Densil Williams | Understanding complexities of The University of the West Indies

There is a perplexing perception across the Caribbean, and especially the northern Caribbean, that The University of the West Indies (UWI) is a big, fat, privileged and entitled bureaucracy that is arrogant and depends on government funding to ensure its survival. A closer understanding of the UWI will show this perception is not only wrong but dangerous to hold on to as well.

The UWI has approximately 50,000 students, 8,000 employees and operates across four landed campuses in Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda, and has a smart technology-driven campus referred to as the Open Campus, which operates across 17 countries. Annually, the UWI fulfils its obligation to provide high-quality world-renowned research, teaching and learning and advocacy on behalf of the Caribbean people, on a budget of circa US$500 million per year.

Critically, to fund the budget, governments of the region who send their citizens to be educated at the institution contributes roughly 45 per cent of this budget. The remaining 55 per cent of the budget is funded by student and other fees and the entrepreneurial endeavours of the institution. Student fees account for circa 20 per cent while the remaining 35 per cent is derived from the commercial activities which the UWI undertakes in order to ensure its survival. Entrepreneurism is alive and well at the UWI.

Any close reading of the numbers will show that, while our governmental partners are valued members of the partnership to advance tertiary education in the region, it is not accurate to say that the UWI is solely dependent on the governments of the region to ensure its survival. Although 45 per cent of funding comes from the governments of the region, and is the largest block of funds from any single partner in the partnership, a disaggregated analysis will show that the contribution from the various governments is very uneven. There are some who pay 100 per cent of the economic costs for their citizens to attend the UWI, while there are others who pay a mere 36 per cent. It is clear that, without the entrepreneurism of the UWI, government funding alone could not ensure its continued survival, though an important part of the partnership.

CLAIM OF EXTRAVAGANCE

The claim of extravagance has also dogged the UWI since recently. A more nuanced understanding of the institution and higher education in general will also show that this is not an accurate representation. Since 2015, the UWI has been on a growth path to entrench access to higher education in the region.

The Caribbean has a very low level of gross enrolment in post-secondary education. On average, only two of every 10 students who leave secondary education move on to pursue post-secondary education. When compared to more developed and emerging developed countries where, on average, seven of every 10 students who leave secondary education move to post-secondary education, it shows that the region is in a bad shape. With these numbers, the region cannot operate successfully in the new economy driven by smart automation and information and communications technologies, the fourth industrial revolution.

To succeed in the new economy, more citizens of the region must have access to high-quality post-secondary education. It is this observation that drove the UWI to push the boundaries and seek partnerships across the globe to offer high-quality educational opportunities to Caribbean citizens. In most cases, the development and execution of these partnerships are not well understood by external players who view them through orthodox commercial lens.

For example, when the UWI develops a partnership with a university in South Africa, this does not entail that the UWI is establishing green or brownfield operations in those locations. In most cases, it is existing faculty who collaborate across institutions to carry out research, teaching and learning activities, and global advocacy agenda, among other things. These arrangements require no new administrative structure, no new financial commitments (maybe besides airfare and subsistence for infrequent travel), no new technological infrastructure, no new marketing spend, among other things.

In the commercial world, invariably, those expenditures would be necessary when a firm establishes a new business in a new country. Persons, who do not understand the academic world conflate business development in the commercial sense with business development/partnerships within the context of the academe. It is this conflation that generally leads to accusation of extravagance.

While the UWI entered into some commercial deals that could have been done differently, these activities are not pervasive in the system. A close reading of the UWI financial statements year over year would show very little evidence of extravagance in the system.

In fact, the major drivers of the deficits in the UWI statement of comprehensive income are derived from pensions and post-employment benefits, items that are negotiated between the UWI and its unions. The normal day-to-day operational expenditures do not show a deficit. In fact, in the main, the UWI covers its normal day-to-day expenditures from the revenues it generate, although this is not even across the campuses. A disaggregation of the UWI accounts will show the main pain points.

GOVERNANCE

Since the publication of the Byron’s commission report on governance of the UWI in late 2020, there has been a healthy debate on the governance structure of the UWI. Like all universities, UWI’s governance structure is Byzantine. It is comprised of an interconnected set of campuses and a university centre which provides coordination to ensure the regionality of the system, while also maintaining the balance of responding to national imperatives. Within this architecture is a complex set of committees and boards which provide checks and balance to the system.

The Byron report found that this system is complex, has conflict of interest issues and needs to be simplified in order to derive greater efficiency. While the UWI embraces the report, like any organisation, it has to examine the efficacy of the recommendations as it thinks through the implementation mechanisms. This is no different from in the implementation of the Ramphall report of 1996 and the Alleyne report of 2004.

Embracing of conversation, deliberations and discourse should not be seen as a rejection of the report. For any organisation at 73 years old, change is the only constant. However, change does not mean destroying historical antecedents in order to move ahead. The best way to ensure meaningful change is to build on the strong elements of the foundation that was laid. In the end, I am sure the UWI will emerge stronger in its governance architecture after the deliberations and comments on the Byron report.

CONCLUDING THOUGHT

The UWI will continue to transform the operationalisation of its business model, especially as the COVID-19 environment has forced higher educational institutions to be more agile in the delivery of their core business. A strong UWI is critical to Caribbean development for, without greater access to high-quality post-secondary education, the Caribbean region will not be able to achieve high and sustained levels of economic growth. Dialogue and debate will be an important part of this transformation so that all players can better understand the complex enterprise called the UWI.

- Densil Williams is a professor of International Business at the UWI. Send feedback to densilw@yahoo.com