UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA

CAPABILITY AND POTENTIALS OF RESPONSIBILITY CENTRES UNDER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALISATION POLICY

ZANARIAH MOHD NOR

FPP 2001 13

CAPABILITY AND POTENTIALS OF RESPONSIBILITY CENTRES UNDER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALISATION POLICY

By

ZANARIAH MOHO NOR

Thesis submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Master of Science in the Faculty of Educational Studies

Universiti Putra Malaysia

April 2001

Abstract of thesIs presented to Senate of the Unlversltl Putra Malaysia In fulfilment of requirement for the Master of SCience

CAPABILITY AND POTENTIALS OF RESPONSIBILITY CENTRES UNDER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALISATION POLICY

By

ZANARIAH MOHO NOR

Apri l 2001

Chairman Assoc. Prof. Dr. Turiman Suandi

Faculty Educational Stud ies

The introduction of a decentrallsed system In a public university In 1 995 was

geared for capacity· bUilding of Responsibi l ity Centres (RCs) In overcoming some

l imitations of the centralised administrative system The decentrallsed system did not

seem to achieve ItS objectives when several problems emerged. The study was an

attempt to examine the capabil ity and potentials of RCs In administering and managing

academic and support functions under the decentrallsed system In a public university

The model of public policy, administration and finance by Rondinelli et a/ (1 989, 1 984)

was used to gUide the study process

The study adopted a quantitative and a modified qualitative approach The study

population comprised administrators at the academic RCs A total of 99 respondents

and 1 6 Informants were Involved the quantitative and qualitative approaches

respectively A self-administered questionnaire was used for the quantitative approach

while the semi-structured Interview was used for the qualitative approach The

quantitative data were analysed uSing the Statistical Package for Social SCience ver 7 5

while the qualitative data were analysed uSing the Ethnograph ver 5

Under the decentrallsed system , the study found that the RCs encountered

several constraints related to bureaucratic, organisational and resources factors The

11

central management tended to provide insufficient empowerment and administrative

assistance to Res to undertake the increased workloads and responsibilities. This

problem was exacerbated with inadequate documentation on policies, regulations,

procedures and strategies to guide Res. The central management seemed unable to

provide adequate resources to Res to operationalise the assigned functions.

In spite of the shortcomings, the Res seemed to have high capability and

potentials in administering and managing the resource management and faculty

administration and management; and the academic functions. The Res had moderate

capabil ity and potentials in administering and managing other functions such as

research; the development and maintenance of physical facilities; and students

development, admission and welfare; and consultancy and community services. Some

Res seemed to be better than others in administering and managing three functions i .e .

resource management; and faculty administration and management; and students

development, admission and welfare. About one-half of administrators were clear with

the objectives of academic and support functions. They also showed different levels of

clarity towards the objectives.

The study discovered that, to some extent, the decentralised system had

potentials to consolidate the university governance. Being empowered and held

accountable seemed to have built strengths in Res viabil ity to seize opportunity to

generate incomes and adopt several coping strategies in mitigating the constraints

faced.

There is a need for the university to review the factors related to bureaucratic,

organisational , and resources to ensure the policy would consol idate capacity building

of Res in governing its various functions. The central management should strongly

support and commit itself to adequately empower Res to discharge their functions . The

effort should be supported with sufficient documents to guide Res with pragmatic

III

decentralisation concepts and principles as an effective monitoring system. The Res

also should be provided with adequate resources to ensure the efficiency and

effectiveness of governance.

IV

Abstrak tesis yang dikemukakcm kepada Senat Universiti Putra Malaysia sebagai Memenuhi keperluan untuk Ijazah Master Sains

KEUPAYAAN DAN POTENSI PUSAT TANGGUNGJAWAB 01 BAWAH PELAKSANAAN POLISI OESENTRALISASI

Oleh

ZANARIAH MOHO NOR

Apri l 2001

Pengerusi Prof. Madya Dr. Turiman Suandi

Fakulti Pengajian Pendidikan

Pelaksanaan sistem desentralisasi di sebuah universiti awam adalah

bermatlamat untuk membina kapasiti Pusat Tanggungjawab (PT J) dalam mengatasi

kekangan sistem pentadbiran berpusat. Beberapa masalah yang timbul menunjukkan

matlamatnya tidak dicapai sepenuhnya. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk menilai keupayaan

dan potensi PT J dalam mentadbir dan mengurus fungsi-fungsi akademik dan sokongan

di bawah sistem desentralisasi di sebuah universiti awam. Model pentadbiran awam

dan keewangan oleh Rondinell i et a/. (1 989; 1 984) digunakan bagi membantu proses

kajian.

Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dan kual itatif yang diubahsuai .

Populasi kajian adalah para pentadbir PT J akademik. Pendekatan kuantitatif

melibatkan 99 responden manakala pendekatan kualititatif melibatkan 16 informan.

Pendekatan kuantitatif mengunakan borang soal-selidik manakala pendekatan kualitatif

menggunakan temubual berpandu. Data kuantitatif dianalisis menggunakan Statistical

Package for Social Science versi 7.S. Data kualitatif dianalisis menggunakan

Ethnograph versi S.

Kajian mendapati PT J mengalami beberapa kekangan yang dikategorikan

sebagai faktor-faktor birokrasi , organisasi dan sumber. Pihak atasan nampaknya tidak

v

memberikan pengupayaan dan bantuan pentadbiran yang sejajar dengan beban yang

dipertanggungjawabkan kepada PT J. Ookumentasi polisi desentralisasi, peraturan dan

strategi didapati tidak mencukupi sebagai garispanduan kepada PT J. Pihak atasan juga

didapati gagal menyediakan sumber yang mencukupi kepada PT J untuk

merealisasikan fungsi-fungsi yang diserahkan.

Oi sebalik kekangan-kekangan yang dialami , di dapati PT J mempunyai

keupayaan dan potensi yang tinggi dalam mentadbir dan menguruskan sumber; fakulti;

dan fungsi-fungsi akademik. PT J hanya mempunyai keupayaan dan potensi sederhana

dalam mentadbir dan mengurus fungsi-fungsi penyelidikan; pembangunan dan

penyelenggaraan kemudahan fizikal; pembangunan, kemasukan dan kebaj ikan pelajar;

dan perkhidmatan konsultan dan komuniti. 8eberapa PT J didapati mempunyai

keupayaan dan potensi yang lebih baik dalam mentadbirkan dan menguruskan sumber;

fakulti; dan fungsi pembangunan kemasukan dan kebaj ikan pelajar. Hampir 50.0

peratus para pentadbir PT J jelas terhadap objektif-objektif bagi fungsi-fungsi akademik

dan sokongan, dan mereka menunjukkan tahap kejelasan yang berbeza terhadap

objektif-objektif tersebut.

Kaj ian mendapati pelaksanaan polisi ini mempunyai potensi mengukuhkan

pengurusan dan pentabiran universiti. Pengupayaan dan akauntabili PT J nampaknya

memberi kekuatan dalam mengukuhkan kemandirian setiap PT J untuk mengumpulkan

pendapatan dan mempraktikkan beberapa strategi bagi mengurangkan kekangan­

kekangan yang dialami .

Adalah satu keperluan bagi pihak pentadbir universiti untuk meneliti setiap

faktor-faktor birokrasi , organisasi dan sumber bagi memastikan polisi ini mengukuhkan

pembangunan kapasiti PT J dalam pentadbiran fungsi-fungsi yang diserahkan. Pihak

atasan perlu menyokong dan memberi komitmen untuk memberi pengupayaan yang

mencukupi kepada PT J. Usaha ini perlu disokong dengan dokumentasi konsep dan

VI

prinsip polisi desentralisasi yang praktikal dan mencukupi sebagai sistem pemantaun

berkesan. Penyaluran sumber yang mencukupi kepada PT J perlu bagi memastikan

pentadbiran yang cekap dan berkesan.

VII

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In The Name of ALLAH, The Most Gracious and The Most Mercifu l , Thank You

for giving me strength to complete the masters programme. Alhamdunillah.

I would like to express my great thanks to my Supervisory Committee:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Turiman Suandi, Prof. Dr. Rahim Md. Sail and Prof. Dr. Azimi Hamzah

for guidance, support and supervisions throughout the process of completion of this

thesis. I also express my deep sense of gratitude and appreciation to Prof. Rahim Md.

Sail for the advantageous comments, suggestion and moral support.

My sincere gratitude is extended to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Turiman Suandi and the

Research Unit of UPM in providing me a Short Term Research Grant that made the

study possible. Warm and sincere .words of thank to Yang Mulia Dr. Raja Ahmad

Tajuddin Shah the guidance and support in the final touch up to the thesis.

My sincere appreciation also goes to my beloved and respected parents,

Tuan Hj . Mohd Nor Hj . Endut and Fatimah Othman; my elder sister Zarina and the rest

of the family-Sofia, Mohd Nizam, Ahmad Faiz, Nurul Izzah and Amirruddin; for their

affection and support. My deep appreciation also goes to Sis Fazimah Hayati Hassan

Basri for her support and concern .

I would also like to thank to the many individuals, who in one way or another

have contributed directly and indirectly to the completion of my study, I affirm my

indebtedness. Without all these wonderful people and their support and confidence it is

unlikely that I could have made it through.

viii

I certify that an Examination Committee met on 26th April, 2001 to conduct the final examination of Zanariah Mohd Nor on her Master of Science thesis entitled "Capability and Potentials of Responsibil ity Centres Under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy" in accordance with Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Higher Degree) Act 1 980 and Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Higher Degree) Regulations 1 981 . The Committee recommends that the candidate be awarded the relevant degree. Members of the Examination Committee are as follows:

Y .M RAJA AHMAD TAJUDDIN SHAH RAJA ABDUL RASHID, Ph. D. Department of Information Technology Faculty of Agriculture Universiti Putra Malaysia (Chairman)

TURIMAN SUANDI , Ph. D. Associate Professor Faculty of Educational Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia (Member)

RAHI M MD. SAI L, PH. D. Professor I nstitute for Community Development and Youth Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia (Member)

AZIM I HAMZAH, PH. D. Professor Institute for Community Development and Youth Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia (Member)

. GHAZALI MOHAYIDIN , Ph. D. ProfessorlDeputy Dean of Graduate School, Universiti Putra Malaysia

Date: 0 8 MAY ZaOl

ix

This thesis submitted to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malayisa has been accepted as fulfi lment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science.

AINI IDERIS, PH. D. Professor Dean of Graduate School Universiti Putra Malaysia

Date:

x

DECLARATION FORM

I hereby declare that the thesis is based on my original work except for quotations and citations which have been duly acknowledged. I also declare that it has not been previously or concurrently submitted for any other degree at UPM or other institutions.

Date: 4 mAY �i

XI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ABSTRAK ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS APPROVAL DECLARA TION LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER

1

2

3

INTRODUCTION Decentralisation in the Education Sector Brief Scenario of the Implementation of RCM

in the Study Location Decentralisation Policy in the Capacity Building

of Local Government Statement of the Problem Objective of the Study Significance of the Study Limitations of the Study Scope of the Study Definition of Terms

LITERATURE REVIEW Rationale for Decentralisation Movement Objectives of Decentralisation Concepts of Decentralisation Benefits of Decentralisation Policy Decentralisation in Educational Sector Influencing Factors

Political Related Factors Organisational Related Factors Resources Related Factors

Conceptual Framework of the Study

METHODOLOGY Research Design Location and Subjects of the Study Study Population and Study Sample

Selection of Respondents and Informants Instrumentation

Self Administered Questionnaires Semi-Structured Interviews Questionnaire for Background of Faculty

Xli

Page ii

v viii ix xi xv

xvii

Page

1 4 7

8

10 12 13 14 15 17

19 19

20 23 27 29 32 33 41 53 64

69 69 72 75 76 81 81 95 96

CHAPTER

Validity and Reliability of Instruments Data Collection Data Analysis

Page

96 98 103

4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 107 Background of Respondents 107 Background of Faculties 112

Enrolment of Students 112 Courses Offered 114 Staff to Students Ratio 114

Physical Academic Facilities 116 Operational Budget of Faculties 117 Research Projects (IRPA) 117 Short Term Research (STR) Activities 120 Students Drop-Out of Bachelor and Diploma 120

Programmes The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 123

Managing Academic and Support Functions under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 123 Administering and Managing the Academic Function Under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 125 Administering and Managing the Function of Teaching and Advising Students under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 128 Administering and Managing the Research Function under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 130 Administering and Managing Consultancy Services under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 133 Administering and Managing Faculty Administration and Management under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 137 Administering and Managing Resource Management under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 139 Administering and Managing the Function of Development and Maintenance of Physical Facilities under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 141 Administering and Managing the Function of Students Development, Admission and Welfare under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

Xlii

CHAPTER Page

5

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in 1 43 Administering and Managing Community Services under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Clarity of Objectives of Faculties in Administering 1 45 and Managing Academic and Support Functions under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

Bureaucratic, Organisational and Resources Related Factors 1 46 Bureaucratic Related Factors 1 46 Organisational Related Factors 1 51 Resources Related Factors 1 62

Summary 1 80

SU M MARY, CONCLUSIONS, I MPLICATIONS AND RECOM MENDATIONS The Study Summary of Findings Conclusions Implications Recommendations

1 83

1 83 1 85 1 87 1 89 1 90

REFERENCES 1 94

APPENDICES APPENDIX

209

1 2 3 4

5

6

7 8 9

10

11

12

Set 1 Questionnaire Set 2 Questionnaire Set 3 Questionnaire Distribution of Training on Administration Attended by

Respondents by Position

210 223 224 234

Distribution of Duration of Respondents Attended Training on 235 Administration

Distribution of Programmes and Courses Offered by 236 Faculty (1 999)

Distribution of Manpower by Faculty Distribution of Physical Academic Facilities by Faculty (1999) The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and

Managing Academic Function under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

237 238 239

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 240 Managing the Function of Teaching and AdviSing Students under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 241 Managing the Research Function under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 242 Managing Consultancy Services under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

XIV

APPENDIX Page

13 The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 243 Managing Faculty Administration and Management under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

14 The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 245 Managing Resource Management under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

15 The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 246 Managing the Function of Development and Maintenance of Physical Facil ities under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (detai ls)

16 The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 247 Managing the Function of Students Development, Admission and Welfare under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

17 The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 248 Managing Community Services under the Implementation of Decentral isation Policy (details)

18 The Clarity of Objectives of Faculties in Administering and 249 Managing the Academic and Support Functions under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy (details)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

xv

250

Table 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

LISTS OF TABLES

Caption Enrolment of Students by Programmes in the University: Sessions

July 94/95-Nov 98/99

Distribution of Population of the Study

Distribution of Statements according to Section

Score Categorisation of RC's Abil ity and Potentials in Administering and Managing the Academic and Support Functions

Cronbach's Alpha Coefficients of Variables of the Study

Distribution of Respondents by Position

Distribution of Respondents by Faculty

Level of Education among Respondents

Tenure of Current Post among Respondents

Page 8

77

89

95

1 00

1 08

1 09

1 09

1 1 0

10 Distribution of Training on Administration Attended by 1 1 1 Respondents

1 1 Respondents' Adequacy in Attending Training on Administration 1 1 1

12 Distribution of Students in Percentages by Programmes in Each 1 1 3 Faculty (1 998/99)

13 Ratio Staff to Students by Faculty 1 1 5

14 Distribution of Operational Budget by Faculty 1 1 8

1 5 Distribution of Research Projects by Faculty (1 996-1999) 1 1 9

16 Distribution of Short Term Research by Faculty (1 996-1 999) 121

17 Distribution of Drop-Out of Bachelor and Diploma Students by 1 22 Faculty (May 98/99 Session to May 1 999/2000 Session)

18 The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and 1 23 Managing Academic Function under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

XVI

Table 19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

Caption Summary of Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties (Scores) in

Administering and Managing Academic and Support Functions under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing the Function of Teaching and Advising Students under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing the Research Function under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing Consultancy Services under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing Faculty Administration and Management under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing Resource Management under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capabil ity and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing the Function of Development and Maintenance of Physical Facilities under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing the Function of Students Development, Admission and Welfare under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

Community Services Conducted by Faculties in the Last Three Years

The Capability and Potentials of Faculties in Administering and Managing Community Services under the Implementation of Decentralisation Pol icy

The Clarity of Objectives of Faculties in Administering and Managing Academic and Support Functions under the Implementation of Decentralisation Policy

XVll

Page 1 26

1 26

1 28

1 30

1 33

137

1 39

1 42

1 43

1 44

1 46

LISTS OF FIGURES

Figure Caption 1 Conceptual Framework of the Study

XVlll

Page 68

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The decentralisation movement has been a popular agenda in

reformation, development, building and consolidating the capacity of both local

and central administration in provision of services within bureaucracy

constraints in various sectors nationwide (Hirschmann, 1 999) . Ideally, the most

attractive feature of decentralisation policy, is a win-win situation that benefits

the locals and central management. Whereby, it umbrellas various

fundamental values l ike l iberty, equality, fraternity and efficiency that is

institutionalised within the development and economic growth, resource

mobilisation and allocation, productivity, self-reliance, self-sufficiency,

democracy and accountability (Swanson, 1 989; Faguet, 1 997) .

Rondinelli ( 1981 ) broadly defined decentralisation as the transfer of

responsibil ity for planning, management, and raising and allocating resources

from the central government and its agencies to: (a) field units of central

government ministries and agencies, (b) subordinate units or levels of

government, (c) semi-autonomous public authorities or corporations,

(d) areawide, regional or functional authorities, or (e) non-governmental private

or voluntary organisations. Decentralisation policy entails primarily on

distribution of authority and responsibility in decision-making, mobilisation of

2

resources and accountability framework that is required by the operating units to

perform the offloaded functions by the central administration (Manor, 1 997) . The

objectives of decentralisation are divided into three broad categories that are related

to the political or democratic, institutional or administrative and economic or fiscal

policies. The objectives are usualiy in a mix form of either two or all types (Rahman

Khan, 1 997; Parker, 1 995) that attempt to address overlapping objectives which

occasionally are conflicting (Mohanty, 1 995) . Yet, a mixed of all types noted by

Manor (1 997) is compulsory to gain significant benefit of the policy.

Regardless of claimed "democracy", most impetus and survival of

decentralisation were heavily inspired by the upheavals of politics and economy

than the democracy itself. This was demonstrated in Japan (Takao, 1 999), Sri Lanka

(Slater, 1 997) , Indonesia (Gabriele, 1 999; Devas, 1997) , Bangladesh (Rahman and

Khan, 1 997) , New Zealand (McGrath, 1997), Nigeria (Slater, 1 990), Phil l ipine,

Bolivia, Honduras, Kartanaka, Ukraine and Mali (Blair, 1 997) . Several bureaucratic

factors were found to strongly influence the success of the policy implementation in

these countries; whereby, the central governments often not wanting to devolve any

real power to the locals; and if there existed significant devolution, it created

disproportionate share of benefits. Thus, the national politicians and civil servants

commonly settled for deconcentration that is hidden behind the formality of

devolution. In extreme cases, it can cause adverse impact to beneficiaries as the

programmes and activities failed to achieve the intended objective (Gabriele, 1 999;

Rahman and Khan, 1 997; Devas, 1 997; Semboja and Therkildsen, 1 994; Silverman,

1 990; Rondinelli and Cheema, 1 983).

