How to remain collegial when pressure for change is high?

The French higher education system has experienced reforms since the 2000s that gradually emphasized the executive power of universities and the centralization of decision-making. This culminated with the excellence initiatives (Idex) that concentrated 7.7 billion euros on only nine institutions to create “world-class” universities and made their leaders responsible for the local allocation of this substantial endowment. The universities’ executives had four years to complete changes in governance in order to see their institution permanently awarded the title and the funding of Idex. The hiring process is one of the elements that this policy impacted the most within these universities, enabling leaders to create new kinds of positions and control the hiring process. However, by looking at the hiring practices within three different Idex, we will show that collegiality did not disappear but rather it evolved: in the three cases, the closest colleagues have been marginalized but decision-making remained collective and in the hands of academics chosen by the university executives. Variations in the intensity of this evolution could be observed according to two dimensions. First, the scientific reputation of the university: the higher it is, the less collegiality is transformed. Second, the level of external pressures: the less collegial universities have relaxed their hiring practices after the evaluation that permanently granted them the label of Idex

RESISTIRE D3.4 Overview of summary reports on mapping quantitative indicators, Cycles 1, 2, and 3

This report presents a summary of the three-cycle analysis of quantitative indicators within the RESISTIRÉ project. It focuses on assessing the economic, social, and environmental impacts of COVID-19 at both the national and European levels. National insights are derived from Rapid Assessment Surveys (RAS), while European-level insights are based on literature reviews and the analysis of the Eurofound online survey "Living, working and COVID-19," conducted between 2020 and 2022. The first cycle offered analytical insights into the pandemic's impact across various domains of inequality, including the labor market, the economy, gender pay disparities, pension gaps, gender care gap, gender-based violence, decision-making in politics, human and fundamental rights, and environmental justice. In the second cycle, we updated the quantitative assessment of both national and European indicators, with a particular focus on the experiences of distinct demographic groups. This included young and older individuals, single parents, migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) communities. The third cycle concentrated on longitudinal data and indicators to uncover the lasting impact of the pandemic and potential actions to tackle future crises. This report showcases the key findings from these cycles, illustrating how the pandemic's profound effects affected individuals across multiple dimensions of inequality. It also identifies recovery strategies and offers insights into methodological approaches for researching similar crises in the future

"Outroduction":A research agenda on collegiality in university settings

Collegiality is the modus operandi of universities. Collegiality is central to academic freedom and scientific quality. In this way, collegiality also contributes to the good functioning of universities’ contribution to society and democracy. In this concluding paper of the special issue on collegiality, we summarize the main findings and takeaways from our collective studies. We summarize the main challenges and contestations to collegiality and to universities, but also document lines of resistance, activation, and maintenance. We depict varieties of collegiality and conclude by emphasizing that future research needs to be based on an appreciation of this variation. We argue that it is essential to incorporate such a variation-sensitive perspective into discussions on academic freedom and scientific quality and highlight themes surfaced by the different studies that remain under-explored in extant literature: institutional trust, field-level studies of collegiality, and collegiality and communication. Finally, we offer some remarks on methodological and theoretical implications of this research and conclude by summarizing our research agenda in a list of themes

"Outroduction”: A Research Agenda on Collegiality in University Settings

Collegiality is the modus operandi of universities. Collegiality is central to academic freedom and scientific quality. In this way, collegiality also contributes to the good functioning of universities’ contribution to society and democracy. In this concluding paper of the special issue on collegiality, we summarize the main findings and takeaways from our collective studies. We summarize the main challenges and contestations to collegiality and to universities, but also document lines of resistance, activation, and maintenance. We depict varieties of collegiality and conclude by emphasizing that future research needs to be based on an appreciation of this variation. We argue that it is essential to incorporate such a variation-sensitive perspective into discussions on academic freedom and scientific quality and highlight themes surfaced by the different studies that remain under-explored in extant literature: institutional trust, field-level studies of collegiality, and collegiality and communication. Finally, we offer some remarks on methodological and theoretical implications of this research and conclude by summarizing our research agenda in a list of themes

“Outroduction” : a research agenda on collegiality In university settings

Collegiality is the modus operandi of universities. Collegiality is central to academic freedom and scientific quality. In this way, collegiality also contributes to the good functioning of universities’ contribution to society and democracy. In this concluding paper of the special issue on collegiality, we summarize the main findings and takeaways from our collective studies. We summarize the main challenges and contestations to collegiality and to universities, but also document lines of resistance, activation, and maintenance. We depict varieties of collegiality and conclude by emphasizing that future research needs to be based on an appreciation of this variation. We argue that it is essential to incorporate such a variation-sensitive perspective into discussions on academic freedom and scientific quality and highlight themes surfaced by the different studies that remain under-explored in extant literature: institutional trust, field-level studies of collegiality, and collegiality and communication. Finally, we offer some remarks on methodological and theoretical implications of this research and conclude by summarizing our research agenda in a list of themes

Gouverner par les inégalités : la mise en œuvre d’une initiative d’excellence dans l’enseignement supérieur et la recherche

