Abstract
Globalizing forces have both transformed the higher education sector and made it increasingly homogenous. Growing similarities among universities have been attributed to isomorphic pressures to ensure and/or enhance legitimacy by imitating higher education institutions that are perceived as successful internationally, particularly universities that are highly ranked globally (Cantwell & Kauppinen, 2014; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In this study, we compared the strategic plans of 78 high-ranked, low-ranked, and unranked universities in 33 countries in 9 regions of the world. In analyzing the plans of these 78 universities, the study explored patterns of similarity and difference in universities’ strategic positioning according to Suchman’s (1995) 3 types of legitimacy: cognitive, pragmatic, and moral. We found evidence of stratified university strategies in a global higher education landscape that varied by institutional status. In offering a corrective to neoinstitutional theory, we suggest that patterns of globalization are mediated by status-based differences in aspirational behavior (Riesman, 1958) and “old institutional” forces (Stinchcombe, 1997) that contribute to differently situated universities pursuing new paths in seeking to build external legitimacy.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 539-562 |
| Number of pages | 24 |
| Journal | Journal of Higher Education |
| Volume | 90 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 4 2019 |
Keywords
- Strategic plans
- global rankings
- institutional theory
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Education
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Stratified University Strategies: The Shaping of Institutional Legitimacy in a Global Perspective'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS