A Bibliometric Review of Institutional Theory on Higher Education Institutions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24023/FutureJournal/2175-5825/2018.v10i3.384Keywords:
Higher education, Institution, Bibliometric Coupling, Management, BusinessAbstract
In this study, we explore how institutional theory and its many subareas contributes, are utilized and applied to the area of higher education management’s research by their scholars. For this purpose, we performed a bibliometric analysis on 659 papers extracted from Web of Science database. As results we indicate five main clusters as foundation to the field: institutional theory; economic impact of entrepreneurship and universities; competitiveness of universities as businesses; service quality and; measurement and development of models for higher education. And 7 main clusters as subfields of research: Institutional Multiplicity; Institutional pressures on Higher Education; Higher Education Efficiency; Leadership in Higher Education; Entrepreneurial Higher Education; Academy & Professional relations and; Quality and Satisfaction in Higher Education.
Downloads
References
Agasisti, T., & Catalano, G. (2006). Governance models of university systems - Towards quasi-markets? Tendencies and perspectives: A European comparison. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(3), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800600980056
Alam, G. M. (2009). Can governance and regulatory control ensure private higher education as business or public goods in Bangladesh ? African Journal of Business Management, 3(12), 890–906. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM09.282
Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315307303542
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2009). The measurement of the construct satisfaction in higher education. Service Industries Journal, 29(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060802294995
Aristovnik, A. (2012). The relative efficiency of education and R&D expenditures in the new EU member states. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(5), 832–848. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2011.620167
Audretsch, D. B., & Fritsch, M. (1994). The Geography of Firm Births in Germany. Regional Studies, 28(4), 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409412331348326
Audretsch, D. B., & Fritsch, M. (2002). Growth regimes over time and space. Regional Studies, 36(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400220121909
Bana e Costa, C. A., & Oliveira, M. D. (2012). A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation. Omega, 40(4), 424–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2011.08.006
Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E., & Zaim, S. (2008). An instrument for measuring the critical factors of TQM in Turkish higher education. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 19(6), 551–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360802023921
Benner, M. J., & Ranganathan, R. (2012). Offsetting illegitimacy? How pressures from securities analysts influence inbumbents in the face of new technologies. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0530
Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2005). Exploring size and agglomeration effects on public research productivity. Scientometrics, 63(1), 87–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0205-3
Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. a. (1992). Measuring Quality : A Reexamination and. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252296
Dacin, M. T. (1997). Isomorphism in Context : the Power and Prescription of Institutional Norms. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 46–81.
Dehler, G. E. (2009). Prospects and possibilities of critical management education: Critical beings and a pedagogy of critical action. Management Learning, 40(1), 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507608099312
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823–833. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6
Fidgeon, P. R. (2010). Tourism education and curriculum design: A time for consolidation and review? Tourism Management, 31(6), 699–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.05.019
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goodall, A. H. (2009). Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities. Research Policy, 38(7), 1079–1092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.04.002
Gordon, I., Hamilton, E., & Jack, S. (2012). A study of a university-led entrepreneurship education programme for small business owner/managers. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 24(9–10), 767–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2011.566377
Gosling, J., Bolden, R., & Petrov, G. (2009). Distributed leadership in higher education: What does it accomplish? Leadership, 5(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715009337762
Greenwood, R., Diaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521–539. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453
Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. (2008). Handbook of Organizational institutionalism. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational institutionalism. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387.n28
Grönroos, C. (1984). A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications Christian Grönroos, Article. European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090910954864
Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.008
Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2012). The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9171-x
Heitor, M., Horta, H., & Mendonça, J. (2014). Developing human capital and research capacity: Science policies promoting brain gain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.008
Horta, H. (2013). Deepening our understanding of academic inbreeding effects on research information exchange and scientific output: New insights for academic based research. Higher Education, 65(4), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9559-7
Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (1993). Measuring the Research Performance of UK Economics Departments : An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis Geraint Johnes ; Jill Johnes. Oxford Economic Papers, 45(2), 332–347.
Kirby, D. A., Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2011). Making universities more entrepreneurial: Development of a model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28(3), 302–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/CJAS.220
Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Wild, A. (2015). The institutionalization of third stream activities in UK higher education: The role of discourse and metrics. British Journal of Management, 26(1), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12069
Lockett, N., Kerr, R., & Robinson, S. (2008). Multiple perspectives on the challenges for knowledge transfer between higher education institutions and industry. International Small Business Journal, 26(6), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242608096088
Lounsbury, M. (2008). Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4–5), 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.04.001
Marginson, S. (2007). The public/private divide in higher education: A global revision. Higher Education, 53(3), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-8230-y
Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push‐pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540210418403
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
Paradeise, C., & Thoenig, J. C. (2013). Academic Institutions in Search of Quality: Local Orders and Global Standards. Organization Studies, 34(2), 189–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612473550
Parasuraman, a, Zeithaml, V. a, & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. American Marketing Association, 49(4), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251430
Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. (2009). The Institution-Based View as a Third Leg for a Strategy Tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2009.43479264
Pittaway, L., Rodriguez-Falcon, E., Aiyegbayo, O., & King, A. (2011). The role of entrepreneurship clubs and societies in entrepreneurial learning. International Small Business Journal, 29(1), 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242610369876
Rebora, G., & Turri, M. (2013). The UK and Italian research assessment exercises face to face. Research Policy, 42(9), 1657–1666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.06.009
Research policy. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.journals.elsevier.com/research-policy/
Saisana, M., D’Hombres, B., & Saltelli, A. (2011). Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications. Research Policy, 40(1), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.003
Schubert, T. (2009). Empirical observations on New Public Management to increase efficiency in public research-Boon or bane? Research Policy, 38(8), 1225–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.007
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPER.2002.4312460
Agasisti, T., & Catalano, G. (2006). Governance models of university systems - Towards quasi-markets? Tendencies and perspectives: A European comparison. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(3), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800600980056
Alam, G. M. (2009). Can governance and regulatory control ensure private higher education as business or public goods in Bangladesh ? African Journal of Business Management, 3(12), 890–906. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM09.282
Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315307303542
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2009). The measurement of the construct satisfaction in higher education. Service Industries Journal, 29(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060802294995
Aristovnik, A. (2012). The relative efficiency of education and R&D expenditures in the new EU member states. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(5), 832–848. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2011.620167
Audretsch, D. B., & Fritsch, M. (1994). The Geography of Firm Births in Germany. Regional Studies, 28(4), 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409412331348326
Audretsch, D. B., & Fritsch, M. (2002). Growth regimes over time and space. Regional Studies, 36(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400220121909
Bana e Costa, C. A., & Oliveira, M. D. (2012). A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation. Omega, 40(4), 424–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2011.08.006
Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E., & Zaim, S. (2008). An instrument for measuring the critical factors of TQM in Turkish higher education. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 19(6), 551–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360802023921
Benner, M. J., & Ranganathan, R. (2012). Offsetting illegitimacy? How pressures from securities analysts influence inbumbents in the face of new technologies. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0530
Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2005). Exploring size and agglomeration effects on public research productivity. Scientometrics, 63(1), 87–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0205-3
Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. a. (1992). Measuring Quality : A Reexamination and. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252296
Dacin, M. T. (1997). Isomorphism in Context : the Power and Prescription of Institutional Norms. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 46–81.
Dehler, G. E. (2009). Prospects and possibilities of critical management education: Critical beings and a pedagogy of critical action. Management Learning, 40(1), 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507608099312
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823–833. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6
Fidgeon, P. R. (2010). Tourism education and curriculum design: A time for consolidation and review? Tourism Management, 31(6), 699–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.05.019
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goodall, A. H. (2009). Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities. Research Policy, 38(7), 1079–1092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.04.002
Gordon, I., Hamilton, E., & Jack, S. (2012). A study of a university-led entrepreneurship education programme for small business owner/managers. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 24(9–10), 767–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2011.566377
Gosling, J., Bolden, R., & Petrov, G. (2009). Distributed leadership in higher education: What does it accomplish? Leadership, 5(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715009337762
Greenwood, R., Diaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521–539. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453
Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. (2008). Handbook of Organizational institutionalism. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational institutionalism. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387.n28
Grönroos, C. (1984). A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications Christian Grönroos, Article. European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090910954864
Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.008
Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2012). The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9171-x
Heitor, M., Horta, H., & Mendonça, J. (2014). Developing human capital and research capacity: Science policies promoting brain gain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.008
Horta, H. (2013). Deepening our understanding of academic inbreeding effects on research information exchange and scientific output: New insights for academic based research. Higher Education, 65(4), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9559-7
Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (1993). Measuring the Research Performance of UK Economics Departments : An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis Geraint Johnes ; Jill Johnes. Oxford Economic Papers, 45(2), 332–347.