While the production and reproduction of inequalities is often considered a perverse effect of public institutions, many so-called neo-managerial reforms today aim to govern the public sector by creating, deepening, or building on inequalities among professionals, organizations, or users. Higher education and research is one of the sectors at the forefront of these transformations of public action. In France, the launch of the ‘Initiatives of Excellence’ (Idex) policy is an emblematic illustration: by using calls for projects that put universities in competition with each other to create "world-class" institutions, this program concentrates resources on approximately ten universities and increases the competition between researchers, laboratories, and institutions. Using a longitudinal analysis of an Idex project, this thesis examines these new inegalitarian policies, questions the social and political conditions of their implementation, and takes the measure of the inequalities created on the scale of a university site.I demonstrate that through the Idex, the State governs through inequalities. However, this governing is only possible under certain conditions that strongly involve local dynamics and actors. I have also shown that this policy is based on organizational reform, in the sense that the administration of an Idex essentially amounts to putting in place rules, procedures, and structures in order to make universities more unequal. This policy governs the contours of excellence projects more than the conduct of researchers within them. Ultimately, the Initiatives of Excellence govern the perimeters and it is within and between these boundaries that inequalities are played out.Tandis que la reproduction et l’accroissement des inégalités sont souvent considérés comme des effets pervers des institutions publiques, de nombreuses réformes dites néomanagériales visent aujourd’hui à gouverner le secteur public en créant, creusant, ou prenant appui sur des inégalités parmi les professionnels, les organisations, ou les usagers. L’enseignement supérieur et la recherche figurent parmi les secteurs à l’avant-garde de ces recompositions de l’action publique. En France, le lancement de la politique des Initiatives d’excellence (Idex) en est une illustration emblématique : en recourant à des appels à projets mettant en compétition les universités pour faire émerger des établissements « de classe mondiale », ce programme concentre les ressources sur une dizaine d’établissements et accroit la mise en concurrence des chercheurs, des laboratoires et des établissements. En recourant à l’analyse longitudinale d’une Idex, cette thèse prend pour objet ces nouvelles politiques inégalitaires, interroge les conditions sociales et politiques de leur mise en œuvre et prend la mesure des inégalités créées à l’échelle d’un site universitaire. Nous démontrons ainsi qu’à travers les Idex, l’État gouverne par les inégalités. Cependant, ce gouvernement n’est possible qu’à certaines conditions mettant fortement à contribution les dynamiques et les acteurs locaux. Cette politique repose également sur une réforme organisationnelle, dans le sens où l’administration d’une Idex revient essentiellement à mettre en place des règles, des procédures, des structures afin de rendre les universités plus inégalitaires. Il s’avère que cette politique gouverne davantage les contours des projets d’excellence que les conduites des chercheurs à l’intérieur de ces derniers. En définitive, les Idex gouvernent des périmètres, et c’est à l’intérieur et entre ces derniers que les inégalités se jouent

Les petites mains de l’excellence: Place et rôle des chargées de projet dans la mise en œuvre d’une Initiative d’excellence

Since the mid-2000s, the State has been supporting “excellence” policies aimed at creating world-class universities in France by focusing resources on the best institutions, laboratories, and researchers. While these policies make university leaders the central actors of these instruments, this article shows that on a day-to-day basis their implementation depends on precarious actors such as project managers. These policies of excellence produce a stratification of the academic profession from the top, by strengthening the institutions’ executive teams, but also from the bottom by creating precarious, undervalued positions with a difficult work rhythm, particularly invested by women researchers.Depuis le milieu des années 2000, l’État soutient des politiques d’excellence qui visent à créer en France des universités de classe mondiale en concentrant des ressources supplémentaires sur les meilleurs établissements, les meilleurs laboratoires et les meilleurs chercheurs. Alors que ces politiques font des équipes dirigeantes des universités les acteurs centraux du pilotage de ces instruments, cet article montre que, au jour le jour, leur mise en œuvre repose sur des acteurs précaires comme les chargées de projet. Ces politiques d’excellence produisent une stratification de la profession académique par le haut, en renforçant les équipes dirigeantes des établissements, mais aussi par le bas en créant des postes précaires, dévalorisés, avec un rythme de travail difficile et particulièrement investis par des chercheuses

Les initiatives d’excellence : le résultat de politiques winner-take-all dans l’enseignement supérieur et la recherche?

