IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/eurrev/v18y2010is1ps117-s139_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Academic Profession and the Managerial University: An International Comparative Study from Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Arimoto, Akira

Abstract

Traditionally, academics like to think that they further society by furthering their academic disciplines. The managerial university focuses on rationalization and efficiency, and believes in market mechanisms. These different viewpoints lie at the root of many conflicts. Moreover, one cannot see these issues in isolation. The logic of the managerial university reflects a shift from knowledge communities to knowledge enterprises. This conflicts with the logic of the academic profession, valuing academic autonomy and academic freedom. In the 2007 Changing Academic Profession survey, Japanese academics regarded the threats of the looming bureaucracy as almost as dangerous as did the academics surveyed in 1992 in the context of the Carnegie international comparative study on the academic profession, which was carried out in Europe and the US. This report intends to analyse the results of the CAP survey in order to compare the similarities and differences of academic staff’s reactions to the managerial university from an international perspective. More specifically, the focus will be on the following topics: (1) the role of knowledge and academic vision; (2) decision making; (3) the role of institutional missions and profiles; (4) the impact of incentives and sanctions; (5) supervisory mechanisms; and (6) cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Arimoto, Akira, 2010. "The Academic Profession and the Managerial University: An International Comparative Study from Japan," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(S1), pages 117-139, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:eurrev:v:18:y:2010:i:s1:p:s117-s139_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1062798709990354/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:eurrev:v:18:y:2010:i:s1:p:s117-s139_99. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/erw .

    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.