Universities in Transition: Reclaiming Values in a Competitive Age

The French university system has been the subject of continuous reforms for over three decades, resulting in profound structural transformations. Rooted in the principles of New Public Management (NPM), the recent reforms focused on a logic of results and the implementation of high standards of quality and excellence (Musselin, 2018). These NPM-based reforms made efficiency the main driver of their policies (Masou, 2018). Consequently, academic contexts are experiencing hyper competition between universities (Musselin, 2024) and even between academics for a limited number of permanent positions (Bozzon et al., 2017; Bartlett et al., 2021).

A notable example is the 2020 Research Programming Law, or LPR, which reinforces the scientific mission of universities while institutionalizing neoliberal practices, promoting research privatization, and encouraging competitive funding mechanisms (Doussot & Pons, 2020). Institutional budgets now depend largely on success in project-based funding calls (Musselin, 2022). The LPR also introduced the “Junior Professorship,” a new recruitment channel offering potential access to tenured positions as university professors or research directors. Appointees sign a research and teaching agreement and a fixed-term contract of three to six years, though tenure is not guaranteed at the end of the term.

These reforms have led to greater competition between individual academics and between teams, inherent in research activities, which now “extends to institutions” (Musselin, 2022:8). This heightened competition transforms universities from collegiate organizations to institutional bureaucracies (Musselin, 2021:7). Factors such as escalating research costs (Altbach, 2015), the parallel increase in the number of academics and the decrease in public budgets (Tandberg, 2010; cited in Musselin, 2018) have reinforced this pattern.

The neoliberal practices in universities widened the discrepancy between their traditional role as ideal-type institutions—guardians of public interest and civil society—and their evolving function within a market-driven knowledge economy.

According to the Quintuple Helix Model (Carayannis & Campbell, 2017), universities are pivotal actors in the innovation ecosystem, contributing not only to knowledge production, but also to societal advancement through ethical engagement and social responsibility. This responsibility entails a commitment to ethical conduct and to fostering economic development while enhancing the well-being of employees, their families, and the broader community (Asemah et al., 2013).

Although universities are expected to embody these ideal-type values, the competitive pressures they now face raise concerns about their consequences. Academics increasingly devote time to securing permanent positions or funding opportunities (Fernandes et al., 2020), often at the expense of other activities like research and mentorship (Bartlett et al., 2021). Academic precarity is also intensifying. While the employment of Non-Permanent Academics is not new, universities worldwide are experiencing growing academic flexibility as a result of neoliberal and market-driven logics (Herschberg et al., 2018; Bone, 2020; Sim & Bierema, 2025).

Historically, debates around academic labour conditions focused on non-tenured staff. Today, however, these concerns have expanded to include tenured faculty, who are now facing escalating administrative burdens, intensified pressure to publish (often referred to as the “Star Wars” of academia) and diminishing job security. These developments prompt a fundamental question: What values do universities truly represent and uphold in the current context?

The contemporary trajectory of higher education reflects a shift toward managerial governance, often at the expense of institutional autonomy.This shift reflects a broader trend toward treating higher education institutions as businesses, emphasizing efficiency, competition, and branding. However, such an approach risks undermining the foundational values that define the university—namely, intellectual freedom, collegial governance, and the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake.

Under the influence of managerialism, universities have become increasingly integrated into the knowledge economy, adopting market-based mechanisms and aligning with innovation-driven production-consumption logics (Broucker & De Wit, 2015; Figuier, 2023). This evolution raises significant ethical concerns, particularly regarding the treatment and well-being of academic staff. In sum, these transformations call into question the contemporary role and identity of universities. Their foundational values, institutional autonomy, and societal mission are increasingly at risk in a context dominated by managerial imperatives and market rationalities.

One must keep in mind that institutional autonomy remains essential for universities to fulfill their societal role without succumbing to external pressures, whether from market, political agendas, or branding imperatives. Sustained public funding is therefore critical—not only to preserve this autonomy but also to ensure the viability of all disciplines, particularly in the humanities and social sciences, which are frequently marginalized in favor of STEM and business-oriented programs. Moreover, higher education institutions must resist the commodification of learning, which frames students as consumers and education as a transactional service. The guiding principle of university education should be intellectual development, not merely student satisfaction metrics or employment outcomes.

References

Altbach, P. (2015). The costs and benefits of world-class universities. International Higher Education, 33, 5–8. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2003.33.7381

Asemah, E. S., Okpanachi, R. A., & Olumuji, E. O. (2013). Universities and corporate social responsibility performance: An implosion of the reality. African Research Review: An International Multidisciplinary Journal, 7(4), 195–224. https://doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.7i4.12

Bartlett, M. J., Arslan, F. N., Bankston, A., & Sarabipour, S. (2021). Ten simple rules to improve academic work–life balance. PLOS Computational Biology, 17(7), e1009124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009124

Bone, K. (2020). Cruel optimism and precarious employment: The crisis ordinariness of academic work. Journal of Business Ethics, 174, 275–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04605-2

Bozzon, R., Murgia, A., Poggio, B., & Rapetti, E. (2017). Work–life interferences in the early stages of academic careers: The case of precarious researchers in Italy. European Educational Research Journal, 16, 332–351.

Broucker, B., & De Wit, K. (2015). New public management in higher education. In The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance (pp. 57–75). Palgrave Macmillan.

Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2017). Les systèmes d’innovation de la quadruple et de la quintuple hélice. Innovations, 54, 173–195. https://www.cairn.info/load_pdf.php?ID_ARTICLE=INNO_PR1_0023&download=1

Doussot, S., & Pons, X. (2020). La LPPR et la réforme de l’enseignement supérieur et de la recherche: Analyses critiques / The LPPR and the reform of higher education and research in France: Critical analyses. Revue française de pédagogie, 207, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.4000/rfp.9141

Fernandes, J. D., Sarabipour, S., Smith, C. T., Niemi, N. M., Jadavji, N. M., Kozik, A. J., et al. (2020). Research culture: A survey-based analysis of the academic job market. eLife, 9, e54097. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54097

Figuier, R. (2023, February 8). Université de marché ? Mise au pas, l’Université ? En attendant Nadeau, Journal de la littérature, des idées et des arts. https://www.en-attendantnadeau.fr/2023/02/08/université-marche/

Herschberg, C., Benschop, Y., & Brink, M. (2018). Precarious postdocs: A comparative study on recruitment and selection of early-career researchers. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34, 303–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2018.10.001

Masou, R. (2018). The responsibility of university managers when conducting performance-oriented reforms. Revue Française d’Administration Publique, 166(2), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfap.166.0353

Musselin, C. (2018). New forms of competition in higher education. Socio-Economic Review, 16(3), 657–683. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwy033

Musselin, C. (2021). University governance in meso and macro perspective. Annual Review of Sociology, 47, 305–345. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03367341/document

Musselin, C. (2022). Université. In D. Fassin (Ed.), La société qui vient (pp. 490–506). Seuil.

Musselin, C. (2024). France – Tenure tracks, but only for some. In Tenure tracks in European universities (Chapter 6). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035302451.00012

Sim, E., & Bierema, L. L. (2025). Intersectional precarity in academia: A systematic literature review. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-09-2023-0306

Tandberg, D. A. (2010). Politics, interest groups and state funding of public higher education. Research in Higher Education, 51, 416–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9164-5