Les initiatives d’excellence (Idex) constituent l’une des dernières réformes de l’enseignement supérieur et de la recherche. Il s’agit d’appels à projets qui concentrent des ressources supplémentaires sur une dizaine de sites universitaires afin de doter la France d’établissements capables de rivaliser avec les meilleures universités du monde. Dans cet article, nous étudions le renforcement progressif des équipes dirigeantes d’un site universitaire qui ont élaboré, porté et administré avec succès un projet Idex qui a été obtenu puis confirmé. Plus précisément, il s’agit d’une configuration comparable aux politiques winner-take-all dans la mesure où le site et les acteurs en question sont systématiquement sortis affermis de l’alignement entre leur programme et les réformes déployées dans le secteur de l’enseignement supérieur et la recherche depuis les années 2000. = The “Initiatives of Excellence” (Idex) are one of the latest reforms in higher education. These initiatives are calls for projects that concentrate additional resources on a dozen university sites, with a view to developing French institutions capable of competing with the best universities in the world. In this article, we study the progressive strengthening of a university board of directors that developed, supported, and administered a successful Idex project. More precisely, this project turned out to be a configuration comparable to winner-take-all policies, in so far as the site and the actors in question systematically emerged strengthened by the alignment between their program and the reforms deployed in higher education during the 2000s

Les petites mains de l’excellence: Place et rôle des chargées de projet dans la mise en œuvre d’une Initiative d’excellence

Since the mid-2000s, the State has been supporting “excellence” policies aimed at creating world-class universities in France by focusing resources on the best institutions, laboratories, and researchers. While these policies make university leaders the central actors of these instruments, this article shows that on a day-to-day basis their implementation depends on precarious actors such as project managers. These policies of excellence produce a stratification of the academic profession from the top, by strengthening the institutions’ executive teams, but also from the bottom by creating precarious, undervalued positions with a difficult work rhythm, particularly invested by women researchers.Depuis le milieu des années 2000, l’État soutient des politiques d’excellence qui visent à créer en France des universités de classe mondiale en concentrant des ressources supplémentaires sur les meilleurs établissements, les meilleurs laboratoires et les meilleurs chercheurs. Alors que ces politiques font des équipes dirigeantes des universités les acteurs centraux du pilotage de ces instruments, cet article montre que, au jour le jour, leur mise en œuvre repose sur des acteurs précaires comme les chargées de projet. Ces politiques d’excellence produisent une stratification de la profession académique par le haut, en renforçant les équipes dirigeantes des établissements, mais aussi par le bas en créant des postes précaires, dévalorisés, avec un rythme de travail difficile et particulièrement investis par des chercheuses

Governing through inequalities : the implementation of excellence initiatives in french higher education and research

Tandis que la reproduction et l’accroissement des inégalités sont souvent considérés comme des effets pervers des institutions publiques, de nombreuses réformes dites néomanagériales visent aujourd’hui à gouverner le secteur public en créant, creusant, ou prenant appui sur des inégalités parmi les professionnels, les organisations, ou les usagers. L’enseignement supérieur et la recherche figurent parmi les secteurs à l’avant-garde de ces recompositions de l’action publique. En France, le lancement de la politique des Initiatives d’excellence (Idex) en est une illustration emblématique : en recourant à des appels à projets mettant en compétition les universités pour faire émerger des établissements « de classe mondiale », ce programme concentre les ressources sur une dizaine d’établissements et accroit la mise en concurrence des chercheurs, des laboratoires et des établissements. En recourant à l’analyse longitudinale d’une Idex, cette thèse prend pour objet ces nouvelles politiques inégalitaires, interroge les conditions sociales et politiques de leur mise en œuvre et prend la mesure des inégalités créées à l’échelle d’un site universitaire. Nous démontrons ainsi qu’à travers les Idex, l’État gouverne par les inégalités. Cependant, ce gouvernement n’est possible qu’à certaines conditions mettant fortement à contribution les dynamiques et les acteurs locaux. Cette politique repose également sur une réforme organisationnelle, dans le sens où l’administration d’une Idex revient essentiellement à mettre en place des règles, des procédures, des structures afin de rendre les universités plus inégalitaires. Il s’avère que cette politique gouverne davantage les contours des projets d’excellence que les conduites des chercheurs à l’intérieur de ces derniers. En définitive, les Idex gouvernent des périmètres, et c’est à l’intérieur et entre ces derniers que les inégalités se jouent.While the production and reproduction of inequalities is often considered a perverse effect of public institutions, many so-called neo-managerial reforms today aim to govern the public sector by creating, deepening, or building on inequalities among professionals, organizations, or users. Higher education and research is one of the sectors at the forefront of these transformations of public action. In France, the launch of the ‘Initiatives of Excellence’ (Idex) policy is an emblematic illustration: by using calls for projects that put universities in competition with each other to create "world-class" institutions, this program concentrates resources on approximately ten universities and increases the competition between researchers, laboratories, and institutions. Using a longitudinal analysis of an Idex project, this thesis examines these new inegalitarian policies, questions the social and political conditions of their implementation, and takes the measure of the inequalities created on the scale of a university site.I demonstrate that through the Idex, the State governs through inequalities. However, this governing is only possible under certain conditions that strongly involve local dynamics and actors. I have also shown that this policy is based on organizational reform, in the sense that the administration of an Idex essentially amounts to putting in place rules, procedures, and structures in order to make universities more unequal. This policy governs the contours of excellence projects more than the conduct of researchers within them. Ultimately, the Initiatives of Excellence govern the perimeters and it is within and between these boundaries that inequalities are played out