@article{SeyfriedReith2020,
  author    = {Seyfried, Markus and Reith, Florian},
  title     = {Strength of weakness},
  series = {Journal of higher education policy and management},
  volume    = {43},
  journal   = {Journal of higher education policy and management},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1360-080X},
  doi       = {10.1080/1360080X.2020.1812802},
  pages     = {298 -- 314},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {The paper investigates quality management in teaching and learning in higher education institutions from a principal-agent perspective. Based on data gained from semi-structured interviews and from a nation-wide survey with quality managers of German higher education institutions, the study shows how quality managers position themselves in relation to their perception of the interests of other actors in higher education institutions. The paper describes the various interests and discusses the main implications of this constellation of actors. It argues that quality managers, although they may be considered as rather weak actors within the higher education institution, may be characterised as having a strength of weakness due to diverging interests of their principals.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SeyfriedDoeringAnsmann2022,
  author    = {Seyfried, Markus and D{\"o}ring, Matthias and Ansmann, Moritz},
  title     = {The sequence of isomorphism—},
  series = {Administration \& society},
  volume    = {54},
  journal   = {Administration \& society},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {Thousand Oaks},
  issn      = {0095-3997},
  doi       = {10.1177/00953997211017137},
  pages     = {87 -- 116},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Isomorphism has been widely used to describe why trends penetrate entire organizational fields. However, research so far has neglected the temporal aspects of such diffusion processes and the organizational reasons underlying the introduction of new management tools. We argue that during reform waves, the reasons for adopting the new tools differ over time. Using comparative data from two surveys on quality management in the field of higher education and the health sector, we show that early adopters are more likely to be motivated by instrumental reasons, while late adopters will more likely be motivated by institutional reasons.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SeyfriedReith2019,
  author    = {Seyfried, Markus and Reith, Florian},
  title     = {The seven deadly sins of quality management: trade-offs and implications for further research},
  series = {Quality in higher education},
  volume    = {25},
  journal   = {Quality in higher education},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1353-8322},
  doi       = {10.1080/13538322.2019.1683943},
  pages     = {289 -- 303},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Quality management in higher education is generally discussed with reference to commendable outcomes such as success, best practice, improvement or control. This paper, though, focuses on the problems of organising quality management. It follows the narrative of the seven deadly sins, with each 'sin' illustrating an inherent trade-off or paradox in the implementation of internal quality management in teaching and learning in higher education institutions. Identifying the trade-offs behind these sins is essential for a better understanding of quality management as an organisational problem.},
  language  = {en}
}