RESEARCH ARTICLE

National policies as drivers of organizational
change in universities: A string of
reinforcing reforms

Keine offenen Zugänge

Tagebuch

Danish Centre for Studies in Research & Research Policy, Department of Political Science & Government, Aarhus University,
Bartholins Allé 7, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark

Andreas Kjær Stage

and Kaare Aagaard

Zitat: Stage, A. K., & Aagaard, K.
(2020). National policies as drivers of
organizational change in universities:
A string of reinforcing reforms.
Quantitative Science Studies, 1(2),
849–871. https://doi.org/10.1162/
qss_a_00046

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00046

Erhalten: 02 Oktober 2019
Akzeptiert: 25 Marsch 2020

Korrespondierender Autor:
Andreas Kjær Stage
ak@ps.au.dk

Handling-Editor:
Ludo Waltman

Urheberrechte ©: © 2020 Andreas Kjær Stage
and Kaare Aagaard. Published under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International (CC BY 4.0) Lizenz.

Die MIT-Presse

Schlüsselwörter: higher education reforms, resilient universities, scientific workforce, universities as
Organisationen

ABSTRAKT

Since the turn of the millennium, the Danish university sector has been one of the most
intensely reformed in Europe. In parallel, the staff composition of Danish Universities has also
changed more than the corresponding compositions in other Western countries. But how
direct is the link between the policy reforms and the staff changes? While we expect national
policy reforms to have influence on organizational change in universities, we also know that
the content and impact of policies are often shaped and modified by global trends as well as
local path dependencies. To shed light on this question, this article examines the impact of
four major reforms on the staff composition of Danish universities by interpreting long-term
staff data at multiple levels. Contrary to the notions of change resistance and path dependency,
the empirical analysis suggests that a consistent string of policy reforms has had a profound
impact on the Danish universities. Jedoch, the analysis also shows that the links between
national reforms and actual changes are seldom immediate and straightforward and that the
local, National, and global levels interact. In doing so they often appear to reinforce the
influence of each other.

1.

EINFÜHRUNG

Although it is generally acknowledged that universities in most countries are becoming in-
creasingly hierarchically organized entities with altered staff compositions (z.B., Gornitzka
& Larsen, 2004; Krücken, Blümel, & Kloke, 2013; Rhoades & Frye, 2015; Stage & Aagaard,
2019), it is still unclear to what degree these developments are uniform in content and timing
across different institutional and national contexts, and how we can understand the underlying
drivers of these developments. While evidence regarding the former is starting to emerge (z.B.,
Baltaru & Soysal, 2018; Seeber, Lepori, et al., 2015; Stage, 2020), we still have limited knowl-
edge regarding the latter. There is a profound lack of systematic investigations into potential
explanations (Baltaru, 2018, P. 3) although research early on had already stressed the impor-
tance of understanding the factors associated with the observed patterns of change (Gumport
& Pusser, 1995). There are thus compelling reasons to examine some of the potential under-
lying drivers of the transformation of universities as organizations. This study takes one of the
first steps in this direction by analyzing long-term developments in Denmark.

Two theoretical perspectives have so far dominated the scholarly debates of both change
and inertia related to the development of universities. Einerseits, it is argued that global

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

standards push universities towards transnational convergence (Drori, Meyer, et al., 2002).
Based on this perspective, national university systems are argued to become more alike over
time as “global scripts” gain ground (Meyer, Ramirez, et al., 2007; Ramirez, 2013). Auf dem anderen
Hand, it is also underlined that universities are highly institutionalized and change-resistant
organizations—and hence that there are clear limits to such convergence due to local path
dependencies (Paradeise, Reale, et al., 2009; Whitley, 2008, 2012). From this perspective,
national and local differences are expected to be reproduced over time in spite of similar
external pressures.

Jedoch, in both cases national policies can be perceived as intermediary factors that may
either reinforce transnational pressures or leave room for local translation—sometimes even
both at the same time. Einerseits, national policies can, at least in principle, be ex-
pected to have a direct and coercive influence, as the state can demand a high degree of
compliance. Andererseits, this influence may, nonetheless, not always be as linear
and immediate, as policy reforms will often leave room for local interpretation. The way in
which national policies influence organizational changes can hence be expected to be
shaped and modified by both global scripts and local path dependencies.

To shed light on such processes, this article investigates the link between selected national
reforms and changes in staff composition in the Danish context. Dabei, the present study
builds on two recent studies. The first one provides an in-depth analysis of the content of or-
ganizational change at Danish universities from 1999–2017, but it does so without touching
much on the underlying drivers of such changes (Stage & Aagaard, 2019). The second study
compares the Danish system’s transition toward a new university organizational model with
the corresponding developments in the United States, das Vereinigte Königreich, Deutschland, Und
Norwegen, and shows that Danish universities have changed the most among this group of coun-
tries in terms of staff composition (Stage, 2020). Taken together, these two previous studies
raise the question of how this particular development in Denmark has come about.

The article proceeds as follows: Abschnitte 2 Und 3 outline the theoretical framework and the
method of this article, jeweils. Abschnitt 4 proceeds by characterizing the general develop-
ment of Danish university policy. Against this background, Abschnitt 5 examines the role of four
major policy reforms as potential drivers of the observed developments in staff composition. In
Abschnitt 6, the four subanalyses are discussed in concert, before the article concludes by re-
flecting upon the interaction between global, National, and local drivers of both change and
inertia.

2. POLICY REFORMS, GLOBAL SCRIPTS, AND LOCAL PATH DEPENDENCY

Branches of institutional theory claim that universities as organizations converge on a global
Modell (Drori et al., 2002; Ramirez, 2013). Transnational scripts, visions, or ideas about appro-
priate organizing are seen to travel across boundaries and affect the actual organization of
local universities (Krücken & Meier, 2006; Olsen, 2007). Such spreading of ideas takes place
in global fields through international relations, with the OECD and EU as important actors—
often in the form of soft law (Amaral, Meek, & Larsen, 2003; Sahlin, Wijkström, et al., 2015).
But transnational scripts not only affect national policy agendas but also influence the or-
ganizational members of universities (academics, students, managers, administrators, usw.).
Somit, while the EU, OECD, and other transnational and intermediary organizations reflect
what is happening in a global field, they also shape and disseminate visions of best practices
(Sahlin et al., 2015, P. 410) and through normative pressure influence how universities are
organized (King, 2009; Sauder & Espeland, 2009). Gleichzeitig, universities are also

Quantitative Science Studies

850

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

shaped and pushed toward convergence by their members’ hunt for reputation in the stratified
global scientific communities, where prestigious centers, departments, or universities function
as organizational blueprints for others to follow (Drori et al., 2002; Ramirez, 2013).

Other institutional scholars stress, Jedoch, that universities in general only change reluc-
tantly and incrementally. According to this perspective, historical characteristics specific to
individual organizations tend to work as buffers against external pressures. While many coun-
tries have granted universities increased formal autonomy to accentuate their competitive pro-
Dateien (de Boer, Enders, & Leisyte, 2007), not all universities “want to nor can imitate the model
of the US research university” (Hüther & Krücken, 2018, P. 69). Für einige, it is more important
to be appropriately organized in the eyes of self-selected peer-organizations or national con-
stituencies, or in accordance with traditions linked to scientific disciplines, which have varied
preferences (Paradeise & Thoenig, 2013; Schmid & Wilkesmann, 2015). Due to these compet-
ing logics in the environment and varied organizational characteristics, the path dependency
perspective thus suggests that external policy pressure may have limited impact on individual
organizations and that differentiation and diversity tend to be reproduced over time. As orga-
nizations often have leeway to strategically select, translate, and edit external pressures, Sie
will seek to implement elements that fit into their local cultures and pathways and decouple
the rest from actual work practices (Brunsson, 2009). Somit, in this view, institutionalized
organizations are relatively resilient and change less uniformly and far more incrementally
than implied by the transnational convergence thesis (z.B., Ramirez, 2013).

