Session guide: Case study: Establishment of a directorate of research at the Soronno University of Agriculture (SUA)
Case study: Establishment of a directorate of research at Soronno University of Agriculture (SUA)
DATE
TIME
FORMAT - Case discussion
TRAINER
OBJECTIVES
At the end of this session, participants should be able to understand and appreciate:
1. Organizational structure of a research organization.
2. Managing change in an organization.
3. Need for coordination and integration within an organization.
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
None.
REQUIRED READING
Case study: Establishment of a Directorate of Research at the Soronno University of Agriculture (SUA)
BACKGROUND READING
Reading note: Organizational theories (see Module 3 - Session 1)
Reading note: Structure of an organization (see Module 3 - Session 2)
Reading note: Organizational design and change (see Module 3 - Session 3)
SPECIAL EQUIPMENT AND AIDS
Overhead projector and chalkboard.
Initiate discussion on the case by asking participants: "What are the issues and why are they so important as to agonize top management?" Is it because the proposal to establish a separate Directorate of Research is opposed by several faculties? Is it the fear that the proposed set-up may not produce the desired results? It is important to understand what the present set-up is and what is wrong with it. The present set-up consists of research and publication committees in each faculty and a coordinating committee for research and publications at senate level. It is argued that the senate-level committee is weak in coordination and dissemination of research results. It is generally agreed that the committee is ineffective because its chairman, the deputy vice-chancellor, has too many things on his hands and is thus unable to devote any time to the work of the committee. Other members of the committee are also busy in their academic pursuits. The overall effect is that the committee is unable to plan, administer and disseminate research in an effective manner. The proposal is to set up a separate directorate of research, which will replace the senate-level committee on research and publications. The new set-up is considered necessary in the context of national priorities and the need to strengthen research, whatever might be the organizational structure. Besides, the university is growing, with increasing demand on research; therefore there is a possibility of resources being less and less available. The proposal has to be considered in the context of whether or not it will indeed result in strengthening research at the university. Observe that research is an important function of the university. The proposal for a change in the organizational structure has been initiated internally. It is expected to provide an appropriate organizational base for improving and strengthening the conduct and coordination of research. In comparison with the present committee arrangement, the proposed directorate of research will have an enhanced role in respect of coordination of research activities in various faculties, creation of databases, generation of funds and dissemination of research results. The overall effect will be the creation of a professional environment for research, with a problem orientation and increasing cooperation among researchers.
Why are people opposed to the new set-up? They are apprehensive that the new set-up will be more bureaucratic than the present one. It will become another power centre and a control point. Besides, it is argued that the director of research to be appointed will also be a member of the faculty and that he or she too may have other academic interests. What is the guarantee that he or she will devote time to the activities of the directorate? Some believe that the establishment of a new directorate is not going to be of much help. The problem is not with the structure but the people staffing it and the administrative support they receive.
Since there is a general agreement that the existing committee is ineffective, what is the alternative to setting up a directorate? Those who are opposed to this idea have suggested different ways of overcoming the ineffectiveness of the present committee. An important suggestion is to strengthen the present set-up by removing it from the office of the deputy vice-chancellor. Another suggestion is to strengthen the administrative staff while letting the committee function under the chairmanship of the deputy vice-chancellor. Yet another suggestion is to have an administrative officer for the committee with responsibility for managing research and raising funds. There is little agreement on any of these alternatives. There is also the potential for conflict arising between the research and publication committees at faculty level and the directorate of research.
What is wrong with the present set-up? Is it the structure or the personalities involved? If the problem is structural, why change it? Should a directorate of research be established? Will the proposed set-up indeed help strengthen research activities? Would you implement the mandate from the Senate or would you look for other alternatives?
During the case discussion, the resource person might wish to discuss the following issues at appropriate places:
· the principal features (including strengths and weaknesses) of disciplinary, functional and project organizations;· theoretical concepts underlying coordination and integration in an organization; and
· issues in managing conflicts.
