Search results

We explore and explain how academic organizations attempt to establish legitimacy in a transition to a postconflict context, and we examine the ethical challenges that emerge from insightful approaches to formal education in such contexts.

We use legitimacy theory to present a case study of a business school in Medellin, Colombia (herein referred to by the pseudonym BS-MED) in the empirical setting of the end of the most prolonged armed conflict in the world.

We identify the mechanisms implemented by BS-MED to comply with the Colombian government's peace process and rhetoric of business profitability and the faculty members' initiatives in response to social and academic tensions.

This study identifies the sources of the tensions and discrepancies between the regulatory and pragmatic versus moral and cultural-cognitive criteria of legitimacy in transitions to a postconflict context. This examination advances our understanding of the challenges that organizations face regarding changes to legitimacy over time. The extreme setting of our case positions academics as key players who lead the search for legitimacy. This study challenges the understandings of legitimacy in the literature on organizations, which rarely consider broader sociopolitical transitions to a peace context.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the emergence of organized academic entrepreneurship in the context of institutional complexity, in which multiple institutional logics co-exist. The paper is focused on the dynamics of internal legitimation of new research commercialization initiatives and the interrelations between internal and external legitimacy and their underlying institutional logics.

Based on a historical case study of the founding of Yeda Research and Development Company at the Weizmann Institute of Science in 1959, the paper examines the rhetorical struggles between the proponents and opponents of the company. The analysis is based on archival data and focuses on the analysis of a meeting of the Institute’s Scientific Committee in which the new company was introduced and debated.

The findings show the strengths and limitations of rhetorical legitimation work in supporting the establishment of new organizational initiatives. Rhetorical strategies that bridge the different institutional logics in the field can enable the emergence of new enterprises. Yet, when organizational practices do not concur with the institutional logic on which internal legitimacy is based, new organizational initiatives become illegitimate and organizational actors withdraw their support.

This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the under-researched process of constructing internal legitimacy for an organizational change, both in general and in the specific context of academic entrepreneurship. Further, this study contributes new insights to research on the historical process of the emergence of organized research commercialization in universities in the context of institutional complexity.

One of the consequences of the democratization of higher education in the United States is the explosion of institutions that have arisen to meet mass demand, and the stratification of those institutions based on the populations they serve. The Ivy League, the “public ivy” flagship state universities, and a cadre of elite small private liberal arts colleges are the basis for the institutionalized myths that inform public perception of what colleges or universities are, even though these schools account for an ever-shrinking fraction of American higher education experiences. The growth in schools serving primarily “nontraditional” students – that is, anything except in-person residential undergraduate liberal arts for at-least-middle-class white eighteen-year-olds with certain test scores coming directly from a college-preparatory high school program – has created a legitimacy paradox within the higher education sector. Democratization has created a need for different types of institutions, but the quest for legitimacy within the higher education sector drives isomorphic change and fuels mission creep, pulling schools away from their original nontraditional constituencies. In order to effectively serve nontraditional students, schools must explore other sectors outside of higher education where there is potential for creating programmatic and/or institutional legitimacy, including the business sector, specific professional sectors, and social/cultural milieu. The intentional development of multiliminality, where institutions draw legitimacy from multiple overlapping environmental sectors simultaneously, offers one response which helps anchor colleges and universities in their missions and helps maintain the access promised by the democratization of higher education.

The paper aims to clarify a debate about the legitimacy of entrepreneurship as a field of study. Katz and Kuratko continued this discussion by evaluating the legitimacy as an academic discipline. Their work extends the earlier contributions of Stephenson, Meyer, Finkle et al., and Fiet. Their research focused on the use of secondary data to consider this research question. This study uses an empirical evaluation of the actors that form the basis of this field of study, the faculty that teach entrepreneurship.

This study used an online survey to ascertain the academic background, dissertation subject, doctoral course work, teaching assignments, and research output of individuals that described themselves as entrepreneurship faculty.

The results show that a significant percentage of the sample of college instructors did not have a doctorate in entrepreneurship, nor did they study entrepreneurship in their curriculum thereby potentially undermining perceptions of legitimacy.

