作为意识形态的管理:19科维德时期的 "新 "管理主义和企业大学

IF 3.1 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Muhammad Al Mahameed, David Yates, Florian Gebreiter
{"title":"作为意识形态的管理:19科维德时期的 \"新 \"管理主义和企业大学","authors":"Muhammad Al Mahameed,&nbsp;David Yates,&nbsp;Florian Gebreiter","doi":"10.1111/faam.12359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this paper, we examine how Covid-19 was utilized by the management of a university as a catalyst for ideological change, with the objective of transforming the ethos of a university management school and the role(s) of the academics employed within. Through new modes of working that maintained corporeal distance between university staff, market-based ideology was mobilized to institute radical and lasting change within the roles of academics and operations of the institution. We focus on a singular case study: “Blue Management School” (BMS, pseudonym), based within an English mid-tier research university which has historically embraced corporatization more readily than most of its peers. We conducted a qualitative analysis of management email communications and from interviews with nine academics (both current and former employees) who were working at BMS during the time concerned (March 2020 onward). We observe that Covid-19 posed significant challenges to corporatized universities, and that university managers at BMS sought to address these challenges by undertaking further steps toward corporatization and mobilizing organizational change legitimized by the need to manage the Covid-19 situation. This included hierarchical forms of accountability, with academics answering for module content to teaching convenors and the management team (“manager academics”). We draw attention to how management communications carried profound effects for the mobilization of ideological change within the institution, during this period. In addition, academic identity was affected, moving away from traditional research and teaching scholars toward revenue-generating customer service workers, facilitating a power shift away from academics and further toward managers.</p>","PeriodicalId":47120,"journal":{"name":"Financial Accountability & Management","volume":"40 1","pages":"34-57"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faam.12359","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Management as ideology: “New” managerialism and the corporate university in the period of Covid-19\",\"authors\":\"Muhammad Al Mahameed,&nbsp;David Yates,&nbsp;Florian Gebreiter\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/faam.12359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In this paper, we examine how Covid-19 was utilized by the management of a university as a catalyst for ideological change, with the objective of transforming the ethos of a university management school and the role(s) of the academics employed within. Through new modes of working that maintained corporeal distance between university staff, market-based ideology was mobilized to institute radical and lasting change within the roles of academics and operations of the institution. We focus on a singular case study: “Blue Management School” (BMS, pseudonym), based within an English mid-tier research university which has historically embraced corporatization more readily than most of its peers. We conducted a qualitative analysis of management email communications and from interviews with nine academics (both current and former employees) who were working at BMS during the time concerned (March 2020 onward). We observe that Covid-19 posed significant challenges to corporatized universities, and that university managers at BMS sought to address these challenges by undertaking further steps toward corporatization and mobilizing organizational change legitimized by the need to manage the Covid-19 situation. This included hierarchical forms of accountability, with academics answering for module content to teaching convenors and the management team (“manager academics”). We draw attention to how management communications carried profound effects for the mobilization of ideological change within the institution, during this period. In addition, academic identity was affected, moving away from traditional research and teaching scholars toward revenue-generating customer service workers, facilitating a power shift away from academics and further toward managers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47120,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Financial Accountability & Management\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"34-57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faam.12359\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Financial Accountability & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faam.12359\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Accountability & Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faam.12359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我们将探讨一所大学的管理层如何利用 Covid-19 作为意识形态变革的催化剂,以改变大学管理学院的精神面貌和学院内学者的角色。通过在大学员工之间保持肉体距离的新工作模式,以市场为基础的意识形态被调动起来,对学者的角色和机构的运作进行彻底而持久的变革。我们将重点放在一个独特的案例研究上:"蓝色管理学院"(BMS,化名)是英国一所中等研究型大学,在历史上比大多数同行更容易接受企业化。我们对管理层的电子邮件通信进行了定性分析,并对相关时间(2020 年 3 月起)在 BMS 工作的九位学者(包括现任和前任员工)进行了访谈。我们发现,Covid-19 对公司化大学构成了重大挑战,而 BMS 的大学管理者则试图通过采取进一步的公司化措施来应对这些挑战,并动员组织变革,使管理 Covid-19 形势的需要合法化。这包括等级形式的问责制,即学者向教学召集人和管理团队("管理学者")负责模块内容。我们提请大家注意,在此期间,管理沟通是如何对院校内部的意识形态变革产生深远影响的。此外,学术身份也受到了影响,从传统的研究和教学学者转变为创收的客户服务人员,促进了权力从学者向管理者的转移。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Management as ideology: “New” managerialism and the corporate university in the period of Covid-19

In this paper, we examine how Covid-19 was utilized by the management of a university as a catalyst for ideological change, with the objective of transforming the ethos of a university management school and the role(s) of the academics employed within. Through new modes of working that maintained corporeal distance between university staff, market-based ideology was mobilized to institute radical and lasting change within the roles of academics and operations of the institution. We focus on a singular case study: “Blue Management School” (BMS, pseudonym), based within an English mid-tier research university which has historically embraced corporatization more readily than most of its peers. We conducted a qualitative analysis of management email communications and from interviews with nine academics (both current and former employees) who were working at BMS during the time concerned (March 2020 onward). We observe that Covid-19 posed significant challenges to corporatized universities, and that university managers at BMS sought to address these challenges by undertaking further steps toward corporatization and mobilizing organizational change legitimized by the need to manage the Covid-19 situation. This included hierarchical forms of accountability, with academics answering for module content to teaching convenors and the management team (“manager academics”). We draw attention to how management communications carried profound effects for the mobilization of ideological change within the institution, during this period. In addition, academic identity was affected, moving away from traditional research and teaching scholars toward revenue-generating customer service workers, facilitating a power shift away from academics and further toward managers.

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
4.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
27
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信