Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMoodie, Gavinen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T14:15:25Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T14:15:25Z
dc.date.issued2002en_US
dc.date.modified2007-07-25T04:20:18Z
dc.identifier.issn08188068en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/6625
dc.description.abstractAcademic promotion is a curious fish. Most employees - including general staff in higher education institutions - would expect that an appointment to a middle management position (with responsibility for managing 20 staff and a budget of $2 million) would be made for the medium term if not indefinitely, and only after systematic selection from amongst candidates with extensive preparation for the post. On the other hand, they would expect that a pay increase for meritorious performance, if available at all, would be decided annually, largely at the discretion of the employee's supervisor, following a largely informal process. For academics, however, the position is almost completely reversed. As we shall see in greater detail below, appointment as head of a school or department is usually short term, still largely by an informal process for which the main qualification seems not to be management experience and expertise, but the confidence of one's peers. Heads of school might be described in short hand as collegial appointments, although to a managerialist they would appear to be the amateurish appointment of amateurs. In contrast, academics' pay increases for meritorious performance - academic promotions - are made after the most thorough scrutiny of applicants' performance and academic merit. This paper compares the processes for appointing heads of academic schools or departments with those for promoting academic staff in Australian higher education institutions. It considers the future of these largely collegial processes within increasing managerialist institutions.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.format.extent62829 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherNational Tertiary Education Unionen_US
dc.publisher.placeMelbourneen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.nteu.org.au/publications/aur/4502en_AU
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom18en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto22en_US
dc.relation.ispartofedition2002en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue2en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalAustralian Universities' Reviewen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume45en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode330104en_US
dc.titleFish or fowl? Collegial processes in managerialist institutionsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.facultyArts, Education & Law Group, School of Education and Professional Studiesen_US
gro.rights.copyright© The Author(s) 2002 Griffith University. This is the author-manuscript version of the paper. It is posted here with permission of the copyright owner for your personal use only. No further distributions permitted. For information about this journal please refer to the publisher's website or contact the author.en_US
gro.date.issued2002
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record