1,530
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Articles

The rise of new public management at the institutional level: an analysis of a Dutch university and the role of administrators in initiating organizational change, 1980s to 2010s

ORCID Icon
Pages 223-243 | Received 05 Sep 2022, Accepted 01 Aug 2023, Published online: 15 Aug 2023

References

  • Birnbaum, R. 1988. How Colleges Work: The Cybernatics of Academic Organization and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Booth, C., and M. Rowlinson. 2006. “Management and Organizational History: Prospects.” Management & Organizational History 1 (1): 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744935906060627.
  • Boston, J. 2016. “Basic NPM Ideas and Their Development.” In The Ashgate Companion to New Public Management, edited by T. Christensen and P. Lægreid, 17–32. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
  • Bouter, L. 2007. “Kennis als openbaar bezit. De maatschappelijke relevantie van wetenschappelijk onderzoek.“ Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2007, Speech.
  • Broucker, B., and K. De Wit. 2015. “New Public Management in Higher Education.” In The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance, edited by J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. D. Dill, and M. Souto-Otero, 57–75. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5_4.
  • Broucker, B., K. De Wit, and L. Leisyte. 2016. “Higher Education Reform. A Systematic Comparison of Ten Countries from a New Public Management Perspective.” In Positioning Higher Education Institutions. From Here to There, edited by R. M. O. Pritchard, A. Pausits, and J. Williams, 19–40. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-660-6_2.
  • De Boer, H. F. 2003. “Institutionele verandering en professionele autonomie. Een empirisch-verklarende studie naar de doorwerking van de wet ‘Modernisering Universitaire Bestuursorganisatie (MUB).” [ PhD diss.]. Universiteit Twente.
  • Deem, R. 2020. “New Managerialism in Higher Education.” In The International Encyclopedia of Higher Education Systems and Institutions, edited by P. N. Teixeira and J. C. Shin, 2083–2088. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8905-9_308.
  • Don, Y., F. J. H. Mertens, R. Minnée, C. M. M. Paardekooper, and R. Smid. 1989. Beelden van een beleidsdirectie. De directie beleidsintrumentatie 1984-1989. Den Haag, the Netherlands: OCW.
  • Dorrel, S. In: “Public Sector Change is a Worldwide Movement.” September 23, 1993. Speech, Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy:London.
  • European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. 2016. Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World: A Vision for Europe. Brussel, Belgium: Publications Office.
  • Ferlie, E., C. Musselin, and G. Andresani. 2008. “The Steering of Higher Education Systems: A Public Management Perspective.” Higher Education 56 (3): 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9125-5.
  • Gorup, M. 2013. “‘Beyond the Cookie Factory’: Ways of Collectively Resisting New Public Management at VU University Amsterdam.” [ Master Thesis]. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
  • Hood, C. 1983. Tools of Government. London: Red Globe Press London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-17169-9.
  • Hood, C. 1991. “A Public Management for All Seasons?” Public Administration 69 (1): 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x.
  • Huisman, J., H. de Boer, D. D. Dill, M. Souto-Otero, J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. D. Dill, and M. Souto-Otero. 2015. The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5.
  • Jongbloed, B., and C. Salerno. 2003. De bekostiging van het universitaire onderwijs en onderzoek in Nederland: modellen, thema’s en trends. Achtergrondstudie voor de AWT. Twente, the Netherlands: Universiteit Twente.
  • Karsten, L., and H. Letiche. 2006. “Management Concepts: Their Transfer and Implementation.” Critical Perspectives on International Business 2 (3): 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/17422040610682773.
  • Keulen, S., and R. Kroeze. 2012. “De universiteit is er voor onderwijs en onderzoek, niet voor de winst.” Socialisme en Democratie 69 (7–8): 18–26. URL. http://www.wbs.nl/system/files/de_universiteit_is_er_voor_onderwijs_en_onderzoek_niet_voor_de_winst.pdf.