Jedoch, national policies play an important role in between these levels. Auf der einen Seite
hand they can function as a vehicle for the transnational pressures, which via various policies
influence organizational structures. Auf dem anderen, they are also in most cases leaving room for
local translation at the organizational level. Als solche, national policies both set out an overall
direction of change and provide sets of possibilities and limitations for individual organiza-
tionen. Regarding the first: As most universities first and foremost are publicly funded and for-
mally regulated organizations, they are often highly dependent on one focal resource provider
in their environment. In such a situation, organizations are expected to have little power to
bargain or to act against the state’s mandate (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). Zusätzlich, although
universities are granted some autonomy, a substantial part of their organizational setup and
activities are explicitly mandated by laws and decrees. Somit, policy reforms can be expected to
be effective in generating organizational change, because the state can require a high degree of
compliance (Greenwood, Oliver, et al., 2008; Tolbert & Zucker, 1983). As national policies
are used to steer public universities, and as different national politico-administrative systems
translate transnational pressures differently, policy differences will from this perspective be ex-
pected, at least partly, to explain the differences in organizational models across countries
(Michelsen & Bleiklie, 2013). While few scholars will claim that there always is a clear and direct
link from policies to implementation, most will nonetheless acknowledge that universi-
ties are highly resource-dependent organizations and that major policy pressures can be ex-
pected to have at least some influence on their organization. This link between the content of
policies and the actual organizational changes can, Jedoch, in many cases be expected to be
indirect, delayed, and somewhat restricted due to policy leeway for local adaption, symbolic
implementation, or even blocking of intended changes (Capano, Pritoni, & Vicentini, 2019).

3. METHODS AND DATA

Wie oben beschrieben, different theoretical perspectives highlight coexisting dynamics of change
and stability, and when taken together, underline that universities develop in multilevel

Quantitative Science Studies

851

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

governance systems with competing logics. Somit, national policies can be expected to both
mediate and be mediated by global scripts and local path-dependencies. By using detailed
descriptive statistics to match staffing changes with reforms, this study sheds light on some
of these complex interactions. Acknowledging their interconnectedness also implies that mod-
esty is required in terms of drawing simple causal claims. Clear causal relationships between
individual reforms and observed staff changes are in most cases difficult to detect. Eher,
changes are in most cases the result of parallel, mutually reinforcing developments at different
levels.

Somit, by carefully assessing the correspondence between reforms and staffing in both tim-
ing and content at different levels of detail, it is possible to improve our understanding of how
state-led policies in interaction with transnational pressures impact the organization of univer-
sities. This analysis is made possible by combining data from a comprehensive payroll data-
base containing all university employees’ job titles, contract types, salary frames, and working
hours, with two public databases containing longitudinal funding data at the national and or-
ganizational level. These data sources are further complemented with analyses of policy doc-
uments and previous studies.

3.1. Data on Staffing

The ministry granted temporary access to payroll data for all Danish universities from 1999
through to 2017. In Summe, it covers 256,320 individuals who received a salary payment from
a Danish university at least once. These data provide a fine-grained and consistent picture of
universities’ staff composition over time. Although only a partial indicator, staffing changes are
relevant for studying the consequences of reforms, as human resources are the main means of
production at universities (Rhoades & Frye, 2015). We use formal assigned “job titles” to iso-
late staff within different areas of responsibilities, “collective agreements” to isolate staff hold-
ing at least a master’s degree, and “salary frames” to isolate staff on formal managerial
contracts. As for the latter, the salary frames from 36–41 are with few exceptions1 devoted
to public managers and determines their rank as specified in Table 1. Tisch 2 lists the most
general staff categories applied in this article, as well as in the two it builds upon.

3.2. Data on Funding

The available disaggregated data on the funding of Danish universities over time are limited
and patchy. We therefore combine data from the two most-used Danish databases, Die
Statistics Denmark agency and the Universities Denmark association, which are complemen-
tary but not entirely consistent. Sie sind, Jedoch, sufficiently consistent to highlight the main
national and organizational trends. In the analysis, we first distinguish between funding for
education and funding for research (siehe Abbildung 1). The funding for educational activities in
Denmark is almost exclusively activity based, determined by the number and composition
of passed exams for each student. Infolge, the number of students provides a solid indicator
for the otherwise poorly documented educational funding stream.

The funding for research activities is further separated into two streams: one of block grants,
which is mainly allocated based on historical criteria, but with a growing performance-based
share, and one of external research funding from both public and private, national and inter-
national sources (Aagaard, 2017). How to quantify this distinction in the Danish case is not

1 Full professors, together with judges, are placed at salary frame 37 as an exception. In line with most other

records of public managers, we do not count them as such (z.B., MS, 2019A, 2019B).

Quantitative Science Studies

852

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Tisch 1. Salary frames for Danish public sector managers (Dansk Magisterforening, 2020)

Salary frame
36

37

38

Rank

Minor manager/team leader

Section/office manager

Division manager or vice director

Basic salary (Danish krone), 2019
(excluding supplements)
516,132

570,080

648,649

39/40

Director

712,191/796,883

straightforward, as detailed disaggregated data are unavailable. In diesem Artikel, we combine a
seasoned estimate from Statistics Denmark (1999–2011) with a new one from Universities
Denmark (2012–2017), which with sufficient detail shows the contours of the development
during the period in question.

4. THE DANISH DEVELOPMENT IN A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

As a backdrop to the empirical analysis in Section 5, this section outlines the main staff com-
position developments of Danish universities from 1999 Zu 2017 and compares them to the
corresponding developments in four other countries. This cross-country comparison enables
us to examine the Danish development in a broader context, where both general international
trends towards convergence and more specific national developments play a role.

4.1. The Transformation of Danish Universities

A previous study examining the development of Denmark’s university system (Stage &
Aagaard, 2019) documented a strong overall growth in personnel at all eight Danish
universities.

Wie in der Abbildung zu sehen ist 2, the strong overall staff growth was, Jedoch, highly uneven
across categories and has over time led to a high degree of intraorganizational change. Bei
the most aggregated level, the result has been a strengthening of the academic side of
Danish universities—at least when measured by the sheer number of employees in different
categories. This observation stands somewhat in contrast to a popular narrative according to

Tisch 2. Applied staff categories

Academic

Faculty: Permanent academic staff (z.B., Professors, Associate Professors, and Senior Researchers)

Other academic staff: Predominantly temporary academic staff (z.B., Assistant Professors, Postdocs,

PhDs, Academic Assistants, and teaching positions usually not requiring a PhD degree)

Nonacademic

Degree-holding professionals: Administrative staff with a university degree (z.B., Managers, Officers,

Coordinators, and Consultants)

Clerks: Administrative staff usually with vocational education (z.B., Sectaries, Clerical Officers,

and Section Managers)

Technical and manual staff: A diverse set of employees usually with a quite different educational

background and competencies than administrative staff. The technical and manual jobs are usually
not performed at an office desk (z.B., Janitors, Laboratory Technologists, and Engineers)

Quantitative Science Studies

853

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 1. Types of funding streams.

which the administration is outgrowing the academics. But as soon as the aggregated catego-
ries are opened up, important nuances surface. Most notably, it is shown that the growth on
the academic side is to a large extent the result of substantial growth in the use of junior ac-
ademics in temporary positions. On the administrative side, the balance has also shifted be-
tween different categories, but here the direction has been almost the opposite: The strongest
growth has taken place among the higher categories in the internal hierarchy, while nearly all
other categories have decreased in relative terms. Gesamt, we thus observe a weakening of the
middle and a strengthening of the bottom layers of the career hierarchy on the academic side
of the universities, while the strengthening on the administrative side is found at the middle
and top layers. With regard to salaries, these trends reflect the growth of the relatively low-
wage academic positions and the growth of the more expensive administrative positions.
Weiter, a detailed examination of job titles on the administrative side shows a proliferation
of new, specialized management functions that are added on top of the (now shrinking) tra-
ditional administrative support functions.

4.2. The Danish Development in a Comparative Perspective

In order to examine the role of specific national policies and their interaction with more gen-
eral transnational drivers, it is also necessary to compare the Danish development to corre-
sponding developments in other countries. This aspect is addressed in detail in Stage (2020)
and briefly summarized here. Figur 3 shows selected patterns of both variation and similarity
between the staff compositions of five different national university systems over time.

In Abbildung 3, it is noteworthy that the direction of changes overall is similar across countries,
and that the academic staff categories have grown more than the categories of nonacademic
staff in all the examined countries. Although from quite different starting points and with dif-
ferent intensity, the cross-country academic growth uniformly relates to the “Other academic
staff” category rather than to “Faculty.” Likewise the category of “Degree-holding

Figur 2. Staff composition across all current Danish universities, 1999–2017. The growth rate is
given as a percentage and the change in share of the total is in percentage points, calculated from
1999 Zu 2017.

Quantitative Science Studies

854

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Figur 3. Cross-country summary of changes in the relative size of the staff categories over time.

professionals” has everywhere increased at the expense of “Clerks” and “Technical and man-
ual staff.” The timing of these developments has been similar in the continental European
Länder, where the “Other academic staff” category increased in the years leading up to
and after 2008 and decreased again around 2012. Im Gegensatz, the three nonacademic catego-
ries have developed incrementally across all the countries throughout the period. Es gibt,
Jedoch, also differences across countries. Gesamt, Stage (2020) concludes that staff compo-
sition seems to change the most in countries where the state reforms the external conditions of
universities the most (z.B., regulation, funding, Diskurs).

Among these, Denmark is the country with the most comprehensive staff changes across
the board. During the last two decades, the staff changes in Denmark stand out in comparison
with the otherwise similar egalitarian system in Norway and the fellow Humboldtian system in
Deutschland. The restructuring of the academic workforce stagnated in Norwegian universities
halfway through the period, but intensified in Denmark alongside the implementation of
new policy initiatives. Gleichzeitig, the restructuring of the nonacademic workforce
clearly lagged behind in German universities although facing reforms and the same transna-
tional pressures as those in Denmark. These variations align with assertions that the Danish
university system is one of the most intensively reformed in Europe (Aagaard & de Boer, 2017),
making Denmark an interesting case for an examination of the links between transnational
pressures, state-led reforms, and local staff changes (Flyvbjerg, 2006).

5. DANISH POLICY REFORMS AS DRIVERS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE

Denmark, previously characterized as a slow and pragmatic adopter of international research
policy ideas (Aagaard & Mejlgaard, 2012; Hansen, 2002), has during the latest decade repeat-
edly been singled out as a trailblazer among the European countries (Aagaard & de Boer,
2017; Bleiklie & Michelsen, 2019; Hansen, Geschwind, et al., 2019; Kallerud, 2006). Im Par-
besonders, the intensity of reform accelerated after a change of government in 2001, which led to
a sweeping reform process with the aim of transforming Danish universities into key players in

Quantitative Science Studies

855

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 4. Timeline of the investigated policy reforms.

the global knowledge economy. Infolge, several reforms were launched with both direct
and indirect implications for the organization of universities (Aagaard & Mejlgaard, 2012;
Ejersbo, Greve, & Pihl-Thingvad, 2019). Strengthened steering capacity, increased competi-
tion for funding, higher student numbers, large-scale mergers, more comprehensive evaluation
Aktivität, and renewed focus on responsiveness and social responsibility were seen by the gov-
ernment as essential means to modernize the universities.

Four elements in this wave of reforms can be seen as particularly important: the University
Akt (2003), the PhD reform (2004–2013), the changes in the funding system (2002–2012), Und
the merger process (2007; Siehe Abbildung 4). The first three of these are presented briefly in their
respective subsections, but since the merger reform is discussed within these sections, eher
than separately, it is presented briefly here.

The Danish university merger process, launched in 2007, was a far-reaching structural re-
form that reduced the number of universities from 12 to eight and transferred almost all the
existing Government Research Institutes (GRIs) to the eight remaining universities (Aagaard,
Hansen, & Rasmussen, 2016). One of the results was a large concentration of resources within
the three largest universities (University of Copenhagen, Aarhus University, and the Technical
University of Denmark), which today receive close to two-thirds of public research funding. In
addition, the reform represented a clear break with the former division of labor between ac-
ademic research and applied GRI research (Aagaard, 2011).

In the following subsections, the relationships between these reforms and changes in staff

compositions are analyzed one by one.

5.1. The University Act

In 2003, a new University Act, labeled by the responsible minister as the most fundamental
change to the organization of research and education since the establishment of
Copenhagen University in 1479, substantially reformed the governance structure of
Danish universities (Andersen, 2006). Erste, the reform removed the universities from the
formal state hierarchy and turned them into “self-owned entities” with the power to draft
their own statutes. The ministry was still to set policy goals, define budgets, and perform
audits, but the universities were given more freedom to decide how to organize and manage
their activities (Degn & Sørensen, 2015; Wright & Ørberg, 2008). Zweite, the reform in-
stilled university boards with an external majority, replaced elected academic leaders with
appointed managers, and reduced the power of the collegial senates. Somit, after the re-
form a clear line management structure was introduced, where the university boards ap-
point rectors, who appoint deans, who in turn appoint heads of departments (Christensen,
2012). Somit, the new leaders are now appointed downwards and responsible upwards.
This new managerial structure was expected to lead to professionalized management, enable
strategic decision-making, and to strengthen external accountability (Wright & Ørberg, 2008).

Quantitative Science Studies

856

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

The large-scale impact of this reform on the organization of Danish universities has been
highlighted repeatedly (z.B., Aagaard & Mejlgaard, 2012; Christensen, 2012; Degn &
Sørensen, 2015; Ejersbo et al., 2019; Paldam, 2015; Wright & Ørberg, 2008), but despite com-
mon references to expanded management and increased top-down steering, it remains uncer-
tain how the reform was implemented in practice and how it influenced staff compositions.
Based on policy texts and public staff data, Christensen (2012) highlights two ways in which
Die 2003 reform changed the traditional managerial structure:

1. The Act turned academic “manager roles” into full-time “line manager positions.”
2. The professionalization efforts led to specialized “administrative manager positions.”

The actual scale and pace of these developments is, Jedoch, far from evident in the study
by Christensen (2012) or any other (z.B., Boden & Wright, 2010; Paldam, 2015). Both the de-
velopment of the line management (rectors, vice-rectors, deans, vice-deans, department
heads, and research directors) and the administrative management structures are examined
in the following.

5.1.1. Growth of line managers

Prior to the 2003 reform, few departments and faculties had a formal manager position.
Stattdessen, most decision-making was carried out by academics placed in temporary “manager
roles.” These roles circulated among senior colleagues on the basis of collegial elections and
war, as a general rule, only part time and secondary to one’s main position, usually as a pro-
fessor (Christensen, 2012). Contrary to the former informal management roles, the incumbents
of the new line manager positions became employed on formal manager contracts with ded-
icated job titles. Figur 5 shows this development.