Kirby, D. A., Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2011). Making universities more entrepreneurial: Development of a model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28(3), 302–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/CJAS.220
Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Wild, A. (2015). The institutionalization of third stream activities in UK higher education: The role of discourse and metrics. British Journal of Management, 26(1), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12069
Lockett, N., Kerr, R., & Robinson, S. (2008). Multiple perspectives on the challenges for knowledge transfer between higher education institutions and industry. International Small Business Journal, 26(6), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242608096088
Lounsbury, M. (2008). Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4–5), 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.04.001
Marginson, S. (2007). The public/private divide in higher education: A global revision. Higher Education, 53(3), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-8230-y
Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push‐pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540210418403
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
Paradeise, C., & Thoenig, J. C. (2013). Academic Institutions in Search of Quality: Local Orders and Global Standards. Organization Studies, 34(2), 189–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612473550
Parasuraman, a, Zeithaml, V. a, & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. American Marketing Association, 49(4), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251430
Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. (2009). The Institution-Based View as a Third Leg for a Strategy Tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2009.43479264
Pittaway, L., Rodriguez-Falcon, E., Aiyegbayo, O., & King, A. (2011). The role of entrepreneurship clubs and societies in entrepreneurial learning. International Small Business Journal, 29(1), 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242610369876
Rebora, G., & Turri, M. (2013). The UK and Italian research assessment exercises face to face. Research Policy, 42(9), 1657–1666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.06.009
Research policy. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.journals.elsevier.com/research-policy/
Saisana, M., D’Hombres, B., & Saltelli, A. (2011). Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications. Research Policy, 40(1), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.003
Schubert, T. (2009). Empirical observations on New Public Management to increase efficiency in public research-Boon or bane? Research Policy, 38(8), 1225–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.007
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPER.2002.4312460
Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational Endowments and the Performance of University Start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.1.154.14280
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2
Stryker, R. (2000). Legitimacy Proces as Institutional Politics : Implications for Theory and Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 17, 179–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0733-558X(00)17006-5
Suárez-Barraza, M. F., Smith, T., & Dahlgaard-Park, S. M. (2012). Lean Service: A literature analysis and classification. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(3–4), 359–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2011.637777
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080331
Thanassoulis, E., Kortelainen, M., Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (2011). Costs and efficiency of higher education institutions in England: A DEA analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62(7), 1282–1297. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2010.68
Thomas, R. (2012). Business elites, universities and knowledge transfer in tourism. Tourism Management, 33(3), 553–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2011.06.009
Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958‐1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. https://doi.org/10.1086/210361
Williams, C. (2010). Understanding the essential elements of work-based learning and its relevance to everyday clinical practice. Journal of Nursing Management, 18(6), 624–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01141.x
Yiu, D., & Makino, S. (2002). The Choice Between Joint Venture and Wholly Owned Subsidiary: An Institutional Perspective. Organization Science, 13(6), 667–683. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.6.667.494
Zafiropoulos, C., & Vrana, V. (2008). Service quality assessment in a Greek higher education institute. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 9(1), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.3846/1611-1699.2008.9.33-45
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality. Source Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31–46. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1251929%5Cnhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
Zhang, H., Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2013). Building global-class universities: Assessing the impact of the 985 Project. Research Policy, 42(3), 765–775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.10.003
Zietsma, C. E., Groenewgen, P., Logue, D., & Hinings, C. R. (2017). Field or Fields? Building the scaffolding for cumulation of research on institutional fields. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 1–95. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0052
Zilber, T. B. (2011). Institutional Multiplicity in Practice: A Tale of Two High-Tech Conferences in Israel. Organization Science, 22(6), 1539–1559. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0611
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.
