Identifying structural similarities between stricto sensu post-graduation programs in management regarding the strategy tripod.
| Autor | Backes, Danieli Artuzi Pes |
-
Introduction
Universities, due to their public nature, whether considered public or private property, are traditionally funded (Bloom et al, 2007) or regulated by governments (Geiger, 1985). Although their primary function is to provide teaching services (Chakrabarti and Rice, 2003), another recognized role of theirs is to promote knowledge and scientific progress (Atkinson, and Blanpied, 2008). The transforming role of institutions means that university environments are under pressure, meaning that university managers have to consider the government and academic community as important forces (Alperstedt et al, 2005).
Government influence on learning institutions with post-graduate programs in management (PGPMs), known as stricto sensu programs in Brazil, can be seen in the role of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) in the --funding, evaluation and regulation of management programs. Langrafe et al. (2009) argue that these pressures lead programs to assume a similar strategic stance, since in the institutional perspective, organizations that behave so have greater legitimacy in the eyes of regulators and society (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983).
The literature that examines strategic similarity predominantly focuses on the competing theoretical institutional approaches (Miller et al, 2013) and competitive strategy theories at the industrial level (Porter, 1980) or company level (Barney, 1991). However, in this study, we begin from the viewpoint that the combination of these approaches can lead to a better understanding of complex phenomena (Yamakawa et al, 2008) based on the proposal of the strategy tripod (Peng, 2002; Peng et al., 2009).
Therefore, we believe that the influence of the institutional pressures from CAPES on stricto sensu PGPMs leads to the formation of clusters with similar structural characteristics because they need to adapt to the institutional context. However, we do not lose sight of the fact that, even in regulated environments, educational organizations act strategically in order to stand out, given that those in the most favorable positions can be guaranteed better opportunities to access resources (Dias Sobrinho, 2003). Thus, we believe that an integrated view through the strategy tripod can provide a better understanding of the similarities and dissimilarities of the sector than a single view.
Consequently, this study seeks to identify the structural similarities between stricto sensu PGPMs through the formation of clusters, analyzing them through the lens of the strategy tripod. We will use the co-plot method, which was employed in the study by Segev et al. (1999), who evaluated the adaptation of American business schools through changes in the curriculum, seeking to identify the differences between them. In this work, by applying a similar technique to identify clusters, we seek to understand the isomorphic or competitive behavior of each program.
In the following sections, we discuss the principal approaches on which the study is based, beginning with the environmental context, followed by the strategy tripod, methodological procedures and details of the method used, presenting and discussing the results and closing with the conclusions.
-
Environmental context
In Brazil, stricto sensu PGPM are supervised and evaluated by CAPES. CAPES (2008) aims to aid the expansion and consolidation of stricto sensu post-graduation in Brazil and seeks to maintain a continuously improved evaluation system to achieve a national standard of academic excellence. Its functions involve evaluating post-graduation programs, divulging scientific production, international scientific cooperation, funding the qualification of high-level professionals in Brazil and overseas and investing in the qualification of basic education teachers (CAPES, 2012).
CAPES evaluation criteria are the same as those used for planning post-graduation programs in Management used in the presentation of proposals for new courses (Maccari, Lima and Riccio, 2009), differing in only two aspects. For new courses, the following points are evaluated: proposed program; teaching staff; research activity; intellectual production; and teaching and research infrastructure (CAPES, 2016a).
For courses in progress, the criteria are: proposed program; teaching staff; student body; intellectual production; and social inclusion (CAPES, 2016b).
CAPES evaluation system is predominantly based on quantitative, impartial and even standards (Maccari et al., 2014). CAPES system is predominantly quantitative (Sguissardi, 2006), as 80 percent of its evaluation is based on quantitative criteria, with the remaining 20 percent being qualitative, which can be evaluated with metrics (Maccari et al., 2014).
A number of works, in addition to those already cited, have evaluated the role of CAPES in terms of its contribution to organizing the educational field. These works include Maccari, de Almeida, Nishimura and Rodrigues (2009), Kirshbaum et al. (2004), Shigaki and Patrus (2013), Mello et al. (2010), Correa et al. (2009), and Gatti et al. (2003). Some studies highlight the importance of CAPES in the development of Brazilian post-graduation programs. Others question the standardization of the system for the evaluation of any field of knowledge (Spagnolo and Calhau, 2002), while others discuss the consideration that every program that is evaluated has similar conditions in terms of resources (Spagnolo and Calhau, 2002; Thayer and Whelan, 1987; Sguissardi, 2006).
Evaluation means a great deal of pressure because in addition to the accreditation and authorization required for programs to function, CAPES ranks the programs (Maccari et al., 2014; Dias Sobrinho, 2003; Maccari, Lima and Riccio, 2009), directly affecting their ability to gain resources (Dias Sobrinho, 2003). Therefore, the pressures from CAPES promote behavior that strives to earn legitimacy (Rossoni and Guarido Filho, 2009) and the pressures for legitimacy also influence the actions taken by managers to adapt to the institutional environment (Rossetto and Rossetto, 2005). Furthermore, these pressures influence decisions with regard to allocating resources and the structure of courses.
2.1 The strategy tripod perspective
Works that focus on strategic conformity, with companies behaving in a strategically similar way, have employed contrasting theoretical approaches (Miller et al., 2013). The theoretical approaches on competitive strategy argue that companies seek different strategies to ensure a unique position in the sector in which they operate, using the industry-based view (IBV) (Porter, 1980) or the resource-based view (RBV) (Barney, 1991).
In the IBV, competitiveness and observing the competition defines a successful organization that manages to monitor its competitors better and apply strategies that differentiate it and allow it to stand out from the rest (Porter, 1980). The analysis of the IBV is "outside in" (Fleury and Fleury, 2003). Despite criticisms (Mintzberg, 1973; Carneiro et al, 1997; Vasconcelos and Cyrino, 2000; Leite and Porsse, 2003), it continues to play an important role in the corporate world. Despite its heavy emphasis on diagnosing the environment, it seeks to map the actors with whom the company maintains a relationship (Foss, 1996) and provides tools for practical application (Antonio, 2002), and efficiently prepares the right strategies for organizations.
On the other hand, the vision of the RBV can be described as "inside out" (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990), concentrating on the internal elements of the organization, without observing the external environment in which it is embedded. This negligence and other elements have been subject to criticism (Heene and Sanchez, 1997; Mascitelli, 1999; Antonio, 2002; Serra et al, 2008; Burlamaqui and Proenca, 2009; Carneiro et al, 1997). However, since the 1990s, the RBV has dominated studies on strategy and its postulates claim that organizational performance is a function of the types of resources and capabilities that the organization controls, and the greater its competitive differential, the more able it is to control and combine its resources and capabilities (Barney, 1991; Barney and Hesterly, 2011). The theory also idiosyncratically analyzes an organization's rare, valuable, inimitable and organizable resources (Barney and Hesterly, 2011).
Both approaches attempt to understand how to raise the organization's level of competitive performance. However, they do not heed or subjugate the resulting inter-institutional relationships and legal, political, social and normative apparatus. Thus emerges the institution-based view. In the institutional approach, social institutions, armed with laws, regulations, norms and culture, have an influence on organizations (Scott, 1995). Government agencies are among the most influential environmental actors (Frumkin and Galaskiewicz, 2004), to the extent that some formal organizational structures emerge as reflections of institutional norms (Meyer and Rowan, 1977), which end up shaping the behavior of organizations in search of legitimacy (Deephouse, 1996). The drive for legitimacy leads PGPMs to adapt to the social system of norms, values and beliefs in which it is embedded (Suchman, 1995).
Pressures for legitimacy can influence decisions on the allocation of resources and structure of programs, leading to isomorphism. Isomorphism derives from formal and informal pressures on an organization, together with other important forces such as social pressures that stem from the cultural expectations of society (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). The proposal of the strategy tripod (Peng, 2002; Peng et al., 2009) argues that there is a need to integrate these perspectives, especially due to the importance of considering the institutional context. Thus, the institution-based view should be considered as the third perspective in strategy because the IBV and RBV...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃOCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
