The aim of this study is to investigate the 1993 reform and the process where control and management philosophies, systems of rules and regulations are assumed to apply both to the centuries of academic tradition of specific characteristics of organisation and cultural norms. Based on documents, educational political intentions and the plans of action which hereby arise I attempt to analyse the impact of the reform.
New planning and control systems and goal and achievement-related allocation of resources are being introduced at the same time as the country's seats of learning are becoming independent authorities with the right to create their own internal organisation. The new government wants to achieve a decentralisation of decisions-making, responsibility and authority, and to follow up and evaluate operations and results. A particular enquiry has been set up, RUT-93, with the aim of studying the position the individual establishments of higher education take in practice towards the aims of the reform, intentions and to the new possibilities for freedom that are provided.
From a qualitative point of view I analyse how the country's seats of learning react and act in relation to these new preconditions on the basis of a questionnaire and a referral from the RUT-93 enquiry, as well as my own additional empirical material in the form of personal interviews. I reach the conclusion that the state authorities use the concept of freedom to explain a moving away from a centrally controlled system at the same time that strengthened central control is perceived at the country's seats of learning, as connections are made between allocation of resources and demands for achievement, follow-up and results attained.
The strategy behind the RUT-93 enquiry is to ensure that a process of reform survives even if the right-wing government were to lose power after one mandate period. The activities for which initiative is taken, however, acquire the nature of predictability as the aims of the reform and the directives of the report are viewed as being indeterminate and unclear for the country's seats of learning.
I feel I have discovered at least four different horizons of interpretation for how the country's seats oflearning view the reform: the discourse of tradition, an organisational perspective, a power perspective and an undergraduate education perspective. It also appears to be the case that the traditional academic exercise of power is expected to be replaced by a model of control and management of a 'top-down' nature which applies to society as a whole and where control of aims, economy and results is the guiding principle. There also seems to be a connection between the concepts of fraternity, management and democracy, where the concept of classic academic is often associated with and even used synonymously with concepts such as fraternal, democratic, nonhierarchical and 'bottom-up' -Ollented, while the concept of management-oriented is often used as an explanation of a hierarchy or a 'top-down' philosophy of some kind.
I have tried to describe how the 1993 reform of higher education must be understood on the basis of the existential, societal, historical and gender-dependent fabric so that it does not hang loose and floating. A summarising conclusion contains the plausible fact that both state authorities and tax-payers have an interest in the fact that the operations which are run at higher education establishments is in concord with what is happening in society in general, which, however, does necessarily mean that operations must be run or controlled on the basis of the same principles or rules as other state authorities and even less on the basis of what applies to organisations and companies.
Stockholm: Stockholms universitet , 1997. , 140 p.