|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
Higher Education Review ProcessMeeting the Challenges: the Governance and Management of Universities4. university management issues
130 There is no doubt that the academic enterprise is changing at a rapid pace. Sources of university funding have greatly diversified. While Commonwealth funding has increased every year for 20 years, it represents 50 per cent of total revenue today – 20 years ago it represented 90 per cent. This expanding revenue base has important implications for the way in which universities are managed. 131 There is a strong interest in the efficiency and effectiveness of universities not just because of the significant amount of Commonwealth funding made available to universities, but also because of the fundamental role universities play in shaping the nation. This interest needs to be sensitive not only to the autonomy of universities, but also to their expanding revenue base. 132 In Higher Education at the Crossroads a range of management issues associated with the efficiency and effectiveness of universities and workplace relations were canvassed. Submissions to this Review indicate that there are divergent views in relation to the current state of efficiency and effectiveness of universities. The major areas for efficiency improvement identified in submissions require greater flexibility in workplace relations or more cooperation across institutions, especially across the higher education and vocational education and training (VET) sectors. 133 Issues associated with teaching and learning outcomes were covered in the first issues paper prepared for this Review Striving for Quality: Learning, Teaching and Scholarship. The interface between higher education and VET will be the subject of the final issues paper. A detailed examination of efficiency and effectiveness issues will be included in an international comparative study on the resourcing of universities and their management which is currently being undertaken by the Productivity Commission. A draft report from the study is expected in September 2002. 134 This chapter briefly canvasses several important points relating to efficiency and effectiveness as raised in submissions. a. efficiency and effectiveness in general135 Both the public and governments expect that higher education institutions will make cost effective use of the resources provided to them. It is not easy, however, to determine the efficiency of university operations in any absolute sense, relative to other institutions or even to measure changes in efficiency over time. There are major difficulties in measuring university outputs and outcomes. 136 More students can graduate from a university within a given level of resources but this does not necessarily mean that the university has become more productive. It is conceivable that the quality of the education these graduates received may have declined. Decreases in cost per student and increases in indicators such as completion rates and student/staff ratios are frequently interpreted as meaning either that quality must be declining or that productivity must be increasing.
137 The reality is that crude quantitative indicators such as these cannot be interpreted as meaning either of these things without considerably more information. 138 Research productivity is probably even more difficult to measure. The number of research publications and the number of citations for these publications are often used as indicators of research performance. More articles and more citations for a given level of resources cannot be used uncritically as an efficiency measure because issues of quality need to be considered. 139 These considerations lead to the conclusion that there is no magic measure of productivity or efficiency in the higher education sector. Any overall assessment or set of performance measures must be attuned to the circumstances of individual institutions. Notwithstanding the challenges, universities need to monitor their efficiency and effectiveness. It is clearly fundamental to any continuous management improvement approach. b. development of management capacity140 Universities and the Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee (AVCC) run staff development programs that include a focus on university management. The growing corporate nature of universities requires a greater focus on strengthening the management skills of senior staff. This point was made by the Australian Maritime College which notes:
141 Some submissions suggest that a national focus on this matter may be warranted:
142 The Association for Tertiary Education Management (ATEM) argued for greater recognition of university managers. It notes that academic staff are less than 50 per cent of university staff. It argues for a single, targeted professional development programme that addresses the management needs of institutions and is open to all university managers.
143 Is there a role for the Commonwealth and States/Territories, in partnership with the AVCC and other stakeholders, in developing strategies to promote university management capacity? c. cost saving/revenue raising144 Many universities argue that in recent years they have made substantial gains in cost saving and revenue raising which were not adequately recognised in Higher Education at the Crossroads:
145 Universities point to some of the structural barriers to further improvement which are discussed later in the chapter on workplace relations. They also put positions similar to that of the University of Western Australia which argues:
146 Universities argue that cost savings from outsourcing and collaboration with other institutions need to be weighed against matters of institutional control and quality. They support continued efforts to increase efficiency and effectiveness but tend not to support blanket prescriptions. 147 Queensland University of Technology included the following list of possible measures to improve the efficient use of capital assets:
148 Some submissions argue for the Commonwealth to consider the provision of incentives for, or assistance with, major cost saving/revenue raising initiatives.
d. inter-institutional cooperation149 There is a significant level of institutional cooperation occurring between Australian universities, notwithstanding growing competitive forces. Examples of possible areas of cooperation raised during consultations and in submissions to this Review range from the rationalisation of courses through to the sharing of infrastructure, such as university printing facilities and the development of common Occupational Health and Safety Units for groups of universities.
150 The Queensland Government’s submission supports measures to improve the efficient use of capital assets belonging to the vocational education and training (VET) and higher education sectors.
151 This issue will be taken further in the final issues paper to be released for the Review looking at the relationship between higher education and VET. 152 The Queensland University of Technology’s submission expresses the view that there is considerable scope for greater collaboration between higher education institutions and that Government support could be valuable to establish such collaborations. However, it cautions that:
some possible responses153 A number of possible options have been raised in relation to the issues covered in this chapter. While not an exhaustive list, these questions have been included for consideration and discussion:
|
|||
|
Any comments or
queries should be sent to:
highered@dest.gov.au
Department of Education, Science and Training
|