A conceptual model for governance of private universities as social enterprises

Chia sẻ: Huỳnh Ngọc Toàn | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:16

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

4
lượt xem 0
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

India requires successful and sustainable private universities to meet its Higher Education goals. This study proposes a framework covering dimensions for achieving success and sustainability of a private university governed as a social enterprise.

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: A conceptual model for governance of private universities as social enterprises

International Journal of Management (IJM) Volume 7, Issue 7, November–December 2016, pp.98–113, Article ID: IJM_07_07_010 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=7 Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510 © IAEME Publication A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR GOVERNANCE OF PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES AS SOCIAL ENTERPRISES Devang Joshi Research Scholar, Faculty of Management Studies (FMS),Indukaka Ipcowala Institute of Management, Constituent of Charotar University of Science and Technology (CHARUSAT), Gujarat, India Dr. V G Patel Former Director, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India ABSTRACT The concept of Social Enterprises has emerged and evolved in last two decades. Their emergence has gained momentum as the void in services which are not catered by Government and Business sectors have increased worldwide. Social entrepreneurs, the enterprising individuals, are filling this void through Social enterprises. While bringing out the phenomenon of emergence and need of private universities the paper evidences a private university as a Social enterprise. The changing expectations from Society are the spur to draw the rationale of governing a private university as a social enterprise. India requires successful and sustainable private universities to meet its Higher Education goals. This study proposes a framework covering dimensions for achieving success and sustainability of a private university governed as a social enterprise. Analysis of the proposed framework for managing a private university as Social Enterprise is undertaken. Challenges of managing University as a Social enterprise are also presented. Key words: Social enterprises, Private University, Governance, Legitimacy, Stakeholders, accountability, ethics and values. Cite this Article: Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel, A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises. International Journal of Management, 7(7), 2016, pp. 98–113. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=7 1. INTRODUCTION The higher education sector in India and across the world is witnessing major changes. More contribution is expected from Universities towards their fundamental role of societal transformation. The role of Governments in regulating and financing the universities is getting redefined. To what extent Government should fund universities and should the universities be funded at all; are some of the questions indicative of this changed role. Stupendous development of Information and Communication Technologies has affected all the aspects of life and higher education is no exception. These changes have precipitated into considering governance and management of universities with a fresh perspective (Bleiklie&Kogan2007). http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 98 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises This consideration sets the canvas for this paper. Privatisation in higher education sector adds a different colour to this canvas. Being aware of its budgetary limitations, Government has allowed entry of private players to establish universities to meet need of Society. India, in 2015, had a Gross enrolment rate (GER) in Higher Education of 24.8 % (British Council - India, 2015).Through its 12th Five year plan India envisages to achieve GER of 30 %. This capacity expansion cannot be met unless Private universities develop in the country. There is ample knowledge available on different management models for achieving success of a University. These models focus more on the core processes of University covering teaching and research. A research gap prevails on management approaches leading to success of a private university maintaining its basic purpose of societal development. This articleen compasses study of a Private University as a Social enterprise and sustainability. It attempts to answer several questions like what is the need of Private University, should a private university prioritise profit making over social mission, what is the role of Social entrepreneurs who manage the private university to success, does ethical practice affects the success and sustainability, and what are the operational aspects to be focussed for sustainability. Social enterprise research has been marked with narratives on need, typologies and governance approaches. The paper starts with introducing concept and facets of social enterprises as relevant to this study. It’s followed by perspective on Private university scenario prevalent in India. Taking several studies into consideration a rationale for governing private university as a social enterprise is developed. The defining facets of Social enterprise are mapped to analogous facets in a Private university. Through study of research undertaken in the area of Social enterprises, the dimensions of success paradigm of a Social enterprise are sculpted. Based on that, a framework is suggested for achieving success of a private university as a social enterprise. Challenges faced by Private Universities are also discussed to elucidate about institutional environment required for private universities to flourish. Towards the end, conclusion and suggestions for further research are presented. 2. SOCIAL ENTERPRISE CONCEPT AND FACETS The emergence of organizations who have primary motive of social service and who generate income for their sustenance has gained momentum in last two decades. Such organizations have come to be termed as Social Enterprise (Satar & John, 2006). Social enterprises have developed in the realms of the “third sector” other than the government sector and the business sector. Although Governments are mandated to look after welfare of the population they are encumbered with conflicts of interests, sluggish bureaucracy and policy paralyses; while the Business sector is benefiting only its investors and customers. These limitations of both the sectors have resulted in many vulnerable sections of society who are left out from the welfare of the State or who are incapable of buying services from Business sector. These sections are in need of basic services like food, shelter, clothing, education, healthcare and employment. The third sector organizations have emerged to serve the needs of these sections of people. The Social Enterprises are the organisations falling in this category. A Social enterprise can be understood as an organisation addressing social problems through innovations and self-sustaining operations. It uses business strategies for generation of income leading to their self-sustainability (Greene, 2012). A social enterprise undertakes economic activities to generate income to sustain its social mission. 