Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to outline the structures of collegial governance in Australian universities between 1945 and the “Dawkins reforms” of the late 1980s. It describes the historical contours of collegial governance in practice, the changes it underwent, and the structural limits within which it was able to operate.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis is based upon the writings of academics and university administrators from the period, with more fine-grained exemplification provided by archival and other evidence from Faculties of Arts and their equivalents in newer universities.FindingsElements of hierarchy and lateral organisation coexisted in the pre-Dawkins university in ways not generally made explicit in the existing literature. This mixture was sustained by ideals about academic freedom.Research limitations/implicationsBy historicising “collegiality” the research problematises polemical uses of the term, either for or against. It also seeks to clarify the distinctiveness of contemporary structures—especially for those with no first-hand experience of the pre-Dawkins university—by demonstrating historical difference without resort to nostalgia.Originality/value“Collegiality” is a common concept in education and organisation studies, as well as in critiques of the contemporary corporate university. However, the concept has received little sustained historical investigation. A clearer history of collegial governance is valuable both in its own right and as a conceptually clarifying resource for contemporary analyses of collegiality and managerialism.

Abstract The rich body of literature that has sought to shed light on how global trends shape public sector institutions at the local level frequently claims that globalization is significantly transforming national institutions. Against that backdrop, the term governance is actually a multifaceted concept representing an ongoing process characterized by complex interactions between globally spreading movements and locally inherited interests. Focusing on transitions in governance and on the variations found in governance at the local level, the present study aims to make a conceptual contribution to existing characterizations of the dynamics of higher education in the context of globalization. After reviewing studies on changes in the governance of higher education, this paper identifies the limitations and implications of various theoretical approaches to describing the transformation of governance in the education sector. We then construct a hybrid analytical framework combining the main elements of institutional analysis (i.e., rational choice, sociological and historical institutionalism) with theories of public policy as a novel way of conceptualizing and operationalizing educational governance. While some scholars might be hesitant to embrace such an approach, we would argue that it deserves consideration. The framework provides an explicit conceptual construct for advancing the theoretical understanding of the concept of hybridization, which is of great utility for identifying the nuances of higher education governance in transition. Moreover, the analytical framework presented herein contributes to a more find-grained understanding of educational transition and extends previous empirical studies on dynamics in the higher education sector. The results can not only supplement the current approach to studying HE governance but also outline a possible trajectory for further research.

Purpose The incentive to strengthen university governance is espoused by a number of implications but among these three are very conspicuous: improve quality of university education system, and thus provide students and the general public value for money; enhance the utilization of resources invested in university education; and nevertheless contribute significantly in human capital formation, guaranteeing effective and efficient public leadership and services to society. However, there are dearth studies on how this can be realized in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly Ghana. The purpose of this paper is to explore pertinent issues for desirable university governance and how it can be achieved in the sub-region drawing from the Ghanaian perspective. Design/methodology/approach This is a qualitative study seeking to explore the questions: what is needed to ensure desirable university governance? And how can it be achieved? Data were collected from primary sources and bolstered with secondary sources. In-depth interviews (structured and semi-structured guides) and documentary evidence were used to collect data from 19 participants in selected public and private universities in Ghana. Findings The study examines key governance issues such as funding, accountability, infrastructure, trust, and regulation. The paper further identifies and discusses dilemmas (weakness in legislative instruments, quality assurance, increased enrollment and self-regulation) institutions of higher learning have had to contend with in the discharge of their duty. Social implications In an effort to make a difference between poverty and wealth, knowledge becomes an indispensable means and university education is at the center of such knowledge. The call for public universities to be managed like businesses continuous to be as contentious as an issue, as the term governance and the discussion might not end any moment soon. For the proponents of this idea, public universities are no longer getting the needed resource support from the state and by implication the state does no longer view university education as a social good and, therefore, they must find their own way of operating by introducing reasonable fees to generate revenue. However, the school of thought that is against this idea thinks that university education must continue to be treated as a social good because it is geared toward the development of the country and is expensive and if not subsidized, who can afford. The poor and disadvantaged will be marginalized and so the state must directly or indirectly continue to fund university education in return for accountability. Originality/value This explorative study is a contribution to the discourse of university governance. It primarily focuses on issues that could serve as a catalyst in enhancing university education. This has important implications for equipping universities in Ghana and within the African sub-region with similar challenges for a better output to meet the development needs of its ailing economies and reposition it as a major firebrand to instill competition on the global arena of lifelong learning.

This study examines the perceived governance roles of university boards in Nordic higher education, focusing on Sweden and Finland as case examples. In light of global governance reforms, this research aims to explore how board members in Finnish and Swedish university governance systems perceive their roles. The theoretical framework builds on layered governance styles and the literature on board roles. The findings contribute to the discussion of Nordic higher education governance by exploring the visions of board members regarding board governance, which is a relatively under-researched area. This comparative approach not only sheds light on commonalities due to shared historical, social, and political ties between the two countries but also highlights differences through an analysis of key factors and issues that distinguish board governance in these countries. This analysis enriches the understanding of board governance in the Nordic context.

In view of the increasing importance attributed to social responsibility and stakeholder relationship management, more universities have expanded their research topics and their educational programs through the years. High attention is dedicated to the dominant principles and values of internal and external relations, to the innovation processes designed to ensure an approach to sustainable development. However, less attention is dedicated to the sustainability governance orientation and to the development of a strong institutional culture of sustainability, which is a key success factor to improve the quality and the image. This article observes the sustainability governance orientation, through the analysis of the information on the websites of three fair groups of universities in the international Top 500-ARWU (Academic Ranking of World Universities) 2015 ranking. The aim is to verify if there is a link between the degree of sustainability culture in the management and the positioning of the universities in the international ranking. In addition, the analysis is compared with self-assessment data carried out by the same universities in terms of performance sustainability through the STARS (Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System) online platform. As principal consideration, we have noted that the best universities in the ranking have a management approach based on a shared vision of sustainability development of their university leaders, who play an essential role affirming and disseminating a sustainability culture. All this opens broader future implications intended to highlight the importance of management sustainability as a quality improvement factor of universities.

New public management (NPM) has dominated the reforms in the higher education sector and the academic discussion on how universities should be governed since the 1980s. Besides, the introduction of accountability and efficiency measures in the form of performance measurement and pay-for-performance scheme, a key debated aspect of NPM is the strengthening of the role of boards and the introduction of a more firm-like governance structure. Much work is still needed to evaluate the implementation of NPM reforms in the university domain, particularly with respect to the internal governance changes. Besides formal rules, perceptions of key actors on their institutional environment play a major role in investigating university governance. This article uses a unique dataset on Italian universities to illustrate the internal governance patterns that emerged after the 2010 reform and critically analyses the differences in the perceptions of rectors and department chairs providing insights for both academic and policymakers.

The voices of academics have traditionally been strong in university decision-making bodies, where they participated in the shared governance of the university. It has been customary for senior academics to be represented in managing bodies and to exercise control over the key areas of strategy, finance, quality assurance, study programs, and/or human resources. With the new public management reforms that have swept through higher education (HE) systems, the power of academics has been reduced, while managerial guidance has increased, alongside the fostering of universities' institutional autonomy. At the same time, the power of other stakeholders, such as students or industry representatives, has also been increasing as part and parcel of the governance reforms, albeit to different degrees and at different paces across various HE systems. In this context, this article seeks to examine the role that early career researchers (ECRs) play in university decision-making bodies across different countries as internal stakeholders. The research is based on seven case studies from seven European and East Mediterranean countries drawing on documentary data and 55 semi-structured interviews with ECRs and 14 managers, carried out in 2023-2024. Following stakeholder categories distinguished on the basis of their legitimacy, urgency, and power, this article investigates the extent to which ECRs perceive their voices to be heard. The findings show variance between the case studies regarding formal representation, with most universities in the study having limited representation of ECRs in university and faculty/school-level decision-making bodies. The voices of ECRs, however, are heard in informal ways.

Purpose: This study aims to explore the Good University Governance factors that exist in State Universities with Legal Entities (PTNBH) status universities and their influence on its performance. Design/methodology/approach: This study analyzed the university performance using three indicators and Good University Governance/GUG using six indicators from universities with PTNBH status in East Java. This research employed a survey method at PTNBH University using variant-based Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) of the PLS tool to analyze the data. Findings: The results of the PLS analysis indicate that Good University Governance has a significant positive influence on College Performance. These results indicate that improved Good University Governance leads to enhanced university performance, whereas weaker implementation of Good University Governance corresponds to a decline in the university performance. Research limitations/implications: Research related to GUG has been conducted in many companies and profit-oriented organizations both in publicly accountable entities and in entities without public accountability. This study was conducted at a university with PTNBH status because PTNBH is provided autonomy to manage its assets, both BMU and BMN assets entrusted to PTNBH, therefore it is important to have a reliable GUG. Originality/value: This study addresses the existing knowledge gap by examining university governance, while previous governance research has mostly concentrated on corporate settings.

Type of the article: Research Article The study analyzes how academic excellence is conceptualized within Kazakhstani universities, focusing on two key internal stakeholder groups: faculty members and administrative staff. While academic excellence has become a global priority, little empirical evidence exists on how it is interpreted in emerging higher education systems. The paper addresses this gap by examining the Kazakhstani case, where government-led excellence initiatives are still in their early stages. A quota-based survey was conducted across 42 universities, producing weighted responses from 832 faculty and 155 administrators. Quantitative data were processed with IBM SPSS Statistics 25, employing descriptive statistics, Welch’s t-test, and two-way ANOVA to compare perceptions between the groups. Despite a broad consensus on the multidimensional nature of academic excellence (positive agreement averaged > 94%), the results reveal consistent differences in their interpretation of core parameters. Of the 32 indicators tested, only four showed no statistically significant difference between faculty and administrators: faculty numbers (p = 0.246), academic reputation and stakeholder recognition (p = 0.701), graduate employability and employer satisfaction (p = 0.106), and student enrollment (p = 0.588). Overall, administrators assigned systematically higher importance to institutional characteristics, enabling components, and barriers across all thematic blocks. Consistent with the conceptual framework integrating institutional and stakeholder perspectives, these patterns indicate that external policy pressures and role-specific responsibilities shape interpretations of excellence. These findings provide a data-driven basis for designing initiatives that couple system-level reforms with participatory governance and co-created metrics, thereby improving the translation of policy into practice. Acknowledgment This research was funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant No. BR21882373).