Main Content
Lesson 2 Nature and Structure of Administration and Governance in Higher Education
Governing Boards
This section explores the various types of governing boards present in higher education. There are many different governance structures in place (e.g. boards of trustees, boards of regents, etc.), with wide ranging implications depending on the model selected. These structures can change over time. This is more likely in public institutions where external pressures including legislators seek to change the school based on the challenges/issues of the day. Private institutions tend to maintain their structures for longer periods of time.
Think about these contrasting approaches to structuring governing boards. How might they have an impact on how university leaders, administrators, faculty and staff carry out their duties in each case?
Types of Governing Boards
Universities generally fall into three main groups containing a number of sub-categories. Explore each category by clicking on the tabs below. Note: The images in each tab are links to the websites of each university. Simply click on the image to navigate to the website. Click on the back button to return to the course page.
The first group includes those universities that have a single governing board for a campus- based research institution with direct authority and responsibility for the operation and management of the institution. Some institutions in this group, primarily private, have self-perpetuating governing boards with complete authority and responsibility for all aspects of the university’s operation. Others, primarily public, have mostly politically appointed governing boards with an obligation to report to legislatures, governors, or statewide boards or commissions that may limit the institutional board’s authority and responsibility in various ways.
Public example:
University of Wyoming.
Private example:
Villanova University.
The second group includes multiple campus-based public institutions governed by a common statewide board. In this group, the campus-based institutions may report to the statewide board directly or through a system executive.
Public examples:
The Pennsylvania State University
The University of Wisconsin System.
Private example:
Carnegie Mellon University.
The third group of public institutions has a local governing board for the campus institution, and this local board has a subset of powers derived from or delegated by a statewide board. The distribution of authority and responsibility between the statewide board and the local board, and between state-level executives and campus-level executives, varies widely. These relationships tend to change with some frequency in response to challenges, opportunities, personal ambitions of individual actors, and legislative and executive branch preferences.
Public examples:
The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE)
PASSHE: Bloomsburg University
The University of North Carolina system
The University of North Carolina system: UNC Chapel Hill
The three structures identified above are not an exhaustive list and do not represent the entirety of how institutional boards can be structured. They are meant to provide a basic overview of what you will encounter in your professional life and a launching off point for you to understand the most common governing board types. If you are early in your career you might not be as concerned with the type of institution at which you are working, but as you progress through your career the form of governing board may become increasingly important to you. As you reflect on the types of governing boards outlined above, think about what type of organization in which you would like to work. It is also important to think about your career path and the types of institutions you would choose to work.
For many higher education professionals, the type of institution at which they commenced their professional lives, becacme the type of institution where they spent their career. This happens for a number of reasons, the one you will hear most is "institutional fit." Whether someone works best within a community college system, a small private liberal arts institution, or a research university is a matter of fit in terms of professional context and understanding. While you can move between institution types, your professional lens and how you view things is shaped by where you have worked. Different institutional types and the varying organizational governing boards shape the culture, governance style, and priorities of their respective universities and the people that work within them.
Reference: Lombardi, J. V., Craig, D. D., Capaldi, E. D. & Gater, D. S. (2002) University Organization, Governance and Competitiveness. The Center: Arizona State University.