.e. the way in which implicating (rather than explicating) a policy view can actually make the policy construction more effective (see, e.g. Saarinen & Nikula 2013; Saarinen 2014). The absence or presence of the mention of a language, for instance, may be indexical of policy ideologies. Implicit discursive assertions (such as presuppositions) can be used to trigger audience consent, whereas explicit assertions may draw more attention and even criticism (Wodak 2007). Fairclough (2003, 82) suggests that it is more effective to present ideologically loaded political opinions implicitly as if they were common sense. Implicit expression is, thus, an instrument for presenting (as well as suggesting) ideologically loaded policies as common 22 Terhi Nokkala & Taina Saarinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) ground facts, a property of discourse that is also relevant in the 2017 landscape, where the media’s role in politics is being heavily discussed (Saarinen 2008b). Discursive analyses of language ideologies in higher education and the observation that higher education policies are complex combinations of local and global initiatives and potentially conflicting interests led Saarinen to further develop discourse analytical methodologies in the study of policy as multisited, i.e. as situated, layered and temporally and spatially fluctuating (instead of linear and hierarchical) (see Saarinen & Nikula 2013; Halonen, Ihalainen & Saarinen 2015; Saarinen & Taalas 2017). This approach has been beneficial in acknowledging the complex nature of policies of internationalisation in higher education and making visible the multi-layered and discursively connected ideologies and hierarchies in higher education internationalisation. Challenges and limitations of discourse analysis Discourse analysis has been increasingly used, both by us and others in the field of higher education research in the years following the defence of our PhD theses in December 2007. Recent PhD dissertations in higher education research in Finland that have employed discourse analysis include Haltia (2012), Kankaanpää (2013), Laajala (2015) and Schatz (2016). Equally, discursive approaches have, in recent years, found their way in higher education policy research (see, e.g. Ramirez & Tiplic 2014; Fabricius, Mortensen & Haberland 2017; Buckner 2017). This is an indication of the way in which social constructivism has penetrated research, not just in higher education, but in social sciences in general. This has obvious benefits. By focusing on what kinds of social realities are construed by linguistic means, discourse analysis reveals the contexts and ways in which policy construction makes certain policies appear inevitable. A systematic, rigorous analysis of textual data is necessary in order to raise the level of abstraction from the (superficially) textual to the discursive to the societal (Fairclough 2003) and to make more transparent the apparent black box of policy as discourse vs. policy as action. 23 Discourse analysis in higher education research Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Conversely, textual analyses of large masses of documents (“text”) can be time-consuming, and the relationship between “policy reality” (as understood by the actors in the field) and “policy construct” (as a product of discourse analysis) may be obscure or difficult to explain to policy-makers (see Saarinen & Ursin 2012). Another potential problem in any discourse analytical approach is theoretical in nature: the possible over-analysis of language may lead to the researcher distancing himself or herself from the physical environment in which the social construction of reality takes place. This is at the core of the longstanding debate between ontologically realist and relativist approaches to discourse analysis. Realist approaches (cf. Parker 1992; Willig 1998; Fairclough, Jessop & Sayer 2001) perceive there to be non-discursive social practices and institutions or structures that are not constituted by discourse, thereby reproducing unequal power relations in society. The more relativistically oriented approaches have focused on highlighting the multiplicity of contextual linguistic practices, without alluding to the non-discursive realities from which they stem (Edwards, Ashmore & Potter 1995; Potter 1996). Relativist approaches have been criticised by realists for their failure to engage in critical debates to highlight and change the power structures in society and, thus, empower disadvantaged groups. This leads to another question: while the discursive nature of policy has been understood, the process of how “discourse IS action” is a black box in the empirical sense. It thus seems that a post-discursive “material turn” is needed: linguistic phenomena need to be reduced to their fundamentally material roots in order to make “discourse as action” transparent. Similarly, discourse analysis may also fail if it is not applied rigorously. Merely summarising the data, taking sides in the analysis, thinking that quoting text excerpts equals analysis, picking isolated quotes or spotting various linguistic features all amount to typical under-analysis and, thus, failure in discourse analysis (Antaki, Billig, Edwards & Potter 2004). The notion of discourse analysis as unanalytical also constitutes one of the most common, and often well-deserved, critiques of discourse analysis. 30 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) in seeking to publish mixed methods research, researchers must make explicit the value-added of using mix methods so that the journal editors and reviewers can easily justify the quality of their research. Their inferences are important, but when it comes to the practice of conducting mixed methods, there are high demands on more comprehensive and concrete suggestions regarding how to do it, particularly in the field of higher education research. Above all, it is essential to know when and why one needs to choose mixed methods. The research methodology literature tends to suggest a correspondence between the research question and the methodological design (Newman & Benz 1998a). In particular, the research question is more important in mixed methods research (Creswell 2003; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004), in that, it determines whether a mixture of methods is suitable (Curral & Towler 2003, 521; Teddlie & Tashakkori 2006) and what specific designs should be chosen (Onwuegbuzie & Leech 2006). The position that research questions guide decisions about research methods and research designs has been challenged. For instance, drawing on interviews with 20 mixed methods researchers as well as analyses of some mixed methods studies, Bryman (2007) asserts that there is a dilemma between the textbook account and practical research. While textbooks mainly provide a normative position, researchers are more ambivalent about the role of research questions in connection with research methods. Bryman found that some researchers adopt mixed methods for practical or tactical purposes. Moreover, Newman et al. (2003) argue that while the research question is important, it is not sufficient to determine methodology. They stress the importance of research purpose in determining research design. As they put it: Without having one’s purpose (or purposes) clarified, and without time to reflect on that purpose, one cannot have a question that will directly dictate the research methodology. … The research question alone will not produce links to methods unless the question is thought through seriously, as well as iteratively, and becomes reflective of purpose. (Newman et al. 2003, 168) 31 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation The methodological debates imply an ambiguity regarding what drives the choice of mixed methods design. To contribute to the discussions on the topic, in this chapter, I analyse my own experience of conducting mixed methods research in the field of higher education studies and compare this with discussions in the mixed methods literature. My analysis is intended to answer the question: What factors actually drive the choice of using mixed methods? The remainder of the chapter is structured as follows. First, it introduces the mixed methods approach and then discusses possible influencing factors on the choice of using mixed methods, as indicated by the mixed methods literature. Next, using these factors as a benchmark, I review what actually affected my choice of mixed methods in my doctoral research as an illustration. At the end, I draw some conclusions regarding what drives the choice of mixed methods in higher education research and suggest some important avenues for future research. Mixed methods Traditionally, qualitative and quantitative methodological approaches have largely been used on separate tracks in social science research, despite the rich acknowledgement of the drawbacks of such a methodological bifurcation. Most quantitative research is confirmatory, involving theory verification, whereas much qualitative research is exploratory, involving theory generation or discovery. However, the phenomena to be explored are often too complicated to be tackled within the singularity of either a qualitative or quantitative approach. Thus, an emerging methodology, mixed methods, has become increasingly popular. Mixed methods research is a research design (or methodology) in which a researcher collects, analyses and mixes (integrates or connects) both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study or a multiphase programme of inquiry (Creswell 2005, 510). The attempt to incorporate both qualitative and quantitative methods into a mixed methods study is always a challenge. An extensive body of literature on research methodology sharply divides the two 32 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) methods according to their philosophical beliefs between interpretivism and post-positivism. Quantitative studies emphasise the measurement and analysis of causal relationships between variables, often associated with population generalisation. Qualitative methods allow for the articulation of many truths in meaningful social actions, stressing how social experiences are created and given meanings (Denzin & Lincoln 2003, 13). Despite the dichotomy between qualitative and quantitative research strategies, “the two philosophies are neither mutually exclusive (i.e. one need not totally commit to either one or the other) nor interchangeable (i.e. one cannot merge methodologies with no concern for underlying assumptions)” (Newman & Benz 1998a, xi). It follows that studies at the operational level are located on different points of a continuum between qualitative and quantitative. This is consistent with Creswell’s (2003, 4) vision that while traditional paradigms of social science research exist on two opposing stances, requiring either quantitative or qualitative approaches, “the situation today is less quantitative versus qualitative and more how research practices lie somewhere between on a continuum between the two”. This means that the mixed methods approach is located in the realm of pragmatism in the middle of the continuum between interpretivism and post-positivism. For pragmatists, understanding the problem is more important than being committed to any one system of methodological philosophy (p. 12). By mixing both qualitative and quantitative methods, it offers the best chance for answering many important and complex research questions (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004). The rationale for using mixed methods “is grounded in the fact that neither quantitative nor qualitative methods are sufficient, by themselves, to capture the trends and details of a situation” (Ivankova, Creswell & Stick 2006, 3). Despite the lack of a clear definition of what exactly are mixed research questions, it has been commonly agreed that mixed methods studies answer questions that embed both qualitative and quantitative inquires (Creswell 2003, 114). Qualitative research questions often begin with the words “what”, “how” and “why” in relation to discovering/exploring a process, describing experiences or understanding a phenomenon that has not been 33 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation well understood (Creswell 2003, 106; Griffiths 1996, 27; Onwuegbuzie & Leech 2006, 482). While qualitative research questions are characterised as “open-ended, evolving, and non-directional” (Creswell 1998, 99), quantitative research questions are specific in nature, either descriptive, comparative or relationship oriented (Onwuegbuzie & Leech 2006, 480). In the last two categories (comparative or relationship oriented), research questions are often formulated in the form of hypotheses, predicting relations among variables (Creswell 2003, 108). In short, qualitative studies are usually exploratory, while quantitative ones tend to be explanatory. The advantages of using mixed methods for social science research have been argued and evidenced by a number of researchers (Creswell 2003; Miles & Huberman 1994, Chapter 3; Newman & Benz 1998b; Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003). Among these, the convergent view is that the two methods are complementary and compatible. For instance, Newman and Benz (1998b) illustrate that the strength of mixed methods is based on their self-correcting feedback loops (Figure 1). There are different ways of combining or mixing qualitative and quantitative research. The mixed methods literature presents a variety of typologies of mixed methods designs (Creswell 2003; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004; Leech & Onwuegbuzie 2009; Onwuegbuzie, Slate, Leech & Collins 2007; Tashakkori Figure 1. The structure of social science research Source: Adapted from Newman and Benz (1998b, 21) 5 Data analysis B 2 Review Literature 3 Hypothesis 4 Data collection A 6 Conclusion C Hypothesis D 1 Theory Theory E 1–5: Quantitative approach; A–E: Qualitatitive approach 34 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) & Teddlie 1998; Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003; Teddlie & Tashakkori 2006). For instance, in Tashakkori and Teddlie’s (1998, 160–166) typology, three dimensions are used: the nature of the research (confirmatory/exploratory), data collection and operation (qualitative/quantitative), and data analysis (statistical/qualitative). For Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004, 20), a mixed methods design is determined by two primary decisions by the researcher: “(a) whether one wants to operate largely dominant paradigm or not, and (b) whether one wants to conduct the phases concurrently or sequentially”. More recently, Leech and Onwuegbuzie (2009) sought to create an integrated three-dimensional typology of mixed methods designs based on an extensive review of the mixed methods literature: (a) level of mixing (partially mixed versus fully mixed); (b) time orientation (concurrent versus sequential) and (c) emphasis of approaches (equal status versus dominant status). Their typology is not very different from the more commonly used scheme proposed by Creswell et al. (2003), who used four dimensions to categorise mixed methods designs: implementation, priority, integration and theory. Implementation is similar to “time orientation” in Leech and Onwuegbuzie (2009) and refers to whether researchers collect quantitative and qualitative data in different phases (sequentially) or at the same time (concurrently). Concurrent procedures are often used by researchers who are attempting to obtain a comprehensive analysis of the research problem, including concurrent triangulation, concurrent nested and concurrent transformative. In sequential procedures, the researcher seeks to elaborate or expand the findings of one method with another. The sequential strategy includes three models: sequential explanatory, sequential exploratory and sequential transformative. The priority accorded either the qualitative or quantitative approach is similar to Leech and Onwuegbuzie’s (2009) concept of “emphasis of approaches”, which pertains to whether greater priority is given to the quantitative or qualitative approach, especially in terms of data analysis. Priority can also be expressed as dominance. Priority for one type of data or the other depends on the researcher’s interests, reader expectations or the nature of the investigation (e.g. inductive or deductive). In mixed methods studies, there 35 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation are three possibilities: the quantitative approach is prioritised; the qualitative approach is prioritised; both quantitative and qualitative approaches have equal priority. Integration refers to the stages in the research process involving the mixing or integration of the quantitative and qualitative methods, ranging from the stage of addressing research purposes or research questions to that of analysing or interpreting data. This is very much in line on a continuum of the “level of mixing” described by Leech and Onwuegbuzie (2009), on which mixed methods research falls from “not mixed” (i.e. mono-method designs) at one end of the continuum to “fully mixed” at the other end. Partially mixed method designs are located between the two ends. They further elaborate that mixed methods research involves mixing both quantitative and qualitative research within one or more of the following four stages of the research process: 1) formulation of the research objective, 2) data collection, 3) data analysis and 4) inference. Similarly, for Creswell et al. (2003, 220), “integration might occur within the research questions (e.g., both quantitative and qualitative questions are presented), within data collection (e.g., open-ended questions on a structured instrument), within data collection (e.g., transforming qualitative themes into quantitative items or scales), or in interpretation (e.g., examining the quantitative and qualitative results for convergence of findings)”. Leech and Onwuegbuzie’s (2009) typology does not include the dimension of the theoretical perspective suggested by Creswell (2003). According to Creswell et al. (2003), the use of a theoretical lens in mixed methods research may be explicit or implicit. Explicit use of a theoretical perspective refers to situations in which theories have a direct and strong impact on the questions to be asked, the subjects and participants to be studied, the data to be collected and the preference of conclusions. The studies in this kind are value-based and action-oriented and have an advocacy purpose. This is called the transformative model in mixed methods research, whereby researchers use a theoretical lens as an overarching perspective that embraces both qualitative and quantitative data. 36 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Factors affecting the choice of mixed methods The literature suggests three factors that affect the choices of mixed methods. These are research questions, research purposes, practical reasons and beliefs in research paradigms. Types of mixed research questions Research questions can be formulated on the basis of theories, past research, previous experience or the practical need to make data-driven decisions in a work environment. “Thus, they serve as signposts for the reader, foreshadowing the specific details of the study” (Onwuegbuzie & Leech 2006, 478). Mixed methodologists believe that mixed methods are suitable for certain kinds of research questions (Creswell 2003; Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003), and especially for complex research questions (Plano Clark 2005). Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2006) made an initial attempt to develop a framework linking mixed methods research questions and mixed methods designs. They categorised five types of mixed methods research questions: 1)mixed methods research questions for descriptive research designs, 2)mixed methods research questions for causal-comparative research designs, 3) mixed methods research questions for experimental research designs, 4) mixed methods research questions for qualitative comparative designs and 5) the most compatible mixed methods research questions. Their study is inspiring, as it not only corroborates the argument that research questions drive the methods used (Newman & Benz 1998a; Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998), but it also tasks researchers to establish relations between mixed methods research questions and mixed methods designs. Nevertheless, the framework established by Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2006) remains largely ambiguous. On one hand, the descriptions of these types of research questions are on a general and abstract level, despite the provision of a number of exampling questions. On the other hand, the categories of the mixed methods designs used in their framework need to be benchmarked 37 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation with reference to other similar typologies developed elsewhere (for example: Creswell 2003; Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998; Teddlie & Tashakkori 2006). Research purpose and mixed methods designs Newman et al. (2003) argue that the research question alone is not sufficient to determine the methodology. Rather, “by considering the question and purpose iteratively, one can eventually get to a design or set of designs that more clearly reflect the intention of the question” (p. 168). By research purpose, they mean the reasons for conducting a study. Nine general research purposes can be categorised (p. 185): 1) Predict: using all the things we known in this knowledge “base” to explain a field and what might yet unfold in the future 2) Add to the knowledge base: organising all the things we know into a “base” of knowledge 3) Have a personal, social, institutional and/or organisational impact: struggling with the complex environments we experience, particularly when we know that some things we know and experience are not just, fair and in keeping with our ethical or professional purpose 4) Measure change: measuring what happens when we change things 5) Understand complex phenomena: understanding what things we now experience and know 6) Test new ideas: testing these new things 7) Generate new ideas: Discovering some new things 8) Inform constituencies: telling what things we know to those who need to know them 9) Examine the past: what things we already know from the past This typology of research purpose can serve as a valuable tool for researchers to initiate proper research questions and to identify appropriate research methods. In particular, research purposes 2, 3, 5 and 6 (sometimes in combination), due to their complex nature, may lead to mixed methods approaches. 38 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) A universal discourse and practical reasons for conducting mixed methods In his study—which was based on interviews with 20 social scientists with experience of mixed methods research and a review of some mixed methods publications—Bryman (2007) distinguishes between a particularistic discourse and a universal discourse. A particularistic discourse implies that research questions guide decisions about research design and research methods. A universal discourse entails the views that “mixed-methods research will tend to provide better outcomes more or less regardless of the aims of the research” (p. 8). In many cases, it is the universal discourse that underlies researchers’ decisions regarding the use of mixed methods. He also found that some researchers conduct research by simply using the methods with which they are familiar, not necessarily with recourse to the specific research questions, while some adopt mixed methods for some practical or tactical purposes, such as “to secure funding, to get research published or to gain the attention of policy makers” (p. 14). Pragmatist research paradigms and mixed methods Creswell (2003) developed a research design framework (Figure 2), which is very useful for researchers in terms of locating their studies in methodological settings. Between post-positivism and interpretivist paradigms lies that of pragmatism. For pragmatists, understanding the problem is more important than being committed to any one system of methodological philosophy. As Figure 2. Framework of research design (Adapted from Creswell 2003) Epistemologies Social science paradigms Inquiries Objective Subjective Post-positivism Pragmatism Interpretivism Advocacy Quantitative Mixed Quantitative 39 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation such, they tend to use multiple methods of data collection, techniques and procedures of research that meet their needs and purposes (Creswell 2003). Therefore, following pragmatism, the question here is not whether the two methods can be linked in a study design; the directive is that it should be done. This somehow echoes the universal discourse, suggesting that mixed methods may have universal suitability, “supported with little or no reference to research questions” (Bryman 2007, 18). Bryman has observed that “the normative view of the relationship between research questions and research methods may be an account about how the research process should operate, but it is not necessarily an account of how it operates in practice” Bryman (2007, 18). Exemplifying the choice of mixed methods in higher education research In this section, I analyse the factors that affected my choice of mixed methods in my doctoral research, using as my reference framework the discussions in the literature mentioned above. Before that, I briefly introduce my study, titled Academic Staff Integration in Post-Merger Chinese Higher Education Institutions (Cai 2007). The PhD research The aim of my dissertation was to discover the factors affecting academic staff integration in post-merger Chinese higher education institutions, especially the cultural dimension of that integration. The case study institution is a provincial university in China, which was formed in the mid-1990s through the amalgamation of three institutions; they were located in the same city and offered similar programmes in teacher education and training. Two of them were similar in terms of academic strength and organisational age and had programmes leading to both undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications. The third was a much newer institution, offering three-year undergraduate non-degree programmes. 46 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) which accentuates the fitness between research question/purpose and research design/method. Although there are different types of mixed methods research, a shared feature of most is that the research question entails both exploratory and explanatory inquiries. Second, researchers’ beliefs in research paradigms may be a motive for them to conduct mixed methods research. The literature suggests that if researchers follow a pragmatist paradigm, then they will likely apply mixed methods in their research because it would best achieve the research goal. The paradigm of research pragmatism may also influence researchers to pose certain questions, which by nature require mixed methods to gain a full understating of the truth. As implied by Creswell et al. (2003), mixed methods add special value to research when the methods better serve the research purpose. Regardless of my strong beliefs in pragmatism, I have not always use mixed methods in my research. In many cases, my research tackles qualitative explorations only for practical reasons, though I see my qualitative research as one part of a mixed methods approach, with the expectation that the other part could be done in future studies. Third, reasons of practicality do affect the choice of research design. Although one may be keen to conduct research by applying a mixed methods approach, one may not be able to simply because of time constraints and resource shortages. Conducting mixed methods research generally takes significantly longer than when a mono-method is employed. When conditions do allow, Bryman (2007) suggests a number of practical reasons to consider mixed methods, such as to be attractive to stakeholders, to have a better chance of getting funding or being published, etc. The use of mixed methods could be a way to make both a researcher and his or her research distinctive in the field of higher education research. In this chapter, I have engaged in a preliminary effort to explore possible reasons driving researchers’ decisions regarding mixed methods. In the higher education literature, there has been very few studies addressing issues relating to the use of mixed methods. It is much rarer to see discussions addressing the reasons behind researchers’ decisions regarding mixed methods. I take the 47 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation opportunity to call for future research to review and analyse existing higher education studies in the area of mixed methods. It would also be interesting and useful to interview and survey the writers of these studies about what drive their choices of using mixed methods design. 48 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) References Bryman, A. (2007). The research question in social research: What is its role? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10(1), 5–20. Cai, Y. (2007). Academic staff integration in post-merger Chinese higher education institutions. Tampere: Tampere University Press. Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research: Theory, methods and techniques. London: SAGE Publications. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, Calif.; London: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.; London: SAGE Publications. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed method research desins. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks. London. New Delhi: Saga Phblications, 209–240. Curral, S. C. & Towler, A. J. (2003). Research methods in management and organizational research: Toward integratation of qualitative and quantitative techniques. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks. London. New Delhi: Saga Phblications, 513–526. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications, 1–45. Gomm, R., Hammersley, M. & Foster, P. (2000). Case study method: Key issues, key texts. London: SAGE. Griffiths, F. (1996). Qualitative research: The research questions it can help answer, the methods it uses, the assumptions behind the research questions and what influences the direction of research. Family Practice, 13(1), 27–30. Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W. & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3–20. Johnson, R. B. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Reseacher, 33(7), 14. Leech, N. & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality and Quantity, 43(2), 265–275. 49 What drives the choices of mixed methods in higher education research? Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Newman, I. & Benz, C. R. (1998a). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Newman, I. & Benz, C. R. (1998b). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southen Illinois University Press. Newman, I., Ridenour, C. S., Newman, C. & DeMarco, G. M. P. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks. London. New Delhi: Sage Publications, 167–188. Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 474–498. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Slate, J. R., Leech, N. L. & Collins, K. M. T. (2007). Conducting mixed analyses: A general typology. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 1(1), 4–17. Papadimitriou, A., Ivankova, N. & Hurtado, S. (2013). Addressing challenges of conducting quality mixed methods studies in higher education. In J. Huisman & M. Tight (Eds.), International perspectives on higher education research. Volume 9—Theory and Method in Higher Education Research. Emerald, 133– 153. Plano Clark, V. L. (2005). Cross-disciplinary analysis of the use of mixed methods in physics education research, counseling psychology, and primary care. Doctoral Doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Retrieved from http:// digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI3163998 Rossman, G. B. & Rallis, S. F. (1988). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.; London: SAGE Publications. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2003). The past and future of mixed methods research: From data triangulation to mixed model designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks. London. New Delhi: Saga Phblications, 671–701. Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative techniques in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. 50 Yuzhuo Cai Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2006). A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 12–28. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. 51 Researching social stratification in higher education: Methodology and paradigms James Anyan Introduction Researchers of sociology of education, like other researchers in the behavioural and social sciences, are often faced with the dilemma of choice of paradigms, methods and methodology. The controversy regarding the propriety of either adopting a wholly qualitative approach, and thereby presenting readers with the “dissonant music of inequality” of stratification, or going completely quantitative and subsequently presenting readers with the mathematics and statistics of the same phenomenon is yet to abate. A middle-ground approach that has increasingly gained currency has been to leverage the strengths of both the qualitative and quantitative strategies through the adoption of the mixed methods approach and, thus, limit the weaknesses—perceived or real—of the two traditional and dominant approaches to research. Others have had to question whether the strict separation of the quantitative and qualitative research spheres is an exercise in futility, since the boundaries of the two domains can sometimes become blurred (Anyan 2016; Bryman 2012; Creswell 2014; Denzin & Lincoln 1994; Flyvbjerg 2006; Savenye & Robinson 2005). The choice of the mixed methods approach, however, is only half the 52 James Anyan Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) battle; the researcher is then confronted with the adoption of an “appropriate” paradigm(s) to give some grounding to their methodological choices. It is also often the case that the researcher’s beliefs tend to dictate the methodological pace. Either way, thoughts and considerations would have to be given to both the methodology and paradigms in the research process. This chapter does not set out to join the qualitative–quantitative rift. I shall rather devote this space to highlight the evolution of the mixed methods approach and its use in higher education research. The discussion further extends to pragmatism and the transformative research paradigms, their association with the mixed methods approach as well as some of the challenges accompanying their adoption and use. Mixed methods The mixed methods research strategy, otherwise known as multimethod or mixed methodology, emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a “third force”, complementing the two traditional approaches (qualitative and quantitative) with its use and spanning fields like sociology, education, management, evaluation and health sciences. The works of Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003; 2010)—Handbook of Mixed Methods in the Social and Behavioural Sciences sought to offer a more comprehensive overview of this research strategy. Its paths can further be traced to the emergence of a number of journals such as the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches and Fields Methods (Creswell 2014; Hall 2013). Morgan (1998), however, traces the origin of mixed methods to the late 1950s and mid-1960s and credits Donald Campbell and the works of his colleagues on unobtrusive measures as pioneering this research strategy. The term mixed methods is generally used to refer to research that has elements of both the qualitative and quantitative research strategies. The mixing of both quantitative and qualitative data, supposedly, is geared towards achieving a “stronger understanding of the problem” or question than either of the traditional strategies could provide 53 Researching social stratification in higher education: Methodology and paradigms Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation (Creswell 2014, 215; Bryman 2012). However, Sandelowski (2003) believes that it is merely a methodological fashion. Creswell (2014) has identified three different rationales and values for the adoption of the mixed methods approach. When researchers choose mixed methods by virtue of being able to draw on the strengths of both the quantitative and qualitative approaches, while minimising their limitations, they are operating on what he calls the general level; that is to say, the primary reason for adopting the mixed methods approach are the perceived greater strengths and fewer limitations resulting from the combination of the two traditional approaches, as opposed to the use of either a wholly qualitative or quantitative approach. Those who adopt it on the grounds of access to both kinds of data, as well as being able to bring some elements of sophistication and complexity to appeal to enthusiasts of new research procedures, are operating at the practical level. A procedural level user would argue that the use of the mixed methods approach brings a more comprehensive understanding to the research problem by facilitating a comparison of different perspectives from the data, the interpretation of the quantitative data with the qualitative, among others. A number of scholars have identified different ways of classifying and designing studies that adopt the mixed methods research strategy. Morgan (1998) observes that the combination of both quantitative and qualitative research designs has been done such that there are some elements of complementarity and division of labour for each of the strategies. These have been achieved through the making of two primary decisions: (1) a priority decision, which pairs the principal method with a subordinating one, and (2) a sequence decision, which determines whether the subordinating method precedes or succeeds the principal. To illustrate Morgan’s (1998) proposition, if a researcher decides to carry out a survey of students with disabilities in a given higher education system, and he or she decides to interview a few students to inform what goes into the survey design, it is obvious that the quantitative approach has been chosen as the principal method in the priority decision. Since the interview comes first, it is then given the highest weighting as far as the sequence decision is concerned. 