Appraising academic appraisal in the new public management university

Abstract

Against a backdrop of new public management (NPM) thinking and managerialism generally applied to universities in a range of countries, this study examines one of its manifestations – performance management for academics. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 40 academics at an Australian university, this article identifies six stances regularly adopted by those conducting performance appraisal interviews with academics. These are labelled ‘nurturing’, ‘hard-driving’, ‘self-serving’, ‘coddling’, ‘disengaged’ and ‘hostile’. Each of these appraisal stances is described in detail and then considered from two perspectives – that of academics themselves and of NPM. The material presented suggests that while a ‘nurturing’ stance was viewed favourably by the academics interviewed, it is out of step with NPM thinking. ‘Hard-driving’ and ‘self-serving’ stances, which directly reflect NPM thinking, were disliked by many (although not all) of the interviewees who had experienced them. The most common appraising stance – a ‘disengaged’ one – was widely condemned, as was the ‘hostile’ stance, yet both stances have much in common with the ruthlessness of NPM.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 48 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.