Presenter: Ngo Tuyet Mai, School of Education University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

1. Search for Academic Excellence in Public Universities through Multi-level Leadership Practices:Lessons Learnt from East Asia Presenter: Ngo Tuyet Mai, School of Education University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

2. Why University Leadership? • “University leadership matters.” (e.g., Fullan, 2005; Hallinger, 2007; Millett, 1978; Mulford, 2010; Ramsden, 1998). • “Good leadership is conceivably the most practical and cost-effective strategy known to organizations … It can transform the commonplace and average into the remarkable and excellent…It creates an environment for better academic work.” (Ramsden, 1998, p.363) “The changing landscape of higher education requires new thinking and updated leadership practices.” (ADB, 2012)

3. Why Leadership Actions? National Government, universities and their sub-organizational units (departments) are ‘corporate actors’ who can act and need to act. He or she can act in a certain function or from a certain ‘corporate’ position.” (Binsbergen et al., 1994, p.223)

4. Why Leadership Actions? • “Leadership is the particular actions of leaders…Leadership resides in the eye of the beholder (subjectivist/interpretivist) or in the actions of leaders (objectivist/functionalist)” (Middlehurst, 1993, p.19) • “Organizations’ intelligence is seen in leaders’ actions” (Hanson, 2001, p.644). “Leaders must be ‘people of actions’” (Ramsden, 1998, p.9).

5. Leaders’ Actions in University Contexts Actions concerning PRIMARY processes (academic tasks) Actions concerning SECONDARY processes (supportive tasks)

6. Why Incentives Promoting Actions? • The function of university leadership is to provide [promote] incentives for academics to achieve academic excellence (Kehm & Lazendorf (2007, p.171) • “Any success of public actions depends on the adequacy of incentives that they offer to individual units” (Varghese, 2004, p.30) • “Successful reforms in higher education in the recent past were those with incentives to the academic staff” (Zheng, 1997)

7. Why Multi-level Leadership? A Multi-level Model Of University Leadership MACRO DECISION LEVEL (Government/Ministry Leadership Actions MESO IMPLEMENTATION LEVEL (Executive University Leadership Actions) MICRO IMPLEMENTATION LEVEL (Departmental Leadership Actions )

8. Presentation Focus • Multi-level University Leadership Actions of Promoting Incentives for Academic Excellence in Practice: Empirical Case Studies • Implications for Practice: East Asian Lessons for Vietnam • Concluding Remarks

9. Key Research Questions • WHAT do macro, meso and micro leaders in East Asian flagship public universities do in promoting incentives towards achieving universities’ academic excellence? • WHAT can Vietnam learn from other East Asian public university’s multi level leadership practices?

10. University Leadership In Practice: An Empirical Study (2012)

11. METHODOLOGY CHART Data Collection and Sources National Documents University Documents Interviews Questionnaire Survey Qualitative Database Quantitative Database Thematic Analysis: Using Nvivo 9 Statistical Analysis: SPSS 20 Descriptive statistics Scale Alpha Reliability Evidence of Meso Leaders’ Actions Evidence of Macro Leaders’ Actions Evidence of Micro Leaders’ Actions A Multi-level Model of Leadership Actions

12. Research Sites in East Asia: 4 Flagship Public Universities http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/asian-university-rankings http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/top-400.html

13. Macro Leaders’ Actions: Analysis of Government Documents and Websites

14. Meso Leaders’ Actions: Analysis of Interviews with Executive Leaders

15. Cross-National Comparison: University Leaders Actions in Focus

16. Micro Leaders’ Readiness for Actions: Analysis of Questionnaire Survey

17. Cross-National Departmental Leaders’ Readiness for Incentive Promoting Actions

18. Implication 1: Policy Initiatives and Leadership Actions • Government Policy Initiatives: Regulations by Directives vs. Regulations by incentives • University Policy Initiatives PLUS Specific, focused, strategic leadership actions Establish a database of effective multi-level university leadership practices

19. Implication 2 for Leadership Practice Direct the job to be done (Task Structuring) Coordinate and foster the work team as a whole Support and review the individual people doing it

20. Implication 3: Financial Incentives and Social Incentives • 'social incentives' (high appreciations/regards) • 'financial incentives' (money rewards) (Kehm & Lazendorf, 2007, p.157) “Incentives should be individualized to the greatest extent possible given the nature of the education organization” (Windham, 1997, p.47)

21. Implication 4: Strategic Leadership Actions • A single action can be multi-functional (Adair, 1988) • “A single input by a leader can have multiple outcomes” (Mulford, 2010, p.187) • Actions balancing 3 inter-connected needs (1) the task to be performed, (2) the team responsible for performing them, (3) the individuals in that team (Adair, 1988, p.1) • Success, therefore, will depend on which elements and in what sequence the education leader chooses to spend time and attention on (Mulford, 2007, 2010).

22. Wrap-up: Practical Lessons Learnt From The Empirical Study • INSTRUMENTS OF AUTHORITY: • Increasing Autonomy • Empower more, control less • INSTRUMENTS OF DIRECT ACTIONS: • Individual needs focused • Focused Efforts on Academic Goals, • A System of Coordinated and Collective Leadership Actions

23. Concluding Remarks “It may be a mistake to believe that all leadership actions must come from ‘leaders’” (Birnbaum,1989, p.134) “The elements for successful university leadership involve being contextually “literate”, organizationally “savvy” and leadership “smart”.” (Bill Mulford, 2010, p.187)