The Experts below are selected from a list of 285 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Barry Bozeman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Bureaucratization in academic research policy what causes it
2017Co-Authors: Barry Bozeman, Jiwon JungAbstract:Senior academic researchers and research administrators whose careers have spanned decades have witnessed a monotonic trend in the growth of bureaucratic rules and structures pertaining to research policy. The increase in administrative requirements takes many forms, some directly related to research and others tangentially related. While the onslaught of rules has increased administrative burdens, not all of these requirements are red tape; many are useful and even vital. But when taken together, the amount of administrative procedure and documentation associated with research conduct and administration becomes crushing. Others have well documented the Bureaucratization of university research policy and administration. Our primary purpose is to explain why rules and regulations and the bureaucratic structures supporting them continue to grow, extracting an ever-greater toll on time and resources available for actual research. Absent an explanation of the growth of administrative burden, it is not possible to provide valid assessment of the effectiveness of rules and regulations pertaining to research policy. We examine the problem from the lens of a well-developed theory of organizational red tape specifically, applying it specifically to the problem of research administration red tape. The theory suggests that the increase in research policy Bureaucratization can be explained chiefly by three different factors: crisis response, pressures for bureaucratic over-control, and the use of research policy for side-payments, both social side-payments (to achieve social goals not directly related to research) and political side-payments (conferring factor with political supporters by proving rules or policy symbols favored by them). To help elaborate the theory as well as to provide context, we provide case illustrations of ranging from the vitally important (research misconduct) to mundane bureaucratic requirements (standardization of required biosketches).
-
Bureaucratization in Academic Research Policy: What Causes It?
Annals of Science and Technology Policy, 2017Co-Authors: Barry Bozeman, Jiwon JungAbstract:Senior academic researchers and research administrators whose careers have spanned decades have witnessed a monotonic trend in the growth of bureaucratic rules and structures pertaining to research policy. The increase in administrative requirements takes many forms, some directly related to research and others tangentially related. While the onslaught of rules has increased administrative burdens, not all of these requirements are red tape; many are useful and even vital. But when taken together, the amount of administrative procedure and documentation associated with research conduct and administration becomes crushing. Others have well documented the Bureaucratization of university research policy and administration. Our primary purpose is to explain why rules and regulations and the bureaucratic structures supporting them continue to grow, extracting an ever-greater toll on time and resources available for actual research. Absent an explanation of the growth of administrative burden, it is not possible to provide valid assessment of the effectiveness of rules and regulations pertaining to research policy. We examine the problem from the lens of a well-developed theory of organizational red tape specifically, applying it specifically to the problem of research administration red tape. The theory suggests that the increase in research policy Bureaucratization can be explained chiefly by three different factors: crisis response, pressures for bureaucratic over-control, and the use of research policy for side-payments, both social side-payments (to achieve social goals not directly related to research) and political side-payments (conferring factor with political supporters by proving rules or policy symbols favored by them). To help elaborate the theory as well as to provide context, we provide case illustrations of ranging from the vitally important (research misconduct) to mundane bureaucratic requirements (standardization of required biosketches).
-
Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer from US government R&D laboratories: the impact of market orientation
Technovation, 1992Co-Authors: Barry Bozeman, Karen CokerAbstract:This study, based on a national survey of US government laboratories, assesses the degree of success laboratories have had in transferring technology to industry, taking into account the laboratories' differing receptivity to market influences. Three success criteria are considered here, two based on self-evaluations, and a third based on the number of technology licenses issued from the laboratory. The two self-evaluations are rooted in different types of effectiveness, ‘getting technology out the door’ in one case and, in the other, having a demonstrable commercial impact. A core hypothesis of the study is that the two types of effectiveness will be responsive to different factors and, in particular, the laboratories with a clearer market orientation will have a higher degree of success on the commercial impact and technology license criteria. Overall, the results seem to suggest that multi-faceted, multi-mission laboratories are likely to enjoy the most success in technology transfer, especially if they have relatively low levels of Bureaucratization, and either ties to industry (particularly direct financial ties) or a commercial orientation in the selection of projects.
-
The environments of U.S. R&D laboratories: political and market influences
Policy Sciences, 1990Co-Authors: Barry Bozeman, Michael CrowAbstract:R & D laboratories in the United States have during the past decade undergone much structural and environmental change. Much of this change has been in response to public policy initiatives and changing markets. One result of the changing environments of R & D laboratories is that traditional sector-based (government, industry, university) classification of laboratories tells us little about their structure and behavior. This study based on survey data derived from 966 U.S. R & D laboratories, develops an 'environmental input taxonomy,' based not on sector but on the mix of political and market influence on laboratories. This taxonomy is examined in connection with three central policy issues: amount of cooperative research, red tape and Bureaucratization, and laboratory output. Traditional sector classification accounts well for red tape, but the environmental input taxonomy provides additional insights into laboratories' scientific and technical output and cooperative research.
Chris Barrie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Bureaucratization of war moral challenges exemplified by the covert lethal drone
Headmark, 2014Co-Authors: Richard Adams, Chris BarrieAbstract:This paper interrogates the Bureaucratization of war, incarnate in the covert lethal drone. Bureaucracies are criticized typically for their complexity, inefficiency, and inflexibility. The present paper is concerned with their moral indifference. We explore killing, which is so highly administered, so morally remote, and of such scale, that we acknowledge a covert lethal program. This is a bureaucratized program of assassination in contravention of critical human rights.
-
the Bureaucratization of war moral challenges exemplified by the covert lethal drone
Ethics & Global Politics, 2013Co-Authors: Richard Adams, Chris BarrieAbstract:This article interrogates the Bureaucratization of war, incarnate in the covert lethal drone. Bureaucracies are criticized typically for their complexity, inefficiency, and inflexibility. This article is concerned with their moral indifference. It explores killing, which is so highly administered, so morally remote, and of such scale, that we acknowledge a covert lethal program. This is a bureaucratized program of assassination in contravention of critical human rights. In this article, this program is seen to compromise the advance of global justice. Moreover, the Bureaucratization of lethal force is seen to dissolve democratic ideals from within. The bureaucracy isolates the citizens from lethal force applied in their name. People are killed, in the name of the State, but without conspicuous justification, or judicial review, and without informed public debate. This article gives an account of the risk associated with the Bureaucratization of the State’s lethal power. Exemplified by the covert drone, this is power with formidable reach. It is power as well, which requires great moral sensitivity. Considering the drone program, this article identifies challenges, which will become more prominent and pressing, as technology advances.
John P Walsh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Bureaucratization of science
Research Policy, 2015Co-Authors: John P WalshAbstract:While science is traditionally treated as a distinct domain of work organization, increasingly science is organized around larger and larger work groups that resemble small firms, with knowledge as the product. The growth of organized science raises the question of whether we also see a bureaucratic structuring of scientific work groups as predicted by organization theory, with implications for the academic credit system and scientific labor markets. Building on organization theory, we examine the relation between project group size, technical environment, and bureaucratic structuring of scientific work. Using survey data on scientific projects, we find size predicts bureaucratic structuring, with declining marginal effects. We also find that interdisciplinarity and task interdependence have distinct effects on bureaucratic structuring. Finally, the relationship between size and some dimensions of bureaucratic structuring is contingent on levels of work group interdependence in the field. We conclude with a discussion of the implications for policy debates about authorship and scientific careers.
