ABSTRACT

For the last two decades, Finnish universities have faced the implementation of new systems of control and undergone dramatic changes that have worsened academic working conditions – such as corporatisation and budget cuts. This article explores Finnish academics’ experiences of university reforms with a special focus on the consequences it has had in terms of organisational socio-dynamics. We adapt Glynos and Howarth’s logics of critical explanation and apply this theoretical framework to analyse the interviews of academics who, against their own will, did not have their contracts renewed. This approach describes, explains, and criticises the logics – which are social, political and fantasmatic – behind the existence, continuation, and transformation of practices that are very real. Our research findings suggest that there are situations in which experiences of opaque management may occur at university. Academics often found the decision-making processes to be unpredictable and ambiguous, leading to a precarious working atmosphere. Combining the logics approach with micro-level data analysis, we developed the concept of arbitrary management, offering new perspectives for understanding the mediation between social practices and structural reforms. This micro-political analysis provides a new take on how ideologies operate at university in an era of academic capitalism.

摘要

在过去的二十年里，芬兰的大学面临着新的控制系统的实施，并经历了使学术工作条件恶化的剧烈变化——例如公司化和预算削减。本文探讨芬兰学者的大学改革经验，特别关注其在组织社会动力学方面产生的后果。我们采用 Glynos 和 Howarth 的批判性解释逻辑，并应用这一理论框架来分析那些违背自己意愿没有续签合同的学者的访谈。这种方法描述、解释和批判了非常真实的实践的存在、延续和转变背后的社会逻辑、政治逻辑和幻想逻辑。我们的研究结果表明，在某些情况下，大学可能会出现管理不透明的情况。学者们经常发现决策过程是不可预测和模棱两可的，导致工作氛围不稳定。我们将逻辑方法与微观数据分析相结合，提出了任意管理的概念，为理解社会实践与结构性改革之间的中介作用提供了新的视角。这种微观政治分析为意识形态在学术资本主义时代如何在大学中运作提供了新的视角。我们提出了任意管理的概念，为理解社会实践和结构改革之间的中介提供了新的视角。这种微观政治分析为意识形态在学术资本主义时代如何在大学中运作提供了新的视角。我们提出了任意管理的概念，为理解社会实践和结构改革之间的中介提供了新的视角。这种微观政治分析为意识形态在学术资本主义时代如何在大学中运作提供了新的视角。