3. SOCIAL ENTERPRISE: PROBING THE FACETS Varied definitions and interpretations of a social enterprise are deliberated in literature. These are embracing different facets like legal structure, their founders and their focus (Wronka, 2013). The concept adapted for the purpose of this study and based on available definitions is: Social enterprise sare private organizations initiated byan individual or a groupof people with an aim to cater to social needs that were not, in their judgement, adequately provided by government or businesses. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 99 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel These organizations under take commercial activities for income generation to sustain their primary objectives (Martin & Osberg, 2007). This conceptualization captures two prominent facets of a social enterprise. These facets are Social facet and Economic Facet. 3.1. Social Facet Social facet of a Social Enterprise in its essence comprises identification of a social need and satisfaction of that need by efforts of Social entrepreneurs who establish a Social enterprise. 3.1.1. Need and Beneficiaries Addressing a social need is the primary reason for coming into existence for Social enterprises. This need is reflected through beneficiaries who benefit from the activities of a Social enterprise. These beneficiaries may or may not be customers of the business activity carried out by a Social enterprise. 3.1.2. Social Entrepreneurs Social Enterprises are established by an individual or a group of people who have an urge to address a social need (Bornstein, 2007). These people are enterprising and altruistic in nature and are termed as Social entrepreneurs (Martin & Osberg,2007).Explaining Social Entrepreneurs, Dees (2001) notes that Social Entrepreneurs are entrepreneurs with a social mission. For them mission accomplishment is central criterion and wealth creation is just a means to that end. 3.2. Economic Facet Contrasting with not-for-profit organizations, social enterprises do not solely depend on donations and grants for their income. They generate their own income through offering goods and/or services (Doherty et al, 2009).Their financial sustainability is dependent on deciding the income generating activities to be undertaken and efficiency thereof. Professional management practices leading to efficiency are the important dimensions of the Economic facet of a Social Enterprise. All financial resources are generated and employed by a Social Enterprise towards achievement of its social mission. Focus on economic facet of a social enterprise ensures its self-sustainability leading to successful achievement of its social goal. The facets of a Social enterprise are illustrated in figure 1: Social Enterprise Social Mission to cater a social need Social Facet Social Entrepreneurs with urge to serve society Income generation for self - sustainability Economic Facet All economic activities aligned with social goals Figure 1 Key Facets of a Social Enterprise http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 100 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises 4. PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES: INDIAN PERSPECTIVE Presently, India is considered as the second largest country in higher education system after China in terms of number of students enrolled in Higher Education(British Council - India, 2015).The National Knowledge Commission (NKC) of India in its report of year 2007 had recommended establishment of 1500 universities by 2015 to achieve Higher education goals of Country. At present, up to July 2016, only 761 universities are existent in India.(Wikipedia, 2016)This is barely half of the goal recommended by NKC. This shortfall indicates that the State and Central governments are lagging behind in fulfilling the need of Society. This may be because of budget constraints or misplaced priorities or both. Because of unsatisfied social needs and facilitating government policies, private universities have emerged in society. Emergence of Private Universities is a phenomenon happening not only in India but it is happening across the globe. A World Bank report published in March 2008 (Fielden, 2008) – ‘Global Trends in University Governance’ states that: “The higher education strategy of many countries recognizes that without a thriving private sector the national targets for participation in higher education would be simply unachievable. Not only is the cost of expansion beyond the budgetary possibilities of the state, but in many cases the existing institutions are vulnerable to respond adequately the changing needs of the market; private providers can move faster and sometimes more effectively to fill gaps in supply of higher education.” The report not only indicates the phenomenon of emergence of Private universities, it also underpins its requirements for development of Society. In India, the private universities are typically established by a registered Trust or a Society and obtain legal status through State legislature or Parliament (UGC, 2003). A not-for-Profit Company registered under Section 25 of Company’s act 1956 is also allowed to establish a private university. The present regulations and laws do not allow Universities to generate profit for personal benefits of its founders and promoters. Any surpluses generated have to be ploughed back fully for the development of the university. 