When the organization meets the institution …

1. Whentheorganizationmeetstheinstitution… Dr. Rómulo Pinheiro Universityof Oslo (HEDDA/HEIK), Agderforskning & RIS Center

2. Universityabstractions: systems & models • Conceptions: Organization, Institution, Instrument & Strategic Actor • Major Dillemas • Implications for societalroles • Final considerations Contents

3. Help us to sharemeanings and to generaliseonthe basis ofcommonattributes. Abstractions

4. “The Oxbridge idyll, however, was not about distancing but about intimacy… It was about friendships, tradition, associations and loyalties… The English idea of a university was that it was cloistered and self-contained, its own milieu.” (Rothblatt 1997: 379) The Universityas a closed system

5. Democratization & massification • Stakeholder Society (Neave 2002) • The second “academic revolution” (Etzkowitz 2001) “Universities become entrepreneurial for a variety of different reasons… An institution may not be entrepreneurial overall but may have distinctive entrepreneurial enterprises within it.” (Shattock 2009: 204) The gradual movetowardsan open-system

6. The globally-oriented, research-intensive university The locally-embeddedregional university The entrepreneurialuniversity(glo-cal) (Pinheiro, Benneworth & Jones 2012) Stylised Models or Archetypes

8. Organization Institution Instrument Strategic Actor The University:

9. Multiversity Complextechnologies Loose-coupling Bottom-heavy Professional bureaucracy Organizedanarchy Multiplicityof sub-cultures The University as Organization

10. …a collectionofstandardizedrulesand operationalproceduresembodied in structuresofmeaning& resources (Olsen 2007) • Taken for granted, routine behavior: “logic of appropriateness” (March & Olsen 2006) • Institutions are validated by outsiders(e.g. state), but are protected by insidersor social participants The Universityas Institution

11. “…having been exposed to the ruptures of largely discontinued societal processes, universities exist with layer upon layer of quite divergent legacies, yet somehow they have also succeeded in preserving a strong element of continuity amidst all the change ... (Wittrock 1993: 304-5; see also Musselin 2007; Krücken 2003; Frank & Gabler 2006; Pinheiro 2012; Pinheiro et al. 2012) The resilienceoftheinstitution

12. A means to an end; a tool to reachcertainobjectives • The ‘logicofoutcomes’ (March & Olsen 2006) • Rise ofvalorization and thestakeholder society • Instrument to whom? The university as an Instrument

13. A more completeorganization(‘actorhood’) • Rationalization, centralization, integration, identity, funding.. • The rise ofstrategicplanning, strategicscience- & accountability- regimes Transforming theUniversityinto a Strategic Actor

14. InterweavedDillemas Adapted from Olsen (2007)

15. Goals & functions: integral part ofstrategic & operational plans • Integration: Tightercoupling; core & periphery; ‘open-up’ core • Heartland: Support from academics (localintrapreneurs) • Institutional logic: from ‘moral duty’ to ‘strategicopportunity’ • Resource-dependecies: Reducerelianceonthepublicpurse • Differentiation: Aids thesearch for a uniqueinstitutionalprofile Implications for universities’ societalroles

16. Divergingconceptionsofsocietalroles • Winners vs.loosers • Bufferingoftheacademiccore, e.g. via decoupling • Measuring & rewarding • Integrity & identity; preventcooptation • Legacies: ‘ivory-tower’ label That’s it then?

17. As universitiesgraduallychange & adoptnewshapes & forms, so willtheirattitudestowardssociety and theirrole in it • As guardiansoftheinstitution (sacredvalues & identity), most academics (Europe) willcontinue to resistinstrumentalization,rationalization & centralization • University leaders willneed to findnewwaysofbalancingresponsiveness (renewal) withrespect for diversity & autonomy (stability) Final considerations

18. ThankYou! r.t.pinheiro@uv.uio.no romulo.pinheiro@agderforskning.no