Do Performance-Based Funding Policies Promote Prestige Ambitions? An Interest-Convergence Analysis

• In Event: Advancing and Problematizing the Study of Prestige

Abstract

This study seeks to examine the ways in which Performance Based Funding (PBF) and prestige ambitions interact at the institutional level. PBF has emerged within higher education as a response to calls for increased accountability. However, institutions that serve greater proportions of students of color are often implicitly disadvantaged under these policies (Letizia, 2015; Slaughter and Cantwell, 2012; Ziskin, Hossler, Rabourn, Cekic, & Hwang, 2014). Many of the formulas privilege highly-selective, residential research universities and fail to adequately account for varying institutional types (Hillman, 2016; Slaughter & Cantwell, 2012; Ziskin, Rabourn, & Hossler, 2017).

This privileging may have pernicious effects for institution types susceptible to the value systems of highly selective research universities in ways that threaten their own missions and encourage prestige seeking (O’Meara, 2007). This is particularly true for urban-serving research universities (USRUs) (Lynton & Elman, 1987; Mulhollan, 1990; Zerquera, 2016). Their mission includes providing access to urban students and engaging with communities via research and service activities. These significant aspects of the USRU mission are measured directly and indirectly by PBF. With USRUs in particular, this raises questions as to how newly-implemented PBF policies may advance prestige efforts.

While some research has pointed to the influence of PBF pressures on decision making of institutional actors at USRUs (e.g., Zerquera, Ballysingh, & Templeton, in press; Zerquera & Ziskin, 2017), more is needed to understand this interplay directly. Most qualitative research on PBF focuses on the perceptions of stakeholders (Dougherty & Reddy, 2013). This paper seeks to deepen our understanding of prestige seeking as an internally-driven but externally-influenced manifestation within the context of reduced and performance-based funding.

The paper is guided by the following research question: to what extent did the implementation of PBF in one state advance the prestige-seeking objectives and efforts at one university? Guided by Yin’s (2013) case study design, we examine a single USRU located in a state with recently implemented PBF policies. Our analysis brings together data from varying sources: interviews with administrators and practitioners; planning documents from the university archives; and public addresses by campus leadership. The selected case is a distinct example of tension between PBF and prestige ambitions.

Theoretically we borrow from two traditions to guide our analysis. Sensemaking focuses on co-constructed and ongoing views of one’s own organization based on past actions, shared and individual values, and plausibility of ideas (Weick, 2005). It involves enacting the organizational environment to adjust to change, however often reinforces previously held organizational understandings (Jennings & Greenwood, 2003). This lens allows us to capture the interaction of messages from the external environment and the institution itself. Further, we bring in Bell’s concept of interest convergence (1995) and Guinier’s (2004) of interest divergence, both which draw attention to ways systemic racism is perpetuated within policy through advancing or impeding efforts that work towards racial justice. We thus position prestige seeking and PBF as issues that are connected to inequality to better capture how resistance or alignment with these pressures reflect broader commitments to the greater good.

Authors

• Desiree Zerquera, University of San Francisco

• Vasti Torres, University of Michigan