In Bolivia's Law of Popular Participation, the inappropriate leadership norms;

low capacity level of the municipalities to undertake decentralised functions; locals'

fai lure to play an active role to pursue development work; central government's

delays and increase costs were among the factors which caused failures in reaching

sound decisions for municipal planning and management. Yet, it promoted

3

democratic government and accountabil ity of the locals (Gannitsos, 1999; Pierce,

1 998) . In a comparative study of decentralisation policy implementation in agricultural

extension services in Java, Indonesia, Waridin (1 999) reported that the policy was not

effectively executed at the implementation level. The decentralised units received

inadequate support from district government bureaucracies and weak co-ordination

among the related agencies. The scarcity of resources and acute shortage of

qualified agricultural officers at the implementing units reduced their commitment in

executing the extension and activities effectively.

The decentralisation of the National Health Services (NHS) in England,

h indered the implementing units (the Primary Care Groups, PCGs) in performing its'

functions well . This was due to unci early defined boundaries to exercise power and

responsibility; and inconsistently received necessary facilitation and direction from

the Health Authority (HA) that caused unequal development growth among the

PCGs. The system's flexibility failed to address diversity issues of the PCGs but

initiated conflict of interest that induced inconsistency in aims, objectives, structure

and outcome which contradict from the central unit (Hudson, 1 999; Mays et a/.,

1 998; Taylor et al., 1 998). Non-existence of apt structure in a decentralised system

was detrimental to the policy implementation. Restrictions in exercising authority to

manage the project capital , complicated procedures and interventions in retrieving

the funds prohibited the adequate supply of funds to the development projects

(Slater, 1 997) . Devas (1 997) reported that rigid grant system prevented the

decentralised units to achieve mixture of resources. Hence, absence of an

appropriate structure will effect on the financial viabil ity of the decentralised units .

Decentralisation system in various settings disclosed that shortage of human

resources and deficiency in managerial and communication skills and competence

among personnel (managers, decentralised officers and staff) obstructed them to

carry out the heavy responsibil ities (Hudson, 1 999; Mays et a/., 1 998; Taylor et a/. ,

1 998, Devas, 1 997; Lil l is, 1 990). Absence of incentives, threat to self-interest and

4

professlonallsatlon compounded with sustainable and heavy workloads expenenced

by the personnel will detnmentally reduce their support and commitment towards the

policy Implementation Among the consequences were Inequalities of resource

dlstnbutlon and services (Rahman and Khan, 1 997) , less participation (Hudson,

1 999), and the reluctance of senior administrators to delegate authonty to

decentrallsed officers (Nsallwa, 1 996) Nsallwa (1 996) also noted that lacks of

consistent Interest and support from the beneficiaries and stake holders also

hampered the policy Implementation

Decentralisation in the Education Sector

Decentralisation In educational policies was appropriately viewed as a

means of reducing abstraction In deCISion-making, clarifYing lines of accountability,

IdentifYing and responding to problems more qUickly, and promoting innovation It

also created partnership between the locals and the government ThiS bolsters local

Willingness to support locally governed schools and becoming highly accountable for

their own educational necessities and promoted effiCiency that resulted In better

schools (Kemmerer, 1 994, Windham, 1 992, Rondinelli et aI, 1 990, Ranson, 1 990)

A study done by Lunenburg and Ornstein (1 996) revealed that the profeSSional

educators see a greater need to reduce school bureaucracy Thus by accepting

decentralisation It allows them to retain power and make much better academiC

deCISions

Decentralisation In education IS broadly defined by Kemmerer (1 994) as the

transfer of authOrity (and responsibil ity) for the finanCing or governance of schools to

a subnatlonal agency Decentral isation according to Lunenburg and Ornstein (1 996)

diVides the schools system Into smaller Unit, yet the focus of power and authOrity

remains In a Single central administration and board of education The policy, hence,

creates more centres With more opportunity and preferences that served and

reflected different levels of the local Interest, needs and priorities (Nalsbltt, 1 982)

