Stratified University Strategies

The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective

Bjørn Stensaker, Jenny J Lee, Gary D Rhoades, Sowmya Ghosh, Santiago Castiello-Gutiérrez, Hillary Vance, Alper Çalıkoğlu, Vannessa Kramer, Shuiyun Liu, Mahmoud Sayed Marei, Leslie O’Toole, Ivan Pavlyutkin, Cassandra Peel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Globalizing forces have both transformed the higher education sector and made it increasingly homogenous. Growing similarities among universities have been attributed to isomorphic pressures to ensure and/or enhance legitimacy by imitating higher education institutions that are perceived as successful internationally, particularly universities that are highly ranked globally (Cantwell & Kauppinen, 2014; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In this study, we compared the strategic plans of 78 high-ranked, low-ranked, and unranked universities in 33 countries in 9 regions of the world. In analyzing the plans of these 78 universities, the study explored patterns of similarity and difference in universities’ strategic positioning according to Suchman’s (1995) 3 types of legitimacy: cognitive, pragmatic, and moral. We found evidence of stratified university strategies in a global higher education landscape that varied by institutional status. In offering a corrective to neoinstitutional theory, we suggest that patterns of globalization are mediated by status-based differences in aspirational behavior (Riesman, 1958) and “old institutional” forces (Stinchcombe, 1997) that contribute to differently situated universities pursuing new paths in seeking to build external legitimacy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Higher Education
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

legitimacy
university
education
pragmatics
globalization
evidence

Keywords

  • global rankings
  • institutional theory
  • Strategic plans

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Cite this

Stratified University Strategies : The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective. / Stensaker, Bjørn; Lee, Jenny J; Rhoades, Gary D; Ghosh, Sowmya; Castiello-Gutiérrez, Santiago; Vance, Hillary; Çalıkoğlu, Alper; Kramer, Vannessa; Liu, Shuiyun; Marei, Mahmoud Sayed; O’Toole, Leslie; Pavlyutkin, Ivan; Peel, Cassandra.

In: Journal of Higher Education, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stensaker, B, Lee, JJ, Rhoades, GD, Ghosh, S, Castiello-Gutiérrez, S, Vance, H, Çalıkoğlu, A, Kramer, V, Liu, S, Marei, MS, O’Toole, L, Pavlyutkin, I & Peel, C 2018, 'Stratified University Strategies: The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective', Journal of Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1513306
Stensaker, Bjørn ; Lee, Jenny J ; Rhoades, Gary D ; Ghosh, Sowmya ; Castiello-Gutiérrez, Santiago ; Vance, Hillary ; Çalıkoğlu, Alper ; Kramer, Vannessa ; Liu, Shuiyun ; Marei, Mahmoud Sayed ; O’Toole, Leslie ; Pavlyutkin, Ivan ; Peel, Cassandra. / Stratified University Strategies : The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective. In: Journal of Higher Education. 2018.
@article{d9cf1671b9de45199e3c2bbbb9c62224,
title = "Stratified University Strategies: The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective",
abstract = "Globalizing forces have both transformed the higher education sector and made it increasingly homogenous. Growing similarities among universities have been attributed to isomorphic pressures to ensure and/or enhance legitimacy by imitating higher education institutions that are perceived as successful internationally, particularly universities that are highly ranked globally (Cantwell & Kauppinen, 2014; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In this study, we compared the strategic plans of 78 high-ranked, low-ranked, and unranked universities in 33 countries in 9 regions of the world. In analyzing the plans of these 78 universities, the study explored patterns of similarity and difference in universities’ strategic positioning according to Suchman’s (1995) 3 types of legitimacy: cognitive, pragmatic, and moral. We found evidence of stratified university strategies in a global higher education landscape that varied by institutional status. In offering a corrective to neoinstitutional theory, we suggest that patterns of globalization are mediated by status-based differences in aspirational behavior (Riesman, 1958) and “old institutional” forces (Stinchcombe, 1997) that contribute to differently situated universities pursuing new paths in seeking to build external legitimacy.",
keywords = "global rankings, institutional theory, Strategic plans",
author = "Bj{\o}rn Stensaker and Lee, {Jenny J} and Rhoades, {Gary D} and Sowmya Ghosh and Santiago Castiello-Guti{\'e}rrez and Hillary Vance and Alper {\cC}alıkoğlu and Vannessa Kramer and Shuiyun Liu and Marei, {Mahmoud Sayed} and Leslie O’Toole and Ivan Pavlyutkin and Cassandra Peel",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/00221546.2018.1513306",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Higher Education",
issn = "0022-1546",
publisher = "Ohio State University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Stratified University Strategies

T2 - The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective

AU - Stensaker, Bjørn

AU - Lee, Jenny J

AU - Rhoades, Gary D

AU - Ghosh, Sowmya

AU - Castiello-Gutiérrez, Santiago

AU - Vance, Hillary

AU - Çalıkoğlu, Alper

AU - Kramer, Vannessa

AU - Liu, Shuiyun

AU - Marei, Mahmoud Sayed

AU - O’Toole, Leslie

AU - Pavlyutkin, Ivan

AU - Peel, Cassandra

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Globalizing forces have both transformed the higher education sector and made it increasingly homogenous. Growing similarities among universities have been attributed to isomorphic pressures to ensure and/or enhance legitimacy by imitating higher education institutions that are perceived as successful internationally, particularly universities that are highly ranked globally (Cantwell & Kauppinen, 2014; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In this study, we compared the strategic plans of 78 high-ranked, low-ranked, and unranked universities in 33 countries in 9 regions of the world. In analyzing the plans of these 78 universities, the study explored patterns of similarity and difference in universities’ strategic positioning according to Suchman’s (1995) 3 types of legitimacy: cognitive, pragmatic, and moral. We found evidence of stratified university strategies in a global higher education landscape that varied by institutional status. In offering a corrective to neoinstitutional theory, we suggest that patterns of globalization are mediated by status-based differences in aspirational behavior (Riesman, 1958) and “old institutional” forces (Stinchcombe, 1997) that contribute to differently situated universities pursuing new paths in seeking to build external legitimacy.

AB - Globalizing forces have both transformed the higher education sector and made it increasingly homogenous. Growing similarities among universities have been attributed to isomorphic pressures to ensure and/or enhance legitimacy by imitating higher education institutions that are perceived as successful internationally, particularly universities that are highly ranked globally (Cantwell & Kauppinen, 2014; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In this study, we compared the strategic plans of 78 high-ranked, low-ranked, and unranked universities in 33 countries in 9 regions of the world. In analyzing the plans of these 78 universities, the study explored patterns of similarity and difference in universities’ strategic positioning according to Suchman’s (1995) 3 types of legitimacy: cognitive, pragmatic, and moral. We found evidence of stratified university strategies in a global higher education landscape that varied by institutional status. In offering a corrective to neoinstitutional theory, we suggest that patterns of globalization are mediated by status-based differences in aspirational behavior (Riesman, 1958) and “old institutional” forces (Stinchcombe, 1997) that contribute to differently situated universities pursuing new paths in seeking to build external legitimacy.

KW - global rankings

KW - institutional theory

KW - Strategic plans

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053477516&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053477516&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00221546.2018.1513306

DO - 10.1080/00221546.2018.1513306

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Higher Education

JF - Journal of Higher Education

SN - 0022-1546

ER -