GOOD GOVERNANCE
Enhancing the capabilities of technical education in India


HOME  >  GOOD GOVERNANCE PROGRAMME  >  KEY ELEMENTS  >  GOVERNANCE DEVELOPMENT
GOOD GOVERNANCE PROGRAMME - EXPECTED OUTPUTS
2. INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TEQIP Institutions are expected to produce a Governance Development Plan. There should be clear, time bound goals from which an action plan can be developed and embedded into institutional strategic planning processes.



INSTITUTIONAL EXAMPLES OF GOVENANCE SELF-REVIEWS AND GOVERNANCE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
“BVBCET (now the KLE Technological University)”, HUBLI, KARNATAKA (GOVERNMENT-AIDED)
PESIT (UNIVERSITY), BANGALORE, KARNATAKA (PRIVATE-UNAIDED)
CUSAT, COCHIN UNIVERSITY, KERALA (CONSTITUENT COLLEGE)

GOVERNANCE DEVELOPMENT

The TEQIP Good Governance Programme supports governance development in the following ways:

  1. Governance Development Plans: Using the accumulated experience gained from their self-review of current governance practice, governance development plans set out corresponding governance development needs. A good example of this was developed by one of the TEQIP Good Governance Programme pilot institutions: “BVBCET (now the KLE Technological University)”, Hubli (see BVB and other examples above, combining both the self-review and governance development plan) showing how to embed governance development into their institutional strategic planning processes.

    Dr Shettar, KLE Technological University, Hubli (formerly BVBCET, Hubli), further describes how the three outputs from the Good Governance Programme (a self-review, a governance development plan and the development of an institutional governance guidelines document can be embedded into a process of continuous development.

    See also EAG Feedback on Governance Development Priorities and Plans that have been submitted to date.

  2. Governance, Leadership and Management go hand-in-hand. TEQIP Good Governance Programme and the TEQIP Management Capacity Enhancement Training Programme (delivered by seven IIMs: IIM Bangalore, IIM Indore, IIM Lucknow, IIM Kozhikode, IIM Raipur, IIM Trichy, and IIM Udaipur) both stress this important relationship. To assist these developments institutions attending the IIM training courses will be asked to bring their governance self-reviews, governance development plans and governance guidelines documents if they have them. If they have not yet developed any of the three governance development outputs, discussion of these will be incorporated into the training courses bringing together governance, leadership and management development. In addition, a common curriculum has been developed by six IIMs to help facilitate greater integration between governance, leadership and management development.

  3. TEQIP Learning Forums took place on 13-17 October 2014 to bring together representatives from TEQIP institutions demonstrating the fullest engagement to improve governance, leadership and management practice. This will be an opportunity, prior to the completion of the initial Good Governance Programme in December 2014, to share experience, raise questions, and learn about good practice across TEQIP institutions. More will be shared on the content and logistics of these Learning Forums through the website. Watch this space!

Institutions are encouraged to discuss their governance development needs and priorities with their Mentors and SPFU TEQIP Coordinators and IIM Course Coordinators.



Examples of governance development needs at the three different levels are:



EXAMPLES OF INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
How institutions can improve their own systems and practices to achieve better governance.
  • Ensuring that the membership of the governing body encompasses the range of skills and experience that will provide both strong support and well-founded challenge to the institution
  • Being prepared to use the available freedoms to have a full range of professional expertise from external members of the governing body
  • Given that it is not acceptable to have appointed members of the governing body who never attend, having explicit institutional policies to deal with any such instances
  • Taking the lead, at the institutional level, in achieving a better balance between delegated personal responsibility at all levels and suitable systems to ensure accountability at all levels
  • Achieving the greatest degree of autonomy and accountability which is consistent with the regulatory framework
  • Taking the lead in providing management development for managers and administrators at all levels.

Many of the institutional challenges are a reflection of either poor practice at the individual level (for example, non-attendance at governing body meetings, lack of appropriate skill sets to undertake the role of a governing body member, or indeed a lack of understanding of the roles and responsibilities of governing body members), or poor practice at the systems' level (for example, ineffective or out dated rules and regulations).

Such deficiencies can lead to institutional complacency, and worse still poor systems support that is not serving the best interests of students or the country. Institutional leaders and senior managers are key drivers of institutional change.

There are excellent examples of good leadership, governance and management, but not enough are recognized and much more can be done to promote and support the need for good leadership, governance and (modern) management development.

EXAMPLES OF INDIVIDUAL LEVEL DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
How individuals at all levels can achieve greater responsibility with appropriate accountability, and how individuals at all levels can influence change.
  • Having a clear understanding of the relationship between leadership, management and governance, and in particular what governance might mean for them.
  • Having a clear definition of their own role and how this relates to others
  • Being aware of ideas from outside the higher education sector which could have relevance to a TEQIP institution, such as approaches to quality management
  • Understanding what goes on in the institution and having contact beyond the formal meetings
  • Improving personal performance whatever the role is (for example, for governing body members through regular attendance at meetings and taking other opportunities to learn about the institution).

A key challenge for governing bodies is not to manage the institution themselves, rather to ensure and oversee that management by others is effective, efficient and delivering high quality teaching, learning and research - and ensure they are not complacent, but challenge managers sufficiently.

EXAMPLES OF SYSTEMS SUPPORT LEVEL DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
How systems, at the State and National level, could support and encourage better governance:
  • Demonstrate a commitment to autonomy by removing unnecessary obstacles that impede institutional progress
  • Strengthen leadership and management capacity to enable institutions to make good and effective use of greater autonomy
  • Modernise accountability mechanisms (especially for government-funded institutions), so that proper accountability is ensured, but the burden of unnecessary bureaucracy reduced (in particular, on Heads of Institutions)
  • Strengthen the role of external governing body members, ensuring that a relevant range of skills and experience exists to take advantage of the new opportunities that greater autonomy affords
  • Strengthen the autonomy of governing bodies by having more Chairs of governing bodies as external members
  • To consider whether it would be more effective and efficient if those put forward as potential members of governing bodies are not members of more than two governing bodies
  • Where there is a partnership between a college and a university, ensuring that both are clear about their respective roles regarding autonomy.
Many key system support challenges need:
  1. To ensure fitness-for-purpose, especially in relation to autonomy and accountabilities
  2. To remove potential conflicts of interest for policy makers, and
  3. To promote proper and higher standards of professionalism, efficiency and effectiveness at the systems as well as institutional levels.


Self-review is a key activity and output of the TEQIP Good Governance Programme through which institutions carry out an honest assessment of their current governance practice.

Supporting governance development needs of individual governors, governing bodies and institutions. An output of the TEQIP Good Governance Programme is to see how governance development is built into institutional development through a time bound governance development plan with clear goals and action plans.

 

 

Implementing good governance practice is the primary outcome of the TEQIP Good Governance Programme demonstrated by institutions developing and documenting their own governance guidelines based on the principles set out in the TEQIP Good Practice Guide for Governing Bodies.
Sharing experience of the TEQIP Good Governance Programme through good governance learning forums, and sharing of institutional case studies to identify good practice, and the need to embed continuous improvement and identify common gaps, barriers and issues.