“Dogsbody in the System”: A Case Study on the Identity Construction of Chinese Local University Teachers in the Situation of Performance Management

University Performance Management

University performance management aims to promote the achievement of teachers’ individual and organizational goals by establishing a comprehensive remuneration mechanism based on audit assessment to improve the organization’s core competitiveness and achieve sustainable development. Existing research mainly focuses on the process, method, and practical issues of university performance management. In terms of process, Hristov et al. (2022) believe that performance management includes five important stages: setting organizational key goals, executing strategies and plans, setting performance target values, rewarding and motivating employees, and providing feedback on cyclic performance information. From a methodological perspective, Niven and Lamorte (2017) believe that by using data envelopment analysis, the work output and input of university teachers can be decomposed into multiple decision-making units, which can better analyze the performance of university teachers and optimize the allocation of university resources. In practice, there are problems such as simply understanding performance management as performance evaluation, excessive quantification of evaluation indicators, and single application of evaluation results. The current university performance management focuses on a single result-oriented approach while neglecting process management (Cosenz, 2022). The “indicator-quantification-reward” model converts the results of teachers’ work into a single number for evaluation, and connects it with teachers’ performance reward, which affects the development of education evaluation reform in universities (Zhongtai, 2022). The production-team-style “Work Point System” performance evaluation method conflicts with universities’ educational philosophy, cultural connotations, and knowledge characteristics (Daguang, 2019).

The Construction of Teacher Identity

Social constructivism, as one of the theoretical foundations of identity construction, holds that action and change are crucial and remaining static and unchanging can lead to problems (Sharkey & Gash, 2020). Therefore, identity construction is a process that continuously evolves and develops in a continuous manner (Ashforth & Schinoff, 2016). Xingsong and Xia (2020) argue that the construction of teacher identity is an unstable and constantly changing process, which is influenced by past and present external policies, internal organizations, and personal experiences. Stout (2001) claims that the construction of teacher identity is affected by three factors: the environment of educational reform, school organizational culture, and interpersonal relationships within the group. Starting from the teacher’s attitude, Narayanan et al. (2023) suggest that personal values, self-efficacy, personal emotions, and practical knowledge have an impact on the construction of a teacher’s identity. To construct teacher identity, the problems and countermeasures mainly focus on the external institutional level and the teacher’s individual levels. At the external institutional level, Guangcai (2006) states that with the intrusion of business logic and popular culture into education organizations, the boundaries between teachers and other professions have begun to blur, and teachers who have lost their unique identity have fallen into an identity dilemma. At the teacher individual level, Gui (2019) found that rural teachers exhibit the elimination, ambiguity, and anxiety of identity in schools, villages, social structures, and other fields, and proposed the solution idea that teachers should consciously improve their professional abilities, rely on local culture, and regain their sense of identity.

The Identity Construction of University Teachers in the Situation of Performance Management

In the situation of university performance management, the construction of teacher identity mainly faces problems such as an identity recognition crisis, a lack of identity belonging, and identity confirmation anxiety. Regarding the identity recognition crisis, the administrative-led management model fails to fully consider the professional attributes and job characteristics of university teachers, thus undermining teachers’ psychological contract and reducing their professional identity (Ruokun, 2011). Due to the lack of identity belonging, the assessment in university performance management blindly pursues quantifiable explicit performance, which undermines teachers’ self-identity (Taihong, 2018). In terms of identity confirmation anxiety, the invasion of academic capital disrupts the internal logic of academic research, resulting in a deviation of teachers’ academic research interests. As a result, teachers are no longer the sole protagonists in academic activities (Kucirkova & Quinlan, 2017). The service attribute of teaching is increasingly strengthening. While meeting students’ personalized demands and providing knowledge serving, teachers are repositioning their self-identity and experiencing anxiety about identity confirmation (Jingning, 2013).

Overall, the relevant research has laid a solid foundation for this study. However, based on the literature review, it has been found that most of the existing research perspectives follow one-way analysis paths centered on institutions or actors, lacking a connection between internal and external factors in the analysis. Further research is required on university teachers’ understanding and response to the performance management system as well as their self-awareness and identity construction during this process. The application of qualitative research methods also needs to be enriched. Therefore, this research takes the teachers of G University in A Province as the research objects. From the research vantage point, it employs the dual perspectives of institutional perspective and actor-centered perspective to probe into the differentiated understandings and responses of local university teachers regarding the performance management system, thus widening the scope of research problems concerning university teachers. In terms of research methodologies, case study and qualitative research approaches are utilized to explore the identity construction of teachers within the context of performance management. Based on the case analysis, countermeasures, and suggestions are proposed to achieve methodological innovation. Additionally, in contrast to the exploration of extrapolation pathways from a macroscopic perspective, this study delves into an endogenous pathway, thoroughly investigates the more crucial and less quantifiable intrinsic factors that are decisive in the formation of college teachers’ identity, examines the construction process of teacher identity within the performance management context, and enriches the theoretical framework of teacher identity and its construction.

Case Study Approach

In order to ensure that the case selected is both typical and feasible, the study selected G University in A Province as the case for local university performance management research based on the following three aspects. Firstly, from the perspective of the province where G University is located, the economy of A Province is relatively developed. The prevalence of business culture leads to the infiltration of the corporate governance mode into the university governance mode. There is a considerable investment in financial education funds, and self-financing is flexible. Moreover, performance-oriented tendencies are often more prominent. Secondly, from the perspective of school hierarchy, it often determines the development platform and resources of universities. Correspondingly, it also determines the working environment of teachers at different university levels. G University is a comprehensive university with multiple disciplines, distinct characteristics, and strong professionalism. In recent years, it has developed rapidly and ranks high among local universities across the country. Thirdly, in terms of the implementation of the performance management system, due to the pressure of the “Double First-Class” construction, G University attaches great importance to scientific research work, and the implementation of performance management is relatively strong, which has brought tremendous pressure to teachers. G University’s adoption of the “work point system” performance management method is typical. Based on the above, the study selected G University to analyze the construction of teacher identity in its performance management situation, and reflect on its performance management practice based on this. To some extent, by seeing the big from the small, it can inspire performance management reform in similar universities.

Policy Text Analysis

The values, management models, and operational processes of local university performance management are primarily manifested and conveyed through policy texts. Consequently, via methods such as investigations on the official websites of the target university, and on-site research, this study has gathered the policy texts related to performance management in G University. These texts include the First Employment Assessment System, the Annual Performance Allocation System, the Job Appointment System, and the Professional Title Promotion System of G University. Qualitative analysis is performed on the aforementioned policy texts to extract textual keywords and high-frequency terms, and interpretations are made from diverse perspectives, thereby refining scattered and specific data into concepts with relevant semantic connections. Based on this, the development process of the performance management systems in G University is analyzed, and both the performance management systems and practical scenarios are summarized.

Deep Interview and Sampling

Deep interview is a method in which researchers listen to research subjects sharing their cognition and experiences in their language through oral communication and obtain first-hand information through in-depth communication. (Woodhouse, 2005) The study selected stakeholders from G University in A Province as the research object, including front-line teachers and university administrators. To obtain comprehensive, detailed, in-depth, and high-quality interview data, the study used flexible and non-probabilistic theoretical sampling to select respondents who could provide the maximum information relevant to the research questions. The research followed the principle of theory-driven sampling, fully considering the differences in factors such as job title, subject, and professional title. This study selected the teachers of G University as the main research objects, encompassing teachers with different titles such as assistant teachers, lecturers, associate professors, and professors, as well as teachers with different subject backgrounds in engineering, science, humanities, and social sciences. Additionally, the main managers of the personnel department of the university are also included. In addition, it should be noted that the case university selected for this study is not the institution where the author is employed. Moreover, there is no professional relationship between the author and the interviewees. In order to protect the confidentiality of the research subject, the basic information of the interviewed teachers was anonymized. The basic information of the 28 interviewees in this study is shown in Table 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Research Participants and Interview Implementation Information.

