Unravelling University Delegations of Authority for Policy Practitioners

Unravelling university delegations of authority for policy practitioners

Association for Tertiary Education Management (ATEM) Policy Forum

Melbourne, 22 June 2012

Brigid Freeman

University of Melbourne, Australia

Introduction

This presentation will introduce some basic information regarding university delegations of authority. Delegations policies, schedules and registers are some of the most important, but impenetrable suites of documents governing university operations. Policy practitioners regularly engage with delegations and must ensure that delegations embedded in formal policy statements mirror delegations in governance instruments. However, to do so requires an understanding of some basic definitions, an appreciation of the extent of the detail anda grasp of the fundamental delegations principles. This presentation defines ‘delegates’ and ‘delegations of authority’, and describes the process by which delegations are conferred on university staff and committees. It examines the scope and breadth of delegations by category, and explores some key underpinning delegations principles. This presentation is intentionally descriptive and therefore somewhat tedious. However, as delegations are inherently consequential for policy work, the objective of this presentation is to unravel some of the complexities inherent in delegations documentation for policy practitioners.

Method

This paper is based on findings arising from an examination of web-based Australian university delegations documentation conducted over the period April to June 2012. Web-based delegations documentation from all Australian universities was located and examined with respect to definitions, presentation categories and underpinning delegations principles, amongst other things. The research was limited to the extent that documentation was publicly accessible; in some instances delegations documentation was restricted to authenticated users. The findings are limited to the currency and accuracy of the online delegations documentation. This paper also draws onthe Report on the Review of the University of Tasmania Delegations Register (Freeman, 2012).

Definitions

Understanding a few basic definitions is fundamental to engaging with delegations documentation.The University of New South Wales Register of Delegations (2011) defines a delegate as “the substantive, acting or temporary occupant of a position, or a group of persons (e.g. a committee), with delegated authority under (the UNSW Register of Delegations)”. The University of Sydney defines a delegate as “an employee, member or Committee of (the governing body) or any other person or entity to who or to which a delegation has been made by (the governing body) in these delegations of authority” (Delegations of Authority for Administrative Functions, 2006, p. 7). A delegate is therefore a person or committee with delegated authority defined as such in formal university delegations documentation.

Delegation of authority - or more simply, delegation - is defined by the Australian National University in the Delegations of Authority Policy (2009) as “a power or authority given to a delegate. A delegation is expressed in and limited by a form of words, and is formally assigned by the holder of the power to the delegate”. The Charles Sturt University Policy on Delegation and Authorisation (2010) defines delegation as “a conferral by Council of its power and authority to perform functions on an officer or body of the University”. These somewhat circular definitions tell us that a ‘delegate’ (that is, a person or committee) holds a ‘delegation’ (that is, a power or authority) where the governing body or some other formal holder of power formally delegates such power or authority.

Authorities and responsibilities are delegations where they are defined as such in formal university documentation. The Flinders University statement on University delegations (2012) states that “delegations of authority are generally specific in nature and most are identified in the University's Statutes, By-laws or policies, or within the terms of reference of committees”. As such, individual delegations primarily represent extracts from university governance instruments including the university Act and subordinate legislation (that is, Statutes, Regulations, By-laws, Rules as determined by the university Act), policies and committee terms of reference. Therefore, many university policy practitioners will be familiar with both the substance of delegations documentation and the related governance instruments, policy statements and university decision-making processes. Agreed delegations arrangements support clarity and transparency of decision-making (Shattock, 2006). Furthermore, Kaplan (2004) suggests that “while the patterns of delegation and practices of shared governance are neither absolute nor uniform … understanding how governance is defined and implemented … constitutes an essential project for understanding the behaviour of higher education organisations” (p. 166).

Source and flow of power

Understanding the source and flow of powers will support policy practitioners differentiate between delegations and other responsibilities embedded in formal policy statements, and reinforce the imperative of ensuring that policy correctly mirrors delegations articulated in governance instruments.

The power of any university is ultimately derived from its respective state government with the exception of the Australian National University which was established by the Commonwealth government as the national university. State governments, through their parliaments, established and gave universities powers via their foundation legislation (that is, their respective university Acts). These university Acts identify the broad functions of the university, and allocate powers to the university governing bodies, generally referred to as Councils, and peak academic authorities, that is, Academic Senates or Boards. University governing bodies and Academic Senates/Boards reserve some powers (in accordance with provisions of their university Act) and delegate the remainder to the Vice-Chancellor or other officers. In turn, some powers (such as the power to act as the chief executive officer) are reserved solely for the Vice-Chancellor (in accordance with the university Act and subordinate legislation) and the remainder are transferred to the senior executive, other staff and committees (or for example, the senior executive may act in an advisory capacity to the Vice-Chancellor in his/her decision making role).

Figure 1: Flow of power

Extracts from the University of Tasmania Act 1992, Statutes, Ordinances and draft Delegations Policy (2012) are presented to illustrate this flow of power.

FUNCTIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY

The University of Tasmania Act 1992 identifies thefunctions of the University as follows:

•to advance, transmit and preserve knowledge and learning

•to encourage and undertake research

•to promote and sustain teaching and research to international standards of excellence

•to encourage and provide opportunities for students and staff to develop and apply their knowledge and skills

•to provide educational and research facilities appropriate to its other functions

•to promote access to higher education having regard to principles of merit and equity

•to foster or promote the commercialization of any intellectual property

•to engage in activities which promote the social, cultural and economic welfare of the community and to make available for those purposes the resources of the University.

Source: University of Tasmania Act 1992

POWERS VESTED IN THE UNIVERSITY

The University of Tasmania Act 1992vested the following powers in the University:

• to acquire, hold and dispose of realand personal property

• to form, and participate in the formation of, companies

• to subscribe for and purchase shares in, and debentures and other securities of, companies

• to enter into partnerships

• to participate in joint ventures and arrangements for the sharing of profits

• toborrow money

• to do anything incidental to any of its powers.

Source: University of Tasmania Act 1992and draft Delegations Policy (2012)

POWERS RESERVED BY THE GOVERNING BODY (COUNCIL)

• Authority to approve annual budget and business plan
• Authority to elect the Chancellor and Deputy Chancellor(s)
• Authority to appoint the Vice-Chancellor
• Authority to appoint the Vice-Chancellor’s executive and Deans
• Authority to borrow and investment policy
• Authority to establish companies, subsidiaries or University entities
• Authority to set course and unit fee structures
• Authority for the faculty structure
• Authority to approve the audit plan
• Authority to confer the title of Professor Emeritus

Source: Ordinance 1, Ordinance 3 and Ordinance 10 and draft Delegations Policy (2012)

POWERS RESERVED BY/FOR THE PEAK ACADEMIC BODY (ACADEMIC SENATE)

• Authority to approve proposals for awards (course duration, content and structure; entry requirements; methods of delivery and assessment; names and abbreviations of units and courses)
• Authority to determine admission requirements
• Authority to make rules regarding prizes, scholarships, bursaries, awards, admission, assessment, student progress and graduate research

Source: Ordinance 13 and draft Delegations Policy

POWERS RESERVED BY/FOR THE VICE-CHANCELLOR

• Authority to sign-off decision papers presented to Council
• Authority to determine and release policy
• Authority to approve enterprise agreements
• Authority to approve significant strategic agreements with the Commonwealth and State Governments
• Authority to approve allocations of budget resources at the Faculty/Division level

Source: Ordinance 3 and draft Delegations Policy

Scope of delegations

Delegations documentation provides a detailed snapshot of university decision-making spanning all areas of operations, albeit not from the ‘teaching, research, third stream and administration’ lens characteristic of contemporary university strategic planning documentation and organisational charts. In the same way that there is diversity in how universities categorise policy in their policy repositories; there is also considerable variation in the way that delegations documentation is presented. For example, Queensland University of Technology, Edith Cowan University and Melbourne University all categorise delegations very differently. Queensland University of Technology differentiates between governance, academic, financial and human resources delegations in their Schedule of Authorities and Delegations (2012). Edith Cowan University publishes a Delegations Manual (2012) that contains the categories: research activities, financial, human resources, risk management, agreements, facilities and services or administrative delegations. The University of Adelaide categorises delegations into a large number of categories including academic, art and heritage collections, capital expenditure, commonwealth data collections, educational and international agreements, finance, gifts and bequests, governance, human resources, information management, information technology, intellectual property, legal, legislation, marketing, naming rights, organisational structure, records management, research, scholarships and university seal. The University of Melbourne’s Register of Authorities and Responsibilities (RoAR) (2009) categorises delegations into sections entitled university policy, general corporate provisions, teaching and learning, student related academic matters, research and research training, philanthropy and cultural collections, human resources, financial functions, university property acquisitions and disposals, information technology and communication, environment, health and safety, and marketing and communications. So, delegations span all university operations. Whilst not necessarily replicating policy categories, the categories and content relate to governance instrument and policy statement content and understanding the organising frameworks makes the documentation more accessible.

Charles Sturt University (CSU) categorises delegations along functional lines as follows: strategy and policy, academic and course, research, library and collections, finance, legal and contract, commercial activity, human resources, outside professional activities, information and technology, travel, donations and sponsorship, marketing and media. The following descriptive information draws heavily on the CSU delegations documentation and is provided almost in full to illustrate the breadth and depth of university delegations.

The CSU strategy and policy delegations documentation specifies which positions or committees have authority to approve University strategy and plans, subordinate legislation, policies, procedures and guidelines, and the establishment of University committees and organisational units. For most if not all universities, such high-level strategy and policy delegations are held by the governing body and senior executive members.