5. RATIONALE FOR GOVERNING PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES AS SOCIAL ENTERPRISE Universities across the globe are established with a mission of societal development. They can have significant social impact through contributions in scientific, cultural, economic and political development. However, till last many decades, Universities were governed and managed with the approaches falling in the realms of Organisational theories. These approaches are characterised by inside-out lenses where an organisation functions as per its own perceived needs rather than considering outside needs of Society. The universities acted in ivory towers underlining their freedom to follow their academic and research pursuits with little or no attention to the needs of the society. The governments funded universities and obliterated their dependency on society for funding. There was no ‘’pressure’’ on universities to work with sole objective of satisfaction of societal needs. This observation is more clearly emphasised through a World Bank Report on Governance and Management Arrangement around the Globe 2009. (Saint, 2009) as under: The dominant model (of University Governance) was characterised as a “republic of scholars’’ in which academic freedom and the pursuit of knowledge were the overriding values. The institutional Mission was to preserve knowledge, add to accumulated understanding and transmit this intellectual inheritance to the next generation. Any attempt to introduce accountability for performance was routinely rejected as an attack on academic freedom. This trend of University Governance has been changing since last couple of decades. The Society has come to expect more from Universities. The Governments have come forward with reforms giving Universities academic flexibility and at the same time expecting accountability towards society. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 101 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel The same World Bank report (Saint, 2009) indicates this by stating: Overreaching Government Control and public call for reform resulted in the approach to institutional governance and management in higher education, which may be termed as the ‘Autonomy with accountability’’ model (Neave and Vught, 1994). On the one hand it seeks to provide institutions with freedom and flexibility and on the other hand, it strives to ensure that institutions are good stewards of public fund, provide quality education in return for public support and produce graduates, research and services that are relevant to the needs of society and the economy. Bleikie & Kogan (2007) explain this occurrence stating that ‘Organisational and decision making structures of Universities are organized around two central ideas about governance. Any university may be seen either as a ‘republic of scholars’ or as a ‘stakeholders’ organisation’. Both the approaches lead to different outcomes. ‘Republic of Scholars’ approach prioritises academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Whilst, the ‘Stakeholders’ Organisation’ approach primarily considers interests of all the stakeholders. The analysis of published theories and practices points towards the ‘Stakeholders’ Organisation’ approach alternatively reflected as ‘Autonomy with Accountability’ approach for the Governance of present day University. The existing Government universities are found incapable of responding towards changing expectations of Society conforming this approach (Singh, 2011).Whereas, this approach becomes aninevitability for the governance of Private Universities as they directly depend upon Society for their funds and sustainability. With this come explicit and implicit expectationsfrom different stakeholders of society for delivering as per their need. This is the rationale leading to the approach of governing private universities as a Social Enterprise. 6. PRIVATE UNIVERSITY CHARACTERISING A SOCIAL ENTERPRISE Indicating commensalism in a social enterprises, the social missions and economical activities are mutually beneficial.(Gonin, Besharov & Smith, 2013). A private University resonates this hybrid character of a Social Enterprise. Figure 2represents facet-based mapping of a Private University reflecting the characteristics of a Social enterprise. It indicates that the conception of a Private University and its activities echoes the characteristics of a Social enterprise. The rationale of governing a private university as a Social Enterprise is validated by this analysis. Figure 2 Facet-based mapping of Private University as a social enterprise http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 102 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises 7. SUCCESS PARADIGM FOR PRIVATE UNIVERSITY AS A SOCIAL ENTERPRISE The creation of social value and lasting social impact are indicators of the success of a Social enterprise (Dawans & Alter, 2009). Both the facets of a Social enterprise, when synergized, bring its sustainability. These are inextricably interlinked making it inevitable to deal them with integrated approach(Rykaszewski, Ma & Shen, 2013).Thus, the selection of economic activities aligned with the social mission becomes essentiality (Fritsch, Rossi, & Hebb, 2013). Figure 3 Conceptual Framework for Governance of Private University as Social Enterprise Through extensive studies of cited literature on Governance of Social Enterprises leading to its success, a framework is proposed defining success paradigm of a Private University governed as a Social enterprise. The framework incorporates Governance and Operational aspects as determinants of success. The proposed framework does take into cognisance the existing core processes of Teaching-Learning, Research & Development and Extensions Activities. In fact, the aspects proposed in the framework are permeating within these core processes. Abiding by the scope of this study, these core processes are not discussed. 7.1. Governance for Legitimacy Governance is the most important dimension of success paradigm of a Social Enterprise. It has the fundamental responsibility of establishing legitimacy of the Social Enterprise. Organisations which are perceived to be legitimate increase their survival capabilities, thus minimising the risk of organisational demise (Baum & Oliver, 1991; Dart 2004). 7.1.1. Legitimacy Suchman (1995) defines legitimacy as generalised perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs and http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 103 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel definitions. How legitimate internal and external stakeholders perceive an organisation influences its activities and survival (Seanor & Meaton, 2008). The determinants of legitimacy of a Social enterprise are Ethics &Values it adopts and Accountability it manifests leading to stakeholder satisfaction (Smith & Woods, 2015; Mason, Kirkbridge & Bryde, 2007). Social enterprises are perceived legitimate based on their mission, social value creation and stakeholder satisfaction (Mason, 2010).The Governance of a Social Enterprise has to address these to build legitimacy contributing to success of a Social Enterprise. The linkages of legitimacy and its determinants can be understood from figure 4. Figure 4 Legitimacy Linkages Creating a positive social impact and satisfaction of all its stakeholders builds the legitimacy of the University. The Governance of a Private University, by establishing its legitimacy, safeguards perpetual survival of the University. Legitimacy is established by the Boards by ensuring that social objectives are fulfilled when entrepreneurial actions are undertaken (Mason, 2010).Giving priority to income generation over attaining social goals is a way for wilting of a university. In India, Education is considered as a pious activity. The change of focus from Social goal of Education to economical goal of profit-making is taken sceptically by Society. Unethical practices and compromised Accountability undermines the legitimacy of a University ultimately affecting its future sustainability. 