54 James Anyan Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) For Bryman (2012), the purposes of the study should guide the design to be adopted. He spells out 18 different ways of combining quantitative and qualitative data, including: (1) triangulation—when seeking a mutual corroboration of findings; (2) offset—to leverage the strengths and limit the weaknesses of both the quantitative and qualitative approaches; (3) completeness—the notion that combining qualitative and quantitative research would result in a more comprehensive enquiry; (4) process—when the assumption is that quantitative research would cater to the structures of social life while the qualitative would give a sense of the process; (5) different research questions—when the assumption is that each of the research questions is best suited to either a quantitative or qualitative research and (6) explanation— when one of the two approaches is expected to explain the results generated by the other. He adds that mixed methods could also be used on the grounds of instrument development, sampling, credibility, illustration, diversity of views, among others. Creswell (2014) has also set out two broad categories for the design of mixed methods research—basic and advanced. The basic mixed methods design comprises the convergent parallel, explanatory sequential and exploratory sequential. As the names suggest, the convergent parallel is adopted when the goal is to merge data from both the quantitative and qualitative to show the extent of convergence or divergence, and with the view to achieving a comparison of the perspectives from both sets of data. The explanatory sequential seeks an in-depth understanding and an illumination of the results from the quantitative data. Put simply, the qualitative data is used to explain the quantitative results. When the development of better instruments for measurement is the goal, the exploratory sequential comes in handy. As regards the advanced mixed methods design, Creswell (2014) further identifies the embedded, transformative and multiphase designs. The embedded design is used to gain an understanding of the views of participants, for example, for an experimental intervention, while the transformative is used in situations in which the needs of a marginalised group in society need to be understood in the pursuit of an agenda for reform and action. The multiphase design would 55 Researching social stratification in higher education: Methodology and paradigms Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation be more suitable in situations in which formative and summative evaluations are needed for a particular intervention programme. A closer look at the classifications of the mixed methods designs, as spelt out by the three authors (Bryman 2012; Creswell 2014; Morgan 1998) indicates that they share practically the same characteristics. The main differences, as far as I can see, are nomenclatural. Paradigms The adoption of a particular method or methodology for a research enquiry would satisfy just one component of the research process. Researchers need to be clear and explicit about the paradigm(s) or philosophical assumptions underpinning their research, since they tend to drive the data gathering, analysis and interpretation. Bryman (1988) defines a paradigm as “a cluster of beliefs and dictates which for scientists in a particular discipline influence what should be studied, how research should be done, [and] how results should be interpreted” (p. 4). Conversely, Guba (1990) sees it simply as “a set of beliefs that guide action” (as cited in Creswell 2014, 6). A paradigm is otherwise known as a worldview (Creswell & Plano Clark 2007; Teddlie & Tashakkori 2009), epistemologies and ontologies (Crotty 1998) and a mental model (Greene 2007), to mention a few. In the literature, four types of paradigms can generally be found: positivism, constructionism, transformative and pragmatism (Creswell 2014; Hall 2013). Some authors reason that since positivism and post-positivism are more suitable to quantitative research and constructionism (social constructivism) to qualitative research, mixed methods researchers would be better served by going with the transformative and pragmatist paradigms (Creswell 2014; Hall 2013). Hall (2013) argues that mixed methods researchers are faced with three options in their quest for an appropriate paradigm(s) to underpin their research. They can either adopt an a-paradigmatic stance or a single or multiple paradigmatic stance. He rebuffs the proposition for the adoption of an a-paradigmatic stance to research, as proposed by Patton (1990), for example, 62 James Anyan Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) References Anyan, J. (2016). Persistent elitism in access to higher education in Ghana. Publications of the Faculty of Social Sciences, 14, Helsinki: University of Helsinki. Berg, G. A. (2010). Low-income students and the perpetuation of inequality: Higher education in America. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Bergman, M. M. (2008). The straw men of the qualitative-quantitative divide and their influence on mixed methods research. In M. M. Bergman (Ed.), Advances in mixed methods research. London: Sage Publications, 10–21. Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press Inc. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.). New York and London: Routledge Falmer. Cherryholmes, C. H. (1992, August-September). Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism. Education Researcher, 13–17. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. Good, M. R. (2015). Improving student learning in higher education: A mixed method study (Published doctoral dissertation). Paper 18. Retrieved from http://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1017&context= diss201019. Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Hall, R. F. (2013). Mixed methods: In search of a paradigm. In T. Lê & Q. Lê (Eds.), Conducting research in a changing and challenging world. New York: Nova Science Publishers Incorporated, 71–78. Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York: Guilford Press. Mertens, D. M. (2010). Transformative mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 469–474. 63 Researching social stratification in higher education: Methodology and paradigms Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 362–376. Morgan, D. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48–76. Museus, S. D. & Griffin, K. A. (2011). Mapping the margins in higher education: On the promise of intersectionality frameworks in research and discourse. In K.A. Griffin & S.D. Museus (Eds.), Using mixed methods to study intersectionality in higher education: New directions in institutional research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 5–13. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Rossman, G. B. & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation. Education Review, 9(5), 627–643. Sandelowski, M. (2003). Tables or tableaux? The challenges of writing and reading mixed methods studies. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.) (2003). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.) (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 64 James Anyan Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) II Conceptual Approaches Utilised to Understanding University Transformation 67 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Johanna Moisio Introduction The year 2006 marked the start of preparations leading to university reform in Finland. The national discussion on university reform was held concurrently with the higher education (HE) modernisation discourse in the Council of the European Union (EU). There is existing research on the development of EU-level cooperation and the development of Finnish HE policy, but relatively little research on the significance of EU HE policy cooperation in member states. The research problem, then, is the connection between EU and nationallevel discussions on HE policy. The research presented in this chapter evaluated the connection between national higher education policy formation and EU-level discussion on higher education. Policy transfer theory has been tested by Moisio (2014) as an explanatory model for studying the success or failure of EU cooperation in HE policy. The policy transfer method pays particular attention to the policy formation process and the possibility of transfer of ideas, policies and arrangements from one political setting to another setting or system (Radaelli 2000; Dolowitz & Marsh 2000). 68 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Policy learning and policy transfer There is some evidence that the EU education policy discourse has been transferred to EU member states. Lange and Alexiadou’s (2010) research differentiates various policy learning styles (mutual learning, competitive policy learning, imperialistic policy learning and surface policy learning) in education policy by categorising different types of interactions between the same range of public policy actors (member states themselves and member states and the European Commission). The concept of mutual learning holds that qualitative knowledge about different practices is as important as quantitative information. Participation in mutual learning is voluntary, and participating countries/member states have positive incentives to participate (in clusters and peer learning activities) when the knowledge from these events may help them solve national policy problems. According to Lange and Alexiadou, the concept of competitive policy learning focuses more on the quantitative side of cooperation. Various EU institutions (Eurostat, Cedefop and the European Training Foundation) develop statistical analyses of education practices in the EU. Competitive learning starts from specific assumptions, indicators or benchmarks, and discussions are limited to the selected problems. While mutual learning is aimed at the deep learning of traditions and politics, the goal of competitive learning is to open up international comparisons. Competitive learning depends on the pressure created on member states. Because states are motivated to preserve their good reputation, pressure becomes effective when combined with media attention. Since statistics are created mainly by formal institutions, competitive learning is less of a bottom-up process than mutual learning (pp. 452–454). Lawn and Lingard’s (2002, 300) earlier study also stresses the importance of statistical production—previously done mainly by the OECD but latterly by the EU as well—and the statistical comparison that is central to harmonisation. However, Erkkilä (2014) argues that the European Commission has increased its role in HE policy by using global university rankings. These rankings have created “a political imaginary competition, where European universities must be reformed if they are to be successful” (p. 92). 69 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation The concept of imperialistic policy learning refers to the attempt by some countries to export their national education policies to others as well as to the European Commission’s policy agenda (Lange & Alexiadou 2010, 452–454). There is some evidence that this has been one of the goals of the United Kingdom’s HE policy (Alexiadou & Lange 2011). Conversely, surface policy learning refers to a more passive or negative response by a member state, which is an attempt to minimise the influence of the Commission or other member states. Learning, for the most part, entails only observation of possible infringements of national sovereignty that should be reported back to national administrations. Another manifestation of surface policy learning, according to Lange and Alexiadou (2010, 455–456), is the national progress reporting for Education and Training 2010/2020, which sometimes only describes member states’ own national education policies, even with regard to benchmarks that differ in scope or timeline from those mutually agreed at the EU level. As members of international structures or regimes, national governments may have to adopt policies as part of their obligations. The question here is whether policy transfer within the EU can be interpreted as coercive, given that individual nations have, in principle, joined the EU voluntarily. Dolowitz and Marsh (2000, 14–15) point out that each member state does have influence over the adoption of EU policies; thus, they actively and voluntarily shape EU politics. It is therefore possible to argue that policy transfer in the EU is both obligated and negotiated. Contemporary policies are increasingly affected by policy transfer, especially in the European context, because of close cooperation between many policy fields. As part of globalisation and Europeanisation, politicians and civil servants have become acquainted with each other, and at the same time, international organisations and policy entrepreneurs “sell” policies around the world. Teichler (2004) wisely reminds us, however, that although the increase of knowledge transfer across nations has typically been seen as a phenomenon of globalisation, one must keep in mind that governments are highly active in shaping the rules of knowledge transfer, doing so in order to maximise their 70 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) national gains (p. 13). The penultimate section of this chapter examines the concept of policy transfer in greater depth. Policy transfer and explaining lesson drawing Radaelli (2000) and Dolowitz and Marsh (2000) define policy transfer as a process in which knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in one political setting or system (past or present) is used in the development of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in another political setting or system. Dale (1999) identifies a total of eight mechanisms under policy transfer: borrowing, learning, teaching, harmonisation, dissemination, standardisation, installing interdependence and imposition. Policy transfer is the comprehensive term for all these mechanisms, covering both voluntary and coercive transfer in different circumstances and by various actors. The concepts of policy transfer and policy diffusion are both founded on the notion that the ideas of other countries or systems may be worth testing elsewhere. These policies may either spread or be transferred to new environments. The difference between policy transfer and policy diffusion is that diffusion studies tend not to reveal anything about the content of new policies, focusing more on process than on substance (Dolowitz & Marsh 1996, 345). In the globalised world of the twenty-first century, policy transfer is a policy formation tool that has gradually increased in use between nations.1 Public policy is something that is both global and national, and policy-makers study other political systems for new ideas about policies, programmes, institutions and jurisdictions, which they look to apply to their own context. The policy transfer concept can be used either as an independent variable—to explain 1 Dolowitz and Marsh (2000) mention three reasons for increasing policy transfer: global economic pressure, rapid growth of communications and the influence of international organisations. 71 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation why a particular policy was adopted—or as a dependent variable, to explain why transfer occurs (Dolowitz & Marsh 1996, 354). The following questions can usefully be asked about policy transfer. Why engage in policy transfer? Who transfers policy? What is transferred? From where and why? How is the transfer composed, and what are the different degrees of transfer? How is the process related to policy success or failure (see Radaelli 2000; Dolowitz & Marsh 2000)? It has been shown that at least six main categories of actors are involved in policy transfer: elected officials, political parties, civil servants, pressure groups, policy entrepreneurs/experts and supranational institutions (Dolowitz & Marsh 1996, 345). Policy transfer may be either voluntary or coercive and includes objects such as policy goals, structure and content, instruments and techniques, institutions, ideology, attitudes and concepts as well as negative lessons (Dolowitz & Marsh 1996, 350). Voluntary transfer is usually based on a perceived dissatisfaction with a current state or even on observed policy failure. Uncertainty about the reasons behind problems or the effects of previous decisions may prompt actors to search for policies they might wish to borrow. As Haas (quoted in Dolowitz & Marsh 1996, 347) put it: “International collaboration…is an attempt to reduce uncertainty”. Coercive transfer can take place either directly or indirectly. Direct coercive transfer occurs when transfer is required by an external actor. However, that obligation is rarely imposed by another state; international institutions are typical players in direct coercive actions, and EU legislation is a good example of this kind of measure. Indirect coercive methods derive from a variety of situations, including technological development, economic pressures and international consensus. Fears of being left behind on an important public issue may also generate attention and lead to policy transfer: “A country can indirectly be pushed towards policy transfer if political actors perceive their country falling behind its neighbours or competitors” (Dolowitz & Marsh 1996, 347–349). This can be driven by international comparisons, which are made against the current best. The international flow of national data has increased, and comparison is now an everyday business, usually conducted 78 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Table 1. Mode of governance, institutional variable and transfer outcomes (adapted from Bulmer & Padgett 2004, 107) Mode of Governance Institutional variables Range of likely transfer outcomes Hierarchy Authority/normative mandate accruing to EU institutions Density of rules Availability of sanctions/incentives Emulation-Synthesis Negotiation Decision rules/Mode of negotiation: QMV + problem solving Unanimity + bargaining Emulation-Synthesis Synthesis-Abortive Facilitation Institutionalization: Treaty incorporation of objectives Specificity of guidelines Quantifiable benchmarks Density of exchange networks Influence-Abortive Alternatives to policy transfer Criticisms of policy transfer focus mainly on its importance—is it really a theory or just another form of policy-making, distinct from more conventional forms? There have also been questions regarding why lesson-drawing and policy transfer occur in place of other forms of policy-making. A third question that arises is how the policy transfer method affects policy-making, particularly when compared to other policy processes (James & Lodge 2003). James and Lodge (2003) argue that “lesson-drawing” and “policy transfer” are difficult to distinguish from other forms of policy-making. They maintain that researchers interested in conceptual, non-domestic or across-time influences in policy-making should not restrict themselves to the policy transfer framework, as there are other available approaches. The authors give two examples, the first of which is the institutional approach, explaining how policy-making is mediated by institutions. Institutionalism offers an answer to the question of who has power in coercive action, and why some actors are recipients, and some are not. Institutional analysis also offers an explanation of how organisational structures affect learning processes. A second alternative 79 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation or supplementary explanatory model to policy transfer, according to James and Lodge, is the power of ideas in policy-making. The spread of ideas often includes networks of actors involved in learning and transfer, and the nature of the network—whether it is an advocacy coalition or an epistemic community—is important. James and Lodge argue that developing clearer measures of “transfer” might help to develop the approach. Effort should also be made to validate whether transfer has occurred and to assess, as needed, the extent of non-transfer. One must note that James and Lodge’s criticism is from 2003 when the OMC had just started as a policy learning format within the EU. The authors refer to the process of Europeanisation and the OMC, but it was for the purpose of estimating its effects. Policy transfer can be a useful explanatory tool, but other explanatory models can also be useful, such as international cooperation, policy networks, advocacy coalitions and epistemic communities, which also develop and promote various policies and ideas (also Dolowitz & Marsh 2000, 21; Radaelli 1999) and present another way to study the phenomenon at hand. According to Enders (2004, 374), Europeanised policy responses in HE may also be an example of mutual adjustment. Governments continue to adopt their own national policies, but in so doing, they reflect the policy choices of other governments or perceived European developments. Bulmer et al. (2007, 5) add that in earlier periods of policy analysis, it was typical to look at policy convergence since national policy-makers tended to rely on signals from the international system. By adopting similar solutions, there appeared to be convergence. This approach, however, focuses primarily on policy outcomes more than on the actors and methods of the policy process. The policy transfer approach also identifies the external catalysts for change, key actors, reasons behind as well as different steps in the process whereby policy from one jurisdiction is shifted to another. 