IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v8y2020i2p48-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Keeping One’s Shiny Mercedes in the Garage: Why Higher Education Quantification Never Really Took Off in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Maarten Hillebrandt

    (Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki, Finland)

Abstract

The cybernetic dream of regulatory ‘dashboard control’ has taken off in the German higher education system. Both government regulators and university managers are engaged in the creation of waves of increasingly fine-grained quantitative data. Yet a wide range of recent case studies of the German higher education sector attest that in spite of this ‘datafication’ frenzy, the impact of the collected data mass on regulatory and managerial decision-making capacities seems to have remained relatively limited. This article explores why, in spite of the considerable investment in quantitative data infrastructures in the German higher education sector, this did not result in significant overt analytical capacity building. It explores three hypotheses: 1) a legal hypothesis according to which quantification is curbed by legal protections under the Rechtsstaat; 2) a dysfunctionality hypothesis which holds that decision makers reject quantification as a flawed and impracticable pursuit; and 3) an egalitarian federalism hypothesis which argues that Germany’s federal states seek to prevent commensurability to avoid comparison and competition. The article finds that, in spite of its inconspicuousness, quantification indeed does inform various central decision-making processes. However, different legal, political, and relational factors prompt decision makers to engage in a hybrid, tempered and, overall, untransparent application of numerical data.

Suggested Citation

  • Maarten Hillebrandt, 2020. "Keeping One’s Shiny Mercedes in the Garage: Why Higher Education Quantification Never Really Took Off in Germany," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 48-57.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:48-57
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2584
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Huber, 2020. "Steered by Numbers: How Quantification Differentiates the Reform of a German University," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 26-35.
    2. Christopher Hood & Oliver James & B. Guy Peters & Colin Scott (ed.), 2004. "Controlling Modern Government," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3290.
    3. Kurunmaki, Liisa & Mennicken, Andrea & Miller, Peter, 2016. "Quantifying, economising, and marketising: democratising the social sphere?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67549, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Leopold Ringel & Jelena Brankovic & Tobias Werron, 2020. "The Organizational Engine of Rankings: Connecting “New” and “Old” Institutionalism," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 36-47.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julian Hamann, 2020. "Governance by Numbers: A Panopticon Reversed?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 68-71.
    2. Anne K. Krüger, 2020. "Quantification 2.0? Bibliometric Infrastructures in Academic Evaluation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 58-67.
    3. Maarten Hillebrandt & Michael Huber, 2020. "Editorial: Quantifying Higher Education: Governing Universities and Academics by Numbers," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 1-5.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maarten Hillebrandt & Michael Huber, 2020. "Editorial: Quantifying Higher Education: Governing Universities and Academics by Numbers," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 1-5.
    2. Julian Hamann, 2020. "Governance by Numbers: A Panopticon Reversed?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 68-71.
    3. Liliana Doganova & Martin Giraudeau & Hans Kjellberg & Claes-Fredrik Helgesson & Francis Lee & Alexandre Mallard & Andrea Mennicken & Fabian Muniesa & Ebba Sjögren & Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, 2018. "Five years! Have we not had enough of valuation studies by now?," Post-Print halshs-01935355, HAL.
    4. Heald, David & Steel, David, 2018. "The governance of public bodies in times of austerity," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 149-160.
    5. Eyert, Florian & Irgmaier, Florian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2022. "Extending the framework of algorithmic regulation. The Uber case," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 23-44.
    6. Anne K. Krüger, 2020. "Quantification 2.0? Bibliometric Infrastructures in Academic Evaluation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 58-67.
    7. Siguang Li & Xi Weng, 2017. "Random Authority," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 58(1), pages 211-235, February.
    8. Ana Isabel Melo & Cláudia S. Sarrico & Zoe Radnor, 2010. "The Influence of Performance Management Systems on Key Actors in Universities," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 233-254, March.
    9. Hauge, Amalie Martinus, 2018. "Situated valuations: Affordances of management technologies in organizations," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 245-255.
    10. King, Roger, 2006. "Analysing the higher education regulatory state," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 36119, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2021. "Cultural Theory's Contributions to Risk Analysis: A Thematic Review with Directions and Resources for Further Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 429-455, March.
    12. Lodge, Martin & Wegrich, Kai & McElroy, Gail, 2008. "Gammelfleisch everywhere? public debate, variety of worldviews and regulatory change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 36532, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Mennicken, Andrea, 2013. "Too big to fail and too big to succeed: accounting and privatisation in the Prison Service of England and Wales," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 46366, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Arild Gjertsen, 2014. "Legitimacy in Interlocal Partnerships: Balancing Efficiency and Democracy," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(9), pages 1926-1942, July.
    15. Quintin Bradley, 2022. "The accountancy of marketisation: Fictional markets in housing land supply," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(3), pages 493-507, May.
    16. Crepaz, Lukas & Huber, Christian & Scheytt, Tobias, 2016. "Governing arts through valuation: The role of the state as network actor in the European Capital of Culture 2010," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 35-50.
    17. Florian Eyert & Florian Irgmaier & Lena Ulbricht, 2022. "Extending the framework of algorithmic regulation. The Uber case," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 23-44, January.
    18. Anthony M. Bertelli, 2008. "Credible Governance? Transparency, Political Control, the Personal Vote and British Quangos," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(4), pages 807-829, December.
    19. Verhoest, Koen & Wynen, Jan, 2016. "The nexus between agencification and horizontal accountability : A multi-country survey analysis," Other publications TiSEM b3e3605c-d9ff-4411-97b2-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Christel Koop & Martin Lodge, 2017. "What is regulation? An interdisciplinary concept analysis," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 95-108, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:48-57. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.