Respondents	Subject	Professional title (position)	Years of work	Interview time	Interview location
Management A	HR department	Section officer	3	2022-06-23	Office
Management B	HR department	Section chief	6	2022-06-23	Office
Management C	HR department	Deputy director	13	2022-07-18	Office
Management D	HR department	Deputy director	15	2022-09-05	Office
Teacher A	Humanities and social sciences	Associate professor	15	2022-06-24	Office
Teacher B	Humanities and social sciences	Professor	12	2022-07-29	Office
Teacher C	Humanities and social sciences	Associate professor	6	2021-04-17	Office
Teacher D	Humanities and social sciences	Associate professor	4	2021-05-12	Office
Teacher E	Humanities and social sciences	Lecturer	3	2021-06-01	Office
Teacher F	Humanities and social sciences	Professor	8	2021-06-03	Office
Teacher G	Humanities and social sciences	Professor	16	2022-07-09	Office
Teacher H	Humanities and social sciences	Lecturer	2	2021-07-30	Telephone interview
Teacher I	Humanities and social sciences	Lecturer	2	2021-08-02	Telephone interview
Teacher J	Humanities and social sciences	Lecturer	3	2021-08-02	Telephone interview
Teacher K	Humanities and social sciences	Associate professor	18	2022-09-01	Office
Teacher L	Science	Lecturer	1	2021-06-07	Office
Teacher M	Science	Lecturer	3	2021-06-09	Office
Teacher N	Science	Lecturer	1	2021-06-10	Office
Teacher O	Science	Lecturer	2	2021-06-19	Telephone interview
Teacher P	Science	Lecturer	2	2021-06-26	Office
Teacher Q	Science	Lecturer	5	2021-07-05	Office
Teacher R	Engineering	Lecturer	18	2021-06-16	Office
Teacher S	Engineering	Associate professor	5	2021-07-30	Telephone interview
Teacher T	Engineering	Associate professor	5	2022-10-06	Telephone interview
Teacher U	Engineering	Professor	19	2022-11-03	Telephone interview
Teacher V	Engineering	Associate professor	16	2022-11-03	Telephone interview
Teacher W	Engineering	Professor	23	2022-11-03	Telephone interview
Teacher X	Engineering	Associate professor	40	2022-11-03	Telephone interview

The study adopted a semi-structured interview approach. Before the interview, different interview outlines were prepared for two different types of interviewees: university management personnel and university teachers. The interview outline was modified according to the teacher’s answers during the trial test and was only used to clarify the interview direction. During the interview process, responses were made based on the interviewee’s answers; following the interview outline, appropriate questions were asked accordingly. The interview outline for university teachers focuses on the construction of the identity of local university teachers in the performance management situation. The interview outline for university management personnel is mainly based on the implementation and development process of the performance management system in case university (Appendix).

After the interview, the interview corpus was sorted out, and the interview data of university teachers and administrators were analyzed. Similar views were then extracted from the data and coded step by step, ultimately forming a first—level code of teachers’ career intention, teaching conscience, academic feelings, academic interests, material interests, and spiritual interests.

Theoretical Saturation and Ethical Consideration

After interviewing 25 university teachers and management personnel, a preliminary theoretical model was constructed. Subsequently, the sample size was expanded by selecting three more university teachers from different disciplines for further interviews, with the intention of testing whether the data collection had attained theoretical saturation. The concept of theoretical saturation was initially proposed by the founders of grounded theory, Glaser and Strauss (1967), who defined it as “if additional sampling persists, no new categories or related topics will emerge.” Upon analyzing the interview data of these three newly added teachers, it was determined that no new categories or topics emerged from the research, signifying that the data collection had achieved theoretical saturation. The study collected data from a variety of sources and in diverse forms, including G university’s performance management policy texts, interview data from personnel department managers, and interview data from teachers. Triangular mutual verification was then carried out to determine the authenticity and effectiveness of the research results and enhance the credibility of the research.

In addition, the fundamental rights and interests of the respondents are important issues that need to be considered in research. During the research process, three basic ethical principles were always followed: the principle of informed consent, the principle of respect and equality, and the principle of minimum harm and benefit to avoid potential conflicts of interest.

The Performance Management System of the University

Since 2000, G University has explored performance system reform in four aspects: initial employment, performance-based pay, job appointment, and professional title promotion. Over the past 20 years, the performance management policy of G University has been gradually refined, and the performance management situation in G University has been further strengthened.

