Autonomireformen : Kollegialt styre och linjestyrning, kan reformen leda till akademisk segregation mellan institutioner?

Sammanfattning: In 2011 the Swedish government implemented the autonomy reform, which was a legislative change regarding the administration of the institutions of higher education. The aim was to enhance the autonomy of the universities within the framework of the current ruling authority or agency. Collegiality and academic freedom in research and teaching has long been a central norm within the academy. The justification for the autonomy reform proclaimed that if Sweden should have world class institutions for higher education it demands greater autonomy for the universities to manage and frame their internal organisations. The practical implications of the deregulation was generally greater independence regarding administration, teaching positions and the content of education. The institution of collegiality is a natural part of the historic evolution of the universities and a potential increasing marginalisation of the scientific process is a highly relevant issue in political science and administration research. There are some comprehensible effects of the reform that can be identified today. They are clear but very differentiated between institutions. A group of older universities, with a longer tradition and legacy, have mostly kept their old organisations while another group has made vast changes in their organisational structures at the cost of collegiality. Hierarchical administration have increased and affirmative collegial mandates have been transferred to individual actors within the organisation. This divergence between universities is potentially problematic because the common denominators have significant connections to the institutions historical and present quality and prominence. The purpose of this essay is to investigate, from a policy perspective, whether the content and consequences of the autonomy reform are problematic in connection to the universities differing valuation of collegiality as a component in academic prosperity. The analysis indicates that the organisational differences could lead to a widened gap between the universities in terms of quality, prestige and knowledge production. This due to weakened policy instruments that safeguards traditional and proven academic organisational methodology. The consequences of the differing responses to the deregulation can thus lead to a segregation between institutions instead of their convergence, which does not comply with the explicit ambition of a world class and equality driven sector of higher education.