The agricultural and livestock research system of the Republic of Afritonia
Soronno University of Agriculture
Appendix 1: Proposal for the establishment of a directorate of research at Soronno University of Agriculture
Appendix 2: Abstract minutes of the 5th meeting of the research and publications committee of the senate. Held on 14th September, 1995
It was 08:40 on the morning of Saturday, 21 September 1995, and members of the University Senate started arriving at the Audiovisual Room of the Centre for Continuing Education. It was going to be the twelfth meeting of the Senate of Soronno University of Agriculture (SUA) and some important decisions were going to be made. Judging from the topics listed on the agenda, the meeting was likely to last the whole day.
At 08:45, Professor U.R.J. Misool, Vice-Chancellor of the University and Chairman of the Senate, called the meeting to order. Even though the Senate had 51 members, only 27 members were attending the meeting. After the minutes of the previous meeting were approved, the Senate started deliberations on the main items on the agenda. The first item related to a proposal for the establishment of a Directorate of Research at SUA, which would assume many functions and responsibilities of the Research and Publications Committee at senate level (See Appendix 1 to this case study). This proposal was prepared by an ad hoc committee of the Senate Research and Publications Committee, consisting of Professor F.H. Jiwa, Chairman of the Research and Publications Committee of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, and Professor T.M. Weri, Chairman of the Research and Publications Committee of the Faculty of Agriculture. Weri was attending the meeting, representing the Head of the Department of Crop Science.
The proposal for establishing a separate Directorate of Research had been mooted to overcome weaknesses in coordination and dissemination of research results. It was hoped that a separate Directorate would provide an organizational base for improving and strengthening the conduct and coordination of research.
When the Senate first received the proposal, it gave instruction to the Senate Research and Publications Committee to study the document and obtain the reactions of the Faculties of Agriculture, of Forestry and of Veterinary Medicine, and of the Development Studies Committee. These reactions were documented in the minutes of the fifth meeting of the Research and Publications Committee of the Senate, held on September 14 and chaired by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. The relevant portions of these minutes were circulated along with the agenda for the twelfth meeting of the Senate (see Appendix 2 to this case study). It was generally agreed in the Senate Research and Publications Committee that the
Committee in its present form was ineffective. The current Chairman of the Committee, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, had hardly any time for the Committee because of his many responsibilities. The Committee was made up of members who were fully engaged in teaching activities. Consequently not enough time was devoted to effective planning and administration of research and dissemination of results. Something had to be done to overcome this ineffectiveness.
While the Faculty Board of the Faculty of Agriculture had endorsed the proposal, the Faculty Boards of the Faculties of Forestry and of Veterinary Medicine and the Development Studies Committee did not quite agree with the proposal. Instead, they recommended strengthening the present Senate Research and Publications Committee by removing it from the office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, but without necessarily creating a Directorate. The Committee would then have a separate chairperson who would be able to devote more time to management of research at the University and seek outside support to augment university funds for research. The issue had been discussed in various meetings of the Senate and those who had supported establishment of a separate directorate had countered that the Research and Publications Committee was already bureaucratic and if a separate Chairperson were to be appointed for the Committee, the system would be even more bureaucratic. Besides, it would be difficult to evolve a system of strengthening the Research and Publications Committee by appointing an independent chair and additional administrative staff because the new chair would normally be a member of the academic staff, with other duties to perform. In contrast, a separate director would have no other obligatory duties except those related to research. He or she would, therefore, be in a better position to solicit outside funds and effectively coordinate and monitor progress of all research activities at SUA. The directorate would be like a faculty, without any direct links with outside institutions unless given a mandate by the university.
Initiating discussion on the agenda item, Professor Misool reminded the Senate members that agricultural research was a very important function of the university. He also referred to the findings of a study team constituted by the government of Afritonia to assist the university in the next phase of its development. 1
1 The study team was constituted to gather ideas concerning various forms of higher education aimed at serving agriculture and related areas, and to consider the adoption and adaptation of some of these forms of higher education in Afritonia. Following this, the team was to make recommendations concerning their application to the development of SUA. The study team had five national members and three consultants (from the USA). The study included an examination of similar institutions in USA, India and Kenya, and an examination of the home situation. The study team made far-reaching recommendations covering both academic and support systems, including opportunities for assistance.
