DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES AARHUS UNIVERSITY

Transkript

1 DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES AARHUS UNIVERSITY Departmental Forum Department of Economics and Business Att. Lars Relund Nielsen Department of Business Studies Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus University Fuglesangs Allé 4 DK-8210 Aarhus V Denmark Hearing Statement on BSS department structure proposal On 3 December 2014 the Departmental Forum (DF) at the Department of Economics and Business discussed the report from the faculty management with proposals for possible changes in department structures. The discussion raised the following comments/issues. In general, the DF thinks that the establishment of Study Program Panels (SPP) is a good idea, both from a VIP and a student point of view. The focus in the work of the SPP should be on the content of the study and on ensuring a common thread in the study. However, for such a panel to function it is crucial that very clear mandates are given to all panels related to study programmes (e.g. academic council, study boards, management groups etc.). Otherwise it may be ambiguous what kind of roles the panels have. Furthermore, it is hard to see how the SPP can be totally independent of economic issues between departments. Here the long term contract negotiated between head of departments (mentioned in the proposal) should be so specific that the SPP have clear guidelines on how to operate. The success of the SPPs will depend very much on the implementation of the issues raised above. Department of Economics and Business Lars Relund Nielsen Associate Professor Date: 6 December 2014 Direct Tel.: larsrn@asb.dk research.relund.dk/ Sender s CVR no.: Page 1/2 The DF thinks that the proposal about sections with distinct and separate budgets within the departments seems to be a good idea. For large departments it is important to tie together faculty members with similar teaching responsibilities and research interests. Moreover, sections are good for educational planning and faculty recruitment and may improve the quality of MUS conversations. Opinions about the different proposals for future department structure were diverse. Variant 3 seems to be the least popular. Objections against Variant 3 include that the new department will be too small compared to the other departments, that sharing study programmes with yet one more department will not be easier, and that the financial accounting people in the new department will be separated from finance. A fourth variant was suggested in which finance was included in this department so that it gained a more reasonable size. However, comments from the DF representative from finance indicated that this would not be favored by a number of finance people who are closer to Economics and Metrics. Some research groups (according to their DF representative) Department of Economics and Business Fuglesangs Allé 4 DK-8210 Aarhus V Denmark Tel.: Fax: inl@asb.dk

2 DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES AARHUS UNIVERSITY seem to be indifferent between Variants 1 and 2 (finance and logistics) and others prefer Variants 2 and 3 (management accounting) and Variants 2 and 4 (financial accounting). A representative from economics was not present at the meeting. NCCR is not affected directly by the different variants and can therefore not recommend any. Page 2/2 Other comments at the meeting included: 1) No matter which variant is chosen, the contents of the study programmes must not be affected. 2) Some Phd. students worry about their title after department change. 3) It would have been good to include the situation of TAP given the different variants. 4) It seems that some parts of the proposal are already decided on. The DF noted a commercial branding add about Aarhus BSS posted in Jyllands Posten, while the change to the name to Aarhus BSS is merely suggested on p.12. 5) A minority would like to have a secondary Danish name for BSS. Best Regards Lars Relund Nielsen Deputy chairman Departmental Forum at the Department of Economics and Business

3 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Høring vedrørende institutstruktur bidrag fra LSU ved Institut for Økonomi Department of Economics and Business Bidrag på baggrund af LSU-møde på Institut for Økonomi den 28. november 2014: Date: 08 December 2014 Pager: +45 Det forslås, at der skal udarbejdes bedre interne afregningssystemer mellem de to institutter, hvor der er en incitamentsstruktur, som gør det mere attraktivt at samarbejde. Sender's CVR no.: Reference: LBE Page 1/2 Niels tilkendegiver, at såfremt der er grupper/personer på de to institutter, som frivilligt ønsker at skifte institut, og dette i øvrigt giver mening, skal der være mulighed for dette. Christel nævner, at det opleves problematisk, såfremt nogle medarbejdere skal flyttes mod deres vilje. Der gives udtryk for, at det er positivt, at der i oplægget er overvejet nogle initiativer, som bl.a. systematiserer rammerne for et samarbejde på tværs af institutterne omkring delte uddannelser, samt at disse rammevilkår er gældende, uanset hvilken model der vælges. Men der tvivles dog alligevel på, om initiativerne er nok til at sikre et stærk fokus på business delen. Allan supplerer med, at det er vigtigt, at institutterne kan brande sig forskelligt. Vurdering af alternativerne Der er enighed om i LSU, at det er tvivlsomt, om nogle af de tre forslag løser de problematikker, som instituttet oplever. Der drøftes, om det overhovedet er muligt at pege på et scenarie. Nogle af LSUs medlemmer påpeger, at forslag 1 vil være det bedste af de tre, dog med igangsættelse af nogle processer og oprettelse af grupper indenfor fag-undervisning, så de to institutter kan lære hinanden bedre at kende og opnå et bedre samarbejde. Aarhus University Aarhus University Fuglesangs Allé 4 DK-8210 Aarhus V Tel.: au@au.dk