The increases in top line managers (Frame 37 und darüber) in particular accelerated around
the academic year 2006/2007. This timing corroborates previous research showing that the
first steps of the implementation of the reform were quite slow. Somit, it took 3–5 years from
the formal adoption of the 2003 reform until the appointed line managers had replaced the
elected leaders at all levels of the universities (Lind & Aagaard, 2017). Figur 5 reveals, In
addition, that a large share of the appointed line managers were employed “outside salary
frames” during the first 4–5 years.

Figur 5. The number of “line managers” (FTEs) at four salary frame levels, 1999–2017.

Quantitative Science Studies

857

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Tisch 3 shows the composition of the rising numbers of FTEs (full-time equivalents) in job
titles related to the manager roles that today constitute line management. While in 1999 only a
few, beyond the rectors, were employed in dedicated manager positions, the situation had
become markedly different in 2017. The largest change is found in the number of deans
and vice deans and among the heads of department. The number of center/research managers,
who are in charge of smaller academic units associated with a department, has also grown.
Jedoch, the increases shown from 1999 Zu 2017 are obviously somewhat misleading, wie es ist
unknown how many de facto FTEs were spent in manager roles prior to implementation of the
Akt. But while the exact figures are uncertain, it is still clear that the overall increase has been
substantial. This increase also reflects the broader set of responsibilities introduced with the
Akt. In comparison with the former manager roles, the new line managers hold considerably
stronger decision-making power and have a more explicit and much broader strategic steering
responsibility. And to an increasing degree they are not only holding this stronger decision-making
power but also using it actively. In other studies this is observed at the central level, Wo
several universities have engaged in large reorganizations championed by rectors, vice-
rectors, and deans, and at the department level, where department heads are taking a more
active role in strategic steering (Degn, 2015A, 2015B; Hansen, Lind, & Stage, 2020; Lind &
Aagaard, 2017).

Jedoch, the new University Act not only resulted in the explicitly required clearer and
more expanded line management structure, it also influenced the traditional administrative
side of the universities. The next section examines this development.

5.1.2. Growth in the number of administrative managers

As shown in Stage and Aagaard (2019), it is particularly among the pure administrative posi-
tions that an increase in the number of new, specialized managers can be detected. Figur 6
shows the development in the number of administrative management positions outside line
management.

Zusätzlich, Tisch 4 shows the development of four types of manager positions within the
top salary frames from 1999 Zu 2017. In Danish nomenclature, there is a hierarchical relation-
ship between the job titles of Director (Direktør), Manager (Chef ), leader (Leder), and senior
consultant (Chefkonsulent). Similar to the development of line managers, Figur 6 und Tisch 4
show that degree-holding managers have developed in the direction of an elaborated pyramid
shape with a wider middle and bottom layer. Somit, there has been a substantial increase in
the number of lower level managers.

Tisch 3. The number of “line managers” (FTEs) at Danish universities in 1999 Und 2017

Typ
Rectors

Vice-rectors

Deans

Vice-deans

Heads of departments

Center/research managers

1999
8

2

6

0

2

5

2017
8

8

25

24

143

34

858

Quantitative Science Studies

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 6. The number of “degree-holding administrative managers” (FTEs) at four salary frame
levels, 1999–2017.

Jedoch, the strong growth in the number of manager positions in the highest salary frames
around 2006/2007 was not exclusively linked to the implementation of the University Act.
2007 was also the year of the mergers between universities and GRIs. Anfänglich, half of the
new top managers at the universities came from the absorbed units (four small universities
and nine GRIs). But while some of these incoming top managers were phased out over a
ein paar Jahre (due to redundancy as a result of merging self-contained administrations), the total
number of top manager positions did not decrease. Figur 7 shows the different volumes of top
managers at merged and nonmerged universities.

Somit, the reduction in the number of top managers that was expected to be achieved by
economies of scale due to the mergers did not materialize. Eher, new types of top managers
were employed in exchange for the ones that became redundant. Part of the explanation of
this pattern is most likely linked to the fact that the number of top managers (salary frame 37

Tisch 4. Types of degree-holding managers (FTEs) at Danish universities in 1999 Und 2017

Salary frames
38–40

37

36

Typ

Directors

Managers

Leaders

Directors

Managers

Leaders

Directors

Managers

Leaders

Senior consultants

1999
8

1

0

1

19

4

0

29

7

10

2017
11

1

1

44

27

4

10

133

115

580

859

Quantitative Science Studies

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 7. Top administrative managers (salary frame 37 und darüber) at merged and nonmerged
universities, 1999–2017.

und darüber) at Danish public institutions is restricted by a quota assigned by the Ministry of
Finance (MS, 2019A, 2019B). As a result of the mergers, the three largest universities had their
quotas expanded overnight. In the following decade, these universities continued to use the
new full quotas, probably because it was available to them, and partly because it was contrac-
tually difficult to downgrade redundant top managers. Instead of restricting the number, it ap-
pears that the quotas in this particular case actually led to a lasting increase in the number of
top university managers.

Contrary to the abrupt development in the management positions with the highest salary
frames in the three largest universities, the number of managers in salary frame 36 (welches ist
outside the control of the Ministry of Finance) has steadily increased over the full period at all
universities, from fewer than 100 In 1999 to more than 900 In 2017 (Figur 6). The develop-
ment of this category shows, on the one hand, that the change processes were well under way
before the 2003 reform, but also that the move towards a more comprehensive and specialized
management system was accelerated after the appointed line managers took office around
2006/2007.

Around 75% of the administrative leaders in salary frame 36 hold the job title of “Senior
consultant,” which is formally a minor manager or team leader position and is also increas-
ingly used as a final career advancement step for degree-holding specialists. The remaining
25% generally hold job titles such as “Head of secretariat” or “Head of unit.” Overall, the stark
expansion of lower level managers indicates a move towards a university administration com-
posed of an increasingly fine-grained system of specialized offices. The large lowest level of
(Mitte) managers, especially the senior consultants, also reflects a move toward more project-
or team-based public administration, with many new leaders of relatively small teams.

Figur 8 shows that the administrative hierarchy has not simply been upscaled from 1999 Zu
2017 but also expanded with new administrative layers and divisions. While the overall num-
ber of staff doubled, the size of the administrative hierarchy tripled, which is a conservative
estimate, as many omitted senior consultants also act as managers. Those manager and direc-
tor categories that were large in 1999 (the red circles, z.B., Office manager, Secretariat
Manager, and Director) remained large in 2017, although new, equally large categories had
emerged (the pink circles, z.B., Financial Manager, Division Manager, Communication
Manager, Deputy Director, Associate Director). The few small manager categories that ceased
(the green circles) do not represent discontinued but rather outsourced or merged responsibil-
ities. Above all, the new managerial titles are hyphenated with rank or area, revealing the con-
tours of an extended hierarchy and its increasingly fine-grained system of specialized offices.
Somit, the administrative hierarchy has obviously been expanded and elaborated.

Gesamt, this part of the analysis thus supports the claim that the University Act has contrib-
uted to changing Danish universities as organizations. A new and more elaborated hierarchy
of both line managers and administrative managers has developed over time. Das

Quantitative Science Studies

860

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Figur 8. The volume and composition of the administrative top manager and director job titles2 at Danish universities in 1999 Und 2017.

development sheds light in particular on the emergence of a changed managerial structure in
the form of a large-scale influx of employees working on tasks that previously were not re-
garded as part of the core administrative and managerial responsibilities. There is a fairly clear
correspondence between these positions and the implementation of the policy agenda behind
the University Act, but not a one-to-one relationship. Erste, the development started even
before the reform, and secondly other reforms are also likely to have played a role. So while
the University Act most likely accelerated the observed development, it does not fully explain
Es. The following sections examine other important factors.