The study team had emphasized an expanded role for research in agriculture, forestry, and animal health. This was to be achieved through additional and improved linkages and coordination with the research agencies of the relevant ministries. More joint and collaborative research among the university scientific staff and the research staff of the related ministries had to be encouraged. Such relationships would particularly involve the Golania Agricultural Research Institute and the Livestock Research Centre at Pamwa. Funding for research by the university scientific staff had to be obtained from grants or agreements with the related ministries, the Afritonian Scientific Research Council, and an expanded complement in the university budget. Collaborative research with the wider scientific community was to be pursued. The team had also emphasized an expanded role for the university in extension. A more effective linkage between research and extension was advocated, considering the fact that much of the research information had not been used in the past and was not now being used despite repeated calls to expand food production. If the university was to be significantly involved, its intellectual resources must be linked in practical ways with the extensive extension network of the ministry.
Professor Misool concluded:
"the university must therefore have an effective system of planning, coordinating and monitoring research. The university is expanding and resource constraints are likely to go on increasing. There is need, therefore, to foresee a growing university and its future demands on research. With these considerations in mind, the Senate should not shy away from taking a decision one way or the other on the proposal for establishing a Directorate of Research at SUA."
Afritonia, like many other African nations, is predominantly an agricultural country. Research in agriculture is mainly the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development (MALD). However, the Finance Ministry also plays a role in it through the National Scientific Research Council (NSRC).1
1 A parastatal organization established in 1968 under the Ministry of Finance, with responsibility for coordination of all national research, including agricultural research. It scrutinizes research programmes and gives guidance to technical ministries and the government. NSRC is represented on the board of each of the research parastatals. It has a team of specialist advisory committees, including one on agricultural research. NSRC has not been effective in formulating research policies and coordinating research. Lack of competent and experienced staff and establishment of parastatal research organizations like AARO and AALIRO, which diluted its authority have contributed to the Council's lacklustre performance. Thus MALD was mainly responsible for agricultural research in Afritonia.
The organizational structure of agricultural research in Afritonia under MALD has undergone many changes and expansion. Expansion was partly because of the absorption of several research institutes which were formerly administered by the Eastern Alizanian Community. These were the Tropical Pesticides Research Institute, the Sugar Research Institute and the Tea Research Institute.
In 1980, the former Ministry of Agriculture was split into two new ministries: one for agriculture (crops) and the other for livestock development. Subsequently, two new semi-autonomous research organizations, the Afritonia Agricultural Research Organization (AARO) and the Afritonia Agricultural Livestock Research Organization (AALIRO), were established to plan and conduct research for their respective ministries.
AARO is the largest of the research parastatals dealing with crop research. Other organizations engaged directly in agricultural research are the University of Descanso at Sado (UDS), with a large Faculty of Agriculture; Upwell Agricultural Centre (UAC); and the Tropical Pests Research Institute (TPRI).2
2 Other related parastatal research organizations are the Afritonia Fisheries Research Organization (AFIRO), the Afritonia Forest Research Organization (AFORO) and the Afritonia Industrial Research Council (AIRCO).
In 1984, the two ministries were merged once again to form MALD. Consequently, the research section of the erstwhile Ministry of Agriculture concentrates on coordinating overall research policy in the new ministry. It also plays a liaison role in the government, the councils of the research organizations, and in other scientific bodies engaged in agricultural research outside the ministry.
The research division retains direct responsibility for horticultural research and coordinated coconut research. Even though the two ministries have been merged, the two parastatal research organizations - AARO and AALIRO - continue to maintain their separate identities and research functions, though under the administrative control of the new ministry. SUA is also under the administrative control of the new ministry.
