Oili-Helena Ylijoki

Entangled in academic capitalism? A case-study on changing ideals and practices of university research

During recent years universities have engagedincreasingly in academic capitalism as aresponse to the decrease in budget funding andthe external push towards entrepreneurialactivities. This paper explores on the microlevel what impacts the changing fundingpatterns have on university research, how thechanges are responded to in different researchunits, and how researchers experience them.Based on focused interviews with seniorresearchers in three different types ofresearch settings in Finland, the paper arguesthat engaging in academic capitalism iseveryday reality in all units but takes adiversity of forms depending on how close ordistant the field is from the market. Inaddition the disciplinary and institutionalcultures shape the process of adaptation to thechanging environmental conditions. It isconcluded that increasing market-orientationdoes not displace traditional academicpractices, values and ideals as researchers tryto accommodate them to entrepreneurialactivities. However, especially due to thegrowth and intensification of project work onshort-term contracts, achieving a balancebetween the two value-sets is at present feltto be increasingly difficult, thus generating avariety of tensions in the daily work of theresearchers and even endangering the quality ofresearch.

Conflicting Time Perspectives in Academic Work

This article explores the diversity of time perspectives in academic work. The background of the study stems from recent changes in university management and funding, which impose new demands for academic work, including its temporal order. Drawing on focused interviews with 52 academics, we discern four core time perspectives according to which academics experience their work: scheduled time, timeless time, contracted time and personal time. Scheduled time refers to the accelerating pace of work, timeless time to transcending time through immersion in work, contracted time to short-term employment with limited future prospects and finally, personal time to ones temporality and the role of work in it. In addition, we discuss the relationships between the different time perspectives, focusing on dilemmas and tensions between them.

Academic nostalgia: A narrative approach to academic work

This article argues that one of the core narratives within the present-day university is a nostalgic story line. Drawing on focused interviews with 23 senior researchers in three academic environments in Finland, the article shows that although the nostalgic plot structure cuts across the data, it has different contents in each of the three settings, thus emphasizing the internal diversity in academic life. However, in all cases nostalgic yearning refers to the loss of academic freedom and autonomy in work. The article concludes that nostalgia does not describe the actual past but rather the problems and tensions of the present. It is an idealization of the past, the function of which is to clarify the values and morals of the organization, which in turn can help to come to terms with the conflicting pressures of the current situation.

Boundary-work between work and life in the high-speed university

Drawing upon the notion of acceleration of time in late capitalism, the article addresses the different forms and driving forces of the speeding up of the tempo and rhythm in research work in academia, and the impact of the temporal acceleration on how academics perceive their work and its connection to the private sphere of life. Based on 40 in-depth interviews with Finnish academics representing various disciplinary fields, organisational settings and university positions, three different constructions of the relationship between work and life are discerned: total commitment involving the work-life equation, boundary between time for real work and wasted time, and boundary between work and life. The article discusses the implications these temporal boundaries have on the moral grounding and basic meaning of academic work and the university as an institution.

Future orientations in episodic labour: Short-term academics as a case in point:

Universities have witnessed a radical growth in the number of academics working on short-term employment. In this article I will explore the future orientations of these academics faced with job insecurity. Drawing on biographical interviews with 40 Finnish academics, I identify three ideal typical future orientations: instant living, multiple futures and scheduled future. Instant living refers to bracketing the future and concentrating on the present. In multiple futures, by contrast, academics are loosely rooted in the present as they ponder alternative careers. Scheduled future refers to structured aims and plans by which the future is divided into progressive career steps. In addition to exploring the temporal characteristics of the three orientations, the article discusses the implications for professional identities and for the nature of research work.

The construction of academic identity in the changes of Finnish higher education

This article sets out to explore how academics make sense of the current transformations of higher education and what kinds of academic identities are thereby constructed. Based on a narrative analysis of 42 interviews with Finnish academics, nine narratives are discerned, each providing a different answer as to what it means to be an academic in the present-day university. Narratives of resistance, loss, administrative work overload and job insecurity are embedded in a regressive storyline, describing deterioration of academic work and ones standing. In a sharp contrast, narratives of success, mobility and change agency rely on a progressive storyline which sees the current changes in a positive light. Between these opposites, narratives of work–life balance and bystander follow stable storylines, involving a neutral stance toward university transformations. The paper concludes that academic identities have become increasingly diversified and polarized due to the managerial and structural changes in higher education.

