The increasingly evident polarization of university presses poses a significant challenge to the ecological balance and sustainable development of the entire university publishing industry, with the Matthew effect becoming increasingly prominent. This dynamic has placed certain presses at risk of marginalization or even existential crises in market competition. To address this pressing issue, this study employs a combined research methodology of in-depth interviews and data analysis to systematically explore the influencing factors behind the polarization of university presses in China. Between 2023 and 2024, the research team conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with representatives from 29 university presses across the country, aiming to comprehensively assess their current developmental status and challenges, identify the main factors contributing to polarization, and highlight beneficial practices in university publishing. Based on these interviews, this paper reveals the interwoven effects of general market laws and the specific institutional logic of universities from four dimensions: historical accumulation, personnel factors, external environment, and internal agency. The findings indicate that existing publishing structures, scale, and brand recognition shape a press′s initial competitive position and long-term growth potential. Leadership characteristics and the appointment processes of leaders influence strategic direction, while staff compensation and career advancement opportunities affect overall operational vitality and sustainability. The parent university constitutes the most direct external environment for a university press; some presses operate under stringent administrative oversight that limits decision-making autonomy, whereas the marginalization of others reflects insufficient institutional prioritization of publishing activities. Furthermore, the extent to which a press leverages and reciprocally contributes to its parent university′s resources not only shapes its own development but also affect its relationship with the parent university. The parent university serves as a solid foundation and strong backing for press development, and university presses should proactively align with national development strategies, deepen collaboration with their parent universities, thoroughly exploit high-quality publishing resources, and better serve teaching and research of the parent university. Concurrently, parent universities should also enhance their commitment to university publishing, optimize the selection and management methods for university press leadership, strengthen the construction of the press′s talent pool, improve operational management levels, and, within policy limits, grant university presses greater flexibility and sufficient decision-making autonomy to adapt to evolving publishing technologies and intensifying market competition. However, a prosperous symbiotic relationship between a university and its press does not require perfectly synchronized development trajectories. While mutual reinforcement remains essential, university presses should maintain flexibility, foresight, and transcendence, striving to surpass the existing capabilities of their parent university and infuse new vitality into the university′s development. Overall, the observed polarization of university presses stems from both general laws of the publishing market and the profound influence of the specific institutional logic of the 'university-press relationship.′ Addressing this requires coordinated efforts to optimize management mechanisms, improve talent systems, enhance operational autonomy, and reinforce collaborative integration—all aimed at ensuring the healthy and sustainable development of the university publishing industry.