The Influence of Global University Rankings on Performance Funding

• In Event: Roundtable Session (Tuesday IV)
  In Refereed Round-Table Session: Role of higher education in society

Proposal

To what extent have governments adopted the tenets of global rankings in the funding of public higher education? This comparative study addresses this question by exploring the degree to which the funds allocated to public universities on the basis performance incorporate indicators used by global rankings, such as ARWU, QS, and THE. The study investigates this relationship through the performance funding systems of Austria, Canada (Ontario), Denmark, Finland, and Holland. The findings provide insights into the effects of global ranking on state priorities for higher education as expressed in performance funding. This can provide basis for further inquiry into the implications and the capacity of such a funding mechanism to drive the quality and sustainability of public higher education in the jurisdictions selected.

Context
Since the launch of Shanghai Jiao Tong rankings in 2003, global league tables have become crucial to the policy frameworks designed to inform how universities should serve society. Presence amongst the top 100 (or 1%) ranked universities is now a strategic priority for many governments, underlying reforms aimed to help universities gain a world-class status by securing favourable rankings position. Rationales vary, but the strongest one is the association many policymakers make between high ranked institutions and their nation’s economic health (Douglass, 2017; Hazelkorn, 2009, 2017). Mergers, excellence initiatives, and competitive funding typify reforms in many countries, aspiring to improve the visibility of their universities on global rankings, and thus, boost economic competitiveness. Regarding funding, it is argued that “many governments are using competitive or performance-based funding instruments, based on indicators which mimic those developed by rankings” (Hazelkorn, 2011, p. 198). I believe that global league tables have come of age, and the time is ripe for empirical investigation of this particular influence. This study is a step on this road.

Theoretical Framework
The study draws on resource dependence theory, a theoretical perspective from organisational theory, to explain and justify how performance funding systems are expected, in theory, to incentivise universities to emphasise performance areas that can directly influence institutional reputation as viewed by global rankings. In its simplest form, resource dependency theory frames organisations as open systems influenced by the environment (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). The need to ensure a stable flow of resources from external support partially structures organisational behaviour within the broader organisational fields as “[t]he key to organisational survival is the ability to acquire and maintain resources” (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978, p. 2). Funding has a steering power, and governments arguably use it to drive change through resource dependence.

Research Design
The study employs case study method. It attempts to identify parallels between global rankings indicators and the indicators governments use to financially reward universities for performance. Comparison between cases is conducted through the analysis of conceptual elements of performance funding, such as indicator types, weights, and distribution mechanism. The study can be useful for debates on the capacity of performance funding to drive quality of learning. It can also be useful for systems which consider adopting this type of budgeting strategy.

References
Douglass, J. A. (2016). How rankings came to determine world class. In J. A. Douglass (Eds), The new flagship university: Changing the paradigm from global ranking to national relevancy (pp. 3-29). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hazelokorn, E. (2009). Rankings and the battle for world-class excellence: Institutional strategies and policy choice. Management and Policy, 21(1), 55-76.
Hazelkorn, E. (2011). Rankings and the reshaping of higher education: The battle for world-class excellence. Houndsmills, Bashingstoke, Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hazelkorn, E. (2017). Introduction: The geopolitics of rankings. In E. Hazelkorn (Eds.), Global rankings and the geopolitics of higher education: Understanding the influence and impact of rankings on higher education, policy and society (pp. 1-20). New York: Routledge.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G.R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.

Author

• Edmund Adam, University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education