Benchmarking University Council Performance

1
Benchmarking University Council Performance

• Professor Anona Armstrong
• Centre for International Corporate Governance
  Research
• Victoria University
• Presented to the University Governance Conference
• 30 March 2007

2
Pictures for sale?
3
Premier Bracks 2005

• The Victorian Government is committed to
  improving and enhancing the corporate governance
  of regimes within specific public bodies and at a
  whole of government level. The Government is
  continually monitoring the governance framework
  as it applies to public bodies, and will continue
  to develop policy and where necessary legislation
  which improves the accountability, efficiency and
  operation of public bodies.

4
Commonwealth funding tied to compliance with

• the National Governance Protocols
• HE Workplace Relations Requests
• an increase to base funding, rising to 7.5
  from 2007.

5
Protocol 4

• At regular intervals the governing body must
  assess both its performance and its conformance
  with these Protocols and identify needed skills
  and expertise for the future
• DEST 2006

6
Distinction between Council and management

• In terms of ensuring corporate performance,
  directors are seeking greater input into the
  strategic direction of companies they govern. But
  how do they achieve this without crossing the
  line into management?
• Kiel and Nicholson 2003

7
Assessing board performance Why bother?

• Implements a robust system of governance
• Enhances council performance
• Lays a foundation for continuous improvement
• Enhances public reputation through enhanced
  transparency and accountability
• Provides a mechanism for benchmarking
  accountability
• Assists in the prevention and detection of
  fraudulent and/or unethical behaviour

8
Traditional focus on best practice is necessary
but not enough

• Size of the board
• Majority of independent directors
• Balance of director skills
• Audit and other committees
• Transparent appointment processes

9
Size of boards
10
The assessment process
Quantitative Review
Continuous Improvement
11
Assessment of an effective board

• Structures
• the constitution of the board and its
  decision-making processes
• Composition
• balance of skills, behaviours, relationships and
  diversity
• Measurement
• Quantitative measurement supported by qualitative
  inquiry
• Include The Human factors
• the leadership qualities of the chair of the
  board,
• the nature of the relationship between the board
  and management
• the fit among individual directors and how they
  relate to one another as a team.

12
Questions addressed before assessment

• Who will be assessed?
• Who will do the assessment?
• What will be the criteria against which
  performance will be assessed?
• What will happen as a result of the assessment?

13
Who should assess a councils performance?

• Internal Review
• Chair
• A Council Committee

• External Review
• An independent advisor

14
Developing The University Council Assessment
Questionnaire (UCAQ)

• Chait et al 1996
• Carver 1997
• Australian Corporate Governance Standards 2003
• Le Blanc 2005
• Kiel, Kiel-Chisholm and Nicholson 2004
• National Governance Protocols 2006
• UCAQ 2007

15
Development of the UCAQ

• Chait et al1996
• Carver 1997
• Australian Standard Corporate Governance 2003
• Le Blanc 2005
• Kiel, Kiel-Chisholm and Nicholson 2004
• National Governance Protocols 2006
• UCAQ 2007

16
Collective
Conformist
Controller
Consensus-Builder
Change Agent
Caretaker-Chair
Conductor-Chair
Dissent
Consensus
Critic
Cheerleader
Challenger
Counsellor
Persuasive
Leblanc and Gillies 2005 Leadership
Individual
17
Factors assessed by The University Council
Assessment Questionnaire (UCAQ)
Structures and Relationships
Leadership

• A practical framework
• Leadership
• Structures and relationships
• Accountability
• Compliance
• Performance
• Meetings

Structures
Board Asse
Relation
Meetings
UCAQ
Compliance
Performance
Accountability
18
The University Council Assessment Questionnaire
(UCAQ) Example UCAQRelationships

• Committee communication with the Council is
  satisfactory
• Members ask appropriate questions of the
  Committees
• The Council is sufficiently independent of the
  University management
• Council members ask appropriate questions of
  management
• Council maintains channels of communication with
  specific key community leaders
• Major stakeholders evaluation of the
  performance of the Council over the past 12
  months would be positive

19
UCAQRelationships

• Council members take decisions for the good of
  the whole organization and not individual
  constituencies
• There are adequate opportunity for informal
  discussion among Council members
• When a new member joins this Council, we make
  sure that a mentor helps this person to learn the
  ropes
• The Council operates as an effective team
• There is open and frank discussion
• The Council collects information on the morale of
  staff
• The council fosters an appropriate corporate
  culture

20
UCAQCommunication

• Other Council members have important information
  that I lack on key issues
• The Council communicates its decisions to all
  those who are affected by them
• I am able to speak my mind on key issues without
  fear that I will be ostracized by some members of
  the Council
• There is at least as much dialogue among council
  members as there is between members and
  administration

21
Complete the University Council Assessment
Questionnaire today
22
The value of self-assessment

• Confidentiality Who knows what goes on!
• Only Council members can improve their
  performance

23
UCAQ A partnership

• OTTE
• - funding
• Victoria University
• expertise
• Evaluation Solutions
• Data collection and analysis

24
The benefits of performance assessment

• A defence against charges of misconduct
• A practical guide to excellence

25
Benchmarking University Council Performance
Professor Anona Armstrong Centre for
International Corporate Governance
Research Victoria University anona.armstrong_at_vu.
edu.au Questions?