@article{JannSeyfried2009, author = {Jann, Werner and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Does executive governance matter? executives an policy performance}, isbn = {978-3-86793-013-0}, year = {2009}, language = {en} } @incollection{KuhlmannSeyfried2020, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Comparative methods B}, series = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, booktitle = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, editor = {Vigoda-Gadot, Eran and Vashdi, Dana R.}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK}, isbn = {978-1-78990-347-8}, doi = {10.4337/9781789903485.00017}, pages = {181 -- 196}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This chapter outlines the relevance and value of comparative approaches and methods in studying Public Administration (PA). It discusses the roots and current developments of comparative research in PA and discusses various methodological venues for cross-country comparisons, such as most similar/dissimilar systems designs, the method of concomitant variation and the difference-in-difference method. Besides the description of these approaches, we highlight their conceptual value for theory-driven empirical comparative research. Drawing on selected pieces of comparative research, the chapter furthermore provides examples for the application of comparative methods in practice presenting empirical findings and highlighting strengths and weaknesses. The chapter finally emphasizes that the methodological development in comparative PA research has by far not yet reached its end, and that some future challenges need to be addressed, such as the issues of causality, generalizability, and mixed-methods approaches.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannSeyfried2020, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Comparatice methods B}, series = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, journal = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham}, isbn = {978-1-78990-347-8}, pages = {181 -- 196}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @article{HustedtSeyfried2016, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Co-ordination across internal organizational boundaries: how the EU Commission co-ordinates climate policies}, series = {Journal of European public policy}, volume = {23}, journal = {Journal of European public policy}, publisher = {Springer Publishing Company}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1350-1763}, doi = {10.1080/13501763.2015.1074605}, pages = {888 -- 905}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Through an analysis of climate policy-making in the European Commission (EU), this article argues that co-ordination in the Commission displays the same characteristics as the co-ordination across ministries in central governments, i.e., the properties of negative co-ordination. The article is based on a survey among Commission officials. Overall, the article reveals that a public administration perspective on the Commission proves invaluable to gain insights on how decisions are made at the European Union level. The article contributes to the emerging literature viewing the Commission as an ordinary bureaucracy - as opposed to a unique supranational organization.}, language = {en} } @incollection{HustedtSeyfried2020, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Challenges, Triggers and Initiatorsof Climate Policies and Implications for Policy Formulation}, series = {Leidenschaft und Augenmaß : sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf Entwicklung, Verwaltung, Umwelt und Klima : Festschrift f{\"u}r Harald Fuhr}, booktitle = {Leidenschaft und Augenmaß : sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf Entwicklung, Verwaltung, Umwelt und Klima : Festschrift f{\"u}r Harald Fuhr}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-5249-2}, pages = {169 -- 179}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @incollection{HustedtSeyfried2020, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Challenges, triggers and initiators of climate policies and implications for policy formulation}, series = {Leidenschaft und Augenmaß}, booktitle = {Leidenschaft und Augenmaß}, editor = {Hickmann, Thomas and Lederer, Markus}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-5249-2}, doi = {10.5771/9783845294292-169}, pages = {169 -- 180}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @incollection{Seyfried2021, author = {Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Bundesrechnungshof}, series = {Handw{\"o}rterbuch des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland}, booktitle = {Handw{\"o}rterbuch des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland}, editor = {Andersen, Uwe and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Marschall, Stefan and Woyke, Wichard}, edition = {8., {\"u}berarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage}, publisher = {Springer VS}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-23665-6}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-23666-3_20}, pages = {80 -- 82}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Der Bundesrechnungshof schaut mittlerweile auf eine {\"u}ber 300 j{\"a}hrige Geschichte der Finanzkontrolle zur{\"u}ck (vgl. Engels 2014). Auch wenn Aufgaben und Organisation damaliger Rechenkammern bestenfalls rudiment{\"a}r mit den Einrichtungen moderner Finanzkontrolle vergleichbar sind, so legten sie doch einst deren Grundstein. Heute ist der Bundesrechnungshof eine oberste Bundesbeh{\"o}rde und pr{\"u}ft laut Artikel 114 Abs. 2 GG die „Rechnung sowie die Wirtschaftlichkeit und Ordnungsm{\"a}ßigkeit der Haushalts- und Wirtschaftsf{\"u}hrung des Bundes." Weitere Regelungen f{\"u}r den Bundesrechnungshof finden sich in der Bundeshaushaltsordnung (BHO, hier Teil V Rechnungspr{\"u}fung bis Teil VIII Entlastung, \S\S 88 bis 114) und im Bundesrechnungshofgesetz (BRHG vom 11.07.1985, mit letzter {\"A}nderung vom 05.02.2009).}, language = {de} } @article{ReithSeyfried2018, author = {Reith, Florian and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Balancing the Moods}, series = {Higher education policy}, volume = {32}, journal = {Higher education policy}, number = {1}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Basingstoke}, issn = {0952-8733}, doi = {10.1057/s41307-018-0124-6}, pages = {71 -- 91}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Quality management (QM) has spread around the world and reached higher education in Europe in the early 1990s (Mendel, 2006, 137; Kernegger and Vettori, 2013, 1). However, researchers were rather more interested in national quality assurance policies (macro-level) and accreditation systems (meso-level) than in intra-organizational perspectives about the day-to-day implementation of quality assurance policies by various actors (micro-level). Undoubtedly, organizational change is a challenging endeavor for all kinds of groups. On the one hand, it provides the opportunity of further development and innovation, but on the other hand, it exposes organizations and actors to the risk of losing established structures and accepted routines. Like in