Search results

Chapter 1: Does it really matter? Assessing the performance effects of changes in leadership and management structures in Nordic higher education -- Chapter 2: Performance in higher education institutions and its variations in Nordic policy -- Chapter 3: Nordic higher education in flux: system evolution and reform trajectories -- Chapter 4: National performance-based research funding systems: constructing local perceptions of research -- Chapter 5: External research funding and authority relations -- Chapter 6: The changing roles of academic leaders: decision-making, power and performance -- Chapter 7: Strategy as dialogue and engagement -- Chapter 8: Evaluation practices and impact: overload? -- Chapter 9: Governing performance in the Nordic universities: where are we heading and what have we learnt?

The paper contributes to the existing literature on reactions to economic shocks by adding a specific comparative focus on core welfare sectors within the Nordic region. Comparing crisis reactions across two countries using a framework of "cost saving", "reorganisation" and "programme" logic reveals patterns and constraints in different institutional settings. The paper concludes that Denmark and Norway initially tried to shelter the health care and higher education sectors, but they have moved on to more radical strategic responses as the crisis has persisted. Many similarities in the crisis reactions are apparent across the two countries and sectors, but important differences are also clear that may be ascribed to the specific institutional contexts.

The public sector in the Nordic countries has been subject to substantial reform in recent decades. The article explores the changing reform dynamic in Denmark and Norway, focusing on centralising and decentralising trends in two prominent sectors: higher education and health care. The main question is: How can the reform dynamics over the last decade explain changes surrounding decentralisation and/or re-centralisation? A new trend can be observed in both sectors, namely the rise of re-centralisation and the concomitant growth of state responsibility in matters pertaining to political and fiscal decision-making. Both hospitals and universities have been given increased (procedural) autonomy. At the same time there is stronger centralised planning and management of performance management, which means that (substantive) autonomy has been reduced.

The public sector in the Nordic countries has been subject to substantial reform in recent decades. The article explores the changing reform dynamic in Denmark and Norway, focusing on centralising and decentralising trends in two prominent sectors: higher education and health care. The main question is: How can the reform dynamics over the last decade explain changes surrounding decentralisation and/or re-centralisation? A new trend can be observed in both sectors, namely the rise of re-centralisation and the concomitant growth of state responsibility in matters pertaining to political and fiscal decision-making. Both hospitals and universities have been given increased (procedural) autonomy. At the same time there is stronger centralised planning and management of performance management, which means that (substantive) autonomy has been reduced.

This paper investigates the accountability mechanisms introduced in the universities in the Nordic countries by building on a typology of accountability types. By utilising survey data, it analyses how academics experience the changes in accountability mechanisms and how they perceive the impact of these changes on their performance. The analysis shows that especially political/bureaucratic and managerial accountability demands have been strengthened. This development has fostered debates on how to measure academic performance. Some academics, more in Denmark than in the other countries, have experienced the development as a sign of mistrust.