Consortium of Higher Education Researchers 21st Annual Conference“E ll d Di it i Hi h Ed ti M i G l d“Excellence and Diversity in Higher Education. Meanings Goals and Instruments”Università degli Studi di Pavia/Italy, 11-13 September 2008, Track 3

EXCELLENCE AND EFFICIENCY – FRIENDS OR FOES?

Prof Dr M Klumpp KCL FOM Essen/Germany*Prof. Dr. M. Klumpp, KCL, FOM Essen/Germany*Prof. Dr. S. Zelewski, PIM, University Duisburg-Essen/Germany

*Presenting Author, E-Mail: matthias.klumpp@fom.de

1Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

Agenda

1. Higher Education Data Sources

2 Data Envelopment Analysis2. Data Envelopment Analysis

3. DEA Results

4. Interpretations

5 Conclusions5. Conclusions

2Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

1. Higher Education Data Sources

SJTU Ranking (2007, 510 HEI): HiCi, N&S, SCI, Size (Outputs)

Budget Data (Input) from HEI Homepages 69 Data Sets (DMU)

USA USA GER GER

Budget Data (Input) from HEI Homepages, 69 Data Sets (DMU)

USA (number)

USA (% of SJTU)

USA (% ofUSA)

GER (number)

GER (% of SJTU)

GER (% of GER)

TOP 100 54 54,00 % 1,35 % 6 6,00 % 1,58 %

TOP 202 88 43,56 % 2,20 % 14 6,93 % 3,68 %

TOP 510 (all) 166 32,55 % 4,15 % 41 8,04 % 10,79 %

2. DEA Methodology

Input-output-comparison on an individual level (DMU) –therefore different paths to efficiency possible, no “prejudiced”therefore different paths to efficiency possible, no prejudiced production assumptions (especially important for HE)

DEA often used in “non-monetary” or social production y penvironments as e.g. health care or higher education without known production functions

Model with constant returns to scale (used in most analytical cases but to be reviewed for HE later on)

Software analysis based on the program “Frontier Analyst®” of Banxia Holdings Ltd., Version 4.0.10.

4Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

2. DEA Data Input/Output

Data of the first

25 of 69 DMU25 of 69 DMU.

5Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

3. DEA Results, Case Overview

Data of the first

25 of 69 DMU25 of 69 DMU.

6Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

3. DEA Results, Case A

1 Harvard

St f dStanford

Berkeley

U Penn

Berkeley Efficiency

+

+ -

Excellence

+

-

TU DresdenUSAGermany

7Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

R = 0,80

3. DEA Results, Case AU Wü b

2U Würzburg

Harvard

Stanford

U PennTU Dresden

8Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

R = -0,49

3. DEA Results, Case A

3„Efficiency Frontier“ U Bayreuthy

Potential (33): 15%

U Würzburg

( )

U Freiburg

9Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

3. DEA Results, Case B

1

Harvard

„Accumulation Law“

Stanford

U PennU Penn

TU Dresden

10Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

R = 0,82

3. DEA Results, Case B

2

„economies of scale“„diseconomies“

11Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

R = -0,70

3. DEA Results, Case B

3 U Regensb.

Potential (33): 18%

U Würzburg

U F ibU Freiburg

H dHarvard

12Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

3. DEA Results, Case C

1Harvard

Stanford

U Penn

TU Dresden

13Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

R = 0,70

3. DEA Results, Case C

2

„diseconomies“

14Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

R = -0,49

3. DEA Results, Case C

3U Bayreuth

U Regensb.y

U F ib Potential (33): 19%U Freiburg

U Penn

15Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

4. Interpretations

(1) In general larger budgets provide for larger output measures – with an increasingly strategic task of fundraisingmeasures with an increasingly strategic task of fundraising in higher education (no excellence without successful fundraising)

(2) But smaller and also public universities are according to this calculation more efficient than the usual suspects of largecalculation more efficient than the usual suspects of large and/or private universities – without any causality to be proven efficiency seems to be found in smaller universities

(3) The calculated efficiency benchmarks leave much room for improvement for most of the analyzed universities, startingp y , gfrom about 15% budget reduction possible in the provided example

16Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

5. Conclusions

Excellence and efficiency seem to be foes

Excellence is intertwined with a certain inefficiency

This can be called “slack”

An interesting question for further research may be aAn interesting question for further research may be a possible distinction in

) “ i ti l l k” (t b id da) an “organisational slack” (to be avoided as “inefficiency”) and

b) a “scientific slack” (to be cultivated as base for innovation and excellence: “blue sky research”)

17Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08

Consortium of Higher Education Researchers 21st Annual Conference“E ll d Di it i Hi h Ed ti M i G l d“Excellence and Diversity in Higher Education. Meanings Goals and Instruments”Università degli Studi di Pavia, 11-13 September 2008, Track 3

EXCELLENCE AND EFFICIENCY – FRIENDS OR FOES?

Prof. Dr. M. Klumpp, KCL, FOM Essen/Germany*Prof. Dr. S. Zelewski, PIM, University Duisburg-Essen/Germany, , y g y

*Presenting Author, E-Mail: matthias.klumpp@fom.de

Thank you very much for your attention.

18Klumpp/Zelewski: Excellence and Efficiency – Friends or Foes?Sep-08