Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence

Farah Dubois-Shaik; Christophe Dubois

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

| Peer-Reviewed

Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence

Farah Dubois-Shaik, Christophe Dubois

Published in Advances in Sciences and Humanities (Volume 6, Issue 2)

Received: 27 May 2020 Accepted: 11 June 2020 Published: 28 June 2020

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Drawing on an empirical case study conducted in a Belgian University [1], this article proposes a framework to analyze how academic organizations are both structuring and structured by academics’ strategies. First, it accounts for three major logics of action – Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence – percolating three organizational dimensions – namely managerial discourses, formal and parallel structures [2]. Moreover, this paper proposes that these organizational dimensions constitute three different and always temporary states that are constantly being shaped by three phases of organizing processes – namely translation, inscription, enactment [6]. Second, drawing on Gherardi et al.’s metaphor of “shadow organizing” [3], the article identifies some ideal-typical strategies developed by academics: sober stowing away, selecting the local candidate, and invisible caring. The identification of these strategies opens up to discussing how academics are (pretending to) playing and applying the rules of the game, while also disengaging from them. In doing so, academics contribute to preserving and reinforcing the managerial discourse and the formal structure of their organization.

Published in	Advances in Sciences and Humanities (Volume 6, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
Page(s)	70-81
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Academic Strategies, Shadow Organizing, Excellence, Entrepreneurship, Omnipresence

