Realized Publicness at Public and Private Research Universities

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although research-extensive universities in the United States produce similar outcomes-research, teaching, and service-they vary substantially in terms of the publicness of their environments. In this article, the authors adopt a public values framework to examine how regulative, normative/associative, and cultural cognitive components affect realized public outcomes by faculty. Using survey data from a random sample of faculty scientists in six fields of science and engineering at Carnegie Research I universities, findings show that organizational and individual public values components are associated predictably with different realized individual public outcomes. For example, individual support from federal resources and affiliation with a federal lab (associative) are related to increased research outcomes, while tuition and fee levels (regulative) explain teaching outcomes, and perceived level of influence in the workplace (cultural cognitive) explains teaching and service outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)272-284
Number of pages13
JournalPublic Administration Review
Volume72
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

teaching research
university
Teaching
fee
random sample
Values
workplace
engineering
science
resources
University research
Outcomes research
Public value
Fees
Survey data
Resources
Work place

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Public Administration
  • Marketing

Cite this

Realized Publicness at Public and Private Research Universities. / Feeney, Mary; Welch, Eric.

In: Public Administration Review, Vol. 72, No. 2, 03.2012, p. 272-284.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{88f9c4db44e04d83bf5d804c50174f4f,
title = "Realized Publicness at Public and Private Research Universities",
abstract = "Although research-extensive universities in the United States produce similar outcomes-research, teaching, and service-they vary substantially in terms of the publicness of their environments. In this article, the authors adopt a public values framework to examine how regulative, normative/associative, and cultural cognitive components affect realized public outcomes by faculty. Using survey data from a random sample of faculty scientists in six fields of science and engineering at Carnegie Research I universities, findings show that organizational and individual public values components are associated predictably with different realized individual public outcomes. For example, individual support from federal resources and affiliation with a federal lab (associative) are related to increased research outcomes, while tuition and fee levels (regulative) explain teaching outcomes, and perceived level of influence in the workplace (cultural cognitive) explains teaching and service outcomes.",
author = "Mary Feeney and Eric Welch",
year = "2012",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02521.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "72",
pages = "272--284",
journal = "Public Administration Review",
issn = "0033-3352",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Realized Publicness at Public and Private Research Universities

AU - Feeney, Mary

AU - Welch, Eric

PY - 2012/3

Y1 - 2012/3

N2 - Although research-extensive universities in the United States produce similar outcomes-research, teaching, and service-they vary substantially in terms of the publicness of their environments. In this article, the authors adopt a public values framework to examine how regulative, normative/associative, and cultural cognitive components affect realized public outcomes by faculty. Using survey data from a random sample of faculty scientists in six fields of science and engineering at Carnegie Research I universities, findings show that organizational and individual public values components are associated predictably with different realized individual public outcomes. For example, individual support from federal resources and affiliation with a federal lab (associative) are related to increased research outcomes, while tuition and fee levels (regulative) explain teaching outcomes, and perceived level of influence in the workplace (cultural cognitive) explains teaching and service outcomes.

AB - Although research-extensive universities in the United States produce similar outcomes-research, teaching, and service-they vary substantially in terms of the publicness of their environments. In this article, the authors adopt a public values framework to examine how regulative, normative/associative, and cultural cognitive components affect realized public outcomes by faculty. Using survey data from a random sample of faculty scientists in six fields of science and engineering at Carnegie Research I universities, findings show that organizational and individual public values components are associated predictably with different realized individual public outcomes. For example, individual support from federal resources and affiliation with a federal lab (associative) are related to increased research outcomes, while tuition and fee levels (regulative) explain teaching outcomes, and perceived level of influence in the workplace (cultural cognitive) explains teaching and service outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857003546&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857003546&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02521.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02521.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84857003546

VL - 72

SP - 272

EP - 284

JO - Public Administration Review

JF - Public Administration Review

SN - 0033-3352

IS - 2

ER -