5.2. The PhD Reform

In parallel to the University Act, the Danish PhD system was also reformed. Where the
University Act mainly influenced the composition of the nonacademic side of the universities,
the PhD reform first and foremost targeted the composition of the academic staff. The first part

2 Job titles containing either “Direktør” or “Chef.” The figures do not include senior consultants, although

many act as managers.

Quantitative Science Studies

861

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 9.
The start and end of the PhD reform are marked by vertical lines.

Index of FTEs in academic subcategories at all current Danish universities, 1999–2017.

of the reform was implemented in 2004, when Parliament decided to increase the PhD uptake
by an additional 460 students per year. This ambition was subsequently significantly strength-
ened with the Globalization Strategy of 2006, welche (among other goals) aimed to double the
entire PhD uptake before 2010. This target was incorporated into the funding allocation and
development contracts between universities and the Ministry in the period from 2007 Zu 2010.
One-third of the additional PhD expenditure was granted in block funding, while the remain-
ing two-thirds was to be covered by expected increases in external research funding (Aagaard,
2011, P. 392).

As shown in Figure 9, the number of PhD students did, in fact, grow as fast and as exten-
sively as the reformers demanded. It even outpaced the target. The termination of the PhD
reform also had a delayed but clear effect (since a PhD grant lasts 3 years in Denmark).
The PhD population peaked in early 2014 with no fewer than 5,200 FTEs. Since then, Die
number has decreased consistently by around 70 FTEs every quarter.

Es ist, Jedoch, noteworthy that the two categories of “Academic assistants” and “Temporary
faculty” (z.B., postdoctoral researchers in particular) grew almost as quickly as the PhD stu-
dents, even though they were not covered by the PhD reform’s formal instruments.
Darüber hinaus, these two categories did not start to decrease after the termination of the reform.
Although the temporary faculty numbers stagnated for 3 years after 2015, the absolute
numbers did not decrease. The spiky3 line of academic assistants also continued its irregular
rise, reaching a new high in 2017. The abrupt increases for most categories in 2007 reflect the
mergers, which brought additional staff into the current universities from the absorbed units.

Regardless of whether they were affected by the mergers in 2007, all Danish universities
had a similar ratio between PhD students and faculty in the first 5 years of the period, but this
ratio began to increase more rapidly at the merged universities towards the end of 2005
(Figur 10). This likely reflects that the merged universities were already, from the outset, mehr
research intensive than the nonmerged ones. The further concentration of research resources
at the three biggest Danish universities as a result of the mergers in 2007 further accelerated
Dieser Trend (Aagaard et al., 2016). Zusätzlich, the merged universities also benefitted from field-
specific requirements in the PhD reform.

3 The spikiness reflects that employment of research assistants is concentrated at the end of each year.

Quantitative Science Studies

862

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 10. PhD students per permanent academic position at merged and nonmerged
universities.

A more detailed insight into the effect of the PhD reform can be gained by looking at the
developments within two selected universities. Here variation can be expected between uni-
versities with different profiles as the PhD reform primarily aimed to increase the uptake within
the medical, technical, and natural sciences (90% of the increase was to take place within
these fields according to the reform agreement [Pedersen, 2015, P. 21]). Hence by comparing
the Danish Technical University (DTU), a Natural Science/Technical Science university, mit
Copenhagen Business School (CBS), a Social Science/Humanities university, it is possible to
see the effects of the reform at a disaggregated level.

Wie in der Abbildung zu sehen ist 11, the pattern here is in line with the reform’s intention. DTU had
a strong increase in PhD students under the reform period, while the pattern at CBS appears to
be almost unrelated to the reform. Tatsächlich, the strongest fluctuation in the number of PhD stu-
dents at CBS can be observed after the reform’s termination and as the growth levels off at
DTU.

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Figur 11. The number of FTEs in four subcategories of “Other academic staff” and the total num-
ber of academic FTEs at The Danish Technical University and Copenhagen Business School, 1999–
2017. The dotted lines mark the start and end of the PhD reform.

Quantitative Science Studies

863

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Somit, overall the correlation between the PhD reform’s content and timing and the actual
developments within the PhD category suggests a relatively clear relationship between the
zwei. Jedoch, the fact that the number of PhD students outgrew the target and the fact that
the two other temporary academic subcategories surged simultaneously shows that also in this
case there appears to have been other coinciding, reinforcing factors. Funding is likely to be
one of the most important of these. Somit, the role of changed funding streams is examined in
the next section.

5.3. Changes in the Volume and Composition of Funding

While the University Act, the PhD reform and the mergers influenced staff compositions, Es
cannot be disregarded that the reforms were implemented in a period characterized by strong
overall growth in the funding of universities (siehe Abbildung 12). This growth, Jedoch, was not
evenly distributed across different funding streams or across individual universities. Somit,
both the overall growth in itself and the changed funding composition can be expected to have
played a role in the restructuring of university staffing.

The general funding changes were initiated in the early 2000s, when a number of new
funding organizations were established, but accelerated sharply as a result of the
Globalization Strategy, which led to an unparalleled investment in the university sector from
2007 Zu 2012. The link between changes in specific funding streams and specific staff cate-
gories is, nonetheless, far from straightforward. Due to a combination of a high degree of fi-
nancial autonomy and substantial complementarity between different “university missions”
(teaching, Forschung, and outreach), the different funding streams cannot be clearly

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Figur 12. The development in three selected staff categories, compared to indicators of changes
in the three funding streams, at all Danish universities 1999–2017. (Quelle: Statistics Denmark
[1999–2011] and Universities Denmark [2012–2017]).

Quantitative Science Studies

864

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

disentangled within the universities. Somit, organizational changes can rarely be attributed
directly to changes in a single funding stream. Trotzdem, some funding streams can be expected
to be more closely linked to some staff categories than to others. Insbesondere, it is often as-
sumed that increased external research funding gives rise to temporary academic positions
(z.B., Milojevic, Radicchi, & Walsh, 2019; Yudkevich, Altbach, & Rumbley, 2015).

Erste, the funding for educational activities in Denmark is almost exclusively activity-
based, determined by the number and composition of passed exams for each student. As a
Ergebnis, there is a close relationship between the number of students and the educational fund-
ing stream. Wie in der Abbildung zu sehen ist 12, there has been a substantial increase in the number of
students, which increased by 42 percent from 2004 Zu 2014. These numbers, Jedoch,
dropped again over the last 4 years of the period under study due to state-led quotas in certain
fields of study.

Zweite, the funding for research activities consists of two streams: one of block grants
(which are mainly allocated based on historical criteria, but with a growing performance-
based share), and one of external research funding from both public and private national
and international sources (Aagaard, 2017). Figur 12 shows these two streams combined as
“Annual R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP,” which increased in particular from 2007
and onwards.

A disproportional part of this increase in R&D expenditures has, Jedoch, been allocated
through the external stream, and often with special strings attached (Aagaard, 2017). Figur 12
shows the contours of the development during the period in question. The main increase in
external funding here again took place in the years after 2007, where its relative size grew
from around 30% Zu 45%.

As shown in Figure 12, we will in the following subanalysis focus on the relationships
between these funding streams and three selected staff categories: “Other academic staff,”
“Faculty,” and “Degree-holding professionals.”

