E I P

Appendix B: Governing Bodies of 26 Australian Universities - Comparison in Size and Composition Between 1990 and 1995 [Next Chapter] [Previous Chapter] [Contents]

Two years after the release of the White Paper on higher education, the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee distributed a questionnaire to its members at that time concerning the composition and size of their governing bodies. The following 26 universities provided the requested information and the results were reported by Wood and Smith in 1992.

New South Wales:

• Sydney
• New South Wales
• Macquarie
• Wollongong
• University of New England
• University of Technology, Sydney
• Newcastle
• Western Sydney
• Charles Sturt.

Victoria:

• Melbourne
• Monash
• La Trobe
• Deakin.

Queensland:

• Queensland
• James Cook University of Northern Queensland
• Griffith
• Queensland University of Technology.

South Australia:

• Adelaide
• Flinders University of South Australia.

Western Australia:

• University of Western Australia
• Murdoch
• Curtin.

Tasmania:

• University of Tasmania.

Northern Territory:

• Northern Territory University.

Australian Capital Territory:

• Australian National University
• University of Canberra.

In view of the continuing concern from both within and outside universities regarding contemporary management practices in Australian higher education, a comparison has been made between the size and composition of the above 26 universities in 1990 and in 1995. However, while changes have certainly been made over this period in a number of the universities' governing bodies on both these characteristics, the average size of the governing bodies is still well-above 20.

Table B.1 provides a breakdown for each of the universities in terms of membership category: Ex-Officio (such as the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor); those elected by i) academic staff (ii) general staff iii) students; parliamentarians (from either one or other or both Houses); election by convocation; appointments by governor/minister and co-opted members. External members in both the 1990 survey and the report of the Hoare Committee in 1995 constitute the greater proportion of governing body membership.

Size of University Governing Bodies

As Table B.1 shows there is a considerable variation in the size of university governing bodies - from 17 to 44 in 1990 and from 18 to 40 in 1995. The White Paper on Higher Education released in 1988 recommended the size for governing bodies of between 10 to 15. This recommended size was again endorsed by the Hoare Committee in 1995 which was of the view that: 'Governing bodies with more than 20 are likely to be unmanageable, particularly given the increased strategic focus that the bodies should have'(Hoare Report 1995: 53).

Of the 26 universities, seven have decreased the size of their governing bodies since the Wood and Smith 1990 survey, nine have increased the size of their governing body and 10 have remained unchanged. The average size of the 26 boards in 1995 was 26 members just one less than the 27 member average in 1990. The Universities of Wollongong and Newcastle had the smallest boards with 18. Both of these institutions had reduced their board size since 1990. The largest boards were the University of Melbourne (40), Monash University (39) La Trobe University (36), followed by the University of Queensland, James Cook University, University of Adelaide, and Flinders University each with 35 members. The University of Canberra had the smallest governing body membership in 1990-17 members. However, since 1990 it has had the largest proportional increase of all the 26 survey institutions-an increase of 18 per cent primarily in the governor/ministerial category.

The most dramatic changes in governing body size and composition have been at ANU. In 1990 ANU had the largest governing body with 44 members. However, in 1995 ANU's governing body numbered 22. This has been effected by reductions in most categories of membership.

Changes in Membership Categories

Ex Officio

• The greatest increase is by 3 representatives at The University of Melbourne.
• The greatest decrease is by 3 representatives at the University of New England (reflecting no doubt the disamalgamation of the former networked UNE).

Academic Staff

• No increase.
• The greatest decrease is by 3 representatives at Australian National University.

General Staff

• The greatest increase is by 1 representative at the University of Tasmania.
• The greatest decrease is by 1 at the University of Queensland and Australian National University.

Students

• Some institutions such as University of New England, University of Technology, Sydney, and University of Western Sydney have increased the number of student representatives. This is possibly to ensure representation of both undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

Parliamentarians

• No increase.
• The greatest decrease is from 4 to 2 representatives at the Australian National University.

Convocation

• No increase.
• The greatest decrease is by 2 representatives at the Australian National University.

Governor or Ministerial Appointments

• The greatest increase is from 5 (1990) to 9 (1995) representatives at the University of Canberra
• The greatest decrease is from 12 (1990) to 6 (1995) representatives at the Australian National University.

Coopted

• The greatest increase is by 5 representatives at La Trobe University (3 in 1990, 8 in 1995).
• The greatest decrease is by 3 representatives at the University of Tasmania and 2 at Monash University.

Other

• No increase.
• The greatest decrease is by 4 representatives at the Australian National University.

Comment

An analysis of the proportion of total members in each category shows the groups that tend to dominate the governing bodies in Australian Universities are drawn from Government/Ministerial appointments, convocation, ex-officio positions and university staff. The Hoare Report (1995, Appendix 5) gives the proportion of external members as at least 50 per cent for all but two institutions. However, the Hoare Report (1995: 51) also concludes: 'that many governing bodies would operate more effectively if parliamentarians were not a prescribed membership category.'

Of the 26 universities included in this sample 12 were identified by the Hoare Report as having an Executive body reporting to the governing body. Other universities noted the existence of a standing committee or delegated executive authority may be given to the Vice-Chancellor to act on some matters. The institutions that do have an executive are: University of New South Wales, Wollongong, Western Sydney, Charles Sturt University, Melbourne, Monash, La Trobe, Queensland, Flinders, University of Western Australia, University of Tasmania, and Northern Territory University.

To view Table B.1: Composition and Size of Governing Bodies of 26 Australian Universities, click here.

[return to top]