Academic and course delegations encompass authorities concerning learning and teaching and student administration related matters, including approval of degrees and awards, admission, deferral and transfer, credit, subject substitution, withdrawal and leave of absence, courses and subjects, assessment, examinations, graduation, testamurs, appeals, penalties and reviews and student academic misconduct. The academic delegations capture the detail of academic governance that is a fundamental characteristic of university decision-making. Research delegations differentiate between authority to approveresearch proposals/applications, funding, Co-operative Research Centres, consultancies, fees and disbursement of income and royalties. In many, if not all universities, research contract delegations are reserved to senior research executive members (such as the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Research and Director, Research Office) as there are such significant consequential financial, institutional ranking and reputational implications for research-income related compliance.

Library and collections delegations focus on the conditions of library use, library fees, charges and fines, the library collection, borrowing agreements, library materials and library systems. Library-related delegations involving the imposition of fines are directly derived from university subordinate legislation, as such legislation can prescribe enforceable punitive measures. Library and collections delegations are somewhat idiosyncratic; senior library and collections staff may hold delegations at a relatively high financial threshold to reflect the frequency of large library-related financial transactions (for example, subscriptions and acquisitions).

The finance delegations documentation specifies which positions or committees have authority to approve the University Budget, annual accounts, fees and charges, investment policy, insurance providers, banking and finance suppliers. In addition, finance delegations documentation specifies general expenditure delegations (including accounts payable, accounts receivable and journal transactions), plant and equipment (asset) records, debt write-off, and issuance of university business/credit cards. In many instances general expenditure delegations are operationalised by electronic systems where delegations are ‘workflowed’ to the member of staff holding the requisite delegation. For example, under the CSU delegations framework a Head of School has authority to approve general expenditure to $20,000. General expenditure transactions above this would automatically be forwarded to their respective CSU Dean, who has authority to approve general expenditure transactions to $100,000. Financial delegations arrangements are explicitly hierarchical; transactions involving relatively low levels of expenditure may be made by large numbers of delegates dispersed throughout all organisational units, whereas financial transactions involving relatively high levels of expenditure are highly centralized and quarantined to senior staff and University governing bodies. This reflects both legislative requirements and well established risk, corruption and fraud mitigation strategies.

The legal and contract delegations specify which positions or committees have responsibility for approving contracts, the provision of legal advice, legal costs, and affixing the common seal. Contract delegations are complex. They are open to genuine misinterpretation and reliant on good legal advice. Contract delegations are complicated by the diversity of contract types, the variations in monetary amounts involved (including questions concerning incoming/outgoing monies; cash and in-kind), the length of contract and the question of contract variations. For example, different contract delegations may be allocated to different delegates depending on contract type – which may include memoranda of understanding (MOUs), verdicts and settlements, ex-gratia payments, partnerships, intellectual property agreements, joint ventures, companies and associations, university entities, business names and trademarks. Contract delegations are partially determined on the basis of monetary amounts involved. As such there is frequently a direct relationship between contract and financial delegations. However there are exceptions; some ‘contracts’ such as MOUs may have no nominated monetary valuebut still have the potential to expose the university to reputational risk. In such instances a senior executive member may hold the delegation.

Commercial activitydelegations include approvinga new commercial activity, the criteria to evaluate whether a proposal involves a commercial activity, the development of a proposal for a new commercial activity, and commercial activity involving the delivery of courses with a third party overseas. Such delegations may be incorporated into broader contract delegations.

The human resources delegations documentation specifies positions and committees holding authority to negotiate and approve enterprise agreements, manage the staffing profile in terms of recruitment, classification and payments for academic staff (including casuals, levels A-E, Deans, senior executive members and the Vice-Chancellor) and professional staff (including casuals, Higher Education Officer/Worker classifications, senior managers and senior executive members). The human resources delegations documentation also specifies approval authorities for staff awards/rewards, leave, academic promotions, acting appointments, disciplinary action, resignation, retirement and termination. Human resources delegations with respect to the senior executive are frequently derived directly from the university Act or subordinate legislation, and the scope of delegations generally reflects enterprise agreements and other industrial instruments. Delegations may also be derived from human resources policy or procedures, or document existing practice and be defined formally as delegations. The outside professional activities delegations documentation specifies positions (and committees) holding authority to approve staff engagement as an expert witness, as a private consultant, in professional practice or some other form of secondary employment or engagement.

The travel delegations include authority to approve domestic and international travel by various forms of transport, private motor vehicle use and airline lounge membership. The donations and sponsorship delegations document approval authorities for receiving donations, allocating sponsorships, fundraising initiatives (including their University Foundation’s advancement initiatives), establishment of charitable trusts and securing beneficial interests.

Information technology delegations documentation specifies positions and committees holding authority to approve IT software and service agreements, domain names, IT security, privacy, copyright and electronic records. Marketing delegations concern authority to approve use of the university logo, advertising campaigns, marketing publications, the University website and promotional events. Media delegations concern authority to approve media releases and make representations to the media (including senior executive members authorities, and more general authorities for academics and professional in relation to their respective areas of professional interest).