Managing productivity in an academic institution: Rethinking the whom, which, what, and whose of productivity

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Drawing on a review of scholarly literature, this article suggests rethinking productivity in academic institutions along tour dimensions: the productivity of whom, productivity for which unit of analysis, productivity according to what functions, and productivity in whose interests. It offers principles for promoting enlightened discussion and pursuit of productivity at all levels of the organization. In contrast to the dominant discourse, which emphasizes focus, centralized standard measures, and accountability, the bias in my principles is toward balance, decentralized diversity, and recalibration. I suggest the ideal is not for employees and units to produce to centrally managed objectives but for all individuals and units to manage individually and collectively to design their work to improve their productivity along multiple dimensions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)619-632
Number of pages14
JournalResearch in Higher Education
Volume42
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2001

Fingerprint

productivity
employee
organization
responsibility
discourse
trend

Keywords

  • Academic management
  • Faculty
  • Productivity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Cite this

@article{5b7cc7f3032b4ad5bb0a062dc55122fc,
title = "Managing productivity in an academic institution: Rethinking the whom, which, what, and whose of productivity",
abstract = "Drawing on a review of scholarly literature, this article suggests rethinking productivity in academic institutions along tour dimensions: the productivity of whom, productivity for which unit of analysis, productivity according to what functions, and productivity in whose interests. It offers principles for promoting enlightened discussion and pursuit of productivity at all levels of the organization. In contrast to the dominant discourse, which emphasizes focus, centralized standard measures, and accountability, the bias in my principles is toward balance, decentralized diversity, and recalibration. I suggest the ideal is not for employees and units to produce to centrally managed objectives but for all individuals and units to manage individually and collectively to design their work to improve their productivity along multiple dimensions.",
keywords = "Academic management, Faculty, Productivity",
author = "Rhoades, {Gary D}",
year = "2001",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1023/A:1011006511651",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "619--632",
journal = "Research in Higher Education",
issn = "0361-0365",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Managing productivity in an academic institution

T2 - Rethinking the whom, which, what, and whose of productivity

AU - Rhoades, Gary D

PY - 2001/10

Y1 - 2001/10

N2 - Drawing on a review of scholarly literature, this article suggests rethinking productivity in academic institutions along tour dimensions: the productivity of whom, productivity for which unit of analysis, productivity according to what functions, and productivity in whose interests. It offers principles for promoting enlightened discussion and pursuit of productivity at all levels of the organization. In contrast to the dominant discourse, which emphasizes focus, centralized standard measures, and accountability, the bias in my principles is toward balance, decentralized diversity, and recalibration. I suggest the ideal is not for employees and units to produce to centrally managed objectives but for all individuals and units to manage individually and collectively to design their work to improve their productivity along multiple dimensions.

AB - Drawing on a review of scholarly literature, this article suggests rethinking productivity in academic institutions along tour dimensions: the productivity of whom, productivity for which unit of analysis, productivity according to what functions, and productivity in whose interests. It offers principles for promoting enlightened discussion and pursuit of productivity at all levels of the organization. In contrast to the dominant discourse, which emphasizes focus, centralized standard measures, and accountability, the bias in my principles is toward balance, decentralized diversity, and recalibration. I suggest the ideal is not for employees and units to produce to centrally managed objectives but for all individuals and units to manage individually and collectively to design their work to improve their productivity along multiple dimensions.

KW - Academic management

KW - Faculty

KW - Productivity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035486322&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035486322&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/A:1011006511651

DO - 10.1023/A:1011006511651

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0035486322

VL - 42

SP - 619

EP - 632

JO - Research in Higher Education

JF - Research in Higher Education

SN - 0361-0365

IS - 5

ER -