Corporate governance in Colombian universities
| Published date | 01 September 2019 |
| Author | María Victoria López-Pérez,Jesús Mauricio Flórez-Parra,Antonio Manuel López-Hernández |
| Date | 01 September 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852317707331 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
Article
Corporate governance in
Colombian universities
Jesu
´s Mauricio Flo
´rez-Parra
Universidad de Granada. Spain
Marı
´a Victoria Lo
´pez-Pe
´rez
Universidad de Granada. Spain
Antonio Manuel Lo
´pez-Herna
´ndez
Universidad de Granada. Spain
Abstract
In a context of greater demands in terms of accountability and transparency in man-
agement, we analyse the extent to which Corporate Governance (CG) mechanisms
have been adopted and we define the model of governance in universities in Colombia.
In the field of higher education, there are usually no compulsory requirements related
to CG. Nevertheless, governance mechanisms are nowadays crucial in determining the
objectives, strategies and direction of universities. Based on a survey of 81 rectors
of higher education institutions in Colombia, we analyse the models of CG adopted
(managerial and stakeholder models). The results contribute to a better understanding
of key CG concepts at universities.
Points for practitioners
There is an increasing awareness of the importance of improving the mechanisms of
governance that may help to achieve greater effectiveness and efficiency in the man-
agement of resources and awareness of society. The analysis of the predominant CG
models, the stakeholder model and the managerial model, and the way in which
Colombian universities are introducing these models could be used to promote the
establishment of a common legal framework. This model should be flexible and include
different opinions and preferences. The results may be useful and could be transferred
to other countries that have the same characteristics.
Keywords
Colombia, corporate governance, management education, rectors, universities
International Review of
Administrative Sciences
2019, Vol. 85(3) 544–565
!The Author(s) 2017
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0020852317707331
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
Corresponding author:
Jesu
´s Mauricio Flo
´rez-Parra, Universidad de Granada, Calle comandante cousteau N2 1i, Granada 18071,
Spain.
Email: jflorez@correo.ugr.es
Governance structure in universities
During the 1980s, many organizational changes took place at universities on a
worldwide scale. We are witnessing profound university reforms that can produce
change in the governance model of universities (Jemielniak and Greenwood, 2015;
Levy, 1986). There is an increasing awareness of the importance of improving
the mechanisms of governance (Huisman, 2009) that can play a decisive role in
establishing the balance that currently exists between university organizational
autonomy and government control of universities (Huisman et al., 2015; Kehm
and Lanzendorf, 2007).
In the Western world, the state has gradually given more autonomy to univer-
sities at the same time as promoting the implementation of new management
systems and exerting steering from a distance (Huisman, 2009; Kehm, 2012). The
management of these institutions has gradually been oriented towards the market
(Girotto et al., 2013) and, at the same time, improved awareness of society
(Huisman et al., 2015).
In the literature, we find several models of university management
(Trakman, 2008): (a) the collegiate model in which university governance is
carried out by academic staff; (b) the managerial model which is structured through
CG mechanisms mainly focused on control – accountability and efficiency –
in university management; (c) the trust model whereby governance is supervised
by a trust council which is not necessarily composed of academics or stakeholders;
(d) the stakeholder model wherein representatives of different interest groups
participate in the governance of the university; and, finally, (e) the mixed
model which combines elements of the previous models (governance by academics,
stakeholders and a trust council, pluralism and control). Management can
be identified with different governance modes: quasi-market, network steering,
interactive governance, multi-level and multi-actor governance (Huisman et al.,
2015).
The two models that predominantly coexist in university governance are the
stakeholder model and the managerial model. The difference between them lies
in the role of boards – the coordinating and control roles, respectively (Hung,
1998). The most important theories in CG in higher education are agency theory
(Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Shleifer and Vishny, 1997) and, from a social perspec-
tive, stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984). Agency theory emphasizes the control
role (the managerial model can be included in this theory) while stakeholder theory
places the emphasis on pluralism through involving stakeholders (the stakeholder
model fits into this theory). Stakeholder theory extends the agency problem to a
multilateral relation among all stakeholders. In the context of higher education, the
most common agency problem is accountability to the state in the case of public
universities or to owners in that of private universities (Faccio et al., 2001).
The stakeholder model has been mainly implemented in Europe, where manage-
ment is generally carried out by academics and in which stakeholders participate.
The philosophy of pluralism and self-governing in terms of procedures and
contents is predominant (Kehm, 2012). The managerial model, implemented in
Flo
´rez-Parra et al. 545
To continue reading
Request your trial