The performance assessment system during the first employment period primarily focuses on teaching and scientific research while also giving full attention to the ideological and political performance, moral performance, and social service of teachers. The assessment content for new teachers at G University includes scientific research level and quantity, teaching and course evaluation level, and teacher ethics standards, among other aspects. In terms of scientific research, the assessment tasks for new teachers are arduous. They need to complete three CSSCI papers or one SSCI paper and preside over one provincial or ministerial-level project. In terms of teaching, the teaching evaluation level of new teachers needs to reach level B or above.

Local universities widely adopt performance-based salaries as an internal distribution system. Overall, the total performance-based salary of G University accounts for about 70% of the total teacher income (excluding the public accumulation fund for housing). Moreover, the higher authorities in A Province impose a “Per Capita Cap” on the performance-based salary of G University. Therefore, what a teacher gains more in performance-based salary means what other teachers gain less, objectively forming a “Zero-sum Game” pattern in the performance-based salary.

Job appointment and professional title promotion systems are also crucial for university performance management. The main content of the job performance assessment for teachers at G University includes four aspects: teaching work, scientific research work, public affairs work, and the evaluation of teacher ethics and professional conduct, with an emphasis on quantitative assessment. Completing teacher appointment tasks is directly correlated with the distribution of performance-based salary, job level promotion, award, and the job appointment level in the next round. The promotion of professional titles at G University is based on the quantitative work points counted in three dimensions: scientific research, teaching, and social services, and the total numbers of quantitative work points of teachers applying for professional title promotion needs to be compared.

Practice of Performance Management System

Through in-depth interviews with teachers and management staff at G University, it can be seen that performance management has stimulated teachers’ enthusiasm and has had a positive impact on the personal development of teachers and the university. However, the problems in performance management in terms of assessment concepts, methods, and standards have also brought practical difficulties for G University in implementing performance management.

Firstly, it has stimulated the enthusiasm of teachers in their work. In order to maintain its qualification as a “Double First-Class” university, G university reflects a sense of performance and motivation in the introduction, training, and management of teachers, continuously promoting performance management reform. As Manager C pointed out, “the incentive mechanisms and channels introduced by performance management enable teachers to clearly understand their tasks, and specify the workload and work effectiveness of teachers.” This enables teachers to have a direction to strive for and strive to be seen, maximizing the enthusiasm of teachers in their work.

Secondly, the conflict between teaching and research is becoming increasingly prominent. Teaching and research are the main responsibilities of university teacher and the channels for constructing teacher identity. G University has clearly stated in its official documents that it values high-quality teaching. However, the tangible rewards in the performance management policy actually reinforce the emphasis on scientific research. “From a policy perspective, the teaching workload must be greater than the scientific research workload. But the salaries of teachers mainly engaged in teaching may be lower than those of teachers mainly engaged in research.”(Manager B) In addition, the demand bias of university strategy and the difficulty in objectifying teaching quality have also contributed to the contradiction between teaching and research.

Thirdly, performance evaluation standards are difficult to achieve fair. There are significant differences in knowledge attributes, research paradigms, value orientations, and achievement forms between the hard disciplines represented by science and engineering and the soft disciplines represented by humanities. Manager A acknowledged that “the methods, means, difficulties, and time—horizons for generating research outcomes differ across various disciplines. This renders it arduous to assess the academic productivity of diverse fields with uniform indicators, and there indeed exist certain disciplinary disparities in performance evaluations.” Although G University has attempted to optimize performance evaluation in recent years by implementing classified evaluations based on positions and disciplines, the differences between disciplines are not fully reflected, and the performance evaluation standards cannot truly be fair.

Fourthly, the promotion space for teacher professional titles is gradually narrowing. The promotion system for university teachers’ professional titles is regarded as the most effective institutional arrangement for motivating and promoting teacher professional growth. However, due to the limitations on the number of senior professional titles in universities imposed by higher-level personnel management departments of A Province, G university has relatively few senior positions allocated. “Province A has very strict control over the number of senior—level professional titles. The insufficient number of title quotas means that teachers who originally meet the assessment requirements are unable to be promoted to a higher professional title, intensifying the competition among teachers.” (Manager C) The scarcity of senior titles and the strong connection between professional title promotion and quantitative research output has led to increasingly fierce competition among teachers, narrowing the space for professional title promotion and making it difficult for teachers to achieve psychological peace.

Teachers’ Belief Recognition in Performance Management Situation

Based on the analysis of interview data, in the performance management situation, the internal influencing factors of teachers’ beliefs and identity mainly involve three aspects: teachers’original professional intention, teaching conscience, and academic sentiment.

The original intention of a teacher’s career choice has an impact on their beliefs in work. The individual interest of teachers mainly stems from the recognition of the teaching profession in universities, which is based on their past learning experiences (Shouxin & Rujun, 2024). Teacher O holds the view that “the sense of mission and fulfillment in academic research led me to choose the profession of a university teacher.” Some of the interviewed teachers found the position of a university teacher appealing after comparing their past work experiences. As Teacher B stated, “Teaching and research in university are more autonomous.” Some respondents have a low initial recognition of university teachers but remain at university to work due to coincidence or psychological inertia (Dexin & Yue, 2020). For example, teacher D believes, “Most liberal arts doctoral students in China go to work in universities after graduation; otherwise, where else can they go?!”

The tendency of the performance management system leads to the phenomenon of “valuing scientific research over teaching” in universities, which means that university teachers will face many conscience tortures when engaging in professional work. Teaching conscience refers to the high sense of moral responsibility formed by teachers consciously adhering to external teaching norms and internalizing them into stable teaching beliefs (Hong & Dong, 2018). Teachers K and G believe that “teaching must be the priority. It must align with the original intention of preaching and teaching.” However, the performance management system environment in the university makes it difficult to form a robust incentive mechanism for teaching activities, and some teachers may view teaching as a task of “meeting standards without accidents,” leading to teaching becoming a “conscience work” in another sense.

Academic research is one of the main responsibilities of university teachers. Endogenous academic beliefs often influence teachers’ academic actions. How teachers interpret the significance of academic research work is a concentrated reflection of their researcher identity. Most interviewed teachers believe that academic research requires consistent interest and passion, a mission to explore truth, and a dedication to science. “We enjoy the high-quality educational resources, then our identity should be the backbone of social development, which is our responsibility.”(Teacher G; Teacher E) However, teacher’s academic sentiment will be severely eroded by high-intensity performance evaluations.

The external factor that affects teachers’ belief identity is the performance management situation in universities, which mainly influences teachers’ beliefs through organizational management purport and performance culture. The New Managerialism has impacted the management methods of universities, making them focus on output efficiency and utility value (Exworthy & Halford, 1999). Performance management in universities has more characteristics of Managerialism, which has been transformed into huge pressure on teachers. Teacher B believes that the pursuit of efficient management logic contradicts the law of knowledge production. “The institutional requirements of all aspects of the school emphasize that teachers need to produce output every year. But in fact, it violates the law of knowledge production, not that it can always be achieved after planning. This conflict is a great pressure for many teachers.” In terms of performance culture, the organizational culture centered on performance pursuit will have a profound negative impact on teachers’ value orientation and behavioral norms. Teachers’ identification with the university organizational culture affects their work enthusiasm and has a negative impact on their belief building.

The Construction of Teacher Identity Under Different Belief Recognition

Based on teachers’ personal value orientation and belief support, university teachers will make different choices when facing the performance management system. The results of teachers’ choices manifest as adhering to, adjusting, or giving up their original beliefs, which affects their identity construction. Both teacher C and Management C maintain that the current performance management culture in the university is more utilitarianism and lacks basic humanistic care, which gradually weakens teachers’ sense of identification with the organization. In the performance management situation, teachers interpret their identity as “academic migrant workers” who “earn work points.” The university can “have a set of standards that specify what kind of teachers are successful in university, but when managing people with institutions, there should be basic humanistic care.”

Based on the analysis of interview data, according to the different matching degrees between teacher beliefs and organizational situation, the identity of G University teachers can be divided into three categories: the “adhering to the original mindset” type that is low in compliance with the system, the “round outside but square inside” type that is passive in compliance, and the “taking what is necessary” type that is active in compliance (Figure 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Teachers identity construction framework based on their beliefs.