References

[1]	Dubois-Shaik, F., Fusulier B and Vincke C (2018) The Leaky Pipeline and Interrelated Phenomena in Six European Countries. In: The Precarisation of Research Careers: a Comparative Gender Analysis, eds Murgia, Annalisa, and Barbara Poggio, chapter 6. London: Routledge, doi:https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315201245.
[2]	Friedberg, E. (2012). La sociologie et le management des organizations. Seminar presentation, Liège, 23 March.
[3]	Gherardi, S., Jensen, K. & Nerland, M. (2017). Shadow organizing: a metaphor to explore organizing as intra-relating. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 12 (1): 2–17, DOI: 10.1108/QROM-06-2016-1385.
[4]	Crozier, M. (1964). The Bureaucratic Phénomenon, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
[5]	Kuty, O., & Dubois, C. (2019). De la valeur à la norme: Introduction à la sociologie. Louvain-la-Neuve : De Boeck.
[6]	Freeman, R. & Sturdy, S. (2014). Knowledge in policy: Embodied, inscribed, enacted. Bristol: Policy Press.
[7]	Czarniawska, B. (2004). Narratives in Social Science Research: introducing qualitative methods. London: SAGE.
[8]	Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society 4 (2): 133-168, https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002002.
[9]	Fallon, C. (2014). Des chiffres de la politique à la politique du chiffre/ le cas des réformes du financement de la recherche dans les universités belges francophones. Reflets et perspectives de la vie économique 53 (2): 113-131, https://www.cairn.info/revue-reflets-et-perspectives-de-la-vie- economique-2014-2-page-113.htm.
[10]	Musselin, C. (2017). La grande course des universités. Paris: Presses De Sciences Po.
[11]	Van den Brink, M. & Benschop, Y. (2012). Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs. Organization 19 (4): 507-524, https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508411414293.
[12]	Gläser, J. & Serrano Velarde, K. (2018). Changing Funding Arrangements and the Production of Scientific Knowledge. Minerva, 56 (1): 1-10, DOI: 10.1007/s11024-018-9346-4.
[13]	Kallio, K. M., Kallio, T., Tienari, J. & Hyvönen, T. (2016). Ethos at stake: Performance management and academic work in universities. Human Relations 69 (3): 685-709, https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715596802.
[14]	Ylijoki, O. H. (2005). Academic nostalgia. A narrative approach to academic work. Human Relations 58 (5): 555-576, https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726705055963.
[15]	Engwall, L. (2007). Universities, the state and the market. Higher Education Management and Policy 19 (3): 1-18.
[16]	Chatelain-Ponroy, S., Mignot-Gérard, S., Musselin, C. & Sponem, S. (2018). Is Commitment to Performance-based Management Compatible with Commitment to University “Publicness”? Academics’ Values in French Universities. Organization Studies 39 (10): 1377-1401.
[17]	Benner, M. & Sandström, U., (2000). Institutionalizing the Triple Helix: Research Funding and Norms in the Academic System, Research Policy, 29: 291–301.
[18]	Etzkowitz, H. (2010). The Capitalization of Knowledge: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government. Ed. (with Viale). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
[19]	Meyer, M. (2003). Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research-based ventures and public support mechanisms, R&D Management, 33 (2): 105-115.
[20]	Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, I. & Ferlie, E. (Eds.) (2009). University governance. Dordrecht: Springer.
[21]	Dubois-Shaik, F. and Fusulier B (2017) Understanding gender inequality and the role of work/family interface in contemporary academia: an introduction. European Education Research Journal 16 (2-3): 99-105, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117701143.
[22]	Whitley, R., Gläser, J. & Engwall, L. (Eds.) (2010). Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[23]	Dubois-Shaik, F., Fusulier F, and Lits G (2019) L’excellence académique entre "nomination" et "compétition". SociologieS. Dossiers, Universités : les politiques d’égalité entre femmes et hommes à l’heure de l’excellence, mis en ligne le 27 octobre 2019, https://journals.openedition.org/sociologies/.
[24]	Czarniawska, B. & Genell, K. (2002). Gone shopping? Universities on their way to the market. Scandinavian Journal of Management 18 (4): 455-474, DOI: 10.1016/S0956-5221(01)00029-X.
[25]	Lamont, M. (2009). How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[26]	Hammarfelt, B., de Rijcke, S. & Wouters, P. (2017). From eminent men to excellent universities: University rankings as calculative devices. Minerva 55 (4): 391-411, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9329-x.
[27]	Power, M. (2015). How accounting begins: Object formation and the accretion of infrastructure. Accounting, Organizations and Society 47: 43-55.
[28]	Paradeise, C. & Thoenig, J. C. (2013). Academic institutions in search of quality: Local orders and global standards. Organization studies 34 (2): 189-218, 10.1177/0170840612473550.
[29]	Scully, M. A. (1997). Meritocracy. In: Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Business Ethics. Werhane, Patricia Hogue, and R. Edward Freeman, 413-414. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
[30]	Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago Press.
[31]	Hicks, D. & Katz, J. S. (2011). Equity and excellence in research funding. Minerva 49 (2): 137-151.
[32]	Watermeyer, R. & Olssen, M. M. (2016). ‘Excellence’ and exclusion: the individual costs of institutional competitiveness. Minerva 54 (2): 201-218.
[33]	Kasten, K. L. (1984). Tenure and merit pay as rewards for research, teaching, and service at a research university. The Journal of Higher Education 55 (4): 500-514.
[34]	Park, S. M. (1996). Research, teaching, and service: Why shouldn't women's work count? The Journal of Higher Education, 67 (1), 46-84, https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780249.
[35]	Geurts, P., & Maassen, P. (2005). Academics and institutional governance. In: The Professoriate: Profile of a profession, ed. Anthony Welch, 35-58. Dordrecht: Springer.
[36]	Macfarlane, B. (2007). Defining and rewarding academic citizenship. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 29 (3): 261-273, https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800701457863.
[37]	Bleijenbergh, I. L., Marloes, Lv. E. & Vinkenburg, C. J. (2012). Othering women- fluid images of the ideal academic. Equality, diversity and inclusion- An international journal 32 (1): 22-35.
[38]	Coser, L. A. (1974). Greedy Institutions. New York: The Free Press.
[39]	Fusulier, B. & Nicole-Drancourt, C. (2015). Pursuing Gender Equality in a "Multi-Active" Society. Global Dialogue, 5 (1), 30-31.
[40]	Olsen, J. P. (2010). Governing through institution building: Institutional theory and recent European experiments in democratic organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[41]	Friedberg, E. (1997). Local orders: Dynamics of organized action. Greenwich: Jai Press.
[42]	Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton University Press.
[43]	Brunsson N (1989) The organization of hypocrisy: talk, decisions, and actions in organizations. New York: Wiley.
[44]	Bercovitz, J. & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic Entrepreneurs: Organizational Change at the Individual Level. Organization Science 19 (1): 69-89, doi 10.1287.
[45]	Van den Brink, M., Benschop Y. & Jansen, W. (2010). Transparency in academic recruitment: a problematic tool for gender equality? Organization Studies 31 (11): 1459-1483, DOI: 10.1177/0170840610380812.
[46]	Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Oaks: Sage.
[47]	Fusulier, B. (2016). Faire une carrière scientifique aujourd’hui. Quelques clés de lectures et critiques. In: L’évaluation de la recherche en question (s). eds Leclercq B, Timmermans B, Clerbaux B, Bersini H, Hudon M, and Zaccai E, 101-110. Bruxelles: Académie Royale de Belgique.
[48]	Brunsson, N. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy: talk, decisions, and actions in organizations. New York: Wiley.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Farah Dubois-Shaik, Christophe Dubois. (2020). Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence. Advances in Sciences and Humanities, 6(2), 70-81. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Farah Dubois-Shaik; Christophe Dubois. Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence. Adv. Sci. Humanit. 2020, 6(2), 70-81. doi: 10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Farah Dubois-Shaik, Christophe Dubois. Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence. Adv Sci Humanit. 2020;6(2):70-81. doi: 10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13,
  author = {Farah Dubois-Shaik and Christophe Dubois},
  title = {Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence},
  journal = {Advances in Sciences and Humanities},
  volume = {6},
  number = {2},
  pages = {70-81},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ash.20200602.13},
  abstract = {Drawing on an empirical case study conducted in a Belgian University [1], this article proposes a framework to analyze how academic organizations are both structuring and structured by academics’ strategies. First, it accounts for three major logics of action – Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence – percolating three organizational dimensions – namely managerial discourses, formal and parallel structures [2]. Moreover, this paper proposes that these organizational dimensions constitute three different and always temporary states that are constantly being shaped by three phases of organizing processes – namely translation, inscription, enactment [6]. Second, drawing on Gherardi et al.’s metaphor of “shadow organizing” [3], the article identifies some ideal-typical strategies developed by academics: sober stowing away, selecting the local candidate, and invisible caring. The identification of these strategies opens up to discussing how academics are (pretending to) playing and applying the rules of the game, while also disengaging from them. In doing so, academics contribute to preserving and reinforcing the managerial discourse and the formal structure of their organization.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence
AU  - Farah Dubois-Shaik
AU  - Christophe Dubois
Y1  - 2020/06/28
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
T2  - Advances in Sciences and Humanities
JF  - Advances in Sciences and Humanities
JO  - Advances in Sciences and Humanities
SP  - 70
EP  - 81
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2472-0984
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
AB  - Drawing on an empirical case study conducted in a Belgian University [1], this article proposes a framework to analyze how academic organizations are both structuring and structured by academics’ strategies. First, it accounts for three major logics of action – Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence – percolating three organizational dimensions – namely managerial discourses, formal and parallel structures [2]. Moreover, this paper proposes that these organizational dimensions constitute three different and always temporary states that are constantly being shaped by three phases of organizing processes – namely translation, inscription, enactment [6]. Second, drawing on Gherardi et al.’s metaphor of “shadow organizing” [3], the article identifies some ideal-typical strategies developed by academics: sober stowing away, selecting the local candidate, and invisible caring. The identification of these strategies opens up to discussing how academics are (pretending to) playing and applying the rules of the game, while also disengaging from them. In doing so, academics contribute to preserving and reinforcing the managerial discourse and the formal structure of their organization.
VL  - 6
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Farah Dubois-Shaik

Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
Christophe Dubois

Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Farah Dubois-Shaik, Christophe Dubois. (2020). Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence. Advances in Sciences and Humanities, 6(2), 70-81. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Farah Dubois-Shaik; Christophe Dubois. Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence. Adv. Sci. Humanit. 2020, 6(2), 70-81. doi: 10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Farah Dubois-Shaik, Christophe Dubois. Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence. Adv Sci Humanit. 2020;6(2):70-81. doi: 10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13,
  author = {Farah Dubois-Shaik and Christophe Dubois},
  title = {Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence},
  journal = {Advances in Sciences and Humanities},
  volume = {6},
  number = {2},
  pages = {70-81},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ash.20200602.13},
  abstract = {Drawing on an empirical case study conducted in a Belgian University [1], this article proposes a framework to analyze how academic organizations are both structuring and structured by academics’ strategies. First, it accounts for three major logics of action – Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence – percolating three organizational dimensions – namely managerial discourses, formal and parallel structures [2]. Moreover, this paper proposes that these organizational dimensions constitute three different and always temporary states that are constantly being shaped by three phases of organizing processes – namely translation, inscription, enactment [6]. Second, drawing on Gherardi et al.’s metaphor of “shadow organizing” [3], the article identifies some ideal-typical strategies developed by academics: sober stowing away, selecting the local candidate, and invisible caring. The identification of these strategies opens up to discussing how academics are (pretending to) playing and applying the rules of the game, while also disengaging from them. In doing so, academics contribute to preserving and reinforcing the managerial discourse and the formal structure of their organization.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Organizing in the Shadow of Academic Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence
AU  - Farah Dubois-Shaik
AU  - Christophe Dubois
Y1  - 2020/06/28
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
T2  - Advances in Sciences and Humanities
JF  - Advances in Sciences and Humanities
JO  - Advances in Sciences and Humanities
SP  - 70
EP  - 81
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2472-0984
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20200602.13
AB  - Drawing on an empirical case study conducted in a Belgian University [1], this article proposes a framework to analyze how academic organizations are both structuring and structured by academics’ strategies. First, it accounts for three major logics of action – Entrepreneurship, Excellence and Omnipresence – percolating three organizational dimensions – namely managerial discourses, formal and parallel structures [2]. Moreover, this paper proposes that these organizational dimensions constitute three different and always temporary states that are constantly being shaped by three phases of organizing processes – namely translation, inscription, enactment [6]. Second, drawing on Gherardi et al.’s metaphor of “shadow organizing” [3], the article identifies some ideal-typical strategies developed by academics: sober stowing away, selecting the local candidate, and invisible caring. The identification of these strategies opens up to discussing how academics are (pretending to) playing and applying the rules of the game, while also disengaging from them. In doing so, academics contribute to preserving and reinforcing the managerial discourse and the formal structure of their organization.
VL  - 6
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download