Between Collegiality and Managerialism: Academic Autonomy in Argentina, Chile and Mexico

Abstract

This article explores academics' perceptions of their participation in decision-making and management models in universities in these three countries, with a particular focus on how reforms based on New Public Management (NPM) have affected academic autonomy. Through a comparative approach, using data from the survey 'The Academic Profession in the Knowledge-Based Society' (APIKS), the study analyses how these changes have varied in each national context. In Mexico, academics report greater influence in decision-making, albeit tempered by increasing centralisation and demands for efficiency. In Chile, perceptions of participation are much lower, reflecting an erosion of collegial governance due to the advance of managerialism. Argentina, on the other hand, represents a balance between the two trends, maintaining some capacity to influence collegial structures, albeit with increasing professionalisation of management. The study also highlights that, while peer review is still relevant in Argentina, in Mexico and Chile managerial mechanisms have gained the upper hand, limiting academic autonomy. Furthermore, there is a prioritisation of research over teaching, driven by national policies to promote scientific productivity, especially in Mexico and Chile. Finally, the article shows how the adoption of the NGP has given rise to hybrid forms of university governance, generating tensions between traditional values of academic autonomy and new managerial demands, with significant differences in each country.