Investigating the Role of Intermediary Organizations in University Autonomy from Management Perspective: Case Studies in the EHEA
Chen, Ruixue (2016)
2016
MDP in Research and Innovation in Higher Education
Johtamiskorkeakoulu - School of Management
This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Hyväksymispäivämäärä
2016-07-31
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:uta-201609022220
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:uta-201609022220
Tiivistelmä
This study employed qualitative multiple case study methodology to exam how the two well-known intermediary organizations from different European higher education settings advocate university autonomy by exploring the main difficulties they face as well as the actions in countering the difficulties. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with purposefully selected employees from the two case organizations, and through website analysis as well as review of the relevant documents, striving to present solid evidences to support the findings.
Thematic analysis of data resulted in the generation of the four major themes from the massive information collected through the multiple data collection tools, which altogether answered all the research questions posed at the beginning, additionally, the matters related to the concept of university autonomy were also addressed. One major finding of the study is that the two organizations, though practicing in different levels of the European higher education settings, both working for university autonomy with the exclusive focus on strengthening the institutional leadership, regardless of the autonomy of individuals in the university. A second major finding pointed to the various sources of the difficulties the two organizations receive in relation to the advocacy of university autonomy. Though the difficulties were distinct in either substance or the degree to the two organizations, an amicable solution of friendly communication and active negotiation were adopted to triumph over those moments. At last, the paper concludes with critical examination of the study along with along with implications for practical issues, academic communities and possible suggestions for future research.
Thematic analysis of data resulted in the generation of the four major themes from the massive information collected through the multiple data collection tools, which altogether answered all the research questions posed at the beginning, additionally, the matters related to the concept of university autonomy were also addressed. One major finding of the study is that the two organizations, though practicing in different levels of the European higher education settings, both working for university autonomy with the exclusive focus on strengthening the institutional leadership, regardless of the autonomy of individuals in the university. A second major finding pointed to the various sources of the difficulties the two organizations receive in relation to the advocacy of university autonomy. Though the difficulties were distinct in either substance or the degree to the two organizations, an amicable solution of friendly communication and active negotiation were adopted to triumph over those moments. At last, the paper concludes with critical examination of the study along with along with implications for practical issues, academic communities and possible suggestions for future research.