Search results

Adopting an agentic positioning, we question and compare competing logics hybridization within French hospitals and universities facing major reforms inspired by new public management. In addition to the resulting forms of hybridization exposed in the literature (accepted or refused), we observe four additional modes: instrumentalized, uncomfortable, reformulated, and suffered. They all reveal the varied manner with which each professional faces reform. However, we develop a new argument: the ways professionals hybridize (or do not) their prevailing logic depends on an overarching mode of hybridization that characterizes the way their organization deals with reform. We identify two contrasting modes: overarching strategic logics hybridization and overarching enforced logics hybridization. They give insight into how actors decouple structure from practices. We contribute to the literature on logics hybridization by first analyzing the role of specific actors who act as either a translator-actor or a closure-actor to respectively facilitate appropriation of the reforms or to protect professionals against the growing dominance of the new logic introduced by the law; and secondly by discussing importance of articulating higher and lower organizational levels all involved in hybridization.

This paper aims to investigate the unfolding dynamics and evolving processes relating to the formation of accounting tools by university actors. It answers the research questions: How do individual actors engage in the formation of new accounting tools during university hybridisation? Specifically, what forms of reflexivity do these actors display in various phases of university hybridisation?

This is a longitudinal case study of the development of new accounting tools in one Russian technical university from 2010 to 2016. It is based on an institutional work perspective, involving 29 interviews, documentary analysis, and observations of internal meetings relating to new accounting tools’ formation.

The findings show that academics themselves were gradually engaged in the marginalisation of academic demands in university governance in favour of managerialism via accounting. Nevertheless, the role of accounting morphed over time from a dysfunctional and negative carrier of managerial ideology and its domination, to what could arguably be considered a mediation device between academic and managerial demands. These dynamic processes and the role of accounting within them are explained by the constant challenge stemming from the involvement of several groups of actors in institutional work, which is often unpredictable and fluid due to the intricate play of plural reflexivities and actors’ identities during university hybridisation.

This paper advances the field by showing that the engagement and reflexivity of academics in the formation of accounting tools is not a “panacea” to deal with hybridisation within universities. The results highlight several obstacles, including variation in the reflexive capacities of actors within the university, leading to a reflexivity lag and reflexivity trap.

While previous health-care-related hybridity research has focused on macro- and micro-level investigations, this paper aims to study hybridization at the organizational level, with a specific focus on decision-making. The authors investigate how new politico-economic expectations toward a university hospital as a hybrid organization become internalized via organizational decision-making, resulting in the establishment of a new business collaboration and innovation-oriented unit.

The authors employed a social systems theoretical framework to explore organizational decision-making processes involved in the establishment of the new hybrid hospital unit. Drawing on 15 interviews and nine organizational documents, the authors describe and analyze three decision-making cycles using the concepts of complexity, decision and justification.

The findings reveal the challenging nature of decision-making during hybridization, as decisions regarding unprecedented organizational structures and activities cannot be justified by traditional decision premises. The authors show that decision-makers use a combination of novel justification strategies, namely, justification by problems, by examples and by obligations, to legitimize decisions oriented at non-traditional activities. Further, the analysis reveals how expectations of several societal systems, i.e. health care, education, science, law, economy and politics, are considered in decision-making taking place in hybrid organizations.

The study draws attention to the complexity of decision-making in a hybrid context and highlights the role of justification strategies in partially reducing complexity by concealing the paradoxical nature of decision-making and ensuring the credibility of resulting decisions. Also, the study presents a move beyond the dualism inherent in many previous hybridity studies by illustrating the involvement of several societal systems in hybridization.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight and compare insights from research conducted in different disciplines on the effects of the use of calculative practices in academia. It also acts as an introduction to the special issue on “governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities’ accountability”.

This paper reviews the findings and reflections provided in academic literature on the various types of consequences stemming from the diffusion of the “audit culture” in academia. In so doing, it draws upon insights from previous literature in education, management and accounting, and other papers included in this special issue of Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management.

The literature review shows that a growing number of studies are focussing on the hybridization of universities, not only in terms of calculative practices (e.g. performance indicators) but also in relation to individual actors (e.g. academics and managers) who may have divergent values, and thus, act according to multiple logics (business and academic logics). It highlights many areas in which further robust academic research is needed to guide policy and practice developments in universities.

This paper provides academics, regulators and decision-makers with relevant insights into the critical issues of using calculative practices in academia. Despite the negative effects have been observed in various disciplines, there is an evident perpetuation in the use of those practices.

This paper contributes to the ongoing debates on the disillusion of calculative practices in academia. Yet, positive changes can be achieved within the complex settings of “hybrid” universities when the apparent class division between academics and managers is bridged.

Universities in Malaysia, particular public universities, have been tasked not only with the traditional focus on the pursuit of knowledge, but also the important role of nation-building. The purpose of this paper is to explore the nation-building agenda in the development of Malaysian higher education in the globalisation era.

Grounded within the literature of nation-building and globalisation and neoliberalism, the approach of this paper examines the development of higher education in Malaysia across time.

Two particular aspects in the Malaysian higher education that have seen tension and changes emerging from the interaction between globalisation and nation-building are: the medium of instruction and hybridisation in universities.

The paper illustrates the ways in which universities have adapted in terms of the medium of instruction between the Malay language and English, as well as hybridisation that has taken place as a result of globalisation on the local vision, structure and characteristics of Malaysian universities.

