Agency theory as a framework for higher education governance

The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 132-151

  Kivistö, Jussi ^a   Zalyevska, Inga ^b  

^a TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84978335847     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5     Document Type: Chapter

References (46)

1. Alchian, A. A. and H. Demsetz (1972) ‘Production, information costs, and economic organization’, The American Economic Review, 62(5), 777-795.
2. Alpert, D. (1985) ‘Performance and Paralysis: The Organizational Context of the American Research University’, The Journal of Higher Education, 56(3), 241-281.
3. Auld, D. (2010) ‘Strategic planning and the principal-agent issue in higher education leadership’, Academic Leadership, 8(3), 31-35.
4. Birnbaum, R. (1988) How Colleges Work. The Cybernetics of Academic Organization and Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass).
5. Blalark, F. J. (2012) Utilizing Principal-Agent Theory and Data Envelopment Analysis to Examine Efficiency of Resource Utilization in Undergraduate Education for Public and Private Non-Profit Four-Year Research Universities (Doctoral dissertation) (The University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://purl.umn.edu/136257).
6. Borgos, J. (2013) ‘Using principal-agent theory as a framework for analysis in evaluating the multiple stakeholders involved in the accreditation and quality assurance of international medical branch campuses’, Quality in Higher Education, 19(2), 173-190.
7. Clark, B. R. (1983) The Higher Education System. Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press).
8. Cuevas-Rodríguez, G., Gomez-Mejia, L. R. and R. M. Wiseman (2012), ‘Has agency theory run its course?: Making the theory more flexible to inform the management of reward systems’ Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20, 526-546
9. Donaldson, L. (1990) ‘The ethereal hand: Organizational economics and management theory’, Academy of Management Review, 15(3), 369-381.
10. Enders, J., de Boer, H. and E. Weyer (2013), ‘Regulatory autonomy and performance: The reform of higher education re-visited’ Higher Education, 65, 5-23
11. Eisenhardt, K. (1989) ‘Agency theory: An assessment and review’, Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74.
12. Ferris, J. M. (1991) ‘Contracting and higher education’, The Journal of Higher Education, 62(1), 1-24.
13. Geuna, A. (1999) The Economics of Knowledge Production: Funding and Structure of University research (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
14. Gomez-Meijia, L. R. and R. M. Wiseman (2006), ‘Commentary: Does agency theory have universal relevance? A reply to Lubatkin, Lane, Collin, and Very’ Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28, 81-88
15. Gornitzka, Å., Stensaker, B., Smeby, J-C. and H. de Boer (2004) ‘Contract arrangements in the Nordic countries: Solving the efficiency/effectiveness dilemma?’ Higher Education in Europe, 29(1), 87-101.
16. Harmon, M. M. and R. T. Mayer (1986) Organization Theory for Public Administration (Glenview: Scott, Foresman and Company).
17. Hölttä, S. (1995) Towards the Self-Regulative University (Doctoral dissertation) (Joensuu: University of Joensuu).
18. Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling (1976) ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure’, Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
19. Jensen, M. C. (1994) ‘Self-interest, altruism, incentives, and agency theory’, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 7(2), 40-45.
20. Jongbloed, B., de Boer, H., Enders, J. and J. File (2010) Progress in Higher Education Reform across Europe: Funding Reform. Volume 1, Executive Summary and main report (Enschede: CHEPS).
21. Kezar, A. (2006) ‘To use or not to use theory: Is that the question?’ in J. C. Smart (ed) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (pp. 283-344) (Dordrecht: Springer).
22. Kivistö, J. (2005) ‘Government-higher education institution relationship: Theoretical considerations from the perspective of agency theory’, Tertiary Education and Management, 11(1), 1-17.
23. Kivistö, J. (2007) Agency Theory as a Framework for the Government-University Relationship (Doctoral dissertation) (Tampere: Tampere University Press).
24. Kivistö, J. (2008) ‘Agency theory as a framework for government-university relationship: Assessment of the theory’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(4), 339-350.
25. Lane, J. E. (2005, November) Agency Problems with Complex Principals: State Oversight of Higher Education: A Theoretical Review of Agency Problems with Complex Principals, Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education (Philadelphia, United States).
26. Lane, J. E. (2007) ‘Spider web of oversight: Latent and manifest regulatory controls in higher education’, Journal of Higher Education, 78(6), 1-30.
27. Lane, J. E., Kinser, K. and D. Knox (2013), ‘Regulating cross-border higher education: A case study of the United States’ Higher Education Policy, 26, 147-172
28. Lane, J. E. and J. Kivistö (2008) ‘Interests, information, and incentives in higher education: Principal-agent theory and its potential applications to the study of higher education governance’, in J. C. Smart (ed) Higher education: Handbook of Theory and Research (pp. 141-179) (Dordrecht: Springer).
29. Liefner, I. (2003), ‘Funding, resource allocation, and performance in higher education systems’ Higher Education, 46, 469-489
30. Macias, A. (2012) A Case Study Using Principal-Agent Theory to Explore How a Public, Four-Year University Interacts with a System Office, Doctoral dissertation (Las Vegas: Digital Scholarship at University of Nevada, available from: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/).
31. Massy, W. F. (1996) ‘Reengineering resource allocation systems’, in W. F. Massy (ed) Resource Allocation in Higher Education (pp. 15-47) (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press).
32. McLendon, M. K. (2003) ‘The politics of higher education: Toward an expanded research agenda’, Educational Policy, 17(1), 165-191.
33. Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts (1992) Economics, Organization and Management (New Jersey: Prentice Hall).
34. Mitnick, B. M. (1975), ‘The Theory of Agency: The Policing "Paradox" and Regulatory Behaviour’ Public Choice, 24, 27-42
35. Moe, T. M. (1984) ‘The new economics of organization’, American Journal of Political Science, 28(4), 739-777.
36. Patterson, G. (2001) ‘The applicability of institutional goals to the university organisation’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 23(2), 159-169.
37. Perrow, C. (1986) Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay (New York: Random House).
38. Pratt, J. W. and R. J. Zeckhauser (1985) ‘Principals and agents: An overview’, in J. W. Pratt and R. J. Zeckhauser (eds) Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business (pp. 1-35) (Boston: Harvard Business School Press).
39. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1978) Corruption. A Study in Political Economy (New York: Academic Press).
40. Ross, S. A. (1973) ‘The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem’, American Economic Review, 63(2), 134-139.
41. Shapiro, S. P. (2005) ‘Agency theory’, Annual Review of Sociology, 31(3), 263-284.
42. Waterman, R. W. and K. J. Meier (1998) ‘Principal-agent models: An expansion’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2), 173-202.
43. Weick, K. E. (1976) ‘Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1-19.
44. Wilkesmann, U. (2013) ‘Effects of transactional and transformational governance on academic teaching: Empirical evidence from two types of higher education institutions’, Tertiary Education and Management, 19(4), 281-300.
45. Wilkesmann, U. and C. Schmid (2012), ‘The impacts of new governance on teaching at German universities: Findings from a national survey’ Higher Education, 63, 33-52
46. Williams, G. (1995) ‘The "marketization" of higher education: Reforms and potential reforms in higher education finance’, in D. D. Dill and B. Sporn (eds) Emerging Patterns of Social Demand and University Reform: Through a Glass Darkly (pp. 170-193) (Oxford: IAU Press/Pergamon).