Zarko Dragsic

This self-ethnography complements the other articles in this special issue by spotlighting a set of key challenges facing international research teams. The study is focused on the relationship between information and communication technology (ICT)-based collaboration and research team dynamics. Our diverse team, drawn from researchers in five countries and three projects, argues that an ironic casualty of the powerful, global phenomena we study, is a lack of insight into what happens to generic research team dynamics, when groups are ‘stretched’ in terms of geographical distance, generations, cultural beliefs, values and norms, as well as disciplinary/specialist traditions. Good intentions are not sufficient to cope with these challenges. This is because of the emerging complexity inherent in many types of international, interdisciplinary fields of study and the complexity of the career trajectories needed to make these studies a reality. Our study underlines that there are no beliefs, values, norms and practices linked to research team dynamics, that hold across the current territory, generations, disciplines, cultures, organizations and individuals leading and conducting comparative studies—and even less reflection on the implications of this fact. Compounding this lack of awareness is a less-than-perfect understanding of the way in which ICT-based collaboration bears on research team dynamics. We assert that a holistic, critical, long-term approach to emerging insights into the global division of academic labor, serves our field better than folk psychology or the methodological parochialism that sustains convention at the expense of creativity. Careful consideration of emergent processes, relationships and linkages that explain how short-term cooperation—within projects—begins to make sense—over careers—illuminates key focal points, which, in turn qualitatively illuminates the way forward concerning conceptualization and problematization of our practice; and novel methodological routes available for those interested in attaining better outcomes, over the long term.

Abstract In this conceptual contribution to the study of university governance the
authors will approach potential patterns of behavior of key decision-makers at central
university level, i.e. roles of governance actors, as well as the set of factors that shape and
constrain the governance actor’s room of manoevre and provide avenues to explain varying
role enactments through an actor analysis of members of the newly introduced university
boards. In a first part the introduction and empowerment of university boards in European
higher education institutions is described as a building block of the transformation of
university governance. In the second part the main hypothesis derived is that, in governance
practice, board members enact roles which are not only shaped and constrained by
formal institutions, as given by the organizational context and regulatory structure, but also
by conformable, appropriate and legitimate role expectations of central role senders. As a
showcase analysis, the roles of university board members are conceptually explored.
Especially in the context of recent reform processes, board members who tend to have a
varied status set, very often find themselves in a troubling situation of conflicting role
expectations, leading to high levels of role conflicts and role ambiguity. It is the aim of this
paper to sketch and examine the factors that contribute to the different roles university
board members may take.