From Inside Higher Ed:
Following the recent surge of complaints of antisemitism and Islamophobia on college campuses—and increased scrutiny from the federal government—more and more universities are creating new jobs to lead the institutions’ response to these complaints.
Of course, bloated campus DEI bureaucracies have been a central complaint of right of center critics of higher education. But this is a feature of bureaucratic creep more generally, which as sociologists and law and society scholars have argued for some time, often expands and diffuses for institutional and other reasons.
In a prior life (before I became obsessed with Taboo Trades), I was obsessed with compliance and the industries (including lawyers) that provide it as a service. If you’re interested in some background reading on these phenomena and literature reviews of the underlying research, I cover some of that in:
Cosmetic Compliance and the Failure of Negotiated Governance, and
Let’s Talk: What FinReg Can Learn from New Governance (And Vice Versa) (a review of Laurie Edelman’s “Working Law,” may she rest in peace)
There is also a large body of work by law and society scholars, such as Frank Dobbin, Laurie Edelman, Marc Galanter and others, as well as classics like DiMaggio & Powell (1983), much of which is summarized in the articles linked above.
Never bet against Meyer & Rowan (1977) or DiMaggio & Powell (1983).
— Kieran Healy (@kjhealy.co) July 14, 2025 at 7:26 AM