Search results

Recent changes in university systems, debates on academic freedom, and changing roles of knowledge in society all point to questions regarding how higher education and research should be governed and the role of scientists and faculty in this. Rationalizations of systems of higher education and research have been accompanied by the questioning and erosion of faculty authority and challenges to academic collegiality. In light of these developments, we see a need for a more conceptually precise discussion about what academic collegiality is, how it is practiced, how collegial forms of governance may be supported or challenged by other forms of governance, and finally, why collegial governance of higher education and research is important.

We see collegiality as an institution of self-governance that includes formal rules and structures for decision-making, normative and cognitive underpinnings of identities and purposes, and specific practices. Studies of collegiality then, need to capture structures and rules as well as identities, norms, purposes and practices. Distinguishing between vertical and horizontal collegiality, we show how they balance and support each other.

Universities are subject to mixed modes of governance related to the many tasks and missions that higher education and research is expected to fulfill. Mixed modes of governance also stem from reforms based on widely held ideals of governance and organization. We examine university reforms and challenges to collegiality through the lenses of three ideal types of governance – collegiality, bureaucracy and enterprise – and combinations thereof.

This paper aims to ascertain whether and to what degree universities are becoming organizational actors globally. Utilizing an original dataset of a sample of 500 globally oriented universities, we explore how universities have increasingly become organizational actors as is the case of American universities. We consider the following indicators of university transformation into organization actors: development or institutional advancement, diversity or inclusion, legalization, and internationalization goals and structures. We find that these globally oriented universities have created international, development, and legal offices. Surprisingly, nearly half of the universities in our sample also have diversity offices. These “getting organized” indicators are somewhat similar to what holds for American universities, suggesting that there is globalization of organizational actorhood among universities. At the same time, however, we find that there are pronounced regional differences, especially when it comes to organizing around diversity and legal affairs.

One of the most hyped concepts in the manufacturing industry is ‘Industry 4.0’. The ‘Industry 4.0’ concept is grabbing the attention of every manufacturing industry across the globe because of its immense applications. This phenomenon is an advanced version of Industry 3.0, combining manufacturing processes and the latest Internet of Things (IoT) technologies. The main advantage of this paradigm shift is efficiency and efficacy in the manufacturing process with the help of advanced automated technologies. The concept of ‘Industry 4.0’ is contemporary, so it falls under exploratory study. Therefore, the research methodology is thematic narration grounded on secondary data (online) analysis. In this light, this chapter aims to explain ‘Industry 4.0’ in terms of concepts, theories and models based on the Web of Science (WoS) database. The data include research manuscripts, book chapters, blogs, white papers, news items and proceedings. The study details the latest technologies behind the ‘Industry 4.0’ phenomenon, different business intelligence technologies and their practical implications in some manufacturing industries. This chapter mainly elaborates on Industry 4.0 frameworks designed by (1) PwC (2) IBM (3) Frost & Sullivan.

Collegiality is the modus operandi of universities. Collegiality is central to academic freedom and scientific quality. In this way, collegiality also contributes to the good functioning of universities’ contribution to society and democracy. In this concluding paper of the special issue on collegiality, we summarize the main findings and takeaways from our collective studies. We summarize the main challenges and contestations to collegiality and to universities, but also document lines of resistance, activation, and maintenance. We depict varieties of collegiality and conclude by emphasizing that future research needs to be based on an appreciation of this variation. We argue that it is essential to incorporate such a variation-sensitive perspective into discussions on academic freedom and scientific quality and highlight themes surfaced by the different studies that remain under-explored in extant literature: institutional trust, field-level studies of collegiality, and collegiality and communication. Finally, we offer some remarks on methodological and theoretical implications of this research and conclude by summarizing our research agenda in a list of themes.

This study examines three significant collaborative journalism projects in the Americas: The Panama Papers, from the United States-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ); “América Latina, Región de Carteles,” by Colombian-based Connectas; and the first phase of the Brazilian-based project, Comprova, supported by Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalists (Abraji) and First Draft. The work investigates what encompasses collaborative journalism; and explores whether it is a recent phenomenon of the news ecosystem, a consequence of the institutional crisis of journalism, and if it is influenced by a network-based and platformed society. A mixed-method approach is applied in a three-stage analysis: (1) desk research; (2) quantitative content analysis; and (3) qualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews. To gain a broader picture of the organizations and their respective projects, documental and bibliographical research was carried out with a focus on data from press releases, corporate reports, and articles published on the websites of the organizations coordinating the projects. Furthermore, a quantitative content analysis of 10 news articles published by each of these collaboration partnerships was completed. Finally, qualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with the directors, managers, and professional journalists’ part of the organizations and project. This study emphasizes the importance of collaborative practices, demonstrates how collaborative practices contribute to a new modus operandi of the news ecosystem; and considers why journalists and media organizations have turned to collaborative journalism as a model of production, circulation, and distribution of journalistic investigations.

International collaboration in higher education and research is considered crucial for economic growth and development. The policy pursued for international research collaboration depends on conditions in other geographical regions and countries, such as trade interests, conflicts, security, and pandemics, hence the term geopolitics. These conditions can be expected to have a major impact on how relationships and cooperation patterns develop. The handling of these issues is discussed in this chapter in the framework of the European policy context as well as through empirical examples regarding the dependence of international recruitment of researchers in two Scandinavian countries, Denmark and Norway. The chapter points to the possible barriers current geopolitical challenges may have for the realization of European as well as national policies for internationalization in higher education. Inequalities depending on gender, career stage, country of birth and other factors have intensified during the pandemic and academic autonomy and freedom of individual researchers and scientific communities are at stake due to a geopolitical situation, which entails increased control with knowledge transfer and research collaboration across national borders. These developments require more complex, targeted safeguarding and policies to protect collaboration in higher education and research.