lnu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 21) Show all publications
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J. & Tienari, J. (2018). Ethical dilemmas caused by performance measurement in universities: exploring the experiences of Finnish scholars. In: Paper presented at the 10th International EIASM Public Sector Conference, Lund, Sweden, September 4-6, 2018: . Paper presented at 10th International EIASM Public Sector Conference, Lund, Sweden, September 4-6, 2018. EIASM
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ethical dilemmas caused by performance measurement in universities: exploring the experiences of Finnish scholars
2018 (English)In: Paper presented at the 10th International EIASM Public Sector Conference, Lund, Sweden, September 4-6, 2018, EIASM , 2018Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
EIASM, 2018
National Category
Economics and Business
Research subject
Economy, Ledarskap, entreprenörskap och organisation
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79243 (URN)
Conference
10th International EIASM Public Sector Conference, Lund, Sweden, September 4-6, 2018
Available from: 2018-12-17 Created: 2018-12-17 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, T. J. & Kallio, K.-M. (2018). Revisiting professional bureaucracy: adoption of a new PM system in the Finnish universities. In: Paper presented at the Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management Journal Workshop: “Governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities' accountability”, Warsaw, Poland, October 25-26, 2018: . Paper presented at Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management Journal Workshop: “Governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities' accountability”, Warsaw, Poland, October 25-26, 2018.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Revisiting professional bureaucracy: adoption of a new PM system in the Finnish universities
2018 (English)In: Paper presented at the Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management Journal Workshop: “Governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities' accountability”, Warsaw, Poland, October 25-26, 2018, 2018Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
National Category
Economics and Business
Research subject
Economy, Ledarskap, entreprenörskap och organisation
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79242 (URN)
Conference
Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management Journal Workshop: “Governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities' accountability”, Warsaw, Poland, October 25-26, 2018
Available from: 2018-12-17 Created: 2018-12-17 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, T. J., Kallio, K.-M., Grossi, G. & Engblom, J. (2017). Measuring performance in Finnish universities: a longitudinal analysis of the institutional change. In: Paper presented at the Performance Measurement Association Australasia (PMAA) Conference 2017, Dunedin, New Zealand, March 1-3, 2017: . Paper presented at Performance Measurement Association Australasia (PMAA) Conference 2017, Dunedin, New Zealand, March 1-3, 2017. PMAA
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Measuring performance in Finnish universities: a longitudinal analysis of the institutional change
2017 (English)In: Paper presented at the Performance Measurement Association Australasia (PMAA) Conference 2017, Dunedin, New Zealand, March 1-3, 2017, PMAA , 2017Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Over the last thirty years, institutional and socio-economic development and the phenomenon ofglobalization have played a crucial role in changes seen in the higher education sector. Thesechanges have impacted aspects such as governance, organization, financing, management systems,and the academic and social legitimacy of universities (Burke & Associates, 2005).

Previous studies have focused on changes in performance measurement (PM) and the managementof universities, for example in the implementation of PM (Deem, 1998; Shun et al, 2006; Broadbent,2007), the assessment of academic performance (Kanji et al, 2010), the use of key performanceindicators (Ball & Halwachi, 1987; Lewis et al, 2000; Guthrie and Newman, 2007), and themeasurement of institutional and individual performance (Modell, 2003, 2005, 2006; Taylor, 2001;Kallio & Kallio, 2014; Ter Bogt & Scapens, 2012). The common factor in these studies seems to be atransition in institutional logics from academic logics to business logics (see Pettersen, 2015).

In line with this recent development, universities in Nordic countries have faced increasedcompetition for students, researchers, and resources and they are now managed using different PMtools (see Vakkuri & Meklin, 2003; Kallio et al., forthcoming). Universities are complex andheterogeneous organizations characterized by the multiplicity of ‘institutional logics’ that compete,shift, and interact (Friedland & Alford, 1991; Thornton & Ocasio, 2008).

