SFS vice-chairman Jacob Färnert reflects on collegiality and the importance of trust in the higher education sector with the reason that the government yesterday decided to shorten the term of office for the new members of the boards of 30 universities and colleges. A decision which SFS has criticized in a statement.
The existence of political control of academia is not a new phenomenon. It is something that has been consistent throughout the ages regardless of the color of the government. On the other hand, when there are new decisions or proposals that involve political control of the academy, I often ask myself why the state does not seem to believe in the collegiality that characterizes the organizations at universities and colleges. What is collegiality and why is it something we should believe in?
Collegiality is a principle of governance that is based on the practice that prevails in the business. For the university's organization, that practice naturally becomes the scientific one. The scientific activities are based on the teachers and students. The form of governance is therefore based on a dialogue with good arguments that deal with how we should jointly deal with current issues from a scientific and evidence-based perspective. In practice, this means that decisions are often made in a grouping of teachers and students. It is reflected in various forms of collegial bodies in the structure of the higher education institutions. These are often found at all levels, such as at a department/department or a faculty/academy.
Appropriately enough for this text, it was at a faculty that my student engagement began. As a student representative on a faculty committee, I got my first introduction to a collegial forum. Institutions' organization differs, at other institutions similar bodies may instead be called faculty boards, academy councils or the like. In any case, the faculty committee was the faculty's highest decision-making body, and was tasked, among other things, with deciding on planning and implementation as well as systematically securing, developing and monitoring quality in education and research within the faculty's area. The faculty was led by several elected deans who had an academic background, and the remaining members of the board were made up of students and teachers as well as technical-administrative staff and union representatives.
The culture we had at the faculty was characterized by shared responsibility. This has left a very deep impression on me and has shaped much of my view of the higher education sector. That is why I am prepared to also include students in the collegial concept that I wrote earlier. Some possibly associate collegiality with something that is only between the academy's scientific colleagues, i.e. between teachers at the university. For my own part, however, I am prepared to define it as broader, where students can also be included, or in any case collaborate with it to a large extent. Collegiality contributes to joint and collective reflection and conversation where criticism can also be voiced. It forms the basis for the quality work that takes place at the universities and constitutes a basic prerequisite for research and education. Basically, this is also a very nice democratic order where those who contribute to and are affected by the business also have an influence on the business.
Where does collegiality occur? It is an academic tradition and therefore mainly occurs at the universities. However, there is research that shows that collegiality has decreased over time (Ahlbäck Öberg & Boberg. 2022). Collegiality has sometimes been criticized for being a very slow form of governance and for being incapable of dealing with sudden challenges from the outside world. There may possibly be some truth in that criticism. The contrasts can certainly become extra strong when collegiality is compared to the forms of governance that exist in business or the modern world of New Public Management. For example, it can take up to two years to hire a professor, something that I think surprises many people from other sectors.
However, there is a point about the inertia. Without the collegial form of governance, the academy loses the values I have written about before. The collective reflection and discussion disappears, and with it the guarantees of quality assurance also disappear. In addition, I believe, contrary to the critics of collegiality, that the universities are fully capable of dealing with challenges that quickly strike.
Our higher education institutions have shown that they are capable of dealing with various challenges effectively. An example that is close at hand is when several Swedish universities and colleges very quickly broke off collaborations with Russian institutions of higher learning in connection with Russia's invasion of Ukraine. These decisions demonstrated the strength and integrity of the higher education institutions by taking a stand against an international conflict and acting in accordance with their values.
Another example is the corona pandemic. During the pandemic, universities and colleges have also demonstrated their ability to adapt to new circumstances and continue their operations in an efficient manner. The universities have implemented new digital tools to enable distance teaching and research. They have also taken measures to ensure the health and safety of students and employees, by introducing restrictions and guidelines that followed the Public Health Agency's recommendations.
It is therefore with great disappointment that I was informed yesterday that the government had decided to bypass the collegial processes and that a review of the appointment procedure for the boards of higher education institutions is to be expected. When the government disregards established practices and approaches to the appointment process, it opens the door to more direct political interference in the operations of higher education institutions. Collegiality ends up on the back foot and instead politics must decide what is best for the business. It is also very strange to target the boards of higher education institutions in particular. As I have described before, many of the issues are dealt with in other parts of the business, either within the collegial bodies or the boards giving a task to the university administrations to deal with it. The universities also carry out an annual risk and vulnerability analysis where questions of a security policy nature are addressed by all members of the college.
Trust-based governance has been discussed more and more lately. In that perspective, there is a great focus on the purpose of the business and that trusting relationships must be built. The development we see in the higher education sector goes completely against this. The purpose of the universities' and colleges' activities is research and education that is conducted on a scientific basis that is free from external influence. The governance needs to stimulate this and not least the state governance needs to have confidence that the collegial forms of governance can handle the challenges they face. For us students, of course, there is also an important task left in showing that we, together with the universities, can handle the issues that come up on the agenda. I am convinced that the ability exists and that it is something that we can do in the future. Therefore, I want to urge both student union colleagues and universities, but above all the government - believe in collegiality!