Agricultural research at SUA
Funding of research
Mechanism for administering SUA research funds
Formulation of research strategies and policies
Annual record of research
University budget
In 1984, the Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Veterinary Medicine was separated from the University of Descanso at Sado (UDS) at Orogomoc to form an independent university. The name Soronno was added later to honour former Prime Minister Soronno, who had died in a motor accident in Orogomoc soon after attending the meeting of parliament which passed an act establishing SUA as an independent institution.
Apart from the usual functions of a university, SUA was charged with responsibility to provide facilities for university education in the fields of or connected with agricultural sciences, including technical and professional agricultural education, and to initiate and conduct basic and applied research in the fields of land use, crop and livestock production, fisheries, natural resources and allied sciences, mechanical arts and technology, and to promote the integration of research with training and agricultural extension services.
The university is located about 3 km south of Orogomoc. The town itself is 200 km west of Descanso at Sado and traversed by the Afritonia-Aizawal highway and the Great Central Railway line.
SUA owns about 3 350 ha of land, most of which is at an altitude of between 500 and 600 m above sea level. The area is bordered by the Urugutu mountains on the eastern and southern sides, and by the Alugala and Meglin Mountains on the western and north-western sides. The university owns two other parcels of land. That at Tozeur-Morotal is 6 ha and that at Morotal is 20 ha. Both properties are an altitude of 1 200 m above sea level and ideal for growing temperate and semi-temperate crops. Annual rainfall ranges from 600 to 1000 mm, with a mean of 660 mm. The probability of getting at least 600 mm of rainfall a year is 70%.
The university also owns forestry field stations at Orivesi, 15 km from Asharu, and at Mazoorbai in Tohoso. These forest lands are 840 ha and 320 ha respectively.
The university farm, some 2 300 ha, is used for training of students at all levels in crop, livestock and forestry husbandry, and in management practices. Areas not needed for training and research are used for growing farm produce by the university staff, although a large part the area is still fallow.
Currently the university has faculties of agriculture, forestry and veterinary medicine, offering courses in various fields of study. Courses in agricultural engineering are taught jointly with the University of Descanso at Sado.
SUA has a unit of development studies. It also has a Centre for Continuing Education, which offers short-term, in-service courses to field and operational staff from ministries and public institutions to upgrade their knowledge and skills in specific fields.
Research work at SUA is undertaken by four main groups:
· University staff doing research for the purpose of generating new knowledge and understanding in the natural, physical and social sciences. The staff (1996) includes 47 PhDs degree holders, 12 PhD candidates, 46 MSc degree holders, 12 MSc candidates, and 36 BSc degree holders.· University staff (numbering 72) doing research for master's or doctoral degrees.
· Non-university staff doing research for master's or doctoral degrees.
· Undergraduate students (numbering 494) doing special studies as part of the university requirement for bachelor's degrees.
Research conducted by the university staff is principally supported by donor agencies, government institutions and parastatals, and SUA research funds. As of fiscal year 1995-96, funds from external sources account for a large percentage. They are also highly sought after by many researchers because of their more liberal compensation schemes. Donor agencies have included the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada; the International Foundation for Science (IFS), Sweden; the Ford Foundation; the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA); and the Norwegian Agency for Development (NORAD). Technical assistance and other aid has also come through the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations.
SUA research funds provide financial assistance to university staff who want to do worthwhile research work but can not obtain funding from other sources. In the mid-1980s, fund availability exceeded assistance requested in research proposals, but since then situation has reversed, and now there are more proposals than can be financed. This situation has come about because of two major developments. There has been a reduction in the overall budget for research as a result of austerity measures taken by the university, and, at the same time, the number of research proposals requesting support has increased as a result of increases in the strength of faculty after SUA assumed autonomy and independence from the University of Descanso at Sado. Consequently SUA has adopted a policy of giving priority to research proposals of the university staff working for their master's and doctoral degrees.
The process of evaluation, approval and monitoring of funded research projects is through a system of research and publications committees at the faculty and senate levels. Each faculty has a Research and Publications Committee composed of one representative from each of the departments.
There is also a Research and Publications Committee at senate level. This committee consists of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Chair) and two representatives from each of the faculty-level Research and Publications Committees. In 1995, this Committee had seven members, namely the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and two each from Agriculture, Forestry and Veterinary Medicine.
Although conceived as planning and coordinating bodies, the Research and Publications Committees actually serve as screening and monitoring units. Decisions made by the Committees are recommendatory. It is the Senate which takes the ultimate decisions on research projects to be supported by the university.
The Research and Publications Committees of the various faculties report to the Research and Publications Committee of the senate. Their functions are:
· to receive and evaluate research applications from individual staff of the departments and forward them to the Research and Publications Committee of the senate, together with their recommendation;· to review progress reports on all research supported by the university research fund;
· to draw up priority areas for research for the guidance of staff in each faculty; and
· to receive and consider all requests for publication of manuscripts related to research.
The procedure for preparation, review and approval of research projects varies according to the academic status of the researchers.
Research strategies are formulated at department level. Each department develops research priority areas independently of each other, which become general guidelines for their respective staff to follow. They are given a free hand, especially in designing and implementing projects funded from external sources. They are also encouraged to seek funds for research from outside agencies.
Student research is governed by university policies. Research conducted by undergraduate students is called special studies because of the limited time given to them. They devote two months, distributed over one year, to their research or investigations. The primary objective of special studies is to introduce students to basic research approaches and techniques.
Master's students are required to devote at least one year of their time to research. The principal objective is to train them to be proficient researchers.
Students in the PhD programme are required to devote at least three years to research. Some minimum course work is also required. The objective is to train them to carry out original research.
Although the university is expected to publish an annual record of research, it has been published erratically. The first volume was published in April 1977, and presented abstracts of the work done, including papers presented at conferences prior to 1977. The second volume was published in 1985, and the third is still being compiled.
The operating budgets of the university for fiscal years 1994-95 and 1995-96 were Shs 94 044 000 and Shs 122 147 000, respectively. The corresponding budgets for research in the two years were Shs 300 000 and Shs 500 000. Donor funds constituted 94.7% of the development budget during the fiscal year 1994-95.
1. INTRODUCTION
The objectives and functions of SUA include:
i) initiation and conduct of basic and applied research in the fields of land use, crop and livestock production, fisheries, natural resources and allied sciences, mechanical arts and technology, and promoting the integration of research with training and agricultural extension services, andii) cooperating with national and international institutions in initiation and conduct of cooperative research and training programmes for the mutual benefit of the cooperating institutions and the Republic.
Such a strong emphasis on research by this university calls for a thorough examination of the institution's research-oriented resources with a view of determining how best they can be directed to meet these expectations.
1.1. Current Status of Research at SUA
Research at SUA has mainly been of two types:
i) students' research, in the form of undergraduate special projects and graduate students' theses and dissertations;ii) academic staff research, either within the departments or across departments. Cases of collaborative research with researchers or institutions outside the university also exist.
Research has been aimed at either solving some national problem or attaining some academic qualifications. The latter is true of most student research, especially at the undergraduate level. However graduate student research can, and has in many cases, been directed at both objectives, i.e., achieving academic qualification through problem-oriented research for their theses and dissertations. Most academic staff research is problem oriented.
1.2. Need for a Directorate of Research at SUA
One of the weaknesses of research at SUA is associated with the dissemination of research results. The most common forum for publications of research findings has been student's theses and dissertations. Some students' research results and most academic staff research findings are usually published in journals or bulletins which are largely foreign and are usually not circulated in the areas where the researched problems exist. As a consequence, research results rarely trickle back to the areas where they might have an effect.
Further, it is not the responsibility of SUA to oversee the adoption of research results by institutions where such research was conducted. Usefulness of research can only be assessed by the extent to which its results, when implemented, solve the problems being faced in the field.
Another weakness of research at SUA has been its coordination. A Research and Publications Committee has been coordinating research at the university. This Committee is made up of members who are fully engaged in teaching activities; consequently not enough time is devoted to the effective planning and administration of research and dissemination of its results.
SUA, being the only agricultural university in the country, is in a strong position to make a significant contribution to leadership in agriculture-related fields in Afritonia. Therefore, the creation of a research body within SUA will go a long way towards helping the development of collective philosophy which will assist in guiding the development of the agricultural sector on which the nation heavily relies.
In response to the challenge given to the university with respect to research, and in view of the weaknesses of research planning and management at SUA, and also in the light of the crucial position SUA occupies with respect to agricultural development in the country, it is proposed that a Directorate of Research be created at SUA with the following objectives:
(a) to improve and strengthen the administration and coordination of research at SUA;(b) to manage research data in terms of their collection, storage, analysis and retrieval;
(c) to solicit funds for research (it is noteworthy that current funding of research has been very low: only 3% of the university budget);
(d) to improve the dissemination of SUA research results;
(e) to promote problem-oriented research as directed by the University Act, and especially emphasizing the use of available appropriate technology; and
(f) to strengthen cooperation among researchers and related institutions within and outside the country, especially through joint research programmes.
2. STAFF OF THE DIRECTORATE
In keeping with the prevailing economic climate in the country, the establishment of the Directorate has to be within the limits of resources available. As such it is necessary for the Directorate to rely very much on skills and other resources within the university's reach. The staffing pattern of the Directorate is reflected in the budget. The top position is that of the Director of Research, who shall hold qualifications equivalent to those of a Senior Lecturer (SUA) or above, and shall be at par with Deans of Faculties. He or she would be:
(a) chief planner and administrator of research at SUA;(b) coordinator of the total research operations of SUA to ensure unity and continuity of purpose;
(c) a liaison officer between SUA and other related national and international organizations;
(d) responsible for soliciting funds for the Directorate;
(e) in charge of SUA research publications (e.g., Annual Record of Research Highlights);
(f) in charge of research conferences, seminars and workshops;
(g) chairperson of the Senate Research and Publications Committee; and
(h) a Member of the Senate, Higher Degrees Committee and Extension Committee.
In terms of the chain of command, the Director of Research would be responsible for day-today activities to the Vice-Chancellor, through the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. He or she will be advised by the Senate Research and Publications Committee, in its regular sittings, of which he or she would be the Chair.
The Director shall be assisted by an administrative assistant with an MSc degree or equivalent in the field of agriculture, forestry or veterinary sciences.
As the two-year budget portrays (see Section 3, below), the funding of the Directorate would be in phases and depend on its level of development. On the whole, its funding requirements are expected to be modest. To minimize costs, the position in the proposed Directorate could be filled through an internal reorganization of university staff.
It is also proposed that the university provide the Directorate with office space.
In order to help the achievement of its objectives, it is further proposed that the Research and Publications Committee become a working committee of the Directorate, with the Director as Chair.
3. BUDGET FOR PROPOSED SUA DIRECTORATE OF RESEARCH
|
|
Estimates |
||
|
1985-86 |
1986-87 |
||
|
SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES |
|||
|
Senior Positions |
|||
|
Director |
(1) |
72 900 |
72 000 |
|
Junior Positions |
|||
|
Personal secretary |
(1) |
23 100 |
24 120 |
|
Sub-total |
199 020 |
216 960 |
|
|
Other Allowances |
|||
|
Retirement benefits |
|
18 875 |
18 075 |
|
Sub-total |
63 136 |
65 629 |
|
|
Total salaries and Allowances |
262 156 |
282 589 |
|
|
OTHER EXPENSES |
|||
|
Travel and subsistence |
25 000 |
30 000 |
|
|
Sub-total |
70 000 |
150 000 |
|
|
SPECIAL EXPENDITURE |
|||
|
4WD vehicle (LandRover) |
(1) |
- |
350 000 |
|
Sub-total |
84 000 |
350 000 |
|
|
GRAND TOTAL |
426 156 |
769 749 |
|
Previous Minute: 17.1.5.2 - Establishment of a Research Directorate at SUA
23.4.1 REPORTED in connection with Min. 17.1.5.2 that all Faculties and the Development Studies Unit have submitted their views on the establishment of a Directorate of Research at SUA.
