UTILIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION IN STATE UNIVERSITIES INSOUTH EAST NIGERIA.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the study

The adoption of committee system of administration in university administration is not new, neither is it limited  to  Nigeria.  The demand  for and  supply of institutional arrangements for decision-making in universities are as old as the universities themselves. In Nigeria, State Universities evolved when in 1979, Higher education was returned to the concurrent  legislative  list  which  enabled  different  state  governments  in  Nigeria  to establish  their  own  universities  funded  by  them,  to  provide  university  education  to teeming population of their youths (Ali, 2008). These state universities are run basically in the same way as the other universities because the National University Commission (NUC) provides minimum standards for all universities in Nigeria. (Emenalo in Uche and Ahunanya, 2013). The use of committees was entrenched in the laws and statutes that established the university system and they are vital instruments in the decision-making process. The utilization of committees provides opportunity for sharing governance with the university governing body because  of staff participation  in  committees.  This also allows the university to benefit from the expertise and experience of faculty members thereby facilitating change and enhancing performance. According to Ogurunku (2012), Nigerian  universities,   (state  universities  inclusive)  believe  in  the  spirit  of  shared governance and therefore engage the services of committees to debate institutional-wide issues and to provide advisory services to the university administration. The effective utilization of these committees enhances university governance making it smoother and

easier.

1

Committees have been described in many ways. Nwachukwu in Ogbonida, Obaino and  Emmanuel  (2013)  defines  committee  as  a device  for  achieving  co-ordination  of activities and sharing information among various departments and divisions of an organization. According to Cotton (2005) committee system is a democratic method of school management. From these definitions one can deduce that any group appointed or established  by a larger group elected  for a purpose or purposes can be regarded  as a committee.  One can equally deduce  that a committee  is a subsystem of a system,  an organization  of  people  with  delegated  authority  established  either  to  advise,  make decisions or recommendations towards the achievement of the goals of the organization. Eno-Ibanga (2005) revealed that the primary purpose of instituting committee system in university governance grew out of the need for more broadly-based decision-making as universities become more complex. University committees could be ad-hoc, standing or constitutional/statutory micro-entities that are created to meet some specific and critical needs of the system in  its daily search  for knowledge  and truth. Panels,  Boards  and special task-forces constitute kinds of committees in Nigerian university system. These committees are either responsible to the council, senate or congregation.

The  Governing  council  is  the  highest  administrative  body  in  the  university, saddled  with  the  task  of general  arrangement,  supervision  and  control of the  affairs, policy, assets and liabilities and funding of the university. According to Ogbonda, Obaino and Emmanuel (2013) the chairman of the governing council is usually appointed by the visitor who could be a State Governor or the President depending on the ownership of the institution. The second administrative  system is the senate. It is the highest academic authority in the university and has direct policy control over all academic matters in the university  system.  The  senate  is  the  main  organ  regulating  internal  activities  of the

university  making  and  implementing  academic  programmes,  moderating  examinations and  directing  teaching  and  learning.  The  senate  also  approves  sessional  results.  Its chairman is the vice-chancellor. Other members of the senate include the Deputy Vice- chancellor, the Registrar, the Deans of Faculties and Provosts, Heads of Departments, Directors of Institutes and Centres, the Librarian, all Professors and nominated members from the congregation. For academic programmes, selected studies are grouped into colleges/faculties with each Faculty/College having a Dean (or Provost) as the case may be as its head. Faculties/Colleges  are further sub-divided into various departments and each is headed by a Head of Department.

There are two broad divisions existing among the university staff, – academic or teaching staff and non-academic/non teaching or administrative staff. These two groups work  towards  the  realization   of  the  set  goals  and  objectives   of  the  university. Administration in universities provides the matrix which binds together various integral and  important  parts  of  the  university.  According  to  Duze  (2012)  it  lubricates  the machinery of governance  to  sustain  a smooth  and  effective  operation.  The degree  of complexity attendant in university administration is hardly to be encountered in any other situation   with   peculiarities   which   distinguish   it   from   others,   among   these   are examinations and a high degree of concentration of brains. The administration of state universities  is  centred  around  the  council,  the  senate,  faculties  and  departments  for academic decisions and library, registry, catering, bursary and maintenance  section for supportive  activities.  Each  of  these  broad  divisions  highlighted  above  seems  very complex that it is often subdivided into smaller units to enable fewer people handle them effectively. The identification  and establishment of these units and the desire to make democracy succeed in the institution suggests the adoption of the committee system of

administration. Committees are set up to look into greater details, issues and problems associated with each sub unit, that are relevant to the realization of the university set goals and objectives. Among these committees according to Sofolowe, Akinsola and Kayode (2012) are Finance and General Purpose Committee, Development Committee, Appointment and Promotion Committee, Admissions Committee, Academic Planning Committee, Research Grants Committee among others. Ibukun in Ogbonida, Obaino and Emmanuel (2013) also identified the basic committees in Nigerian universities to include: Finance and General Purpose Committee, Admissions Committee, Committee of Deans, Research   Grants   Committee   and   Ceremony   Committee.   Others   are   consultative committee  on  community  Development,  students’ welfare  Board,  Library Committee, Sports Council, Students Disciplinary Committee, Staff Disciplinary Committee, Development  and  Physical  Planning  Committee,  Staff  Housing  Committee/Lodging Bureau, Tenders Board, Alumini relations committee among others.