The present study uses institutional logics to analyze how the renewal of the PM system in Finnishuniversities has led to a change in the operating logics of individual university employees. The studyis based on a survey conducted in 2015 including 672 respondents from three different universitiesin Finland. The preliminary analysis revealed that despite the way in which university employees’perceive the PM system in use, this system has initiated a change in the institutional logics ofindividual researchers and lecturers.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
PMAA, 2017
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68765 (URN)
Conference
Performance Measurement Association Australasia (PMAA) Conference 2017, Dunedin, New Zealand, March 1-3, 2017
Available from: 2017-11-15 Created: 2017-11-15 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J. & Grossi, G. (2017). Performance measurement in universities: ambiguities in the use of quality versus quantity in performance indicators. Public Money & Management, 37(4), 293-300
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Performance measurement in universities: ambiguities in the use of quality versus quantity in performance indicators
2017 (English)In: Public Money & Management, ISSN 0954-0962, E-ISSN 1467-9302, Vol. 37, no 4, p. 293-300Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Performance measurement (PM) is now common in Western universities. This is also the case in Finland, where a new funding scheme was implemented to ensure that quality was included in universities’ PM. However, this paper shows that the quality indicators in use are, in practice, quantitative. The paper is based on a large survey and has implications for university PM systems in Finland and internationally.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2017
Keywords
Academic publishing, Finland, performance measurement, universities’ economy, efficiency and effectiveness
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68746 (URN)10.1080/09540962.2017.1295735 (DOI)000399607100014 ()
Available from: 2017-11-15 Created: 2017-11-15 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, K.-M., Blomberg, A., Roslender, R. & Kallio, T. J. (2017). Under surveillance?: performance measurement, governance and self-governance in academic work. In: Paper presented at the 21st International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Budapest, Hungary, April 19-21, 2017: . Paper presented at The 21st International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Budapest, Hungary, April 19-21, 2017. IRSPM
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Under surveillance?: performance measurement, governance and self-governance in academic work
2017 (English)In: Paper presented at the 21st International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Budapest, Hungary, April 19-21, 2017, IRSPM , 2017Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

During the last decade or so, performance measurement (PM) has become an everyday activity in the higher education sector. Owing to the adoption of PM, previously collegial university management has taken steps towards a managerial model that emphasizes accountability, efficiency and cost-effectiveness. However, the new judgmental PM systems seem to undermine important aspects of academic work, such as creativity and quality of work and cause increased stress and pressure to publish.

Foucault invites us to look at the ways various techniques of power and control impact and structure human behavior. His concept of ‘governmentality’ refers to the organizational governance, but also to self-governance, which the individuals under the organizational governance engage in. According to Foucault individuals internalize the norms, ideals and targets of the control system, and start to self-discipline and regulate their own behavior accordingly. Internalizing the control mechanisms makes individuals aim at achieving a ‘normative self’, which at least in the context of academic work remains out of reach for many academics. Somewhat surprisingly, however, it has been found that found that despite dissatisfaction and disquiet, most academics are complicit with the demands of performance measurement. However, the genuine interest in the work itself – the labor of love – is being stretched and at the risk of being lost. 

In this paper, we use the framework of Michel Foucault in looking at the ways in which various techniques of control impact and structure human behavior, and aim at problematizing the use of PM practices in the context of academic work. We examine the PM systems introduced into universities in the Foucauldian sense as forms of surveillance and self-surveillance, and explore how academics deal with the norms and ideals of the PM system. The empirical data of the study consists of open-ended questions collected from a large survey for university employees collected in 2015 with 672 respondents. The analysis is still ongoing, but the preliminary results show that the PM impacts the university employees’ relationship with their work. Partly, it seems to have guided the academics’ working towards the ideals of PM, yet there are also those who resist the PM ideals. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IRSPM, 2017
Keywords
Performance measurement, governmentality, self-governance, universities, Foucault
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68763 (URN)
Conference
The 21st International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Budapest, Hungary, April 19-21, 2017
Available from: 2017-11-15 Created: 2017-11-15 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, K.-M., Blomberg, A., Roslender, R. & Kallio, T. J. (2017). Under surveillance?: performance measurement, governance and self-governance in academic work. In: Paper presented at Hallinnon ja kuntatutkimuksen tiedepäivät 2017, Tampere, Finland, November 16-17, 2017: . Paper presented at Hallinnon ja kuntatutkimuksen tiedepäivät 2017, Tampere, Finland, November 16-17, 2017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Under surveillance?: performance measurement, governance and self-governance in academic work
2017 (English)In: Paper presented at Hallinnon ja kuntatutkimuksen tiedepäivät 2017, Tampere, Finland, November 16-17, 2017, 2017Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

During the last decade, performance measurement (PM) has become an everyday activity in higher education. Owing to the adoption of PM, previously collegial university management has taken steps towards a managerial model. As a result, the new judgmental PM systems seem to undermine important aspects of academic work, such as creativity and quality of work and cause increased stress and pressure.

Foucault invites us to look at the ways various techniques of power and control impact and structure human behavior. His concept of ‘governmentality’ refers to the organizational governance, but also to self-governance, which the individuals under the organizational governance engage in. According to Foucault individuals internalize the norms, ideals and targets of the control system, and start to self-discipline and regulate their own behavior accordingly. Internalizing the control mechanisms makes individuals aim at achieving a ‘normative self’, which at least in the context of academic work remains out of reach for many academics. It has been found that found that despite dissatisfaction and disquiet, most academics are complicit with the demands of performance measurement. However, the genuine interest in the work itself is being stretched and at the risk of being lost.

