The status games they play: unpacking the dynamics of organisational status competition in higher education
The article uses the concept of organisational status to explore how universities respond to intensifying competition. Although status is not a novel phenomenon in higher education, recent insights show that the concerns with vertical positioning, both nationally and internationally, are gaining prominence with a growing number of universities worldwide. As global competition becomes as fierce as ever, universities’ efforts to maintain or advance their position vis-à-vis each other are becoming more salient. The paper draws from extant literature to identify three mechanisms of organisational status construction—categories, intermediaries and affiliations—and offers a set of propositions as to how universities of different status rank are expected to act when seeking to maintain or advance their status. Such activities, it is argued, shape status hierarchies, which, in turn, affect the scope of organisational action. The article contributes to the discussions on competition in higher-education literature and, more broadly, to the theory of organisational action in the tradition of sociological institutionalism.
KeywordsUniversities Organisations Competition Status Hierarchies Organisational sociology Sociological institutionalism
I would like to thank Dominik Antonowicz, Gary Barron, Meta Gorup, Jeroen Huisman, Renze Kolster, Georg Krücken, Jelle Mampaey, Leopold Ringel, Marco Seeber, Daniel Semper, Tobias Werron and two anonymous reviewers for having read previous versions of the paper and invaluably contributing to its improvement. All errors are my own.
Compliance with ethical standards
The author acknowledges the financial support from the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO), grant number G.OC42.13N.
- Abrams, D., Hogg, M. A., & Marques, J. M. (2004). A social psychological framework for understanding social inclusion and exclusion. In D. Abrams, M. A. Hogg, & J. M. Marques (Eds.), Social psychology of inclusion and exclusion (pp. 1–24). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Baum, J. A. C., & Lant, T. K. (2003). Hits and Misses: Managers’ (Mis)Categorization of Competitors in the Manhattan Hotel Industry. In J. A. C. Baum & O. Sorenson (Eds.), Geography and Strategy (pp. 119–156). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
- Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Piscataway: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
- Brankovic, J. (2014). Positioning of private higher education institutions in the Western Balkans: emulation, differentiation and legitimacy building. In J. Brankovic, M. Kovacevic, P. Maassen, B. Stensaker, & M. Vukasovic (Eds.), The re-institutionalization of higher education in the Western Balkans: The interplay between European ideas, domestic policies, and institutional practices (pp. 121–144). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Brint, S., & Karabel, J. (1991). Institutional origins and transformations: the case of American community colleges. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 337–360). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Chatterji, A. K., & Toffel, M. W. (2010). How firms respond to being rated. Strategic Management Journal, 31(9), 917–945.Google Scholar
- Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Colman, T. (2008). Wine politics: how governments, environmentalists, mobsters, and critics influence the wines we drink. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Delmestri, G., & Greenwood, R. (2016). How Cinderella became a queen: theorizing radical status change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(4), 507–550.Google Scholar
- Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2016). Engines of anxiety: academic rankings, reputation, and accountability. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Frank, R. H. (1986). Choosing the right pond: human behavior and the quest for status. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Frank, R. H., & Cook, P. J. (1995). The winner-take-all society: why the few at the top get so much more than the rest of us. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
- Geiger, R. L. (2004). Knowledge and money: research universities and the paradox of the marketplace. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Grove, J. (2013). Leru pulls out of EU’s U-Multirank scheme. Times Higher Education (THE). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/leru-pulls-out-of-eus-u-multirank-scheme/2001361.article. Accessed 20 September 2016.
- Hannan, M. T., Pólos, L., & Carroll, G. R. (2007). Logics of organization theory: audiences, codes, and ecologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Havergal, C. (2016). Some Russell Group universities ‘could opt out of the TEF’. Times Higher Education (THE). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/some-russell-group-universities-could-opt-out-tef. Accessed 2 September 2016.
- Hay, C. (2010). The political economy of price and status formation in the Bordeaux en primeur market: the role of wine critics as rating agencies. Socio-Economic Review, 685–707.Google Scholar
- Jensen, M., Kim, B. K., & Kim, H. (2011). The Importance of Status in Markets: A Market Identity Perspective (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1750271). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1750271. Accessed 5 August 2016.
- Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an organizational actor. In G. S. Drori, J. W. Meyer, & H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and organization: world society and Organizational change (pp. 241–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Marginson, S. (2015). Global stratification in higher education. In S. Slaughter & B. J. Taylor (Eds.), Higher education, stratification, and workforce development: competitive advantage in Europe, the US, and Canada (pp. 13–34). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Meyer, J. W. (2008). Reflections on institutional theories of organizations. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 788–808). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., & Thomas, G. M. (1987). Ontology and rationalization in the Western cultural account. In G. M. Thomas, J. W. Meyer, F. O. Ramirez, & J. Boli (Eds.), Institutional structure: constituting state, Society, and the individual (pp. 12–37). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Monks, J., & Ehrenberg, R. G. (1999). The Impact of US News and World Report College Rankings on Admission Outcomes and Pricing Decisions at Selective Private Institutions (Working Paper No. 7227). National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w7227. Accessed 10 August 2016.
- Musselin, C. (2010). The market for academics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Negro, G., Koçak, Ö., & Hsu, G. (2010). Research on categories in the sociology of organizations. In G. Negro, Ö. Koçak, & G. Hsu (Eds.), Categories in Markets: Origins and Evolution (pp. 3–35). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Pratt, J., & Burgess, T. (1974). Polytechnics: a report. London: Pitman Publishing.Google Scholar
- Rodriguez-Pomeda, J., & Casani, F. (2016). Legitimating the world-class university concept through the discourse of elite universities’ presidents. Higher Education Research & Development, 0(0), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Shin, J. C., Toutkoushian, R. K., & Teichler, U. (Eds.). (2011). University rankings: theoretical basis, methodology and impacts on global higher education. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
- Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (2011). Social dominance theory. In P. A. M. V. Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: volume one (pp. 418–438). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Teather, D. C. B. (2004). Consortia: international networking alliances of universities. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
- Werron, T., & Ringel, L. (In press). Rankings in a comparative perspective. Conceptual remarks. In S. Lessenich (Ed.), Geschlossene Gesellschaften. Verhandlungen des 38. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie. Essen: DGS.Google Scholar