University mergers: Are they a valid option for Korean universities?

• In Event: Impact of the global university

Proposal

Purpose of this paper: University merger is increasing due to the decrease in the number of students in Korea. Despite the challenges it poses to professors as well as students, there have been few studies so far. In this context, this study aims to explore real issues and problems of mergers between higher education institutions (HEIs) through examining the phenomenon from a perspective of faculty members.

Design/methodology/approach: A qualitative multiple case study method was used to gain an in-depth understanding of university merger. Semi-structured interviews of ten faculty members from the three HEIs which were consolidated with two-year colleges were conducted for the data collection. One of the three institutions was a 4-your national university while the rest were 4-year private universities. The former implemented two mergers with two small community colleges because of the governmental pressure. Two private universities merged with 2-year community colleges which were run by the same university foundation as a way to enhance their institutional competitiveness. All interviews were voice-recorded, transcribed for the qualitative analysis, and analysed based on the grounded theory.

Findings: The qualitative analysis revealed that most of the informants were not satisfied by the process and the effects of their mergers. The results show that mergers in three case institutions were implemented through top-down decisions which inevitably excluded quite a number of faculty members and staffs from the decision-making. Whether the mergers was driven by the external forces or the internal motives, the informants regarded the merger process as ill-structured and limiting members of university constituents’ participation. Terms and conditions of the merger were not clearly communicated as faculties could make their own decisions based on the information on the merger. Although the regulations for university mergers require merging institutions to obtain contents from all constituents, the process to acquire consents was not accompanied by active discussions among community members. On the whole, faculties found themselves powerless and passive, and, sometimes, alienated from the merger process. The tendency was salient among faculties from two-year community colleges. Some faculties had to change their departments since their original department was closed due to the merger. Some of them had to enrol in a new doctoral program in order to teach totally new subjects of different disciplines. Faculties from two-year colleges often had to accept salary cut and degradation of their position when their institutions were merged with a four-year university. Along this process, senior faculties and those belonging to unpopular departments suffered greatly. The traditional associations of full-time faculties were not recognized as the valid representative organization of faculty members by the universities. In the Korean context, they are one of the consultative groups within a university. Because there was no trade-union-like representatives of faculty members, they had to make their decision individually on the issue of university merger.
On the impacts that the mergers had on members of universities, the informants evaluated negatively. They argued that the hasty decision on the merger and the merger plans devoid of concrete strategies result in bad mergers in spite of huge sacrifices made by some members. After the merger process ended, faculty members have experienced various changes in their teaching and researching activities and, thus, they had to cope with different organizational cultures and rules. The degree of negative evaluation that the informants expressed varied depending on the recent performance of their institution in recruiting undergraduate students and winning government subsidies. On the whole, however, the informants of all case institutions agreed that the process of integration and adaptation has not ended yet, since institutional supports for organizational integration ended too early. Disconnection between multiple campuses, in particular, was said to have hindered the full integration among faculty members. The multiple campus issue seems to be a result of the contexts surrounding the Korean higher education sector: The steep stratification structure of HEIs and the limited autonomy that satellite campuses can have. Informants criticized the low level of democracy and equity in the process and results of university mergers.

Social Implications: This research shows that mergers among universities are a difficult option in the Korean higher education. As the process of restructuring of the sector is accelerating, the government and HEIs should consider this option more cautiously and plan it more carefully. Merger itself does not bring the intended effects automatically, and supports and efforts for a true integration should be provided from a longer perspective. Considerations on country-specific environmental factors should be also made by the policy makers in order to improve the chances of successful university merger.

Author

• Su Youn Byoun Byoun, Busan University of Foreign Studies