How do institutional changes affect scientific innovations? the effects of shifts in authority relationships, protected space, and flexibility

Research in the Sociology of Organizations

Volumn 42, Issue , 2014, Pages 367-406

  Whitley, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Authority; Flexibility; Institutional changes; Protected space; Scientific innovations

Indexed keywords

EID: 84902554534     PISSN: 0733558X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1108/S0733-558X20140000042012     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aljets, E., & Lettkemann, E. (2011, July). New demands for strategic action: Research in Germany. Paper presented to Subtheme 45 on Reconstructing Uni versities as Organizations: Increasing Authority with Limited Strategic Capabilities at the 27th EGOS Colloquium, Gothenburg.
2. Ballarino, G., & Perotti, L. (2011). Italy: Gradual changes and an uncertain autonomy. In M . Regini (Ed.) European universities and the challenge of the market (pp. 168-182). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
3. Barlow, M. (2011). Corpus linguistics and theoretical linguistics. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16, 3-44.
4. Brunsson, N., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000). Constructing organizations: The example of public sector reform. Organization Studies, 21, 721-746.
5. Capano, G. (2009). Looking for serendipity: The problematical reform of government within Italy's universities. Higher Education, 55, 481-504.
6. De Boer H. Enders J. Leistye L. 2007 Public sector reform in Dutch higher education: The organizational transformation of the university. Public Administration.85.27-46.
7. Durrell, M. (2012, December). ?Representativeness', ?bad data' and legitimate expectations. What can an electronic historical corpus tell us that we didn't actually know already (and how)? Paper presented to a conference on histo rical corpora held at the Johann Goethe University, Frankfurt.
8. Engwall, L., Kipping, M., & Usdiken, B. (2010). Public science systems, higher education and the trajectory of academic disciplines: Business studies in the United States and Europe. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 325-369). Oxford: Oxfo rd University Press.
9. Fries, P. H. (2010). Charles C. Fries, linguistics and corpus linguistics. ICAME Journal, 34, 89-119.
10. Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35, 790-807.
11. Gläser, J. (2010). From governance to authority relationš In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Rec onfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 357-370). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. Gläser, J., Lange, S., Laudel, G., & Schimank, U. (2010). The limits of universality: How field-specific epistemic conditions affect authority relations and their consequences. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in t he sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 291-324). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2007). Evaluation without evaluators: The impact of funding formulae on Australian University research. In R. Whitley & J. Gläser (Eds.), The changing governance of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems (Vol. 26, pp. 127-152). Dordrecht: Springer. (Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook
14. Hardie, A., & McEnery, T. (2010). On two traditions in corpus linguistics, and what they have in common. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15, 384-394.
15. Joerges, B., & Shinn, T. (Eds.). (2001). Instrumentation between science, state and industry (Vol. 22). Dordrecht: Kluwer. (Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook
16. Krücken, G. (2003). Learning the ?new, new thing': On the role of path dependency in university structures. Higher Education, 46, 315-339.
17. Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an organizational actor. In G. S. Drori, J. W. Meye r, & H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change (pp. 241-257). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18. Kushida, K., & Shimizu, K. (2013). Syncretism: The politics of Japan's financial reforms. Socio-Economic Review, 11, 337-369.
19. Laurence, H. (2001). Money rules: The new politics of finance in Britain and Japan. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
20. Lee, F. (2007). The re search assessment exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31, 309-325.
21. Lee, F., Pham, X., & Gu, G. (2013). The UK research assessment exercise and the narrowing of UK economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 37, 693-717.
22. Louvel, S. (2010). Changing authority relations within French academic research units since the 1960s: From patronage to partnership. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 184-210). Oxford: Oxford University Pres s.
23. Martin, B., & Whitley, R. (2010). The UK research assessment exercise: A case of regulatory capture In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationshi ps in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 51-80). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Meier, F., & Schimank, U. (2010). Mission now possible: Profile building and leadership in German universities. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 211-236). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Morris, N. (2010). Authority relations as condition for, and outcome of, shifts in governance: The limited impact of the UK research assessment exercise on the biosciences. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfi guring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 239-265). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Moscati R. 2001 Italian professors in transition. Higher Education. 41.103-129.
27. Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat , B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2004). Ivory tower and industrial innovation: University-industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh-Dole Act. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
28. Mukherjee, J. (2010). Corpu s linguistics versus corpus dogmatism-Pace Wolfgang Teubert. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15, 370-378.
29. Müller-Camen, M., & Salzgeber, S. (2005). Changes in academic work and the chair regime: The case of German business administration academics. Organization Studies, 26, 271-290.
30. Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, I., & Ferlie, E. (Eds.). (2009). University governance: Western European comparative perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.
31. Regini, M. (2011a). The challenge of the market. In M. Regini (Ed.), European universities and the challenge of the market (pp. 80-90). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
32. Regini, M. (Ed.). (2011b). European universities and the challenge of the market. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
33. Schimank, U. (2005). New public management and the academic profession: Reflections on the German situation. Minerva, 43, 361-376.
34. Smith, A., & Raven, R. (2012). What is protective space Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability. Research Policy, 41, 1025-1036.
35. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
36. Svartvik, J. (2007). Corpus linguistics 25+ years on. In R. Facchinetti (Ed.), Corpus linguistics 25 years on (pp. 11-25). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
37. Teubert, W. (2010). Our brave new world? International Journal of Linguistics, 15, 354-358.
38. Weingart, P., & Maasen, S. (2007). Elite through rankings-The emergence of the enterprising university. In R. Whitley & J. Gläser (Eds.), The changing governa nce of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems (Vol. 26, pp. 75-100). Dordrecht: Springer. (Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook
39. Whitley, R. (2000). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. (first edition 1984
40. Whitley, R. (2007). Changing governance of the public sciences: The consequences of establishing research evaluation systems for knowledge production in different countries and scientific fields. In R. Whitley & J. Gläser (Eds.), The changing governance of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems (Vol. 26, pp. 3-27). Dordrecht: Springer. (Sociology of the Science s Yearbook
41. Whitley, R. (2010). Reconfiguring the public sciences: The impact of governance changes on authority and innovation in public science systems. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowled ge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 3-47). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42. Whitley, R. (2012). Transforming universities: National conditions of their varied organisational actorhood. Minerva, 50, 493-510.
43. Whitley, R., & Gläser, J. (Eds.). (2007). The changing governance of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems (Vol. 26). Dordrecht: Springer. (Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook
44. Whitley, R., Gläser, J., & Engwall, L. (Eds.). (2010). Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45. Wilson, D. (2008). Reconfiguring biological sciences in the late twentieth century: A study of the University of Manchester. Manchester: Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester.
46. Wilson, D., & Lancelot, G. (200 8). Making way for molecular biology: Institutionalising and managing reform of biological science in a UK university during the 1980s and 1990s. Studies in the History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 39, 93-108.
47. Wright, S., & Ø rberg, J. (2009). Prometheus (on the) rebound? Freedom and the Danish steering system. In J. Huisman (Ed.), International perspectives on the governance of higher education (pp. 69-87). London: Routledge.
48. Ziman J. 2000 Real science: What it is and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.