Suchergebnisse

Das Buch beleuchtet Fusionen von Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen aus der Perspektive des organisationssoziologischen Neoinstitutionalismus. Fusionen im Hochschulsektor scheinen in Deutschland zuzunehmen und sind dabei mit hohen Erwartungen verbunden. Die Arbeit betrachtet Fusionen als Prozesse des institutionellen Wandels und der Deinstitutionalisierung bestehender und der gleichzeitigen Institutionalisierung neuer Elemente. Zunächst wird in einem Deutschland-Großbritannien-Vergleich untersucht, inwiefern Fusionen durch globale Trends ausgelöst werden. Am Beispiel der Fusion zum Karlsruher Institut für Technologie werden die Mechanismen bestimmt, die dazu führen, dass sich globale Logiken nicht einfach durchsetzen können, sondern mit lokalen Elementen in Konkurrenz treten. Im KIT-Prozess treffen dabei zum einen die universitäre Wissenschaftslogik und die eher betrieblich orientierte Großforschungslogik auf lokaler Ebene mit der durch globale Prozesse beeinflussten Logik der Exzellenzinitiative zusammen. ReiheInterdisziplinäre Schriften zur Wissenschaftsforschung - Band 15.

Wendy Brown: Nihilistic Times: Thinking with Max Weber. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 2023. 978-0-674-27938-4

This contribution looks into changing institutional logics in the field of academic science in Germany using the case of the merger between the University of Karlsruhe and the Research Center Karlsruhe as an example. As a result of an ongoing process of critique, a new institutional logic of "organizational competition" was theorized over time that contradicted the dominant logic of "corporatist planning." The conditions for the merger case were 1) an increasing alignment and cooperation between both organizations as an outcome of the public critique of big science research institutes, and 2) the rise of a new institutional logic of organizational competition including the organizational implementation of a new management model of science, notably the concept of the "entrepreneurial university" (e.g. the MIT in the United States). After the merger had been decided, political activities shifted from a projective "mode of theorization" to a pragmatic "mode of negotiation." The institutionalization of the new "Karlsruhe Institute of Technology" (KIT) was shaped by two competing logics: Whereas the state and the Helmholtz Society did not want to lose their influence, the new KIT was committed to the concept of the "entrepreneurial university" and thus to a higher degree of organizational autonomy and strategic management. The final outcome was a compromise built on a layered structure that combined pre-existing and new organizational structures.

This contribution looks into changing institutional logics in the field of academic science in Germany using the case of the merger between the University of Karlsruhe and the Research Center Karlsruhe as an example. As a result of an ongoing process of critique, a new institutional logic of "organizational competition" was theorized over time that contradicted the dominant logic of "corporatist planning." The conditions for the merger case were 1) an increasing alignment and cooperation between both organizations as an outcome of the public critique of big science research institutes, and 2) the rise of a new institutional logic of organizational competition including the organizational implementation of a new management model of science, notably the concept of the "entrepreneurial university" (e.g. the MIT in the United States). After the merger had been decided, political activities shifted from a projective "mode of theorization" to a pragmatic "mode of negotiation." The institutionalization of the new "Karlsruhe Institute of Technology" (KIT) was shaped by two competing logics: Whereas the state and the Helmholtz Society did not want to lose their influence, the new KIT was committed to the concept of the "entrepreneurial university" and thus to a higher degree of organizational autonomy and strategic management. The final outcome was a compromise built on a layered structure that combined pre-existing and new organizational structures.

Das Buch beleuchtet Fusionen von Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen aus der Perspektive des organisationssoziologischen Neoinstitutionalismus. Fusionen im Hochschulsektor scheinen in Deutschland zuzunehmen und sind dabei mit hohen Erwartungen verbunden. Die Arbeit betrachtet Fusionen als Prozesse des institutionellen Wandels und der Deinstitutionalisierung bestehender und der gleichzeitigen Institutionalisierung neuer Elemente. Zunächst wird in einem Deutschland-Großbritannien-Vergleich untersucht, inwiefern Fusionen durch globale Trends ausgelöst werden. Am Beispiel der Fusion zum Karlsruher Institut für Technologie werden die Mechanismen bestimmt, die dazu führen, dass sich globale Logiken nicht einfach durchsetzen können, sondern mit lokalen Elementen in Konkurrenz treten. Im KIT-Prozess treffen dabei zum einen die universitäre Wissenschaftslogik und die eher betrieblich orientierte Großforschungslogik auf lokaler Ebene mit der durch globale Prozesse beeinflussten Logik der Exzellenzinitiative zusammen

This book analyses and describes the effects of the reforms of the European science systems on research. Taking the multilevel governance of the science system into account, the authors describe the effects of the reforms on different aspects: research collaborations and research lines, PhD education, performance profiles, research funding and legal aspects. The first part of the book deals with 'PhD education' from an economic perspective. How successful are Research Training Groups and is heterogeneity really a factor of success? What kind of PhD education leads to success? The second part focuses on the interactions of governance and research. How do changes at the national and organisational level influence research cooperation, research lines and research performance? The third part reflects the Europeanisation and Internationalisation of research and research funding. To what extent are research collaborations becoming international? How is the role of European funding agencies changing?