7.1.2. Values and Ethics The word ‘Social’ in social enterprise raises expectations from stakeholders for moral and ethical conduct from their Boards, Management and employees (Chell et al. 2016).The “price” of misconduct is higher in the non-profit sector than it is in the profit sector (De Kam, 2003). A social enterprise is not only expected to focus on business values but also on social, moral and ethical values as well (Argandoña, 2007). An organisation fosters strong ethical culture when top management leads with integrity and employees display commitment to ethical values. Bornstein (2004), while characterising a social entrepreneur mentions “strong ethical fibre” as one of the essentials. Ethical conduct of social http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 104 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises entrepreneurs leading a social enterprise and values like honesty and integrity reflected in operations of a Social Enterprise bring legitimacy to the Social Enterprise. To sustain and nurture its brand image and reputation, a private University requires to have high quality students and high quality teachers. The ethics and values in its operations are important considerations for these two sections of population when they chose a University. Public-interfacing operations of a University like admissions, staff selection, purchases, charging of fees, and legal & regulatory compliances exude the ethics and values of a University. Internal operations like evaluation & assessments, promotions, and HR practices also reflect the ethics and values of a University. Credentials and conduct of people in the management and employment and that of students and alumni contribute towards the reputation of a University as an ethical organisation. The values of honesty, integrity and transparency are the important contributors to build social image and legitimacy of a University. 7.1.3. Accountability Dual goals make accountability conception of a Social Enterprise different from other organisations. (Wang, 2009).Its accountability is conceived not only for spending money properly but also creating positive social impact. Kearns (1996) also emphasises that accountability is “the obligation of public and non-profit organisations to serve a higher authority – the public trust – which is the ultimate source of their mandate, their authority and their legitimacy”. Aligning all their activities towards the basic purpose of serving society becomes imperative for private Universities as reflection of accountability. Core activities like Programmes offered, Teaching –Learning systems and Research undertaken are to align with the mission. Ancillary activities like managing residences, transport services, food services, security services, stationary supplies and others are to be undertaken imbibing this spirit. Perceptible positive impact on its stakeholders like Students, Parents, academia, Government industry, and surrounding community contribute to the Accountability of a University. Compliance of prevalent laws, diligent and honest accounting, and achievement of highest standards of performance are the immediate measures exhibiting accountability of the university towards society. Assessment through external agencies: The accountability of a university is made noticeable through assessment by independent external agencies. Regular academic and administrative assessment of a University, internally as well externally, is an exercise towards ensuring accountability of the university. There are national accreditation authorities who assess the capability of a university towards fulfilment of its social mission. Outcomes from such assessments are indicative of the achievement of the social goals of the university. 7.1.4. Stakeholders’ Satisfaction Meeting expectations of Stakeholders contribute to Accountability going beyond compliance of laws and regulation (Kearns,1996). Freeman defines stakeholders as ‘any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organisation’s objectives’(Freeman, 2010). Whereas for-profit organisations focus only on customers and owners, a Social enterprise has to focus on all the stakeholders. The term stakeholder in its first usage in 1963 at the Stanford Research Institute was explained as ‘those groups without whose support the organisation would cease to exist’. This is essentially true in case of a Social enterprise as its existence depends on support of its stakeholders. (Ko, 2012).Relationships with Stakeholders also facilitates access to capital (Mair and Marti 2006) Jongbloed, Enders & Salerno (2008) bring out that legitimacy of a higher education institute in a society is increasingly being determined by the level and quality of its commitment to its stakeholders. Identifying the stakeholders and meeting their needs give competitive advantage to universities(Dobni&Luffman, 2003). http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 105 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel A private university draws its support from Society due to support of various stakeholders like students, parents, alumni, employees, industry, academia, government, regulating bodies, associations, financial institutions, donors, volunteers, media and general public(Mainerdes, Alves &Raposo,2010).A University is accountable to these stakeholders through its actions and governance. 7.2. Operational Aspects The leaders of a social enterprise should look into the operational aspects of Social Enterprise by considering its mission and stakeholders being served (Chell, 2007).Operational aspects of a social enterprise which are differentiated because of its dual mission are Finance Management, Human Resource Management and Marketing Management. Adoption of New Managerialism governance mode incorporating market principles towards these aspects along with consideration of social goals leads towards success of economic activities and sustainability of Social Enterprise (Braun, 1999; Lynch, 2014). 