1. International Trends in Governance Reforms Jamil Salmi Global Tertiary Education Expert Sofia, 19 March 2012

2. 2

3. natural lab experiment: U. of Malaya vs. NUS early 1960s: 2 branches of University of Malaya today, stark difference: THES: NUS # 34, UoM not in top 200 SJTU: NUS 101- 151, UoM not in top 500 3

4. 4 outline of the presentation... importance of good governance system-wide dimensions oversight at institutional level institutional autonomy

5. 5 why does governance matter?

6. what do we know about good governance? 6

7. 7 2007 comparison of US and European universities European universities suffer from –poor governance –insufficient autonomy –perverse incentives

8. U. Of Malaya vs. NUS – appointment of VC highly political in Malaysia: 10 VCs until 2008 (Prime Minister statement) –more professional in Singapore (5 VCs) –UM: restricted by government regulations and control, unable to hire top foreign professors –NUS: status of a private corporation, able to attract world-class foreign researchers –52% of professors (9% from Malaysia) –79% of researchers (11% from Malaysia) 8

9. creating the Solar Energy Institute 9

10. 10 outline of the presentation... importance of good governance system-wide dimensions

11. 11 role of the State from central planning to steering at a distance

12. 12 system-wide guidance and policy-making principal functions at national level –vision about the future of tertiary education –policy-making –regulating and monitoring

13. 13 do we really need accountability?

14. 14 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

15. 15 accountability mechanisms legal information governance funding allocation quality assurance

16. 16 legal mechanisms regulatory framework financial audits public disclosure law annual performance report presentation before Parliament

17. 17 information mechanisms student engagement surveys rankings –national rankings –integrity rankings –international rankings labor market observatories

18. 18 financial mechanisms linking resources and performance (supply-side) demand-side funding (grants, student loans, vouchers)

19. 19 outline of the presentation... importance of good governance system-wide dimensions oversight at institutional level

20. 20 guidance & oversight from inward looking to outward looking

21. 21 guidance and oversight at institutional level composition and role of Board –independent with outside representation selection of institutional leader –democratic or professional criteria?

22. 22 governance in the autonomous university the Board: appoints the U leader and monitors his/her performance approves the mission and strategic plan, budget and performance indicators assesses performance against the strategy and plan establishes and monitors control and risk management systems

23. 23 effective Boards Board = interface between society and universities learning to work together: U leadership and Board need for capacity building clear boundaries

24. 24 code of conduct for Boards elaborated in consensus-based mode and voluntary adherence areas covered –role of Board –structure and processes –effectiveness and performance review –responsibilities of members –conduct of business pioneers: Australia, Ireland, UK

25. 25 governance mechanisms (international advisory Board) experienced practitioners constructive criticism and guidance

26. 26 appointment of university leader mode of appointment –government appointment –democratic election (faculty, administration, students, alumni) –competitive appointment (Board, govt, electorate)

27. 27 appointment of university leader (II) eligibility -only faculty member -only from the university -from outside duration of appointment -one or more mandate -from 4 years to 4 ever

28. 28 outline of the presentation... importance of good governance system-wide dimensions oversight at institutional level institutional autonomy

29. 29 2008 Aghion study research performance positively linked to degree of autonomy of universities in the sample, especially with regard to: – budget management –ability to hire faculty and staff, and –freedom to set salaries

30. 30 international trends general move to granting greater autonomy (Denmark, Japan, Thailand, Germany, France) freedom from civil service rules (human resources, procurement, financial management) growth in scale and intrusiveness of monitoring by governments

31. 31 flexibility good feedback mechanisms strategic planning to orient change ability to react and adapt rapidly

32. results framework 32 governance characteristics effective decision- making management efficiency system and institutional performance

33. 33 effective decision-making? possibility to consider reforms speed in making decisions ownership / consensus for smooth implementation

34. 34 efficient management? academic management human resources management procurement financial management

36. 36

37. international trends State devolving increased autonomy accountability through independent Board with outside representation selection of leadership team with professional criteria flexibility and responsiveness with power to act 37

38. ?

40. 40