We use the framework of Foucault in looking at the ways in which various techniques of control impact and structure human behavior, and aim at problematizing the use of PM practices in the context of academic work. The empirical data of the study consists of open-ended questions from a large survey for university employees collected in 2015 with 672 respondents. The results show that the PM impacts the university employees’ relationship with their work.

Keywords
Performance measurement, governmentality, self-governance, universities, Foucault
National Category
Economics and Business
Research subject
Economy, Business administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79212 (URN)
Conference
Hallinnon ja kuntatutkimuksen tiedepäivät 2017, Tampere, Finland, November 16-17, 2017
Available from: 2018-12-14 Created: 2018-12-14 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J., Tienari, J. & Hyvönen, T. (2016). Ethos at stake: performance management and academic work in universities. Human Relations, 69(3), 685-709
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ethos at stake: performance management and academic work in universities
2016 (English)In: Human Relations, ISSN 0018-7267, E-ISSN 1741-282X, Vol. 69, no 3, p. 685-709Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Higher education has been subject to substantial reforms as new forms of performance management are implemented in universities across the world. Extant research suggests that in many cases performance management systems have disrupted academic life. We complement this literature with an extensive mixed methods study of how the performance management system is understood by academics across universities and departments in Finland at a time when new management principles and practices are being forcefully introduced. While our survey results enabled us to map the generally critical and negative view that Finnish scholars have of performance management, the qualitative inquiry allowed us to disentangle how and why our respondents resent the ways and means of measuring their work, the assumptions that underlie the measurement, and the university ideal on which the performance management system is rooted. Most significantly, we highlight how the proliferation of performance management can be seen as a catalyst for changing the very ethos of what it is to be an academic and to do academic work.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2016
Keywords
academic careers, academic work, ethos, knowledge-intensive organizations, management, organizational theory, performance appraisal and performance feedback, performance management, public management, university
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68747 (URN)10.1177/0018726715596802 (DOI)000371147800007 ()
Available from: 2017-11-15 Created: 2017-11-15 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J. & Grossi, G. (2016). Measuring performance in Finnish universities: struggling with institutional complexity. In: Paper presented at the 20th International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Hong Kong, China, April 13-15, 2016: . Paper presented at The 20th International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Hong Kong, China, April 13-15, 2016. IRSPM
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Measuring performance in Finnish universities: struggling with institutional complexity
2016 (English)In: Paper presented at the 20th International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Hong Kong, China, April 13-15, 2016, IRSPM , 2016Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Over the last thirty years, institutional and socio-economic development and globalization have played a crucial role in changes seen in the higher education sector. These changes have impacted aspects such as governance, organization, financing, management systems, and the academic and social legitimacy of universities (Burke & Associates, 2005).

Previous studies have focused on changes in performance measurement (PM) and the management of universities, for example in the implementation of PM, the assessment of academic performance (Lewis, 2014), the use of key performance indicators (Guthrie & Neuman, 2007), and the measurement of institutional and individual performance (Modell, 2006; Kallio & Kallio, 2014; ter Bogt & Scapens, 2012). The common factor in these studies seems to be a transition in institutional logics from academic to business logics (Pettersen, 2015).

In line with this recent development, universities in Nordic countries have faced increased competition for students, researchers, and resources and they are now managed using different PM tools (Vakkuri & Meklin, 2003; Kallio et al., forthcoming). Universities are complex and heterogeneous organizations characterized by the multiplicity of ‘institutional logics’ that compete, shift, and interact (Thornton & Ocasio, 2008). 

The present study uses institutional logics to analyze how the renewal of the PM system in Finnish universities has led to a change in the operating logics of individual university employees. The study is based on a survey conducted in 2015 including 672 respondents from three different universities in Finland. The preliminary analysis revealed that despite the way in which university employees’ perceive the PM system in use, this system has initiated a change in the institutional logics of individual researchers and lecturers.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IRSPM, 2016
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68766 (URN)
Conference
The 20th International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) Conference, Hong Kong, China, April 13-15, 2016
Available from: 2017-11-15 Created: 2017-11-15 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, T. J., Kallio, K.-M. & Grossi, G. (2015). Ambiguities in university performance measurement: the Finnish case. In: Paper presented at 23rd Nordic Academy of Management Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 12-14, 2015: . Paper presented at 23rd Nordic Academy of Management Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 12-14, 2015. Nordic Academy of Management
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ambiguities in university performance measurement: the Finnish case
2015 (English)In: Paper presented at 23rd Nordic Academy of Management Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 12-14, 2015, Nordic Academy of Management , 2015Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In recent years, performance measurement (PM) tools and practices have been implemented at literally hundreds of universities in Western countries. Accordingly, PM practices have been adopted in practice in all countries infected by New Public Management (NPM) doctrine. The seemingly well-intentioned reforms—designed to improve universities’ economy, efficiency and effectiveness—have led to widespread criticism among scholars, ranging from fierce resistance and loud outbursts  to somewhat more analytical and theoretical arguments. Most scholars who study university management in general and university PM systems in particular have recognized there are many more cons than pros in the recent developments. Scholars see PM systems in universities as structures of attention rather than formal systems of accountability.

