IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/joinma/v10y2018i2p19-39n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition vs. Searching as a Mechanism of the Rector’s Selection in Higher Education Institutions in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Degtyarova Iryna

    (Polish Rectors Foundation – Institute of Knowledge SocietyWarsaw University of Technology, Poland)

  • Woźnicki Jerzy

    (Polish Rectors Foundation – Institute of Knowledge SocietyWarsaw University of Technology, Poland)

Abstract

Objective: This paper aims at looking at the mechanisms of rector’s appointment in public higher education institutions in Poland based on the analysis of the legislation binding since 2005 with reference to the latest changes.Methodology: Legislative analysis of the past and current regulations on the models of rector’s election was conducted, including mechanisms of nominating candidates in the Act on Higher education 2005, its amendments in 2011 and the Act on Higher education and Science in 2018. Literature review and empirical analysis of good practices were used.Findings: The issue of strengthening a rector’s position and professionalizing university management in the system of higher education is very important and being widely discussed in terms of governance reforms. Changes, new regulations, reforms depend on how they are implemented on the institutional level in terms of their strategical development and how they are supported and promoted by the executive head.The model of nominating and appointing the rector determines his relationship with the university board, senate and with academic community as well. In public higher education institutions in Poland the competition model is more burdensome than the model of election, it has numerous disadvantages and threats, and wasn’t applied by any university. New regulations in Poland make the process of nomination more important than before. In general, there are two main models of nominating candidates: an open procedure (open competition) and a closed one (e.g. searching, headhunting for senior executive staff in HR, in business sphere), each has their own strengths and weaknesses. In case of HEIs, both respect the principles of institutional autonomy, guaranteed to universities by the Polish Constitution and the law. It is an autonomous right of the academic community, of the university itself to define their own framework and nomination procedure. The model of executive search in nominating candidates can become more feasible and effective for professionalizing and improvement of the rector’s governance.Value Added: The model of rector’s appointment has a significant impact on the whole university performance. By professionalizing appointment mechanisms at all its stages, universities will improve university governance and introduce new quality of management.Recommendations: New regulations in higher education create possibilities for introducing into the academic practice the executive search as a mechanism for nominating candidates for a rector’s position in Polish universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Degtyarova Iryna & Woźnicki Jerzy, 2018. "Competition vs. Searching as a Mechanism of the Rector’s Selection in Higher Education Institutions in Poland," Journal of Intercultural Management, Sciendo, vol. 10(2), pages 19-39, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:joinma:v:10:y:2018:i:2:p:19-39:n:2
    DOI: 10.2478/joim-2018-0008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/joim-2018-0008
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/joim-2018-0008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    rector; higher education; governance; autonomy; searching; competition; nomination;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:joinma:v:10:y:2018:i:2:p:19-39:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.