Abstract
The public administration framework New Public Management (NPM) has been applied to higher education systems in many western countries. The literature on these reforms reports on some positive effects but many critical voices can also be found. Even though NPM as a narrative unifies principles and measures under one roof, a detailed analysis shows that NPM principles fit differently for different tasks. Using a contingency approach, we show that, within the NPM narrative, two different higher education funding approaches exist, namely high-tech versus high-touch. Our study confirms the theoretical proposition that high-touch approaches match better with higher education domains. The use of contingency theory to classify NPM measures thus might be a promising way to further advance NPM theory and its practical application to topics as controversial as academic funding.
Published Version
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.
