The Power of Collegiality : A Qualitative Analysis of University Presidents‘ Leadership in Germany

Nadja Bieletzki explores how university presidents lead universities. She provides insights into the upper echelons of higher education management and focuses especially on university presidents in Germany. Special attention is given to the career background of university presidents and the way they conduct reform projects. Based on the results from semi-structured expert interviews and their qualitative analysis, the author shows that university presidents do not use all their formal power although their position has been strengthened by law. This can be explained by the collegial characteristics of universities, which drive and restrict presidential actions Nadja Bieletzki was awarded the Ulrich Teichler Prize for Excellent Dissertations 2016. Foreword 6 Contents 9 List of Figures 13 List of Tables 14 1 Introduction 15 2 State of the Art 19 2.1 Universities as Organizations, Shared Governance, and Collegiality 19 2.1.1 What Kind of Organizations are Universities? 19 2.1.2 Shared Governance in Universities 25 2.1.3 The Concept of Collegiality at Universities 36 2.1.4 German Universities: Changes in Formal Regulations, the Organization, Shared Governance, and Collegiality 40 2.2 Research on University Presidents 46 2.3 Career Paths of University Presidents 53 3 Theories Applied in this Study 57 3.1 Analyzing Career Paths of University Presidents with Bourdieu 58 3.1.1 The Scientific Field 58 3.1.2 Scientific Capital 60 3.1.3 Habitus 63 3.2 Understanding Reforms in Universities with Micro/Organizational Politics 64 3.2.1 The Concept of Micro Politics in this Study 66 3.2.2 The Sources and Three Dimensions of Power 70 4 Methods and Sampling 76 4.1 Qualitative Approach: Semi-Structured Expert Interviews 86 4.2 Qualitative Content Analysis 87 4.3 Coding 88 5 Career Paths of German University Presidents: 2011, 1995 and 1980 89 5.1 The Sample 91 5.2 Results - Career Paths: 2011 92 5.2.1 Internal and External Recruitment, and Gender in 2011 92 5.2.2 Academic Disciplines 93 5.2.3 Experience in Academic Self-Administration: Deanship and Vice-Presidency 94 5.2.4 University President 97 5.3 Results - Career Paths: 1995 97 5.3.1 Internal and External Recruitment, and Gender in 1995 97 5.3.2 Academic Disciplines 98 5.3.3 University President 100 5.4 Results - Career Paths: 1980 100 5.4.1 Internal and External Recruitment, and Gender 100 5.4.2 Academic Disciplines 102 5.4.3 Deanship and Vice-Presidency 102 5.4.4 University President 102 5.4.5 Conclusions Regarding Presidential Career Paths 103 5.5 Brief Digression: Job Advertisements 107 6 Self-Description Given by German University Presidents 111 6.1 Transition into Presidency 111 6.2 Necessary Skills and Prior Experience 115 6.3 Transition from Expert Scientist to Top-Level Administrator 117 6.4 Shape and Create 120 6.5 Summary 122 7 Getting Reforms Done 126 7.1 Initiating a Reform 128 7.1.1 Constructing a Need for Reform 128 7.1.2 First Contact Persons 129 7.1.3 Telling the Academic Senate and the University 132 7.2 Conducting the Reform 133 7.2.1 Support and Resistance 133 7.2.2 Coping with Anticipated Resistance 134 7.2.3 How to Deal with Different Forms of Resistance 135 7.2.4 Dealing with Resistance and Fostering Support 138 7.3 Essential Reform Requirements 140 7.3.1 Networks and Coalitions 140 7.3.2 Working Groups 142 7.4 Formal Power vs. Collegiality 151 7.4.1 Why not Use Formal Power Instead? 151 7.5 Summary 155 7.5.1 Initiating Reforms 155 7.5.2 Dealing with Resistance 156 7.5.3 Essential Reform Requirements 157 7.5.4 Formal Power vs. Collegiality 160 8 How University Presidents Cope with the Academic Senate, the Ministry, and the Board of Trustees 163 8.1 Federal State Ministries of Science 163 8.2 The Board of Trustees 165 8.3 The Federal State Board of Trustees 167 8.4 The Academic Senates 168 8.5 The Academic Senate, the Board of Trustees, the Federal State Ministry of Science in Relation to one Another According to the University Presidents 172 8.6 Summary 176 9 Results and Discussion 181 9.1 The Presidential Career Paths 181 9.2 Collegiality 185 9.3 Formality – Informality and how University Presidents Deal with Both 186 9.4 Decision-Making in Universities is a Process, not an Event 195 Bibliography 200 Nadja Bieletzki explores how university presidents lead universities. She provides insights into the upper echelons of higher education management and focuses especially on university presidents in Germany. Special attention is given to the career background of university presidents and the way they conduct reform projects. Based on the results from semi-structured expert interviews and their qualitative analysis, the author shows that university presidents do not use all their formal power although their position has been strengthened by law. This can be explained by the collegial characteristics of universities, which drive and restrict presidential actions. Contents Analyzing Higher Education Management Career Paths of University Presidents Understanding Reforms in Universities with Micro/Organizational Politics Target Groups Researchers and students in the fields of sociology and political sciences with a focus on higher education research and science studies Science managers at higher education and research institutions as well as ministries with an interest in scientific results of higher education research The Author Dr. Nadja Bieletzki is coordinator of the Leibniz Center for Science and Society (LCSS) at the Leibniz University of Hannover.#xE000 Nadja Bieletzki explores how university presidents lead universities. She provides insights into the upper echelons of higher education management and focuses especially on university presidents in Germany. Special attention is given to the career background of university presidents and the way they conduct reform projects. Based on the results from semi-structured expert interviews and their qualitative analysis, the author shows that university presidents do not use all their formal power although their position has been strengthened by law. This can be explained by the collegial characteristics of universities, which drive and restrict presidential actions. Contents Analyzing Higher Education Management Career Paths of University Presidents Understanding Reforms in Universities with Micro/Organizational Politics Target Groups Researchers and students in the fields of sociology and political sciences with a focus on higher education research and science studies Science managers at higher education and research institutions as well as ministries with an interest in scientific results of higher education research The Author Dr. Nadja Bieletzki is coordinator of the Leibniz Center for Science and Society (LCSS) at the Leibniz University of Hannover. . Front Matter ....Pages I-XV Introduction (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 1-4 State of the Art (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 5-42 Theories Applied in this Study (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 43-61 Methods and Sampling (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 63-75 Career Paths of German University Presidents: 2011, 1995 and 1980 (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 77-98 Self-Description Given by German University Presidents (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 99-113 Getting Reforms Done (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 115-151 How University Presidents Cope with the Academic Senate, the Ministry, and the Board of Trustees (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 153-170 Results and Discussion (Nadja Bieletzki)....Pages 171-189 Back Matter ....Pages 191-209