  • Keulen, S., and R. Kroeze. 2014. “Introduction: The Era of Management. A Historical Perspective on Twentieth-Century Management.” Management & Organizational History 9 (4): 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2014.982658.
  • Kickert, W. J. M. 2003. “Beyond Public Management. Shifting Frames of Reference in Administrative Reforms in the Netherlands.” Public Management Review 5 (3): 377–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/1471903032000146955.
  • Kösters, R., B. Mellink, M. Oudenampsen, and M. van Rossum. 2021. “Not so Consensual After All. A New Perspective on the Dutch 1980s.” TSEG – the Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History 18 (1): 5–18. https://doi.org/10.18352/tseg.1196.
  • Kroeze, R., and S. Keulen. 2014. “The Managers’ Moment in Western Politics: The Popularization of Management and Its Effects in the 1980s and 1990s.” Management & Organizational History 9 (4): 394–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2014.989235.
  • Lusiani, M., and L. Zan. 2011. “Change and Continuity in Managerialism: 100 Years of Administrative History at the International Museum of Ceramics in Faenza.” Management & Organizational History 6 (1): 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744935910387029.
  • Maclean, M., C. Harvey, and S. R. Clegg. 2016. “Conceptualizing Historical Organization Studies.” The Academy of Management Review 41 (4): 609–632. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0133.
  • Miedema, F. 2022. Open Science: The Very Idea. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-2115-6.
  • Nevalainen, P. 2017. “Facing the Inevitable? The Public Telecom Monopoly’s Way of Coping with Deregulation.” Business History 59 (3): 362–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2016.1197207.
  • Oosterhuis, G., and T. P. W. van der Krogt. 1996. “The Netherlands.” In New Public Managers in Europe. Public Servants in Transition, edited by D. Farnham, S. Horton, J. Barlow, and A. Hondeghem, 240–256. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-13947-7_11.
  • Osborne, D., and T. Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Plume.
  • Oudenampsen, M., and B. Mellink. 2021. “Bureaucrats First. The Leading Role of Policymakers in the Dutch Neoliberal Turn of the 1980s.” TSEG – the Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History 18 (1): 19–52. https://doi.org/10.18352/tseg.1197.
  • Pollitt, C., and G. Bouckaert. 2011. Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis – New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Third edition ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Rennison, B. W. 2007. “Historical Discourses of Public Management in Denmark: Past Emergence and Present Challenge.” Management & Organizational History 2 (1): 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744935907076347.
  • Rijkhoff, S. M. 2017. “Van WUB naar MUB: Veranderingen in het universitair bestuur aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.” Bachelor Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
  • Rowlinson, M., and J. S. Hassard. 2013. “Historical Neo-Institutionalism or Neo-Institutionalist History? Historical Research in Management and Organization Studies.” Management & Organizational History 8 (2): 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2013.780518.
  • Rowlinson, M., J. Hassard, and S. Decker. 2014. “Research Strategies for Organizational History: A Dialogue Between Historical Theory and Organization Theory.” The Academy of Management Review 39 (3): 250–274. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0203.
  • Schut, D. M. 1996. “Gedisciplineerd besturen.” In Ambiguïteit en pluraliteit. Bij het afscheid van drs. H.J. Brinkman, VU-bestuurder, 117–124. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
  • Tansey, O. 2007. “Process Tracing and Elite Interviewing: A Case for Non-Probability Sampling.” PS: Political Science and Politics 40 (4): 765–772. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096507071211.
  • Treacy, M., and F. Wiersema. 1993. “Customer Intimacy and Other Value Disciplines.” Harvard Business Review 71 (1): 84–93. URL. https://hbr.org/1993/01/customer-intimacy-and-other-value-disciplines.
  • Treacy, M., and F. Wiersema. 1995. “The Discipline of Market Leaders.“ Choose Your Customers, Narrow Your Focus, Dominate Your Market. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
  • Van der Zwan, A., H. J. Brinkman, M. K. Snijders, and C. M. M. Paardekooper. 1991. Zelfstandig besturen. Op weg naar universitaire charters. Advies van de tijdelijke adviescommissie bestuursorganisatie w.o. Den Haag, the Netherlands: OCW.
