Assignment # 4

Case Study
A Challenge in Governance:
A Case of Higher Education in Pakistan

Student Name: Waqar Mansoor (62790)

Course Name: SFAD
Term: Fall 2020
Instructor: Dr. Arsalan Hashmi
1. What are the challenges and key issues that Namal’s Board needs to
address after the acquisition of the 1000-acre land?

“The approval for the 1000-acre land had not come easy for Namal. For over
five years, Namal’s board waited with the construction plans without being
able to move even a single brick. It was back in 2009 when Mr. Razak had
made one of his first trips to Mianwali with Mr. Imran. At that time, Mr Razak
suggested, ‘If you are really talking long term you need nothing less than 1000
acres of land. Apply for 1000 acres now, you will need it.’ After a long wait,
Namal finally got the land.

Since its establishment, Namal’s journey had not been easy. First, the remote
rural location of Namal created infrastructure, logistics and accommodation
issues for the faculty, students and staff. Namal was distantly situated from
the main city. The closest commercial area offering access to basic utilities
was 20 to 30 minutes away. Facilities like electricity, health, accommodation,
transportation, internet and other amenities were considered a luxury for those
living in Mianwali. Further, Namal’s expansion plans had also come to a
standstill due to the delays in land allotment. The best that Namal could offer
at this point was to accommodate students in a rented government college
building and find accommodation for faculty in the nearby areas, which was
also 40 minutes’ drive from the campus.

Finding right peoples

The afore mentioned issues created several challenges for Namal’s

leadership—the foremost being the difficulty in attracting and retaining quality
faculty. Namal was initially established as a vocational training institute and
had recruited its first cohort of faculty from the local village who were qualified
for teaching in a technical institute. Later, when Namal evolved into a degree-
awarding college, the qualifications of the existing faculty did not match the
requirements of a university undergraduate programme. As a result, Namal
faced several issues in terms of hiring PhD faculty while laying off some
faculty members and acquiring new and more qualified teaching staff. To be
able to attract top faculty was one of Mr Razak’s primary concerns for Namal:

Revenue/ funding
Namal’s campus expansion, construction and infrastructural development
along with financial constraints was yet another aspect. Numerous
construction challenges existed due to the hilly terrain and uneven landscape.
In the absence of a plane land, construction was difficult and drainage was
tricky. For instance, the distance between the lake and the hill was just one
kilometre, which meant cutting the hill or adjusting construction in the available
width. The remoteness of the area further added to the construction challenge
as well as the cost. ‘Only the cost of building a laboratory was approximately
PKR 15 million’, as pointed out by Ms Aleema. Hence, at this point, funding
was required not only to sustain operational expenses and scholarships but
also for construction and expansion. Needless to say, this required exorbitant
amounts of funds. As of 2014, payables to scholarship, construction and
endowment fund were estimated to be over PKR 49 million. Fundraising had
its own challenges. First, most donors wanted to fund the scholarships rather
than the operational expenses. Second, higher education still remained a
second priority for many philanthropists in Pakistan who saw
primary/secondary education, health and poverty alleviation initiatives as more
urgent social issues.”

2. What is your assessment of Namal’s existing Board? What role has it

played?

“In 2009, Mr Imran approached his friends and other influential members of
the community to form the Board of Governors for Namal College. The first
few individuals with whom he discussed the idea of establishing a technical
college were Mr Rehman Mir and Mr Rashid Khan. Mr Rashid Khan, an
educationist and prominent businessman, was also a trustee of MDT and was
fully supportive of Namal and its vision for a technical college. Mr Rehman
Mir,8 a philanthropist and businessman, was one of the initial donors for the
college

Soon after the affiliation with Bradford, Mr Imran’s sister Ms Aleema Khan, the
entrepreneur owner of Cotton Connection Private Ltd. and Marketing Director
at Shaukat Khanum Memorial Hospital9 (SKMH) joined Namal’s board. Next,
Mr Imran asked Mr Abdul Razak Dawood, a leading entrepreneur, industrialist
and the founder and Rector of Lahore University of Management Sciences
(LUMS), to come on board. Mr Razak and Mr Imran went back a long way. Mr
Imran had worked closely with Mr Razak while building SKMH. Mr Razak is
the main driving force on the board. The amount of time and effort he gives for
Namal is outstanding. He plays the key decision-making role, especially in
financial and budgetary matters. He also works very closely with the University
of Bradford and is the key person overlooking Namal’s construction plans.

Soon after Mr Razak joined, Dr Arif Butt, Professor and Dean of Suleman
Dawood School of Business at LUMS, also became part of Namal. Right from
the onset, Mr Razak, Ms Aleema and Dr Arif played an active role in
overlooking Namal’s management along with fulfilling other responsibilities. Dr
Arif has played a vital role in Namal. He serves as a fatherly role for the
students and handles even the toughest situations very calmly. His initiatives
in attracting like-minded people to join Namal, giving directions for academics
and vision for the institution are crucial for the organization.

By 2009, other eminent members such as Dr Pervez Hassan, a senior

advocate of the Supreme Court, joined Namal’s board. Dr Pervez Hassan
played a leading role in all the legal matters at Namal College. Later that year,
Mr Taher Nawaz, a chartered accountant by profession, also joined the board.
It was with his assistance that Namal College and Imran Khan Foundation
(IKF) were registered as charitable organizations in the United Kingdom and
were able to generate funds. In 2010, Dr Rashid Amjad, the former Chief
Economist of Pakistan Planning Commission, also came on board and
provided a steering role for the academics of the college. Further, Dr Atta-ur-
Rahman, the former Chairman of Higher Education Commission (HEC), was a
welcoming addition to the board.

