Visible organisational boundaries and the invisible boundaries of the scholarly profession

T. Siekkinen, E. Pekkola, T. Nokkala

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)


The role of universities in knowledge production has changed. Although most higher learning still takes place in universities, knowledge is increasingly produced in collaborative networks comprising partners from different sectors (Välimaa, J., V. Papatsiba, and D. M. Hoffman. 2016. “Higher Education in Networked Knowledge Societies.” In Re-becoming Universities, The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective. Vol. 15, edited by D. M. Hoffman and J. Välimaa, 13–39. Dordrecht: Springer). In addition, the focus of universities’ personnel policies has shifted from supporting professional inclusion and exclusion towards supporting the national development of talent and human capital. New kinds of networks and collaborative arrangements have emerged to facilitate the mobility of academics between universities and other sectors. This paper draws upon survey data collected in 2017 from PhD graduates working in universities and the private and public sector in Finland, in order to explore their perceptions related to the relevance of their work, and their commitment to the organisation and the scientific community. We found some differences between the private sector, and the public sector and universities, and between disciplines. Between public sector and universities only small differences occurred. The results indicate that the research work between sectors is rather similar according to the indicators that were used, in some cases the differences might be more significant between disciplines.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)415-434
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 2022
Publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Publication forum classification

  • Publication forum level 1


Dive into the research topics of 'Visible organisational boundaries and the invisible boundaries of the scholarly profession'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this