IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/scaman/v26y2010i2p107-120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The softening bureaucracy: Accommodating new research opportunities in the entrepreneurial university

Author

Listed:
  • Styhre, Alexander
  • Lind, Frida

Abstract

Summary In the growing literature on the entrepreneurial university, the divergent attitudes between industry and academy are often put forth as a major obstacle to more fruitful collaborations. This paper presents a study of a major Scandinavian technical university (referred to with the pseudonym UniTech), suggesting that the organization of such collaborations is perhaps a more substantial challenge for the entrepreneurial university. Drawing on a body of literature that addresses bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic organization forms, it is suggested that the entrepreneurial university could emerge as a soft bureaucracy, that is, a hybrid organization form comprising both bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic elements. While the soft bureaucracy organization form offers distinct opportunities, it also demands the sacrificing of some bureaucratic features such as full transparency and the predictability of operations. As a consequence, the entrepreneurial university needs to institute a number of mechanisms and procedures that structure and guide its day-to-day work, and nourish an attitude whereby a certain degree of ambiguity can be tolerated.

Suggested Citation

  • Styhre, Alexander & Lind, Frida, 2010. "The softening bureaucracy: Accommodating new research opportunities in the entrepreneurial university," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 107-120, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:scaman:v:26:y:2010:i:2:p:107-120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522109000931
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dischner, Simon, 2015. "Organizational structure, organizational form, and counterproductive work behavior: A competitive test of the bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic views," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 501-514.
    2. Päivikki Kuoppakangas & Kati Suomi & Jari Stenvall & Elias Pekkola & Jussi Kivistö & Tomi Kallio, 2019. "Revisiting the five problems of public sector organisations and reputation management—the perspective of higher education practitioners and ex-academics," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 16(2), pages 147-171, December.
    3. Reza Kiani Mavi, 2014. "Indicators of Entrepreneurial University: Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 370-387, June.
    4. Yazdan Moradi & Siamak Noori, 2020. "Entrepreneurial Cooperation Model between University and SMEs: A Case Study in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-22, November.
    5. Ghulam Mustafa & Hans Solli-Sæther & Virginia Bodolica & Jon Ivar Håvold & Anam Ilyas, 2022. "Digitalization trends and organizational structure: bureaucracy, ambidexterity or post-bureaucracy?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(4), pages 671-694, December.
    6. Irina Jormanainen & Alexei Koveshnikov, 2012. "International Activities of Emerging Market Firms," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 691-725, October.
    7. Florian, Mona, 2018. "Unlikely allies: Bureaucracy as a cultural trope in a grassroots volunteer organization," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 151-161.
    8. Yung-Chi Shen, 2017. "Identifying the key barriers and their interrelationships impeding the university technology transfer in Taiwan: a multi-stakeholder perspective," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2865-2884, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:scaman:v:26:y:2010:i:2:p:107-120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/872/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.