7.2.1. Finance Management Economic activity of a Social Enterprise is an indispensable component of its success paradigm making finance management very important operational aspect. The aim of financial management is economic wealth creation leading to social value creation. Social Enterprise generate their major income from commercial activities though other sources like grants and donations may be available. The expectations of the stakeholders and social mission focus are factored in when Social Enterprise determine pricing of their products and services. This leads to generation of less surpluses that it would have been if full economic costing is affected (VanSandt, Sud, & Marme, 2009). Legitimacy considerations affect the perceptions of operational expenses. For an instance, an expense like ‘’Hospitality’’ is looked at differently by different stakeholders. A manager may consider it an essential expense for customer satisfaction whereas a donor or a volunteer may consider it unnecessary. Stable financial situation is the prerequisite for success of a Private University. It’s an important task of Governing Board of not letting Finance dominate but making it a platform for achieving social goal (Shattock, 2010). The objective of finance management in a traditional for-profit business is profit maximization and wealth maximization of its owners. Contrasting to this, for a private university the sound Finance management incorporates: • Minimisation of the cost of education to the students • Provision of sufficient resources for operations and growth of the university • Risk mitigation by avoiding overdependence on one resource The major source of finance for a private university is student fees. Fluctuating societal demands, competition and government regulations heavily influence the student fees that can be charged. Overdependence on student fees, thus, increases the risk of a private university. Increasing other sources of income like endowments, donations, consultancy and sale of intellectual property provide hedging against the risk. This also reduces the cost of education to the students. Raising finance for fuelling its expansion poses a challenging situation for a University. Availing debts becomes difficult as it doesn’t generate cash flows like a for-profit organisation and Government regulations further restrict it. Philanthropic donations remain one source which has a limited supply owing to competition. 7.2.2. Human Resource Management The existence of dual logic of social mission and commercial activities make human resource management more difficult in a Social Enterprise (Satar & John, 2016). Starting from Governing Board, it is a challenge http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 106 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises for a social enterprise to have people who have right combination of social orientation and commercial activity skills.(Mason, Kirkbride & Bryde, 2007) This requires the governing board to have a blend of people with inclination for social service, business management and entrepreneurial skills. The human resource of a university comprise of students, staff and the management. All the three organs are to be quite aware of duality of the goal of the university i.e. social mission and income generation for self-sustainability. Their harmonisation leads towards achievement of these two goals. The management of the university plays the lead role in harmonising all the human resources towards the achievement of the university goals. 7.2.3. Marketing Management Marketing Management of a social enterprise is a confluence of social marketing and commercial marketing bringing in its challenges. Whereas Social marketing is about promoting a cause, idea or a mission; Commercial marketing aims at promotion of goods or services. Social enterprises use varied marketing communications to create organisational impression contributing to its legitimacy (Teasdale 2010). Organisational impression management involves actions executed to influence others’ view an organization (Bolino et al., 2008). It is particularly important where the value of product offered is not perceived solely in financial terms (Nicholls, 2009). Impression management also influences marketing actions for goods/services of a Social Enterprise. An Orphanage selling stationery items made by orphan children will advertise using a different vocabulary than a for-profit organisation. Also, it is likely to choose different distribution channels and use different pricing models. A private university functions in a competitive scenario. The important objectives of marketing management – customer creation, customer satisfaction, increasing market share and building brand image – are also applicable to it (Enders, 2013; Gross & Godwin; 2005; Hanover Research, 2014).These, as applicable to a university is elaborated in Table 1 Table 1 Applicability of marketing objectives for a private university Marketing Objective Private University applicability Introduction of new academic programmes as per demand and Customer creation requirements of society Delivery of best education and other services like consultancy, transfer of technology, R&D Customer satisfaction Providing best working environment to its employees Working for benefit of society including surrounding community leading to Stakeholder satisfaction Exploring new regions/States/Countries for getting students Increasing Market Engagement with Industry and Government for services like Share Consultancy, Technology Transfer and more Establishing multiple Campuses Using various communication channels like media, events and word- Building brand image of-mouth to spread information about university Active engagement with Stakeholders Ethical practices and law compliances indicating Accountability http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 107 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel Organisation impression management becomes an important dimension in marketing narrative of University strengthening its brand image. It aims for creating appropriate impression of university amongst the different stakeholders of the University. For an instance, a University which organises fund raising event for war martyrs forms an impression of a nationalist organisation. An effective marketing effort generates a strong brand image results in increased quantity and quality of student and staff leading to increased quantity and quality of outputs like research, patents, technologies and other intellectual property benefitting society. 8. CHALLENGES FOR MANAGING PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES AS SOCIAL ENTERPRISES Universities are conceived to work for societal development through producing graduates with requisite skills and by creation and application of intellectual property. They are also considered to be harbinger of new ideologies and cultural change. A private university has these expectations directly perceptible through its various stakeholders. Its dual goals of providing service to society and generation its own income bring several challenges in its functioning. Some of the major challenges are as follows: 8.1. Government Controls Affecting Autonomy The institutional environment in which private universities function is characterised by multiplicity and complexity of Government regulatory controls. As per Constitution of India, education is a concurrent subject. This invites Government controls from State as well as Central Governments. Government regulatory controls are all pervasive affecting functioning of Boards, admissions of the students, amount of fees to be charged, selection of teaching staff, salary structures, selection of the programmes, expansion initiatives, funding from financial institutions and establishment of capital assets. These controls fetter the autonomy and flexibility of a Private university. If the private universities are to survive and thrive, they require lot of autonomy in admission of students and earning from fees without encumbering restrictions. Just as a commercial enterprise will fail if Government controls and restrictions do not allow it to freely function and earn, a social enterprise, particularly in India, will not last long if donations, endowments and grants flow is controlled. The latest example of such control is recent provision in The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. It stipulates that all the office bearers of a Social enterprise receiving partial funding from Government or receiving foreign donations amounting to Rupees Ten Lakhs or more have to declare their and their spouse/children’s assets every year. This will restrict people coming forward and volunteering their services in management Boards of any private university. 8.2. Leadership & Governance Challenges Private universities are established by Social entrepreneurs. They are expected to have blend of strong motivation to serve society, business skills and leadership skills to effectively govern a University. For an instance, Universities, due to lack of focus, invest more funds for infrastructure and buildings rather than on knowledge resources like teachers, books, journals, software and IT resources. This diminishes quality of education and research. Traditional governance approach, unlike professional management approach, jeopardises sustainability of a university. In case of human resources, university often supports longevity instead of productivity. This creates dissatisfaction amongst highly productive employees. Similarly, due to parochial attitude, private universities adopt exploitative salary structures, which cause reduction in quality of human resources. This compromises its intended purpose of social and cultural transformation. 8.3. Financial Challenges Private Universities, unlike commercial enterprises, have latent constraints to allocate their full operational costs to students’ fees owing to their social mission commitments. Their income generating capability is http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 108 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises subdued by this unique challenge. The attenuated cash flows prompt reluctance in the financial institutions to forward loans to private universities. The fund raising becomes further challenging because of not-for- profit legal status. The options of availing debt or equity get restricted by Government regulations for not- for-profits. The prevalent taxation laws like Income Tax, Service Tax, Excise & Customs etc. do not have any exempting or discounting provisions for commercial activities of Private Universities though they are expected to work for Societal development. The income generating potential gets reduced by these tax obligations. For example; a Private University importing a Lab equipment has to pay the same Custom duty which a commercial enterprise will pay for importing a production equipment. Student fees remain the most important source of income for a private university. Availability of demand side funding mechanisms like education loans, financial aids and scholarships which make private university education more accessible remains an important task for society at large. 8.4. Human Resource Challenges Teaching staff form the major Human resources of a University driving it to excellence. Government has stipulated qualifications and salary scales for teachers of different cadres. For a person to be appointed as Professor requires minimum qualification of PhD and relevant research and teaching experience. There prevails a shortage nationwide of people meeting these requirements and situation exacerbates in fields like engineering & technology. The issue amplifies when considerations for remuneration packages are added. Highly qualified people require commensurate pay packages. A private university with moderate income generating activities because of social goals has limitations in offering such packages. The people who derive satisfaction from social service with reasonable salary expectations are not easily available. 9. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION This study has drawn insights from two distinct knowledge domains: field of Social enterprises and field of Higher education. Through confluence of these insights it has proposed a new concept of managing private university as a social enterprise. Social enterprises have grown to provide solutions to societal problems through generating their own income. The economic development and the demographic profile have put India on the threshold of transformative changes. At current rate of economic growth, India shall be the third largest economy of the world by the year 2020 (The Economic Times, 2016;British Council of India, 2014). In spite of this salubrious growth the divide between haves and have-nots is remains rampant. Vast sections of society do not have access to basic amenities of Food, Shelter, Education and Healthcare (Mukunthan A., 2016).This national landscape provides the breeding opportunities for Social enterprises in India. The research on such organisations has been with the perspective of managing its dual goals. Only few studies have looked into the operational aspects and still lesser have considered the concept of legitimacy as determinant of success. Similarly there are several studies on determinants of success of a University but almost none which