University of Leicester
Browse

The spectacle of research assessment systems: insights from New Zealand and the United Kingdom

Version 2 2020-04-15, 16:15
Version 1 2020-04-15, 16:13
journal contribution
posted on 2020-04-15, 16:15 authored by Hugo Letiche, B chatterjee, carolyn cordery, ivo de loo

Purpose

In this paper, we concentrate on the use of research assessment (RA) systems in universities in New Zealand (NZ) and the United Kingdom (UK). Primarily we focus on PBRF and REF, and explore differences between these systems on individual and systemic levels. We ask in what way(s) the systemic differences between PBRF and REF actually make a difference to how the two RA systems are experienced by academic staff.

Design/methodology/approach

This research is exploratory and draws on 19 interviews in which accounting researchers from both countries offer reflections on their careers and how RA (systems) have influenced these careers. The stories they tell are classified by regarding RA in universities as a manifestation of the spectacle society, following Debord (1992) and Flyverbom and Reinecke (2017).

Findings

Both UK and New Zealand academics concur that, these days, their research activities and views on research are very much shaped by journal rankings and citations. Among UK academics, there seems to be a greater critical attitude towards the benefits and drawbacks of REF, which may be related to the history of REF in their country. Relatively speaking, in New Zealand, individualism has grown after the introduction of the PBRF, with little active pushback against the system. Cultural aspects may partially explain this outcome. Academics in both countries lament the lack of focus on practitioner issues that the increased significance of RA appears to have evoked.

Research limitations/implications

This research is context-specific and may have limited applicability to other situations, academics or countries.

Practical implications

RA and RA systems seem to be here to stay. However, as academics we can, and ought to, take responsibility to try to ensure that these systems reflect the future of accounting (research) we wish to create. It is certainly not mainly or solely up to upper management officials to set this in motion, as has occasionally been claimed in previous literature. Some of the academics who participated in this research actively sought to bring about a different future.

Originality/value

This research provides a unique contextual analysis of accounting academics’ perspectives and reactions to RA and RA systems and the impact these have had on their careers across two countries. In addition, the paper offers valuable critical reflections on the application of Debord's (1992) notion of the spectacle society in future accounting studies. We find more mixed and nuanced views on RA in academia than many previous studies have shown.

History

Citation

Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 2020, In Press

Version

  • AM (Accepted Manuscript)

Published in

Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

Acceptance date

2020-03-06

Copyright date

2020

Publisher version

TBA

Language

en

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Categories

    No categories selected

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC