Leveraging Universities Through IT Governance

Part of the Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management book series (ITKM)


European universities are today confronted by major change, largely as a result of the process of standardization of European education systems. The process, which was initiated at the Sorbonne in 1998 and subsequently expanded in the Bologna Declaration and the Prague and Berlin Communiqués, serves the following primary objectives:
  • creation of a two-cycle degree system,

  • introduction of a credits system,

  • modularization of study programs,

  • increased student mobility, as well as

  • new quality assurance measures (European Commission 2010, online).


Corporate Governance Quality Assurance Measure Chief Information Officer Alma Mater Bologna Declaration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Brooks AC (2005) What do nonprofit organizations seek? (And why should policymakers care?). J Policy Anal Manag 24(3):543–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carr N (2003) IT doesn’t matter. Harvard Bus Rev 81(5):41–51Google Scholar
  3. Etzkowitz H, Webster A, Gebhardt C, Terra BRC (2000) The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Res Policy 29(2):313–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. European Commission (2010) Bologna process: harmonisation of the university systems. URL: (Date of visit: 10-01-2010)
  5. Floridi L (2007) A look into the future impact of ICTICT on our lives. Inf Soc 23(1):59–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Foster I (2001) The anatomy of the grid: enabling scalable virtual organisations. In: Sakellariou R (ed) Parallel processing: proceedings of the 7th international Euro-Par conference, Manchester, UK, 28–31 August 2001. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  7. Gutheil U (2007) Chancen und Herausforderungen eines modernen. Campus-ManagementsGoogle Scholar
  8. Hansmann E (2009) IT messen und steuern. Inf Manag Consult 24(4):25–29Google Scholar
  9. Mirski P (2010) IT-Governance für Hochschulen. Wettbewerbsstärkung von Hochschulen durch Integration interner IT-Abteilungen. Innsbruck, 243Google Scholar
  10. Oberhuemer E (2006) Überlegungen zur Entwicklung einer Contentstrategie für die Universität Wien. In: Mettinger (Hg) 2006 – eLearning an der Universität Wien, Münster, p 33Google Scholar
  11. PLS Ramboll Management (2004) Virtual models of European universities. Draft final report to the EU commission, DG Education & CultureGoogle Scholar
  12. Ritter UP (1999) Die Internet-Universität, virtuelle Universitäten und die Zukunft der Europäischen Universitäten. Das Hochschulwesen 47(4):102–107Google Scholar
  13. Seufert S (2008) Innovationsorientiertes Bildungsmanagement: Hochschulentwicklung durch Sicherung der Nachhaltigkeit von eLearning. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  14. Stratmann F (2007) Vorwort. In: Altvater P (ed) Organisationsentwicklung in Hochschulen, Hannover, p 2Google Scholar
  15. Teichler U (2007) Die Internationalisierung der Hochschulen: Neue Herausforderungen und strategies. Campus, Frankfurt/MainGoogle Scholar
  16. Weill P (2004) IT governance: how top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Harvard Business School, BostonGoogle Scholar
  17. Wissel C (2007) Hochschule als Organisationsproblem. Neue Modi universitärer Selbstbeschreibung in Deutschland. Transcript, Bielefeld, p 11Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MCI Management Center Innsbruck—The Entrepreneurial SchoolInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations