Mark McGowan’s announcement of an independent review panel to examine the structure of Western Australia’s four public universities has ignited discussion on the fiery topic of university mergers.
Announced last month, the review’s terms of reference make no specific mention of the possibility of mergers. However, many in the sector argue the government’s initiative is aimed at reducing the number of public universities in WA to three, two or even one to create the state’s first ‘super university’.
There is little doubt the review represents a tangible opportunity to discuss the possibility of amalgamations. At the same time, it presents an even better opportunity to discuss strategic alternatives to mergers that might enhance our public universities and deliver better outcomes for the WA community.
Alternatives worth discussing are many and varied.
Picture, for example, one of our four public universities becoming an internationally renowned specialist institution focused on science or the arts, or even commerce and business. Such a university would be able to direct all its resources to its specialty rather than try to spread funds thinly across multiple subject areas.
There is also the very real option of a WA postgraduate-only university, focused solely on students seeking to obtain qualifications beyond a bachelor’s degree.
It might also be feasible to strengthen higher education’s relationship with the vocational education and training sector through the establishment of the state’s first dual-sector university. Think of the likes of RMIT, Swinburne, Federation and Victoria universities in Victoria, Charles Darwin University in the Northern Territory and the Central Queensland University.
There is also the prospect of an online-only university based in WA, with a small physical footprint but the opportunity to enrol students virtually from around the globe.
Perhaps most importantly, the review might consider the prospect of one or more of our universities becoming a teaching-only institution.
This possibility needs to be raised, even though protagonists of these types of institutions claim research is critical to informing university teaching (and that the title ‘university’ in Australia is reserved only for those institutions that conduct research alongside teaching).
And if there was a teaching-only institution in WA, why not a research-only one, too?
If we did not want to take the discussion that far, it would be worth encouraging the four vice-chancellors to agree to a reduction in the current duplication of course offerings.
Each WA public university offers courses in teacher education, business, law and nursing, which presents a real opportunity for course consolidation. Add private provider Notre Dame University to the mix and there are five choices for those wanting to study any one of those areas.
There is little question that each alternative to mergers offers unique benefits and challenges, which will require universities to carefully assess options and work closely with the state and federal governments to bring them to fruition.
But if mergers are to be the focus of the review, a few home truths must be exposed.
The rationale for a merger of one or more of WA’s public universities needs to be much clearer, and not just based on the notion that a merged entity will climb the global rankings because of an enhanced research profile.
Disappointingly, when people raise the topic of university mergers it is usually within the context of increasing research productivity, while teaching and learning remain an afterthought.
Students and their learning experience must be at the very centre of any rationale for amalgamation.
From a student perspective, having a reduced number of universities – and maybe only one – might stifle choice of experience. This could prompt local students to see what’s on offer interstate or even overseas and contribute to a brain drain out of WA.
And if international students do not have enough choice in WA, they might increasingly look east of the Nullarbor for options.
Besides, in selecting a degree program, most undergraduate students look to the quality of a course on offer and the experience it will provide, not the size of the university or where it ranks globally.
To prove that point, look no further than Bond University, a private institution located in Queensland.
With just 5,000 students, Bond University’s website boasts: “For the better part of two decades, Bond has remained Australia’s number one university for student experience, achieving five-star ratings in every student experience category in the 2023 Good Universities Guide.”
Amalgamations and mergers also come with significant leadership challenges.
Merging just two universities will require exceptional leadership. Merging more than two might create an unwieldy organisation that is slow to respond to issues, challenges and opportunities.
And we must stop thinking that merging universities will be a quick fix for the sector.
A merger of two or even four public universities is never going to be a quick process. At the very least, it could take five to 10 years to bring together different systems and processes and streamline course offerings and research focuses and strengths.
We should also be mindful that there is no such thing as a true merger.
It is rare that merger partners are truly equal in standing. One will always have more students, greater assets, a stronger brand, a superior reputation for teaching or greater international outreach.
It is not that mergers do not present opportunities, but they are not a default strategy for universities that have been battered by changed conditions and, in general, continue to undertake excellent work.
Despite facing those merger home truths, if the government’s review panel is focused on amalgamations, it would be well advised to consider sourcing the right partners from across Australia, and not restrict mergers to institutions in WA.
Some WA universities are in clusters of ‘like’ universities. Murdoch, for example, is part of Innovative Universities Australia, UWA is a member of the Group of Eight and Curtin is a member of the Australian Technology Network.
Perhaps the review might consider how mergers could work better within those groupings.
We seem to have become obsessed over many years with university mergers in WA and ignored the promise of other possibilities to advance the state’s higher-education sector.
The closest WA has come to the creation of a super university was a loose proposal in 2005 to initially merge Curtin and Murdoch universities and, later, add Edith Cowan University to form the University of Perth. The proposal was dismissed as unworkable while still in the discussion phase.
This latest round of local merger discussions might well have arisen because of the publicity surrounding two South Australian universities agreeing to undertake due diligence around a possible merger.
Yet what institutions in SA are planning to do should have no bearing on what happens in WA.
A review of WA’s public universities is commendable and seems to have the support of the four vice-chancellors.
What matters now is that the review panel acts in the best interests of Western Australians and makes recommendations that consider the full range of possibilities for structural reform to continue to build a thriving and even more distinctive higher education community for the state.
• Professor Gary Martin is chief executive officer of the Australian Institute of Management WA
