New Governance Models: an international perspective Jamil Salmi London, 10 March 2008

2 a few stories Mexico India Azerbaijan Uganda NZ Australia Peru

3 outline of the presentation does governance matter? changing governance models the role of governing boards

4 natural lab experiment: U. of Malaya vs. NUS early 1960s: 2 branches of University of Malaya today: NUS ranked # 19 UM only # 192

Autonomy Academic Freedom Students Teaching Staff Researchers Research Output Technology Transfer Concentration of Talent Abundant Resources Favorable Governance Leadership Team Strategic Vision Culture of Excellence Public Budget Resources Endowment Revenues Tuition Fees Research Grants WCU Supportive Regulatory Framework Graduates Characteristics of a World-Class University Alignment of Key Factors Source: Elaborated by Jamil Salmi

6 U. Of Malaya vs. NUS – talent UM: selection bias in favor of Bumiputras, less than 5% foreign students, no foreign professors NUS: highly selective, 43% of graduates students are foreign, many foreign professors

7 U. Of Malaya vs. NUS (II)  finance UM: $118 million, $4,053 per student NUS: $750 million endowment, $205 million, $6,300 per student  governance UM: restricted by government regulations and control, unable to hire top foreign professors NUS: status of a private corporation, able to attract world- class researchers (incl. Malaysians)

8 France and Germany low in the rankings civil service status and mentality no tradition of competition –equal distribution of limited resources

9 Germany “Excellence initiative” –competition –additional resources governance reform

10 France world rankings have forced to ask questions dual structure –“Grandes Ecoles” with best students, more resources and favorable governance, but no research –universities: “second best” students, but research vocation autonomy reform

11 outline of the presentation does governance matter? changing governance models

12 governance models from central government control to steering at a distance

13 how to define autonomy? academic freedom is not negotiable freedom to deliver whatever programs one wants and research whatever one wants? freedom to spend as one wants within a lump sum?

14 how to define autonomy? total freedom is not realistic autonomy has to operate alongside accountability

15 critical dimensions of autonomy selection of students (qualifications and number) program and curriculum development recruitment / evaluation of faculty remuneration income generation ownership of infrastructure and ability to borrow

16 accountability in return for increased autonomy, governments expect accountability in: *adherence to national goals and policies *maintaining academic quality *financial honesty and value for money *good governance and management

17 autonomy / accountability tension within institutions independent colleges / faculties institutional strategic plan

18 international trends general move to granting greater autonomy (Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, Germany, France) MOEs are surrendering some functions to buffer bodies or intermediate agencies

19 international trends (II) growth in scale and intrusiveness of monitoring and reporting by governments increase in number of monitoring agencies (statistics, QA, financing)

20 outline of the presentation does governance matter? changing governance models the role of governing boards

21 appointment of leader mode of appointment –democratic election (faculty, administration, students, alumni) –government appointment –competitive appointment (Board, gvt, electorate)

22 appointment of leader (II) eligibility –only from faculty –only from the university –from outside duration of appointment –one or more mandate –from 4 years to 4 ever

23 vision

24 Stagnation Diamond Absence of Vision Performance Gap Complacency Business as Usual

25 Transformation Diamond Goals Setting Improved Performance Aspiration Renewal Strategy

26

27 evolution of Nokia sales

28 Clemson University land grant university focused on agricultural and mechanical crafts changing region strategic partnership with BMW to become premier automotive and sports car research U aims to become # 20

29 flexibility strategic planning to provide direction for change close linkages with the economic environment for adequate feedback ability to react and adapt rapidly

30 principles of good governance powers of the key internal stakeholders are understood and accepted by all the Board, the President and the Academic Council work together and respect each other the academic community accepts that the decisions of the senior executives are in the University’s best interests

31 principles of good governance (II) communication of ideas and information flowing both ways (up and down) not too many committees, but enough to provide for participation in key policy decisions

33 conclusion

34 conclusion Board = interface between society and universities learning to work together: U leadership and Board need for capacity building clear boundaries