IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v109y2016i3d10.1007_s11192-016-2080-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The dynamics of university units as a multi‐level process. Credibility cycles and resource dependencies

Author

Listed:
  • Benedetto Lepori

    (Università della Svizzera Italiana)

  • Michael Wise

    (Università della Svizzera Italiana)

  • Diana Ingenhoff

    (University of Fribourg)

  • Alexander Buhmann

    (BI Norwegian Business School)

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of resource acquisition and profile development of institutional units within universities. We conceptualize resource acquisition as a two-level nested process, where units compete for external resources based on their credibility, but at the same time are granted faculty positions from the larger units (department) to which they belong. Our model implies that the growth of university units is constrained by the decisions of their parent department on the allocation of professorial positions, which represent the critical resource for most units’ activities. In our field of study this allocation is largely based on educational activities, and therefore, units with high scientific credibility are not necessarily able to grow, despite an increasing reliance on external funds. Our paper therefore sheds light on the implications that the dual funding system of European universities has for the development of units, while taking into account the interaction between institutional funding and third-party funding.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedetto Lepori & Michael Wise & Diana Ingenhoff & Alexander Buhmann, 2016. "The dynamics of university units as a multi‐level process. Credibility cycles and resource dependencies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2279-2301, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:109:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2080-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-2080-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-2080-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-016-2080-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grit Laudel, 2006. "The art of getting funded: How scientists adapt to their funding conditions," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(7), pages 489-504, August.
    2. Joly, P. B. & Mangematin, V., 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 901-922, September.
    3. R. Coronini & V. Mangematin, 1999. "From individual scientific visibility to collective competencies: The example of an academic department in the social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(1), pages 55-80, May.
    4. Carole Probst & Benedetto Lepori & Daniela De Filippo & Diana Ingenhoff, 2011. "Profiles and beyond: constructing consensus on measuring research output in communication sciences," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 73-88, March.
    5. Braun, Dietmar, 1998. "The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 807-821, December.
    6. Aldo Geuna, 2001. "The Changing Rationale for European University Research Funding: Are There Negative Unintended Consequences?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 607-632, September.
    7. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2004. "Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1081-1102, October.
    8. Ulrich Schmoch & Torben Schubert, 2009. "When and how to use bibliometrics as a screening tool for research performance," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(10), pages 753-762, December.
    9. Nicolas Carayol & Mireille Matt, 2004. "Does research organization influence academic production ?," Post-Print hal-00279014, HAL.
    10. Neil Viner & Rod Green & Philip Powell, 2006. "Segmenting academics: resource targeting of research grants," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(3), pages 166-178, April.
    11. Lutz Bornmann & Andreas Thor & Werner Marx & Hermann Schier, 2016. "The application of bibliometrics to research evaluation in the humanities and social sciences: An exploratory study using normalized Google Scholar data for the publications of a research institute," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(11), pages 2778-2789, November.
    12. Philippe Larédo & Philippe Mustar, 2000. "Laboratory Activity Profiles: An Exploratory Approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(3), pages 515-539, March.
    13. Robert Braam & Peter van den Besselaar, 2010. "Life cycles of research groups: the case of CWTS," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 173-184, September.
    14. Maaike Verbree & Edwin Horlings & Peter Groenewegen & Inge Weijden & Peter Besselaar, 2015. "Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: a multivariate study of biomedical research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 25-49, January.
    15. Moll, Jodie & Hoque, Zahirul, 2011. "Budgeting for legitimacy: The case of an Australian university," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 86-101, February.
    16. Roger Coronini & Vincent Mangematin, 1999. "From individual scientific visibility to collective competencies : the example of an academic department in social science," Post-Print hal-00437647, HAL.
    17. P.-B. Joly & Vincent Mangematin, 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Post-Print hal-00422575, HAL.
    18. Lepori, Benedetto, 2011. "Coordination modes in public funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 355-367, April.
    19. Crow, Michael & Bozeman, Barry, 1987. "R&D laboratory classification and public policy: The effects of environmental context on laboratory behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 229-258, October.
    20. Benedetto Lepori & Carole Probst, 2009. "Using curricula vitae for mapping scientific fields: a small-scale experience for Swiss communication sciences," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 125-134, June.
    21. Robert Braam & Peter Besselaar, 2014. "Indicators for the dynamics of research organizations: a biomedical case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 949-971, June.
    22. Roger Coronini & Vincent Mangematin, 1999. "From individual scientific visibility to collective competencies : the example of an academic department in social science," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00437647, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas, Duncan Andrew & Ramos-Vielba, Irene, 2022. "Reframing study of research(er) funding towards configurations and trails," SocArXiv uty2v, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maaike Verbree & Edwin Horlings & Peter Groenewegen & Inge Weijden & Peter Besselaar, 2015. "Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: a multivariate study of biomedical research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 25-49, January.
    2. Lepori, Benedetto, 2011. "Coordination modes in public funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 355-367, April.
    3. Schuetzenmeister, Falk, 2010. "University Research Management: An Exploratory Literature Review," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt77p3j2hr, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    4. Edwin Horlings & Thomas Gurney, 2013. "Search strategies along the academic lifecycle," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1137-1160, March.
    5. Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Castro-Martínez, Elena & D’Este, Pablo, 2014. "Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 696-706.
    6. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2004. "Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1081-1102, October.
    7. Nicolas Carayol, 2006. "La production de brevets par les chercheurs et enseignants-chercheurs.. Le cas de l'université Louis Pasteur," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(4), pages 117-134.
    8. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi & Enza Setteducati & Alessio Ancaiani, 2014. "Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 169-198, April.
    9. Emanuela Reale, 2017. "Analysis of National Public Research Funding (PREF) - Final Report," JRC Research Reports JRC107599, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Carayol, Nicolas, 2003. "Objectives, agreements and matching in science-industry collaborations: reassembling the pieces of the puzzle," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 887-908, June.
    11. Thomas, Duncan Andrew & Ramos-Vielba, Irene, 2022. "Reframing study of research(er) funding towards configurations and trails," SocArXiv uty2v, Center for Open Science.
    12. Philippe Larédo & Philippe Mustar, 2000. "Laboratory Activity Profiles: An Exploratory Approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(3), pages 515-539, March.
    13. Sanz-Menendez, Luis & Cruz-Castro, Laura, 2003. "Coping with environmental pressures: public research organisations responses to funding crises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1293-1308, September.
    14. Kerstin Pull & Birgit Pferdmenges & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2017. "Do Research Training Groups Operate at Optimal Size?," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 18(2), pages 129-145, May.
    15. Bozeman, Barry & Rogers, Juan D., 2002. "A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 769-794, July.
    16. Baldini, Nicola & Grimaldi, Rosa & Sobrero, Maurizio, 2006. "Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: A study of Italian universities' patenting activities between 1965 and 2002," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 518-532, May.
    17. Richard S. J. Tol, 2012. "Shapley values for assessing research production and impact of schools and scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 763-780, March.
    18. Ioana Alexandra HORODNIC, 2014. "Academic Performance: Measurement Methods Used In Socio - Economic Sciences," THE YEARBOOK OF THE "GH. ZANE" INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC RESEARCHES, Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research ( from THE ROMANIAN ACADEMY, JASSY BRANCH), vol. 23(1), pages 5-17.
    19. Van Looy, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Callaert, Julie & van Pottelsberghe, Bruno & Sapsalis, Eleftherios & Debackere, Koenraad, 2011. "Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 553-564, May.
    20. Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Inés Andújar-Nagore & Sandro Giachi & Manuel Fernández-Esquinas, 2016. "New Organizational Arrangements for Public-Private Research Collaboration," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 80-103, March.

    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:spr:scient:v:109:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2080-5. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.