studies success of a private University when managed as a Social enterprise. This research study has suggested a conceptual framework for governance of Private University as a Social enterprise (Figure 3) and achieving success through that approach. It underscores that, for a Social enterprise, generation of income is complementary to achievement of social goals. Alignment of income generating activities along the social mission is the basis of success paradigm (Poon, 2011). By suggesting this approach, it’s not intended to undermine the focus on core processes of University like teaching and research for its success; but it’s presented that they are to be relooked into by the lenses of a Social enterprise. For achieving its goal of Gross enrolment ratio in higher education of 30% by 2020, India will require 40 million university enrolments. At present 59 % of enrolment is in Private institutions. The private universities have grown from 7 to 201 in the few years spanning from 2005-06 to 2012-13 (British Council of India, 2015). These facts are indicative that Private universities will be dominating in fulfilling the future demand of higher education. Thus, it becomes essential that these universities flourish in the http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 109 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel direction benefitting the society. Along with the suggested framework, the challenges faced by Private universities to flourish are also elaborated. To surmount the challenges and to adopt the suggested framework, a university has to be enterprising and entrepreneurial (Mainardes, Alves & Raposo, 2010).This requires Universities to develop competencies not required in past, especially in realms of fund generation and Management, Student education and services, building their brand image and performance assessment (Michael, 2004). The entrepreneurial university starts with imbibing culture of excellence and enterprise from its leaders to the faculty to the students. It involves itself in creating, identifying, and relentlessly pursuing the opportunities to develop and serve society. It empowers its people to take innovative initiatives through formal and informal ways(Coyle, Gibb& Haskins, 2013).It encourages bottoms up approach and cross- disciplinary team efforts. It effectively connects globally using Information and communication technologies for teaching and research using virtual classrooms and labs. This University serves society by creating entrepreneurs from students leading to job and wealth creation. Bringing in responsibility to its stakeholders, Entrepreneurial University fosters Student-Faculty synergies, Inter-Departmental tie-ups and Community & Business linkages. The measure of excellence for such University emerging from Accountability to Society and Stakeholder’s satisfaction will include: • Enterprising and Ethical governance • Innovations in Teaching and Research. • Career Placements of Students and Entrepreneurs produced • Impact of Research in Academics and Society • Perceptible Community development An entrepreneurial university requires a conducive environment. It can succeed only in liberalised Government regime giving it encouragement, autonomy and flexibility. 10. SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The conceptual framework (Figure 3) suggested provides new perspective on management of private universities and its role in society. By taking a sample of private universities an exploratory study on applicability of the suggested framework can add value either by further validation or by addition of new dimensions to the framework or both. Likewise a study may be undertaken to comprehend which of the existing private universities have become financially viable and which have failed and hence how and why. The role of Social entrepreneurs in establishment of a Social enterprise in form ofa private university can be researched through study of their competencies, leadership skills and managerial skills. The challenges faced by universities as a social enterprise are referred by the authors based on their experience in the governance of universities. Elaboration of these challenge, identification of new challenges and ways to meet these challenges requires further empirical research. One of the major challenges faced by private universities is maintaining their autonomy and flexibility under complex Government control. Government has been exercising these controls with the apprehensions of likely unlawful conduct of Private Universities. An academic inquest about this will give add to knowledge about governance of private universities. Outcomes of suggested future research and this study will lead to successful governance of private universities ultimately benefitting society. NOTES Authors are grateful to Charotar University of Science and Technology (CHARUSAT), Changa, Gujarat, India for facilitating this study. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 110 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises REFERENCE [1] Alter, K. (2007). Social enterprise typology. Virtue Ventures LLC, 12, 1-124. [2] Argandona, A. (2007). Ethical management systems for Not-for-profit Organizations. [3] Baum, J. A., & Oliver, C. (1991). Institutional linkages and organizational mortality.Administrative science quarterly, 187-218. [4] Bleiklie, I., &Kogan, M. (2007). Organization and governance of universities. Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 477-493. [5] Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W. H., &Gilstrap, J. B. (2008). A multi-level review of impression management motives and behaviours. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1080-1109. [6] Bornstein, D. (2007). How to change the world: Social entrepreneurs and the power of new ideas. Oxford University Press. [7] Braun, D. (1999). Changing governance models in higher education: The case of the new managerialism. Swiss Political Science Review, 5(3), 1-24. [8] British Council of India, A report on Managing Large Systems; A comparative analysis: Challenges and opportunities for large higher education systems, June 2015, p.07 [9] Chell, E. (2007). Social enterprise and entrepreneurship towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process. International small business journal, 25(1), 5-26. [10] Chell, E., Spence, L. J., Perrini, F., & Harris, J. D. (2016). Social entrepreneurship and business ethics: does social equal ethical? Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 619-625. [11] Coyle, P., Gibb, A., & Haskins, G. (2013). The Entrepreneurial University: from concept to action. [12] Dart, R. (2004), The legitimacy of Social enterprise, Non-Profit Management and Leadership, 14, pp.411-424 [13] Dawans, V., & Alter, K. (2009). The Four Lenses Strategic Framework. Toward an Integrated Social. [14] De Kam, G. (2003). Accountability and social entrepreneurship. Managing on the Edge. [15] Dees, J. G. (2001). The meaning of social entrepreneurship. [16] Dobni, C. B., &Luffman, G. (2003). Determining the scope and impact of market orientation profiles on strategy implementation and performance. Strategic management journal, 24(6), 577-585. [17] Doherty, B., Foster, G., Meehan, J., & Mason, C. (2009). Management for social enterprise. Sage Publications. [18] Enders, J. (2013). The university in the audit society: On accountability, trust and markets. [19] Fielden, J. (2008). Global trends in university governance. Education working paper series, 9, 278200- 1099079877269. [20] Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press. [21] Fritsch, B., Rossi, B., & Hebb, T. (2013). An examination of the tension between business and mission among social enterprises. Carleton Centre for Community Innovation Working Paper, May. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 111 editor@iaeme.com
Devang Joshi and Dr. V G Patel [22] Gonin, M., Besharov, M. H. P., & Smith, W. K. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprises. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2013, No. 1, p. 11745). Academy of Management. [23] Greene, J. (2012). An Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship, Portland State University [24] Gross, K., & Godwin, P. (2005). Education’s many stakeholders. University Business, Sep. [25] Hanover Research Report (2014). Trends in Higher Education Marketing, Recruitment, and Technology, Washington [26] Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher education, 56(3), 303-324. [27] Kearns, K. P. (1996). Managing for accountability: Preserving the public trust in public and non-profit organizations. Jossey-Bass. [28] Ko, S. (2012). Viability of social enterprises: the spill over effect. Social Enterprise Journal, 8(3), 251- 263. [29] Lynch, K. (2014). New Managerialism: The Impact on Education. Concept,5(3), 11. [30] Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., &Raposo, M. (2010). An exploratory research on the stakeholders of a university. Journal of Management and Strategy, 1(1), 76. [31] Mair, Johanna and Marti, Ignasi, (2006), Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight, Journal of World Business, 41, issue 1, p. 36-44. [32] Martin, R. L., &Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford social innovation review, 5(2), 28-39. [33] Martin, R. L., &Osberg, S. R. (2015). Two Keys to Sustainable Social Enterprise. Harvard Business Review, 93(5), 86-+. [34] Mason, C. (2010). Some challenges in social enterprise governance. Social Enterprise Journal, 6(2). [35] Mason, C., Kirkbride, J., &Bryde, D. (2007). From stakeholders to institutions: the changing face of social enterprise governance theory. Management decision, 45(2), 284-301. [36] Michael, S. 2004 In search of universal principles of higher education management. The International Journal of Education Management, 18(2), p.118-137 [37] Neave, G., & Van Vught, F. A. (1994). Government and Higher Education Relationships across Three Continents: The Winds of Change. Issues in Higher Education Series, Volume 2. Pergamon Press, Elsevier Science Ltd., The Boulevard, Langford Ln., Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, England, United Kingdom [38] Nicholls, A. (2009). ‘We do good things, don’t we?’: ‘Blended Value Accounting’ in social entrepreneurship. Accounting, organizations and society, 34(6), 755-769. [39] Poon, D. (2011). The emergence and development of social enterprise sectors. [40] Rural India is far behind urban India in every indicator of progress by AthreyaMukunthan, Dec 5, 2015, extracted from Factly-making public data meaningful, factly.in [41] Rykaszewski, S., Ma, M., & Shen, Y. (2013). Failure in Social Enterprises. SEE Change Magazine, 1- 28. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 112 editor@iaeme.com
A Conceptual Model for Governance of Private Universities as Social Enterprises [42] Saint, W. (2009). Guiding Universities: Governance and Management Arrangements around the Globe. Human Development Network. Washington, DC: World Bank. [43] Satar, M. S., & John, S. (2016). A conceptual model of critical success factors for Indian social enterprises. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 12(2), 113- 138. [44] Seanor, P., &Meaton, J. (2008). Learning from failure, ambiguity and trust in social enterprise. Social Enterprise Journal, 4(1), 24-40. [45] Shattock, M. (2010). Managing successful universities. McGraw-Hill Education (UK). [46] Singh, J. D. (2011). Higher Education in India–Issues, Challenges and Suggestions. Higher Education, 93-103. [47] Smith, L., & Woods, C. (2015). Stakeholder Engagement in the Social Entrepreneurship Process: Identity, Governance and Legitimacy. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 6(2), 186-217. [48] Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches.Academy of management review, 20(3), 571-610. [49] Teasdale, S. (2010). Explaining the multifaceted nature of social enterprise: impression management as (social) entrepreneurial behaviour. Voluntary Sector Review, 1(3), 271-292. [50] The Economic Times, 31st may, 2016, India’s growth at 7.6% in 2015-16 fastest in five years [51] Understanding India: The future of Higher education and Opportunities for International Cooperation; February 2014; British Council of India, 2014 [52] University Grant Commission (2003), Establishment of and maintenance of standards in private universities [53] VanSandt, C., Sud, M. and Marme, C. (2009), Enabling the original intent: catalysts for social entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Ethics, 90, pp. 419-428. [54] Wang, W.J.(2009). Accountability in Social Enterprises: An Analytical Framework. Graduate School of Public and International Affairs University of Pittsburgh, Working Paper Series. [55] Wikipedia (2016), List of universities in India [56] Wronka, M. (2013, June). Analysing the Success of Social Enterprises: Critical Success Factors Perspective. In Active Citizenship by Knowledge Management & Innovation: Proceedings of the Management, Knowledge and Learning International Conference 2013 (pp. 593-605). To Know Press. [57] Jyotsna Ghildiyal Bijalwan, Corporate Governance System in India. International Journal of Management (IJM), 3(2), 2012, pp. 260–269. [58] V MallikaVedantham and JD Sarswathi. Good Governance in Higher Education. International Journal of Management (IJM) , 7(2), 2016, pp. 443 - 448 http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 113 editor@iaeme.com