In the performance management situation at G University, when faced with conflicts between internal beliefs and institutional expectations, teachers of the “adhering to the original mindset” type choose to adhere to academic ideals and beliefs and attach great importance to the output quality. Therefore, in the process of identity construction, they mainly rely on individual internal beliefs, and pay more attention to realizing self-life value in terms of professional value. When faced with differences and conflicts between individual concepts and external institutional expectations, teachers of the “outer circle and inner square” type tend to balance the relationship between the two but sometimes also have to compromise with the regulations of external institutions. In terms of professional values, they often passively comply with the requirements of the institutions to ensure their survive. Teachers of the “taking what is necessary” type tend to consciously combine personal and organizational development to achieve organizational goals and actively comply with external institutional guidance. In terms of professional value, they mostly “value scientific research over teaching,” especially in the pursuit of the output of scientific research results.

Considerations of Teacher Benefits in Performance Management Situation

Based on the analysis of interview data, in terms of academic interests, the academic professionalism of university teachers is an essential attribute that distinguishes them from other professions. Academic interests are a special demand arising from the professional characteristics and work contents of university teachers. Specifically, academic interests can be manifested as academic freedom, academic status, academic achievements, and academic discourse power. Respecting academic and academic freedom is an important academic interest demand of the university teacher community (Cao & Chen, 2024). However, the current overly quantified performance management system has compressed the academic freedom of G University teachers, and teachers unilaterally pursue research efficiency and the quantity of research results, resulting in a non-free working state.

In terms of material interests, the profession of university teachers also has the material pursuit to meet basic survival needs. Most respondents stated that the basic salary in the performance-based salary system is too low, and the efforts and gains of teachers are not commensurate. “Our current basic salary is too low, and there is a Pareto Principle in performance management research, which is that 80% of workload is completed by 20% of teachers”(Teacher A). The mismatch between the material benefits and work efforts of G University teachers has led to unsatisfactory external material incentives. Even some teachers who lack academic ability have completely abandoned scientific research and turned to other “side jobs” with higher material returns.

The spiritual interests of university teachers are a form of interest that meets their spiritual needs. Spiritual needs depend on obtaining high-level needs such as self-realization, achievement, belonging, and happiness in the work practice process. The satisfaction of spiritual needs can more effectively mobilize their initiative and enthusiasm in work (Yuan, 2018). However, spiritual interests are an invisible benefit. The corresponding needs of teachers are easily marginalized or even ignored, which is a problem existing in the performance management of G University. Based on interview data, it is precisely the quantitative rigidity and short-term output orientation of performance management that seriously erodes teachers’ sense of organizational belonging and self-actualization, highlighting the mentality of “dogsbody.”

The Construction of Teacher Identity Under Different Interest Considerations

Under different interest considerations, university teachers construct their identity in the following three dimensions of performance behavior choices.

Problems and Its Attribution in Teacher Identity Construction in Performance Management Situation

Based on the comprehensive analysis of interview data, it can be concluded that there is a cultural identity crisis in the construction of G University teachers’ identity, which is aggravated by a utilitarian mentality. In the performance evaluation process, the lack of teacher subject identity leads to the obscuring of teacher subject identity. In performance practice, the multiple identity functions of teachers have resulted in the generalization of teachers’ professional identity (Erjun, 2011). “Now university teachers are engaged in teaching, research, and administrative tasks simultaneously. So, what is your main identity?”(Teacher I)

The main reasons for these problems are the conflict between instrumental rationality of performance systems and value rationality (Chen, 2017), the decline in the rationality and constraints of academic communities in universities (Dongdong, 2022), and the imbalance between internal motivation stimulation and external behavior induction (Guang & Huajun, 2019; Huajun & Guang, 2022). These three attributions also echo existing research on university performance management in the academic community. It can be observed that the excessive pursuit of a short-term input-output ratio by the universities is a manifestation of instrumental rationality (Cai & Zhang, 2021). In contrast, the substantive contribution of higher education as a noble social cause to human civilization and social development, as a pursuit of value rationality, has been overwhelmed in frequent quantitative performance evaluations and even performance point measurement comparisons. The academic community where university teachers are located has its academic rationality in existence and thus forms intangible academic shared value (Songlin & Tingting, 2015). However, the binding force of these norms is weakened in the benefits calculation advocated by performance management systems. “Right now, I can’t do something that I’m really interested in. I have to work hard to earn points under the pressure of performance reviews.”(Teacher Q) In addition, the current paradigm of performance management systems presents a simple “indicator-statistics-reward and punishment” logic (Zhongtai, 2022), which focuses more on external behavior induction than on stimulating and strengthening the internal work motivation of individual teachers through belief identification and institutional incentives. The existence of these three types of problems ultimately leads to the dilemma of constructing the identity of G University teachers in performance management.

The Game Between Beliefs and Interests of Teacher Identity Constructing

A situation is a product constructed through the interaction between individuals and systems (Goffman, 2008). From the perspective of the factors influencing the construction of teacher identity and the process of teacher identity construction, the teacher’s identity is constantly reshaped as they seek self-meaning and value through the interaction between individual teachers and external situations (Shuhai & Mei, 2015). This research has found that the identity construction of G University teachers is influenced by two dimensions of factors: belief identification and interest considerations. The performance management system guides, stimulates, and strengthens the interaction between belief identification and interest considerations. Therefore, in the performance management situation, teachers’ performance behavior will oscillate between belief identification and interest considerations, and engage in games and trade-offs between belief identification and interest seeking, thereby affecting the teachers’ identity construction. The game details of beliefs and interests in the process of constructing teacher performance identity are shown in Figure 2.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Identity construction of local G University Teachers in performance management situation.

In the dimension of interests, teachers’ interest considering are widespread. Among them, material interests serve as the external driving force for transforming university teachers’ behavior. Achieving achievements based on survival and development holds an important position in the teachers’ needs. Academic interests are an important driving force for the academic development of university teachers and an important factor for teachers to judge their status and value. Spiritual interests are the endogenous driving force that promotes the transformation of teacher behavior and can have more lasting and profound motivating effects on teachers. “These three factors have an impact on my behavior choices, and I will have my own considerations” (Teacher A; Teacher V). Based on the practical characteristics of performance management at G University, such as high intensity, short-term nature, quantitative assessment, single subjectivity, and obscured professional growth, teachers position their identities according to specific situations of triple-interest considerations. To maximize their interests, some teachers’ performance behavior is manifested as fully “mobilizing” various capital, maximizing the utility of cultural capital, and emphasizing scientific research over teaching and universalizing social capital reciprocity. In the dimension of belief, the development of teachers goes through four stages: pre-employment, onboarding, growth, and stability. Teacher beliefs mainly consist of academic, teaching, and social service beliefs. At each stage of development, the self-interpretation of teacher identity is undergoing changes and gameplay. “At different stages, my understanding of the importance of academics, teaching and community service is different, and this belief is in flux” (Teacher T). After entering the stable period, three different types of teacher identity construction with varying intensities of belief have gradually formed, they are the type of taking what is necessary, the type of outer circle inner square, and the type of adhering to the original heart.

The Interaction Between Performance Management and Teacher Identity Construction

Constructing teacher identity includes individual teachers forming internal beliefs based on a certain value orientation, interacting with external situations through their resources, choosing the parts they identify with, and engaging in games with their existing concepts (Shuangmiao & Jing, 2022). This process is ultimately manifested in the individual performance behavior choices of teachers. In this process, there is an interaction between individual teachers and performance management situations. Performance management situations regulate the construction of teacher identity, while the latter solidifies the existing performance culture when it is difficult to resist institutional rigidity (Figure 3).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Interaction between teacher identity construction and performance management situations.