80 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) The utility of policy transfer As described in Moisio (2014), Bulmer and Padgett’s (2004) typology of various forms of governance and policy transfer may serve to explain the policy transfer forms in EU policy cooperation in HE (see Table 2). Bulmer and colleagues (2007, 9) note that governance by negotiation amounts to policy transfer by consent, centred on the Council of the EU. Common rules and norms are agreed by the member states and thereby adopted by the EU. In the process, member states have the opportunity to “upload” their policy preferences to the supranational level. The Commission is the agenda-setter, and it “controls the access points at which policy ideas enter the EU system” (p. 55), as member states also try to influence the ideas adopted by the Commission for transfer. “Self-interested Member States can be expected to compete to shape EU norms according to domestic preferences and practices, thereby reducing the subsequent adaptation pressures” (p. 20). In a soft law sector such as education, as noted above, adaptation pressure is minimal, which may in part explain why Finland was active in the HE modernisation talks, seeking to direct the discussion in the Council to favour the purposes of national policy formation. 81 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Table 2. Governance of education and policy transfer (adopted from Bulmer and Padgett 2004; Bulmer et al. 2007, 25) Mode of Governance Institutional variables Range of likely transfer outcomes *Instrument* in education policy Negotiation Decision rules/Mode of negotiation: QMV + problem solving Unanimity + bargaining Emulation-Synthesis Synthesis-Abortive Recommendation of the EYC Resolution/conclusion of the EYC Facilitation Institutionalization: Treaty incorporation of objectives Specificity of guidelines Quantifiable benchmarks Density of exchange networks Influence-Abortive ET 2010 OMC “Under facilitation sovereignty remains vested in national arenas, but is overlaid by interaction between national policy-makers facilitated by the EU” (p. 23). Facilitation as a mode of governance offers only soft and flexible means to persuade member states to reassess their policy practices; the new form of cooperation, the OMC, was a good example of such means. The role of the EU is to work as an enabler of exchange and a mediator between member states (p. 24). A low level of institutionalisation means that policy transfer is restricted to influence and that there is a relatively high incidence of abortive measures (p. 24). According to the Finnish experts interviewed for the study, this was the case with OMC in HE policy. Policy transfer can be a useful explanatory tool, but it is clear that no theory can explain all outcomes. Other explanatory models can also be useful, such as international cooperation, policy networks, advocacy coalitions and epistemic communities, which also develop and promote various policies and ideas (Dolowitz & Marsh 2000, 21; Radaelli 1999) and could be another way of studying the phenomenon at hand. According to Enders (2004, 374), Europeanised policy responses in HE may also be an example of mutual adjustment; governments continue to adopt their own national policies, but 82 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) in so doing, they reflect the policy choices of other governments or perceived European developments. It is possible to conclude, however, that policy transfer can be useful when explaining the outcomes of the four categories of description here. Moreover, the results suggest that the theoretical development could be further improved by introducing the concepts of interaction and/or policy spin. The outcome space below shows how the significance of EU cooperation arises according to the understandings of Finnish HE policy experts, from category D (irrelevance and resistance) to category A (change)—that is, from entirely voluntary cooperation (OMC) to semi-coercive negotiated transfer (the Lisbon Strategy implementation). The categories are different and separate, but their contents are mutually supportive. For instance, the notion of a new kind of interdependence in category A supports the understanding of a variety of influences on a member state from EU cooperation. Category C, in describing fusion, supports category A in characterising change in EU-level cooperation: other forms of cooperation (OECD and Bologna) were seen to be important, but the relevance of EU cooperation increased at the turn of the century. The understandings in category D of the irrelevance of the OMC and soft law can also be supported by category C, where the interviewees observed that the EU is only one form of international cooperation. Clearly, although they can be introduced separately, the categories are also interconnected. Figure 1 presents the completed outcome space for the four results categories. The preliminary outcome space improved with the scale of policy transfer (according to Bulmer et al. 2007). EU HE policy cooperation does not reach the point of entirely coercive transfer, moving from completely voluntary policy transfer to semi-coercive policy transfer when connected with overall EU goals, such as the Lisbon Strategy. To date, there has been no direct imposition of implementation of EU HE policy; thus, the outcome space stops at semi-coercive transfer. Here, the term “to date” is of relevance, as the new EU2020 strategy and its follow-up, with the European semester and new financial regulation, may change the situation in the near future. This may be a theme for further research. 83 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation With reference to the scale of policy transfer (from Bulmer et al. 2007, 15), EU HE policy cooperation has changed from voluntary to semi-coercive policy transfer, but it has yet to become entirely coercive. Conclusion Effective policy analysis requires knowledge of how policy works. If reformers do not understand causation in public policy, they cannot assess whether or not their choices will work. A failure to understand decision-making procedures and the context within which they work often results in inappropriate choices when transforming methods of policy-making (John 1998, 10). The purpose of this chapter was to describe how, through the transferability and functionality of transfer mechanisms, it is possible to study the effectiveness of policy cooperation. Policy transfer theory may help in understanding what is significant in EU cooperation and which methods of EU cooperation transfer Figure 1. Outcome space: From voluntary to semi-coercive transfer Entirely Coercive (direct imposition) Perfectly Voluntary (lesson-drawing) Semi-Coercive (negotiated, perceived necessity) 84 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) policies to the national level. In the post-2006 context of Finnish HE policy formation, there was a clear connection between EU-level and national-level decision-making. The theoretical framework offers an approach to combining the different findings and observations and can be used as an “overcoat” for the study, but theory alone cannot explain all possible results (Maxwell 1996, 33). 85 Policy transfer in higher education policy formation Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation References Alexiadou, N. & Lange, B. (2011). Deflecting European Union influence on national education policy-making: The case of the United Kingdom. Paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research Conference in Reykjavik 2011. Retrieved from http://www.ecprnet.eu/conferences/general_conference/ reykjavik/paper_details.asp?paperid=502. Bache, I. & Olsson, J. (2001). Legitimacy through partnership? EU policy diffusion in Britain and Sweden. Scandinavian Political Studies, 24(3), 2001. Bulmer, S. & Padgett, S. (2004). Policy transfer in the European Union: An institutional perspective. British Journal of Political Science, 35, 103–126. Bulmer, S., Dolowitz, D., Humphreys, P. & Padgett, S. (2007). Policy transfer in European Union governance. Regulating the utilities. Oxon: Routledge. Dale, R. (1999). Specifying globalization effects on national policy: Focus on the mechanisms. Journal of Education Policy, 14(1), 1–17. Dolowitz, D. P. & Marsh, D. (1996). Who learns what from whom: A review of the policy transfer literature. Political Studies, XLIV, 343–357. Dolowitz, D. P. & Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13(1), 5–24. Enders, J. (2004). Higher education, internationalisation, and the nation-state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education, 47, 361–382. Erkkilä, T. (2014). Global university rankings, transnational policy discourse and higher education in Europe. European Journal of Education, 49(1), 2014. Grek, S., Lawn, M., Lingard, B., Ozga J., Rinne, R., Segerholm, C. & Simola, H. (2009). National policy brokering and the construction of the European education space in England, Sweden, Finland and Scotland. Comparative Education, 45(1), 5–21. Hill, M. (1997/2009). The public policy process (5th ed.). England: Pearson. James, O. & Lodge, M. (2003). The limitations of “policy transfer” and “lesson drawing” for public policy research. Political Studies Review, 1, 179–193. John, P. (1998). Analysing public policy. London and New York: Pinter. Karakhanyan, S., van Veen K. & Bergen, T. (2011). Educational policy diffusion and transfer: The case of Armenia. Higher Education Policy, 24, 53–83. Moisio, J. (2014). Understanding the significance of EU higher education policy cooperation in Finnish higher education policy. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 2004. Tampere University Press, Tampere. 86 Johanna Moisio Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Lange, B. & Alexiadou, N. (2010). Governing through learning about policy: Just all words? An introduction to policy learning in the context of open methods of co-ordinating education in the European Union (EU). Journal of Education Policy, 25(4), 443–463. Lawn, M. & Lingard, B. (2002). Constructing a European policy space in educational governance: The role of transnational policy actors. European Educational Research Journal, 1(2). Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. London: Sage Publications. Radaelli, C. M. (2000). Policy transfer in the European Union: Institutional isomorphism as a source of legitimacy. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13(1), 25–43. Teichler, U. (2004). The changing debate on internationalisation of higher education. Higher Education, 48, 5–26. 87 A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa Pascal Doh Introduction This chapter is an offshoot of a doctoral study supervised by Professor Holtta, which investigated the role of higher education in poverty reduction in Africa (Doh 2012). The study found the necessity of a university-led community innovation system (CIS), of a quadruple structure in complementing the lack and weaknesses of national university systems in most developing countries. Indeed, gone are the days when the university was an ivory tower, disconnected and distanced from the realities of its environment. Today, the university is undergoing a second revolution, which involves a third mission of economic development, including poverty reduction. This revolution is leading to a search for the most appropriate frameworks within which the university will perform and contribute most effectively. While the triple helix of the university, industry and government partnership, (Etzkowitz & Leydesdoff 1997) and the national innovation system (NIS) (Lundvall 1992; Lundvall et al. 2002) seem to be developing as the way to strengthen the role of universities in economic 94 Pascal Doh Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) three helices maintain roles similar to those of the triple helix, with connection to the local councils and communities: Table 1. Expected roles of the major actors in the quadruple helix (contextualised from the triple helix role analysis to a quadruple helix; Doh 2012, 126). Actor Role (s) 1. The Government Connecting the university to the local communities, designs university community innovation support programmes Connecting the local communities and universities to the industries Funding the connections Facilitating access to the markets Coordinating and regulating the interactions between the three 2. The University Knowledge, skills creator and supplier to industries and society A physical environment for research and teaching on local innovations Transmitting and disseminating the knowledge to industries Integrating the community knowledge into R&D and science and technology Providing incentives for academics to interact and cooperate with local communities and industries Academics constantly seek to relate to the knowledge and innovations from local communities Academics design the projects, apply for funding and link the innovations to industry 3. Community (Council) With local councils officials coordinating structures for local community innovations Connecting the local community to universities and industry Where the grassroots population is active in proposing its knowledge and innovations to universities Where councils are capable of linking innovations to the global market Where councils substitute the government as the designer and executor of national innovation policies and funder and regulator at the local level 4. Industry Cooperating with universities Providing resources to stimulate interaction between universities and the grassroots population Providing feedback to universities Linking interactions and the products of local innovation to the market, society and the global knowledge economy 95 A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation A few observations ought to be made from the above four actors of the quadruple helix. Although by deductive reasoning, CIS can be understood as the smaller spatial and local component of national and regional innovation systems, during the analyses, we found that the national government remains the major and largest actor in designing university-local community innovation activities, governing and regulating them. This suggests that an innovative entrepreneurial local community should reflect and translate the innovative capacity of a nation, the NIS and vice versa. Consequently, there was no obvious reason to alter the position of the government in the hierarchy of the four actors. In fact, innovation processes that take place at the local community level do not necessarily operate in a vacuum at the basic special units of the nation. They could be the results of system-wide innovation policy, structures, cultures and incentives. A second observation draws on the fact that the role of the university as a major actor and a knowledge, research and training institution does not change as much as in the triple helix. What changes is the importance of the innovative and entrepreneurial academics at the basic units of the university, who are likely to be involved in the informal processes and contacts with the local communities. They are also important in the identification of community knowledge and the development and transformation of these knowledge and technologies to economically useful knowledge. Drawn on Doh (2012), the (local) community actor(s) is understood as comprising a variety of sub-actors such as individuals with local grassroots knowledge, micro businesses and SMEs, councils, civic organisations and other development agents in the local communities. These are community-based organisations and social entrepreneurs that are active in innovation as well as in promoting local innovations and linking them to university actors. There is the need to highlight, within this community perspective, the importance of local councils as formal structures that could be charged with connecting grassroots community innovations to universities, industries and even the market. The observation was that the role of the council was not dramatically different from that of the government since local councils as governors and regulators of local innovations could be carriers to national 96 Pascal Doh Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) innovation policies, especially within more decentralised and autonomous politico-geographical entities. Local councils can also be strategic in outsourcing funding from government and industries. In fact, there was also the thought about designing the local community councils as a separate main actor, leading to a quintuple helix, since it could be clearly distinguished from community-based individuals and organisations as well as social entrepreneurs that are active in the innovation processes. However, the council was retained as part of the local community on the grounds of every innovation system having a defined spatial and geographical connotation. Although the industry actor was altered from the triple helix to become the fourth and last actor, it remains the last important point for the actualisation and materialisation of economically useful knowledge from the communities. The industry is an important funder and provider of feedback. It links final innovations and products to the market. The proactive African university in its community innovation system The entrepreneurial university pathway and its limits In a rhetorical question as to which type of university is relevant in the innovation system, Doh (2012) affirms an “entrepreneurial university” (Clark 1998; 2004) as embracing the “third mission” of economic development (Etzkowitz & Zhou 2008, 629) as the best institutional framework. These have been maintained for the CIS, essentially because of the same reasons. The entrepreneurial university frameworks implicitly stimulate external collaboration between the university and its external economic development environment. The entrepreneurial university is, according to Etzkowitz and Zhou (2008, 629), “a means to promote economic growth”. Economic growth nowadays, especially with regard to developing countries, requires greater interaction and collaboration from universities (Etzkowitz & Zhou 2008; Etzkowitz et al. 2008; Clark 1998; 2004). Zhou and Peng (2008, 638) perceive 97 A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation the entrepreneurial university as the best tool for indigenous innovation because of its stronger service function and influence on the economy. However, in two other articles, Doh (2016a; 2016b) highlights several contextual limitations of the entrepreneurial university in terms of developing countries. These are expounded below. The entrepreneurial university framework views entrepreneurship merely as an institutional characteristic, not taking into consideration that entrepreneurship could be stimulated from an upper layer of the university and that entrepreneurship does exist in micro units (Azele 2008). As a result of system-wide policy designs and funding, Clark (1998) does not situate the entrepreneurial university within a systemic framework. The entrepreneurial university, even entrepreneurship education at the basic unit, could be related to a particular funding scheme or policy designed beyond the basic unit and beyond the university, and vice versa, where policies are designed on the basis of the entrepreneurship education practices at the basic unit. Moreover, although the entrepreneurial university might have viewed partnerships and activities with industries as a characteristic, it focuses more on the extra second and third stream income and funding dimension and not on the economic role as a trigger of the entrepreneurial university, as Ezkowitz and Zhou (2008) postulate. One of the fundamental weaknesses of the entrepreneurial university framework, as observed by Doh (2012), is that most of its related studies have concentrated on research and technological and applied institutions in high income and highly industrial environments. Meanwhile, its conceptual glasses can be applicable to universities of all types, from those with an intensive research tradition to comprehensive ones in all contexts (Gibb, Haskins & Robertson 2009). Also, it can be observed that entrepreneurship education strategies in many European universities have been developed separately from the institutional aspect. Doh (2016a; 2016b) argues for the necessity of a multilevel framework that connects the two dimensions. Lastly, the entrepreneurial university framework does not pay sufficient attention to scientist-led entrepreneurship. University professors are very important actors in the informal networking that grants business to the university and are more strategic in the CIS, in the 98 Pascal Doh Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) developing countries connecting the university to the grassroots population and in local innovations. Entrepreneurial professors in community innovation It is important to present a separate account of entrepreneurial professors in this subsection because the employment of the entrepreneurial university concept in the case study of higher education and poverty reduction strategies (Doh (2012) generally showed a weak institutional support system (e.g. no discretionary funding, poor understanding of entrepreneurship, etc.). However, despite the generally weak institutional framework in response to the entrepreneurial university pathways, some departments and professors continue to stand conspicuously and tall in interactions with an effective university-led CIS. A principle example of this interaction in the case study of Cameroon, which, like most of Africa, is in the medical, pharmaceutical, chemical and life science fields. Respondent Number 16 (R16) (Doh 2012) of the University of Buea, Cameroon (Doh 12), was involved in pharmacological validation towards drug discovery. This entails meeting charlatan traditional doctors (most likely less educated) in order to acquire knowledge of certain medicinal plants which the doctor in the grassroot community claims cure certain diseases. R16 (the principal investigator) then conducts scientific research in the lab to validate whether the traditional medicinal plants actually cure what the (charlatan) traditional doctors claim that they cure, then examines prospects for drug discovery from the contents of the plants. In a well-structured NIS, which encompasses a CIS with appropriate incentives and an inclusive intellectual property regime, it could be possible for the traditional doctor to be integrated as part of the drug discovery. The cycle of the CIS is completed once the results of the potentials of the medicinal plants are affirmed, with patents and drugs put on the market, and the charlatan doctor, most often from a rural area, being part of the proceeds. Respondent R12, from the Physics Department, develops prototypes that can be used to electrify rural areas (R12). The respondent 99 A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation believes that the micro hydroelectricity and wind turbine generation of electricity can help reduce cost and extend and improve the generative capacity in Cameroon. R18 does research and advocacy on gender, women and land ownership and believes that for women to contribute to poverty reduction, they must own factors of production in the society, one of which is land. The respondent argued that within the current dispensation, the customary laws have tended to disfavour women and that this is a major handicap to poverty reduction strategies. Other university departments in the case study were seen to provide continuing education, adult and lifelong learning to improve the analytic and innovative capacities of the grassroots population. Drawback to the university in the innovation system The first challenge—which was observed to undermine the role of the university in most of the national or community innovation systems in most African countries, for example, the case country Cameroon—is the absence of a NIS. Most innovation systems in Africa, like most developing countries, are marred by weak linkages and low levels of interaction between actors, elements and institutions. These weaknesses manifest in the form of lack of funding and lack of internal or interface structures to connect the university to the society and the market. For instance, the principal investigator (R16) above (Doh 2012) revealed that once he had done the pharmacological validation and obtained the results, it became very difficult, if not impossible, to go from there to develop products that could be taken to the market. The respondent observed that more capital was needed to carry out the formulation and registration of the product but that the “national environment just ignores” them at this point. This is exemplified below: Our activities are handicapped by the fact that there is no structure, means and prospects to take us from scientific results to product development. We could have more direct relevance and impact on poverty with products in the markets if (1) we start manufacturing the drugs; (2) if those drugs get to be used; (3) if you start working with a particular medicinal plant and you can 100 Pascal Doh Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) demonstrate scientifically from the lab that the plant can generate income, you are directly impacting on poverty. Most often, our work does not go out of the laboratory, “nobody takes us out of the laboratory”. (R16) R12 (Doh 2012), who was producing prototypes of electrification for the community, believed that if the university researchers have the proper government or systems (institutional/financial) to support the country, then its citizens would be able to benefit more directly from what they were doing. Rural electrification, for instance, is one of the main developmental challenges of Cameroon (R12). The potentials of drug discovery for health and the national economy cannot be over-emphasised. Given a strong innovation system with interconnectedness and linkages, the results of electricity and drug discovery of the two respondents above would be taken over by the related ministerial departments in Cameroon for exploitation, sponsorship and commercialisation and dissemination. Respondent R12 argued that if there were sufficient funding and systemic support, their activities could be scaled up to help the national electricity corporation (SONEL) to produce power plants of a higher capacity instead of using smaller ones for rural areas From the above example, it can be argued that the NIS, among others, can enhance the university’s contribution in the CIS and, thus, poverty. Doh (2016) notes other weaknesses affecting the university in the NIS and CIS, such as the lack of a national strategic plan, insignificant systems culture for research and poor understanding by the population and politicians of the activities of universities. The low R&D potential of local firms and the country at large can also affect the performance of the university in the CIS. The absence of key facilitators to link universities’ potential and results to potential users is a significant impediment. The low degree of networking and weak educational and analytic capacity of the grassroots population affect universities’ interaction and connection with the local community; both academic and grassroots communities are likely to “speak different languages” and have different world views. 101 A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Conclusion This chapter has demonstrated and presented elements of the aloofness of universities in developing countries to their grassroot communities as a huge limitation, both in the roles of the universities and in the economic development processes. This aloofness to the local community is a major weakness for developing countries’ universities, such as those in Africa, because more than 70% of the countries’ potential and activities are in the informal sector. A significant amount of the riches are in indigenous and grassroots knowledge and technology. The chapter has proposed the importance of a university-led community innovation built on the basis of a quadruple helix framework, composed of a coordinated relationship between the university, government, local community and industries. This implies a broadened innovation system to capture the rural community and articulate both the commercial and noncommercial and social aspects of innovation. Rather than focusing mostly in terms of the “rich” forms of innovations and becoming globally competitive, it is necessary to see innovation from the perspective of being locally adapted, embedded and socially inclusive. Within this quadruple helix approach, the university plays a lead role in scanning the environment and identifying convertible economically useful knowledge in its grassroots community. The university converts tacit and explicit knowledge from the local communities into innovation, then is passes this on to industry and products in the market. The government is, above all, coordinating, funding and linking the other three actors. Local councils become a very important constituted and organised body, which can substitute the government, and vice versa, as the coordinator, regulator and funder of innovation processes. It is important to note that the conceptualisation finds equally important the formal (established) industry as final end points, relevant for bringing the products of local innovation to market. Studies on formal policy approaches and frameworks that link the university to local community innovations, especially in Africa will yield very interesting results in terms of economic development and poverty reduction. 102 Pascal Doh Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) References Altenburg, T. (2009). Building inclusive innovation systems in developing countries: Challenges of IS research. In B. A. Lundvall, K. J. Joseph, C. Chimnade & J. Vang (Eds.), Handbook of innovation systems and developing countries: Building domestic capabilities in a global setting. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, 33–56. Arocena, R. & Sutz, J. (1999). Looking at innovation systems from the South. Paper presented at DRUID’s Summer Conference 1999, Rebuild, Denmark. Azele, M., Meyer, M. & Pottelsbeghe, B. (2008). Turning science into business: A case study of a major European research university. Science and Public Policy, 35(9), 669–679. Bertelsen, P. & Muller, J. (2003). Changing the outlook: Explicating the indigenous systems of innovation in Tanzania. In M. Muchie, P. Gammeltoft & B. A. Lundvall (Eds.), Putting Africa first: The making of African innovation systems. Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press, 123–138. Breschi, S. & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral systems of innovation: Technological regimes, Schumperian dynamics and spatial boundaries. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation. London: F. Printer. Carayannis, E., Barth, T. & Campbell, D. (2009). The quintuple helix innovation model: Global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-5372-1-2. Chaminade, C., Lundvall, B. A., Vang-Lauridsen, J. & Joseph, K. J. (2010). Innovation policies for development: Towards a systemic experimentation based approach. CIRCLE Electronic Working Papers 2010/1, Lund University, CIRCLE – Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy. Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organisational pathways of transformation (1st ed.). Oxford and New York: Pergamon Press. Clark, B. R. (2004). Sustaining change in universities. Continuities in case studies and concepts. Open University Press. Doh, P. S (2012). The responses of the higher education sector in the poverty reduction strategies in Africa: The case of Cameroon (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tampere University, Tampere. Retrieved from http://tampub.uta.fi/ bitstream/handle/10024/66935/978-951-44-8885-6.pdf;sequence=1. Doh, P. S. (2016a). Developing a multilevel framework for university entrepreneurship in Africa. Horrizon, 21(4). Doh, P. S. (2016b). Understanding entrepreneurship education in the context of the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of University and Leadership. 103 A quadruple helix framework for university-led community innovation systems in Africa Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (Eds.). (1997). Universities in the global economy: A triple helix of university—industry-government relations. London: Cassell Academic. Etzkowitz, H. & Zhou, C. (2008). Introduction to special issue building the entrepreneurial university: A global perspective. Science and Public Policy, 35(9), 627–635. Gibb, A., Haskins, G. & Robertson, I. (2009). Leading the entrepreneurial university: Meeting the entrepreneurial needs of higher education institutions. Said Business School, Oxford, National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship. Goktepe-Hulten, D. (2008). Academic inventors and research groups: Entrepreneurial cultures at universities. Science and Public Policy, 35(9), 657–666. Gu, S. (1999). Implications of the national innovation system for developing countries: Managing change and complexity in economic development. UNU-INTECH, Maastricht. Jensen, B. M., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E. & Lundvall, B. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, (680–993). Lundvall, B. Å. (1988). Innovation as an interactive process: From user-producer interactions to the national system of innovation. In G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg & L. Soete (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory. London: Pinter, 349–369. Lundvall, B. Å. (Ed.). (1992). National systems of innovation—Toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers. Lundvall, B. Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S. & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 2, 213–231. Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Muchie, M. (2003). Re-thinking Africa’s development through the national innovation system. In M. Muchie, P. Gammeltoft & B. A. Lundvall (Eds.), Putting Africa first: The making of African innovation systems. Aalborg: Aalborg University Press, 1–28. Muchie, M., Gammeltoft, P. & Lundvall, B. A. (Eds.) (2003). Putting Africa first: The making of African innovation systems. Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press. Nelson, R. & Rosenberg, N. (1993). Technical innovation and national systems. In R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Netshiluvhi, T. & Galada, N. (2012). Exploration of community innovation system: The innovation divide between the formal and informal sectors. National Council on Innovation, South Africa. 110 Anu Lyytinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) basic research, the significance of transdisciplinary and applied research has grown. Knowledge is increasingly produced in interaction among the actors representing different disciplines, including actors outside the academic community and in organisationally diversified contexts aiming at solving topical problems of society. The quality and impact of research is also being evaluated—in addition to being based on academic criteria and peer review— on the basis of the social impact of research. Clark’s (1998) study Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation analysed entrepreneurial universities from the viewpoint of management and organisation. The next section of the chapter focuses on analysing the entrepreneurial university concept from the viewpoint of Clark’s study. Clark’s study has been chosen because it analyses the management and organisation of universities—universities as entrepreneurial organisations. In addition, his study has been widely considered as a pioneer on entrepreneurial universities (Shattock 2008). It has also had implications for university development in Europe (Rhoades 2017; Shattock 2008). Burton Clark’s study on entrepreneurial universities Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation focused on European universities1 which were intentionally aimed at becoming more entrepreneurial (Clark 1998). By means of five case studies, Clark identified how universities had changed their organisation and practices to become more entrepreneurial. He was especially interested in whether there were common pathways to transformation. Clark emphasised entrepreneurship as a characteristic of the social system, the higher education institution and its units, rather than as a characteristic of an individual academic, which had been the traditional conception of entrepreneurship. Accordingly, he saw collective entrepreneurial action and initiatives as the core impulse of transformation (Clark 1998; Shattock 2010). 1 University of Warwick, University of Twente, University of Strathclyde, University of Chalmers and University of Joensuu. 111 Analysing the organisational transformation of higher education institutions Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Second, Clark noted that he did not see entrepreneurialism as hard businessoriented and profit-seeking activity, but instead, he defined an entrepreneurial university as an institution that actively and wilfully builds its organisation, seeks a special organisational identity, innovates and takes risks in terms of how it carries out its activities. Thus, his conception of the entrepreneurial university was akin to that of being innovative. Clark did not see academic and collegial values as subordinate to managerial values, but he emphasised that an essential aspect is to seek balance between collegial and managerial values and goals. Clark’s approach was inductive, proceeding from practice to theory. As a result of the case studies, which were based on interviews, observations and analyses of documentary data, he summarised five organisational elements that he saw as important in transforming universities towards more entrepreneurial ways of action. These elements are the strengthened steering core, the expanded developmental periphery, the diversified funding base, the stimulated academic heartland and the integrated entrepreneurial culture (Clark 1998). The strengthened steering core is essential because universities continuously encounter pressures to become quicker, more flexible and responsive in their reactions. According to Clark (1998), the strengthened steering core refers to an HEI’s efforts to strengthen and systematise its managerial capacities. Although the strengthened steering core may assume different forms, it should include both central managerial and academic groups in order to reconcile managerial and traditional academic values. Moreover, it is administratively strong at all levels of organisation (Clark 1998; 2004). The entrepreneurial university also actively crosses the traditional boundaries of the organisation to create linkages and collaboration with external stakeholders. The aim of this boundary-spanning is, for example, to mediate between academic departments and the external environment to promote new competencies, acquire information or generate income. Boundary-spanning typically takes the forms of administrative offices, new academic units and programmes, interdisciplinary research centres, teaching outreach, which tasks can include, e.g. supply of teaching and research services, knowledge and technology transfer, university-industry collaboration, 112 Anu Lyytinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) fundraising and alumni relations. Clark (1994; 2004) calls this the expanded developmental periphery. When the government’s core funding decreases, diversifying funding base becomes important in enhancing the self-regulative capacities of HEIs and creating opportunities for new initiatives. Clark divides this into second and third stream funding sources. Second stream funding sources refer to funding from governmental research councils (competitive research funding), while third stream funding means all other governmental funding sources, private organised sources as well as university-generated income, such as endowments, alumni fundraising and tuition fees. According to Clark, third stream funding sources represent real financial diversification (Clark 1998; 2004). To initiate change, the ultimate question is how the academic units responsible for teaching and research and formed around disciplines or fields of education are oriented to change. Academic heartlands are places where academic values are most strongly rooted and where change often occurs last. Change requires new forms of knowledge production (applied research and development work) and diversification of funding sources to meet new social demands (Clark 1998; 2004). As the integrative concept, Clark uses the integrated entrepreneurial culture, meaning that entrepreneurial universities also develop a work culture that embraces and is oriented to change. Transformation can start from an idea to a set of beliefs, which can later become university-wide culture (Clark 1998). In his later publication, Sustaining Change in Universities: Continuities in Case Studies and Concepts, Clark (2004) expanded the case studies to countries and universities in Africa, Latin America, Australia and North America and further defined the transformation elements. The focus of the study was to analyse how elements of transformation become elements of sustainability. Clark summarised the dynamics of sustainability in three principles. According to him, organisational transformation elements become elements of sustainability when they combine into a basic organisational character. Second, the university keeps in motion by means of incremental, experimental 113 Analysing the organisational transformation of higher education institutions Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation and gradual adjustment to changing demands and opportunities. Third, ambitious collegial will is essential for sustaining change. Clark’s conclusion was that the capacity to carry on changing is essential for the entrepreneurial university (Clark 2004, 90–93). Discussion and conclusion This sub-chapter discusses and sums up how the concept and transformation elements of the entrepreneurial university (Clark 1998) illustrate the organisational transformation of European universities, what kinds of challenges and possibilities exist in applying the entrepreneurial university concept and its transformation elements to the university context. It is important to note that the idea and concept of an entrepreneurial university originated from the United States, where the role of markets has traditionally been strong, the control of the state over universities low and where universities are more autonomous, which have, for their part, forced universities to become more entrepreneurial and responsive to the socioeconomic environment (Ben-David 1968; Mowery & Sampat 2005). The emergence of entrepreneurial universities in the United States has also been a bottom-up phenomenon (Etzkowitz 2003). Conversely, European universities have a long tradition as public organisations; they have a public mission to offer services that produce benefits to the wider society (Jongbloed, Enders & Salerno 2008), values which are opposite to those of business enterprises, e.g. profit maximisation, commercialisation and the adoption of market principles (e.g. Shattock 2010). The role of the state has also been strong in steering European universities, and universities have been dependent on state funding. Moreover, Europe did not have the same entrepreneurial cultural traditions as those of the United States (Jongbloed et al. 2008). However, Clark’s book was published as the situation was gradually starting to change: the direct regulative role of the state was diminishing, and the autonomy of universities was increasing (Jongbloed et al. 2008; Shattock 2010). This changing relationship between the state and HEIs also directed the 114 Anu Lyytinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) focus of attention to the question of how universities as organisations respond to the new challenges (Rhoades 2017). According to Shattock (2010), Clark’s book has had an impact, especially on the way in which EU and European universities ponder the appropriate balance between institutional autonomy and state control: the European Commission quickly adopted the ideas of the entrepreneurial university in its policy documents (e.g. CEC 2003; CEC 2005; CEC 2006). Similarly, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) devoted one conference to Clark’s book in 2000 (Rhoades 2017). Thereafter, Clark’s ideas have been applied in several ways, not least as a reference point in higher education reforms and change (Rhoades 2017). During recent decades, several European countries have reformed their higher education systems in a way that emphasises entrepreneurial ways of action. According to Mora and Vieira (2009), the main change trends in university governance in European countries include increased institutional autonomy and diminished state regulation, the consequences of which have been, e.g. strengthened university leadership, greater accountability and more detailed quality assurance procedures. At the same time, the role of markets and co-operation with different stakeholders has grown. Universities have widely incorporated a third mission alongside their teaching and research tasks, and these university-society linkages are of a more institutional nature (Geuna & Muscio 2009). It can be said that the current funding instruments, such as strategic research programmes and government analysis, assessment and research activities in the Finnish context, also stimulate academics to conduct applied research and pay attention to the social impact of research. All of these change trends share commonalities with Clark’s organisational transformation dimensions. Clark’s book gained a substantial amount of attention when it was published, and it has become a world renown and widely cited publication, which has also stimulated further studies by higher education researchers. Researchers have applied the entrepreneurial university concept to describe the different forms of transformation in the higher education sector (Rhoades 115 Analysing the organisational transformation of higher education institutions Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation 2017). Organisational transformation elements of the entrepreneurial university have been applied and further developed to studying and evaluating entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial transformation of universities and universities of applied sciences in different countries (e.g. Shattock 2009; Gjerding et al. 2006; Marginson & Considine 2000; Lyytinen 2011). Clark’s organisational transformation elements of the entrepreneurial university can be criticised for being descriptive and overly simplified, having been derived from inductive analyses of a few cases. They also lack conceptual profundity and integration to theoretical traditions. However, Clark’s main contribution is not theoretical, but practical. The strength of the book is that it has awakened discussion on university development at the European level and has impacted the policy and practices of HEIs (see also Shattock 2010). Another special contribution of Clark’s approach was that he did not define and analyse the entrepreneurial university only from economic viewpoints, but also from academic standpoints, taking different dimensions of the university organisation into consideration, and by emphasising balance between managerial and academic values and goals, which fit European universities well. Second, Clark’s new contribution was also the organisational viewpoint: he analysed entrepreneurialism as a characteristic of the organisation and social system rather than as a characteristic of an individual academic or discipline (Shattock 2010). It can be said that Clark’s idea of the entrepreneurial university is still topical in Europe, although the book was published 20 years ago. Rhoades (2017) has even argued that the impact of Clark’s book has been stronger in Europe than in the United States. According to Shattock (2010), Clark’s book has further legitimised the concept of the entrepreneurial in the university context (Shattock 2010). However, although the transformation elements do present challenges, which have been faced by European universities in one way or another, and describe well some of the main development trends in university governance, they cannot be straightforwardly and uncritically transferred to different country contexts and HEIs. Instead, each country is to find entrepreneurial ways of action that are appropriate to its HEI system and society. 116 Anu Lyytinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) References Ben-David, J. (1968). Fundamental research and the universities: Some comments on international differences. Paris: OECD. Benner, M. & Sandström, U. (2000). Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system. Research Policy, 29(2), 291–301. Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work? The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bleiklie, I., Enders, J. & Lepori, B. (2013). Introduction: Transformation of universities in Europe. Higher Education, 65, 1–4. Bleiklie, I., Enders, J. & Lepori, B. (2017) (Eds.). Managing universities: Policy and organizational change from a western European comparative perspective. Palgrave Studies in Global Higher Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Chanphirun, S. & van der Sijde, P. (2014). Understanding the concept of the entrepreneurial university from the perspective of higher education models. Higher Education, 68, 891–908. Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Clark, B. (2004). Sustaining change in universities: Continuities in case studies and concepts. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Commission of the European Communities. (2003). The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge. Brussels: Author. Commission of the European Communities. (2005). Mobilising brain power of Europe. Brussels: Author. Commission of the European Communities. (2006). Delivering on the modernization agenda for universities: education, research and innovation. Brussels: Author. Etzkowitz, H. (1983). Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science. Minerva, xxi(2–3), 198–233. Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, summer, 18–29. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as “quasi-firms”: The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32 (2003), 109–121. Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (1997) (Eds.). Universities and the global knowledge economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. London: Pinter. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C. & Terra, B. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330. 117 Analysing the organisational transformation of higher education institutions Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Etzkowitz, H., Ranga, M., Benner, M., Guaranys, L., Maculan, M. & Kneller, R. (2008). Pathways to the entrepreneurial university: towards a global convergence. Science and Public Policy, 35(9), 681–695. European Commission. (2017). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions on a Renewed EU Agenda for Higher Education. Brussels 30.5.2017. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0247&from=EN Gjerding, A., Wilderom, C., Cameron, S., Taylor, A. & Scheunert, K.-J. (2006). Twenty Practices of an Entrepreneurial University. Higher Education Management and Policy, 18(3), 83–110. Geuna, A. & Muscio, A. (2009). The governance of university knowledge transfer: A critical review of literature. Minerva, 47, 93–114. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE. Jongbloed, B., Enders, J. & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependence and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56, 303–324. Kaukonen, E. & Nieminen, M. (1999). Modeling the triple helix from a small country perspective: the case of Finland. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, 173–183. Kerr, K. (1963). The uses of the university. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Lyytinen, A. (2011). Finnish polytechnics in the regional innovation system – Towards new ways of action. Tampere: Tampere University Press. Marginson, S. & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Miettinen, R. & Tuunainen, J. (2006). Johdanto. In R. Miettinen, J. Tuunainen, T. Knuuttila & E. Mattila (Eds.), Tieteestä tuotteeksi? Yliopistotutkimus muutosten ristipaineessa. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino, 13–27. Mora, J.-G. & Vieira, M.-J. (2009). Governance, organizational change and entrepreneurialism: Is there a connection? In M. Shattock (Ed.), Entrepreneurialism in universities and the knowledge economy: Diversification and organizational change in European higher education. London: McGraw-Hill Education, 74– 99. Mowery, D. & Sampat, B. (2005). Universities in national innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery & R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 209–239. 118 Anu Lyytinen Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Nelles, J. & Vorley, T. (2010). Constructing an entrepreneurial architecture: An emergent framework for studying the contemporary university beyond the entrepreneurial turn. Innovative Higher Education, 35, 161–176. Pinheiro, R. & Stensaker, B. (2013). Designing the entrepreneurial university: The interpretation of a global idea. Public Organization Review, 14(4), 497–516. Rhoades, G. (2017). Bringing organisations and systems back together: Extending Clark’s entrepreneurial university. Higher Education Quarterly, 71(2), 129– 140. Shattock, M. (2008). Entrepreneurialism and organizational change in higher education. In M. Shattock (Ed.), Entrepreneurialism in universities and the knowledge economy: Diversification and organisational change. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 1–8. Shattock, M. (2010). The entrepreneurial university: An idea for its time. London Review of Education, 8(3), 263–271. Slaughter, S. & Leslie, L. (1997). Politics, policies and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Slaughter, S. & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. III Scholarly Traditions Applied to Understand Universities and Academic Work 126 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) (jurisdictions) are gained and maintained in ever-changing environments (technological, social and cultural) and that different professional groups have the authority and legitimacy to provide solutions to the same social problems across different time periods. He defines alcoholism (and the profession providing treatment for it) as changing from sin (priest) to criminal activity (lawyer), social problem (social worker) and, finally, illness (medical doctor). He further argues that there are no predefined areas of knowledge and professions and that they are dynamic and interrelated. Markets and organisations are becoming increasingly important in the context of changing professions (Brint 1994). Professions are “both a type of organization and a type of status category” (Brint 1994, 23), and this aspect leads to emphases on the historical perspective; social organisation and status category both change and develop by nature. Evetts (2009; 2011) describes how changes in professionalism have been influenced by new public management: from occupational professionalism that emphasises, for instance, collegial authority, trust and autonomy to organisational professionalism that focuses on, for example, rational-legal forms of authority, hierarchical structures and managerialism. However, and interestingly, when organisational principles, strategies and methods affect occupational identities, structures and practices, the questions have to do with which aspects change and which ones remain to be constructed and controlled by professionals. Thus, the fourth step in research can be called the organisational or managerial study of professions. Recent reviews of the sociological literature (Adams 2015; Brock & Saks 2015; Saks 2016) reveal that research attention has shifted to the various challenges faced by professional groups within organisations. This is a dominant trend in both the sociology and management literature on the theoretical perspectives of neo-Weberianism and neoinstitutionalism (Brock & Saks 2015). Classical theorists defined tensions between professions, and their employer organisation (Freidson 2001), consequently evolving with neo-liberal and managerial tendencies. Further, a blurring of boundaries between professions and organisations and the growth of professional–managerial hybrids have been acknowledged. Hybridism 127 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation has been increasingly used to overcome the notion of professionalism and managerialism as opposite dimensions or distinct institutional logics (Bevort & Suddaby 2016; Carvalho 2014; Carvalho & Santiago 2015a; Noordegraaf 2015; Noordegraaf et al. 2015; Olakivi & Niska 2017). Simultaneous changes in how knowledge is produced and disseminated, along with higher education institutions losing their monopoly, question the relevance of scientific knowledge and credentialism in sustaining professional projects (Carvalho & Santiago 2016a). Scholars and practitioners have been concerned about the disregard of professional principles by the spread of managerial influences. However, debates have moved beyond confrontation between the two principles of professionalism and managerialism to building more consensus-based ideas regarding how both principles could benefit each other in daily practices (Noordegraaf 2015). This new type of professionalism is a hybrid of professional and managerial principles. According to Noordegraaf (2015, 6, 12), hybrid professionalism is about professionals treating cases within a well-managed organisational context; it is “meaningfully managed professional work”. Noordegraaf also describes the “beyond hybridity” model, which describes situations in which professionals consider organising to be an important task, that is, professionals deal with contradictions between professional and managerial principles, wherein organising becomes part of the job (Noordegraaf 2015). There have been two key developments in the hybridisation of organisations. First, increased development in inter-organisational interactions has resulted in hybrid contracting arrangements between different organisations. Such arrangements require new ways of assessing risk and accountability, which raises the need for managerial skills to deal with assessing such risks and new accountability structures (Miller & Kurunmäki 2008). The second development can be observed between public and private organisations: the mixing of public policy goals and profit motives within public–private partnerships and state-owned organisations as well as privatisation, commissioning and contracting out arrangements, signified as part of the new public management 128 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) (NPM) doctrine, that demand increased awareness of business management practices among professional ranks (Johanson & Vakkuri 2017). In certain cases, strong professions have shown willingness to incorporate managerial knowledge into their professional practices, such as medical doctors in Finland compared to their counterparts in the United Kingdom (Kurunmäki et al. 2008). Theoretically, therefore, developments in hybridisation might erode the organisational control of professionals (see Noordegraaf 2007). A fundamental change within the confines of a single organisation has been the adaptation of team-based organisations comprising multi-professional workgroups that combine the expertise of numerous occupational groups. Together with other developments in flexible specialisation and a decrease in the levels of hierarchy, new organisational forms work against occupational segregation between professional groups. Consequently, team-based organisation not only emphasises equality between types of expertise within the work group, but also decreases the possibilities of resorting to collegial decision-making within a single professional group (Janhonen & Johanson 2011). Overstating the influence of new organisational practices on the control of professional work is unnecessary, as professional status is protected by extraorganisational guarantees in educational requirements that are stipulated in legislation and protected by the professional group itself. The fundamental change brought about by the new organisational order is that professional groups are less able to insulate themselves from interactions with, and the influence of, other occupational groups that do not allow professional closure. It is premature to define the current school of thought in the sociology of professions. However, there have been at least two attempts to define recent research. Some researchers argue that Western societies have faced so many fundamental changes that the concept of profession is hollowing out, for which changes in the labour and educational structures in Western societies are mainly responsible. In many Western societies, higher education has been massified for several decades, becoming a universal phenomenon. It also means that poorly paid jobs have become knowledge intensive. Currently, there are several “precarious” occupations that are independent of time or 129 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation space, often requiring a highly skilled workforce and individual commitment, and that have become part of the identity of workers. The old professions are becoming more middle-class and female dominated and losing their traditional foundations, that has been based on elite and male domination. Some professional occupations are still more elite than others, but their power is defined though methods that are different from those adopted by traditional professionals. Conversely, for similar reasons, some researchers suggest that the study of professions has made a full loop and that researchers are beginning to question what professionals are and how they can be distinguished from other groups. Table 1 summarises the development of the sociology of professions and its implications for research. Table 1. Development of research into professions Phase Research objective Questions Phenomena Functional 1940–1960 Societal functions of professions Traits of professions What is a profession? How are professions defined? Altruist missions Interactional 1960–1980 Power of professions Professions and the objective of work What do professions do in relation to other groups? How do they use power? Relation between professions and clients Systemic 1980–1990 System of professions Professionalisation How do professions interact? How do professions evolve, develop and maintain? Relations and demarcation of professions Organisational 1990–2010 Professionals managed internally and by organisations Changing occupational professionalism, organisational professionalism, hybrid professionalism How do managerial principles change occupational professionalism? How can professionals be well managed inside organisations? Relationship and tensions between occupational and managerial principles, values and practices Professionals working in organisations. 2010– to date Fundamental changes in Western societies, production and the role of knowledge; managerialism causing the hollowing out of professionalism Professions–organisations relations, beyond hybridity Closing the circle and going back to basics 130 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Other conceptual dimensions and definitions The chronological typology of theory development is a one-dimensional approach to the sociology of professions. There are other important dimensions that one should be aware of when reading the literature on professions. These include contextual (geographical or cultural), historical (chronological) and conceptual (substantive) dimensions. Contextual dimension As is well known, context matters in the study of governance, power, work and societies. In the study of public administration, the most important contextual dichotomy can be made between continental and Anglo-American societies and administrative (legal) culture and traditions. In this tradition, even basic terms such as the state, public, policy and law are variously understood. While reading and applying the literature, these differences must be carefully considered, and this holds true for the study of professions. In Anglo-American (mainstream) studies on professions, the assumption of a strong civil society is crucial. The role of professions in Anglo-American societies is often considered a counterbalancing force between the state and citizens acting in the markets. Professions are considered actors who define themselves and their working environment. In the continental tradition, professions are often strictly connected to the state and professionals, who are often civil servants. Here, profession is often defined in the context of the public sector. As Bertilsson (1990) explains, the role of markets differs between these two traditions: In the one (liberal) case, we speak of professions regulating the markets and, in turn, being regulated by the markets; and in the other (welfare) case, [we] speak of professions regulating the law and in turn, being regulated by the law. In the first case, an important device to allocate social goods is by means of the supply and demand by markets and in the other case, by means of law. One could speak of these two mechanisms as monetization and juridification, respectively. 131 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation In the past few decades, we have been able to observe the convergence of political systems and the hegemony of certain (OECD-led) neoliberal policies. However, the NPM critique often offers a rather simplistic picture of the resemblance of the challenges, problems and tendencies facing public administrations in different countries. The variation in administrative cultures remains wide, and the differences are significant. Nevertheless, in the global tendencies of developing professional services, the differences are still deeply rooted in the culture and practices of the professions. Thus, the Anglo– American literature cannot be applied directly to the continental reality. Historical dimension Professions can be approached from historical perspectives, as practiced by many scholars as they sought to derive their own typologies of professions. Elliot probably provided the most famous approach in the 1970s. According to Elliot, professions can be divided into three distinctive groups. The first group is the so-called “status” or “traditional professions” that are linked directly to societal power (e.g. priests and officers and, more recently, lawyers and medical doctors). This group of professions has evolved as a process of transforming feudal estates under the control of a central power, with help from university education. The second group of “new” professions are the socalled “occupational professions” that have emerged to meet societal needs, such as social workers and accountants. The third group are educational professions that are part of the occupational system and, at the same time, an integral part of the educational system which lays the foundation for the occupational system (e.g. professors and teachers). Brante (2010) further developed this historical analysis of professions. Accordingly, professions can be classified into six groups on the basis of the context of state and governance development. His typology is described in Table 2, which shows that while the state is developing, it needs new types of professions to implement its policies and to control new areas of reality. It also provides an opportunity to consider the development of the academic 132 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) profession alongside this more generic development, as well as the role of universities in the professional game and in government. Table 2. Development of professions (adapted from Brante 2010) Pragmatic organisation Professional prototype Essence (command of…) Nation state (1550 →) State bureaucracy, army State servant (e.g. military and civil) Social order and cultural identity Aesthetic state (1750→) Cultural institutions Architect, artist Symbolic expressions Industrial state (1850 →) Factory Engineer Non-social environment Welfare state (1935 →) People-processing (service) organisations Physician, teacher Normality (social environment) Neoliberal state (1985→) Stock market or private company Consultant Investments International state or supranational (1990 →) Supranational organisation Supranational servant Social order and cultural identity Conceptual dimension In the study of professions, two concepts are of utmost importance: professionalism and professionalisation (Evetts 2013). The study of professionalism addresses professionals’ values, norms, discourses and identities. The study of professionalisation examines the societal role of professions. Research on professionalisation has three dimensions: 1) Power relations between professionals and clients 2) Relationships between professions and other occupational groups 3) Relationships between professions, government and other societal groups. The academic profession as a profession The study of the academic profession has been both attached to and disconnected from that of professions. There are two main approaches to describing the 133 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation development of the study of the academic profession. First, we approach it from the viewpoint of the literature on the sociology of professions, and second, we describe the applications of the sociology of professions and related studies on the academic profession in the context of higher education (higher education studies). We will first provide a brief overview of the literature on the academic profession in the sociology of professions. Next, and more importantly, we will describe the study of the academic profession on the basis of the tradition of higher education studies. The academic profession is considered a “basic” profession alongside status and traditional professions. It is considered a component of educational professions because its members are part of the educational system. However, professors differ from school teachers because they also educate teachers and conduct research. Furthermore, drawing on the Humboldtian tradition, academics are expected to perform the dual role of producers (researchers) and disseminators (teachers) of knowledge. It appears that the classical theories in the sociology of professions tend to focus more on the first role, which can be attributed to the relevance of science and scientific knowledge to modern societies. Irrespective of the consensus that the academic profession (professors) is a profession, there are two main reasons that the study of the academic profession, especially its theoretical development, remains underdeveloped (Pekkola 2014). First, the basic problem is that classical texts are often empirically interested in other professions such as that of medical doctors. This creates a situation in which the academic profession has a differentiated role, that is, it is described as a supporting profession that connects professionals to the system of knowledge. In practice, this means that most established professions writers recognise the academic profession but do not study it. Goode (1969) offers one of the best illustrations of the topic: “Precisely because of the temptation to analyse the academics in length is strong, I shall stifle and simply locate the problem” (p. 306). Second is the lack of critical studies on the academic profession. In fact, professors themselves are unwilling to criticise their own profession and are 134 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) expected to control scientific knowledge. This possibly explain why literature users of coercive and degenerating power in the academic world are generally managers, politicians and markets and not professors. Given these limitations in theory development, the study of the academic profession remains variously uninstitutionalised. There are at least three approaches to the study of the academic profession in the context of higher education studies. The first and most narrow way of delimiting the study of the academic profession is to focus on studies published in forums of higher education studies, which explicitly refer to the theory of professions. This would entail only a minor difference (publication outlet) between studies on the academic profession in higher education studies and the tradition of the sociology of professions. The second and broader method of defining the study of the academic profession is to consider all studies that explicitly define profession, professionalisation or professionalism as their study object, regardless of the theoretical underpinnings. The third, universal approach is to include all studies on academics, academic work and career and division of academic labour under the umbrella of academic profession (see Table 3). Table 3. Approaches to the study of the academic profession Approach Type of studies Sociology of professions Academics as object of the study of professions Narrow Theory of professions applied to the field of higher education studies Broad Themes of the sociology of professions studied using concepts of higher education studies Universal Academic profession as an object of study of higher education However, none of these definitions is established or commonly used. Thus, when reading the higher education literature on the academic profession, one can expect to encounter everything from the serious sociology of professions (in its multiple variations and rich traditions) to descriptive studies on the well-being or attitude of university teachers and researchers. Unfortunately, 135 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation the latter is more often the case. In the next section, we will adopt the broad, though not universal, approach to describe the study of the academic profession in the field of higher education. We begin with basic questions on different theory traditions (see Table 4). Table 4. Development of research into the academic profession Tradition Questions for higher education researchers Functional What is the academic profession? How can the academic profession be defined? Interactional What is the role of the academic profession for clients and ‘lower’ professional groups? How does the academic profession use power? Systemic How does the academic profession interact? How has the academic profession evolved, developed and maintained? Organisational Is the academic profession losing its occupational values and becoming more organisational? How is the academic profession balancing between its occupational and organisational values and demands? Is the academic profession becoming more organisational, and what are the other occupational values? Foundational As previously mentioned, the question relating to the academic profession is a tricky one. The academic profession is closely connected to other professions (and sometimes, it is almost impossible to separate). It has a disintegrated knowledge base (disciplinary fragmentation), and it is career-vice fragmented (professors/others) and mission-vice fragmented (teacher/researcher). Clark (1987a) described this basic problem well in a classic text of the study of the academic profession(s). His book on the academic profession in the United States, Small Worlds—Different Worlds concludes with the slogan “the one and the many”, which suggests a possibility for the common in the fragmented world of academicians. Becher (1987b), the other founding father of higher education studies, describes the same challenge using the following metaphor: 142 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Because of its dual role, the academic profession has been part of the development of the state and other professions, while continuing to independently develop and expand. In fact, it has served as an important instrument for the state to control the content