Review of internal decision-making processes

Iain Hunter Birte C. HornemannKirsten Molgaard Nielsen

Jan Evers Christiane BimbergAndreas Stich

Table of Contents

Introduction

Models of decision-making processes

Case studies

Conclusion

Reflections

Introduction

Assignment:

Through a study of the management structure and power base in your university, monitor and evaluate the decision-making processes, and assess their effectiveness. … Suggest ways of improving the quality and speed of decision-making.

Case studies

Strategic planning (Strathclyde, Twente)

Appointment of professors (Aalborg, Dortmund)

New study programmes (Dortmund)

Models of decision-making processes

Collegial model

Bureaucratic model

Political model

Organized anarchy model

Economic model

Strategic planning (Twente)

Strategic plan 2005 - 2010

Successor of 2001 – 2005

Developed in Spring 2004 – Spring 2005

Involvement of stakeholders, except support staff

Risk: Change of Executive Board

Strategic planning (Strathclyde)

Five year rolling plan, currently 2003 - 2007

Policy document that ALSO contains hard targets

Lack of iteration results in many staff not adopting stakeholder view

Plan in need of revision, as some targets are not achieved

Potential problem with staff who are not stakeholders

Appointment of professors (Aalborg)

The Faculty‘s strategic plan is to let active groups grow

Calculation of staff capacity and needs of staff

Faculty doubling of external funding

Consequences

Appointment of professors (Dortmund)

Main players: Faculty, Senate, Rector’s Office and Ministry

Process often took too much time: process has to be shortened

Strategic importance of appointment of professors: high leverage of Rector’s Office is justified

Since January 2005: the Rector’s Office decides without the Ministry’s participation

New Study programmes (Dortmund)

Implementation of the new modularised study programmes in teacher training in English and American Studies

Intermediate phase in preparation of the new graded BA/MA-Programmes

Top-down process with overlapping responsibilities and conflicting allegiances and insufficient coordination and communication

Maintenance of well-proven quality of teacher training

Creation of competitive programmes in regional, national and international contexts.

Conclusion -1/2

No university fitted completely in one of the decision-making models.

Current practice of decision-making is highly diverse at each university/in each country.

National and legal guidelines set limits: transfer from one country to another only with adjustment.

Potential for improvement: decentralisation adapted to the local situation

Conclusion – 2/2

Reorganisation of governance and management structures. Especially:

shift of decision making power to the appropriate levels of competency

balanced combination of bottom-up and top-down processes

more clearly defined responsibilities

administrators to support the academic staff on various levels of the university

Reflections

The process of discussions and communication was as important as the subject of the assignment.

All of us have benefited from discussing cultural and structural differences in higher educational systems

Suggestions

Mixing administrators and scientists in the assignment groups should be continued

Continue visits to different universities

Quality and relevance of the lectures improved

New assignment topics defined by the groups

Short focused assignments on different themes at each meeting

The goal for the programme should be clearer and more visible during the programme