OpenAIR@RGU
The Open Access Institutional Repository
at The Robert Gordon University
http://openair.rgu.ac.uk
This is an author produced version of a paper published in
Education, Knowledge and Economy (ISSN 1749-6896, 1749-690X
(electronic))
This version may not include final proof corrections and does not include
published layout or pagination.
Citation Details
Citation for the version of the work held in ‘OpenAIR@RGU’:
TURNER, Y. and ROBSON, S., 2007. Competitive and cooperative
impulses to internationalization: reflecting on the interplay
between management intentions and the experience of academics
in a British university. Available from OpenAIR@RGU. [online].
Available from: http://openair.rgu.ac.uk
Citation for the publisher’s version:
TURNER, Y. and ROBSON, S., 2007. Competitive and cooperative
impulses to internationalization: reflecting on the interplay
between management intentions and the experience of academics
in a British university. Education, Knowledge and Economy, 1 (1),
pp. 65-82.
Copyright
Items in ‘OpenAIR@RGU’, The Robert Gordon University Open Access Institutional
Repository, are protected by copyright and intellectual property law. If you believe that
any material held in ‘OpenAIR@RGU’ infringes copyright, please contact
openair-help@rgu.ac.uk
with details. The item will be removed from the repository while
the claim is investigated.
1
Competitive and cooperative impulses to internationalization: reflecting on the interplay
between management intentions and the experience of academics in a British university
Yvonne Turner and Sue Robson, University of Newcastle, UK
Correspondence information:
Dr. Yvonne Turner
University of Newcastle upon Tyne Business School
Room 10,
Armstrong Building
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 7RU
UK
Tel: ++44 191 222 8575
Email: yvonne.turner@ncl.ac.uk
2
Competitive and cooperative impulses to internationalization: reflecting on the interplay
between management intentions and the experience of academics in a British university
Abstract
The paper
This paper explores some of the practical tensions associated with Higher Education
internationalization through the introduction of an institutional case study. The case
highlights the interplay between policy-makers and academics around the emergence of an
‘internationalization’ agenda in a British university. It aims to illustrate aspects of the debate
within the literature which discuss the gap between competitive and cooperative international
motivations and to explore the impact of commercial internationalization upon the academic
community. The key conclusions are that: cooperative and competitive impulses to
internationalization respond to different ideological positions; linking a commercial revenue-
generating approach with internationalist rhetoric may frustrate the development of an
international orientation in an institution; and increasing academic disengagement with the
commercial agenda possesses the potential to obstruct management intention.
3
Competitive and cooperative impulses to internationalization: reflecting on the interplay
between management intentions and the experience of academics in a British university.
Internationalization in the UK
Internationalization has impacted widely upon Anglophone Higher Education (HE) in the past
two decades, reflecting broad globalizing trends which have prompted increases in student
mobility and stimulated demand for English language medium education, especially from
countries such as China and India. Unsurprisingly, the UK has featured significantly within
that process and, more than at any time in its recent history, British HE can be characterized
as an international rather than national institution (Hatakenaka, 2004). The presence of
international students has had an impact on many aspects of university activity and identity.
Overseas students studying in Britain have grown not only in numbers but also in the range of
their countries of origin, broadening the cultural diversity of the student community
(UKCOSA, 2006). Their participation has influenced programming and curriculum, notably
though the development of one-year taught postgraduate programmes in vocational subjects
(Sastry, 2004; Turner, 2006). In addition, British universities have also looked towards
overseas students as a source of revenue (Humfrey 1999; de Vita and Case, 2003; HEPI,
2006). Shifts in domestic UK government policy which restructured HE funding during the
late twentieth century encouraged universities to attempt to maximize the revenue
contribution from premium-fee-paying students, including those from overseas (Hodges,
2001; Bekhradnia, 2006).
