Tokenized but remaining: how do international academics make sense of their decision to remain in Japanese universities?

Despite challenging and uncertain circumstances and the perception of being tokenized symbols in Japanese universities, the majority of international academics are more inclined to remain in their affiliations. The study intends to elucidate how international academics make sense of their decision to remain in Japanese universities. The data are from a qualitative dataset examining the integration experiences of international academics in Japan. Following the philosophical foundations of purposive sampling in interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), which was applied as a methodological framework, the study recruited a total of 30 participants. The study reveals varied sensemaking strategies among the interviewees, characterized as survivors, pragmatists, and ambitionists. Survivors refer to those who were compelled to remain in their current affiliations often due to constraints related to their academic roles or age restrictions. Pragmatists prioritize the practical benefits of their positions or affiliations, deriving from professional aspects, sociocultural dimensions, and personal considerations. Ambitionist academics generally view experiences in their current affiliations as a stepping stone toward future professional opportunities elsewhere. The study suggests that insufficient dedication to recruiting and retaining international academics may pose potential long-term risks for Japanese higher education institutions (HEIs) in the global academic sphere, affecting their internationally competitive standing and resilience in an evolving academic landscape. The study provides theoretical and practical implications to researchers, university administrators, and policymakers.