Chemistry professor Alfred Vella, the frontrunner in the race for university rector, tells Ariadne Massa that if chosen he will have his own style of management. He knows what it means to be pro-rector and is keen to continue working for the university as its leader.

If anybody believes that by anointing chemistry professor Alfred Vella as the next rector of the University of Malta they can maintain the existing state of affairs they will be disappointed.

“Continuity does not mean preserving the status quo. Frankly, I’d be deluding people and selling myself too cheaply if I did that,” he told The Sunday Times of Malta in his first comments since the debate started.

With Prof. Juanito Camilleri choosing not to stay on in the position after 10 years at the helm, the 65-year-old pro-rector in academic affairs has emerged as the frontrunner in the race.

The university Council is expected to take a secret vote on March 18. However, a controversy arose after this newspaper reported that the government was using its political clout – and its majority on the Council – to try and influence the choice and push the relatively unknown and relatively young associate professor, Tanya Sammut-Bonnici.

With Prof. Sammut-Bonnici having subsequently made it clear to her peers that she was not interested in the position, the strongest contenders named so far are Prof. Vella and sociology professor Godfrey Baldacchino.

Did Prof. Vella even want the job, seeing that he was recently given the green light to take a two-year sabbatical after 11 years as dean of the Faculty of Science, and 10 years as pro-rector?

“Yes. I’d be lying if I said I’m not interested. The only reason I want to do it is out of affection for the institution; it’s surely not a matter of big-headedness,” he said, keen to stress that the last thing he wanted was for his words to come across as false modesty or humility, something that “horrified” him.

I’m sorry but if I’m not good enough to be rector, I will not stay on as pro-rector

“I know what it means to be pro-rector. So I want to continue working for the university as its leader because I feel it’s the next natural step forward… It’s an act of love but even that sounds too corny.”

Many questioned whether anybody vying to take on the mantel from Prof. Camilleri was in his right mind, seeing that the post comes with a long list of challenges, and numerous opinions on the extraordinary talents a rector should possess.

He laughed and stopped to reflect on whether this was a momentary lapse of reason, but it is clear it is something that if given the chance he is keen to take on for five years – “not more, as that would then be lunacy; entertaining the thought of staying on past 70”.

He is quick to dispel the notion that there was any one person who could don the superman cape – this newspaper last week featured the anointed one as a superhero – and acquiesce to the tall demands.

“I don’t think that such a rector exists. Maybe as a collective team we can try to meet everyone’s needs, but even then I doubt if any team will have the big S emblazoned on its chest.”

Although Prof. Vella is keen to see the end of this deliberation process so that he can focus on his future, he is serene with whatever decision is taken. One thing he knows for sure is that he does not intend remaining in his present position.

“I’m sorry but if I’m not good enough to be rector, I will not stay on as pro-rector,” he said.

Academics see in Prof. Vella the reassurance of continuity. This was also the key trait that the deans of all the faculties highlighted when they last week reached consensus to back him for the post.

They were comforted in the belief that by backing Prof. Vella various initiatives spearheaded by the outgoing rector would be consolidated and come to fruition.

But while deeply honoured by the deans’ backing, the word “continuity” troubled him somewhat.

Did he find it demeaning that deans were supporting him because he was the “safest” choice, “the person they know”?

“If by safe they mean I won’t make grave mistakes because I’ve been in this job for so long and therefore I’m used to navigating the pitfalls then it doesn’t bother me.

“What would bother me is if they thought that this guy is our friend and he’s not going to do anything to shake us from our comfort zone,” he said, keen to stress that any new team would have its own projects and identity.

He is also eager to erase any perception that may have formed in people’s minds that when deans settled on him on the presumption that they “know me” that there was some form of “cabal” and he was simply there as a vehicle to push their interests.

Having made his point extremely clear that he is his own man and will have his own style of leadership if chosen, Prof. Vella also goes to great pains to put across the message that a rector was primus inter pares (the first among equals) and he would be a fool if he just forged ahead without listening.

“The power a rector has is through persuasion; he has to inspire everyone to do what is right.”

Prof. Vella was actually surprised by the deans’ vote of confidence, especially since in the past 10 years, as pro-rector of academic affairs, he has “inflicted upon them” procedures, processes and bureaucracies, which he was fully aware they found annoying because these were perceived as taking them away from their work in the lecture room or the lab.

“I wouldn’t have been too sure of their support before this. Evidently, this means they appreciate that we introduced these measures to improve our product.

“And while I will definitely be a factor of continuity, this does not mean that all we did till now, and the way we did it before, will remain the same going forward… It’s impossible for the status quo to remain.

“So what continuity are we talking about? Well, the processes and interpersonal interactions have to be managed well by somebody who has the background and knowledge to avoid past pitfalls. If chosen, my team and I hope to improve on all the good that has been achieved so far.”

Asked about his vision for the university, Prof. Vella is wary of presenting the way forward in a superficial list since the university was a complex entity and being too prescriptive was too simplistic.

“What’s important is to have eyes open to challenges and to the opportunities to grab them.”

One of the important things on his agenda is balancing teaching with research, as without the latter the university would simply be a glorified secondary school.

Prof. Vella wants to ensure proper systems were in place so that researchers were supported in their work and not deterred from embarking on the process to apply for EU funds, continuing on the sterling work of the present rector.

“What gives us the pedigree as a university is research. And while there’s no magic wand to achieving the right balance, especially since being the only national university we cannot renege on teaching, we have to be a research-intensive university and with proper guidance students have an important part to play in this,” he said.

Prof. Vella is also keen to encourage academics to expose themselves to the scrutiny of their peers to ensure the best product was presented to students.

Another factor which Prof. Vella has to keep in mind is the new university Act, which has been in the offing for years. This, he said, could have a profound influence on the university’s governance as it worked on recalibrating old practices to address new realities.

If by safe they mean I won’t make grave mistakes because… I’m used to navigating the pitfalls then it doesn’t bother me

Talk of changes to the law, also poses the question of whether he believed the time was also ripe to change the way the university council – whose majority of the more than 30 members were appointed by the government – chose its rector.

“If I want to be populist I’d answer by saying the university should be the one to choose its rector from within, but this is not respectful of the fact that the university is supported by public funds and the government of the day will not be served if it doesn’t have a major say,” he said.

One proposal put forward was to have candidates head-hunted locally and internationally, chosen by a selection committee made up of local and internationally-renowned academics with minimal influence from government. What did he think of this?

“That’s one possibility… Could it work? If the government of the day has a determining role in it, it could.

“However, I cannot see – and I don’t want to come across as if I’m trying to suck up to the government – how realistic it is for a singular university to achieve this if the government that’s forking out the money renounces its position. Minimal influence means no influence,” he said, adding that it was not an easy choice.

But was he not bothered by the very real prospect that the government could dictate who the rector was, even if that person did not command their peers’ respect and even if they believed the government’s choice would spell disaster for the university?

“Yes it worries me… It worries me the same way that I’m concerned about the existence of cancer and the Zika virus. If the government does that it would have to reap the consequences of its decisions, but the university is resilient and I cannot imagine a situation where the leadership is so dodgy that the university will sink into obscurity.”

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.