Abstract
In most Western countries there has been an increasing demand for new and different types of audit, evaluation and reporting systems that reveal the output of public sector organizations (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2000). Quality assessments have had a profound impact on the funding of university research, most visibly in the UK. However, the relationship between qualitative and quantitative indicators of research performance has been an ongoing source of debate (Bence and Oppenheim 2004). By exploring four different types of accountability relations, this paper investigates different stakeholders' perceptions of whether or not performance funding increases accountability and transparency, and poses the following questions: Does performance funding result in high accountability and high transparency? Does high accountability imply high transparency? Does high transparency lead to low accountability? Three main empirical sources have been utilized: a comprehensive survey of faculty at Norwegian higher education institutions, a stakeholder survey, and data from case studies of four universities.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
