Search results

Recent reforms to higher education systems in many OECD countries have focused on making universities more effective organisations in competing for resources and reputations. This has often involved increasing their internal cohesion and external autonomy from the state to make them more similar to private companies. However, pre-reform universities differed so greatly in their governance and capabilities that the impact of institutional changes has varied considerably between three ideal types: Hollow, State-chartered, and Autarkic. Furthermore, the combination of: (a) the inherent uncertainty of scientific research undertaken for publication, (b) limited managerial control over work processes and reputations, and (c) the contradictory effects of some funding and governance changes has greatly restricted the ability of universities to function as authoritatively integrated organisations capable of developing distinctive competitive competences.

Asks how innovative Dutch immigrant entrepreneurs are. Since the mid‐1980s the number of immigrant firms has more than tripled. This coincides with a huge increase in the number of start‐ups in the Dutch economy as a whole. However, international comparisons show that this increase has not resulted in an equal rise in the number of fast growing firms that add value and create employment – the so‐called gazelles – and are hence the preferred ideal of policy makers. This raises the question of how innovative the Dutch economy might be. To address this issue, constructs a framework of assessment, derived from the divergent capitalisms approach of Richard Whitley and associates, as this approach offers a useful conceptual instrument to do so. Concludes that, despite appearances, the Dutch institutional setting is not very conducive for value creating innovations, but instead seduces firms, especially small and medium enterprises, to follow reactive strategies. Offers some general remarks on how the conditions for innovation can be improved.

Recent changes in the funding and governance of academic research in many OECD countries have altered established authority relationships governing research priorities and judgements. These shifts in the influence of a variety of groups and organisations over scientific choices and careers can be expected to affect the development of different kinds of intellectual innovations by changing the level of protected space they provide researchers and the flexibility of dominant intellectual standards governing the allocation of resources and evaluation of research outcomes. Variations in these features of public science systems influence scientists’ willingness to pursue unusual and risky projects over many years and help to explain cross-national differences in the rate and mode of development of four innovations in the physical, biological and human sciences.

This paper aims to utilize Whitley's theory of the intellectual and social organization of the sciences and build on research carried on by Aarek et al., Vakkari, Rochester and Vakkari, and Åström, to analyze both intellectual and institutional characteristics of Arabic library and information science (LIS).

Data derived from a content analysis of sampled research articles published in seven core peer‐reviewed Arabic LIS journals and from an inventory of the currently identified Arabic LIS educational institutions, professional associations, and scholarly communication channels were analyzed in terms of Whitley's theory and relevant LIS research.

The social organization of Arabic LIS has highly influenced its intellectual organization. An analysis of types and diversity of institutional affiliations, determination of terminology, resources and fund accessibility, scholarly communication of intellectual productivity, and research collaboration point to high levels of “tasks uncertainty”, low levels of “mutual dependency” and uncontrolled “reputational autonomy”.

Because Arabic LIS institutions, associations, and research channels are poorly represented on the internet or in accessible literature, it was difficult to collect data comprehensively. While the findings are suggestive and are in agreement with views from the Arabic LIS literature, the results cannot be generalized to regions beyond the Arab world. This investigation is not primarily intended as a contribution to the philosophy of LIS, but to describe the development of LIS in the Arab States within a broad social and intellectual framework.

While there is a considerable body of theoretically‐oriented interpretations for bibliometric findings, no research has been conducted to analyze the social and intellectual dimensions of LIS in the Arab world. This paper also fills a gap for this type of the research in Arabic LIS and creates awareness of Arabic LIS for English‐speaking readers.

The metaphor of a poker game suggests the reality of international business as a competitive field in which players test their wits against each other, often using guile, and play at high levels of uncertainty. The game's rules are essentially simple but there is extensive room to maneuver. If business were actually conducted internationally with one set of clear rules used by all, then it would be like chess. A chess master can play against many others, given the highly structured nature of the game's processes. A poker master takes on a different kind of complexity, and in that, the reading of others’ minds, characters, behavior patterns, and interactions becomes crucial. The essential challenge of the global mindset is that, whereas you might think you are playing chess against several opponents, you are actually playing poker.

This article questions how institutional change influences actors’ behavior within organizations affected by the evolution of their institutional environment. This issue is addressed by looking at how university leaders are empowered by the external reviews led by evaluation agencies and research councils and how they use these reviews as managerial tools and to make decisions. It is argued that this process is complementary to the reforms in university governance and structures and amplifies their effects because it is more legitimate, favors organizational coupling and the appropriation of new norms. It draws on a study led in three French universities in 2011.

The purpose of this paper is to address the key developments concerning innovation at universities at a macro level. It describes the key trends and changes in the governance of universities and the transformation of universities into organizational actors. This also affects the governance on academic research in the sense that it leads to a gradual evolution of the specific public science system in which research is being initiated and executed.

Cultural evolution involves social articulation and transmission of knowledge. What makes a culture distinctive is how it distributes interactions in the information-space.

The innovation policies of the European Union play a noticeable, but not yet dominant, role in the EU member states, at least not in the large member states. The wide gap between the North of Europe and the South and East of Europe in innovative performance is – despite the innovation policies of the European Union – still difficult to overcome.

The actual innovative performance of ten European countries has been evaluated. Northern European countries show a higher score on the Innovation Index, whereas countries in Southern Europe score relatively low. Can we relate this difference to cultural factors?

There are few social phenomena which have as significant effects on our lives in industrial societies as the management of firms. Despite this the empirical study of management is still an underdeveloped area of social scientific research. Though very much has been written about management it can still be argued that very little is known about it as a social practice in concrete historically specified contexts. Such a state of the art is mainly due to the fact that there has been a tendency to take the individual manager as the unit of analysis and abstract away from the historical, organisational and wider institutional context of managers and managing (Willmott 1984; 1987). By emphasising abstract‐general and universalistic determinations of managers and managing, most traditions of management research have missed crucial aspects of the nature of these phenomena. The problems to be solved by managers in firms and in the wide societal environment are, however, both varied and historically specific. The types of knowledge and skills required of managers are highly specific and related to particularistic objects of work (cf. Whitley 1988). In addition, success on the part of management is very much dependent on the right timing of their interventions.