many other organizations, actors may not necessarily perceive change as a promoter of innovation and development. Instead, they may consider change as a threat to the existing status quo or, as March points out, as an "interplay between rationality and foolishness" (March, 1981, 563). Consequently, change provokes either affective or behavioral actions (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999, 308-310), such as, for example, resistance. Anderson (2006, 2008) and Lucas (2014) have shown, for example, that academic resistance is an important issue. However, Piderit characterizes resistance as a multidimensional construct (Piderit, 2000, 786-787) subject to a wide variety of issues related to quality and QM. Although QM has been described as a "fashion" (Stensaker, 2007, 101) in the higher education sector that provokes many different reactions, its implementation in higher education institutions (HEIs) is still a rather unexplored field. Thus, the evidence provided by Anderson (2006, 2008) and others (Newton, 2000, 2002; McInnis et al., 1995; Fredman and Doughney, 2012; Lucas, 2014; etc.) needs to be expanded, because they only consider the perspective of academia. In particular, the view of other actors during the implementation of quality assurance policies is a missing piece in this empirical puzzle. Nearly nothing is known about how quality managers deal with reactions to organizational change like resistance and obstruction. Until now, only a few studies have focused on intra-organizational dynamics (see, for example: Csizmadia et al., 2008; Lipnicka, 2016). Besides the lack of research on the implementation of quality assurance policies in HEIs, quality managers seem to be an interesting subject for further investigations because they are "endogenous" to institutional processes. On the one hand, quality managers are the result of quality assurance policies, and on the other hand, they influence the implementation of quality assurance policies, which affect other actors (like academics, administrative staff, etc.). Here, quality managers, as members of an emerging higher education profession, are involved in various conflict lines between QM, HEI management and departments, which need further research (Seyfried and Pohlenz, 2018, 9). Therefore, the aim of our paper is twofold: firstly, to answer the question of how quality managers perceive resistance, and secondly, which measures they take in situations of perceived resistance. We offer a new research perspective and argue that resistance is not merely provoked by organizational change; it also provokes counter-reactions by actors who are confronted with resistance. Thus, resistance seems to be rather endogenous. To theorize our argument, we apply parts of the work of Christine Oliver (1991), which provides theoretical insights into strategic responses to institutional processes, ranging from acquiescence to manipulation (Oliver, 1991, 152). We, therefore, investigate the introduction of QM in teaching and learning, and the emergence of quality managers as higher education professionals as one of the results of quality assurance policies. Consequently, the introduction of QM may be considered as an institutional process provoking reactions and counter-reactions of various organizational units within HEIs. These circumstances are constitutive for how quality managers deal with resistance and other reactions toward organizational change. We use this theoretical framework to analyze the German higher education sector, because this particular case can be considered as a latecomer in New Public Management reforms (Schimank, 2005, 369) and Germany is a country where academic self-governance plays a very important role, and strongly influences academics' behavior when it comes to organizational change (Wolter, 2004). Our empirical results are based on a mixed-methods research design and integrate half-structured interviews and a nationwide survey at the central level in German HEIs, which excludes faculty members of QM (decentral level). They reveal that quality managers take different types of action when resistance occurs during the implementation of quality assurance policies. Furthermore, quality managers mainly react with different tactics. These tactics seem to be relevant for convincing academics and for the enhancement of their commitment to improve the quality of teaching and learning, instead of provoking further resistance or avoidance practices. This article proceeds as follows: the next sections describe the context and explain our main theoretical concepts referring to the work of Oliver (1991) and others. After that, we present our case selection and the methodological framework, including the data sources and the operationalization of selected variables. Finally, we provide our empirical results about quality managers' perceptions on resistance and we draw conclusions.}, language = {en} } @misc{SeyfriedPohlenz2018, author = {Seyfried, Markus and Pohlenz, Philipp}, title = {Assessing quality assurance in higher education}, series = {European Journal of Higher Education}, journal = {European Journal of Higher Education}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-413052}, pages = {15}, year = {2018}, abstract = {The present article offers a mixed-method perspective on the investigation of determinants of effectiveness in quality assurance at higher education institutions. We collected survey data from German higher education institutions to analyse the degree to which quality managers perceive their approaches to quality assurance as effective. Based on this data, we develop an ordinary least squares regression model which explains perceived effectiveness through structural variables and certain quality assurance-related activities of quality managers. The results show that support by higher education institutions' higher management and cooperation with other education institutions are relevant preconditions for larger perceived degrees of quality assurance effectiveness. Moreover, quality managers' role as promoters of quality assurance exhibits significant correlations with perceived effectiveness. In contrast, sanctions and the perception of quality assurance as another administrative burden reveal negative correlations.}, language = {en} } @misc{Seyfried2005, author = {Seyfried, Markus}, title = {"Wie viel ist genug?" : Bev{\"o}lkerungswachstum ; Forschungsgegenstand mit vielen Facetten}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-47919}, year = {2005}, abstract = {„Menschen ben{\"o}tigen Platz zum Leben." In dieser Erkenntnis liegt noch nichts Besonderes oder gar Aufregendes. Erst die Tatsache, dass die menschliche Bev{\"o}lkerung seit jeher zunimmt, aber der zur Verf{\"u}gung stehende Platz konstant bleibt bzw. die Ressourcen in ihrem Bestand sogar abnehmen, macht dieses Thema wesentlich gehaltvoller. Offensichtlich ist außerdem: „Population growth seems to affect everything but is seldom held responsible for anything." (McKee 2003: 10) Dies ist der Hauptgrund daf{\"u}r, dass gerade die Thematik der Bev{\"o}lkerungsentwicklung internationale Beachtung und Aufmerksamkeit verdient.}, language = {de} }