Abstract:
Higher education globally is undergoing a radical transformation with multiple external and internal pressures changing the nature, focus and conditions of academic and leadership work. Exteranal pressures include massification, changing global professional labour markets, privatisation of provision, demands for innovation and applied research, university rankings, internationalisation, volatile funding and policies, and new learning and management technologies. Internal responses include intensification of academic labour, increased scope and scale of academic work, rising expectations for high quality teaching and research, collaborative research and partnerships, quality assurance regimes, digital pedagogies and increased executive power (Blackmore 2015).
This three-year ARC Leadership in Entrepreneurial Universities: diversity and disengagement investigated the changing context, demands and nature of university leadership. The study adopted a qualitative approach based on 180 interviews with leaders in both formal and informal leaderships (executive and middle managers, research leaders) in three university (a Go8, regional and Utech) case studies. Interviews were undertaken with HR, union and equity personnel and policy makers as well as post graduates, the pool of potential leaders.
Using feminist theories that highlight the gendered organisation of universities and relations of power (Connell 2016) and their performative aspects, this paper draws on data arising from the question: what is the role of the professoriate in this context? The paper argues that 'the professoriate' is being re/positioned within a corporatised academy. Academic governance has altered favouring executive and managerial power (Rowlands 2016). Strategic plans and funding mechanisms determine what research is valued, and where the role of the professor is itself under scrutiny internally in terms of what they contribute to university priorities, their role in (or not) in university decision-making (Lynch et al 2012). Signifiers of professorial marginalisation include the declining power of academic boards, reduced representation on decision-making committees allocating funds and determining priorities, comprehensive compliance regimes regarding doctoral supervision, measuring success on research income not output, reduced recognition of the gift economy of academic work, and great surveillance over what can be said publically (Hughes 2013). All signal restricted autonomy and making the professoriate 'redundant'.
Blackmore, J. (2015) Executive power and scaled-up gender subtexts in Australian entrepreneurial universities Gender and Education doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2015.1027670
This three-year ARC Leadership in Entrepreneurial Universities: diversity and disengagement investigated the changing context, demands and nature of university leadership. The study adopted a qualitative approach based on 180 interviews with leaders in both formal and informal leaderships (executive and middle managers, research leaders) in three university (a Go8, regional and Utech) case studies. Interviews were undertaken with HR, union and equity personnel and policy makers as well as post graduates, the pool of potential leaders.
Using feminist theories that highlight the gendered organisation of universities and relations of power (Connell 2016) and their performative aspects, this paper draws on data arising from the question: what is the role of the professoriate in this context? The paper argues that 'the professoriate' is being re/positioned within a corporatised academy. Academic governance has altered favouring executive and managerial power (Rowlands 2016). Strategic plans and funding mechanisms determine what research is valued, and where the role of the professor is itself under scrutiny internally in terms of what they contribute to university priorities, their role in (or not) in university decision-making (Lynch et al 2012). Signifiers of professorial marginalisation include the declining power of academic boards, reduced representation on decision-making committees allocating funds and determining priorities, comprehensive compliance regimes regarding doctoral supervision, measuring success on research income not output, reduced recognition of the gift economy of academic work, and great surveillance over what can be said publically (Hughes 2013). All signal restricted autonomy and making the professoriate 'redundant'.
Blackmore, J. (2015) Executive power and scaled-up gender subtexts in Australian entrepreneurial universities Gender and Education doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2015.1027670