"While it may be reasonable to believe that a lack of institutional incentives is detrimental in terms of research productivity, a sophisticated and intrusive system of rewards and surveillance focused on performance measurement may stifle innovation […].“
The above statement by Gendron (2008) raises the question: How much is too much? The present seminar thesis shall explain, in which status of performance thinking accompanied by rewards the higher education sector is situated and which implications follow out of this for research activities of universities in particular.
Concretely, the research question „Does performatization foster intellectual stagnation“ shall be examined. For this purpose, a literature study has been operated, which encompasses inter alia renowned authors like Alvesson, Gendron, Hopwood, Humphrey, Parker and Sandberg.
The seminar thesis is set up as follows: It starts with a brief overview about the presence of performance thinking in academia and its emergence. Thereupon, the actual main part follows which deals with the examination of the consequences triggered by performativity. After limiting the thesis to the university’s activity of research and more precisely to the performance indicator of journal rankings in particular, firstly positive consequences and subsequently negative consequences are examined. As a next step, change attempts and resistance against the performativity movement in general and against specific consequences out of it are introduced. In the final discussion chapter, the previous findings are illuminated from different angels and in this course also reflected and brought into wider context. The seminar thesis ends with a short summary of the outcomes and a personal notation of the author.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The emergence of performativity in academia
3. Consequences of academia’s performativity
3.1 Limitation to research and its performance indicator of journal rankings
3.2 Positive consequences
3.3 Negative consequences
3.3.1 Careerism
3.3.2 Conformity
3.3.3 Gap spotting research and puzzle solving
3.3.4 Internationalization
3.3.5 Lacking practical linkage
3.3.6 Researcher identity
3.3.6 Readership
3.3.7 Power asymmetry
3.3.8 Summary and differentiation
4. Resistance and attempts of change
4.1 Rethinking
4.2 Institutional arrangements
4.3 Individual Actions
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This seminar thesis investigates the impact of "performatization" on the academic sector, specifically examining whether the pressure of performance measurement and journal rankings leads to intellectual stagnation in research. By analyzing literature from prominent authors in organization studies, the thesis explores the emergence of performance thinking, its consequences for academic autonomy, and potential avenues for institutional or individual resistance.
- The historical emergence of performance metrics in higher education
- Consequences of journal rankings on research quality and innovation
- Negative phenomena: Careerism, conformity, and "gap spotting"
- Shifting researcher identities under the "publish or perish" mentality
- Resistance strategies and alternative models for scholarly work
Excerpt from the Book
3.3.1 Careerism
Progession in the career path is linked to publication of articles. As already described, the university as employer can use this for rationalizing promotion decisions and for generating motivation. But looking at it from an employee‘s angle, this places enormous pressure on academic researches. In order to display their personal productivity, they are forced to produce articles in a „steady flow“ (Humphrey & Gendron, 2015, p.48); otherwise their career advancement and also academic reputation is at risk. There is not only the demand of continuously publishing, but also to publish in highly-ranked journals. Gendron (2008) captions this phenomen as „publish or perish mentality“ (p.97), whereas Lyotard even considers the performance pressure as terror engendering (as cited in Gendron, 2008). To put it in other words, a researcher’s performance is assessed by the amount of hits placed in high esteemed journals instead of the quality of their work.
Which efforts need to be undertaken in order to be able to publish an article in a high-class journal? Gabriel (2010) describes this as „a long process, involving numerous revisions, citing authors one does not care for, engaging with arguments one is not interested in and seeking to satisfy different harsh masters, often with conflicting and incompatible demands, while staying within a strict word limit“ (p.763). According to Alvesson & Sandberg (2013) this process often ends in dismissal due to the high competition for getting published. The rate, at which high-grade journals nowadays accept submitted manuscripts, is at 5 per cent.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the research question regarding intellectual stagnation in academia and provides a roadmap for the literature review.
2. The emergence of performativity in academia: Details the historical shift toward New Public Management and neoliberal influences that transformed universities into hybrid organizations.
3. Consequences of academia’s performativity: Critically analyzes both positive and negative effects of performance metrics, with a focus on journal rankings and their impact on innovation.
4. Resistance and attempts of change: Categorizes potential solutions into rethinking academic mindsets, institutional reforms, and individual research models.
5. Discussion: Reflects on the findings by contextualizing them within broader debates about market-oriented structures and the transfer of research into practice.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the dominance of negative consequences in current literature and raises questions about whether the researchers themselves are caught in the criticized patterns.
Keywords
Performativity, Intellectual Stagnation, Journal Rankings, New Public Management, Academic Research, Careerism, Conformity, Gap Spotting, Research Innovation, Higher Education, Publishing, Academic Identity, Power Asymmetry, Institutional Reform, Marketization
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The work examines whether the increasing "performatization" of the higher education sector, driven by metrics like journal rankings, creates an environment that fosters intellectual stagnation rather than innovative research.
What are the central themes discussed?
The core themes include the impact of New Public Management on universities, the "publish or perish" mentality, the homogeneity of academic research, and the shifting power dynamics between journal editors, university management, and researchers.
What is the main research question?
The central research question is: "Does performatization foster intellectual stagnation?"
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author employs a comprehensive literature study, drawing on the work of renowned scholars such as Alvesson, Gendron, Hopwood, and others to synthesize current knowledge on academic performativity.
What topics are covered in the main section of the thesis?
The main section covers the history of performance thinking, specific consequences such as careerism and conformity, the impact on researcher identity, and potential resistance strategies.
Which keywords best describe this study?
Key terms include Performativity, Intellectual Stagnation, Journal Rankings, New Public Management, and academic research innovation.
How does "gap spotting" contribute to stagnation according to the author?
The author argues that gap spotting focuses on incrementally extending existing literature rather than challenging taken-for-granted assumptions, which suppresses revolutionary or truly innovative scientific breakthroughs.
What paradox does the author identify regarding journal publications?
The author highlights the paradox that while there is an increase in the total number of academic articles published, there is simultaneously a perceived decrease in research innovation due to pressures to conform to standard paradigms.
What final critical reflection does the author offer about the researchers themselves?
The author concludes by questioning whether the scholars contributing to the discourse on performativity are themselves practicing the very "rule-consistent" and "gap spotting" research that they criticize in their articles.
- Quote paper
- Nadine Butzhammer (Author), 2018, Does performatization foster intellectual stagnation?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/538599