This study was based upon feedback from 112 faculty. A test using a χ2 goodness-of-fit showed there was no significant difference between the geographic location of respondents to non-respondents. The findings paint a distressing picture of the academic qualifications of the faculty assigned to teach entrepreneurship. In addition, the results were disappointing for the research productivity of faculty in the field. The fact that so many of them view themselves as entrepreneurship and small business faculty reinforces the significance of the findings. In general, the authors find empirical evidence in the sample that entrepreneurship and small business may not be viewed as a legitimate field due to the lack of academic credentials and the extensive professional credentials of their instructors.

The findings demonstrate that entrepreneurship is likely not considered legitimate, in part, due to a lack of academic preparation or research productivity of instructors within the field of entrepreneurship. The lack of doctoral preparation is a critical problem. This issue would not be paramount where faculty publishing solely in the field. However, the findings demonstrate self-described entrepreneurship instructors publish in other fields of study. Thus, the fact that faculty do not solely teach in the field is also testimony to the challenges of legitimacy faced by individuals that teach entrepreneurship.

The authors are not aware of any studies that specifically evaluate the academic background, dissertation subject, doctoral course work, teaching assignments, and research output of individuals that teach entrepreneurship.

Global trends in higher education are calling now for public university reforms which aim to increase the competitiveness of the university on the world markets, enlarging its role in the economy and in society by making it more entrepreneurial, more efficient, and closer to practical life. In order to achieve these goals, universities should be managed in a different way. The principles of New Public Management (NPM), which are being actively introduced in Russian universities, substantially transform educational and scientific practices. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the growing crisis of NPM-based university institutional reforms in terms of legitimisation, to reveal which factors shape legitimacy, and to show why legitimacy as such cannot be achieved within the framework of NPM.

The productivity and efficiency of the NPM-based strategy are mainly defined by the attitudes of all actors, or stakeholders. As such, it is very important to investigate local responses on a workplace level, in order to understand how insiders – lecturers and researchers – view the structural changes taking place within Russian universities. In order to do so, an empirical research of lecturers in four national research universities (NRUs) in St Petersburg has been organised. Using a self-designed questionnaire, the authors assessed the academic perceptions and evaluations of certain changes which have taken place in Russian universities over the last few years. In all, 126 teachers of four St Petersburg NRUs took part in the survey, which was conducted between January and February 2015 and consisted of questions measuring resources of legitimacy and legitimacy markers.

Legitimacy markers were revealed such as acceptance of goals, positive perception of results and emotional state. A serious conflict between the existing cognitive culture of universities and the new managerialistic approach was diagnosed. The legitimacy of NPM-based reforms in Russian NRUs was proven to be low for the following reasons: the objectives of reforms are unclear or even unknown to employees; the results of the reforms are either not seen or negatively evaluated; and the reforms provoke stress and professional burnout. The following factors influencing the process of legitimisation were proven to be significant: the agreement of personnel with reforms and the changes they bring, positive perception of changes, opportunity to participate in decision making (engagement), and, to some extent, influence. Remuneration has only a slight effect on legitimacy.

The findings of this study are not free from limitations. The data were collected within only four research universities in St Petersburg. Furthermore, the authors’ findings are based on self-reported data, which can be biased. Increasing the volume of the sample and the number of NRUs could be one solution. In the future, research could be developed by enhancing the sample, by making international comparisons, and by providing a more detailed questionnaire.

Higher education systems in many countries in the world are going through similar reforms and are facing similar issues: increasing competition for funds, students and teachers, massification and commercialisation of education, a new managerialistic approach to governance, research valorisation, and effective contracts. New managerial ideology is having a big impact on university culture and can cause passive resistance to reforms, along with disappointment, frustration and professional burnout. These are important issues which cannot be ignored if a successful “third generation” entrepreneurial university is to be built. This study provides important insights into the perceptions of reforms and requires us to pay more attention to university as a social and public value.

The research is original. It is interesting and new because it discusses the NPM-based reforms in higher education in the Russian Federation, a country which was earlier quite well-known for the quality of its education and richness of its university traditions, and empirically tests the factors influencing their legitimacy. Prior research on legitimacy applies the concept mainly in politics. Otherwise, legitimacy is still a concept which is difficult in terms of both theoretical interpretation and empirical validation. The results of the study have practical implications for providing and developing more effective governance in public organisations.

This study contributes to a better understanding of the important actor-specific, micro-level legitimacy dimensions in dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs).

Using an embedded case study approach and rich longitudinal data collected over 16 years within a French EE, the study analyzes the legitimacy gaining process of two actors coming from opposite founding conditions.

