Sejahtera Academic Framework (SAF)

154 153 Governance Management · Set and norms, strategic vision and direction and formulate high- level goals and policies. · Oversee management and organisational performance to ensure that the organisation is working in the best interests of the public, and more specifically the stakeholders who are served by the organisation’s mission. · Direct and oversee the management to ensure that the organisation is achieving the desired outcomes and to ensure that the organisation is acting prudently, ethically and legally. · Run the organisation in line with the broad goals and direction set by the governing body. · Implement the decisions within the context of the mission and strategic vision. · Make operational decisions and policies, keep the governance bodies informed and educated. · Be responsive to requests for additional information. Realising the discrepancy between the two based on the ideals that SAF espouses and what is “not” carried out or aligned to the values system is an important “reality-check.” It could be the much-needed brief moments to better prepare oneself at times when moral and ethical dilemmas are being subtly put to test. This will go a long way to merely play safe and gradually fails to put KhAIR in its proper place. Over time it gets worse when no one is willing and able to keep the saf true to its meaning and purpose in a disciplined way. Ultimately, the Whole Institution Transformation, complemented strongly by the Whole Curriculum Transformation (SAF) in tandem to the institutional one will also suffer. Table 5.1 below summarises the main differences between governance and management: to achieve concrete outcomes. Management refers to individuals or groups of people who are given the authority to achieve the desired results.” In contrast, “[g]overnance systems set the parameters under which management and administrative systems will operate. Governance is about how power is distributed and shared, how policies are formulated, priorities set and stakeholders made accountable. The term ‘good governance’ is also frequently used as a necessary pre-condition for creating an enabling environment in meeting outcomes related and sustainable human development in the context of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs), and more recently the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). REACHING TO THE PREFERRED SCENARIO The Sejahtera Academic Framework is both “old” and “new”. It is “old” in the sense that the core values and the vision and mission of the University continue to be the bedrock. It is “new” in that it weaves together the current and future major agenda while demanding each and everyone of us - at both the individual and organisational levels - reflect on our roles and responsibilities to move the University into the future. And what is the future? Chronologically, the “future” is a specific time ahead that we are planning for. So what are we planning for? This is where foresight studies may help us understand the possible futures. For the purpose of the foresight studies, 2040 is chosen as the next “station.” UNESCO has put 2030 as its time goal for its 5 pillars of learning. With SAF launched in 2020, coupled with Education 2030, 2040 is a good time period to expect the full manifestation and impact of these 2 major initiatives reflected in IIUM. Moving ahead to 2040, there are several probable scenarios*. Scenario 1. The University community in 2020 has chosen not to change, for we seem to be doing well, and things have been working, though not flawlessly, but things get done - students graduate, staff get promoted - the University has even won several awards at both the national and international level. With that choice, in 2040, it is expected that the University will become a “Museum of Yesterday” - the Garden of Knowledge and Virtue is essentially a deserted and abandoned garden. No longer competitive programme-wise and not willing to change organisational-wise, the University no longer attracts much less retain the brightest minds, it is merely existing, as long as the government continues to fund it. Meanwhile, the world outside continues to change, at times exponentially. Scenario 2. The University community in 2020 has chosen to change marginally. Everyone understands that some things have got to change, but the changes are done only as and when needed, why rock the boat too much? Just row the boat ahead but don’t rock it. With that choice, in 2040, it is expected that the University will transform into a Sejahtera community. This does not seem like a bad decision to have made in 2020 then. Until the details are looked into and we see that is it essentially a stagnant community that is resistant to change, and everyone continues to be in their comfort zone - textbook and exam- oriented pedagogies, low-impact research done mainly for getting promotions, technology-slave and follower culture - these images permeate the assembly-line setting. There is still too much bureaucracy and too much emphasis on maintaining legacy or heritage blindly. The “ Sejahtera Transformer” in this Sejahtera community remains more of a litany and a concept than the reality, for in the end, it continues to be about the paper qualification and instant self-glorification.