A Vice-Chancellor is the principal academic and administrative officer of the university. He/she chairs the Council of the University, the Board of Faculties and the Finance Committee of the university. In the main, he provides leadership, academic and administrative to the whole University, represents the university externally, both within and overseas, secures a financial base sufficient to allow the delivery of the university’s mission, aims and objectives and carries out certain important ceremonial and civic duties. Who then is a good vice Chancellor or a leader? Someone who has humility, guts, self-awareness, knowhow, simplicity, integrity, passion, courage, intellect, and balance. The “Ten Commandments” so to say.
Last year in October, Mumbai University saw its Vice Chancellor removed for gross negligence and failure to announce the results. Same year in December, the Union Government sacked the Vice Chancellor of Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, after finding him guilty of administrative irregularities. A former VC of VTU had been controversial and was forced to step down following charges of huge financial irregularities at the varsity during his tenure. A former Vice Chancellor in Tamil Nadu is serving time. Another in Pondicherry also had to leave office. A couple of months ago, the 100-year-old Banaras Hindu University, witnessed massive student protests due to the mishandling of sexual harassment complaints by its vice chancellor who was “forced to leave” until his retirement, and the reputation of one of the finest universities in India was in tatters.
The vice-chancellor of Bath University, ranked 129th in the World, whose pay package of £468,000 made her a figure of national controversy, also agreed to step down by the end of the year. A year back, the Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities (SSANU) has called for the sack of four Vice Chancellors of Nigerian universities over alleged corruption.
What is common in all these cases? Firstly, they either lacked the “Ten Commandments” or they compromised some, or all of them. Secondly, though on paper, there is a proper system in place for appointing vice chancellors that involves a committee of eminent individual’s shortlisting the best candidates, the final selection would be mired in political compulsions. Many vice chancellors face corruption charges, or have been caught running rackets in appointments and admissions. Some have been found to have awarded contracts to their favourite firms. Others have even been found to have sold fake degrees or fudged marks, often in collusion with various lobbies. This happens because executive bodies are often dominated by members either nominated or elected not necessarily on merit. We know the adage, “Mediocrity breeds more mediocrity” and some universities even suffered, when the leaders were chosen from within the organisation.
What is performance? That is one of the key questions that higher education leaders must answer. The performance expectations of those inside higher education does not appear to align with the performance expectations of those outside of higher education. This misalignment is leading to more regulations and more frustration. There is a belief among some outside of higher education that if colleges were more innovative, outcomes would improve. Yet despite this desire for innovation, the vast majority of funding formulas from state and Central governments remain very traditional. That said, there is also a growing trend within state funding sources across the country to establish performance funding formulas (pay for outcomes) which elected officials believe will make higher education more efficient and produce more, and “better,” graduates.
Learning 1.0 was treated as if all knowledge was singular, stable and simply solvable. Inherent are the limitations to universal quality. It is debatable whether the need to prepare new leaders in higher education is coming or has already arrived and we need to recognise that a leadership crisis is looming. Demographic data probably would show an increasingly “seasoned” group at the top of our colleges and universities. New and young leaders have to be nurtured and trained in the Manager/Administrator training academies and while some may question whether these are the right places to be training future leaders, in areas such as the use of technology, innovation, advocacy and entrepreneurial thinking, there is little else filling the void. Collaborating with the best in the World, setting up a few teacher training institutes would be a welcome step.
A slow deterioration in values, in research, in teaching learning processes, and almost every aspect over the years, has brought the universities to brink where even declaration of results is questioned. The last mile, the student who is the most important peg in the giant wheel, is made to suffer for no fault of his or her. Credibility is the consequent casualty.
If the courses are sub-standard, if lecturers don’t turn up, if supervision doesn’t materialise, and when students pay huge tuition fees, will they be able to demand their money back if university fails to deliver? Admittedly, students do not buy degrees and diplomas. But they do buy services. If a product doesn’t live up to expectations, if it’s not of merchantable quality, then consumers have rights to ask for their money back under the Sale of Goods Act. But what if you are paying for a course that didn’t live up to expectations?
An oft repeated criticism is that, in the need to administer and retain control, the autonomy to grow, expand and absorb changes has been given a goby. The control of the administrative bodies by people other than academicians and well-meaning individuals in the society has been a serious bane. Be that as it may, one of the most basic and bounden duty of a university is to conduct examinations which are seen to be fair and following the rule book, answer books assessed with a great amount of commitment and results declared in time, so that the student who has everything to look forward to is not cheated out of his or her future.
Universities are meant to be epitomes of wisdom. What wisdom and knowledge can be transferred if the wisdom deserts the administration and basic functions and tenets on which a university function? A crisis of leadership cannot be camouflaged as emergencies and exigencies. Like Colin Powell, the retired General of the US army once said, “Good leadership involves responsibility to the welfare of the group, which means that some people will get angry at your actions and decisions. It’s inevitable – if you’re honourable. Trying to get everyone to like you is a sign of mediocrity. You’ll avoid the tough decisions, you’ll avoid confronting the people who need to be confronted, and you’ll avoid offering differential rewards based on differential performance because some people might get upset. Ironically, by procrastinating on the difficult choices, by trying not to get anyone mad, and by treating everyone equally “nicely” regardless of their contributions, you’ll simply ensure that the only people you’ll wind up angering are the most creative and productive people in the organization”.
How many institutions and organisations will be sacrificed for want of decisive leadership and enabling ecosystems? Some superbly talented people in our universities deserve better. The credibility of the universities needs to be restored once again leading us to a discussion of a disrupted University and learning 2.0.
To be continued: