Institutional Analysis of the Recruitment and Management of High-Level Talent in Higher Vocational Colleges in China

The high-quality development of vocational education requires the support of high-level teachers. However, the recruitment of high-level talent in higher vocational colleges (HVCs) has difficulties, such as insufficient attractiveness in salary and professional development, a lack of vocational education-specific talent categorization, and an absence of systematic planning in recruitment processes. Some colleges have even resorted to the controversial practice of recruiting low-quality “degree-holders” in order to achieve the goal of talent recruitment. Under China's grand strategy of building a leading country in education, such challenges in HVCs’ talent recruitment and management have not only affected the quality of the teaching staff but also triggered social attention and debates on talent evaluation standards and recruitment policies. This study adopts an institutional logic perspective to analyze relevant national policies and institutional documents concerning the recruitment and management of high-level talent in HVCs. Through text analysis of 27 national policies and 6 institutional documents of HVCs and local governments, the study finds that national policies present a dual discourse of “administrative accountability” and “autonomy,” a meritocratic value system, and the assumption of the “school as corporation.” These institutional elements impose structural pressure on HVCs, defining the values and offering an underlying rationale for practical flexibility simultaneously. On one hand, colleges translate policy implications and engage in institutional imitation to gain “legitimacy.” On the other hand, these talent recruitment institutions in colleges create space for flexible interpretation within recruitment procedures as a form of “leeway.” Based on these findings, the study further explores the multiplicity and internal consistency of institutional logics in the recruitment and management systems of HVCs and proposes recommendations for addressing these challenges through institutional entrepreneurship. Policymakers and administrators of HVCs should actively engage multiple stakeholder groups in the formulation of institutional policies and boldly challenge existing certification and evaluation frameworks. Emphasis should be placed on the flexible recruitment of industry professionals, prioritizing their up-to-date professional skills, innovative capabilities, and digital literacy. These approaches aim to establish talent recruitment standards, institutional frameworks, and practical discourse systems that are well-suited to the demands of vocational education.