The main focus of the article is the question if mergers, takeovers, and organizational restructuring lead to increased university efficacy. The task of defining efficacy with several “input” and “output” performance indicators nowadays is easily solved by a data envelope analysis (DEA). Two models for evaluating educational and academic efficacy of a university. Calculations use DEA model oriented towards input (Input Orientated) with constant return to scale (Constant Returns to Scale, CRS). In order to conduct comparative analysis of groups of universities undergoing restructuring process of different magnitude the authors suggest several university classifications: according to the number of merged and/or liquidated units; restructuring completion period; restructuring mechanism type; including mid level professional education into the university under evaluation. In order to test the suggested hypotheses the authors used non parametric statistic methods of average comparison. The pool for this research covered 132 universities with the Russian Federation Ministry of Education and Science as a founder. The research has not identified decreased efficacy of universities as a result of restructuring process. It has turned out that universities actively participating in restructuring processes have become more effective in comparison with other universities. The research has not observed the effect of temporary decrease and following growth of efficacy at organizations undergoing mergers or takeovers. The research has not supported the hypothesis of decreasing university efficacy as a result of taking over mid level professional education institution. The results of the research clearly indicate the lag in efficacy as compared to the leading competitors where 2010 is a reference year. The authors understand that testing whether suggested hypotheses are true or false and require more detailed research of the university as compared to 2010. As many countries have accumulated sufficient experience of higher education restructuring the results of research into Russian universities restructuring making a comparison of the efficacy of the leading competitors according to numbers in 2010. The authors understand that it will take time to see if their suggestion are true or false. As foreign higher education restructuring materials can be easily downloaded. The results of the research of Russian Federation universities restructuring allow for provide conclusions, using accumulated theoretical concepts for explaining and predicting possible consequences of using different restricting mechanisms. The article uses academically acknowledged envelope data analysis method. This method is for the first time used to compare university efficacy in dynamics.
The article examines the key features of innovations in education, analyzes the economic interests of major stakeholders at the present stage of development of education and substantiates proposals on the need for theoretical rethinking and conceptual development of the principal models used today for describing the range of problems in general education.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.