Trust and dual executive leadership in the public sector: the introduction of the „chancellor system" in the Hungarian higher education

After the change of regime in 1989, Hungarian higher education started to return to its Humboldtian roots. It was widely accepted that academic freedom could be guaranteed by high degree of institutional autonomy manifested... [ view full abstract ]

After the change of regime in 1989, Hungarian higher education started to return to its Humboldtian roots. It was widely accepted that academic freedom could be guaranteed by high degree of institutional autonomy manifested especially in structures of self-governance and avoidance of direct state supervision/interventions. Attempts to introduce boards and other supervising bodies were successfully resisted until 2011. The new government coming into power in 2010, however, introduced a new system of governance in which state-appointed chancellors became responsible for the finance, maintenance and administration of institutions, while rectors kept their responsibilities in academic issues. The new governance system created institutions the success of which depends on the cooperation of its two independent and interdependent leaders, the rector and the chancellor.
Although unitary leadership is dominant in current management practice and assumed to be more efficient in management theory (and in New Public Management), dual executive leadership is not unheard of neither in business, nor in public organisations. In the success of such particular leadership constellation initial literature analysis (fucusing mainly on business organisations) highlighted the critical role of shared cognition, trust, affection and the division of authority. However, the influence of contextual factors, such as the way of introduction, the initial level of trust or the peculiarity of public sector are not analysed.
Therefore the main research question of the paper are the following:
1. What are the major influencing factors of trust in dual leadership constellations?
2. Are there effective trust-building strategies in enforced dual leadership situations?

Methods

Two surveys were conducted in 2015 and 2016 among academic leaders of Hungarian higher education institutions. It focused on the opinion of respondents in topics like how the introduction of the chancellor system would influence some key factors in the institutions (expectations), what the current and expected roles of chancellors were, and what would be the benefits and disadvantages of the new governance system.
Interviews will be conducted with academic leaders as well as policy makers and chancellors in 2016 and 2017 to provide deeper understanding of the major influencing factors of dual leadership situations, particularly the level of trust. Interviews will focus on opinions on the necessity of the chancellor system, the benefits and obstacles of the cooperation between the rector and the chancellor, the perceived role of chancellors and the changing role of rectors.

Expected outcomes/results

The survey and the analysis of the institutional and legislative context provided some initial results. Chancellors are clearly seen as political representatives of the government rather than technocratic managers by many respondents which has a tremendous impact on the trust towards chancellors and the chancellor system in general. There is a smaller minority however, which considers the role of chancellors as the enforcer of accountability and economy, and the breaker of the undesired status quo in institutions. Conclusions will focus on governmental and institutional policies regarding trust-building in dual leadership situation as well as legislative consequences.