1. Institutional Autonomy Thomas Estermann Head of Unit Governance, Autonomy & Funding Lithuanian Society of Young Researchers Conference Vilnius, Lithuania 20 September 2011

2. …2… Brief Profile of EUA Established in 2001 Non-governmental membership organisation 850 individual university members 35 National Rectors’ Conferences members 46 countries Independent voice for the university sector Focus on EHEA and ERA

3. EUA’s work on autonomy …3… Conference series 2007-2009 EUA – declarations (Glasgow, Lisbon, Prague) Exploratory Study on university autonomy in Europe (2009)  Sketches broad trends in university autonomy and governance in 34 higher education systems Autonomy Scorecard (2009-2011)  Maps and compares university autonomy and accountability through a set of common indicators  Enables governments to benchmark their progress on governance/autonomy reforms vis-à-vis other HE systems Case studies: TRENDS reports, Financially Sustainable Universities, Institutional Evaluation Programme.

4. Correlation between autonomy and:  Performance (Aghion et al., Ritzen)  Quality (Trends IV, V and 2010)  Degree of income diversification (higher share of additional income – EUDIS)  More sucessful internationalisation (Trends 2010)  Efficiency and effectiveness Institutional autonomy  allows universities to decide on strategic priorities according to their strengths  does not automaticially lead to better performance, but it is an important prerequisite Why university autonomy? …4…

5. Four dimensions of autonomy …5… Organisational autonomy Academic and administrative structures Governing bodies Executive leadership Financial autonomy Funding framework Public funding cycles and modalities Financial capacity Reserves & surpluses Students’ contributions Real estate Staffing autonomy Recruitment, dismissal and promotion of staff Staff salaries Civil servant status Academic autonomy Quality assurance Academic profile Degree programmes Student admission and selection

6. Internal academic structures Universities are free to determine their internal academic structures in approximately 2/3 of higher education systems. In the remaining third, the law may either list faculties or provide guidelines. In GR or TR, academic structures must be approved by an external authority. …6…

7. Appointing external members of university governing bodies …7…

8. Public funding via block-grants In almost all systems, universities receive block grant funding, although several restrictions exist: In F, HU, IS LV,LT, PT, SK and SE the block grant is divided into broad categories between which funds cannot be moved. Often parts of the block grant are earmarked. …8…

9. Keeping surplus on public funding In a majority of systems, universities are able to keep a surplus, but often other restrictions may still apply. Only in four countries, including Lithuania, can a surplus not be kept. …9…

10. Ownership of property …10…

11. Different labour laws across Europe provide a framework Possible restrictions to staffing autonomy:  Number of posts restricted  Recruitment/selection procedures prescribed in law  Appointment made outside university  Academic staff needs to be accredited  Restrictions on promotion procedures  Limitations on dismissal  Salaries (institutional level, individual level)  Restrictions on incentives Restrictions – an example on staffing …11…

12. Ability to choose QA mechanisms and providers …12…

13. …13… Admission criteria at Bachelor level

14. Autonomy scores in Lithuania …14… 1 HIGH AUTONOMY 2 3 4 5 6 7 MEDIUM HIGH AUTONOMY - 1st LEVEL LITHUANIA 8 9 MEDIUM HIGH AUTONOMY - 2nd LEVEL 10 11 12 MEDIUM HIGH AUTONOMY - 3rd LEVEL 13 14 15 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 LOW AUTONOMY 28 Organisational autonomy Financial autonomy 1 HIGH AUTONOMY 2 3 4 MEDIUM HIGH AUTONOMY 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY – 1st LEVEL 14 15 16 17 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY – 2nd LEVEL LITHUANIA 18 19 20 21 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY – 3rd LEVEL 22 23 24 25 LOW AUTONOMY 26 27 28

15. Autonomy scores in Lithuania cont. …15… Staffing autonomy Academic autonomy 1 HIGH AUTONOMY – 1st LEVEL 2 3 4 HIGH AUTONOMY – 2nd LEVEL 5 6 7 8 HIGH AUTONOMY – 3rd LEVEL LITHUANIA 9 10 11 12 MEDIUM HIGH AUTONOMY 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LOW AUTONOMY 1 HIGH AUTONOMY 2 3 4 5 6 7 MEDIUM HIGH AUTONOMY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY – 1st LEVEL 17 18 19 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY – 2nd LEVEL 20 21 22 23 MEDIUM LOW AUTONOMY – 3rd LEVEL LITHUANIA 24 25 26 27 LOW AUTONOMY 28

16. Trends Organisational autonomy Still strong influence by state in selecting external board members North-Western European countries have a CEO-type rectorship but majority still traditional model Development of dual governance structures Academic autonomy Many universities still have no influence on number of students or their selection Still large restrictions on language of instruction Little capacity to select QA mechanism Staffing autonomy Increased flexibility in staffing issues but little ability to determine salaries Selection of academic staff still strongly regulated Financial autonomy East/West divide in autonomy regarding tuition fees as well as in use of public funding Limited ability to borrow and raise money Limited ability to own real estate Heavy reporting procedures …16…

17. …17… Which elements of autonomy are important? More financially autonomous institutions with inappropriate organisational structures will not reap the benefits Institutions less autonomous in financial and academic aspects will not be able to use greater freedom in organisational or staffing autonomy All areas and elements of autonomy are related Governance and autonomy reforms need to take a holistic approach But no “one size fits all model”- each system needs to find balance between accountability and responsibility related to its background.

18. …18… How to ensure accountability? Appropriate Quality assurance procedures Financial transparency through Full costing Appropriate reporting Participation of external members in institutional decision-making

19. …19… But is autonomy enough? Sufficient funding  University autonomy and funding are mutually reinforcing factors Leadership development - Key success factor to:  lead change in institution  reinforce strategic approach  implement successful income generation Human Resource development and professionalisation to develop:  new skills  management capacity  new staff profiles

20. …20… THANK YOU! For more information please contact: Thomas.estermann@eua.be www.eua.be