Governance and decision-making in higher education

Concluding Observations

From the presentations of the survey outcomes is has become clear that substantial differences exist between both types of institutions as well as between countries. To a large extent, the results for the universities in particular still reflect the dominant notion of professional expertise, especially where the primary processes of teaching and research are concerned. At the same time, it also has become clear that the role of the central institutional administration is a non-negligible factor in higher education, especially for what we can call the ‘non-primary processes’ issues. With respect to differences between countries, the study shows substantial variation between the countries. This alone appears to provide sufficient basis to question the general assumption of the continental model. On the European continent clearly different institutional governance systems exist, and it would appear logical to relate these to the different ways in which national governments in these systems have changed their policies and policy priorities over the years. However, to shed further light on these differences, a more detailed analysis of the data will have to be performed, for example relating the survey out-comes to differences in governmental steering paradigms.