SFS Vice Chairman Jacob Färnert reflects on collegiality and the importance of trust in the higher education sector on the occasion of The government yesterday decided to shorten the term of office for the new members of the boards of 30 universities and colleges.A decision that 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 history, regardless of the color of the government. However, when new decisions or proposals arise that involve political control of academia, 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 activities. For the university organization, that practice is of course the scientific practice. The scientific activity is based on the teachers and students. The form of governance is therefore based on a dialogue with good arguments that deals with how we should jointly handle 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. This is reflected in various forms of collegial bodies in the structure of the universities. 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 involvement began. As a student representative on a faculty board, I received my first introduction to a collegial forum. The organization of universities differs; at other universities, similar bodies may instead be called faculty boards, academic councils or similar. In any case, the faculty board was the faculty's highest decision-making body, and had, among other things, the task of deciding on the organization and implementation as well as systematically ensuring, developing and following up on the quality of 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 consisted of students and teachers as well as technical-administrative staff and union representatives.
The culture that we had at the faculty was characterized by shared responsibility. This has left a very deep mark 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 about earlier. Some may associate collegiality with something that is only between academic colleagues, that is, 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 at least collaborate with it to a large extent. Collegiality contributes to a joint and collective reflection and conversation where criticism can also be expressed. It forms the basis for the quality work that takes place at the universities and is a fundamental prerequisite for research and education. Basically, this is also a very fine democratic order where those who contribute to and are affected by the activities also have an influence on the activities.
Where does collegiality occur? It is an academic tradition and therefore occurs primarily at 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 handling 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 with the forms of governance that exist in the business world or the modern New Public Management world. For example, it can take up to two years to hire a professor, something that I think surprises many from other sectors.
There is, however, a point to the inertia. Without the collegial form of governance, academia loses the values I have written about earlier. The collective reflection and discussion disappear, and with it the guarantees for quality assurance. Furthermore, I believe, contrary to the critics of collegiality, that universities are fully capable of handling challenges that strike quickly.
Our higher education institutions have shown that they are capable of handling various challenges effectively. A close example is when several Swedish universities and colleges very quickly broke off collaborations with Russian higher education institutions 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 effectively. The institutions have implemented new digital tools to enable remote 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 recommendations of the Public Health Agency of Sweden.
It is therefore with great disappointment that I received the news yesterday that the government had decided to bypass the collegial processes and that a review of the appointment procedure for university boards is to be expected. When the government disregards established practice and procedures for the appointment procedure, it opens the door to more direct political interference in the operations of universities. Collegiality is put on the back burner and instead politics should decide what is best for the operations. It is also very strange to target the boards of universities in particular. As I have described earlier, many of the issues are handled in other parts of the operations, either within the collegial bodies or that the boards give an assignment to the university administrations to handle it. The universities also conduct an annual risk and vulnerability analysis where issues of a security policy nature are addressed by all members of the college.
Trust-based governance has been discussed more and more recently. From that perspective, there is a great focus on the purpose of the activity and that trusting relationships should be built. The development we see in the higher education sector goes completely against this. The purpose of the activities of universities and higher education institutions is research and education that is conducted on a scientific basis that is free from external influence. Governance needs to stimulate this and, not least, state governance needs to have confidence that the collegial forms of governance can handle the challenges they face. For us students, there is of course also an important task left in demonstrating that we, together with the higher education institutions, 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 would like to urge both student union colleagues and higher education institutions, but above all the government – to believe in collegiality!