A governance review has found UC’s foundations are strong but there are areas for improvement. Photo: University of Canberra.
An independent review of University of Canberra’s governance has found it has the “right foundations in place” but still has a way to go in areas of transparency and communication.
The review came off the back of “turbulence” in leadership and the university in general, and a push by both the National Tertiary Education Union and the ACT Government for an inquiry into what was happening in the UC Council.
Recommendations focused on five areas: clarify the role and focus of the Council, revise delegations to push decision-making where it’s needed, set up and use strategic KPIs to track performance, improve transparency, and embed a culture of confidence and trust.
“The challenges in the last 18 months have rightly seen emphasis placed on financial risks,” the review noted.
“This appears to have diluted attention to other areas, such as academic risks.”
It found there was a “very low appetite” for risk across the university, which meant it could miss out on “bold” new ideas.
“[This] might mean the University misses an opportunity to be a leader in a new area,” the review noted.
“There is plenty of room to get better: trust delegates, monitor performance and build a culture in which accountability counts because of outcomes, not because of weight of papers, or number of words, or hours spent in a room.”
It gave the example of a change to the combination of units in a course requiring approvals from six levels of governance.
Transparency was especially highlighted as a key issue.
“Information provided to Council is too long, delivered too late, and lacks strategic focus. Meanwhile, Council’s operations and outcomes are opaque to most University stakeholders,” the review noted.
“Meetings should not take six hours or require 500 pages of material to be read.”
The review pointed out Council Standing Orders required the Council agenda (excluding matters considered in closed session) to be public on the university website at least three business days before the meeting.
It found UC’s governance practices around ethics and integrity were compliant with legislative requirements and accountabilities clearly documented, but the authority to make decisions needed to be shifted.
“From the Council down it needs to be crystal clear who has responsibility for what, how delivery is consistently monitored and how accountability is real,” the review noted.
“Stakeholders raised concerns about the lack of monitoring to uphold accountability, across all levels of the University.
Faculties have no real consequences for overspending or making decisions that conflict with UC’s priorities or that affect other schools and faculties. Processes for addressing staff underperformance are not well understood or consistently applied.”
It found a high level of support and strong commitment from staff to UC’s success and appreciation for Vice-Chancellor Bill Shorten’s “active engagement” with the community in regards to UC’s strategy.
“Staff are generally optimistic about the future and have confidence in executive leadership to return the University to financial stability,” the review noted.
“Challenges remain, however … the University has some work to do strengthening transparency to bring people along on the journey, particularly amid such significant organisational change.
“It is not too late to develop a change management communication plan. Clear, transparent communication from senior University staff and executive will be critical to helping remaining staff move forward following the redundancies.”
UC supported all the recommendations bar one, which recommended the Planning and Development Committee be converted to an ad hoc one.
Mr Shorten said the review would shape the way governance and leadership at UC was approached in the future.
“It will contribute to building a more collaborative and transparent operating environment and returning UC to a position of strength,” he said.
“The University needs to be agile and responsive to the dynamic environment we operate in. We will need to operate effectively with a reduced workforce, embrace change in the way we work, and trust our staff to make decisions supported by appropriate accountability measures.
“This will ensure our success.”
NTEU ACT division secretary Dr Lachlan Clohesy said the review left a lot of unanswered questions, pointing to the fact UC had five Vice-Chancellors in the space of 14 months.
“The recommendations do speak to assessing the performance of university executive, but oversight of conduct is also important,” he said.
“It has been reported that former Vice-Chancellor Paddy Nixon was told his services were no longer required. The governance review sheds no light on the circumstances of Paddy Nixon’s departure, nor on his $1.8 million package in 2023.
“We hope UC seizes this opportunity to go beyond the recommendations and become an exemplar of good governance in higher education.”