The performance management situation encompasses tangible management mechanisms such as performance policies and regulations, and deep-seated performance culture, beliefs, concepts, etc. (Van Dooren et al., 2015). On the one hand, the performance management system puts new expectations on teachers and guides their behaviors to match performance goals. The expectations of the external institutional situation and the judgment of the individual success of teachers will be largely internalized into their definition of success, thereby supporting the formation of self-identity among teachers. On the other hand, the performance management system has limited applicability, and essential differences exist between university and business enterprise organizations. Teachers’ work performance has limited measurability and is difficult to replace and quantify. If simply copying the performance management system in the business field, it will inevitably cause teachers’ exclusion reaction, which will negatively restrict the construction of teachers’ reasonable identity. In addition, when the academic beliefs of individual teachers are insufficient, the result of teacher identity construction will strengthen the existing performance management system and solidify the performance culture. The original driving force of institutional reform is a rational choice, that is, when individual actors predict through rational calculation that it will benefit themselves, the system begins to change. On the contrary, when teachers become accustomed to the original performance management situation and gain benefits from it, it will be difficult to promote reform of the performance management system.

The “Dogsbody in the System”

From the foregoing discussion, it can be concluded that in performance management situations, the identity construction of G University teachers is influenced by the interaction between individual and external factors. On the one hand, the game process between teachers’ personal beliefs and interests significantly impacts teacher identity formation. On the other hand, the construction of teacher identity is shaped in the interaction between individual teachers and performance management situations. Performance management situation exerts a regulatory and constraining effect on the construction of teacher identity, and the performance behavior generated by the interaction between individual teachers and situations will also strengthen existing performance management system.

It should be noted in addition that the performance management scenario of the case university is embedded in the entire social governance system, or it can be said to be isomorphic with social governance. Specifically, meritism has actually become the ideological basis of the university governance system and has been implemented through technocracy as a methodology. Technocracy is manifested in “technological governance” and “technopolis,” and “technology” and “expert” are the two basic elements of technocracy (Scott, 1984). Technological governance implies that technological rationality dominates all aspects of university management (Esmark, 2017). In the performance management system, this is specifically reflected in the quantitative assessment of teachers’ work. Meanwhile, the assessment indicator system, quantitative standards, and decentralization are all determined by the so—called experts, with no positive interaction with stakeholders. In this situation, the pressure resulting from the prevalence of technocracy is transmitted through the pressure system. The university transfers the performance responsibility of pursuing a “Double First-Class University” to the college in the form of indicators. The college further elaborates these and continues to pass them down, and ultimately, the performance pressure is placed on the university teachers.

In this context, overall, the identity construction of G University teachers can be characterized by “dogsbody in the system.” Firstly, universities are affiliated with public institutions, and university teachers are workers within the system. During China’s planned—economy era, the term “within the system” signified an iron rice bowl, featuring stable employment, relatively good salary and benefits, and a high social status. After the market—economy reform, the “iron rice bowl” for university teachers has been gradually shattered. Although their jobs still retain a certain degree of stability, the basic salary accounts for merely about 30% of the total teacher salary. The remaining 70% is derived from performance-based pay. Secondly, the term “dogsbody” implies that an individual exchanges corresponding remuneration and benefits by contributing labor, knowledge, skills, etc., to the company. In the situation of rigorous performance management, the basic salary of university teachers is insufficient to cover the basic cost of living. As a result, they still need to exert great efforts to earn work points so as to obtain performance-based pay and meet the assessment requirements of the university. This bears resemblance to how workers strive for performance bonuses and job promotions, objectively enhancing the “dogsbody” identity of university teacher. In addition, the self-identity positioning of “dogsbody” also reflects the insufficient identification of university teachers with the university organization and their weak sense of belonging to the university. Mainly relying on external motivation rather than internal belief to enhance teachers’ work enthusiasm, teachers are always “dogsbody” who work for the university, and the internal motivation to dedicate themselves to the development of the university is insufficient.

Implications

Based on the findings and discussion, it is necessary to optimize the performance management of case universities from the following four aspects to promote the construction of teacher identity.

Limitations

Case G University is a local university located in a relatively economically developed region in China. After successfully being selected as a national “Double First-Class” construction university, it is eager to enhance the competitiveness through performance management reform. The performance management implemented has a certain typicality among Chinese local universities, and the research conclusions and countermeasures have certain external validity, which has good inspiration value for other similar universities to implement performance management reform.

Because the identity construction of university teachers is an abstract issue involving teachers’ deep minds, research may have shortcomings such as short tracking period and insufficient data collection. In future research, we will continue to focus on transforming university performance management, adopt more diverse research methods to collect and analyze data, and then further deepen our understanding of teacher identity construction in performance management situation.