Presentation Transcript

1. University Governance and Effective performance Prof. Dr. Dawood A. AL-Hidabi Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors, University of Science and Technology, Yemen. Professor of Education Consultant of Quality and Governance
2. Introduction: why university governance? It started with private sector and corporate failure such as Enron, Ahold, Parmalat..etc. Declining public investment and demand for more funding. Privatization of higher education. Criticism of university management Demands for more accountability. Competitiveness of universities for more students. Students mobility Increased tuitions and students costs. Demand for more university autonomy. globalization and competitiveness. How to make effective changes in universities. We are in the process of rapid change. Effective leadership( governing board) is a key for managing change.
3. Governance Definitions: How universities are directed and controlled. It is about structure and processes in place to facilitate and monitor effective management including legal compliance. It is the relationship between management ,board, stakeholders and to set objectives and monitor performance. How universities are managed. Is related to performance and conformance. It is about authority and how decisions are made. It is related to strategic management and effective leadership The process of making decisions by internal and external stakeholders. It is related to power and influence . The way in which university organized and operated internally and their relationship to external entities. It involves with university autonomy and freedom of ethically responsible individuals.
4. We understand from these definitions that: No agreement on governance definitions but there are common elements among them. Different political, cultural ,legislative and universities contexts leads to different definitions of governance and consequently models. There is no 'one-size-fits' all model of university governance.
5. State and university governance: Lack of state governance lead to the lack of university governance. Democracy, human rights, justice, accountability, freedom , rule of law and combating corruption are basic ingredients of governance in any country.
6. Culture and Governance: We aspire to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our universities….we need to change …we need to develop our universities' performance in all areas: teaching, research and services. In order to do that we need to change our perceptions ,expectations, beliefs , attitudes, values and preferences. In brief we have to change our culture. Our culture directs our behavior including our decisions. We need shared culture. The change in culture begin at senior leadership and management level. i.e. universities' boards, presidents and deputies, deans ,heads of departments and officers. In short we need 'Governance'.
7. Governance benefits: Clear university purpose. Clear strategic direction. Identify priorities. Monitor university outcomes on periodic intervals. Better university performance: Research showed that: university autonomy, good management practices, effective leadership and good staff recruitment, retention and promotion correlate with better performance in teaching and learning, and more production of patent and research.
8. Governance and management: Overseeing vs. doing. Enable and enhance vs. Action. Strategic vs. day to day. Financial audit. Plan for the future. Focus on performance & conformance. Supervision & guidance. Goal setting & decision making.
9. Governance models: There are various models of university governance. All models centered around two themes: the first considers university as community of scholars and the academic staff are the main decision makers where as the second look at the university as an organization where decisions are shared by different internal and external stakeholders. Economic, market ,professional considerations are taken into account in addition to academic and research emphasis.
10. New Trends in Higher Education which affect universities Governance: From state control of academic, funding, management and regulation towards autonomous with public funding and shared governance. Knowledge economy. Globalization and internationalization of higher education. More access to higher education. Demand for change. More flexibility. Heavy use of ICT. Less state regulations. State supervision rather than management.
11. Intermediate organization. Effective Performance –based funding. More cooperation with society and business. Increasing role of effective leadership. Decreasing role for academics. New bodies for supervisory board. Less public funding. More private Higher education institutes. More transparency. Cross-border higher education. More university autonomy. Ability to respond to the changing needs of society.
12. More flexibility and diversity of higher education institutes and programs. Curricula renovation. Internal and external quality assurance. Create competitiveness among HEIs. Reward effective universities. Granting HEIs autonomy and accountability. More business oriented management. Governance culture which enhance compatible beliefs, values and ethics. Decentralization of governance and budget. Faculty members have more roles in academic matters( curriculum, academic policies, assessment, examination, promotion, faculty recruitment, condition of academic employment, teaching and learning) than admin.
13. Delegation of authority. Clear roles and responsibilities. Transparency. Mutual respect and open communication. Common culture to achieve common goals. Strategic management and effective leadership. Strategic plan ,periodic evaluation of individuals and institutions. More representation and participation of internal and external stakeholders. Better and effective allocation of resources. More responsibility on university leadership and management. Results rather than activity oriented management. Clients' and business like management system. More external audit.
14. Governing Board's role: Strategic direction and oversight. Ensuring effective overall management. Ensuring responsible financial risk management. Ensuring legal compliance. Investment activities approval. Appointing and evaluating senior management personnel. Monitoring university overall performance. Set up sound systems of financial control and audit.
15. University Presidents' responsibilities: Control and allocation of fund. University Admin. Establishment. Approval of personnel appointment. Programs' policies establishment. Students affairs and services Admin. Physical environment admin. Resource and fund development admin. Implementing governing board assignments.
16. Governance Challenges: Securing Funds to achieve the required results. Achieving transparency, responsibility, accountability ,justice, representation, participation. Gaining the society trust in university credibility and its ability to lead society. The ability of university to have visionary ,efficient , qualified ,competent and honest senior leader and managers. Effective board members with required committees( audit, financial. risk, investment, remuneration, academic, nomination..etc) to be able to function effectively. Global competitiveness for students. The rise of costs.
17. Effective Governing Board: Members with the right size, qualifications, experiences, and mix. Induction program for members and developing their role competencies. Clear role in meetings. Board evaluation.
18. Effective governance requirements: Cooperation, collaboration and consultation among members of the entire university community. Members of the university should understand the mission of the university and their roles to achieve them. Smooth communication and effective participation in the decision making process and mutual respect among faculty, support staff, students, administrative officers and other external stakeholders. all university members should be responsible and accountable for their roles. Performance should be measured regularly. Shared governance in formulating and implementing policies for learning ,research and innovation is required.
19. Authority, Consultation, and representation are the main principles of university governance . Agreement and consensus among senior managers and leaders about university mission and culture . Common and shared culture among senior leaders and managers of the university.
20. Suggested governance model: To develop the Muslim university model we should take into account the following considerations: Defining the Muslim concept of university and its role in society. Defining the relationship between the state and the university. Defining the organizational culture of our Muslim universities which enhance their performance. Deciding on the legislations which are conducive to university success. Creating a balance in the roles of academic and other stakeholders. Creating a balance between accountability and autonomy of university. Creating a balance between the market and citizenship in universities role. Avoiding the adoption of any model even if it was successful in its context. Learning from the world universities experiences in the area of universities governance.
21. Recommendations: Muslim states should reconsider the nature of relationship between the state and universities taking into account the political, cultural and economic aspects. We should learn from each other and develop effective governance model which contribute to the development of our universities in our respective countries. Muslim universities should enhance common organizational culture based on Muslim common values and ethics. It might be useful to produce a booklet on Muslim universities organizational culture as a guide for Muslim universities to promote . Develop Muslim qualification framework to facilitate Muslim students mobility in our universities. Develop a generic model of Muslim universities governance to be customized by each country or university according to their contexts. Sharing experiences in developing competent and ethically responsible senior Muslim university leaders and managers through exchange of training programs and visiting personnel.
22. References: Aghion, Philippe et al (2009). The Governanceand Performance of Research Universities: Evidence From Europe and The U.S. Working Paper 14851, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, http://www.nber.org/papers/w14851, Akomolafe, C.O; Ibijola, E.Y (2011). Students’ participation in university governance and organizational effectiveness in Ekiti and Ondo states, Nigeria, American Journal of social and Management Sciences, ISSN: Print: 2156-1540, 2(2): 231-236 Benjamin, Roger (2005).Recreating the Faculty Role in University Governance. Brown,D. Lawrence; Caylor,L. Marcus (2004). Corporate Governance and Firm Performance, Georgia State University. Edwards ,Meredith ; Clough ,Robyn (2005). Corporate Governance and Performance An Exploration of the Connection in a Public Sector Context, Corporate Governance ARC Project.
23. Effah, Paul (2010). University Governance: The Role of Senior Management, Accra. European Commission .(2008). Higher Education Governance in Europe, Eurydice, the Information network on Education in Europe, Brussels. Filden, John.(2008).Global Trends in University Governance, World Bank, Washington. Fildman, Sandra et al (NA). Shared Governance in Colleges and Universities, Higher Education program Policy Council, AFT Higher Education. Gayle, John; Tewarie, Bhoendradatt; white, A.Quinton (2003).Governance in The Twenty –First-Centuty University: Approaches to Effective Leadership and Strategic Management. ASHE, Vol-30; No-1, -ERIC: ED482135. Gillies, Malcolm (2011). University Governance: Questions for a New Era.
24. Jamillo, Adrian et al.(2012) Universities through the Looking Glass: Bench Marking University Governance to Enable Higher Education Modernization in MENA, World Bank Report, Washington. Henard, F. and Mitterie,A.(NA). Governance and Quality Guidelines in Higher Education, OECD Report. Hinfelaar, Maria; Polzin, Manfred (2006). Report on “University Governance”European Union Education and Training 2010 Work Programme Cluster “Making the Best Use of Resources” Peer Learning Activity Copenhagen. Knowledge & Skills Building a Future (2002). Review of University Governance, State of Victoria, Department of Education & Training PO Box 266D. Kowalewski , Oskar (2012). Does Corporate Governance Determine Corporate Performance and Dividends During Financial Crisis: Evidence from Poland, Kozminski Center for Corporate Governance, Kozminski University.
25. Lombardi,V. John, et al (2002). The Center: University Organization, Governance, and An Annual Report from The Lombardi Program on Measuring University Performance. Maher, Maria; Andersson ,Thomas (1999). Corporate Governance: Effects on Firm Performance and Economic Growth, OECD Report. Market and Public Organisation University of Bristol, http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cmpo McCormack, Propper and Smith (2013). Herding cats? Management and university performance, Working Paper No. 13/308, Centre for Okwee, Alfred (2011). Makerere University Business School Corporate Governance and Financial Performance of Asccos In Lango Sub Region, Makerere University Štefenhagena, Dita (2010).New Challenges for Academic Institutions’ Governance: Latvia and Finland, Latvia University Address: 19 RainaBlv, Riga, LV-1585.
26. Stevenson, Michael (2004). University Governance and Autonomy Problems in Managing Access, Quality and Accountability, Keynote Address to ADB Conference on University Governance Denpasar, Indonesia . Swansson,A. James; Mow,E. Karen;  Bartos, Stephen (2005). Good university governance in Australia, National Institute for Governance, The University of Canberra, Refereed Proceedings of 2005 Forum of the Australasian Association for Institutional Research, ISBN 0‐646‐45592‐3. Von Prondzynski, Ferdinand et al .(2012). Report of the Review of Higher Education Governance in Scotland , the Review of Higher Education Governance . University of Oxford (2006). White Paper on University Governance, Supplement *5 to Oxford University Gazette, Vol. 136.