and legitimisation of the knowledge needed to build the state, economy and society. The group has been controlling degrees, which play a key role in the receipt of societal positions of power. Table 5 describes the development of the academic profession and universities in the context of state development. Table 5. Development of the academic profession (adapted from Brante 2010) Development of universities Role of academic profession Pre-state (1100→) Establishment of studentand professor-run universities Educating estates, transferring societal power from estates to state and knowledge from church to state Nation state (1550 →) Establishment of national universities Aesthetic state (1750→) Establishment of art schools Socialising national symbols, controlling identity Industrial state (1850 →) Establishment of technical institutions and business schools Educating national industrialists, building national wealth Welfare state (1935 →) Mushrooming of social science-oriented institutions Educating welfare professionals and planners, creating standard supporting productivity Neoliberal state (1985→) New role of universities (third mission) Educating all, building national competitiveness International state or supranational (1990 →) Establishment of European universities, chairs and centres Educating the European elite, transferring national powers to European level The development described above is more inclined towards the continental context than Anglo-American society. As previously mentioned, the differences between these two traditions ought to be acknowledged in the 143 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation study of professions. These differences are evident in the role of the academic profession and its relation to the state, the organisation of universities and the idea of a university as a whole. Table 6 presents some of the major differences relevant to the study of the academic profession. Table 6. Differences in university traditions Anglo-American Continental Universities Charity Public agencies Professors Free professionals Civil servants Organisation and hierarchy Collegial Department Bureaucracy Chair Idea Newman (liberal) Humboldt (professional) Connection to markets Tight Symbolic Relation to the state Funding Legislation and funding Conclusions The study of the academic profession has long adopted the concepts of the sociology of professions. However, while this research has been descriptive, it lacks theoretical rigour. A key challenge in the study of the academic profession in relation to the concepts of the theory of professions remains fundamental: researchers study their own profession. This has several implicit and explicit impacts: 1) Research is unlikely to question the societal role and importance (altruistic mission) of the academic profession 2) Studies are unlikely to objectively examine academics in relation to university organisations, students and other professions (power). Other challenges include the role of the academic profession in the theory of professions as a legitimate scientific branch of occupational professions. This makes it difficult to study the academic profession in comparison to an independent profession. Many researchers have questioned whether the 144 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) academic profession is a profession or a group of professions. However, from a historical perspective, it is fairly clear that the academic profession plays an important role in transferring societal power from estates and families to the state and privileged occupational groups. The application of the theory of professions remains underdeveloped, despite the large number of publications related to the academic profession in recent years. In particular, critical research on the societal role of academicians and their use of power remains untouched. Thus, we encourage researchers, especially those placed outside of academia, to study the academic profession and work. 145 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation References Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labour. London: University of Chicago Press. Adams, T. L. (2015). Sociology of professions: International divergences and research directions. Work, Employment & Society, 29(1), 154–165. Akkerman, S. F. & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169. doi:10.3102/0034654311404435. Apple, M. W. (2002). Does education have independent power? Bernstein and the question of relative autonomy. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(4), 607–616. Bartlett, A. & Mercer, G. (2000). Reconceptualising discourses of power in postgraduate pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(2), 195–204. Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories. Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Ben-David, J. (1972). The profession of science and its powers. Minerva, 10(3), 362– 383. doi:10.1007/BF01556920. Bertilson, M. (1990). The welfare state, professions and citizens. In R. Torstenda & M. Burrage (Eds.), The formation of professions. London: Sage. Bevort, F. & Suddaby, R. (2016). Scripting professional identities: How individuals make sense of contradictory institutional logics. Journal of Professions and Organization, 3(1), 17–38. doi:10.1093/jpo/jov007. Boyer E., Altbach P. & Whitelaw M. (1994). The academic profession: An international perspective. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Brante, T. (2010). Professional fields and truth regimes: In search of alternative approaches. Comparative Sociology, 9(6), 843–886. doi:10.1163/156913310X522615. Brint, S. (1994). In an age of experts: The changing role of professionals in politics and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Brock, D. M. & Saks, M. (2016). Professions and organizations: A European perspective. European Management Journal, 34(1), 1–6. Carvalho, T. (2014). Changing connections between professionalism and managerialism: A case study of nursing in Portugal. Journal of Professions and Organization, 1(2), 176–190. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/jou004. Carvalho, T. & Bruckmann, S. (2014). Reforming Portuguese public sector: A route from health to higher education. In P. Maassen, C. Musselin & P. Teixeira (Eds.), Reforming higher education. Public policy design and implementation, Vol. 41. Dordrecht: Springer, 83–102. 146 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Carvalho, T. & Santiago, R. (Eds.). (2015a). Professionalism, managerialism and reform in higher education and the health services. The European welfare state and the rise of the knowledge society. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Carvalho, T. & Santiago, R. (2015b). Professional autonomy in a comparative perspective: Academics, doctors and nurses. In T. Carvalho & R. Santiago (Eds.), Professionalism, managerialism and reform in higher education and the health services: The European welfare state and the rise of the knowledge society. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 30–63. Carvalho, T. & Santiago, R. (2016a). Professionalism and knowledge. In M. Dent, I. Bourgeault, J. Denis & E. Kuhlmann (Eds.), The Routledge companion to the professions and professionalism. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 144–157. Carvalho, T. & Santiago, R. (2016b). Transforming professional bureaucracies in hospitals and higher education institutions. In M. Lounsbury, R. Pinheiro, F. O. Ramirez, K. Vrangbæk & H. Byrkjeflot (Eds.), A comparative institutionalism? Forms, dynamics and logics across the organizational fields of health and higher education. Vol. 45. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, 243–269. Chiang, S. Y. (2009). Personal power and positional power in a powerful “I”: A discourse analysis of doctoral dissertation supervision. Discourse & Communication, 3(3), 255–271. Clark, B. (1987a). Introduction. In B. Clark (Ed.), The academic profession. National, disciplinary & institutional settings. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press. Clark, B. (1987b). The academic life, small worlds, different worlds. New Jersey, NJ: Carnagie Foundation for the Advancement of teaching. Clark, B. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press. Collins, R. (Ed.) (1990). Changing conceptions in the sociology of the professions. In R. Torstendahl & M. Burrage (Eds.), The formation of professions. London: Sage, 11–22. Crossouard, B. & Pryor, J. (2008). Becoming researchers: A sociocultural perspective on assessment, learning and the construction of identity in a professional doctorate. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 16(3), 221–237. Cummings, W. K. & Teichler, U. (2015). The relevance of academic work in comparative perspective. Vol. 13. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Delamont, S., Parry, O. & Atkinson, P. (1998). Creating a delicate balance: The doctoral supervisor’s dilemmas. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(2), 157–172. Dubar, C. & Tripier, P. (1998). Sociologie des Professions. Paris: Armand Colin. 147 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Evetts, J. (2003). Sociología de los grupos profesionales: Historia, conceptos y teorias. In M. S. Martinez, J. S: Carreras & L. Svensson (Eds.), Sociologia de las profesiones. Murcia: Diego, 29–49. Evetts, J. (2009). New professionalism and new public management: Changes, continuities and consequences. Comparative Sociology, 8(2), 247–266. Evetts, J. (2011). A new professionalism? Challenges and opportunities. Current Sociology, 59(4), 406–422. Evetts, J. (2013). Professionalism: Value and ideology. Current Sociology Review, 6(5– 6), 778–796. Farndale, E. & Hope-Hailey, V. (2009). Personnel departmental power: Realities from the UK higher education sector. Management Revue, 20(4), 392–412. doi:10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_04_Farndale. Freidson, E. (1974). Professional dominance: The social structure of medical care. Transaction Publishers. Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism, the third logic. Cambridge: Polity Press, Graham. Goode, W. J. (1957). Community within a community: The professions. American Sociological Review, 22(2), 194–200. Goode W. (1969). The theoretical limits of professionalization. In E. Amitai (Ed.), The semi-professions and their organization. New York: The Free Press. Gornitzka, Å. & Larsen, I. (2004). Toward professionalization? Restructuring of administrative work force in universities. Higher Education, 47(4), 455–471. Graham, C. (2013). Changing technologies, changing identities: A case study of professional staff and their contributions to learning and teaching. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 17(2), 62–70. doi:10.1080/13603108.2012.716376. Guerin, C. & Green, I. (2015). “They’re the bosses”: Feedback in team supervision. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 39(3), 320–335. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2013.831039. Halse, C. (2011). “Becoming a supervisor”: The impact of doctoral supervisors’ learning. Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 557–570. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.594593. Halse, C. & Malfroy, J. (2010). Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 79–92. Höhle, E. A. & Teichler, U. (2013). The academic profession in the light of comparative surveys. In B. M. Kehm & U. Teichler (Eds.), The academic profession in Europe: New tasks and new challenges. Netherlands: Springer. Janhonen, M. & Johanson, J.-E. (2011). Role of knowledge conversion and social networks in team performance. International Journal of Information Management, 31(3), 217–225. 148 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Johanson, J.-E. & Vakkuri, J. (2018). Governing hybrid organisations. Exploring the variety of institutional life. London: Routledge. Johnson, T. (1972). Professions and power. London: Macmillan. Kogan, M., Moses, I. & El-Khawas, E. (1994). Staffing higher education, meeting new challenges. OECD, Higher Education Policy Series 27. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Kogan, M. & Teichler, U. (Eds.) (2007). Key challenges to the academic profession. Paris and Kassel: UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge. Light, D. (1974). Introduction: The structure of the academic profession. Sociology of Education, 74(1), 2–28. Larson, M. (1977). The rise of professionalism. A sociological analysis. London: University of California Press. Lounsbury, M., Pinheiro, R., Ramirez, F. O., Vrangbæk, K. & Byrkjeflot, H. (2016). A comparative institutionalism? Forms, dynamics and logics across the organizational fields of health and higher education. Bingley: Emerald Publishing. Marginson, S. (2009). Intellectual freedoms and creativity. In M. A. Peters, S. Marginson & P. Murphy (Eds.), Creativity and the global knowledge economy. New York: Peter Lang, 91–123. Marini, G., Videira P. & Carvalho, T. (2016). Is new public management redefining professional boundaries and changing power relations within higher education institutions? Journal of the European Higher Education Area, 2016(3). Merton, K. R. (1973). The sociology of science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Miller, P., Kurunmäki, L. & O’Leary, T. (2008). Accounting, hybrids and the management of risk. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(7), 942–967. Muzzin, L. & Martimianakis, M. A. (2016). The professoriate and professionalism in the academy. In M. Dent, I. L. Bourgeault, J.-L. Denis & E. Kuhlmann (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to the Professions and Professionalism. London: Routledge, 317–328. Morley, L., Leonard, D. & David, M. (2002). Variations in vivas: Quality and equality in British PhD assessments. Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), 263–273. Neave, G. & Roades, G. (1987). The academic estate in Western Europe. In B. Clark (Ed.), The academic profession: National, disciplinary, and institutional setting. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 211–270. 149 The sociology of professions and the study of the academic profession Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives on Higher Education Management and Transformation Neave, G. (2009). The academic estate revisited: Reflections on academia’s rapid progress from the Capitoline Hill to the Tarpeian Rock. In J. Enders & E. de Weert (Eds.), The changing face of academic life: Analytical and comparative perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 15–35. Neave, G. (2015). The state of the academic estate. In T. Carvalho & R. Santiago (Eds.), Professionalism, Managerialism and Reform in Higher Education and the Health Services. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 15–29. Nelson, A. & Irwin, J. (2014). Defining what we do—All over again: Occupational identity, technological change, and the Liberian/internet-search relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 57(3), 892–928. Noordegraaf, M. (2007). From “pure” to “hybrid” professionalism present-day professionalism in ambiguous public domains. Administration & Society, 39(6), 761–785. Noordegraaf, M. (2015). Hybrid professionalism and beyond: (new) Forms of public professionalism in changing organizational and societal contexts. Journal of Professions and Organization, 1–20. doi:10.1093/jpo/jov002. Noordegraaf, M., Schneider, M. M., Van Rensen, E. L. J. & Boselie, J. P. P. E. F. (2015). Cultural complementarity: Reshaping professional and organizational logics in developing frontline medical leadership. Public Management Review, 18(8), 1111–1137. doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1066416. Olakivi, A. & Niska, M. (2017). Rethinking managerialism in professional work: From competing logics to overlapping discourses. Journal of Professions and Organization, 4(1), 20–35. Parsons, T. (1954). Essays in sociological theory. Glencoe: Free Press. Pekkola, E. (2014). Korkeakoulujen profession Suomessa. Ajankuvia, käsitteitä ja kehityskulkuja. Tampereen yliopiston johtamiskorkeakoulu. Doctoral dissertation. University of Tampere. Tampere University Press 2014. Perkin, H. (1969). Key profession: A history of the A.U.T. London: Routledge and Palmer. Peters, M. A., Marginson, S. & Murphy, P. (2009). Creativity and the global knowledge economy. New York: Peter Lang. Saks, M. (2016). A review of theories of professions, organizations and society: The case for neo-Weberianism, neo-institutionalism and eclecticism. Journal of Professions and Organization, 3(2), 170–187. Shelley, L. (2010). Research managers uncovered: Changing roles and “shifting arenas” in the academy. Higher Education Quarterly, 64(1), 41–64. Siekkinen, T., Pekkola, E. & Kivistö, J. (2016). Recruitments in Finnish universities: Practicing strategic or pathetic HRM? Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2(2–3). doi:10.3402/nstep.v2.32316. 150 Elias Pekkola, Teresa Carvalho, Taru Siekkinen & Jan-Erik Johansson Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Vuokko Kohtamäki & Yuzhuo Cai & Anu Lyytinen (Eds.) Slaughter, S. & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Bristol: Policy Press. Teichler, U. (2010). The diversifying academic profession. European Review, 18(1), 157–179. doi:10.1017/S1062798709990378. Verbaan, E. & Cox, A. M. (2014). Occupational sub-cultures, jurisdictional struggle and third space: Theorising professional service responses to research data management. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(3–4), 211–219. Välimaa, J. (1998). Culture and identity in higher education research. Higher Education, 36(2), 119–138. Welch, A. (1998). The end of certainty? The academic profession and the challenge of change. Comparative Education Review, 42(1), 1–14. Weber, M. (1919/1998). Wissenschaft als Beruf. München: Duncker & Humblodt Welch. Whitchurch, C. (2008). Shifting identities and blurring boundaries: The emergence of third space professionals in UK higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), 377–396. Whitchurch, C. & Gordon, G. (2010). Diversifying academic and professional identities in higher education: Some management challenges. Tertiary Education and Management, 16(2), 129–144. doi:10.1080/13583881003757029. 151 Information on efficiency as an aspect of self-regulation in university departments Timo Näppilä Introduction Birnbaum (1988) defines the academic organisation and its leadership within the context of a cybernetic institution. Birnbaumʼs theoretical model was based on a dynamic and nonlinear open system and first-order cybernetic regulatory processes. The main idea of cybernetic regulation is based on constructing dynamic loops in which the element of a system affects the environment, which in turn affects the system. This interactive dynamic between a system and its environment may lead to an amplifying or stabilising process. The process begins when some change in the external or internal environment leads to an organisational response that alters the value of some variable. If that variable is being monitored by some formal or informal group (a sensing unit), and if that change of value moves it beyond acceptable limits, the group will attempt to influence the administration (or some other controlling unit) to change the organisation’s response until the variable moves back into an acceptable range. In the Finnish context, Hölttä (see Hölttä 1995; Hölttä & Nuotio 1995; Hölttä & Karjalainen 1997) has also studied both Birnbaum’s cybernetic institutional management model and self-regulation. According to Hölttä and