Universities are autonomous institutions. They have always fiercely defended the right to determine their own affairs in accordance with their founding legislation. In the last decade of the 20th century, successive governments have focussed on the capability of university systems of governance to manage increasingly complex and expensive institutions in a highly competitive world. Some reviewers have been critical of university governing bodies, and of the cumbersome decision-making machinery in some institutions.
The core of the problem has been the tension between a long tradition of collegial self determination, and the emergence of universities as large corporations which have to be managed. The modern university cannot engage in the luxury of decision-making through unrestricted debate. The challenge of the 1990s has been to develop a system of university governance which reconciles the spirit of collegial inclusivity with the imperatives of a rapidly changing external environment with an emphasis on timelines and effectiveness.
In the early 1990s, our University created six faculties as resource centres which receive one line budgets, to be used at the discretion of each faculty to deliver an agreed set of academic programmes. This structure achieved enhanced delegation of management authority to faculty deans, and enabled them to formulate academic policy in a context where resource considerations were known and understood. The delays occasioned previously by constant reference to central funding were reduced by this change, while the quality of decision making improved once it had been placed in the hands of those with direct responsibility for the outcomes.
A major review of academic groupings within our University will be held in 2000. It has become clear that there is scope for considerable improvement to the devolved structure which would protect the concept of delegated authority but recognise that the academic groupings can be more appropriately organised to reflect new cross-disciplinary approaches to knowledge as well as new areas of study.
The network of committees from Faculty Board to Academic Council and Academic Board has also been tightened. This has improved the movement of business dealing with academic policy through the system, without denying the value of input from a broad spectrum of opinion. The working of the Academic Council as the executive committee of the Academic Board has been particularly successful.
Most recent change has focussed on our University's governing body (the Senate). A year of self evaluation resulted in agreement to a series of reforms designed to make the Senate a smaller body without disenfranchising any of the University's major client groups. It is anticipated that a smaller Senate will be better able to work as a team, and support the Executive by providing a strategic focus for the pursuit of the University's agreed objectives, and by establishing lines of communication to key stake holders in the community. Senate's committee structure has also been revised to give each constituent body a clearer role definition focussed on the University's key objectives.
These changes have been achieved without diminishing Senate's role as the governing authority of the University. The changes provide a framework to facilitate informed but expeditious decision making. As with other aspects of governance referred to in this overview, the change has been careful yet bold, merging the best aspects of traditional university governance with the needs of a contemporary institution facing a new century. | 