Changes in University Governance in Austria: a Ministry Perspective

2. Changes in University Governance in Austria:a Ministry Perspective “Tempus Regional Seminar on University Governance in Eastern European Countries” Podgorica, April 26 – 27, 2010 by Sigurd Höllinger

3. Contents • The new relationship between state and university • Problems and misunderstandings • Recommendations for the road to success

4. The new relationship between state and university 1.1 The reform 2002 – the most sweeping reform in 150 years 1.2 The principles of the reform 1.3 The instruments of the reform 1.4 The tools for steering university development 1.5 Performance agreement 1.6 Where performance agreement cannot be reached 1.7 Autonomy in staff matters for every university 1.8 The role of parliament 1.9 The ministry’s loss of power and influence 1.10 The duties of the ministry 1.11 The effects on staff and organisation of the ministry

5. 1.1 The reform 2002 – the most sweeping reform in 150 years • The aim: a mass-knowledge society • The policy: to improve the contribution of the Universities by • Enhanced teaching performance • Better use of financial resources • Autonomous universities perform better than state directed universities • Traditional sovereign control of the state → collaborative model • universities – full legal entities • the state’s statutory obligation to fund its universities

6. 1.2 The Principles of the reform (1) • Further development of the 200 year old administration tradition • the state retains a significant role • universities obtain full legal capacity (there also exist other solutions: e.g. buffer organisation) • State and university are equals in legal terms

7. The Principles of the reform (2) • Universities become business-like organisations but not businesses • Instead of innumerable detailed regulations – own decision making and responsibility • State regulations should be reduced to a minimum • Traditional academic freedom of research and teaching is preserved • No-one may be forced to research or teach against his conscience • European and international concepts and experiences should be heeded

8. 1.3 The instruments of the reform Legislation regulates the following: • Conditions for the existence of autonomous universities • Transition from traditional / partly autonomous university to fully autonomous • Concrete organisation of the autonomous university is transferred by the university itself – through the new governance

9. 1.4 The tools for steeringuniversity development • Parliament passes the overall budget for the universities • The state (Austria) decides by law on the following: • tuition fees (at present abolished for the most par by exemptions) • admission to study courses • Decisions on major investments (buildings, large laboratories) are reserved for the minister • Everything else: agreement between the ministry and the university (“performance agreement”)

10. 1.5 Performance agreement (1) • Requirements for proper functioning • Participation with responsibility on both sides • Communication as equals at the legal level • Communication as equals at the social level • Consistency of approaches and behaviour • Reliability, mutual trust • Transparency

11. Performance agreement (2) • Elements of the contract: • public law contract • three-year term • services of the university • government money • drafted by the university • basis in the university‘s development plan • recommendations of the “Austrian Science Board” and the Minister’s strategic issues to be taken into consideration

12. Performance agreement (3) • Role of the ministry • Money continues to come from tax-payers • State has a guiding role as a partner – does not dictate

13. 1.6 Where performance agreement cannot be reached • Strong reasons for arriving at an agreement – on both sides • Arbitration procedure (a judge and the same number of nominees by the university and by the ministry) • If the arbitration procedure fails: action in the Administrative Court • In the period before a contract is signed: university’s budget must not be reduced by more the 2% of the figure for the previous year

14. 1.7 Autonomy in matters of staff for every university • New recruits – employees of the universities are no longer civil servants • Civil servant already on the staff • are made available to the university by the state • retain all their rights • positions abolished when civil servants leave

15. 1.8 The role of the parliament • Detail steering by means of legislation disappears • Passing overall budget for the universities • Previous dominance of input-orientation is expanded: new report system (performance, balance sheets) allows control and criticism of the universities’ performance

16. 1.9 The ministry’s loss of power and influence • Prestige of status as an authority • Authority over employees • Many detailled rules and control over their observance • Decrees on what is to be taught and researched • Favourable treatment as the result of individual intervention

17. 1.10 The duties of the ministry • The political “voice of the sciences and the humanities” • Representative of the interests of the academic system • within the state • in the EU • internationally • Financing state academic institutions - planning, preparation and implementation • Harmonisation with other political areas • Development of national strategies • Location policy • Facilitator of academic development • Motor for improvements • Partnership with the universities • Support and consultation • Evaluating the universities’ performance • Legal supervision

18. 1.11 The Effects on staff and organisation of the ministry • Fewer staff • Fewer legal professionals • No further administration of the universities’ staff • New qualifications required • strategy development • assessment of development plans • study of balance sheets • negotiations conducted as equals • Proportionately more people with higher qualifications • Organisation predominantly task-oriented, but elements of the university orientation are retained

19. 2. Problems and misunderstandings 2.1 Resistance to change at the universities and in the ministry 2.2 Clearing up misunderstandings 2.3 Mistakes which could be madein the ministry

20. 2.1 Resistance to change at the universities and in the ministry • Is greater and more open at the universities • Usually: change creates uncertainty • Ministry: abolition of regulations in laws, decrees and edicts – loss of certainty • security of the status of public administration staff • security of regulations as guides to operating procedures • disappearance of familiar, often routine, work • fear of unfamiliar duties • Fear of reductions to staff numbers • Exclusion from planning of the reform • Lack of understanding for the reform

21. 2.2 Clearing up misunderstandings (1) • The state does not abdicate, does not shirk its responsibilities but takes on new duties • The cost-effectiveness of the university does not mean “economisation” of research and teaching • A well-managed university allows undisputed work • University tradition alone is not sufficient to carry out its responsibilities • Self-referential subculture misunderstanding of autonomy is anti-social and expensive • Leadership by the rector and vice-rectors does not mean authoritarian rule, is not undemocratic

