Growth strategies – Czech ambition and OECD experience

11 January 2006

La Muette, Paris

Sigurd Höllinger

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

“Universities can perform if they are allowed to”

Austrian Federal Ministryof Education, Science andCulture

Minoritenplatz 5A-1014 Vienna

Tel: ++43 1 53120 6000Fax: ++43 1 53120 6929sigurd.hoellinger@bmbwk.gv.at

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

0 Are the Austrian reforms best practice?

1 Reform goals

2 Reform principles

3 Weaknesses of previous reforms

4 Autonomy

5 The new state-university relationship

6 Measures taken between 2002–2005

7 Change processes between 2002–2005

8 Performance agreements

9 Strengthening basic research

10 Academic freedom

11 Going forward

12 Universities Act 2002: chart

0 Best practice?

• Possible example of best practice

• Interim report

• Changes to existing institutions:

- Long traditions

- Legacies of the past

- National specificities

• New model: European and international

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

1 Reform goals

• Enhancing research and teaching performance

• Improving the universities’ efficiency

• Universities as European players in research and teaching; international competitiveness

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

2 Reform principles

• Most sweeping reforms for 150 years

• No half-measures

• Autonomous in place of state controlled universities

• New legal framework

• Self-managed change processes

• More competition and cooperation

• Study law remains preserve of state

• Confidence in universities’ ability to renew themselves

under the new conditions of complete autonomy

• World class performance achievable

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

3 Weaknesses of previous reforms

• Blurred responsibilities of universities and the state

• Power without responsibility

• Reversal of effects of the legal system

• Participation based on misconceptions about grassroots democracy

• Rule, not goal-driven approach

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

4 Autonomy

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

• Demanding autonomy more comfortable than practicing it

• Uniting decision-making and responsibility

• Autonomy of the organisation can impinge on individual freedoms

• Academics put their own freedom first

• Influence through performance agreements: educational obligations, state’s ability and willingness to pay

5 The new state-university relationship

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

• Partnership, not sovereign authority

• Legal duty of the state to finance higher education

• Performance agreement between the university and the state

• Draft agreement drawn up by the university

• New recruits employees of the university — no more civil servant status

6 Measures taken between 2002–2005

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

Universities• University councils, rectors and vice-rectors appointed, senate elected• New organisation charts• Development plans• New accounting system• Draft performance agreements• International contacts stepped up

Ministry in conjunction with universities• Intellectual capital report• Indicator-linked budget component (20%)• Activity reports

Budgets for first performance agreement period (2007–2009)

7 Change processes between 2002–2005

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

• Early stages of extended processes visible, but legacies of the past stil apparent

• Act increasingly accepted:

- Awareness of opportunities for individuals and universities

- But resistance to change and rectors from some senates

• Cultural change in the right direction:

- More goal-driven approach

- Increased emphasis on performance

- Management by rectorates accepted and critically monitored

- University councils no longer seen as an “alien presence” — accepted

as useful management bodies

8 Performance agreements

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

• Three-year term

• Rector submits draft agreementApproval of university council required

• Overall budget for three-year period established one year in advance• Informal discussions beforehand (recommendations of Austrian Science

Board, government proposals, last performance report, financial statements)

• Based on development plan

• Failure to agree: first arbitration, then option for both sides of bringing an action in the constitutional court

Additional resources: competitively awarded grants from national, European, international research funds, as well as contract research

9 Strengthening basic research

• Research driven by scientific curiosity

• High risk of failure

• PhD programmes along Bologna follow-up process lines replacing traditional doctoral studies

• Research freedom for all academic staff, regardless of age and status

• More research driven teaching alongside traditional educational obligations

• More funding competitively awarded

• Stringent quality control

• “Austrian Institute of Advanced Science and Technology (AIST)” to be founded

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

10 Academic freedom

• Academic freedom for all university members

• All academic staff have right to choose research field: third-party funded and contract research

• No compulsion to perform work that conflicts with conscience

• Scientific curiosity welcomed

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

11 Going forward

• No return to old habits• Asset formation as means of strengthening autonomy

Buildings not transferred to university ownershipUniversities tenants of buildings owned by a profit oriented, government owned company

• Student admissions: Court of Justice of the European Communities created new conditions, open access dead

• Low, flat-rate university fees successfully introduced: not a satisfactory system for universities that have prospered under autonomy

• Correction of small defects of reform legislation needed

S. H. OECD 11/1/06

Austrian Science Board(12 members)

advises

Performanceagreement

Three-year budgets(at univs’ disposal)

Leitungsorgane

Universität - Juristische Person öffentlichen RechtsU n i v e r s i t y — legal public entity

Governing bodies

University Council Rectorate Senate

5 (7 or 9) persons

• 2 (3 or 4) appointed byFederal Government

• 2 (3 or 4) elected bysenate

• additional member

1 rector up to 4 vice-rectors

Responsibilities• Representation of the

university• Appointment of heads oforganisational units

• Budget allocations• Preparation of proposals for:

- Development plan- Organisation plan- Performance agreement

12–24 persons

Professors: absolute majority (7–13)Students: 1/4 of members (3–6)Assistants, non-academic staff: 2–5

Responsibilities• Chairperson of rectorate• Negotiations on performanceagreements

• Employer’s representative indealings with university members

Responsibilities• Three-person shortlist

for appointment of rector• University statute • Curricula

University determines its internal structure: faculties, departments, institutes, etc.

Responsibilities• Election and dismissal ofrector and vice-rectors

• Supervisory functions • Approval of:

- Development plan- Organisation plan- Performance agreement - Budget allocations

advises

Rector

Universities Act 2002

Ministry of Education, Scienceand Culture