5

Responsibility Centre Management (RCM) is an entity that signified the

decentralisation effort in public and private Institutions of H igher Learn ing (IHLs) . The

impetus of RCM is to address fragmentation in governance and managing l imited

resources prudently in provision of quality services (Lazerson, 1 997; The RCM

Committee Members of IUB, 1 996). Decentralised decision-making in the RCM

allows flexibil ity in governance of financial resources that assisted prompt act in

pursuing the university m ission and objectives. It's potential to produce prosperous

outcome such as rationality, efficiency and increase of productivity has positioned

RCM as a popular agenda in public or private IHLs in several countries (Adams,

1 997; Stocum and Rooney, 1 997; Plater, 1 996; 1996a).

Anon (1 996) stressed that the RCM is an operational decentralisation which

is to support the successful achievement of institutions academic priorities by

aligning operational authority commensurate with operational responsibility. While,

Stocum and Rooney (1 997) defined RCM as a financial management model that

decentralised fiscal authority and responsibility. By transferring significant financial

decision-making power to the academic units that generate university revenues,

RCM enables these units to become directly involved in the resource management

and more accountable for outcomes. The RCM places responsibility closest to

people who knows most about the decisions. Thus, with delegation of authority and

responsibil ity, it provides the "identified people" the ability to make competent

financial decision (Anne Mai, 1 996). Under the RCM, the fiscal responsibil ity is a

shared responsibility and accountabil ity to the provost or vice chancellor as well as to

the deans, department chairs and the faculty (Stocum and Rooney, 1 997) . Plater

(1 996) indicated that, under RCM , a faculty is viewed as a university.

The introduction of the RCM concept contributes to incentives of increasing

and enhancing performance of the university with high quality system. It is an

avenue to ensure that shared visions of academic excellence of each entity of the

university operates to accomplish their objectives and in consensus striving to

6

achieve the missions and visions of IHL under the leadership of the vice chancellor

(Stocum and Rooney, 1 997; Lefstein, 1 996; Overly, 1 996; Reafnsyder, 1 996; Plater,

1 996a; 1 996b; The RCM Committee Members of IUB, 1 996; Robbins and Rooney,

1 995; Whalen, 1 991) . It is strongly recommended to IHLs that undertake

corporatisation as it practices empowerment that transfer authority and responsibil ity

of managing and mobil ising resources through the entrepreneurship spirit, strategic

planning and budgeting process. It ena�les the operating units to heighten their

efficiency, effectiveness and accountability in performance and in provision of

services and products (Stocum and Rooney, 1 997; Plater, 1 996; Osborne and

Gaebler, 1 992) .

Lazerson (1 997) claimed that the RCM was difficult to be implemented and to

be maintained by self-sufficient units as it could caused "violation of academic

freedom. Operating without constraint, the entrepreneurship spirit advocated under

RCM could adversely become a threat and caused complication to pursue a

common academic vision and goals. Several major downsides identified were the

entrepreneurship spirit will influence the selection of activities, the turf interest of the

entities distorted their judgement on educational needs of students and intense

competition for students among the entities (Stocum and Rooney, 1 997; Adams,

1 997) .

Low in clarity towards the defined roles and duties, decision-making process

and the ultimate outcomes of the implementation caused the administrators to

become perplex and apprehensive. As a repercussion, they become uncertain and

uninterested to substantiate the implementation of RCM. The deans also were with

insufficient knowledge and expertise to administer the decentralised unit and to

execute the resource management. The deficiency exacerbated by inadequate

training and technical assistance received from the central administration. Increased

of staff workloads and constraints of time obstruct the operating units in executing

the decentralised functions effectively and efficiently. These impediments discovered