As stated above, it is generally assumed that there is a close link between external research
funding and the number of mainly junior academics in temporary positions. In Wirklichkeit, Wie-
immer, this link is less visible than one could expect—at least at the aggregated sector level.
While the share of temporary academic staff obviously grew in the period when the share
of external funding increased the most (from 2007–2010), it also grew (although at a slower
pace) in the period from 2002–2006, when the share of external funding was decreasing.
Likewise, it can be seen that the number of academic staff in temporary positions started to
drop from around 2015, although the share of external research funding continued to increase.
Jedoch, as shown in the previous subanalysis, the drop first and foremost relates to the ter-
mination of the PhD reform, which effectively decreased the number of PhD students, but not
so much the other temporary staff groups. With regard to the other two staff categories (faculty
and degree-holding professionals), the relationship between individual funding streams and
changes in size is even less detectable at the aggregated sector level. The developments here
appear to be more closely associated with the overall growth in resources than to fluctuations
in specific funding streams.

Since the eight Danish universities have rather different compositions of funding, it is pos-
sible to further disentangle the relationship between funding types and staff categories by ex-
amining selected universities separately. Figur 13 shows just how different the funding
compositions of the universities are. The distributions are shown for just 1 year because the
major institutional differences have been fairly stable from 2007 Zu 2017.

Quantitative Science Studies

865

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Figur 13. Funding composition of Danish universities on a tentative continuum from teaching-
intensive to research-intensive, exemplified by three selected universities in 2017 (Quelle:
Universities Denmark).

The research-intensive universities receive significantly more external funding and larger
block grants for research activities than the teaching-intensive ones, which rely mostly on
the activity-based educational funding stream. These institutional differences in funding com-
positions are increasingly reflected in the academic staff composition. From around 2003, A
divide began to grow in the ratio of temporary to permanent academic positions across the
continuum above. All universities had a similar ratio at the beginning of the period, aber die
size of the temporary academic workforce clearly increased at a faster pace at the research-
intensive universities during the period where the share of external research funding increased.
Figur 14 shows the contrast between the two universities that are located closest to each end
of the continuum.

External research funding accounted for respectively 41% (DTU) Und 35% (KU) of the two
most research-intensive universities’ 2017 budget, and they employed two “Other academic
staff” for every “Faculty” member. Im Gegensatz, external research funding accounted for only
10% of the two most teaching-intensive universities’ 2017 budget, and they employed only
one “Other academic staff” for every “Faculty” member. Umgekehrt, the teaching-heavy uni-
versities have a relatively larger share of “Faculty”; zum Beispiel, RUC had almost twice the
share as DTU in 2017 (33% vs. 18%).

Contrary to these developments within the academic workforce, no clear link emerges be-
tween specific funding streams and changes in the administrative/managerial workforce from
the analysis of separate universities. The category of degree-holding professionals (sowie
the categories of line managers and administrative managers examined above) increased with
surprisingly uniform intensity and persistence across the rather differently funded universities.

Figur 14.
and two most teaching-intensive universities, 1999–2017.

“Other academic staff” per permanent academic staff at the two most research-intensive

Quantitative Science Studies

866

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

This group of specialized managers and administrators increased no less at RUC than at AAU,
even though these universities have had the smallest and largest changes in the level and com-
position of funding respectively. In die gleiche Richtung, the degree-holding professionals group grew
only slightly more at CBS and DTU than it did at the other universities, even though they have
contrasting academic profiles (social science vs. technical science) and funding bases (teach-
ing vs. research funding).

Jedoch, the number of technical and manual staff for every academic staff member has
developed unevenly across the continuum of differently funded universities. The research-
intensive universities have gone from 0.71 Zu 0.26, compared to 0.23 Zu 0.13 at the teaching-
intensive universities. Obviously, CBS and RUC, with their predominantly Social Science
profiles, employ considerably fewer craftspeople and technicians for performing experi-
gen. The high reduction at the research-intensive universities signals a link between these
research-supporting technicians and the stark increase in temporary junior academics, Und
hence also a link to the increases in external research funding. “Technical and manual staff”
Ist, Jedoch, a many-sided category that is also influenced by the other reforms examined
über. The move to larger, more professionally managed and “self-owned” entities were ex-
plicitly intended to lead to economies of scale and to outsourcing of manual tasks, of which
these reductions may also be a weak indication.

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

There is little doubt that the major national policy reforms of recent decades have had a pro-
found influence on the staff composition of Danish universities. Gesamt, there is a relatively
clear correspondence between the scope, Richtung, and content of the reforms on the one
Seite, and the type and magnitude of organizational changes observed on the other. Somit,
instead of change resistance and path dependency, the general development has been char-
acterized by a comprehensive change in Danish universities as organizations—at least seen
through the lens of the relative growth and decline of different staff categories. Es ist, Jedoch,
equally evident from the analysis that the relationships between most of the individual reform
elements and the observed changes in staff developments seldom have been immediate, di-
rect, and straightforward.

Only in a few instances do we observe a relatively clear correspondence between the in-
dividual reform elements and the changes in staff composition. Elements of the University Act
and the PhD reform are examples of such elements with an almost one-to-one relationship
between reform content and staff changes (although with time lags), but these relationships
are rather exceptions than the rule. Vor allem, these two reforms had strong coercive elements
and left limited room for local adaption. But even here it is highly plausible that at least parts of
the observed developments in staff composition would have occurred anyway. For the rest of
the reform elements, the opposite has typically been the case. Most of the reform elements
examined in this article provided substantial leeway for the universities regarding how to im-
plement them. Infolge, the direct effects of these reform elements in isolation are much
more difficult to disentangle.

For two decades now, the staff composition of Danish universities has nonetheless consis-
tently moved in the same overall direction. It thus makes sense to think of the national policies
in question, together with other minor reforms not covered in this article, as a “string of re-
forms” with a relatively coherent vision of how to organize Danish universities. Darüber hinaus,
these different reform elements have, in general, interacted and reinforced one another’s ef-
fects. This finding also corresponds to previous policy studies (Degn & Sørensen, 2015; Greve

Quantitative Science Studies

867

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

.

/

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

& Ejersbo, 2019; Lind & Aagaard, 2017), which highlight that reforms “tend to come in pack-
ages or in strings” (Brunsson, 2009, P. 54). Our empirical analysis accordingly shows that the
substantial staff changes eventually took place in correspondence with the content of the re-
form package as a whole, but that the changes in most cases only manifested themselves slowly
over time and often with considerable time lags. A related and important fact was that most of
the reforms came without additional funding. The University Act and the mergers were ex-
pected to be budget-neutral in the long run, and the PhD reform was only partially funded
through increased institutional funding. Jedoch, the reforms were implemented in a period
of general growth, and the university leaders were under the impression that compliance with
the unfunded reforms would increase the chances of getting a good share of the additional re-
sources that were simultaneously allocated through other strings in the funding system
(Aagaard, 2011).

The national development can, Jedoch, not be fully understood without also taking the
global and local levels into account. On the one side, the consistency in the direction of the
string of reforms suggests that the vision of change has been strongly inspired by the transna-
tional discourse on the organization, role, and missions of universities, which flourished dur-
ing the period under examination (Paradeise et al., 2009). Developments with similar direction
have thus been observed in many other countries during the same period. Stage (2020), für
Beispiel, shows that transformations similar to those observed in Denmark also happened in
Die Vereinigten Staaten, das Vereinigte Königreich, Deutschland, and Norway. This convergence shows how
perceptions of legitimate practices within the global field of universities have opened room for
new types of strategic decision-making about recruitment and division of labor. Infolge, A
bottom-heavy academic workforce and top-heavy administration appear to have become the
“new normal” across countries. This appears to be both the result of national policies shaped
by transnational pressures and local implementation influenced by normative pressure from
the organizational field of universities.

