Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Dennis Gioia, Kumar Chittipeddi (1991)
Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiationSouthern Medical Journal, 12
Tertiary Education and Management, 10
Claus Rerup, M. Feldman (2011)
Routines as a Source of Change in Organizational Schemata: The Role of Trial-and-Error LearningAcademy of Management Journal, 54
L. Holyoke, Patricia Sturko, Nathan Wood, Lora Wu (2012)
Are Academic Departments Perceived as Learning Organizations?Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40
Hershey Friedman, L. Friedman, S. Pollack (2005)
Transforming a University from a Teaching Organization to a Learning Organization, 26
K. Eisenhardt, Nathan Furr, Christopher Bingham (2010)
CROSSROADS - Microfoundations of Performance: Balancing Efficiency and Flexibility in Dynamic EnvironmentsOrgan. Sci., 21
Tim Hallett (2010)
The Myth Incarnate: Recoupling Processes, Turmoil, and Inhabited Institutions in an Urban Elementary SchoolAmerican Sociological Review, 75
L. Leišytė, Jürgen Enders, H. Boer (2010)
Mediating Problem Choice: Academic Researchers' Responses to Changes in their Institutional Environment
The Learning Organization, 19
D. Dill (1999)
Academic accountability and university adaptation: The architecture of an academic learning organizationHigher Education, 38
Jay Dee, L. Leišytė (2016)
Organizational Learning in Higher Education Institutions: Theories, Frameworks, and a Potential Research Agenda
O. Bak (2012)
Universities: Can They Be Considered as Learning Organizations?: A Preliminary Micro-Level Perspective.The Learning Organization, 19
Mustafa Emirbayer, A. Mische (1998)
What Is Agency?1American Journal of Sociology, 103
Georg Schreyögg, J. Sydow (2010)
Organizing for Fluidity? Dilemmas of New Organizational FormsNew Institutional Economics eJournal
Tim Hallett, M. Ventresca (2006)
Inhabited Institutions: Social Interactions and Organizational Forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial BureaucracyTheory and Society, 35
M. Troutt (1995)
Some Modeling Considerations in Deciding Multi-Year Guaranteed Tuition Rates.Higher education management, 11
K. Eisenhardt, Melissa Graebner (2007)
Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And ChallengesAcademy of Management Journal, 50
Georg Schreyögg, Martina Kliesch-Eberl (2007)
How dynamic can organizational capabilities be? Towards a dual-process model of capability dynamizationSouthern Medical Journal, 28
Uwe Wilkesmann (2015)
Imaginary Contradictions of University Governance
Carine Smolders, Alex Vanderstraeten, J. Christiaens (2012)
The Impact of Institutional Pressures on Employee Performance Management Systems in Higher Education in the Low CountriesORG: Employee Performance Appraisal Systems (Topic)
C. Ellis (2009)
Telling Tales on NeighborsInternational Review of Qualitative Research, 2
I. Bleiklie, Jürgen Enders, Benedetto Lepori (2015)
Organizations as Penetrated Hierarchies: Environmental Pressures and Control in Professional OrganizationsOrganization Studies, 36
R. Suddaby (2006)
From the Editors: What Grounded Theory is NotAcademy of Management Journal, 49
Luciana D'Adderio (2010)
Artifacts at the centre of routines: performing the material turn in routines theoryJournal of Institutional Economics, 7
A. Strauss (1992)
Basics Of Qualitative Research
Higher Education Management, 11
Kevin Corley, Dennis Gioia (2011)
Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, , ., 36
C. Nemeth, Keith Brown, J. Rogers (2001)
Devil's advocate versus authentic dissent: stimulating quantity and qualityEuropean Journal of Social Psychology, 31
D. Greenwood (2009)
Are Research Universities Knowledge-Intensive Learning Organizations?
A. Strauss, B. Glaser (1967)
The Discovery of Grounded Theory
Anders Örtenblad, Riina Koris (2014)
Is the learning organization idea relevant to higher educational institutions? A literature review and a “multi-stakeholder contingency approach”International Journal of Educational Management, 28
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to understand how the countervailing processes for enhancing academic excellence based on professional norms are balanced out with the market-oriented processes of standardisation and performance management in a university. Further, the authors aim to explore how and if organisational learning occurs in balancing these processes.Design/methodology/approachThe longitudinal, inductive three-year study of a higher education institution in Lithuania was used to understand how a higher education institution based on the norms of academic excellence was balanced out with the market-oriented processes and what mechanisms of leaning took place during the process. The authors drew upon three data sources – archival materials, observation and interviews with academic staff and administrators – to capture the processes of rebalancing and learning.FindingsA complex balance is observed between the strive for academic excellence and market relevance. Market relevance has been the dominant reform tone for the central administration of a Lithuanian university (LTU), while maintenance of academic excellence prevailed among academic staff. The LTU manages the countervailing processes by standardising, financialising, surveying and disciplining. The rebalancing resulted in dissent from the academic community. Organisational learning could be observed in the example of the introduction of a new examination procedure, while it could not occur during the process of new performance management system introduction. The process led to mutual distrust between the academic staff and the management of the LTU.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature on organisational learning in higher education, showing how an eager entrepreneurial university engages in the reform process and how it engages in the complex balancing of countervailing processes of academic excellence and market relevance. The authors contribute with empirical evidence on how rebalancing processes in a professional organisation works and what limitations it faces. The study shows the vital multi-stakeholder involvement and understanding of the process of change. The authors further contribute to the discussion on the adoption factors of performance-based systems and the process of institutionalisation using a longitudinal perspective as called for in previous research.
The Learning Organization – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jul 10, 2017
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.