The effective utilization of these committees in university administration makes for  a smooth  and easy  administration.  According  to  Ogbogu  (2013),  effective  use of committees in university administration enhances university governance and management because  the  decisions  made  guide  the  judgment  of  university  administrators.  The Committee System democratizes and facilities the decision-making process (Ede 2000), as a means of sharing governance with university governing bodies, it provides an avenue for  ensuring  full  participation  of  staff  in  the  decision-making  process.  When  the committee  system  is  effectively  utilized  it  enhances  managerial  accountability  and maintains the democratic procedures for representation of views set out in the universities charter and statutes. Effective utilization of committees therefore provides a more solid basis for administrative decisions, allows the university benefit from the expertise and

experience of faculty and other staff members, facilitates change and enhances the performance of the system. The product of these is a conducive academic environment ensuring achievement of set goals and objectives.

Most of the challenges being faced by many state universities today are unheard of in university systems with effective committee system. For example, Ajayi and Ekundayo (2009) identified some issues which continue to challenge university administration, especially state universities in spite of the utilization of the Committee System to include; population  explosion, poor funding, insecurity infrastructural  decay, student militancy, insecurity in campuses unabated cases of examination malpractice among others. They are also problems of time and resource wastage, week and unsatisfactory group response as well as interference of politicians in university administration as noted by Sofoluwe, Akinsolu and Kayode  (2012). The presence of the above scenario in our state universities are indicative of the fact that the committee system may be fraught with challenges that could  render its activities  ineffective.  It is also indicative  of the fact that  Committee System  as it is being utilized  today may be inadequate  or improperly utilized  in the administration  of  state  universities.  This  state  of  affairs  has  given  rise  to  a  lot  of complaints  and  grievances  against  the  committee  system  and  people  are  calling  for changes. In fact there is widespread conviction that some changes are needed if Nigerian

universities especially state universities are to meet the challenges of the 21st  century.

Ajayi  & Ekondaya   (2009) noted  that there is need  to review the existing system of management by responding to changing circumstances and new demands through appropriate adaptations both in style and substance to ensure continued  relevance  and survival of the state universities. Adegbite (2004) also noted that Nigerian universities including state universities   require new patterns of the Committee System capable of

responding to the changing needs and emerging challenges of the 21st century. This study therefore sought to determine the ways the committee system can be more effectively and adequately utilized to bring about the needed changes.

Statement of the Problem

Committees are important in the university system because they democratize the decision-making process and assist university administrators to arrive at useful and meaningful decisions.  State universities  have over the years developed  the committee system as a unique strategy for responding to the challenges evolving from radical transformations taking place globally. The use of the Committee System makes room for experienced,  responsible  and enlightened  university management  because of the more broadly-based decision-making process it provides. The committee system has also been known as the only viable instrument for meeting the demands of rapid changes taking place  in  state  universities  and  the  use  of  committees  are  specifically  important  and justifiable in state universities administration because the instrument by which the universities were established prescribed specific committees as part of the governmental structure. The committee system is intended to enhance co-ordination, managerial accountability  and the maintenance of the democratic  procedures for representation  of views set out in the university charter and statutes. The use of committees is therefore expected to provide a more solid basis for administrative decisions since it allows the university to benefit from the expertise and experience of faculty and other staff. The expectation  is that state universities would enjoy a smooth  and a highly goal-oriented administration.

However, some members of the state universities’ community have criticized the utilization  of the  committee  system,  saying  that  it  may be  ineffective,  inadequate  or poorly utilized. According to them, some of the challenges which the committee system was supposed to address were still being experienced. Others have noted that the disadvantages of the utilization of the committee system outweigh its advantages and that committee system may not necessarily be the best method of administering the university.

It was against this background that the researcher investigated the utilization of the committee system in the administration of state universities in South East Nigeria.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of the committee system in the administration  of state universities  in South  East Nigeria.  Specifically,  this study was designed to:

1.  determine the difference in the mean ratings of Senior Administrative Staff and Heads of Departments on the contributions of the committee system of administration in the decision-making process of state universities.

2.  ascertain  the difference  in the mean ratings of Senior Administrative  staff and Heads   of   Department   on   the   contributions   of   the   committee   system   of administration on staff participation in university administration.

3.  determine the difference in the mean ratings of Senior Administrative staff and Heads of Departments on the problems that hinder effective use of the committee system of administration in state universities.

4.  determine the difference in the mean ratings of Senior Administrative Staff and Heads of Departments  on the strategies  for the improvement of the committee system of administration in state universities in South East Nigeria.

