Dirk-Jan Scheffers isn’t just a columnist at UKrant: he’s also a programme director. And he has no idea how much the programme he’s responsible for costs.
SHOW ME THE MONEY! If this doesn’t immediately bring to mind a young, screaming Tom Cruise, you’re probably a lot younger than I am. But if you type this quote into Google, Cruise is the first result. The scene from the film Jerry Maguire was a meme before we even properly knew what a meme was.
These days, the sword of budget cuts hangs over almost every discussion at the university – and not just in Groningen. The already crappy financial situation is made worse by the budget cuts announced by the government, as well as the Internationalisation in Balance Ac.
All over the country, drastic decision are being made about dissolving or combining programmes, research groups, and changing the teaching language. Here in Groningen, we’re all being called upon to brainstorm solutions that would help the academic community save money.
All over the country, drastic decisions are being made
But my ‘show me the money’ isn’t actually directed at educational minister Eppo Bruins – it’s falling on deaf ears, anyway – but at the people at our university who are responsible for making the financial decisions. In the four years that I was on the faculty and university councils, I’ve seen many a faculty and university budget come and go.
Some of these documents contain detailed studies – such as what the Diversity & Inclusion Office is costing the university. But many other matters (such as what a particular programme or institute costs or yields) are completely invisible, because they’re simply not included in the budget. While the financial experts were always willing to answer questions about the budget, the budget systematics conceal this kind of important information.
Now that I’m a programme director, I don’t even know what my programme’s total costs are, or how they relate to those other programmes. All I know is how much spending money we have (the exploitation budget for excursions and things), and how much money our student assistants cost.
Cost-cutting solutions are often limited to low-hanging fruit
This lack of transparency means that even well-informed employees have a hard time predicting the financial consequences of certain changes such as combining programmes or doing away with certain courses.
That means that in brainstorming possible cost-cutting solutions, most people go for low-hanging fruit. Now, this fruit certainly needs plucking, the more than 200,000 euros that’s saved if we close university buildings during the Christmas break being a good example.
But during this time of great uncertainty, which especially affects our international students and staff, dissolving the Diversity & Inclusion Office might just be a decision that’s penny wise, but pound foolish. Because our directors aren’t elected officials, they can’t automatically say they have a mandate from the academic community they’re in charge of.
That means it’s especially important that financial decisions that drastically affect staff, students, and the society the university serves, aren’t just considered extremely carefully behind closed doors; the people making them should also be able to explain them clearly to the outside world.
DIRK-JAN SCHEFFERS