The nature of the university

Higher Education

Volumn 69, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 947-961

  Lenartowicz, Marta ^a,b  

^a VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL   (Belgium)

^b JAGIELLONIAN UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

Author keywords

Autopoiesis; European university; Organizational identity; Resistance to change; Social system; Traditional university

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939874512     PISSN: 00181560     EISSN: 1573174X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10734-014-9815-0     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ackoff, R. L. (1971). Towards a system of systems concepts. Management Science,17(11), 661–671.
2. Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity. Research in Organizational Behavior,7, 263–295.
3. Asztalos, M. (1992). The faculty of theology. In: W. Ruegg (Ed.), The history of the university in Europe (Vol. 1). Universities in the Middle Ages (Chapter 14, pp. 409–441). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways to transformation. Oxford: IAU Press.
5. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1997). Narrating the organization: Dramas of institutional identity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
6. European Comission. (2003). Communication from the commission: The role of the universities in the Europe of Knowledge. Commission of the European Communities COM(2003) 58 final. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0058:FIN:en:pdf. Accessed November 3, 2013.
7. Griffin, R. W. (2011). Fundamentals of management. Mason: South Western Cengage Learning.
8. Hackman, J. R. (Ed.). (1990). Groups That Work (and Those that don’t). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
9. Hackman, J. R., & Coutu, D. (2009). Why teams don’t work. Harvard Business Review,87, 99–105.
10. Haskins, C. H. (1965). The rise of universities. Ithaca, NJ: Cornell University Press.
11. Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2002). The dynamics of organizational identity. Human Relations,. doi:10.1177/0018726702055008181.
12. Hobsbawm, E. (1992). Introduction: Inventing Traditions. In E. Hobsbawm & T. Ranger (Eds.), The invention of tradition (pp. 1–14). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Kerr, C. (1982). The uses of the university. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Krücken, G. (2003). Learning the ‘New. New Thing’: On the role of path dependency in university structures. Higher Education,. doi:10.1023/A:1025344413682.
15. Luhmann, N. (1986). The Autopoiesis of Social Systems. In F. Geyer & J. Van der Zeuwen (Eds.), Sociocybernetic paradoxes: Observation, control, and evolution of self-steering systems (pp. 172–192). London: SAGE Publications.
16. Luhmann, N. (1989). Ecological communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. Luhmann, N. (1990a). Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
18. Luhmann, N. (1990b). Political theory in the welfare state. Berlin: de Gruyter.
19. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
20. Luhmann, N. (2000). Organization und Entscheidung. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
21. Luhmann, N. (2009). Self-organization and autopoiesis. In B. Clarke & M. B. N. Hansen (Eds.), Emergence and embodiment: New essays on second-order systems theory (pp. 143–156). Durham: Duke University Press.
22. Magalhães, R., & Sanchez, R. (Eds.). (2009). Autopoiesis in organization: Theory and practice. Emerald: Bingley.
23. Maturana, H. R. (2002). Autopoiesis, structural coupling and cognition: A history of these and other notions in the biology of cognition. Cybernetics & Human Knowing,9(3–4), 5–34.
24. Maturana, H. R. (2010). Biology and Cognition. In H. R. Maturana & F. J. Varela (Eds.), Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living (pp. 1–58). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
25. Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (2010). Autopoiesis: The organization of the living. In H. R. Maturana & F. J. Varela (Eds.), Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living (pp. 59–123). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
26. Merton, R. K. (1965). On the shoulders of giants: A Shandean postscript. New York: Free Press.
27. Mingers, J. (1995). Self-producing systems: Implications and applications of autopoiesis. New York: Plenum.
28. Pedersen, O. (1997). The first universities: Studium generale and the origins of university education in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Poincaré, J. H. (1890). Sur le problème des trois corps et les équations de la dynamique. Divergence des séries de M: Lindstedt. Acta Mathematica. doi:10.1007/BF02392506.
30. Rüegg, W. (1992). Themes. In: W. Ruegg, (Ed.), The history of the university in Europe (Vol. 1). Universities in the Middle Ages (Chapter 1, pp. 4–14). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Santiago, R., Carvalho, T., & Relva, R. (2008). Research and the universities’ image. European Journal of Education,. doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2008.00370.x.
32. Seidl, D. (2004). Luhmann’s theory of autopoietic social systems, Munich business research. http://www.zfog.bwl.uni-muenchen.de/files/mitarbeiter/paper2004_2.pdf. Accessed September 15, 2012.
33. Seidl, D. (2005). Organisational identity and self-transformation: An autopoietic perspective. Hants: Ashgate.
34. Seidl, D. (2009). Productive misunderstandings between organization science and organization practice: The science–practice relation from the perspective of Niklas Luhmann’s theory of autopoietic systems. In R. Magalhães & R. Sanchez (Eds.), Autopoiesis in organization: Theory and practice (pp. 132–148). Emerald: Bingley.
35. Seidl, D., & Becker, K. H. (2006). Organizations as distinction generating and processing systems: Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Organization,. doi:10.1177/1350508406059635.
36. Sowa, K. Z. (2009). Gdy myślę uniwersytet. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
37. Spencer-Brown, G. (1969). Laws of form. London: Allen & Unwin.
38. Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally & Co.
39. Tierney, B. (Ed.). (1976). Great issues in Western civilization. New York: Random House.
40. von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller.
41. Vorley, T., & Nelles, J. (2008). (Re)Conceptualising the academy: Institutional development of and beyond the third mission. Higher Education Management and Policy,. doi:10.1787/17269822.
42. Weber, C. F. (2004). Ces grands privilèges: The symbolic use of written documents in the foundation and institutionalization processes of medieval universities. In M. Feingold (Ed.), History of Universities (Vol. XIX/1, pp. 12–62). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. Znaniecki, F. (1986). The social role of the man of knowledge. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.