A View From Norway. (September 6, 2006)

    David Peetz is professor of industrial relations in the Griffith business school at Griffith University's campus in Nathan, Queensland.

In today's Australian he mulls over some observations engendered by a stay at the University of Bergen a while back.

In his view what he sees as the increasing "corporatising" of Australia's universities is counterproductive.

Corporations are not good things for universities to emulate. They have a single objective - the maximisation of profit - and are organised to deliver that. This objective is ultimately to the exclusion of any social considerations.

Universities are different, or at least they are meant to be. They are also meant to be about promoting scholarship, learning, research, the advancement of knowledge and service to the community. Indeed, there are those among us who believe these to be the primary objectives of universities, and financial outcomes are but one of many means towards these ends.

And professor Peetz decries the governmental micromanagement that has grown significantly during the past decade.

"But there are other ways of doing things," he says. "In particular, there are other ways of running universities."

University of Bergen

But before continuing some facts:

        Norway's population totals about 4.6 million.

        It's purchasing power parity per capita is something over US$42,000.

       According to the Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University rankings of research university, it has four in the top 500: University of Oslo, 68 while Bergen comes in at 301-400.

Now... what other ways?

Fifteen months ago, Bergen held its four-yearly elections for the rector; that is, the president of the university, or what we call a vice-chancellor.

That's right; they elect the vice-chancellor. Academic and administrative staff and students all have the right to vote. The academic staff contribute 59 per cent of the vote, the technical and administrative staff 16 per cent and the students 25 per cent.

The winner, Sigmund Gronmo, ran on a platform emphasising academic values, the integration of research and teaching, the promotion of basic research and internationalisation, [and] he said, "One must avoid the university being governed by commercial and economic interests; only free and critical activities can result in a critical perspective on society."

Bergen isn't alone in electing its rector. Most, but not all, Norwegian universities do so.

And a few weeks after the University of Bergen election, "the rectorial ballot at the University of Oslo produced a like-minded victor."

Professor Peetz then observes -- on suspects wryly -- "Norwegian rectors, unlike their Australian counterparts, take a high profile in public debate on higher education issues. When the emperor wears no clothes, they point it out. When the state tried to force unwanted reforms on the university sector, they actively and effectively resisted.

"Of course, that's exactly why the Australian Government would be horrified by an attempt to introduce anything resembling participation or democratisation in Australian universities.

"However, if we're serious about creating academic institutions that are right for the future of scholarship and higher learning in Australia through the 21^st century, rather than subsidised research arms of corporations, and are willing to look beyond the ideology of the present Government, then a good place to start would be rethinking the governance of our universities. Let's elect the vice-chancellor.