Internationalization brings with it broader impacts than those immediately associated with the
presence of more overseas students. Academic recruitment and retention issues in British
universities have also had an impact on the international reach of employment patterns and
organizational systems, for example (Bekhradnia and Sastry, 2005). In addition, British
universities are increasingly engaging in international collaborations and partnerships,
including the establishment of transnational ventures around the world (Doorbar, 2004;
Liston, 2004). Moreover, an entrepreneurial, 'managerialist' emphasis to the running and
organization of universities (Slaughter and Leslie, 1997; Deem, 1998) has often brought with
it active, commercial International Marketing practices to UK universities aimed at potential
applicants and partners. This has led to the rapid expansion of university International
Offices, populated by professional recruiters and marketers, whose role is to facilitate the
institutional interface with those overseas (Williams, 1997; Humfrey, 1999).
In the light of the dramatic changes outlined above, the pace of internationalization in UK HE
might seem unstoppable. Indeed, the effects of an incipient international orientation to
university activities have already been far-reaching. However, the evidence also presents a
contradictory picture of internationalization in Britain. A range of press reports have noted the
UK’s declining share of the international student market, for example, reflecting perceptions
about a lack of international reciprocity in British institutions compared to other global
players (THES, 2000; Economist 2003 a, b; Blackstone, 2004). Such commentaries highlight
something of a gap between Britain’s internationalist stance and the experience of some
overseas participants. As a process, therefore, internationalization within UK HE suggests a
series of tensions between the expansionist aspirations of government, sectoral policy
marshaled towards broad commercial international engagem
ent and the pressures experienced
by academics and students inhabiting a dynamically ‘internationalizing’ environment.
The paper
4
This paper explores some of the practical tensions associated with HE internationalization
through the introduction of an institutional case study. The case highlights the interplay
between policy-makers and academics around the emergence of an ‘internationalization’
agenda in the University of Newcastle upon Tyne between 2004 and 2005. It aims to
illustrate aspects of the debate within the literature which discuss the gap between cited and
actual motivations for institutional internationalization and to explore the impact of
commercial internationalization upon the academic community.
‘International’ and ‘internationalization’: problems with definition
At its broadest level, HE ‘internationalization’ is employed as a term which discusses
increasing international engagement within universities. More detailed definitions are often
both elusive and unsatisfactory, however, because the notion is contested. Variously regarded
as a channel for educational opening-up and knowledge-transfer (Bennell and Pearce, 2003),
as a response to international marketing opportunities (de Vita and Case, 2003), a prompt for
international research collaboration (Teichler, 2004) or as a descriptor of cross-border student
flows (Humfrey, 1999), the language of internationalization has been captured within a
number of different educational discourses. The concept is closely allied to broader
ideological debates about globalization, and sometimes subsumed within them (Vaira, 2004).
Discourse about internationalization has also closely accompanied discussions about the
commercialization of HE and the emergence of ‘Enterprise’ universities (Schapper and
Mayson, 2004; Edwards et al, 2003). As such, internationalization has been characterized as
both an energizing catalyst for international knowledge-sharing and a negative neo-liberal
ideological force, bringing the worst of managerialism into academic life.
Partly because of the pervasiveness of internationalization as a theme within HE discourse, it
remains difficult to pin the concept down and relate it to practical phenomena within the
routine experiences of people in universities. The high-level nature of many attempts at
definition compound this difficulty. Here are two typical characterizations:
Internationalization promotes cultural diversity and fosters intercultural understanding,
respect, and tolerance among peoples…commitment to international solidarity, human
security and helps to build a climate of global peace.’ (International Association of
Universities, cited in Black, 2004)
Internationalization at the national, sector and institutional levels is defined as the
process of integrating an international, or global dimension into the purpose, functions
or delivery of postsecondary education (Knight, J, 2003)
While providing a useful way of generally conceiving of internationalization as a
phenomenon and providing focus for debate, these definitions relate only in the broadest
sense to what people in universities do while they are at work every day. This is particularly
the case because internationalization is a multi-stranded concept embracing the motivation
and spirit in which international engagement is undertaken as much as describing tangible
organizational activities (Carroll and Ryan, 2005).
A continuum of positions
One way of considering institutional internationalization, which attempts to capture both
tangible and value-based aspects of the process, is as a continuum from ‘symbolic’ to
‘transformative’ (Bartell, 2003). In this notion, symbolic internationalization is exemplified
by an institution with a basically local/national character and way of doing things, but which
may be populated by overseas students and perhaps some overseas staff. At the other end of