Research for Whom? Research Orientations in Three Academic Cultures

In recent years, it has been argued that the organization, values and practices of university research are undergoing fundamental changes. One of the most prominent arguments has been presented by Gibbons and his co-authors (1994) who claim that traditional academic research is giving way to new forms of knowledge production. This transformation entails that research is increasingly funded by external sources instead of budget funding; that traditional, discipline-based individual research is being taken over by transdisciplinary projects; and that the purely basic research orientation is being replaced by working with problem-oriented applications. It has also been argued that this transition leads to the emergence of new kinds of academic values, ideals, orientations and identities (see also Etzkowitz, 1997, 1998; Ziman, 1996). In these arguments, university research is typically portrayed as a homogenous activity, while the main empirical referent is natural and technical sciences. However, studies of disciplinary cultures have pointed out that academia is not a coherent entity but consists of a variety of ‘small worlds’ (Clark, 1987) or ‘academic tribes’ (Becher, 1989) which are structured primarily around disciplines. According to Becher (see also Clark, 1986), disciplines differ in terms of the cognitive nature of knowledge (hard–soft, pure–applied) as well as in social dimensions (working styles, publishing traditions, career paths, etc.). Thus, from this viewpoint, the university consists of a variety of academic cultures, each with different aims, values, norms and basic beliefs (e.g. Evans, 1988; Traweek, 1988; Ylijoki, 2000). This micro-level perspective leads us to believe that general statements about changes in university research may not tell the whole truth. On the basis of our field research, which consists of interviews with senior researchers in three academic units in Finland—the Department of History, the Work Research Centre, and the Laboratories of Surface Science and Semiconductor Technology (called the SemiLab)1—we are able to Volume 8(2): 373–380 Copyright

A Clash of Academic Cultures: The Case of Dr. X

In recent years higher education institutions in Finland, as in most western countries, have undergone profound changes. With the rise of a so-called knowledge-based economy, higher education policy and science policy have begun to stress universities’ role as crucial players in the national innovation system and as instruments for economic competitiveness in global markets. This means that university education and academic research are increasingly viewed and evaluated from an economic perspective. In accordance with this policy change, universities’ funding patterns and management styles have witnessed profound transformations. The general trend has been a decline of budget funding, for which reason universities and departments have been compelled to seek external income and to engage in entrepreneurial activities (e.g., Slaughter and Leslie 1997; Nieminen 2005). This trend has intertwined with the adoption of the doctrine of the new public management, which brings the values and practices of the private sector to public administration, including higher education institutions (e.g., Chandler et al. 2000; Deem 2003). Martin and Etzkowitz (2000) regard this change as so radical that they call it the second academic revolution. The first academic revolution, taking place in the end of the 19th century, introduced research into the previously teaching-oriented higher education institutions. Now, according to Martin and Etzkowitz, a so-called third function, contribution to the economy, has been added to the core duties of universities. This new emphasis has been conceptualized by a variety of terms: “academic capitalism” (Slaughter and Leslie 1997), “entrepreneurial university” (Clark 1998), “the triple helix of university-industry-government” (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000), “post-academic science” (Ziman 1996) and “new managerialism” (Deem 1998), among others. They all point to an increasing market-orientation accompanied by the advancement of such virtues as accountability, efficiency, cost-effectiveness and productivity.

Gender Equality in Interface Organizations between Science, Technology and Innovation

The article addresses the question of gender equality in the context of interface organizations between science, technology and innovation, focusing on gendered work practices in science parks. Drawing upon the notions of gendered work practices, feminization of work and feminist science and technology studies, the article explores: 1. Key aspects of work practices in science parks; 2. Gender segregation embedded in these practices; and 3. Practices which help to promote gender equality in intermediary work. The study is empirically based on interviews with top managers and female experts of four Finnish science parks, complemented by one focus group interview with representatives of funding agencies, ministries and intermediary organizations. The study demonstrates that work in science parks is simultaneously future-oriented knowledge work and service work characterized by features of feminization and care (i.e. sensitivity to the needs of clients). Gender segregation commonly seen in the science, technology and innovation sector is reproduced in novel ways in the work practices of the science parks, especially due to the gendered patterns of professional recognition and male networking. This implies that - in spite of the feminised work practices - women do not find easy careers in science parks. The data show, however, that there are also several practices which are used to counteract segregation and promote gender equality, including a number of positive actions developed by women themselves in order to promote recognition and networking in science parks.

Tribal, proletarian and entrepreneurial career stories: junior academics as a case in point

This paper explores the career-building of junior academics in the current higher education environment, which is characterised by short-term employment conditions. The paper is based on focus group discussions with Finnish early career academics working in the social sciences. Drawing upon a narrative approach, five career stories are constructed: the Novice of the Academic Elite, the Victim of the Teaching Trap, the Academic Worker, the Research Group Member and the Academic Freelancer. Each story is analysed in terms of four dimensions: core commitment, career risk, career support and stance towards the university. Furthermore, we reflect on the crossing and maintenance of boundaries that each story entails. The stories crystallise the cultural resources that junior academics rely on while making sense of their careers. The results show that there are radically different – even opposite – ways to understand what an academic career is, and how to build it.