Elected versus appointed rectors in top Turkish research universities: Profiles and performance impacts

Abstract

This research examines the academic performance and university rankings under elected and appointed rectors in Turkish research universities, aiming to offer valuable insights into governance dynamics and their effects impact on institutional outcomes. We compare the publication and citation metrics, as well as university rankings, during the tenures of elected and appointed rectors across 19 public universities and their 38 rectors in Türkiye using document analysis and descriptive approach. The findings highlights that while appointed rectors show more diversity, including significant representation from the social sciences and humanities, elected rectors are notably from the medical area, with engineering coming in second. Despite differences in academic backgrounds and disciplinary specializations, the comparison reveals no significant divergence in publication and citation performances between elected and appointed rectors. However, the trajectory of university rankings shows a stark contrast, during times when rectors are appointed. A drop in rankings, which is especially noticeable during contentious appointments, emphasizes how crucial legitimacy and stakeholder trust are in determining institutional performance. This study advances our understanding of governance dynamics and how they affect research universities' institutional reputation.