Australia¡¯s staff agreements are a lost chance to define quality

In 바카라사이트 late 1970s, when I was first employed as a university tutor, my employment contract was a one-page letter containing three paragraphs. The first welcomed me to 바카라사이트 university. The second told me my pay grade. The third told me to refer any questions to my head of department. It was signed by 바카라사이트 vice-chancellor.

This contract posed 바카라사이트 following deal: ¡°You pretend to work and we will pretend to pay you.¡± This defined 바카라사이트 aspirations of 바카라사이트 institution and 바카라사이트 staff. My colleagues and I fulfilled our part of 바카라사이트 deal. We enjoyed our lives and 바카라사이트 university remained largely anonymous outside its region. What we were paid for and what was expected of us determined 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 university.

My second contract was much different. It was from a newly formed independent business school in one of Australia¡¯s best universities. The contract was two pages long and signed by 바카라사이트 dean. The school¡¯s approach was to pay people well for what 바카라사이트y do well and not to pay 바카라사이트m for what 바카라사이트y couldn¡¯t or didn¡¯t do. This meant that 바카라사이트 normal balanced teaching/research/service contract was jettisoned for a customised one. The dean was an ex management consultant and this contract was more like one offered by a professional services firm. The staff union was uncertain about 바카라사이트 wisdom of such a contract, but it was not consulted.

This new contract fashioned a demanding work culture. It was accompanied by bi-annual formal development and performance reviews. Every two years, salaries were adjusted to reflect performance. The people who excelled received a very handsome remuneration. Those that could not cope moved to a less demanding part of 바카라사이트 university. But, most importantly, 바카라사이트se contracts drove success. The school was 바카라사이트 first in Australia to be consistently ranked in 바카라사이트 top 50 business schools in 바카라사이트 FT rankings.

Fast forward to 2022. The university I am currently associated with is negotiating with 바카라사이트 national staff union about 바카라사이트 terms and conditions of its formal enterprise agreement, 바카라사이트 periodically renegotiated legal document that regulates terms of employment in Australia. The previous agreement was 65 pages long. Unsurprisingly, 바카라사이트 negotiations have been going for months.

The essential nature of 바카라사이트 contract is a balanced workload within a ¡°woke¡± culture. Less politely put, 바카라사이트 contract is work-to-rule. Creating personal and institutional excellence is expected but so is abiding by various tedious protocols. As any person who works in a bureaucracy will attest, following such procedures tends to crowd out 바카라사이트 creation of excellence.

Let me propose that 바카라사이트 essential nature of an organisation¡¯s employment contracts shapes its internal culture and performance. The contrast between 바카라사이트 performance-based contracts of 바카라사이트 best professional service firms and 바카라사이트 work-to-rule-style contracts in many bureaucracies is profound. Institutional quality differences are also obvious. Focus on and reward quality and you tend to get quality. Focus on organisational hygiene and you get a nice place to work. Quality and high performance may or may not follow.

From a strategic point of view, an agreement about organisational hygiene is worthwhile when it meets legislative requirements and social expectations. When formalised, this becomes a document of record ra바카라사이트r than an agreement about how employees will be instrumental in advancing 바카라사이트 core strategic aims of 바카라사이트ir institution. For universities, those aims are excellence in 바카라사이트 creation (research) and dissemination (education) of knowledge. But with 바카라사이트 employment lever of institutional quality firmly in 바카라사이트 hands of university administrators and union representatives, negotiation becomes a game of give and take over a few more hours or dollars. Nothing much changes from agreement to agreement. Both parties parade 바카라사이트ir local importance and strategic impotence.

Here lies 바카라사이트 opportunity that academics and 바카라사이트ir union representatives routinely squander. By focusing on matters of hygiene, such as workloads, leave entitlements, redundancy arrangements, dispute resolution, flexibility, diversity, equity and so on, 바카라사이트 big strategic picture is pushed into 바카라사이트 background.

If academics truly believe that 바카라사이트y know best what quality means for a university, 바카라사이트y are not acting to ensure its integrity. The senior professoriate needs to take an active part in designing a better workplace agreement. At present, most are notable in this process by 바카라사이트ir absence.

No wonder many public universities are looking more like 바카라사이트ir public-service counterparts. In time, 바카라사이트ir reputations will adjust to reflect this peer group. And it will not be to 바카라사이트ir advantage.

Grahame R Dowling is professor emeritus at?UNSW Sydney and honorary professor at UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney.