Most universities strive to adopt a shared governance structure to promote the best policies that meet the needs of administration, faculties, staff and students. Publicly-financed universities have a major challenge in managing the tensions that arise from the need to preserve academic autonomy and the dependence on State funding.
The primary objective of a university should always remain the promotion of excellence in teaching, scholarship and service to the community. The publication of the white paper on a new University of Malta Act in April raised issues that need to be addressed to ensure that the University continues to function autonomously while adopting practices that promote transparency and accountability in its administration.
The governance structure adopted in the draft law follows generally-accepted international good practice. Some might argue that no attempt was made to cater for local circumstances to ensure that the government will adhere to both the spirit and the letter of the provisions of the new law.
The fear that, through this law, the government might plot to destroy the independence of the University needs to be addressed. The introduction of a new executive board and a chief operating officer to support the rector on strategic administration issues is a positive development in the University’s governance.
The University Students’ Council (KSU) and the academic staff have reservations on how this executive board will function now that it will be the supreme governing body of the institution. They understandably ask whether the fact that the board will be in charge of the purse-strings will impact on the autonomy of the University. University rector Alfred Vella did well to argue that academic decisions must remain the sole preserve of the academic community after the new law comes in force.
The government today already has substantial influence on what the University does because the present University Council comprises a majority of members who are appointed by the government. The fact that the proposed executive board will be made up exclusively of government appointees would not alter the University’s dependence on the government’s involvement in administration.
Shared governance in the context of a university’s management structure does not mean that all decisions are made by consensus or that all ideas have merit and will be implemented. What it means is that all stakeholders, including students and academic staff, who, arguably, will be the most affected by the executive board’s decisions, will have the right to have an input in discussions leading to important decisions.
While the rector will function more like a CEO with no voting power in the new executive board, his input will always be critically important for the success of the shared governance concept being adopted by the University.
In the days remaining for public consultation, it is crucial that all stakeholders continue to propose improvements to the draft law. The academic staff should make their views heard sooner rather than later. The Minister of Education needs to reassure all concerned that those appointed to serve on the executive board will be chosen on their ability to perform as professional managers of this important institution.
Ultimately, the success of the University Act will depend on whether the interest of all stakeholders are taken into consideration.