Three dimensions of legitimacy (3L) are necessary to be accepted as functional actors within EEs: institutional legitimacy (IL) refers to the EE's acceptance of an actor as an institution active in the field of entrepreneurship; cultural legitimacy (CL) means that the actor is recognized as possessing and promoting values considered appropriate by the entrepreneurial community; relational legitimacy (RL) relates to the willingness of the entrepreneurial community to interact with the actor. These are complementary dimensions that members of EEs need to possess to acquire full legitimacy. Different paths are possible to achieve this full legitimacy.

Replicating the study with a comparative approach including more actors could represent an interesting avenue for research.

This research provides insights into the underlying dimensions of legitimacy in EEs, how various actors gain legitimacy in such contexts and how this influences the dynamics of EEs.

The results provide novel insights into the issue of legitimacy in EEs and legitimacy theory in general.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast perceptions about the research-practice “gap” as it may apply within management accounting, from the perspective of professional accounting bodies in Australia and Germany.

The findings reported in this paper is based on the collection and analysis of data from interviews with 19 senior representatives from four Australian Professional bodies and 14 representatives of German Professional accounting bodies.

In Australia and Germany, there exist common as well as unique barriers preventing a more effective engagement of academic research with practice. Common to both countries is the perception that the communication of research represents a major barrier. In Australia, practitioner access to academic research is seen to be a principal obstacle; in Germany, the relevance of topics researched by academics is perceived to represent a significant barrier to academic research informing practice.

This paper directly engages with, and extends recent empirically based research into the extent to which academic research may “speak” to management accounting practice. It extricates both common and specific barriers contributing to the oft-quoted “research-practice gap” in management accounting, and points to the pivotal nature of an intermediary to act as a conduit between academics and practice.

By investigating this issue in two quite different cultural, educational, academic and practice contexts, this paper provides much-needed empirical evidence about the nature, extent and pervasiveness of the perceived research-practice gap in management accounting, and provides a basis for further investigation of this important topic.

This paper aims to review the evolution of management education primarily over the last 50 years and seeks to identify the challenges and lessons learned in management education and to assess the potential for change. To gain insight into these issues the authors draw on the perspectives of around 40 key individuals from academia, professional bodies, media, business and students.

The content of the paper is based upon a qualitative analysis of around 40 two‐to‐three hour interviews of key global players in the management education field.

The key stakeholders in management education are identified as students, business and employers respectively. But in terms of relative stakeholder influence faculty, business and students are the top three influencers. Faculty represent the supply‐side whereas business and students represent the demand side of management education. There is evidence that higher tuition fees may increase the power of students and business relative to faculty. The individuals who have had the greatest influence on management education are academics such as Mintzberg and Drucker rather than business school deans or administrators. Institutions such as INSEAD, IMD and Harvard have had the greatest influence. The main issues and challenges identified in Management Education include information technology, globalisation, the role of faculty, competition and business model performance. Few game changing innovations in curricula have occurred in management education raising the question of how change will occur in the future.

There are few in‐depth, open‐ended interview studies of key participants in the field of management education. It adds insights to a range of more reflective literature studies from writers such as Khurana, Mintzberg and Pfeffer.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the mechanisms that explain the complexities Indonesian higher education (HE) academic leaders (ALs) experience in performing leadership roles. The research addresses the questions: How do Indonesian ALs perceive their roles in HE? What are the challenges facing Indonesian ALs in their roles in the Indonesian HE context? To what extent does gender impact how ALs act and are perceived?

In sum, 35 ALs from six Indonesian universities representing top executive positions were interviewed. Data were analysed thematically using a retroductive process followed by a series of on-site member-checking activities to establish credibility and authenticity of the findings.

The religious principles of amanah (the “altruistic calling” of their functions needing dedication, commitment, and passion) unique to the Indonesian cultural experience influence ALs views of leadership. ALs face role constraints due to resource limitations, experiencing a double bind, while harmonising differences due to ascribed social status and position.

Supportive structures effective for academic leadership practice must be created, further studies on male ALs’ roles in promoting the leadership ascent of female ALs and promoting work-life balance will improve ALs’ visibility and salience in steering institutional growth.

This is the first study to focus a critical lens on the complexities of context-based leadership practice as it is influenced by amanah. Layers of constraints confronting female ALs were documented due to exigencies of gender role expectations and resource limitations, yet they exhibited paternal navigational skills beyond the maternal and pastoral calling of their roles.