This research investigates to what extent lecturers at universities of applied sciences do regard differentiated rewards—intended to develop and/or display professionalism—to be fair, and to what extent, and in which form, do these stimulate their willingness to (further) professionalise and/or display professionalism. This was a case study research design, and a factorial survey measurement technique was used to collect data. We argue that lecturers believe it is fair that forms of differentiated rewards are used and applied in order to have them develop and/or display more professionalism. Especially the viewpoints/practices that relate to coordination, consultation, and consideration for personal circumstances have an influence on the justice perceived. This paper contributes to the HRM literature confirming that lecturers appreciate financial stimuli enhancing their professionalism; however, elements such as consultation, respect, coordination, and communication are appreciated even more. It appeals to HRM to design new practices which have more stimulating effect on personal and professional growth in subject-specific knowledge.
DOCUMENT
This research investigates to what extent lecturers at universities of applied sciences do regard differentiated rewards(intended to develop and/or display professionalism)to be fair, and to what extent, and in which form, do these stimulate their willingness to (further) professionalise and/or display professionalism. This was a case study research design, and a factorial survey measurement technique was used to collect data. We argue that lecturers believe it is fair that forms of differentiated rewards are used and applied in order to have them develop and/or display more professionalism. Especially the viewpoints/practices that relate to coordination, consultation, and consideration for personal circumstances have an influence on the justice perceived. This paper contributes to the HRM literature confirming that lecturers appreciate financial stimuli enhancing their professionalism; however, elements such as consultation, respect, coordination, and communication are appreciated even more. It appeals to HRM to design new practices which have more stimulating effect on personal and professional growth in subject-specific knowledge.
DOCUMENT
In our work as lecturers, teachers, researchers, coaches or managers in a university of applied sciences, we do feel that the amount and variety of societal challenges on higher vocational education (HVE) is growing. Institutions in HE are in a process of transforming from traditional ‘either or’ research or education institutions into more complex hybrid knowledge institutions. Nowadays, universities of applied sciences (as institutions for HVE) in The Netherlands have three main objectives: providing education, conducting practice-oriented research to add to the professional knowledge base, and contributing to innovation in the professional fields of work. Education, research and innovation form the three pillars in the strategy of Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences (Educational Council of The Netherlands, 2015). These changing societal demands form an impetus for educational reform and innovation at both organizational and individual employee levels (Cummings & Shin, 2014). Changes in context and roles lead to questions: As a teacher/lecturer/researcher, how do I relate to the different stakeholders? What is the real meaning of being a ‘good’ lecturer or researcher in creating added values, and for whom? Some propose that the new challenges concern everybody and thus should be everyone’s job. But when everything becomes everyone’s job, how can we really realize the required added values? Others promote a more differentiated approach of accurately fitting talents and tasks to create the flow and employee satisfaction that is needed to realize the desired outcomes. But then how do we work together and cooperate with such an individualistic approach? These opposing positions in the discourse concern the question of how to define the ‘professional me’ amongst the ‘we’. In other words, the challenge is how we define and navigate our professional identities within the context of a dynamic multiple-identity organization with increasing pressures for professional diversity (Foreman & Whetten, 2002; Aangenendt, 2015).
DOCUMENT