The document provides supplementary material for the article "What is the place for megachurches?" to be published in Sociological Forum 38:1 in 2023. In this article, the push factors of megachurch success in the U.S. are studied. The paper develops a causes of effects-approach, in which local place-based conditions in 22 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) are compared and related to megachurches. The paper uses Correspondence Analysis and Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Accordingly, this supplementary material provides the raw data, information on calibration methods and the truth table.

ZusammenfassungDer Beitrag greift Jeffrey Alexanders (2004) These auf, dass die einzelnen Komponenten kollektiver Rituale in der modernen Gesellschaft zwar zunehmend differenziert und somit religiös "entleert" werden, in der Inszenierung aber "re-fusioniert" werden können. Das Religiöse wird somit subjektiviert, mediatisiert und eventisiert. Rationalisierungsprozesse wie Organisations- und Marktbildung sowie Digitalisierung treiben diese Entwicklung voran. Im empirischen Teil vergleichen wir drei kollektive Rituale aus dem amerikanischen Evangelikalismus, die unterschiedliche Grade der Differenzierung aufweisen: Im Fall der (1) traditionellen Gemeinde wird religiöse Authentizität aus den engen sozialen Beziehungen innerhalb der Gemeinde und zur Denomination erzeugt. (2) Im Megakirchengottesdienst derLakewood Churchwird Authentizität in der professionellen Event-Inszenierung hergestellt. (3) Die evangelikale Vloggerin hingegen erzeugt Authentizität – und damit eine Bindung an ihr Publikum –, indem Skript und Darstellerin in der Inszenierung vollständig verschmelzen.

This introduction of the HSR Special Issue on "Critique and Social Change: Historical, Cultural, and Institutional Perspectives" addresses the question of how critique and social change are interrelated. Conflicts and disputes are considered to be a major source of critique. We distinguish three types of conflicts: (1) Value conflicts result from the ongoing process of rationalization and the differentiation of relatively autonomous "value spheres" (Weber) such as politics, economy, science, law, etc. (2) The growth and expansion of these value spheres, e.g. the growth of capitalism, in turn produce new forms of inequalities and leads to distributional conflicts. (3) As questions of distribution and inclusion are closely linked, critique also originates from identity conflicts, which address the social recognition of individuals and collectivities. In order to understand how critique is related to social change, we suggest that critique can be studied either as a condition for or as an effect from social change. Based on this distinction we provide an overview over the contributions of this volume.

This introduction of the HSR Special Issue on "Critique and Social Change: Historical, Cultural, and Institutional Perspectives" addresses the question of how critique and social change are interrelated. Conflicts and disputes are considered to be a major source of critique. We distinguish three types of conflicts: (1) Value conflicts result from the ongoing process of rationalization and the differentiation of relatively autonomous "value spheres" (Weber) such as politics, economy, science, law, etc. (2) The growth and expansion of these value spheres, e.g. the growth of capitalism, in turn produce new forms of inequalities and leads to distributional conflicts. (3) As questions of distribution and inclusion are closely linked, critique also originates from identity conflicts, which address the social recognition of individuals and collectivities. In order to understand how critique is related to social change, we suggest that critique can be studied either as a condition for or as an effect from social change. Based on this distinction we provide an overview over the contributions of this volume.

Abstract
This study analyzes the interplay between the public image and the self-image of the German Querdenken movement during the covid-19 pandemic. First, we reconstruct the public image of Querdenken with data from the newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. Our findings reveal a multifaceted network of critical arguments against the government's public health measures during the crisis. Querdenken remained at the periphery of this newspaper discourse because it was mostly perceived as anti-democratic, particularistic, and irrational. Next, we compare this public image with Querdenken's self-image using the movement's press releases. Our analysis shows that Querdenken's supporters responded to public criticism by counter-labeling their critics as untrustworthy, conspiratorial, and corrupt. Our conclusion finds that due to its highly contentious "anti-science" and "anti-elite" approach, Querdenken failed to produce a positive "resonance" within the public sphere and developed only limited civil power.