Efficiency of management of higher education in russia in the practices of application of managerial tools

Abstract

The managerial ideology for two decades of its use as a management model in the system of higher education in Russia has demonstrated its inefficiency. It has become a source of higher education losing its social purpose. The purpose of the study: to establish the ability of state managerialism to ensure the effective management of the Russian institution of higher education. Methodology: neo-institutional theory. Methods: document analysis; mass sociological survey among students and teachers; in-depth interviews with vice-rectors and deans of seventeen Russian universities. Hypothesis: the effectiveness of higher education management in the practice of applying managerialism is hindered by three barriers: 1) quality inversion, that can be caused by the disinterest of social actors to work effectively in the conditions of applying managerial ideology; 2) the mismatch between the managerial understanding of efficiency and the goals of higher education. In this case, we are talking about a deliberate rejection of the traditional goals of higher education for the sake of the formal implementation of managerial norms; 3) strict regulation of the work of the teaching staff, the reverse consequence of which is predicted to be the imitative fulfilment of the prescribed rules for the professional activities of students.
 Three empirical indicators were used to test the hypothesis: intensification of educational and scientific activities; stimulation of inter-university and intra-university competition among employees; increasing the professionalisation of university management.
 In the course of using survey methods, the effectiveness of state managerialism was refuted through the respondents' rejection of managerial values, the negative impact of institutional barriers on the process of achieving the goals of higher education, and the recognition of the neo-optimal (inefficient) nature of the use of budgetary funds. Instead of improving management efficiency, there is the emergence of imitative practices that are a direct consequence of formal adaptation to new institutional conditions. Professionals who are forced to adapt to managerial tools develop adaptive self-regulation strategies derived from their resource capabilities. As a result, new management tools operate in idle, on their own, in isolation from the target orientations of professional activity. This gives rise to a directly opposite effect on the goal conceived by the reformers: the effectiveness of management is reduced due to a sharp increase in the costs of using managerial tools and failure to achieve traditional professional goals. A paradoxical situation arises: according to formal signs, there is an increase in efficiency, but according to real results, a sharp decrease in the level of professionalism and expected social utility.