The effect of management practices on academic The effect of management practices on academic research performance:research performance:

Evidence from AustraliaEvidence from Australia

Dr. Maarja BeerkensCHEPS, University of Twente

EAIR Forum, 23-26 August 2009, Vilnius

The effect of research management The effect of research management

• Administrators reluctant to accept that they “manage” research (Taylor 2006 ), but increasingly professional management (performance measurement, benchmarking, HRM etc).

• Interesting question from a theoretical and practical perspective: – “Management fads” (Staw and Epstein 2000, Birnbaum 2000)– Organizational peculiarities: intrinsic motivation, multiple

stakeholders, hardly measurable outcomes, “organized anarchies”

– Practical applications: government pressures

• Existing research:– studies the effect of NPM generically: on productivity, the length

of publications, research-teaching nexus, the type of research, etc.

But what instruments specifically change the behavior? (management approach) – ignores control groups: but is it the organizational practices that

change the behavior or simply a new external environment? – is mostly qualitative

The study questionThe study question

• Do organizational management practices increase academic productivity?

• What specific practices increase academic productivity?

Management practicesManagement practices

• Research leadership (pro Vice Chancellors)• Strategic planning• Research centers• Intellectual property and ethics issues

• Faculty reviews• Performance based funding • Benchmarking • Concentration• Upgrading PhD qualifications• Research support• Research incentives

Management practicesManagement practices

• Research leadership (pro Vice Chancellors)• Strategic planning• Research centers• Intellectual property and ethics issues

• Faculty reviews• Performance based funding • Benchmarking • Concentration• Upgrading PhD qualifications• Research support• Research incentives

Faculty level

University level

Individual level

Methodological approachMethodological approach

• Look Australian universities since the start of the reforms (1992-2003)

• Two periods: 1992-1998 and 1999-2003

Model

Dependent variable: publications (and citations) [ISI]

Explanatory variable: management practices [Audit reports]

Controls: - staff qualifications (PhD, seniority, age)

- teaching commitment (student/staff ratio) - work organization (teaching only staff)

- disciplinary mix

Estimation problemsEstimation problems

Better performing universities tend to have more advanced research management practices. This is not necessarily causal!

1. OLS - unobserved heterogeneity.

2. Fixed effects - since management practices are time invariant, difficult to separate the effect of practices and other effects if correlated

3. Growth model

4. Difference-in-difference model (2 periods)

Results: 1992-1998 (OLS and Results: 1992-1998 (OLS and Growth)Growth)

Management Practices not sign.PhD +Age, age-sq +,-Senior staffStudents per staffTeaching staff Medical school +Publications t-1 +

Results: 1999-2003 (OLS and Results: 1999-2003 (OLS and Growth)Growth)

Management Practices +PhD +Age, age-sq +,-Senior staff +Students per staff -Teaching staffMedical school +Publications t-1 +

Which practices are most effective?Which practices are most effective?

Research management practices

OLS FE Growth

Incentives - - -

Support -

Upgrading qualific. -

Faculty reviews + +

Performance budgeting + + +

Concentration -

Benchmarking + +

Results: 1992-2003 (Difference in Results: 1992-2003 (Difference in difference)difference)

Management Practices +PhD +Age, age-sq +,-Senior staffStudents per staffTeaching staff - * Results do not change much when using

citations.

ConclusionsConclusions

• Research management seems to have an effect.

• Practices that target the multi-level structure of the university are most effective.

• Individual incentives do not seem effective.

• The effects are nuanced and appear only in a more mature/stable environment.