In the same year, Mr Sikander Mustafa, an industrialist and board member at

LUMS, also became part of Namal. Commenting on the role of Dr Atta-ur-
Rehman and Mr Sikandar Mustafa, one of the senior personnel at Namal said:
We are privileged to have Dr Atta-ur-Rehman with us on Namal’s Board. He is
always available when needed. Also, Mr Sikander plays a very active role in
Namal.
Hence, over the course of time, the board expanded to include many
prominent and well-reputed individuals from diverse fields. However, there
were some who remained more involved in Namal. Mr Razak, Ms Aleema, Mr
Sikander and Dr Arif formed the management committee (MC) of Namal that
ensured smooth functioning and operation of the college. “

4. What is the role of a governing body in higher education institutions?

”In Pakistan, higher education refers to education above Grade 12, which
generally corresponds to the age bracket of 17 to 23 years. The higher
education system in Pakistan is made up of two main sectors: the
University/Degree Awarding Institutes (DAI) sector and the Affiliated Colleges
sector.

The Pakistan higher education sector is predominantly public in nature, with

almost 75 per cent of the students enrolled in public sector institutions. There
are 89 universities in the public sector with a total enrolment of 392,893 in
2013. All fundings to the public sector universities are provided by the Higher
Education Commission. There are sixty-nine private sector
universities/Degree Awarding Institutions. In 2013, there were 158 universities
and DAIs and 1,995 affiliated colleges. Student enrolment in higher education
institutes was estimated at 1.2 million in 2013 with 54 per cent males and 46
per cent females.

Public higher education institutes generally offer a wide range of courses and
programs such as agriculture, arts and design, medicines, while private higher
education institutes predominantly offer a narrow range of vocationally
oriented courses and programs such as business and IT. Leading public
universities include National University of Science and Technology Islamabad
(NUST), Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad, Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of
Engineering Sciences and Technology, University of Engineering &
Technology Lahore, University of Agriculture Faisalabad and a few others.

In the private sector, The Agha Khan University was the first university to be
established in 1983 followed by LUMS in 1985 comprising schools of
humanities and social sciences, business, law and science and engineering. It
has established itself as one of the best business schools in Pakistan. The
private sector in higher education provides opportunities left over of public
sector universities. Before the entrance of the private sector, a large number
of students who failed to get admission in public universities went abroad or
gave up further education. However, these universities mostly cater to the
high-income sections of the country and remain skewed in the main cities of
Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad, Peshawar and Faisalabad.

The standard of education in the public sector, which produces over 75 per
cent of the graduates, especially in science and technology, is quite modest.
Quality of faculty at private and especially public universities remains an
important issue. With less than 25 per cent of teachers having a PhD degree,
PhD deficit in the faculty continues to be a major concern.17 Furthermore, the
process of hiring teachers, especially in the public sector remains influenced
by political pressures at various levels.

Most of the buildings in the public sector are old and poorly maintained.
Decades of under-investment in higher education have led to the under-
development of the physical infrastructure of universities. The total GDP
percentage of higher education expenditure in 2011–2012 was 0.19 per cent.
On the other hand, countries like India are spending almost 3.85 per cent of
their GDP on higher education.18 Share of higher education in educational
expenditure in Pakistan is around 12–13 per cent of the total educational
budget whereas the international average is around 30 per cent. “

5. How can institutions create high-powered and effective boards? What

would be your recommend;dations to ARD?

Highly connected people with right mind set

“Board building is an ongoing activity, a process of continuous improvement,

which means boards must keep coming back to the same questions about
purpose, resources, and effectiveness. The best mechanisms for doing that
are annual self-assessments. According to our survey, conducting and acting
on such assessments are among the top activities most likely to improve
board performance overall.

The Engaged Board.

In this model, the board serves as the VC partner. It provides insight, advice,
and support on key decisions. It recognizes its responsibility for overseeing
VC and university performance. The board conducts substantive discussions
of key issues and actively defines its role and boundaries.

The Inadequacy of Conventional Wisdom

Over time, good-governance advocates have developed no shortage of

remedies for failures of governance. Most of these remedies are structural:
They’re concerned with rules, procedures, composition of committees, and the
like, and together they’re supposed to produce vigilant, involved boards.
However, good and bad companies alike have already adopted most of those
practices. Let’s take a look at some of the most common.
Regular Meeting Attendance.
Regular meeting attendance is considered a hallmark of the conscientious
director. It matters a lot and, still, as shareholder activist Nell Minow
comments, “Some big names on the boards…barely show up due to other
commitments, and when they show, they’re not prepared.” Indeed, some
WorldCom directors were on more than ten boards, so how well prepared
could they be? Fortune’s 2001 list of the most-admired U.S. companies
reveals no difference in the attendance records of board members of the
most- and least-admired companies. Data from the Corporate Library, a
corporate governance Web site and database cofounded by Minow, show the
same “acceptable” attendance records at both kinds of companies. Good
attendance is important for individual board members, but it alone doesn’t
seem to have much impact on whether companies are successful.”