4 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Der rettes især kritik af løsningsforslag 3, hvor det vurderes, at det vil være endnu mere vanskeligt at samarbejde 3 institutter end de nuværende 2. Der rettes kritik af delt ejerskab af ECON uddannelsen mellem BADM og ECON, idet det forekommer, at man løser et problem men skaber et nyt. TAP-gruppen har forståelse for, at der i rapporten er lagt vægt på det faglige. Det havde dog været ønskeligt, hvis fakultetsledelsen i notatet med nogle få linjer havde udvist anerkendelse af, at den ændrede struktur også vil have implikationer på TAP-gruppen på instituttet. Page 2/2 LSU ved Institut for Økonomi

5 BSS Department Structure - Proposal Faculty Management Team, November 2014 In response to the abovementioned proposal from the Faculty Management Team, the undersigned Faculty members would like to make the following remarks. A major problem with the current organization is insufficient responsibility and ownership in relation to educational programs, and very large departments. We do not find that the proposal offers an adequate solution to these problems for the Oecon-program, and closely associated teaching areas like e.g. Soc and Public Policy. The Oecon-program is a strong brand, but is has suffered since the merger. In our view the proposal does not ensure that the problems relating to the program are solved, which in turn will have consequences both for the intake and the quality of the program. For research there are strong individual incentives due to the implications for career options, and a possibility of opting out by seeking employment elsewhere. Educational programs, on the other hand, have a public good character, and there are thus inherent freerider problems. It is accordingly important that the organizational structure ensures sufficient ownership and responsibility for the educational program, including development of curriculum, academic quality, teaching methods, intake, adaptability to labour market needs etc. It is a weakness of the current structure that it does not protect the public good embedded in the educational programs. We do not find that the current proposal solves these problems. The main element is the establishment of so-called Study Program Panels. But it is not clear how the introduction of another organizational layer into a problematic organizational structure will solve the fundamental problems. This additional layer raises questions of responsibility between the department chair, the study board and the panel, and coordination problems will increase and principles for resource allocation are unclear. It is not clear which discretionary powers the panel will have, and which can be granted given the University Law. We find that a better solution is to organize department around educational programs, that is, to create a department responsible for the Oecon-program. This will establish a more clear ownership structure to the public goods character of the program in a more lean and transparent organizational structure. The incentive structure will be clear since the consequences of a malfunctioning educational program will rest

6 directly on the department. We think that is possible to make an economic viable department with responsibility for the Oecon-program, but the specific details would have to be worked out. We are aware that some exchange of teaching between departments will be necessary, but this has a clear market mechanism and experience shows that this can be managed. Synergies in research can still develop, especially with a location of all Departments in Economics and Management at Fuglesangs Alle. We strongly urge the Faculty Management Team to reconsider possible solutions. None of the proposed models are ideal and do not solve the fundamental problems related to the current structure, but would add further costly organizational changes. Aarhus, December 5th 2014 Professor Torben M. Andersen, Professor Niels Haldrup, Professor Asger Lunde, Professor Niels Peter Mols, Professor Helena Skyt Nielsen, Professor Bo Sandemann Rasmussen, Professor Marianne Simonsen, Professor Nina Smith, Professor Michael Svarer, Professor Carsten Tanggaard, Associate Professor Karina Skovvang Christensen, Associate Professor Jesper Rosenberg Hansen, Associate Professor Marie Humlum, Associate Professor Morten Berg Jensen, Associate Professor John Kennes, Associate Professor Ann-Kristina Løkke Møller, Associate Professor Robert Ormrod,, Associate Professor Lars Skipper, Associate Professor Niels Skipper, Associate Professor Mikael Søndergaard, Associate Professor Rune Vejlin, Assistant Professor Rune Bysted, Assistant Professor Dan Mønster, Assistant Professor Damiana Rigamonti, Assistant Professor Kenneth Lykke Sørensen, Assistant Professor Jesper Wulff.

7 Tuborg Research Center fagområde International Business Som annonceret har vi haft en række drøftelser bland de Tuborg Research Centret for Globalisation and Firms tilknyttede Forsker fra ECON og BADM, vedrørende IB og International Economics undervisnings aktiviteter og linier (dvs f.eks. CandMerc IB, FIB, IEC) og underviser fra BADM og ECON. Der er store enighed i Centret om at bede Dekanats ledelsen om at i tager hensyn til følgende i den BSS restrukturering i planligger: I bedes sikre en hensigtsmæssig placering af linier, underviser og undervisning af IB og relaterede fag således at ekspertisen og aktiviteterne kan have gavn af Tuborg Research Centret og vice versa. Det vil sikre en fortsat sammenspil af undervisning og forskning. Jeg stå gerne til rådighed, vis Dekanatet eller du ønsker drøftelser og yderlig input herom. Mange hilsner Philipp