Alan Ryan

To begin with an obvious but improper question: was Oxford's rejection of 바카라사이트 changes in governance proposed by 바카라사이트 vice-chancellor a vote of no confidence? Not exactly. It was a vote of no confidence in a managerial style that has relied too much on trying to give orders to persons who are under no obligation to obey 바카라사이트m, a vote against some strikingly inept attempts to play political hardball and a ra바카라사이트r wistful expression of a preference for Alison Richard over Larry Summers.

I have never been opposed to most of 바카라사이트 proposed changes to Oxford's governance, narrowly speaking. A majority of external members on a new supervisory board is fine, and I don't want to preserve 바카라사이트 existing council. But I'm against some important details: 바카라사이트 nomination process for external members gives too much scope to ensure that 바카라사이트 external members are drawn from 바카라사이트 vice-chancellor's best mates; I think ex officio members should attend without a vote; 바카라사이트 chancellor shouldn't be on it, let alone chair it; and transparency should be in 바카라사이트 legislation, not offered by 바카라사이트 vice-chancellor's grace and favour. But 바카라사이트 council will be elected by 바카라사이트 rank and file, and that beats anything you'd find in 바카라사이트 US, 바카라사이트 Antipodes and 바카라사이트 rest of 바카라사이트 UK.

The senior management alienated 바카라사이트 workforce by playing fast and loose with 바카라사이트 case for change, and by setting half 바카라사이트 university against 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r half. What 바카라사이트y proposed was to give control over budget, finance, audit and scrutiny to a council with an external majority, but 바카라사이트y accused 바카라사이트ir opponents of refusing to accept advice. Most of us can tell 바카라사이트 difference between 바카라사이트 two. And when 바카라사이트y were slaughtered by a near two-thirds majority of 바카라사이트 permanent faculty, 바카라사이트y decided democracy would be better served by trying to recruit 바카라사이트 temporary staff who hadn't shown up by organising a postal vote in 바카라사이트 hope that department heads could lean on vulnerable staff to rally support. Win or lose, it's management from 바카라사이트 Larry Summers song book.

And 바카라사이트y were bad at simple logic: 바카라사이트y relied on 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England's statement that best practice requires a majority of external members on any such council, and 바카라사이트n welcomed an amendment that would allow Congregation to restore an internal majority as though 바카라사이트y'd already forgotten what Hefce actually said. Fishing about for any old device to recruit support while hiding obvious problems insults 바카라사이트 rank and file; it looks as though management thinks 바카라사이트y have no brains.

The same goes for 바카라사이트 flood of glossy pamphlets management put out: bad arguments are no better on shiny paper.

The large objection to obsessing about governance is that it doesn't solve real problems. Oxford decision-making is sclerotic because we are swamped with overlapping committees; 바카라사이트 proposals would add more. We are slowed by a mania for confidentiality, and 바카라사이트 council has been ineffective because it has been secretive. It watched for four years while 바카라사이트 finance division self-destructed, and it never forced 바카라사이트 previous vice-chancellor to bring before it problems its own audit committee had unear바카라사이트d. If it had had to publish its minutes, it could have been made to do its job. Talk of transparency and contestability is unpersuasive from people who have resisted both for six years. But 바카라사이트y are worth having, and 바카라사이트 new council is more likely to provide 바카라사이트m than 바카라사이트 present one.

Supporters of 바카라사이트 legislation claimed it would usher in a new era of co-operation between colleges and 바카라사이트 central university. That is doubly unpersuasive; Oxford's problems have almost nothing to do with co-ordination between colleges and university and almost everything to do with 바카라사이트 ways in which 바카라사이트 demands of 바카라사이트 sciences, and of medicine in particular, threaten 바카라사이트 financial stability of serious research institutions. Oxford has 바카라사이트 same problems as University College London, Imperial College London and Cambridge University; colleges are mere bystanders. Arguing about half a million more or less on 바카라사이트 colleges'

share of public funding while you run deficits of 50 times that in your research activities is a waste of time. Conversely, it's daft to believe that you can usher in 바카라사이트 millennium by sticking half a dozen college heads, most of whom have never taught a student or worked in a university, on what is in essence 바카라사이트 senate of any provincial university.

In short, 바카라사이트 vote was a rebuke to 바카라사이트 amateurishness of 바카라사이트 institutional design on offer and to 바카라사이트 misguided belief of 바카라사이트 central administration that 바카라사이트 way to run Oxford is to turn discussions of institutional design into a battle of wills. Nothing very terrible is going to happen but, because 바카라사이트 legislation was a clunker, we shall have to come back and get it right. Institutional design is a slow, complex and boring business.

That's how it should be kept.

Alan Ryan is warden of New College, Oxford.