Somit, the reform’s high impact on Danish universities has also to some degree been re-
inforced by the universities themselves. The apparently close congruence between the overall
policy-vision and the “models” that are either in place or being praised in countries where
“world-class” universities are based (z.B., Die Vereinigten Staaten, das Vereinigte Königreich) have also
created a normative pressure at the local level, urging the Danish universities to implement
and translate the reforms in certain ways. In the opposite scenario, if the reforms had contra-
dicted transnational trends in the global field of universities, the Danish universities would
have been more likely to resist or modify the policy demands—and given the flexibility related
to most of the reform elements, other paths could have been possible to pursue. Gleichzeitig
Zeit, it should also be noticed that, while the different Danish universities have all changed in
a similar direction, they have also maintained some of their initial differences. Most importantly,
it should be noted that the string of reforms appears to have led to increased homogenization on
the administrative side of the universities but to increased differentiation on the academic side.
Where the administrative hierarchy has developed in uniform ways across all universities, Die
differences in staff composition between teaching- and research-intensive universities, bzw-
aktiv, appear to have widened on the academic side.

But as Stage (2020) also shows, the transformation of the organizational model of univer-
sities has gone further in Denmark than in any of the other examined countries. Somit, Die
transnational pressure and local adaption outlined above cannot fully explain the Danish case.
As the present analysis has shown, the more far-reaching Danish staff changes appear to have
been driven by specific national policies and actor constellations. This observation is opposite
to what Hüther and Krücken (2018) observe in neighboring Germany, where policy reforms

Quantitative Science Studies

868

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

have apparently played a minor role in university change. They argue that their federal system
has led to many disconnected and contradictory university reforms and their constitution has
curbed reforms by protecting full professors’ autonomy. Our Danish case, daher, raises a
second-order question: How were Danish policymakers successful in bringing about changes
that have been difficult to carry through in other countries? While a thorough analysis of such
questions is beyond the scope of this article, Aagaard (2011) and Aagaard and Mejlgaard
(2012) suggest a number of possible explanations.

Erste, the Danish reform agenda has since the turn of the millennium been characterized by
a high degree of consensus among policymakers and central stakeholders. Somit, there has
been limited opposition to the development outside of the universities. Zweite, the Danish
universities have at the same time had difficulties finding consensus among themselves and
have therefore had limited veto power. Dritte, the reformation of the Danish university system
has been a long, relatively unitary, and gradual process with many layers of reinforcing re-
Formen. Somit, through different layering and displacement processes taking place over a pro-
longed time period, Danish policymakers have succeeded in bringing about change that
would otherwise be difficult to implement in fewer steps over a shorter time period. Als
Streeck and Thelen (2005, P. 23) argue, when institutions defy radical change, differential
growth of selected elements can eventually lead to the desired changes. Somit, the Danish
string of reinforcing reforms seems to have circumvented parts of the change-resistant nature of
universities. And fourthly, but not least, it is important to highlight that the period as a whole
has been characterized by strong financial growth. Generally, it is easier to implement layering
and displacement strategies when additional money is allocated to the system (Aagaard,
2017).

Somit, policies do matter, and national political-administrative systems can not only be
seen as mediators of transnational ideas, but also as systems that continue to translate, modify,
or even amplify general trends into policies with distinct national colors (Gornitzka &
Maassen, 2014; Michelsen & Bleiklie, 2013). In the case of Danish universities, global pres-
sures quite clearly shaped and empowered the impact of policy reforms, which again empow-
ered hierarchical structures, which in turn further empowered the impact of policy reforms and
global pressures. Somit, the empirical evidence supports the notion that global pressures, Die
state authority, and the university management have all simultaneously had a substantial im-
pact on the trajectory of Danish universities, but also that the string of reinforcing reforms has
been the key catalyst.

BEITRÄGE DES AUTORS

This article has been developed collaboratively with both authors, Andreas Kjær Stage and
Kaare Aagaard, contributing equally. Andreas Kjær Stage: Konzeptualisierung, Datenkuration,
Formale Analyse, Untersuchung, Methodik, Software, Validierung, Visualisierung, Schreiben-
original draft, Writing—review & Bearbeitung. Kaare Aagaard: Konzeptualisierung, Formale Analyse,
Untersuchung, Methodik, Projektverwaltung, Validierung, Visualisierung, Writing—original
Entwurf, Writing—review & Bearbeitung.

COMPETING INTERESTS

The authors have no competing interests.

FUNDING INFORMATION

This work was supported by BSS graduate school, Aarhus University.

Quantitative Science Studies

869

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

DATA AVAILABILITY

The data on funding used in this manuscript are publicly available from the Statistics Denmark
agency and the Universities Denmark association. The data on staffing cannot be made pub-
licly available in a data repository due to social data protection requirements.

VERWEISE

Aagaard, K. (2011). Kampen om basismidlerne. The Danish Centre
for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Aarhus University.
Aagaard, K. (2017). The evolution of a national research funding
System: Transformative change through layering and displace-
ment. Minerva, 55, 279–297.

Aagaard, K., & de Boer, H. (2017). The Danish UNIK initiative: Ein
NPM-inspired mechanism to steer higher education. In Policy
Analysis of Structural Reforms in Higher Education. Dordrecht:
Springer.

Aagaard, K., Hansen, H. F., & Rasmussen, J. G. (2016). Mergers be-
tween governmental research institutes and universities in the
Danish HE sector. European Journal of Higher Education, 6(1),
41–55.

Aagaard, K., & Mejlgaard, N. (2012). Dansk forskningspolitik efter

årtusindskiftet. Aarhus Universitetsforlag.

Amaral, A., Meek, V. L., & Larsen, ICH. M. (Hrsg.) (2003). The Higher

Education Managerial Revolution? Dordrecht: Springer.

Andersen, H. (2006). Universitetsreform: Topstyring og ensretning.

Dansk Sociologi, 13(4), 78–88.

Baltaru, R.-D. (2018). Universities’ pursuit of inclusion and its ef-
fects on professional staff: The case of the United Kingdom.
Higher Education, 77, 641–656.

Baltaru, R.-D., & Soysal, Y. N. (2018). Administrators in higher ed-
ucation: Organizational expansion in a transforming institution.
Higher Education, 76, 213–229.

Bleiklie, ICH., & Michelsen, S. (2019). Scandinavian higher education
governance—Pursuing similar goals through different organiza-
tional arrangements. European Policy Analysis, 5(2), 190–209.
Boden, R., & Wright, S. (2010). Follow the money. An interim re-
port on Danish University funding prepared for Dansk
Magisterforening. Working Papers on University Reform, 16.
Brunsson, N. (2009). Reform as Routine: Organizational Change and
Stability in the Modern World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Capano, G., Pritoni, A., & Vicentini, G. (2019). Do policy instru-
ments matter? Governments’ choice of policy mix and higher ed-
ucation performance in Western Europe. Journal of Public Policy,
1–27.

Christensen, J. G. (2012). Magt og management på universiteterne. In
J. Faye & D. B. Pedersen (Hrsg.), Hvordan Styres Videnssamfundet?
Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne.

Dansk Magisterforening. (2020). Løn i staten. Retrieved January 29,

2020, from https://dm.dk/din-loen/leder/loen-i-staten

de Boer, H., Enders, J., & Leisyte, L. (2007). Public sector reform in
Dutch higher education: The organizational transformation of the
university. Public Administration, 85(1), 27–46.

Degn, L. (2015A). Identity constructions and sensemaking in higher
education—A case study of Danish higher education department
heads. Studies in Higher Education, 40(7), 1179–1193.

Degn, L. (2015B). Sensemaking, sensegiving and strategic man-
agement in Danish higher education. Higher Education, 69(6),
901–913.

Degn, L., & Sørensen, M. P. (2015). From collegial governance to
conduct of conduct: Danish universities set free in the service of
the state. Higher Education, 69(6), 931–946.

