Campus Review Volume 28 - Issue 9 | September 2018 | Page 29

workforce campusreview.com.au executive suite) and placed – at least electronically – centrally. If an academic or researcher needs admin help – let’s say, booking a lecture theatre, or perhaps a trip for a research meeting, or preparing a research grant – then instead of asking the (previously) ever-present and reliable admin or research support person in the school/ faculty/unit, one has to send an email into the maw of shared services and log a job. Someone will eventually read the email and reply. Most often, the reply is little more than directions to a web page where the academic/researcher can do the booking or prepare the grant him or herself. Now, if you are in a lecture and the battery runs out on the remote control, there is no-one to ask about how to replace it – except via online, of course. Little help when one is in the middle of a lecture. If there is so little respect for universities as repositories and generators of knowledge, it is unsurprising that there is a concomitant lack of respect for the academics who try to generate and protect such knowledge. There seems to be no end to the appetite of university executives for more shared services. Why would there not be? Shared services holds out the near holy grail promise of reducing costs, with the added, if never-to-be-spoken of, advantages of centralising executive power and dismantling all of these troublesome loyalty citadels of schools, faculties and groups of academics and local admin staff. All over Australia, we follow the global pied pipers with university after university announcing exciting ‘new initiatives’ that will ‘reduce costs’, ‘transform services’ and, of course, free up more resources that somehow will magically trickle down to all of those resource-starved academics. If only! Universities have become the victims of an army of big and small consulting firms, IT companies, accountants and others all out to ‘partner with’ (read – make money from) them. Among those ‘partners’ are PwC, Kennedy Cater, Deloitte and Huron Consulting Group. You will struggle not to glaze over as every ‘thought leader’ reiterates their mantra about shared services, of ‘transformation’, ‘innovation’, ‘maximising resources’, ‘creating sustainability’, ‘disruptive thinking’, ‘unlocking efficiencies’, ‘driving growth’, ‘business impact’, ‘increasing integration’, ‘maximising revenue’, ‘greater agility’, ‘competitive advantage’, ‘forward-facing business ecosystem’, ‘cross functionality’ and, of course, ‘delivering greater customer value’, ad nauseam. At one university in the US, the move to shared services was even badged as ‘Operation Excellence‘. Unbelievably, the university leaders who buy this snake oil are often experienced academics raised on principles of critical reading and thinking, and trained to smell such rats at 100 paces. EVALUATING THE MODEL There are profound problems associated with shared services. However, they have some advantages, but they depend very much on which definition or understanding of them you accept. If we are talking about a university having a centralised transport facility, or university‑wide IT department, there would be few arguments that these should be shared. The idea of each school or faculty having its own IT department and facilities is simply ludicrous. But is this new centralised model making anything better? We believe it has made things worse, at least for academics and researchers, who, after all, generate the knowledge and pass it on to students – the university’s reason for existing in the first place. Shared services is happening in many universities in many countries. Some places have evaluated this new model and the evidence about how it is working shows that the jury is, at the very least, out. We have done our own ‘back of the envelope’ calculations about the costs of the model, based on the enterprise bargaining agreements (EBAs) at an Australian university. Given that, under this model, all academics basically do their own administration, such as entering marks into spreadsheets, checking their own grant proposals and so on, we took the hourly rate of pay for a Level E (professor) and compared that with the same level for a mid-range admin person who would, under usual models, do the same work. Under most Australian EBAs, a Level E works 48 weeks per year, and 37.5 hours per week. That works out at $97.23 per hour. If someone employed under a mid-range professional staff agreement works 48 weeks per year and 35 hours per week, then that is $42.99 per hour. In other words, under this model, the university is paying over double the rate for administration work. And, of course, if the academics were supported and did not have such a heavy admin load, then they would be freed up to do what they are meant to do – research and teach. A brain drain is developing from this misguided attempt to save money. We have many anecdotal reports of senior academics moving from universities with ‘shared services’ to institutions which do not, who say that the shared services model is a major push factor influencing their decision to leave. In addition, the promotion and career advancement prospects of junior academics and early career researchers are being compromised because of the large amounts of time they have to spend doing administrative tasks that would be better done by persons qualified and employed for those functions. INCREASING CENTRALISATION While education ministers are hell bent on reducing funds to the higher education sector, we will see other instances of university executives scrabbling to keep their places running. But such ill-judged models from the world of managerialism are doing nothing but causing dissatisfaction and staff attrition at quite alarming rates. We will see more and more calls to introduce shared services and all will come with the same seductive Siren promises, and quite possibly with the same lack of evidence. University faculty will be pressured into following the shared service parade, lest they too are deemed ‘resistant to change’, silo thinkers, opposed to modernisation, dinosaurs and more. Academics continue to look for the slightest benefit or advantage of shared services in their everyday work, but are unlikely to see any. What they will see is increasing centralisation, decreasing power and influence within individual faculties and schools, and more and more everyday administrative work stealthily devolved to individual academics so that they may not have time to see how the bigger picture of our universities is changing, so drastically and so disturbingly. ■ Philip Darbyshire is director of Philip Darbyshire Consulting Ltd. Linda Shields is a professor of rural health at Charles Sturt University and an honorary professor in the School of Medicine at the University of Queensland. 27