  • Van Deursen, A. T. 2005. Een hoeksteen in het verzuild bestel. De Vrije Universiteit 1880-2005. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker.
  • Vunderink, R. 2016. De opbrengst van bestuurlijke samenwerking UvA-HvA. Een evaluatie van de periode 2000-2016, in opdracht van het College van Bestuur UvA en HvA. Utrecht, the Netherlands: Berenschot.
  • Wadhwani, R. D., G. Galvez-Behar, J. Mercelis, and A. Guagnini. 2017. “Academic Entrepreneurship and Institutional Change in Historical Perspective.” Management & Organizational History 12 (3): 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2017.1359903.
  • Watson, T. J. 2004. “Managers, Managism, and the Tower of Babble: Making Sense of Managerial Pseudojargon.” International Journal of Sociology of Language 166 (166): 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2004.015.
  • Source material
  • Archive Executive Board VU Amsterdam (2004 – 4144), classification code 8.12.2, Executive Board, VU-Windesheim instellingsfusieplan deel 1, 2004a.
  • Archive University Council VU Amsterdam, Archive code 89.0239, University Council, letter from the university council to the executive board, April 18, 1989.
  • Archive University Council VU Amsterdam, Archive code 91.0319, a brief overview of the works council discussion, May 16, 1991.
  • Archive University Council VU Amsterdam, Archive code 91.0557, letter from the Society to the university council, August 28, 1991.
  • Archive University Council VU Amsterdam, archive code 98.227, letter from the Minister of Education to the Society, March 11, 1998.
  • Archive Works Council VU Amsterdam, C.H. ’t Hart, Informatie voor de leden van de Ondernemingsraad van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2005.
  • Archive Works Council VU Amsterdam, H. Vloet and H. van Horssen (Berenschot), Toets financieel meerjarenkader VU 2011-2016, 2012.
  • Archive Works Council VU Amsterdam, Programmacommissie Bedrijfsvoering 2012, Reorganisatieplan nieuwe bedrijfsvoering Vrije Universiteit, 2012.
  • House of Representatives of the Netherlands, file code 27496 no. 1, Letter from the Minister of Education to the chair of the House of Representatives, November 13, 2000.
  • House of Representatives of the Netherlands, Questions 2012Z15090, question from member of parliament Jasper van Dijk to State Secretary of Education, August 15, 2012.
  • Brinkman, H.J. 1986. “Voorwaardelijke autonomie.” Jaarboek 1985-1986 Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam (pp. 17-28).
  • Brinkman, H.J. 1990. “De Vrije Universiteit 1980-1990 en de modernisering van het Nederlands wetenschappelijk onderwijs in de tweede helft van de twintigste eeuw.” Jaarboek 1989-1990 Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam (pp. 13-28).
  • FEWEB. Success beyond Success. Making it Happen. Summary of FEWEB’s Strategic Plan, 2011-2014. December, 2010.
  • Verbruggen, H. Een alternatief voor “Nieuwe Bedrijfsvoering Vrije Universiteit.” Een inhoudelijke reactie op hoofdlijnen van het CvD, Amsterdam, May 4, 2012.
  • VU Amsterdam. 1989. Jaarboek 1988-1989. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
  • Executive Board VU Amsterdam. 2004b. Jaarverslag 2004. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
  • Interviews
  • Respondent 1B1 (June 1, 2021).
  • Respondent 1A1 (June 2, 2021).
  • Respondent 1A2 (June 7, 2021).
  • Respondent 1A3 (June 9, 2021).
  • Respondent 1A4 (June 15, 2021).
  • Respondent 1A5 (August 27, 2021).
  • Respondent 1D1 (August 10, 2022).
  • Respondent 5E1 (March 23, 2022).
  • Respondent 5E2 (April 11, 2022).
  • Respondent 1F1 (July 20, 2022).