This study reports empirical findings for university PM in Finland and concentrates on the problems of measuring quality aspects in universities and in academic work. As in many other Western countries, the Finnish higher education sector has been broadly affected by NPM-related reforms. However, Finnish universities are especially responsive to new government reforms since, by law, all universities are publicly owned and administered.

The principal empirical data of this study were gathered in 2010 and 2012 from 12 faculties in three Finnish multidisciplinary universities. The data were collected with an Internet-based survey questionnaire sent to all employees in the chosen faculties. The answers to the following open-survey question were used as the principal date: “What kind of quantitative and qualitative indicators should be used to assess performance in universities?”

This study reports which PM indicators Finnish university personnel would prefer in their own work in terms of quality and quantity, and how the Finnish Ministry of Education & Culture (MOE) has implemented quality aspects in the ministry’s PM system. The MOE’s PM systems, which define the actual amount of funding an individual university receives, have largely been copied by individual universities’ and faculties’ internal PM systems that evaluate academics’ performance.

In light of the responses, the issue of qualitative and quantitative measurements is crucial. The current indicators set by the MOE are mainly quantitative, which seems to upset many. In the responses, the problems of university PM are highlighted. For instance, different degrees or research activities are almost impossible to measure together, but in the Finnish PM system, they are, in a way that may seem unproblematic for someone not familiar with the realities of university work. In reality, the same performance criteria might demand very different types of resources in different faculties. The funding scheme for universities is vast and complicated, and different types of outputs and their respective indicators are only loosely coupled with different types of funding.

If we look more closely at the MOE’s university funding scheme, roughly speaking, all quality indicators are quantitative. Although the original purpose of the University Act was to provide independence to individual universities to define their own practices and policies, curiously it seems that the university reforms have, instead, increased homogeneity in PM practices in the Finnish university field.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Nordic Academy of Management, 2015
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68774 (URN)
Conference
23rd Nordic Academy of Management Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 12-14, 2015
Available from: 2017-11-16 Created: 2017-11-16 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J. & Grossi, G. (2015). Performance measurement in universities: quantity vs. quality. In: Paper presented at the 8th Conference on Performance Measurement and Management Control, Nice, France, September 30-October 2, 2015: . Paper presented at 8th Conference on Performance Measurement and Management Control, Nice, France, September 30-October 2, 2015. EIASM
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Performance measurement in universities: quantity vs. quality
2015 (English)In: Paper presented at the 8th Conference on Performance Measurement and Management Control, Nice, France, September 30-October 2, 2015, EIASM , 2015Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In recent years, performance measurement (PM) tools and practices have been implemented at literally hundreds of universities in Western countries. Accordingly, PM practices have been adopted in practice in all countries infected by New Public Management (NPM) doctrine. The seemingly well-intentioned reforms—designed to improve universities’ economy, efficiency and effectiveness—have led to widespread criticism among scholars, ranging from fierce resistance and loud outbursts to somewhat more analytical and theoretical arguments. Most scholars who study university management in general and university PM systems in particular have recognized there are many more cons than pros in the recent developments. Scholars see PM systems in universities as structures of attention rather than formal systems of accountability.

This study reports empirical findings for university PM in Finland and concentrates on the problems of measuring quality aspects in universities and in academic work. The principal empirical data of this study were gathered in 2010 and 2012 from 12 faculties in three Finnish multidisciplinary universities. The data were collected with an Internet-based survey questionnaire sent to all employees in the chosen faculties.

This study reports which PM indicators Finnish university personnel would prefer in their own work in terms of quality and quantity, and how the Finnish Ministry of Education & Culture (MOE) has implemented quality aspects in the ministry’s PM system. The MOE’s PM systems, which define the actual amount of funding an individual university receives, have largely been copied by individual universities’ and faculties’ internal PM systems that evaluate academics’ performance. The funding scheme for universities is vast and complicated, and different types of outputs and their respective indicators are only loosely coupled with different types of funding.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
EIASM, 2015
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-68772 (URN)
Conference
8th Conference on Performance Measurement and Management Control, Nice, France, September 30-October 2, 2015
Available from: 2017-11-16 Created: 2017-11-16 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-8305-6699

Search in DiVA

Show all publications