Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mnl9s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-19T20:23:37.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corporations and Universities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2015

Lars Engwall
Lars Engwall*
Affiliation:
Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University, Box 513, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden. E-mail: Lars.Engwall@fek.uu.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Large quoted corporations have become increasingly visible through the media. As a result, such corporations have become role models for other types of organizations. Even universities face pressures to act like these corporations. This paper demonstrates that there are fundamental differences between corporations and universities, particularly in terms of history, products, objectives, and principals. These differences, it is argued, have significant implications for the leadership of universities.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
European Review , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 501 - 510
Copyright
© Academia Europaea 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Brunsson, N. and Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000) Constructing organizations: the case of public sector reform. Organization Studies, 21(4), pp. 721–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Alchian, A. A. and Demsetz, H. (1972) Production, information costs and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62, pp. 777–795.Google Scholar
3.Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, W. H. (1976) Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), pp. 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Lawrence, P. R. and Lorsch, J. W. (1967) Organization and Environment (Boston, MA: Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University).Google Scholar
5.Pugh, D. S. and Hickson, D. J. (1976) Organizational Structure in its Context: the Aston Programme I (Farnborough: Saxon House).Google Scholar
6.Thompson, J. D. (1967) Organizations in Action (New York: McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
7.Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education (1980) Three Thousand Futures (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), p. 9.Google Scholar
8.Hägg, I. and Johansson, R. (1975) Uppsalaekonomer i arbetslivet: vad anser de om sin utbildning i företagsekonomi? Uppsala universitet, Enheten för pedagogiskt utvecklingsarbete.Google Scholar
9.Baumol, W. J. (1959) Business Behavior, Value and Growth (New York: Macmillan).Google Scholar
10.Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).Google Scholar
11.Engwall, L. (2005) Hur har vi det med beredskapen idag? Utbildning och forskning som modern försvarspolitik. In: A. Björnsson, M. Kylhammar and Å. Linderborg (Eds), Ord i rättan tid (Stockholm: Atlantis), pp. 281–300.Google Scholar
12.DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. W. (1983) The Iron Cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Clark, B. R. (1983) The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Engwall, L. (2007) The universities, the state and the market. Changing patterns of university governance. Higher Education and Policy, 19(3), pp. 87–104.Google Scholar
15.Engwall, L. (2014) The recruitment of university leaders: politics, communities and markets in interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 30(3), pp. 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar