Transforming professionalism discourse in the university

A novel discourse of managerialism is emerging. The new features of university profession were perceived and described discursively in the first speech of the new rector in 1998. The marketization of the university organisation accelerated at the end of the 20^th century. There is a demand in society for the universities to be ‘innovation generators’ (speech 1998). The rector sees that universities are expected to interact more with business. The procedures at university should be made more business-like. Irony is used in the discourse in the term of ‘saying one thing and meaning another’ (Fairclough 1992, 123). The rector admits there is acceleration and irony in the following description of the situation from the university professor perspective;

“Nowadays a professor rushes from one negotiation to another and leads his or her depart-ment or research group – preferably their own company located in the Science Park on the side- just like a CEO. In addition, he or she should be an inspiring teacher, or rather, a science consultant who the students come to listen to even if they have to pay for it.” (Speech 1998)

Elements of the old discourse are presented. In contrast to the ‘business-style-professor’ the rector describes the ‘old-fashioned-‘business-style-professor’ in 1998. during the good old times the Humboldtian (Bildung) -style university professor lives next to the university. The professor might invite students into his or her home and even give an exam there.

A compromise follows when the rector states that he does not miss the good old times. At this point, the discourse signals the readiness for change. The ideal

university professor and teacher has changed and lives only in the memory traces of the older professionals at the university. The younger generation recognises these professionals as caricatures in old Finnish movies (speech 1998).

The discourse of science emerges. A few years later, the rector describes (speech 2003) the mysterious side of the university profession, namely science. Science and research are not very well known or visible outside the university organisation, although research is a key function of the university. The rector describes the ste-reotype of the scientist that is familiar to common people from the newspapers.

The stereotype pictures a researcher in a laboratory in coat. The only times people may read about scientists in newspapers are situations of triumph when prizes are awarded because of the good research results. On the other hand, one might read about the sad cases when a scientist has misused the research funds.

The rector continues describing the transformation of the teaching and lec-turing professions at the university in 1998. The rector states with irony that the good old assistants and university lecturers are “the targets for the national con-servation programmes in the near future.” They will be replaced by the efficient graduate-school students and career oriented assistant professors.

Change readiness is indicated again when the rector questions the develop-ment of professionalism in universities. The rector is for the transformation.

Therefore, the rector suggests the new professional orientation discursively. The rector poses the rhetoric question of whether we should get rid of the professional evolution of the 1970s and 1980s. due to this evolution, the university deferred to the state and the university teachers identified as state-citizens (speech 1998).

The nature of professionalism at university brings its components to univer-sity management to consider. The drive for the modernization of the universi-ties accelerates at the beginning of the 21^st century. The structural transforma-tion dominates the discussion about the modernisatransforma-tion of universities, both in Finland and in Europe, but also within the university organisations themselves.

On 10.5.2006 the European Commission published its report ‘delivering on the modernization agenda for universities’.

The special feature of social capital at university is discussed when the rector critically discusses the report by the European Commission in 2006. The rector refers to the limits of the agenda concerning professionalism in 2006. The uni-versity community has ownership to the uniuni-versity institute. The professionals have immaterial rights to the knowledge they produce through research. Thus professional ownership has accumulated within universities over the decades and centuries. This is known as the social capital of universities. This nature of professionalism creates the unique feature the university organisation, which has to be considered when the management at university is solved. The management of a university cannot be solved simply using public sector management methods, neither by applying business organisation methods (speech 2006).

In order to accomplish structural changes in universities, the university law has been reformed in Finland. The preparation for the reform of the Universities Act started in the ministry in spring 2007. The reform made the universities

inde-pendent legal entities. The universities are separated from the state and they had the choice of becoming either corporations subject to public law or foundations subject to private law. The University of Eastern Finland is a corporation and is subject to public law. University personnel are no longer employed by the state.

Civil-service employment relationships transformed into contractual employ-ment relationships.

In transforming the university organisation the ontological security and sense of trust among the employees (professionals) has been violated. The rector states in 2007 that in the role of the rector, it is not possible to avoid questions concern-ing the structural renewal of the university institutions and the renewal of the university law this autumn (in 2007). Especially the formation of the alliance uni-versity in Eastern Finland raises many questions in Joensuu. The rector contin-ues influencing discursively by stating that if we succeed in implementing these changes, he believes that the whole science community in Joensuu will benefit without these renewals becoming a misery for the community (speech 2007).

The rector sees that the logic of the change in the legal status of the universities has often been interpreted wrongly (speech 2007). It does not mean that the uni-versity will transform itself into a business organisation. The rector sees it rather as the opposite: the aim of the renewal is to lighten the inner bureaucracy at the university. This entails the professionalising of management – but in a university context (speech 2007).

The rector discusses the differences between university organisations and business organisations in his speech in 2007. The main difference between these organisations is the pace of development and level of risk when new knowledge is created. The university creates and produces new knowledge during a longer period and takes greater risks producing new knowledge than a business organi-sation. The university organisation openly delivers new knowledge outside the organisation and to new generations (speech 2007).

The management is emphasised in the university reform. This enables the professionals to concentrate on teaching and research. There has been an ac-cumulation of administrative duties and bureaucracy which has interfered with the core mission of the university. With the emphasis of the management, the administrative duties are focused on a smaller group of managers (speech 2007).

Two simultaneous changes that university organisations are facing are inter-preted as increasing vulnerability and diminishing the sense of security among the professionals and members of the university community. The rector discur-sively clarifies (speech 2007) the difference between the business organisation and university organisation, according to new Universities Act. The rector gives information and adds knowledge about the transforming situation. The rector discusses the renewals inspiring the positive future and possibilities for the or-ganisation. This is interpreted as initiating trust development in the new organi-sation. The ability of the professional to focus on core missions and perform as a researcher in the transforming university organisation builds trust in transform-ing university organisation among professionals.

The reorganising of the administrative and supportive tasks during the pro-cess of the merger has caused a negative atmosphere in the new organisation (2010). The productivity programme of administration and supportive services were aiming to reduce the size of the administration and supportive staff. The academics were not included in the layoff process. The importance of teaching and research was also indicated in the ‘new’ organisation in this way.

The merger of the two university organisations was accomplished in order to keep the teaching and research as core professions in the university organisation in eastern Finland. The rector phrases the University of Eastern Finland (UEF) strategy in 2012, highlighting the strategic choice of being a science university.

Furthermore, the rector emphasises the meaning of this strategic choice. The new organisation after the merger is a university which will have a strong re-search mission and where teaching and rere-search form a reciprocal entity (speech 2012).

A year later (speech 2013), the rector returns discursively to the notion of a science university. The possibility for research besides teaching is a key feature of the professionalism in a university organisation. Teaching and research have been intertwined in Finnish universities during their history, since the 19^th cen-tury. But in reality, research and teaching operate in two separate ‘micro cosmos’

within the university organisation. Teaching and research only randomly en-counter each other (speech 2013).

The success of the science university is measured by the number of research publications. The research, and especially publishing in highly recognised inter-national scientific journals is rewarded in contemporary university organisations.

The transformation in scientific publishing is described discursively by the rector:

“If anything, books were considered to be the peak of scientific publishing and the newest ideas from the international stars of the field spread through them. Nowadays the increasing tendency is to publish in English-language scientific journals,…”(Speech 2011)

Professional careers are evaluated by their publications. This causes a tense rela-tionship in the university profession between teaching and research. Excellence in teaching does not provide as straightforward a progression in a professional career as excellence in research does (speech 2011).

The rector stresses (speech 2011) that a good university is known from its top researchers, as well as for its inspiring teachers. The rector notes that the inspiring teacher and top-researcher are very often the same person in a university. The rector stresses the importance of excellent teaching being the key factor of the competitiveness of the new organisation.

There is an (old) tradition in the university profession that a lecturer mainly teaches. In the ‘new’ university, all the teachers also act as researchers (speech 2011). The teaching supports the research, since while the researcher teaches, the ideas are thought through. Therefore, the reciprocity of teaching and research is productive and teaching assists the research process (speech 2013).

Professors are commonly self-taught when it comes to teaching. Teaching and pedagogy are in that sense undervalued in a research based university. The rec-tor discusses this subject in a trust building manner by positioning himself as an amateur in pedagogy as many professors are. The rector positions himself in the discourse:

“Well, please allow an amateur a few aspects to start this conversation.” (Speech 2013)

Professors are educated for many years to gain research skills and basic knowl-edge in the philosophy of science (speech 2013). The rector includes the power holders within the university organisation, including himself, to blame for the lack of appreciation of pedagogy in the research university (speech 2013). One reason for the lack of appreciation for pedagogy is mentioned by the rector. One reason is the lack of a common language when it comes to university pedagogy.

The discourse of the student as a future researcher or customer consists of a dichotomy. When acting as a young university teacher, the rector has viewed the students to be future researches and scientists (speech 2013). This is an unrealistic way of seeing the student. On the other hand, viewing the student as a customer who is gaining the knowledge in order be professional in the labour market has its limits as well (speech 2013). The rector suggests the consensus discursively:

“It may be that I am a hopeless idealist, but I would also like to give the vocationally-orient-ed programmes more additional elements to support the formation of worldviews, critical thinking and growth as a citizen than is granted nowadays.” (Speech 2013)

Even though the university reform challenges the professionals in the university organisation, the rector influences the atmosphere discursively. The encouraging discourse is already found in the first speech of the new rector of the University of Joensuu in 1998. The rector quotes the philosopher Erik Ahlmann (1925), as follows:

“When the practice of science loses its metaphysical background it ceases being intellectual work: after that it is merely ‘mental work’.”(Speech 1998)

The third mission in universities; professionals as consultants?

Universities have a third mission included in the Universities Act (558/2009); “…

the universities must promote lifelong learning, interact with the surrounding society and promote the impact of research findings… on society.”

The new law replaced the Universities Act of 1997. The third mission as “to impact society in addition to missions of education and research” was added to the university legislation in 2004 (715/2004). The discourse concerning the third mission of the university took place over the years in the rector’s speeches.

Interaction with the environment is mentioned for the first time from the re-source perspective by the rector in 1999. The state-budget for the universities did not include resources for the duties of the third mission. The universities

needed to use project resources outside the basic budget to cover the costs of the third mission. At the same time, the third mission indirectly consumed the basic resources of the universities while the professionals were also focusing on adult education and projects with stakeholders (Speech 1999).

In 2002, the rector mentions the third mission. The researchers and teachers at the University of Joensuu had been proactive and were specialists in many projects where cultural cooperation was built at a global level, as well as at a local level. This was an important part of the third mission of the universities (speech 2002). The third mission was also mentioned in the speech in 2007, when the rector emphasised that the university needed professionals who could interact between the science community and working life. Thus, the teaching at univer-sity was gaining new insights and creating elements for the future needs of the working life (speech 2007).

For its part, the third mission was directing the way towards university re-form in Finland. When the rector gave his last his speech in 2009 as the rector at University of Joensuu, he stresses the role of the third mission. Going through the history of the University of Joensuu by referring to the speeches of the previous rectors, the rector states one of the reasons that led to the university reform and the renewal of the university law.

“Particularly this new for-profit logic, which emphasises competing for re-search financing and the so-called third mission, created a conclusively new economical operating model for universities, and in a way forced universities to gradually reconstruct their administration – first towards the so-called perfor-mance-based management ideal and later the juridical person status detaching oneself from the state’s immediate budget economy.” (Speech 2009)

The new profit-logic forced universities to develop their management. The management and formal authority of administrative leaders increased simulta-neously with the implementation of Management by Objectives (Kekäle 2001, 27) directed by state-bureaucracy. Nowadays, along with the new Universities Act (558/2009), there are further extensions to the autonomy of universities and the emphasis of management.

The future perspective of higher education is dominated by the customer and employment point of view. The international competition for the good and paying students is accelerating (speech 2008). The pressure to move towards commer-cialisation is noticeable in research, as well. In the science branches marketiza-tion is emphasised and there are moves to specialize in economically successful applied science (speech 2008).

In 2011 the rector notes that the third mission has driven the universities away from the university’s civilization mission (Bildung) and from the basic mission of teaching and research. In the name of the third mission, universities have been driven towards projects and subunits which are only loosely connected to the basic mission of the universities. But the rector stresses at the same time that he does not mean the adult education. Lifelong learning is becoming ‘more and more of an important educational challenge to us’ (speech 2011).

One year later, in 2012 the discourse circulates around the professionals’ per-spective, the third mission and professionals performing as consultants. Many teachers and researchers have complained with good reasons to the rector that the third mission is not taken into account as a merit when the effectiveness of the researcher and research groups are evaluated. One of the reasons for the lack of attention to third mission accomplishments is the difficulty in evaluating the mission. It is hard to measure the merits of the third mission because of the multi-dimensionality of the aspects of being a specialist (speech 2012).

On the other hand, the rector questions the merit of the third mission. The rector is not sure if the third mission should be included in the basic budget re-sources or whether it would better to be finance it from supplementary rere-sources.

It is essential that the third mission supports the main missions of universities;

teaching and research. The university should be brave enough to refuse to take tasks which are more appropriate to other educational or research institutes or, for example, the consultant business (speech 2012).