Chengbin Luan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
policy changes and reason analysis of Bureaucratization of native officers in guizhou in qing dynasty
Studies in Sociology of Science, 2014Co-Authors: Mengmei Jiang, Chengbin LuanAbstract:Throughout the whole Qing Dynasty, there had been great twists and changes of the Bureaucratization of native officers in Guizhou area—with the changes in military and political situations, it had gone through several different policy periods of appeasement in Shunzhi period, the active flow-changing of Wu Sangui, resumption of conciliatory policy in Kangxi period, the comprehensive and all-dimensional native officers Bureaucratization in Yongzheng period and the policy rehabilitation of Koreans, Miao nationalities and frontier in Qing Dynasty. As the important strategic pivot, the policy changes of Bureaucratization of native officers in Guizhou stands for an epitome for the minority policy at boarders under the domination of central regime for the great unity, the changing reasons of which are not only closely related with the objective military and political situations, but also related with the ruling styles of the emperors themselves. The national strategies of the mainland-frontier integration of Qing Dynasty were constant; the phased policy changes of Bureaucratization of native officers were only different in manners and measures. It is just in this phased changes and gradually forwarding process that the Bureaucratization of Guizhou realized the general goal of matching politics, economics and culture with the mainland.
-
civilizational spread and ethnic fusion analysis of the impact of Bureaucratization of native officers in guizhou region during ming and qing dynasties
Cross-cultural Communication, 2014Co-Authors: Mengmei Jiang, Chengbin LuanAbstract:Bureaucratization of native officers is a major event in the history of Guizhou region, which went through the Ming and Qing dynasties. In fact, this process is also a province establishing process during which the civilizations of central plains and minority groups interacted and fused together, and the territory of Guizhou province was gradually settled. Bureaucratization of native officers in Guizhou is a systematic project which replaced the economic bases under different social systems in Guizhou with the advanced economic production relations under feudal landlord system in central plains using politics and military as the intervention precursor, economy and commerce as the penetration means, and cultural and educational integration as the auxiliary strategy. Bureaucratization of native officers significantly impacted Guizhou region’s politics, ethnology, culture, economy and ecology. The purpose of this powerful top-down, center-periphery spread and dissemination of Han civilization to Guizhou region is the assimilation of civilization and the construction of a unified multi-ethnic country. It is exactly during the dynamic exchange, struggle and fusion between the Han civilization, which is representative of central dynasty, and Guizhou’s local civilization that the unity in diversity ethnic structure is able to be achieved, and a uniform centripetal force is able to be formed.
Edgar Kiser - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
war and Bureaucratization in qin china exploring an anomalous case
American Sociological Review, 2003Co-Authors: Edgar KiserAbstract:Why did a partially bureaucratized administrative system develop in Qin China about two millennia before it did in European states? In this paper, comparative historical arguments about war and state-making are combined with agency theory to answer this question. The Spring and Autumn and Warring States eras that preceded the Qin unification of China created the necessary conditions for Bureaucratization by weakening the aristocracy, creating a bureaucratic model, facilitating the development of roads, and providing trained and disciplined personnel. Comparative analysis shows that the main factor differentiating Qin China from other states and empires was the extreme weakness of the aristocracy produced by an unusually long period of severe warfare. Although Qin China was more bureaucratic than any other state or empire prior to the seventeenth century, it was far from completely bureaucratic. The persistence of monitoring problems prevented its full development, necessitating deviations such as the use of severe negative sanctions, the creation of redundant positions, and limiting Bureaucratization to the top of the administrative system. The further development of the bureaucratic administrative system in the Han dynasty is also discussed.
-
revolution and state structure the Bureaucratization of tax administration in early modern england and france1
American Journal of Sociology, 2001Co-Authors: Edgar Kiser, Joshua KaneAbstract:This article explores the relationship between revolution and the Bureaucratization of tax administration in early modern England and France. Revolution produces Bureaucratization only when the monitoring capacity of states is developed enough to make bureaucratic organization more efficient than alternatives such as tax farming and collection by local notables. As monitoring capacity varies across types of taxes and levels of administration, states also bureaucratize at different paces and are differentially affected by revolution. This explains why the revolutions in England and France had greater effects on indirect taxes than on direct taxes and at top levels of tax administration compared to lower levels. Thus, revolution is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for Bureaucratization, but it contributes to the process by sweeping away impediments to reform.
