Training Needs of University Councils

This page identifies a number of training needs for members of University councils which have emerged from current research on the governance role of university councils. The study is funded by a grant from the University of Canberra. The research is being undertaken by Meredith Edwards, Mark Turner and Paul Kringas is a comparative study of councils in four universities in Australia and Canada and two in new Zealand with over 60 interviews conducted.

A critical understanding of the historical development of the Higher Education sector

Councils are required to make decisions about expenditure and strategic plans, requiring an understanding of the wider context in which universities operate. External members of council are unlikely to share the considerable knowledge of academic members of how the Higher Education sector has developed.

A critical understanding of the university and the work of staff

In the comparative study of Commonwealth university councils, most external members admitted to being ignorant of how most of the staff in the institution perform their jobs. This extends to critical aspects of the way decisions evolve through committees and consultations and the way the institution has developed through the specific directions of the visions of previous Vice Chancellors. These histories are an essential component of understanding the current situation. Knowledge of prior decisions also averts council members feeling that they act as a “rubber stamp” for decisions made elsewhere. To quote from a member of a Board from a Canadian university:

“The Board plays a watchdog role. For example the president tabled the university's strategic plan at one meeting which is the first time we had seen it and we approved it that day. We have no idea of the political processes that the plan had gone through.”

Councillors hesitate from micro managing, but an insight into what staff do every day would provide the context for council decisions which affect the lives of staff.

This relationship runs both ways: staff can perceive council as irrelevant or interfering, failing to distinguish governance from management. By understanding how universities work, members can communicate effectively to staff about the directions council sets for the whole university without being seen to interfere in daily decisions.

How to know what information to ask for when you don't know what to ask for?

Council members naturally receive their information about the university from the Vice-Chancellor and Deputies, and can feel they are “fed” information that the Vice-Chancellor wants them to have. Information they requested is quickly provided – the difficulty is that most council members do not know what information to ask for.

Clear understanding of role and responsibilities

In general, council members are unclear about their role on council, and can feel like they kind of make it up as they go along. Controversial issues such as how to deal with conflicts of interest need also to be addressed. The role of staff and student members on council is controversial in this regard. “It's the behaviour of Council members that is the problem and in the case of some of the student representatives” one Vice Chancellor said in the international survey, “the lack of fundamental understanding that their responsibilities to the institution over-rides and is different from their responsibility to their constituents.”

Relevant Law and Financial Skills and risk management

In the Kringas survey, Council Secretaries reported that it is becoming common that when approached to become a member of council, people ask about their legal obligations and liability should they accept the position. There is clearly a need to clarify these aspects for members. Other important aspects include things like IP and the ESOS Act.

The budgets of most Australian universities are in excess of $100 million, and the financial reporting information is complex and can be beyond the experience of some members, perhaps particularly those internally appointed. With commensurate risks the consequences of decisions require that all members of council need skills and financial and not just those few external appointees chosen to satisfy the legislation.

Performance Evaluation

Performance evaluation is now becoming more commonplace in some sectors of university governance and management and is strongly promoted by government. While some Australian university councils go through a yearly self-assessment exercise and a system of 360-degree review of senior staff, not all are, and there is no performance evaluation of Chancellors. Performance evaluation of both council and members does provide the opportunity for council to discuss individual and collective roles and skills.

Constructive working relationships and conflict resolution

The governance literature continually reaffirms the principle that councils that work well exhibit very positive and constructive social relationships between members, Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor. The relationship between Vice-Chancellor and Chancellor is particularly critical because of the varieties of appropriate and operating governance and management models for universities and the roles of each office within them. There are numerous examples, in Australia and overseas, where a failure in the relationship between Vice-Chancellor and Chancellor has disruptive impact on the successful operation of the institution.

Disputes arising from misunderstandings may be pre-empted by clarification of governance models and roles generally and the applicable model for the institution. This may also assist the evolution towards a more appropriate model of governance and management for a particular university.

Some clashes can be attributed to differences in ‘personality' - where this is clearly not through misunderstanding training on how to work through conflict situations would more than likely ameliorate the problems.