• Login
    View Item 
    •   Athenaeum Home
    • University of Georgia Theses and Dissertations
    • University of Georgia Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Athenaeum Home
    • University of Georgia Theses and Dissertations
    • University of Georgia Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Structuring to advance science: stem-centered organizational innovations in the research university

    Thumbnail
    Date
    2016-05
    Author
    Warshaw, Jarrett Benjamin
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    As universities compete to advance science and secure external resources, many are changing the fundamental structure of their research cores. In knowledge production science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields have become increasingly interdisciplinary and lucrative, compelling adaptive institutions to develop continua of centers, institutes, schools, and departments for success in this arena. Yet little is known conceptually or empirically about these emerging organizational forms. This thesis draws on institutional theory, resource dependence theory, and academic capitalism to illuminate the nature and parturition of STEM-centered organizational innovations (SOIs). SOIs are centers, institutes, schools, and departments new to their institutions between 2000 and 2014, formed in externally funded areas of research, and with campus access to medical programs. The theories inform the selection of four U.S. public research universities, with each institution representing a quadrant of innovation based on indicators of its institutionalization (high or low) and resource position (strengthened or threatened) in the Association of American Universities. Sampled SOIs from one institution constitute a case for comparison to SOIs (e.g., cases) at the other, three institutions. Within- and cross-case analyses suggest that: Institutionalization neither holds campuses “hostage” nor permits uncoordinated “drift,” but seems to differentiate the normative and financial margins around which SOIs develop, are politicized, and compete to endure. SOIs have the potential to broaden their institutions’ resource dependencies across a number of federal mission agencies, but appear largely to converge within the biomedical/NIH arena. Within the context of academic capitalism, SOIs appear to open disproportionate pathways for scientific specialists/experts, rather than managerial professionals, to formal and symbolic positions of administrative/financial authority. Overall, SOIs in this analysis are suggestive of a deepening “love affair” with science among the public, policy-makers, and social institutions, and they may serve to reaffirm but also facilitate an image of the scientist as ideal educated self. Implications for theory, institutional policy and practice, and future research are discussed.
    URI
    http://purl.galileo.usg.edu/uga_etd/warshaw_jarrett_b_201605_phd
    http://hdl.handle.net/10724/36641
    Collections
    • University of Georgia Theses and Dissertations

    About Athenaeum | Contact Us | Send Feedback
     

     

    Browse

    All of AthenaeumCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About Athenaeum | Contact Us | Send Feedback