23.4.2 NOTED that all Faculties had discussed the proposal in detail and arrived at the following conclusions.
23.4.2.1 Faculty of Agriculture
(i) The risk of increasing bureaucratic inefficiencies instead of enhancing coordination in research publications at SUA is likely to stick out if the directorate is established.(ii) The demands of the proposal in view of the resource constraints (i.e., manpower, office space, finance and transport) prevailing at SUA currently are likely to be more pronounced.
(iii) However, considering the new mandate in research and extension entrusted to SUA, a research directorate would enable the university to meet its obligations to the nation and accordingly endorsed the proposal on the presumption that
(a) the Directorate will be responsible for soliciting funds and have responsibility for coordinating and monitoring progress of all research activities at SUA,(b) the Directorate will just be like a faculty and will not have direct links with other institutions unless given a mandate by the University, and
(c) there is no conflict between the activities of a Directorate of Research and the Institute for Continuing Education.
23.4.2.2 Faculty of Forestry
(i) It was not clear what the power of the Directorate would be, especially with respect to foreign-funded projects.(ii) It would have been useful to get some idea of ongoing research activities and their funding so as to justify establishment of a separate Directorate.
(iii) How would the Directorate be related to NSRC and other research bodies in the country?
(iv) All scientists doing research at SUA are operating within faculties. If faculties are strict at supervising research, the need for a very powerful research director does not arise.
(v) The problems faced by the Research and Publications Committee are related to its current structure. It is tucked under the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC) and has difficulty in reporting. The Committee should have an independent Chairperson reporting directly to Senate.
(vi) The Research and Publications Committee would function better with a strong administrator, and if that happens it is unlikely that a Directorate would be needed.
23.4.2.3 Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
(i) There would be duplication of duties, increased bureaucracy and higher overhead costs.(ii) At this juncture, there is no need to establish such a Directorate. Instead, the DVC's office could be strengthened with additional administrative staff.
(iii) Alternatively, the Research and Publications Committee could be strengthened and the new Chairperson be appointed by the DVC's office as the DVC is far too busy with other administrative matters.
23.4.2.4 Development Studies Committee (DSC)
(i) The work that exists and the expansion of research which can be expected in the near future do not warrant the establishment of an independent Directorate of Research.(ii) The Research and Publication Committee of the Senate should be reinforced so that it can deal with the expected expansion of research activities.
(iii) The following could be done to take care of the expected expansion:
(a) Make a clear distinction between the roles to be played by the Research and Publications Committee of the Senate and the Institute for Continuing Education in the coordination of research and dissemination of research findings.(b) A full-time research and publications officer should be appointed so that he or she can take care of the day-to-day requirements for coordination of research activities that are currently handled by the Research and Publications Committee of the Senate.
(iv) A Directorate of Research should be created only when a full-time research and publications officer has failed to handle matters efficiently.
23.4.3.0. OBSERVED that all Faculty Boards and DSC except the Faculty Board of the Faculty of Agriculture AGREED on the following.
(i) The Research and Publications Committee be removed from the DVC's Chairmanship and a new Chair for the Committee be appointed.(ii) The Committee be strengthened with additional administrative staff to cope with the expanding research administrative activities.
(iii) At this juncture, there is no need to establish a Directorate of Research.
23.4.3.1 OBSERVED further that the Faculty Board of the Faculty of Agriculture ENDORSED the PROPOSAL to establish a Directorate of Research.
23.4.3.2 OBSERVED also that Faculty Boards of the Faculty of Forestry and the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and DSC recommended the creation of a new system of strengthening the present Senate Research and Publications Committee by removing it from the DVC's office, but without necessarily creating a Directorate.
23.4.4 AGREED to re-submit the proposal, along with the observations of various Faculties, to the Senate for consideration.