Significance of the Study

This study is important from both theoretical and practical view points. From the theoretical  view  point,  the  study  was  based  on  the  system  theory  propounded  by Berlalanfy in 1951. A system is any set of distinct parts that interact to form a complex whole. The university is a system with parts such as employees, assets, product, resources and information that form a complex system. System theory regards an organization such as a university as a system. A system can be either closed or open. The university is an open system. An open system interacts with its environment by way of input, through put and output. The tenets of the system theory consist of three essential elements or key concepts. These are Input, Through Put/Process and Output. An organization such as a university receives input such as equipment, natural resources and the work of employees referred to as input. The input are transformed or processed, this processing is called through puts, and then yield products or services called output. Output are released into the environment. Feedback loops are also an important feature of an open system; they provide information to the organization by connecting the output to the input. A negative feedback loop indicates a problem that should be corrected. A positive feedback loop can identify output that have worked well.

This theory is related to the present study in that the university is a system and committees are sub-systems within the university which interact and interrelate as part of the “whole”. The level of performance of committees in the university administration is

directly related to the output of the university. This means that if university committees are effective, the output of the university will be of high standard. But if committees within the university are ineffective, it also results in poor product and poor achievement of set goals of the university. This is because of the concept of interdependence and inter- relatedness of this theory.

On  the  practical  aspect,  the  findings  of  this  study  will  be  of  benefit  to  the university governing bodies – the Council and the Senate. It will also be of great benefit to committee chairmen and members, students and their parents as well as future researchers will also benefit from this study.

State university governing bodies including the Senate and Council and all the principal officers of the university will benefit from this study because if the committee system is effective, the administration of the university becomes smooth and easy. This is because   effective   committee   system   enhances   managerial    accountability    while maintaining democratic procedures for representation of views set out in the university chatter and statutes as well as providing a more solid basis for administrative decisions. This ensures a conducive  academic  environment  and achievement  of set goals of the universities as well as enhances the corporate image of the university.

Committee  chairmen  and  members  will benefit  from the findings of the study because the university administrators will fund committees more adequately to facilitate their  activities.  They will  also  benefit  from  the  provision  of  improved  facilities  and conducive environment for their activities. Committee chairmen and members will also benefit from the findings of this study as the issues of delay in committee  decisions, actions, time wasting as well as monotony of committee meetings will no longer exist

because committee members are adequately trained, experienced,  skilled and knowledgeable in group dynamics, team work and democratic principles which enables them to approach their assignment with a better focus, a positive mindset and adequate planning which lead to greater commitment and goal achievement.

Students, their parents and other stakeholders will benefit from this study because they will enjoy a smooth running academic environment without hitches and graduate as top  quality  products  that  have  all  the  necessary  ingredients  to  meet  the  need  and challenges of the time especially in this 21st  century. Parents will get value for money spent in the education of their children. Other stakeholders such as employers will find suitably qualified people to fit into the required openings in their establishment.

Finally, future researchers in this area of study will use the results as empirical references. This will be done through library research and the internet as the result will be published for public utility.

Scope of the Study

This  study  covered  five  state-owned  universities  in  South-East  Nigeria.  They include  Abia  State  University,  Uturu;  Chukwuemeka  Odunegwu  Ojukwu  University (former Anambra State University of Science and Technology), Uli; Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki; Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu; and Imo State University, Owerri.

The study focused on: ways the committee system contributes to decision-making process of staff in university administration, ways the committee system increases participation  of  staff  members  in  university  administration,  factors  that  hinder  the

effectiveness as well as the strategies for improving the committee system. The study was delimited to senior administrative staff and Heads of Academic Departments (HODs).

Research Questions

The following research questions guided the study:

1.  How do the mean ratings of Senior Administrative Staff and those of Heads of Department differ on the ways the committee system contributes to the decision- making process in state universities in South East Nigeria?

2.  How do the mean rating of Senior Administrative Staff and Heads of Department differ on the ways of the committee system contributes to increased participation of members of staff in university administration?

3.  How do the mean ratings of Senior Administrative Staff and  Heads of Department differ  on  the  problems  that  hinder  effective  use  of  the  committee  system  in university administration.

4.  How do the mean ratings of Senior Administrative Staff and Heads of Department differ  on  the  strategies  for  improving     the  committee  system  for  effective university administration?

Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses guided the study and were tested at 0.05% level of significance.

HO1       There   is   no   significant   difference   between   the   mean   ratings   of   senior administrative  staff and Heads of Academic Departments  (HODs) on ways the

committee system contributes to administrative decision-making process in state universities in South-East Nigeria.

HO2       There   is   no   significant   difference   between   the   mean   ratings   of   senior administrative  staff and Heads of Departments  (HODs) on ways the committee system contributes to increased participation of staff in university administration in state universities in South-East Nigeria.

HO3       There   is   no   significant   difference   between   the   mean   ratings   of   Senior Administrative  Staff and  Heads  of Departments  (HODs)  on  the problems  that hinder effective use of the committee system in university administration.

HO4       There   is   no   significant   difference   between   the   mean   ratings   of   senior administrative staff and Heads of Departments (HODs) on the strategies for improving committee system for effective university administration.

₦5,000.00 – DOWNLOAD FULL PROJECT DOWNLOAD FULL PROJECT Added to cart

---

---

---

---

---

Related Project Topics :