Why should smaller faculties have to merge with larger ones when they’re already functioning perfectly well? Perhaps these faculties should be taken as an example, or the university should work on a federal structure.
So say the spatial sciences and philosophy faculty councils in separate letters to their own faculty board, the board of directors, and independent process manager Arthur Mol.
Mol, former rector magnificus at Wageningen University & Research, was hired by the board in late March to oversee the restructuring plans for the faculties of social sciences, philosophy, law, and economy and business (the SSH domain). He is expected to turn in his recommendations to the board in early July.
Example
But the faculty council for spatial sciences doesn’t understand how reorganising the faculty would make the organisation more efficient. The faculty is active in four UG schools doing interdisciplinary research, has research and educational partnerships with almost every other faculty within the university, and has extensive experience in partnerships on regional, national, and international levels, the council writes.
The faculty has also been successful in attracting external funds and several of their programmes have been highly rated by their students, which is also increasing the faculty’s student numbers.
The council is worried that a reorganisation, instead of leading to more flexibility, will be detrimental to the faculty’s current qualities. The Faculty of Philosophy, from professors to exam committees and former deans, fear the same thing will happen to its faculty.
Preference
Although no definitive choice has yet been made, the board has made it clear that it prefers the scenario in which the three smaller SSH faculties (spatial sciences, philosophy, and religion, culture, and society) are absorbed into the four larger ones (law, arts, economy and business, and behavioural and social sciences).
According to the board, the university should prepare for the developments going on in the Netherlands and the rest of the world (including the impending budget cuts) by being ‘agile’.
Part of this agility is an organisational structure that allows for fast decision making, according to the board. However, in late March, board president De Vries said ‘we’re definitely open to suggestions for suitable reorganisations, as well as discussions on the topic’.
Input
While process manager Mol has been on the job for more than a month, spatial sciences has no idea whether their input is even appreciated.
‘We had an extra meeting on Tuesday, which Arthur Mol attended, says Gwenda van der Vaart, faculty council president. ‘The councils had suggested the meeting, because no one knew exactly how and when the co-determination parties were going to be involved in the process.’
During the meeting, it became clear that so far, Mol has talked to two faculty councils. ‘But only upon the councils’ invitation. We were expecting him to make the rounds past each council on his own initiative.’ Mol did talk to the council at the philosophy faculty, but they were surprised that they had to take the initiative to invite him.
Federal structure
One important point the philosophy faculty makes is that larger faculties do not necessarily mean increased agility. In fact, the faculty thinks the range of independent, well-functioning faculties is exactly what makes the UG such a good university.
The faculty understands that the board prefers to confer with a smaller group of deans to facilitate decision-making. But they also say this doesn’t require restructuring, which will likely be expensive and will lead to a loss of jobs. They could also consider a federal structure such as has been implemented in the Graduate Schools.
This would involve the SSH faculties to discuss things among themselves before sending a group of four deans representing them to talk to the board.
Trust
Both the spatial sciences and the philosophy faculty councils have sent their letters to Mol, as well. ‘We also hope to be able to read a concept of his recommendation in June, before his definitive recommendation is sent to the board in July. Because the board has been playing it so close to the vest, some openness would help build trust.’
The topic was also briefly brought up during a meeting between the university council and the board, last Thursday. The council asked the board to tell deans to talk to their faculty councils as quickly as possible, since the potential reorganisation hasn’t been discussed by many faculty councils. Besides, time is running out. Rector Jacquelien Scherpen promised to talk to the deans.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The letter from philosophy was added after publication.