The blurring of boundaries between, for instance, functional areas, professional and
academic activity, and internal and external constituencies has been fostered by the
emergence of broadly based, extended projects such as student transitions,
community partnership, and professional practice (Whitchurch, 2006a). These have
contributed to the creation of a third space between professional and academic
domains, requiring contributions from a range of staff. In this space, the concept of
administrative service has become re-oriented towards one of partnership with
academic colleagues and the multiple constituencies with whom institutions interact.
However, while considerable attention has been paid to the implications of a
changing environment for academic identities (Henkel, 2000; 2007; Becher and
Trowler, 2001; Barnett, 2005; Barnett and di Napoli, 2008; Kogan and Teichler,
2008), there has been less recognition of the impact on professional staff, or of the
emergence of increasingly mixed identities. The aim of the study described in this
paper, therefore, was to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of these
identities, and of the topology of the newly emerging landscape of activity.
As noted in Whitchurch (2006b), the terms ‘administration’ and ‘management’ not
only lack precision as descriptors of the activities of professional staff, but have been
contested in an academic environment, administration for its association with
unwanted bureaucracy, and management for its association with what is perceived as
an erosion of academic autonomy as institutions respond to competitive markets and
government accountability requirements (Halsey, 1992; Parker and Jary, 1995; Deem,
1998; Trowler, 2002; Peters, 2004). Moreover, as the capacity of staff expands and
diversifies to cope with the ongoing demands on institutions, professional roles and
identities are subject to continual revision. The situation is, therefore, more dynamic
and complex than organisation charts and job descriptions might suggest.
This lack of understanding about the roles and identities of professional staff has been
fostered by the absence of a precise vocabulary to describe staff who
increasingly, for instance:
• have academic credentials such as master’s and doctoral level
qualifications, or a teaching or research background in the college sector;
• work in teams dealing with institutional initiatives that require a range of
specialist, academic, and policy contributions, from bids for one-off
infrastructure funding to the establishment of longer-term regional
partnerships;
• undertake quasi-academic functions such as conducting study-skill
sessions for access students, speaking at outreach events, or conducting
overseas recruitment visits;
• have the possibility of moving into an academic management role, for
instance, a pro-vice-chancellor post with a portfolio such as quality,
staffing, or institutional development (Whitchurch, 2006b).
To address this shortfall in understanding, the study used the concept of identity to
theorise empirical work in the United Kingdom (UK), Australia and the United States
(US), and to explore the increasingly diverse forms of professional that are emerging
in higher education. It builds on contemporary ideas about the fluidity of identity