“What are your solutions? More of the same? We could give Council members the same responsibilities as company board members, but that would mean few people other than corporate types would take the job, which may not be appropriate for bodies that are essentially non-profits”.

The Chancellor cannot be an academic. Neither should Vice Chancellors. We need street wise business people with a strong empathy for academia. A council only needs 8 to 10 dedicated people. Meetings should be held in a meeting room where people can speak freely. No circus rooms like what happens now. Pay Chancellors a base plus incentives. Make them accountable both fiscally and strategically - like striving to be listed as the world’s top 30 unis. Pay VC’s no more than 2 or 3 times a senior lecturer’s pay with the rest paid out as incentives (Don Aitkin once wrote a paper on this). Instill a culture where anyone can be fired for incompetency.

“…but that would mean few people other than corporate types would take the job, which may not be appropriate for bodies that are essentially non-profits.”

Not really. I would like unis to be non profits but I also expect them not to pay their execs like commercial entities, or to lose hundreds of millions of dollars with impunity.

“Basically VCs are well paid by public service standards but not by the standards of corporations of similar size.”

They are too well paid, Andrew. A battalion commander in Iraq or say a Base commander at Williamstown, NSW incharged of lives, B-17’s Globemasters, F-111, F-18 is paid well below $200k er annum for responsibilities that exceed a VC. VC’s pays make them disconnected from reality and the pains that their staff go through - ala the discussion that Fred Hilmer sent to all UNSW staff asking for $100 ea. A joke, really. If he donated $600,000 of his package, he’d still have his $500,000 plus driver, car, varsity home, etc.

BTW Andrew, I have declared my hand. Are you involved in academia, paid for by a university or are highly sympathetic to universities’ perks and salaries? Is this why you “poo bah” efficiency measures within the existing system of funding?

Thanks, Pete.

I don’t doubt that uni management and governance could be improved, but despite having read the numerous reports on this subject over a decade plus am not confident there are easy top-down solutions.

Exposing unis to the market will create strong internal incentives to put the systems in place to deal with a system where student numbers are not near-guaranteed each year, It will also create the freedom to try a wide variety of strategies to achieve targets for student numbers and dollars.

I’m pretty sure that this would trigger governance change, but change engineered to suit the institution rather than ticking the boxes to meet state or federal requirements, which is what has happened in previous governance reforms.

“The difficulty with writing about uni governance is that it requires massive amounts of research to prove anything,….”

In theory true, but in practice, I can give you 2 dozen decisions that drains money from academia faster than a rat up a drainpipe. Will Estcourt’s examples only touches the surface. I suspect you know what I am saying.

“…unlike profit-making companies have no common metric by which to measure success or failure.”

Easy to solve. In the UK, universities embark on Student Satisfaction Benchmarking and Financial Benchmarking. The data is compared amongst universities as well.

“..but it’s hard to say whether their performance is better or worse as a result.”

It is worse. Our Chancellor is trying to sack our VC. Why don’t you interview our Chancellor to analyse the largesse.

“…I doubt that the benefits would be large across the sector.”

You are wrong. I am in my 30th year of uni administration and accumulated losses do add up! Your comment reminds me of a DoD presenter at a careers advisory session on campus who said, “Yes but the losses on the Seasprite helos at $1.6bn are so small it doesn’t matter”. Yes it does. Commit 20 goof-ups and you blow $32bn - enuf to right many wrongs in society and academia. Look up the losses in an ANAO report - you will fall off your chair.

“There is no point holding people accountable for factors beyond their control.”

For the $2m package UQ’s VC got and the $1m+ packages that is now prevalent we should change this.

Here’s the heart of the problem, Andrew. A fish rots from the head down. The composition of our Council is a joke. No one speaks their minds. It is as though this smart group of people had their IQ halved everything they sit in that huge office full of pomp and ceremony.

I suggest you attempt an article on whether an academic ought to be the CEO of a university. Thanks. Pete.

The difficulty with writing about uni governance is that it requires massive amounts of research to prove anything, and because of the inherent complexities of the task - unis have multiple goals and unlike profit-making companies have no common metric by which to measure success or failure.

The many reforms over the last decade have focused on the size and composition of governing bodies, but it’s hard to say whether their performance is better or worse as a result.

The policy reforms I write about could, I believe, deliver big benefits in a relatively short time period (including removing any need to ask staff for money).

While I suspect that stronger scrutiny of university executives could be beneficial I doubt that the benefits would be large across the sector.

Indeed, neither VCs nor Senates are able to make critical decisions about price and quantity that are essential to proper management. There is no point holding people accountable for factors beyond their control.

Given my research and writing time is very limited, governance issues are a low priority.