The Politics of Higher Education: University President Ideology and External Networking

• Author: Amanda Rutherford,Thomas Rabovsky
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12529
• Published date: 01 September 2016
• Date: 01 September 2016

764 Public Administration Review • September | October 2016

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 76, Iss. 5, pp. 764–777. © 2016 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12529.

Amanda Rutherford is assistant

professor in the School of Public and

Environmental Affairs at Indiana University.

Her research focuses on managerial

values and decision making, performance

management, representative bureaucracy,

higher education policy, and research

methodology.

E-mail: aruther@indiana.edu

Thomas Rabovsky is assistant

professor in the School of Public and

Environmental Affairs at Indiana University,

where he teaches public management.

His research focuses on accountability,

performance management, managerial

values and decision making, and higher

education policy.

E-mail: rabovsky@indiana.edu

The Politics of Higher Education:

University President Ideology and External Networking

Abstract : While the importance of networking is increasingly recognized by practitioners and scholars alike, little

is known about why signif‌i cant variance is observed in how often and with whom organizational leaders network.

Further, while we know that political ideology plays a critical role in shaping decision making within public

organizations, current models of networking have largely failed to consider the importance of ideology in driving

networking ef‌f orts. Using data from a 2012 survey of U.S. university presidents and the Integrated Postsecondary

Education Data System, this article explores the role that president ideology plays in shaping networking behavior with

political principals. Findings suggest that the ef‌f ect of ideology on external networking ef‌f orts is moderated by state

policy maker ideology.

Practitioner Points

• While the importance of networking is increasingly recognized by practitioners and scholars alike, little is

known about when and why ideology might cause some agency leaders to engage in more networking than

others.

• University presidents network at higher rates with state-level actors in conflictual rather than cooperative

environments.

• In reference to state actors, presidents of many public universities in this sample have shifted toward

buffering the organization against negative shocks, as opposed to searching for or exploiting new

opportunities, which may have been more common in previous decades when the political and fiscal climate

was more supportive.

Thomas Rabovsky

Amanda Rutherford

Indiana University , Bloomington

N etworks have been the focus of an

expanding line of research within the field

of public administration as more and more

practitioners have created professional relationships

and policy initiatives that span the boundaries of

a number of organizations (see additional work on

boundary spanning in Aldrich and Herker 1977 ;

Brass et al. 2004 ; O ’ Toole 2015 ). Scholars have

conceptualized networking activity as being upward

and downward, horizontal and vertical, and necessary

and optional, among other definitions (Agranoff

and McGuire 2001 ; O ’ Toole, Meier, and Nicholson-

Crotty 2005 ). Most assume that these actions

constitute a solution by public managers to achieve

higher performance levels after some type of problem

has been identified within the organization (Berry

et al. 2004 ), although networks may sometimes be

required by policy mandates. While the importance of

networking is increasingly recognized by practitioners

and scholars alike, little is known about when and

why some agency leaders are more inclined to engage

in networking than others. Further, while we know

that ideology often plays a critical role in shaping

managerial decision making in public organizations

(Kettl 1993 ; Lowi 1969 ), current models of

networking have largely failed to consider the

importance of political ideology as a key mechanism

that can activate or hinder networking activity.

The purpose of this article is to examine the

determinants of networking efforts of top-level

managers. We argue that the ideology of these

individuals has been largely ignored in the networking

literature, leaving current research underspecified.

Beyond the influences of the structural components

of an organization or the external environment,

political ideology should affect when and with

whom top-level managers in public agencies network

to benefit their organizations. In this article, we

specifically consider the role of ideology in shaping

networking activity. We investigate networking in

the context of U.S. public four-year colleges and

universities, organizations that have the potential

to develop sizeable external networks with a variety

of stakeholder groups. Data come largely from an

original survey of university presidents that includes