22. Clearing up misunderstandings (2) • Calling for autonomy is easier than practicing it • The mistakes of autonomous universities are not dramatic • Cultural change – from authority to partnership – requires time • It does not mean being condemned to inactivity on account of the universities’ autonomy • The role of the ministry must be redefined

23. 2.3 Mistakes which could be made in the ministry (1) • Changes take place without due planning • Too many staff • in particular less qualified staff • look for (unnecessary) work • Required qualifications are lacking • strategy development • thinking in structures (instead of in individual cases, as previously) • communication • negotiation • dealing with statistics, reading balance sheets • Uncertainty caused by abolition of regulations is not addressed

24. Mistakes which could be made in the ministry (2) • Inadequate further education • starts too late • concentrated on skills • neglects changing attitudes • Role of ministry remains unclear for too long • Universities not regarded as capable of handling autonomy • Cynically awaiting the failure of autonomy

25. Mistakes which could be made in the ministry (3) • Attempt to avoid changes by • informal partial negotiations with the universities • proposals for amendments to the autonomy law 2002 which would mean a backward development • reserving an unacceptably large amount of the budget allows financing outside of the performance agreement • operative detail regulations in the performance agreement

26. Mistakes which could be made in the ministry (4) • Structure of the ministry is not consistently built-up according to the principle of areas of responsibility • The new “Austrian Science Board” is regarded more as an aid to argumentation, less as an independent critical body

27. 3. Recommendations for the path to success 3.1 A ministry for HE and research 3.2 Staff development of the ministry urgently and in good time 3.3 Code regulating the behaviour of the ministry towards the universities in the transition period

28. 3.1 A ministry for HE and research • New responsibilities instead of the earlier ones • “Voice for the sciences and the humanities” • for the sciences and the humanities in general • for higher education • for pure research • for all academic disciplines • Other solutions: e.g. UK – Ministry of Economics DK – HE, technology, innovations systems • The pros and cons have to be studied • Weak representation of the sciences strengthens the finance ministry

29. 3.1.1 Comprehensive representation of the sciences and the humanities and their institutions • As “voice”, “advocate”, “patron” • In addressing the public • In addressing other areas of politics in the government, in parliament • In addressing political parties and lobbies • In addressing the EU and international organisations (e.g. UNESCO, OECD) • In addressing the business sector

30. 3.1.2 Securing financing • In the government, in parliament, in public • Obtaining relevant tax and foundation law agendas • Operating the system of state grants • Facilitating communication between universities and investors

31. 3.1.3 Steering in line with the interests of the state • Competition between the universities alone is not sufficient • Securing national supply of scientific performance • Defining the capacities required • Location policy • Decisions on major investments • Presenting focal points and diversity for discussion • Ensuring fair competition with private universities • Determining the politically desirable study admission procedure and state grants

32. 3.1.4 Controlling duties • Continuous observation of performance of the universities with regard to the agreed goals • Continuous observation of performance with regard to expenditure • Criticism of performance and initiatives to ensure development of quality

33. 3.1.5 Legal supervision • Intervention in cases where universities infringe the law • Securing basic rights • freedom of research and teaching • freeing from any obligation to teach and research against individual conscience • equality of opportunity with regard to gender, religion, ethnic origin, political beliefs

34. 3.1.6 Facilitator and motor of the development of the academic system • Systematic observer of national development of the sciences in the European and international context • Primarily initiatives from scientific disciplines • As an active motor: with declared goals and processes that can be discussed

35. 3.1.7 Observation of actual developments and preparation of legal exceptions to autonomy • Exceptions must have convincing legal justification • Continuous observation of current conditions of the academic world and effects of change • Up-to-date initiatives (Austria): experienced autonomous universities are able to handle tuition fees and admission procedures

36. 3.2 Staff development in the ministry urgently and in good time (1) • Investment in staff pays off • Staff should be convinced to actively involve themselves in helping decide upon the changes • Changes of attitudes are as important as new qualifications • Openly planned and implemented staff reductions with social support • Favour staff transferfrom ministry to the universities • Organise ongoing rotation of staff between ministry and universities

37. Staff development in the ministry urgently and in good time (2) • Qualification in change management needed • new duties, structures, processes, behaviour • joint initiatives for ministry and university staff

38. 3.3 Code defining behaviour of the ministry towards the universities in the transition period (1) • Institutionalised communication with the universities • Communication as equals, the power of the funding provider should be rarely exercised • No informal parallel negotiations with the universities • No negotiations with lower level of the universities (e.g. faculties) • Allow universities to solve their problems themselves, but indicate inadequacies and the responsibility for dealing with them

39. Code defining behaviour of the ministry towards the universities in the transition period (2) • No interference in selection of management of the universities • Serious examination of performance reports and balance sheets • Counter attempts by the universities to be integrated in responsibility in the traditional way – prevent development of mixed responsibility • Positions must be transparent • Positions must be consistent

40. Code defining behaviour of the ministry towards the universities in the transition period (3) • No concealed “subliminal” attempts at steering • Do not answer parliamentary questions that concern the self-administered sphere of a university independently, but present them as the requested report of the body of the university responsible, with added comment • Adhere to state performance with regard to performance agreements: deviations only where necessitated by state emergency