dc.contributor.author
Mehling, Sebastian
dc.contributor.author
Kolleck, Nina
dc.date.accessioned
2019-10-07T13:37:52Z
dc.date.available
2019-10-07T13:37:52Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/25696
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-25460
dc.description.abstract
In the last years, a shift in the promotion of sustainable development in Higher Education from a focus on universities’ core areas of teaching and research to “whole institution approaches” with an emphasis on the operational management of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) can be observed in different countries. With the aim to foster sustainability, HEIs have increasingly built cross-sectoral networks, involving not only academics but also practitioners in order to relate sustainability not only to research but also to outreach activities. Although there is an increasing body of literature evaluating such initiatives according to supposedly objective management criteria and indicators, there is still a lack of studies that investigate how the social meaning of knowledge production is (re-)negotiated in and through these partnerships. In this article, we analyze how individuals engaged in a cross-sector partnership make sense of the organizational dilemmas and ambiguities that stem from the complexity of working together across sectors in pursuit of an integrative approach to knowledge production. With the term “sector” we refer to the professional affiliations of the individuals involved in the partnerships, e.g., higher education, administration, formal education or non-governmental organizations. We focus on an illustrative cross-sectoral partnership: The Institute for Sustainable Urban Development (ISU), a collaborative project between Malmö University and Malmö’s city administration to facilitate research and planning collaborations between both organizations in respect to furthering sustainable urban (re-)development and higher education in Malmö, Sweden. By employing a constant comparative approach based on Grounded Theory to analyze data collected with focus groups, semi-structured qualitative interviews and document analysis, we claim that rather than entering a partnership with predefined identities, values and sectoral or professional preferences, individuals engage in a narrative struggle about the organizational character of their partnership. Accordingly, an important avenue for investigating cross-sector partnerships is to explore the constructive dilemma of different organizing principles in a cross-sector partnership, and the way people negotiate the boundaries between them. For the cross-sector partnership studied the constructive dilemma for those engaging in it was to separate and link project, organizational and network organizing principles in their work. Implementing whole institutions approaches in order to promote sustainable development in and through HEIs, would accordingly profit much from a deeper analytical investigation of the process of navigating professional identities and organizational narrative(s) in boundary-spanning, cross-sector partnerships.
en
dc.format.extent
24 Seiten
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
higher education institutions (HEIs)
en
dc.subject
cross-sector collaboration
en
dc.subject
multi-professional collaboration
en
dc.subject
transdisciplinary research
en
dc.subject
narrative analysis
en
dc.subject
whole institution approach
en
dc.subject
organizational networks
en
dc.subject.ddc
300 Sozialwissenschaften::370 Bildung und Erziehung::370 Bildung und Erziehung
dc.subject.ddc
300 Sozialwissenschaften::370 Bildung und Erziehung::378 Hochschulbildung
dc.title
Cross-Sector Collaboration in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs): A Critical Analysis of an Urban Sustainability Development Program
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
4982
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.3390/su11184982
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Sustainability
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
18
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
11
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184982
refubium.affiliation
Erziehungswissenschaft und Psychologie
refubium.note.author
Die Publikation wurde aus Open Access Publikationsgeldern der Freien Universität Berlin und der DFG gefördert.
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
2071-1050