This content requires Adobe Flash Player version
or later.
Either you do not have Adobe Flash Player installed,
or your version is too old,
or there is a problem with your Flash installation and we were unable to detect it.
SUMMARY: THE MODEL OF BAD GOVERNANCE AND MALADMINISTRATION
The above documentary analysis of the five assessor reports has revealed many issues regarding bad governance and maladministration at the five evaluated institutions. Figure 1 presents a summary of the major findings of this analysis.
GOVERNING COUNCIL Bad Corporate Governance
Low calibre of some members Divisions and in-fighting
Peddling negative rumours and lies Politically engineered intimidation Abuse of power and authority Pursuance of self-interest
Failure to follow conventional meeting practices Unjustified interventions and decisions Flexing of political muscles
SENATE Low quality debates Fear of victimisation Weak Academic Oversight
ADMINITSRTRATIVE SYSTEMS Low Calibre
Some token appointments Poor Human Relations
Incompetence, In-fighting and Mistrust Weak Management Systems
Competence of Middle Managers Poor human resource management No institutional organogram No performance management system High staff turn-over Low staff morale
No change management strategies Poor Financial Management
No internal controls, e.g. internal audit units Poor / Dysfunctional ICT's and MIS
Poor academic administration (admissions, registration, examinations, graduation) No Risk Management Strategy Poor Communication with Stakeholders Over Population
Mismatch between institutional carrying capacity and student enrolment Figure 1: Model of bad governance and maladministration at some South African Universities Towards a Model of Bad Governance and Maladministration at South African Universities 341