在洪堡和洛克菲勒之间:高等教育中混合性的组织设计方法

IF 2 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Scandinavian Journal of Management Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.scaman.2023.101260
Sascha Albers , Volker Rundshagen , Johanna Vanderstraeten , Markus Raueiser , Lode De Waele
{"title":"在洪堡和洛克菲勒之间:高等教育中混合性的组织设计方法","authors":"Sascha Albers ,&nbsp;Volker Rundshagen ,&nbsp;Johanna Vanderstraeten ,&nbsp;Markus Raueiser ,&nbsp;Lode De Waele","doi":"10.1016/j.scaman.2023.101260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Higher education institutions (HEI) are maneuvering the competing institutional logics of academia and commerce, which provide widely conflicting bases for legitimacy ascriptions. HEI that try to internalize both competing institutional logics become hybrids, addressing the resulting internal tensions and conflicts through efforts of structural separation or blending. Whereas these generic approaches have been well described, also for HEI, their underlying, constituting organizational design remains unclear. We refer to the general organization design literature to suggest templates for hybrid HEI. Dependent on the relative strength attributed to the two competing logics, respectively, we specify typical organizational designs reflecting separation as well as blending solutions. We embed these hybrid organizational design types with the pure archetypes of both logics and offer implications for research and practice in the HE field.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47759,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between Humboldt and Rockefeller: An organization design approach to hybridity in higher education\",\"authors\":\"Sascha Albers ,&nbsp;Volker Rundshagen ,&nbsp;Johanna Vanderstraeten ,&nbsp;Markus Raueiser ,&nbsp;Lode De Waele\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.scaman.2023.101260\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Higher education institutions (HEI) are maneuvering the competing institutional logics of academia and commerce, which provide widely conflicting bases for legitimacy ascriptions. HEI that try to internalize both competing institutional logics become hybrids, addressing the resulting internal tensions and conflicts through efforts of structural separation or blending. Whereas these generic approaches have been well described, also for HEI, their underlying, constituting organizational design remains unclear. We refer to the general organization design literature to suggest templates for hybrid HEI. Dependent on the relative strength attributed to the two competing logics, respectively, we specify typical organizational designs reflecting separation as well as blending solutions. We embed these hybrid organizational design types with the pure archetypes of both logics and offer implications for research and practice in the HE field.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522123000015\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522123000015","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

高等教育机构(HEI)正在操纵学术界和商业界相互竞争的制度逻辑,这为合法性归属提供了广泛的冲突基础。HEI试图将两种相互竞争的制度逻辑内化,成为混合体,通过结构分离或融合来解决由此产生的内部紧张和冲突。尽管这些通用方法已经得到了很好的描述,但对于HEI来说,它们的基本组成组织设计仍然不清楚。我们参考了一般的组织设计文献,以建议混合HEI的模板。根据这两种竞争逻辑的相对强度,我们分别指定了反映分离和混合解决方案的典型组织设计。我们将这些混合的组织设计类型与两种逻辑的纯原型相嵌入,并为高等教育领域的研究和实践提供启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Between Humboldt and Rockefeller: An organization design approach to hybridity in higher education

Higher education institutions (HEI) are maneuvering the competing institutional logics of academia and commerce, which provide widely conflicting bases for legitimacy ascriptions. HEI that try to internalize both competing institutional logics become hybrids, addressing the resulting internal tensions and conflicts through efforts of structural separation or blending. Whereas these generic approaches have been well described, also for HEI, their underlying, constituting organizational design remains unclear. We refer to the general organization design literature to suggest templates for hybrid HEI. Dependent on the relative strength attributed to the two competing logics, respectively, we specify typical organizational designs reflecting separation as well as blending solutions. We embed these hybrid organizational design types with the pure archetypes of both logics and offer implications for research and practice in the HE field.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Management (SJM) provides an international forum for innovative and carefully crafted research on different aspects of management. We promote dialogue and new thinking around theory and practice, based on conceptual creativity, reasoned reflexivity and contextual awareness. We have a passion for empirical inquiry. We promote constructive dialogue among researchers as well as between researchers and practitioners. We encourage new approaches to the study of management and we aim to foster new thinking around management theory and practice. We publish original empirical and theoretical material, which contributes to understanding management in private and public organizations. Full-length articles and book reviews form the core of the journal, but focused discussion-type texts (around 3.000-5.000 words), empirically or theoretically oriented, can also be considered for publication. The Scandinavian Journal of Management is open to different research approaches in terms of methodology and epistemology. We are open to different fields of management application, but narrow technical discussions relevant only to specific sub-fields will not be given priority.
期刊最新文献
Paradoxical tensions at multiple levels: A model of unbalanced supranational coopetition Shifting from an analytical paradigm to a systems paradigm: A fundamentally systemic approach of the business model concept to tackling complexity Going collective: worker takeovers, entrepreneurship and collective actions Pastoral control in remote work Untangling business model innovation in family firms: Socioemotional wealth and corporate social responsibility perspectives
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1