Monthly Archives: June 2016

Summer School in Higher Education Research and Sciences Studies

Dear Community,
we would like to inform you about the planned summer school in September 5-9 organized by the German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW) and the Institute of Sociology at the University of Hanover!
The summer school has the aim to understand the social mechanisms of career decisions
in academia. As conditions in academia are changing due to differentiation and increasing
stratification among higher education institutions, increasing competition for resources and evaluation of achievements, increasingly precarious working conditions and a declining proportion of full or associate professors positions in the academic labour market, a couple of questions arises: Who decides to stay in academia in spite of increasingly difficult career prospects? Are diversity management and equal opportunity programs in order to increase the career chances of women successful? What determines the chances of highly qualified people in the common labour market compared to academia? For which scientists are these drop-out options attractive? How are the chances to find a good job when after 12 or 15 years of work at a university or in research projects it becomes clear that a permanent position will not be available?
There will be a mix of theoretical and methodological contents, of analyses of the German academic labour market and international comparisons. Presenters and invited keynote speakers will be from German und international higher education research and science studies.

Please apply online and sumbmit your abstract by June 24, 2016.
For further information:

Book published: Multi-Level Governance of Universities

Governing universities is a multi-level as well as a highly paradoxical endeavor. The featured studies in this book examine critically the multifaceted repercussions of changing governance logics and how contradictory demands for scholarly peer control, market responsiveness, public policy control, and democratization create governance paradoxes. While a large body of Cover MGiUacademic literature has been focusing on the external governance of universities, this book shifts the focus on organizations’ internal characteristics, thus contributing to a deeper understanding of the changing governance in universities.

The book follows exigent calls for getting back to the heart of organization theory when studying organizational change and turns attention to strategies, structures, and control mechanisms as distinctive but interrelated elements of organizational designs. We take a multi-level approach to explore how universities develop strategies in order to cope with changes in their institutional environment (macro level), how universities implement these strategies in their structures and processes (meso level), and how universities design mechanisms to control the behavior of their members (micro level). As universities are highly complex knowledge-based organizations, their modus operandi, i.e. governing strategies, structures, and controls, needs to be responsive to the multiplicity of demands coming from both inside and outside the organization.

Volume 47 of Springer’s Higher Education Dynamics Series advances higher education research by gathering distinguished scholars with an academic background in management and organization studies and a research interest in the dynamics of university governance. Among them are JC Spender, Mats Alvesson, Alfred Kieser, and many more.

Follow these links to find the full table of contents, to order the book or to access single chapters.

Publons: Get credit for peer review

Reviewers do an important but often underappreciated job in the current publication system. To recognize their invisible and usually unpaid efforts, journals often gratefully publish the name of their reviewers by end of the year. From the perspective of reviewers, these “honorable mentions” are nice, but still somewhat scattered and disconnected.

The online network “publons” offers a more personalized approach of earning credit for reviewing. Once you have created an account, you can forward the “thank-you-for-reviewing”-mails that are automatically generated by submission systems after completion of the process. The information will be verified and added to your profile, thus recording your personal history of peer reviewing. This can be helpful to document your services to the community, e.g. in application processes.

Indikon at the 16th EURAM – 2 papers nominated for the Best Paper Award

The annual conference of the 16th European Academy of Management (EURAM) took place in Paris, the beautiful capital of France. Rick Vogel and I had the opportunity to present two of our current research papers:

“How Influence Tactics and Trustworthiness of Reviewers Affect Authors’ Trust and Commitment to Peer Review” by Fabian Hattke, Isabel Bögner and Rick Vogel.
“Performance Indicators in Academic Research: Do They Improve Performance?” by Rick Vogel and Fabian Hattke.

Both papers were nominated for the best paper award in SIG 09 (Organizational Behavior) and SIG 11 (Public and Non-Profit Management).
We feel honored for the nominations and are thankful for the inspiring discussion possibilities that definitely will help us to improve our actual state.
We warmly congratulate the winners Jamie Lee Gloor and Bert George, Sebastian Desmidt and Eva Cools for the prices and hope to see them again next year in Glasgow!

For further information about the conference, please have a look at EURAM 2017 Glasgow

It’s official: the better the teacher, the worse the evaluation

A recent study found that students’ evaluation of teaching quality at universities drops by about half a standard deviation when the effectiveness of the teacher in improving students’ performance increases by one standard deviation. In other words: the better the teacher, the worse the evaluation. This is mainly due to the extra-effort that good teachers require from their students. The weather also proves to be a determinant of evaluation results. Overall, these findings cast doubts on the evaluation practices of universities, both with regard to current and prospective teachers.