Comprehensive Reform of the University Governance System in China

This chapter introduces and discusses changes with respect to the university governance system in China which is in the process of creating a world-class university by taking Tongji University as an example. It presents an analytical framework on the basis of four powers: (1) the internal democratic nature of the governance structure, (2) the external involvement in university governance, (3) the level of centralization of the decision-making authority in the university, and (4) the concentration of authority in an individual leadership position versus authority in a collective body or spread over various collective bodies. It analyzes and summarizes the reforms of three colleges at Tongji University in these four aspects and puts forward some reasonable suggestions for other universities.

Global Challenges and Trends of University Governance Structures

This chapter tries to identify the different trends in university governance and their underlying causes. Although it focuses on university trends in Europe, it makes reference to global trends and causes, such as digitalization, inter-connectivity of our societies, and growing international competition. In sum, the chapter argues that the digital evolution has led both to a changed approach to teaching as well as to growing global competition in the race to obtain the best talent. This, in combination with a generation that has a growing access to higher education and that thrives on “instant knowledge-satisfaction,” has led to university governance changes that better fit current needs. Government-led austerity programs have further accelerated these changes, as universities seek to optimize their financing whilst, at the same time, striving to move up the international rankings. University governance trends include a professionalization of management, the creation of international excellence networks, and the establishment of interdisciplinary but specialized schools.

Governance Within Diverse University Structures

This chapter focuses on university governance, which reflects the structure of an institution, whether it is centralized or decentralized, but most importantly democratic and autonomous. The case is illustrated using the example of Charles University, which is a large and highly decentralized organization that has been affected by developments in the Czech Republic after 1989 and their consequences for higher education in the country. In this regard, different governance models and recent challenges for higher education institutions are explained. The structure, main bodies, and management of Charles University are described and put into context within the national regulatory framework. The chapter further explores the division of powers and control mechanisms. A special focus is placed on the role of the Academic Senate, which underlines the democratic principles of the institution. The final remarks highlight the importance of a democratic, autonomous environment for both research and education.

Cultural Transformation and Academic Leadership

This chapter aims to elaborate on the leadership properties in the transformation in higher education across the world by advancing specific illustration from the Turkish higher education context. Three specific objectives were identified around this broad aim: (1) document the current forces of change surrounding HEIs, (2) identify the culture shift in HEIs, and (3) provide literature-based evidence for the leadership gap in the face of culture shift and develop preposition for academic leadership. Higher education institutions (HEIs) form one of the sectors which has been drastically affected from the trends and developments in the economic, political, social, and technological spheres and responded to these change forces by radical transformations that have touched their traditional and historical value systems. This chapter argues that HEIs need leadership practices to survive the crisis and conflict era successfully, which carry some properties of transformational leadership while holding the traditional academic leadership perspective.

Academic Leaders in Leading Chinese Universities

The Double First-Class Initiative is now underway in a number of Chinese universities, of which about 36 are designated as level-A first-class universities of China. What kind of academic leaders do these universities have? In order to answer this question, the chapter firstly defines who can be classified as academic leaders at institutional level and their characteristics; secondly, it generalizes the common features of academic leaders in these universities such as education and academic research background, overseas study or research experience, work experience, and so on; thirdly, it analyzes the government policies and institutional strategies related to academic leaders so as to identify benchmark criteria (if in existence) regarding academic leaders in China's first-class universities. It also examines the extent to which these criteria or official requirements coincide with academic leaders' common features and puts forward policy advice on relevant issues.

Governance of Higher Education Institutions in China

This chapter analyzes the background, structures, problems and challenges, reforms, and trends in the governance of higher education institutions in China. It concludes that the centralized governance and management system of higher education institutions in China is deeply affected by the long history of centralized culture, and the current administrative and management system of state political power. The system has undergone many reforms and changes, and it is expected to undergo more reforms and changes in the coming decades.

Vision and Strategic Planning of University Governance

This chapter describes the participative and iterative strategic planning process that was used in Middle East Technical University (METU), as a “good practice” for other institutions of higher education in two major stages: (1) preparation of the strategic plan and (2) its deployment to all organizational units via a catch-ball approach. Both stages are iterative as they involve consecutive phases of collection, evaluation, sharing, and alignment of findings along with strategies, first among different strategic planning areas in the preparation stage, and second among different organizational units in the deployment stage. It is participative in that a large body of internal stakeholder representatives organized into various cross functional teams have carried out strategic planning at the university level. A support team assumes a critical role in coordinating the studies carried out by separate committees, and reporting the process its outcomes to University Strategic Planning Council to ensure the consistency.

“Research and Innovation” as an Integral Part of Strategic University Governance

The chapter sketches some governance features of a medium-sized, comprehensive, urban, public university that are essential to ensure the delicate equilibrium between structured, efficient management and openness towards the changing society, exceptional personalities and breakthrough thinking. Features of university governance are analyzed at all levels, from rectorate to schools (faculties), departments, and research groups. “Research” and “innovation and valorization with societal impact” are situated in relation to three other main academic pillars, namely education, student affairs, and institution-wide internationalization. Building blocks are described and assembled in a coherent governance structure. Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) case is taken as an example. Generalization of the discussed concepts should be done with care because choices are dependent on the university's vision, strategic plan, and road map, and one single best governance structure that is appropriate for all contexts does not exist.

The Counselor System Under the Perspective of Chinese University Governance

The university counselor system, an essential part of the development of college students, is the mainstay of quality-oriented education and modern management. This chapter focuses on the Chinese university counselor system and the relationship between the system and university governance. The chapter probes into the features and dilemmas of modern Chinese university governance, discusses the content and historical development of the Chinese university counselor system, and proposes ideas on how to learn from the advantages of similar systems in European countries and the USA from a comparative perspective. This chapter analyzes the effect of the Chinese counselor system on the university governance system from the perspective of Chinese university governance, including the positive effect of the system on university stakeholders' governance and modern university governance. Then, the chapter discusses suggested improvements for the university counselor system, and puts forward some suggestions, including moral education, role definition, and professionalization.

Research Funding and Its Influence on Academic Research Under China's University Governance System

One of the most important goals for universities in China today is to enhance research competence. Focusing on the role of research funding from government and non-government sectors, this chapter aims to examine research productivity under different governance systems. Based on a sample of faculty members from 30 public universities in China, it describes how various university governance systems influence scientific research in different ways. A bureaucratic governance system increases the amount of government funding, which contributes to academic publications and patents. Whereas, a collegial governance model has a lesser effect on non-government funding, which could promote patenting and technology transfer. The findings indicate several policy implications regarding the reform of research management and university governance in China.