by Philipp Steger

Over many decades, Austrian Universities have consistently provided free, high quality education to a broad range of students. Anyone with the “Matura,” the Austrian equivalent of a high school diploma, could choose one or more of the many Austrian universities offering a myriad of disciplines ranging from law and medicine to more exotic ones such as tibetology or oceanography (exotic only in landlocked Austria). And money was not an issue: universities didn’t charge tuition, and the state provided an elaborate system of scholarships and other financial assistance to allow students from lower income families to cover their expenses without having to work while attending university. It was, undoubtedly, a system which benefited many, making university education accessible to people from varied backgrounds and improving their chances of creating successful professional lives.

by Gertrude Brinek

From the end of World War II until 1975, Austrian universities had very rigid and hierarchical administrative structures. Increasing enrollments resulted in democratization and structuring of education into 3 bodies/groupings as well as in ongoing formal and informal lobbying for new resources in the Federal Ministry for higher education. This had less to do with “education through academics” than with the recognition by the knowledge-based society of a broader mandate for the universities. The University Act of 1993 was meant to liberalize higher education. The goals, more or less achieved, were: greater effectiveness, a more entrepreneurial approach, and less state influence. Technical colleges (Fachhochschulen) contributed to an increase in qualified professional training at a higher level.

by Herbert Hrachovec

"Institutional memory" is the set of procedural rules and – mostly implicit – know-how an established organization needs to work properly. There can be no doubt that the recent Universitätsgesetz 2002 (University Act of 2002) was drafted to strategically abrogate such a memory by thoroughly changing the basic modus operandi of Austrian universities. Opinions differ as to the outcome of this political intervention. Is it a liberating move towards "autonomy" and Weltklasse, or one more attempt to crush grassroots self-determination in the interest of the neo-liberal agenda?

by Max Kothbauer

When shifting from business and administration to the university realm, one realizes that, in the latter, perceptions of phenomena may differ considerably from those in other areas. That is why my perspectives on university reform may be unlike those from other points of view.

by Sigurd Höllinger

The University Act of 2002 represents a continuation of policies in place since 1990, whereby the Austrian universities are being progressively weaned away from a system traditionally based on central command and control, and towards autonomy. The previous reforms did not go far enough, and embodied too many compromises. The new Act has opened the way for decisive changes, which the universities are now in the process of planning and implementing.

by Reinhard Folk

Only nine years after the University Act of 1993 – without any evaluation of the 1993 reform – the new government decided to change the university law again. This so called “reform” was driven by the ideas of the “New Public Management” and neo-liberal policy: The universities should become responsible for their own concerns (fully legal autonomy) while the state’s responsibility would be reduced to financing the universities on the basis of performance agreements (Leistungsvereinbarung). Teaching and research are considered satisfying demands of customers (students as customers of university teachers, and industry as customers of university researchers). Since the university law of 1975, the ‘curia’ of professors, the junior faculty (Mittelbau), the students, and (since 1993) the non-faculty personnel were organized into distinct federal institutions to accompany the democratically-organized self-administration of the universities. Apart from the students’ institution, the others have now been abolished while the ‘curia’ has been retained.

by Kurt Grünewald

The federal law for the organization of the universities (University Act of 2002) transformed universities from entities under State regulation to fully legal entities under public law. Simultaneously, their administrative structures were streamlined, and the position ofthe university president ( Rektor) was afforded additional power. Introduced as a complement to the university president and the senate (Senat) was the university’s board of trustees (Universitätsrat), comparable to the board of trustees of a US university. Consequently, most provisions of the University Organization Act (UOG) of 1993 and the Art University Act (KUOG) were rendered ineffective. In the spirit of deregulation, consolidation, and streamlining, the new act regulates not only organizational law, but personnel and academic realms as well.

by Hans Pechar

In recent years, governance at Austrian universities has been subjected to a series of reforms. Finally, in 2002 a new University Act (UG 2002) transformed university institutions from state agencies into public enterprises. Some people claim that universities were privatized, but this interpretation is not correct; universities remain ‘legal persons under public law’ (Körperschaften öffentlichen Rechts). The federal government retains responsibility for basic funding, but universities are exempt from the fiscal regulations of the federal budget and instead receive lump sum budgets at their own discretion. Resources are allocated on the basis of performance contracts. Twenty percent of the budget allocation will be determined by indicators. The internal organization of universities – previously prescribed by law – is now determined by statutes (Satzung) decided by the academic senate. Each university has a university’s board of trustees (Universitätsrat) of between five and nine members, half of them elected by the academic senate, and the other half appointed by the Minister of Education. Presidents are elected by the university’s board of trustees. Thus presidents are less dependent on university academic bodies, but more dependent on the board of trustees. The new universities are the employers of all academic and non-academic staff. Academics are no longer civil servants, but are employed with private contracts. It is fair to say that the pattern of governance is now quite similar to that of public universities in the US.