不稳定性悖论:不稳定性导致的公立大学研究效率低下

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
António Ferreira, João Quesado Delgado
{"title":"不稳定性悖论:不稳定性导致的公立大学研究效率低下","authors":"António Ferreira, João Quesado Delgado","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Precarity is often interpreted as a neoliberal management strategy to maximize profits in private companies through the endorsement of insecure jobs, inadequate wages, and limited rights for workers. This interpretation, however, is unsuitable to analyse situations where the State endorses precarity in non-profit public organizations, for example, State-sponsored universities. We hypothesize that in these situations, the ‘precarity paradox’ is particularly prone to manifest. Such a paradox can be defined as the endorsement of precarity to induce organizational productivity and flexibility that, instead, leads to overwhelming inefficiencies and productivity losses. To test this hypothesis, we conducted empirical research at the faculty of engineering of a Portuguese public university where precarious contracts are dominant among researchers. Based on the analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data collected, it is concluded that productivity- and flexibility-oriented precarities reduce the productivity of researchers while jeopardizing the capacity of the faculty to rationally employ its human resources.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":"75 1-2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The precarity paradox: the precarity-driven inefficiencies of research at a public university\",\"authors\":\"António Ferreira, João Quesado Delgado\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/scipol/scad075\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Precarity is often interpreted as a neoliberal management strategy to maximize profits in private companies through the endorsement of insecure jobs, inadequate wages, and limited rights for workers. This interpretation, however, is unsuitable to analyse situations where the State endorses precarity in non-profit public organizations, for example, State-sponsored universities. We hypothesize that in these situations, the ‘precarity paradox’ is particularly prone to manifest. Such a paradox can be defined as the endorsement of precarity to induce organizational productivity and flexibility that, instead, leads to overwhelming inefficiencies and productivity losses. To test this hypothesis, we conducted empirical research at the faculty of engineering of a Portuguese public university where precarious contracts are dominant among researchers. Based on the analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data collected, it is concluded that productivity- and flexibility-oriented precarities reduce the productivity of researchers while jeopardizing the capacity of the faculty to rationally employ its human resources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"75 1-2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad075\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad075","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

不稳定性通常被解释为一种新自由主义的管理策略,通过支持不稳定的工作、不充分的工资和工人的有限权利,使私营公司的利润最大化。但是,这种解释不适用于分析国家赞同非营利性公共组织(例如国家资助的大学)不稳定的情况。我们假设,在这些情况下,“不稳定悖论”特别容易表现出来。这种悖论可以被定义为支持不稳定性以诱导组织的生产力和灵活性,而不是导致压倒性的低效率和生产力损失。为了验证这一假设,我们在一所葡萄牙公立大学的工程系进行了实证研究,在那里,不稳定合同在研究人员中占主导地位。通过对所收集的定量和定性数据的分析,得出了生产力导向和灵活性导向的不稳定性降低了研究人员的生产力,同时损害了学院合理利用人力资源的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The precarity paradox: the precarity-driven inefficiencies of research at a public university
Precarity is often interpreted as a neoliberal management strategy to maximize profits in private companies through the endorsement of insecure jobs, inadequate wages, and limited rights for workers. This interpretation, however, is unsuitable to analyse situations where the State endorses precarity in non-profit public organizations, for example, State-sponsored universities. We hypothesize that in these situations, the ‘precarity paradox’ is particularly prone to manifest. Such a paradox can be defined as the endorsement of precarity to induce organizational productivity and flexibility that, instead, leads to overwhelming inefficiencies and productivity losses. To test this hypothesis, we conducted empirical research at the faculty of engineering of a Portuguese public university where precarious contracts are dominant among researchers. Based on the analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data collected, it is concluded that productivity- and flexibility-oriented precarities reduce the productivity of researchers while jeopardizing the capacity of the faculty to rationally employ its human resources.
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
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Science and Public Policy is a leading refereed, international journal on public policies for science, technology and innovation, and on their implications for other public policies. It covers basic, applied, high, low, and any other types of S&T, and rich or poorer countries. It is read in around 70 countries, in universities (teaching and research), government ministries and agencies, consultancies, industry and elsewhere.
×
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