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., Ramirez, F. O., & Schofer, E. (2002).
Science in the modern world polity: Institutionalization and
globalization. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Ejersbo, N., Greve, C., & Pihl-Thingvad, S. (Hrsg.). (2019).

Governing the reformed university. New York: Routledge.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study re-

suchen. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.

Gornitzka, Å., & Larsen, ICH. M. (2004). Towards professionalisation?
Restructuring of administrative work force in universities. Higher
Education, 47(4), 455–471.

Gornitzka, Å., & Maassen, P. (2014). Dynamics of convergence
and divergence: Exploring accounts of higher education policy
ändern. In P. Mattei (Ed.) University Adaptation in Difficult
Economic Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R., & Sahlin-Andersson, K.
(2008). The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Greve, C., & Ejersbo, N. (2019). University reforms in context—The
relationship between university reforms and general reforms in
the public sector. In C. Greve & N. Ejersbo (Hrsg.), Governing
the reformed university (S. 27–39). New York: Routledge.
Gumport, P. J., & Pusser, B. (1995). A case of bureaucratic accretion:
Context and consequences. The Journal of Higher Education, 66(5),
493–520.

Hansen, H. F. (2002). Hvilken slags politik er forskningspolitik?

Økonomi and Politik, 75(3), 41–56.

Hansen, H. F., Geschwind, L., Kivistö, J., Pekkola, E., Pinheiro, R.,
& Pulkkinen, K. (2019). Balancing accountability and trust:
University reforms in the Nordic countries. Higher Education,
78(3), 557–573.

Hansen, H. F., Lind, J. K., & Stage, A. K. (2020). Changing mana-

gerial roles in Danish universities. Wissenschaft & Public Policy.

Hüther, O., & Krücken, G. (Hrsg.) (2018). Higher education in
Germany—Recent developments in an international perspective.
Dordrecht: Springer.

Kallerud, E. (2006). Den nordiske modellen-redefinert og ettertrak-

tet. Forskningspolitikk, 4, 8–9.

King, R. (2009). Governing universities globally—Organizations,

regulation and rankings. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Krücken, G., Blümel, A., & Kloke, K. (2013). The managerial turn in
higher education? On the interplay of organizational and occu-
pational change in German academia. Minerva, 51(4), 417–442.
Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an or-
ganizational actor. In G. S. Drori, J. W. Meyer, & H. Hwang
(Hrsg.), Globalization and organization: World society and orga-
nizational change (S. 241–257). Oxford: Oxford University
Drücken Sie.

Lind, J. K., & Aagaard, K. (2017). Danske universiteter efter
reformbølgen: fra makro-reformer til intra-organisatorisk forandr-
ing. In E. M. Kristiansen, C. H. Grøn, & M. Kristiansen (Hrsg.),
Styring og evaluering i den offentlige sektor: Festskrift til Hanne
Foss Hansen. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

Meyer, J. W., Ramirez, F. O., Frank, D. J., & Schofer, E. (2007). Higher
education as an institution. In P. J. Gumport (Ed.), Sociology of

Quantitative Science Studies

870

National policies as drivers of organizational change in universities

Higher Education: Contributions and their Contexts. Baltimore,
MD: Johns Hopkins Universität.

Michelsen, S., & Bleiklie, ICH. (2013). Comparing HE policies in
Europa: Structures and reform outputs in eight countries.
Higher Education, 65(1), 113–133.

Milojevic, S., Radicchi, F., & Walsh, J. P. (2019). Changing demo-
graphics of scientific careers: The rise of the temporary work-
force. Verfahren der Nationalen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 116(4),
12616–12623.

MS. (2019A). Personale Administrative Vejledning (PAV).

Copenhagen: Moderningseringsstyrelsen.

MS. (2019B). Flere kvinder bliver ledere i staten. Retrieved from
https://modst.dk/nyheder/nyhedsarkiv/2019/januar/flere-kvinder-
bliver-ledere-i-staten/

Olsen, J. P. (2007). The institutional dynamics of the European uni-
Vielseitigkeit. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Hrsg.), University Dynamics
and European Integration (S. 25–54). Dordrecht: Springer.
Paldam, M. (2015). The public choice of university organization: A
stylized story of a constitutional reform. Constitutional Political
Economy, 26(2), 137–158.

Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, ICH., & Ferlie, E. (2009). Universität
governance—Western European comparative perspectives.
Dordrecht: Springer.

Paradeise, C., & Thoenig, J.-C. (2013). Academic institutions in search
of quality: Local orders and global standards. Organization Studies,
34(2), 189–218.

Pedersen, H. S. (2015). Empirical essays on the labor market outcomes

of PhD graduates. Forlaget Politica.

Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organi-
zations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.

Ramirez, F. Ö. (2013). World society and the university as formal
organization. Sisyphus—Journal of Education, 1(1), 124–154.
Rhoades, G., & Frye, J. (2015). College tuition increases and faculty
labor costs: A counterintuitive disconnect. Tucson: Working pa-
per series on labor in academe, Center for the Study of Higher
Education, University of Arizona.

Sahlin, K., Wijkström, F., Dellmuth, L. M., Einarsson, T., Oberg, A., &
Wijkstrom, F. (2015). The “Milky Way” of intermediary organizations:

A transnational field of university governance. Policy & Politik,
43(3), 407–424.

Sauder, M., & Espeland, W. N. (2009). The discipline of rankings:
Tight coupling and organizational change. American Sociological
Rezension, 74(1), 63–82.

Schmid, C. J., & Wilkesmann, U. (2015). Ansichtssache
Managerialismus an deutschen Hochschulen—ein empirisches
Stimmungsbild und Erklärungen. Beiträge Zur Hochschulforschung,
37(2), 56–87.

Seeber, M., Lepori, B., Montauti, M., Enders, J., de Boer, H.,
Weyer, E., … Reale, E. (2015). European universities as com-
plete organizations? Understanding identity, hierarchy and ratio-
nality in public organizations. Public Management Review, 17(10),
1444–1474.

Stage, A. K. (2020). Are national university systems becoming more
alike? Long-term developments in staff composition across five
Länder. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 4(1), 68–104.
Stage, A. K., & Aagaard, K. (2019). Danish universities under trans-
Formation: Developments in staff categories as indicator of orga-
nizational change. Higher Education, 78, 629–652.

Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. A. (2005). Beyond continuity: Institutional
change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford
Universitätsverlag.

Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1983). Institutional sources of
change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion
of civil service reform, 1880–1935. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 28(1), 22–39.

Whitley, R. (2008). Universities as strategic actors: Limitations and
Variationen. In L. Engwall & D. Weaire (Hrsg.), The University in the
Market. London: Portland Press.

Whitley, R. (2012). Transforming universities: National condi-
tions of their varied organisational actorhood. Minerva, 50(4),
493–510.

Wright, S., & Ørberg, J. W. (2008). Autonomy and control: Danish
university reform in the context of modern governance. Learning
and Teaching, 1(1), 27–57.

Yudkevich, M., Altbach, P. G., & Rumbley, L. E. (2015). Jung
faculty in the twenty-first century: International perspectives.
New York: SUNY Press.

Quantitative Science Studies

871

l

D
Ö
w
N
Ö
A
D
e
D

F
R
Ö
M
H

T
T

P

:
/
/

D
ich
R
e
C
T
.

M

ich
T
.

/

e
D
u
Q
S
S
/
A
R
T
ich
C
e
–
P
D

l

F
/

/

/

/

1
2
8
4
9
1
8
8
5
8
9
0
Q
S
S
_
A
_
0
0
0
4
6
P
D

/

.

F

B
j
G
u
e
S
T

T

Ö
N
0
7
S
e
P
e
M
B
e
R
2
0
2
3

PDF Herunterladen