Abstract
AbstractThe article examines how higher education institutions respond to ambiguous governance instruments. A key focus is how ambiguity is tackled in the interpretation and implementation processes. Building on theoretical perspectives from institutional analysis of organisations, an empirical point of departure is the analysis of ten higher education institutions in Norway and their response on the introduction of development agreements. The findings point out two important dimensions in analysing implementation processes: focusing on the change dynamics and the degree of internal integration. In combination, these point towards distinct patterns in organisational responses to ambiguous policy instruments.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference47 articles.
1. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543–571.
2. Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (2015). How does collaborative governance scale? Policy & Politics, 43(3), 315–329.
3. Benneworth, P., de Boer, H., Cremonini, L., Jongbloed, B., Leisyte, L., Vossensteyn, H., & De Weert, E. (2011). Quality-related funding, performance agreements and profiling in higher education: An international comparative study. CHEPS.
4. Bingham, L. B. (2011). Collaborative governance. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of governance (pp. 386–401). Sage.
5. Bromley, P., Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2012). Decoupling revisited: Common pressures, divergent strategies in the US nonprofit sector. M@n@gement, 15(5), 469–501.