This article explores the hybrid modernity made through missionary architectural practices during colonial Korea, by examining how the master plan of Yonsei University, one of the earliest mission schools in Korea, has gone through a unique evolutionary process throughout the convoluted modern history of the twentieth century. In doing so, this article conducts a thorough visual and spatial analysis of the given case with two emphases: first, analyzing three campus master plans—produced in 1917, 1925, and 2016 respectively—in a comparative way; and second, analyzing the layout and façade composition of major buildings that comprise the campus in great details. These master plans are crucial evidences enabling us to investigate the transatlantic architectural practices in early 20th century, as Henry K. Murphy, the architect in charge of the first two master plans of Yonsei University, was one who had long practiced in New York and greatly admired the values of Asian architecture through a series of field trips to major Asian cities, including Beijing, Shanghai, Tokyo, and Seoul.

While the 1917 master plan was in part influenced by the Western precedents, as well as ones from Japan and China some of which Murphy himself was involved in as a master architect the 1925 case deviates from it and illustrates multiple points of transformation that go beyond spatial symmetry and visual harmony. The 1925 one is marked by the rearranged spatial disposition and façade composition of dormitories and residential halls as influenced by the geographical peculiarities of Korea at that time. Long after the revision, the third, 2016, version illustrates the much expanded, triangular shape toward the south with added buildings and facilities, while the entombment area and other historical fragments in the upper part are well preserved. Hence, this article claims that the case of Yonsei University elicits the hybridization of missionary architectural practices and local Korean culture throughout the twentieth century, which is neither subsumed by the missionaries' imposition of design ideas nor bound by the authentically Korean tradition of design.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate, in general, what are the contemporary external influences that have been dominant in Malaysian universities and what are the major local traditional practices that are also found in these universities.

From the literature review, the paper proposes a conceptual framework to explore hybridity in governance and management, programs and curriculum, teaching and learning, and research and service.

Using the conceptual framework, the paper discusses the Malaysian higher education in terms of Western influence and indigenization of Western models, the background context of Islamic universities and seven possible hybridities compiled from anecdotal evidences.

The conceptual framework and possible hybridities identified in the paper serve to provide the guide to a more systemic empirical investigation to examine the characteristics of Malaysian universities emerging from the interaction between external influence and local cultures. The Malaysian case also potentially contribute in exploring the question, “Are Asian universities different from Western universities?”.

This paper examines the historical background of accountingization, colonization and hybridization in the health services by exploring the relationship between hospital accounting and clinical medicine in Britain between the late 1960s and the early 2000s.

The paper draws on an analysis of professional journals, government reports and other documentary sources relating to accounting and medical developments. It is informed by Abbott's sociology of professions and Eyal's sociology of expertise.

The paper shows that not only accountants but also elements within the medical profession sought to make the practice of medicine more visible, calculable and standardized, and that accounting and medical attempts to make medicine calculable interacted in a mutually reinforcing manner. Consequently, it argues that a movement towards clinical forms of quantification within the medical profession made it more open to economic calculation, which underpinned hospital accounting reforms and the accountingization, colonization or hybridization of health services.

The paper demonstrates that a fuller understanding of the relationship between accounting and public sector professions can be developed if we examine their mutual interactions rather than restricting ourselves to analyzing accounting's effects on public sector professions. The paper moreover illustrates instances of intraprofessional conflict and inter-professional cooperation, and draws on the sociology of expertise to suggests that while hospital accounting reforms have curbed the power of medical professionals, they have also enhanced the power of clinical expertise.

This purpose of this study is to understand how the spread of audit culture and the related public sector reforms have affected Finnish universities’ organization principles, performance measurement (PM) criteria and ultimately their reason for being.

Applying extensive qualitative data by combining interview data with document materials, this study takes a longitudinal perspective toward the changing Finnish higher education field.

The analysis suggests the reforms have altered universities’ administrative structures, planning and control systems, coordination mechanisms and the role of staff units, as well as the allocation of power and thus challenged their reason for being. Power has become concentrated into the hands of formal managers, while operational core professionals have been distanced from decision making. Efficiency in terms of financial and performance indicators has become a coordinating principle of university organizations, and PM practices are used to steer the work of professionals. Because of the reforms, universities have moved away from the ideal type of professional bureaucracy and begun resembling the new, emerging ideal type of competitive bureaucracy.

This study builds on rich, real-life, longitudinal empirical material and details a chronological description of the changes in Finland’s university sector. Moreover, it illustrates how the spread of audit culture and the related legislative changes have transformed the ideal type of university organization and challenged universities’ reason for being. These changes entail significant consequences regarding universities as organizations and their role in society.

Conflicting institutional logics are thought to be factors that hinder organizational changes in public institutions. Thus, this study explores the different strategies of public sector organizations to handle tensions from conflicting institutional logics in their day-to-day activities.

The authors argue that strategies for handling conflicting logics should not be treated separately. Rather, the authors show that within organizations, different strategies could be interconnected and depend on each other. The empirical insights come from a case study of a large German federal authority, in which management reporting was introduced with the intent to effect change in the organization.

The authors show how, over time, organization members confront the practice of management reporting with different approaches to address conflicting institutional demands and to find ways to create management reports that would be accepted by different addressees.

The study documents three states of responds to conflicting institutional logics: decoupling, compromising and hybridization. The authors highlight the power dynamics between the corresponding actors and the consequences for using management reports in these different states. Accordingly, the authors aim to provide profound insights into the microdynamics in the context of conflicting institutional logics.