The influence of performance-based management on teaching and research performance of Finnish senior academics

References

• Aarrevaara, T., & Pekkola, E. (2010). Muuttuva akateeminen professio Suomessa–maaraportti. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andersen, L. B., & Pallesen, T. (2008). ‘Not just for the money?’ How financial incentives affect the number of publications at Danish research institutions. International Public Management Journal, 11, 28–47.10.1080/10967490801887889
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auld, D. (2010). Strategic planning and the principal-agent issue in higher education leadership. Academic Leadership, 8, 31–35.
   Google Scholar
• Blalark, F. J. (2012). Utilizing principal-agent theory and data envelopment analysis to examine efficiency of resource utilization in undergraduate education for public and private non-profit four-year research universities (doctoral dissertation). The University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy Retrieved from http://purl.umn.edu/136257
   Google Scholar
• Borgos, J. (2013). Using principal-agent theory as a framework for analysis in evaluating the multiple stakeholders involved in the accreditation and quality assurance of international medical branch campuses. Quality in Higher Education, 19, 173–190.10.1080/13538322.2013.805068
   Google Scholar
• Claeys-Kulik, A.-L., & Estermann, T. (2015). DEFINE thematic report: Performance-based funding of universities in Europe. Brussels: European University Association.
   Google Scholar
• de Boer, H., Jongbloed, B., Benneworth, P., Cremonini, L., Kolster, R., Kottmann, A., & Vossensteyn, H. (2015). Performance-based funding and performance agreements in fourteen higher education systems. Enschede: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies, University of Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Dougherty, K., & Reddy, V. (2011). The impacts of state performance funding systems on higher education institutions: Research literature review and policy recommendations ( CCRC Working Paper No. 37). New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14, 57–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enders, J., de Boer, H., & Weyer, E. (2013). Regulatory autonomy and performance: The reform of higher education re-visited. Higher Education, 65, 5–23.10.1007/s10734-012-9578-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey, B. S., & Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15, 589–611.10.1111/1467-6419.00150
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillman, N. W., Tandberg, D. A., & Fryar, A. H. (2015). Evaluating the impacts of ‘new’ performance funding in higher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37, 501–519.10.3102/0162373714560224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsen, C., & Andersen, L. (2014). Performance management for academic researchers: How publication command systems affect individual behavior. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34, 84–107.10.1177/0734371X13510850
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kivistö, J. (2005). Government-higher education institution relationship—Theoretical considerations from the perspective of agency theory. Tertiary Education and Management, 11, 1–17.10.1080/13583883.2005.9967136
   Google Scholar
• Kivistö, J. (2007). Agency theory as a framework for the government-university relationship ( doctoral dissertation). Higher Education Finance and Management Series. Tampere University Press, Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Kivistö, J. & Kohtamäki, V. (2016). Does performance-based funding work? Reviewing the impacts of performance-based funding on higher education institutions. In R. Pritchard, A. Pausits, & J. Williams (Eds.), Positioning higher education institutions: From here to there (pp. 215–226). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.10.1007/978-94-6300-660-6
   Google Scholar
• Kivistö, J., & Zalyevska, I. (2015). Agency theory as a framework for higher education governance. In J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. Dill, & M. Souto-Otero (Eds.), The palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance (pp. 132–151). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5
   Google Scholar
• Kroner, N. (2015). What influences the organizational commitment of professors? A secondary analysis on organizational commitment of professors at German research universities and universities of applied sciences. Paper presented at Research Workshop, Technische Universität Dortmund. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283046426
   Google Scholar
• Kuoppala, K., Pekkola, Elias, Kivistö, J., Siekkinen, T., & Hölttä, S. (Eds.). (2015). Tietoyhteiskunnan työläinen: suomalaisen akateemisen projektitutkijan työ ja toimintaympäristö. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lane, J. E., Kinser, K., & Knox, D. (2013). Regulating cross-border higher education: A case study of the United States. Higher Education Policy, 26, 147–172.10.1057/hep.2012.23
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, J. E., & Kivistö, J. (2008). Interests, information, and incentives in higher education: Principal-agent theory and its potential applications to the study of higher education governance. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. XXIII, pp. 141–179). Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6959-8
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, I., Maassen, P., & Stensaker, B. (2009). Four basic dilemmas in university governance reform. Higher Education Management and Policy, 21, 41–58.
   Google Scholar
• Liefner, I. (2003). Funding, resource allocation, and performance in higher education systems. Higher Education, 46, 469–489.10.1023/A:1027381906977
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lind, J. K., Pekkola, E., Stensaker, B., & Söderlind, J. (2016, September 5–7). Unpacking incentive structures in academia: Structural factors driving motivation of academic staff in Nordic universities. Paper presented at the 29th annual CHER conference, Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Maassen, P., Moen, E., & Stensaker, B. (2011). Reforming higher education in the Netherlands and Norway: The role of the state and national modes of governance. Policy Studies, 32, 479–495.10.1080/01442872.2011.566721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moe, T. M. (1984). The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 739–777.10.2307/2110997
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pekkola, E. (2009). Akateeminen professio Suomessa — hit valtakeskittymä vai kolmen luokan työntekijöitä? Politiikka, 51, 268–290.
   Google Scholar
• Pekkola, E. (2010). Nuorten yliopistolaisten työn palkitsevuus ja sen merkitys akateemisen uran houkuttelevuudelle. Työelämän tutkimus, 2, 145–159.
   Google Scholar
• Pekkola, E. (2014). Korkeakoulujen professio Suomessa. Kehityskulkuja, käsitteitä ja ajankuvia ( doctoral dissertation). Tampere University Press, Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Pekkola, E., Siekkinen, T., Kivistö, J., & Lyytinen, A. (2017). Management and academic profession: Comparing the Finnish professors with and without management positions. Studies in Higher Education, 1–15. doi:10.1080/03075079.2017.1294578
   Google Scholar
• Ross, S. A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. American Economic Review, 63, 134–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutherford, A., & Rabovsky, T. (2014). evaluating impacts of performance funding policies on student outcomes in higher education. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655, 185–208.10.1177/0002716214541048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandford, D., & Hunter, J. (2011). Impact of performance funding on retention and graduation rates. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 19, 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Tandberg, D., & Hillman, N. (2013). State performance funding for higher education: Silver bullet or red herring ( WISCAPE Policy Brief, 18). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for the Advancement of Postsecondary Education.
   Google Scholar
• Wangenge-Ouma, G., Lutomiah, A., & Langa, P. (2015). Academic incentives for knowledge production in Africa. In N. Cloete, P. Maassen, & T. Bailey (Eds.), Knowledge production and contradictory functions in African higher education (pp. 128–147). Cape Town: African Minds.
   Google Scholar
• Wholey, J. S. (1999). Performance-based management: Responding to the challenges. Public Productivity and Management Review, 22, 288–307.10.2307/3380705
   Google Scholar