Internal university labor market: problem, inevitability or expediency?

12+ Submit an article

Received: 15.03.2023 Published: 15.03.2023

UDC: 331.1 DOI: 10.22394/2410-132X-2023-9-3-15-26

Abstract

There are 2 strategic vectors of human resource management: an open or closed model. The reasons for the development or rooting of a closed model (the internal labor market) we explain by two groups of basic conditions (factors): the specifics of the external environment and the business model of the organization. Each of the conditions determines the need to attract workers with specific characteristics.The article is devoted to the study of the influence of these factors on the creation of internal labor markets in universities. The methodological framework of the study is based on human resource management and labor economics. The specificity of the business model of the university is due to the multifunctionality of its target efficiency, the complexity of the hierarchy, and the special characteristics of the goods. Also, the reasons for the emergence of closed models of human resource management are associated with bilateral and quasi-market relations in the higher education. Together, these factors explain the emergence of a special type of internal labor market. Its key characteristics are an indirect system for assessing the level of professor’s qualifications; self-selection and inbreeding as the unique institutions; implicit individual contracts as a by-product of the hidden career and the working time elasticity. In Russian universities, internal labor markets are a non-alternative model of human resource management due to the underdevelopment of infrastructure, as well as an imbalance in supply and demand in the external labor market. It is shown that the functioning of such a model will be relatively expedient when building the effective work of a university in a loose coupling net of national and international academic community.

Keywords

How to cite

Для цитирования:

Орехова С.В., Никитина О.М. Внутренний рынок труда университета: проблема, неизбежность или целесообразность? // Экономика науки. 2023. Т. 9, № 3. С. 15–26. https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2023-9-3-15-26

For citation:

Orekhova S.V., Nikitina O.M. Internal university labor market: problem, inevitability or expediency? // Economics of Science. 2023. Vol. 9, no. 3. P. 15–26. https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2023-9-3-15-26

Коды статьи

  • УДК 331.1
  • Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)
  • SPIN-код Орехова С. В.: 8132-8027
  • SPIN-код Никитина О. М.: 1925-6897

How to Cite

Orekhova S.V., Nikitina O.M. Internal university labor market: problem, inevitability or expediency? // Economics of Science. 2023. Vol. 9, no. 3. P. 15–26. https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2023-9-3-15-26

References

  1. Академический инбридинг и мобильность в высшем образовании: Глобальные перспективы [Текст] / под ред. М. М. Юдкевич, Ф. Дж. Альтбаха, Л. Рамбли; пер. с англ. Г. С. Петренко под науч. ред. М. М. Юдкевич; отв. ред. Н. М. Халатянц; Нац. исслед. ун-т «Высшая школа экономики». Москва: Издательский дом Высшей школы экономики, 2016. 328 с.
  2. Гозалова А. В., Рыжова В. С., Скачкова Л. С. «И швец, и жнец, и на дуде игрец…»: универсальны ли научно-педагогические работники? // Управленец. 2022. Т. 13. № 5. С. 85–101. doi: 10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-5-6.
  3. Орехова С. В. Развитие внутреннего рынка труда градообразующего промышленного предприятия. / диссертация на соискание ученой степени кандидата экономических наук. Екатеринбург: Уральский государственный экономический университет, 2009. 211 с.
  4. Сивак Е. В., Юдкевич М. М.Академическийинбридинг: заипротив // Вопросыобразования. 2009. № 1 С. 170–187.
  5. Сорокин А. Какой он, человек университетский. (интервью). 27 окт. 2021. https://skillbox.ru/media/education/kakoy-on-chelovek-universitetskiy/
  6. Шибанова Е. Ю. Политика NPM в высшем образовании: обзор влияния «нового государственного управления» на эффективность и производительность вузов. // Вопросы образования / Educational Studies. 2023. № 2. С. 241–281.
  7. Юдкевич М. М. Деятельность университетов и ученых: экономические объяснения и академические оправдания (комментарий к статье А. М. Даймонда «Поведение университетов и ученых: экономические объяснения». / в кн. Экономика университета: институты и организации. Москва: Издательский дом Высшей школы экономики 2007. 249 с., С. 48–77.
  8. Altbach P. Academic Freedom: International Realities and Challenges. // Higher Education. 2001. Vol. 41, № 1–2. P. 205–219.
  9. Becker G. S. Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis. // The Journal of Political Economy. 1962. Vol. 70, № 5. Р. 9–49.
  10. Cestone G., Fumagalli C., Kramarz F., Pica G. Insurance Between Firms: The Role of Internal Labor Markets. Finance Working Paper № 489/2016. April 2018–70 р.
  11. Culyer A. J. Utility Maximizing View of Universities. // Scottish Journal of Political Economy. 1970. Vol. 17 (3), Nov. Р. 349–368.
  12. Czarniawska B., Genell K. Gone shopping? Universities on their way to the market. // Scandinavian Journal of Management. 2002. Vol. 18, № 4. Р. 455–474.
  13. Darby M., Karni E. Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. // The Journal of Law &Economics. 1973. Vol. 16, № 1. 1973. Р. 67–88.
  14. Diamond A. M. Jr. Economic Explanations of the Behavior of Universities and Scholars. // Journal of Economic Studies. 1993. Vol. 20, № 4–5. P. 107–133.
  15. Doeringer P. B., Piore M. J. Internal Labour Markets and Manpower Analysis, Lexington, Massachusetts: DC Heath and Company. 1971. 248 р.
  16. Ehrenberg R. Adam Smith goes to College: An Economist Becomes an Academic Administrator // The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1999. Vol. 13. № 1. P. 99–116.
  17. Garicano L., Rossi-Hansberg E. Organization and inequality in a knowledge economy. // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2006. № 121(4). Р. 1383–1435.
  18. Grunig S. Research, Reputation, and Recourses: The Effect of Research Activity on Reputations of UnderGraduate Education and Institutional Recourse Acquisition. // Journal of Higher Education. 1997. Vol. 68. № 1. Р.17–52.
  19. Huitfeldt I., Kostøl A. R., Nimczik J., Weber A. Internal Labor Markets: A Worker Flow Approach. / IZA DP № 14637. AUGUST. 2021. 46p.
  20. Jovanovic B. Job Matching and the Theory of Turnover. // Journal of Political Economy. 1979. Vol. 87 Iss. 5. P. 972–990.
  21. Meyer H. D., Rowan B. Institutional analysis and the Study of Education. /in: The New Institutionalism in Education. N. Y. State University of New York Press. 2006. P. 1–13.
  22. Rogge B., Goodrich P. F. Education in a Free Society. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1973. Р. 29–55.
  23. Royal C. Internal labour markets – the current debate and a theoretical framework. – Sydney: University of New South Wales. School of Industrial Relations and Organizational Behavior. 2000. 34 p.
  24. Sicherman N., Galor O. A Theory of Career Mobility. // Journal of Political Economy. 1990. Vol. 98 № 1. P. 169–192.
  25. Skeels J. W., Fairbanks R. P. Publish or Perish: An Analysis of the Mobility of publishing and nonpublishing Economists // Southern Economic Journal. 1968–1969. Vol. 35, № 1–4. P. 17–25.
  26. Slichter S. The Turnover of Factory Labor. New York: Appleton. 1919. 460 р.
  27. Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Indianapolis: Liberty Press. 1976.
  28. Soler М. How Inbreeding Affects Productivity in Europe. // Nature. 2001.Vol. 411. P. 132.
  29. Stinebrickner T. R. A Dynamic Model of Teacher Labor Supply. // Journal of Labor Economics. 2001. Vol. 19 (1). P. 196–230.

Articles

All articles