Does your univeristy operate mostly as a corporation trying to maximize profit?

[GuyRien]

If allowed fill in some examples

[secundem_artem]

They would if they could figure out how.

[Parasaurolophus]

They would if they could figure out how.

Yeah, pretty much.


The most egregious example, for me, is our international student recruitment, which is indiscriminate, immoral, and potentially illegal in some respects (e.g. taking their money but not having classes available for them to take). Recruitment is farmed out to headhunters who charge studeents an unregulated surplus fee on top of tuition. Some students are, I'm afraid, functionally illiterate in English (their third-plus language, mind you; their spoken English is okay). In pursuing this source of revenue, they've allowed domestic enrollment to plummet so low that our provincial funding is at risk.

We only offer, like, five majors and fewer minors, in "profitable" subjects like business, psychology, and music. Never mind that this is why we're bleeding domestic enrollment. (Also... accreditation?)

There is no tenure. We're all paid per-course, and don't have any guarantee of our course loads. And faculty are routinely shorted on parental leave (the contract says we're owed 85% of our salary, but since we're paid per-course the administration has decided we don't have salaries and aren't owed a cent for courses from which we're on leave... I, for example, am still owed ~$20 000 from my leave in 2022).

[clean]

How should a university operate?
Should they not be good stewards of the tax payer's money entrusted to them? 

[GuyRien]

How should a university operate?
Should they not be good stewards of the tax payer's money entrusted to them? 

I would think their priorities are to:

a) Advanced research
b) Educate students

Different universities weight these differently but I would think that maximizing profits isn't up there.

[Wahoo Redux]

Our university operates like a company trying to stay in business.

[GuyRien]

Our university operates like a company trying to stay in business.

So what type of university is it? I'm at an R1.

[apl68]

They would if they could figure out how.

Yeah, pretty much.


The most egregious example, for me, is our international student recruitment, which is indiscriminate, immoral, and potentially illegal in some respects (e.g. taking their money but not having classes available for them to take). Recruitment is farmed out to headhunters who charge studeents an unregulated surplus fee on top of tuition. Some students are, I'm afraid, functionally illiterate in English (their third-plus language, mind you; their spoken English is okay). In pursuing this source of revenue, they've allowed domestic enrollment to plummet so low that our provincial funding is at risk.

We only offer, like, five majors and fewer minors, in "profitable" subjects like business, psychology, and music. Never mind that this is why we're bleeding domestic enrollment. (Also... accreditation?)

There is no tenure. We're all paid per-course, and don't have any guarantee of our course loads. And faculty are routinely shorted on parental leave (the contract says we're owed 85% of our salary, but since we're paid per-course the administration has decided we don't have salaries and aren't owed a cent for courses from which we're on leave... I, for example, am still owed ~$20 000 from my leave in 2022).

It sounds like a for-profit school in all but name.

[Parasaurolophus]

They would if they could figure out how.

Yeah, pretty much.


The most egregious example, for me, is our international student recruitment, which is indiscriminate, immoral, and potentially illegal in some respects (e.g. taking their money but not having classes available for them to take). Recruitment is farmed out to headhunters who charge studeents an unregulated surplus fee on top of tuition. Some students are, I'm afraid, functionally illiterate in English (their third-plus language, mind you; their spoken English is okay). In pursuing this source of revenue, they've allowed domestic enrollment to plummet so low that our provincial funding is at risk.

We only offer, like, five majors and fewer minors, in "profitable" subjects like business, psychology, and music. Never mind that this is why we're bleeding domestic enrollment. (Also... accreditation?)

There is no tenure. We're all paid per-course, and don't have any guarantee of our course loads. And faculty are routinely shorted on parental leave (the contract says we're owed 85% of our salary, but since we're paid per-course the administration has decided we don't have salaries and aren't owed a cent for courses from which we're on leave... I, for example, am still owed ~$20 000 from my leave in 2022).

It sounds like a for-profit school in all but name.

Yeah. If ever I can jump ship, I will.

[ciao_yall]

I put "never" because my former employer couldn't balance a budget to save its life. They made decisions that were bad for the bottom line AND the community on a regular basis. Remember the Stonehenge scene from This is Spinal Tap? Yeah. That.

Any organization needs to (not necessarily in this order...)

• Balance its budget.
• Generate enough surplus to fund new initiatives.
• Achieve its mission.
• Comply with legal, ethical and social standards.

If that is running like a business, not sure how that is different from how a university should operate?

[quasihumanist]

Our university operates like a company trying to stay in business.

Exactly.

[dismalist]

How should a university be organized for efficiency? It is useful to indeed assume that a university produces research and instruction, though not necessarily both. It has come to be said that the objective function of the university is to maximize prestige. OK.

The sole reason for questioning profit making status is information asymmetry, i.e the customers don't know what they're buying. Non-profit status ameliorates this condition, but does not solve it. It allows that we will still exploit you, but not too much.

What non-profit status does not do is provide the correct incentives to producers, us. The non-profit still can make profit, it's just that the profits can't be taken home by anybody. So, they are spent on thick carpets for the admin and countless initiatives for interest groups on campus -- from mental health and safe spaces to sports, climbing walls, and pizza -- to keep these groups off the backs of admins, who don't have to pay for this stuff.

Government financing doesn't really help efficiency. The financiers aren't smart enough to determine what is efficient -- see WVa. [I mean which cuts, but more important, all that previous expansion.]

The only group that knows what's the right product to offer is the faculty, better the tenured faculty. Problem is they don't have the right incentives either, for they have no skin in the game! Let the tenured faculty hire the administration, and go down the tubes with it when a mistake is made. Have voting members buy in with, say, the value of a house.

What we see now is the product of many problems -- the incentive problems as above, interest groups on campus, but also the current demographic decline in demand for higher ed. Hence the bold cries for more government funding. I don't think it will come, even if we build.   

[Ruralguy]

The mission of a bakery is to get quality bread, pasteries, and whatever else (coffee for some, specialty cakes, etc.) to the public. Should they not also be acting like a company trying to maximize profits? The two concepts should not be mutually anathema to each other.

So, yes, of course, the mission of a college, University, etc., is to educate, to conduct quality research, and probably for many, to provide some sort of "experience" for its students, especially undergraduates (and that includes athletics). In my mind they should certainly be doing this in a way that balances the budget, and keeps operations stable. I am not sure about "maximizing profits", but certainly "competently running the business side of things" is absolutely essential.

[dismalist]

How should a university be organized for efficiency? It is useful to indeed assume that a university produces research and instruction, though not necessarily both. It has come to be said that the objective function of the university is to maximize prestige. OK.

The sole reason for questioning profit making status is information asymmetry, i.e the customers don't know what they're buying. Non-profit status ameliorates this condition, but does not solve it. It allows that we will still exploit you, but not too much.

What non-profit status does not do is provide the correct incentives to producers, us. The non-profit still can make profit, it's just that the profits can't be taken home by anybody. So, they are spent on thick carpets for the admin and countless initiatives for interest groups on campus -- from mental health and safe spaces to sports, climbing walls, and pizza -- to keep these groups off the backs of admins, who don't have to pay for this stuff.

Government financing doesn't really help efficiency. The financiers aren't smart enough to determine what is efficient -- see WVa. [I mean which cuts, but more important, all that previous expansion.]

The only group that knows what's the right product to offer is the faculty, better the tenured faculty. Problem is they don't have the right incentives either, for they have no skin in the game! Let the tenured faculty hire the administration, and go down the tubes with it when a mistake is made. Have voting members buy in with, say, the value of a house.

What we see now is the product of many problems -- the incentive problems as above, interest groups on campus, but also the current demographic decline in demand for higher ed. Hence the bold cries for more government funding. I don't think it will come, even if we build.   

The mission of a bakery is to get quality bread, pasteries, and whatever else (coffee for some, specialty cakes, etc.) to the public. Should they not also be acting like a company trying to maximize profits? The two concepts should not be mutually anathema to each other.

So, yes, of course, the mission of a college, University, etc., is to educate, to conduct quality research, and probably for many, to provide some sort of "experience" for its students, especially undergraduates (and that includes athletics). In my mind they should certainly be doing this in a way that balances the budget, and keeps operations stable. I am not sure about "maximizing profits", but certainly "competently running the business side of things" is absolutely essential.

The customer knows the quality of the bread. It's cheap to learn of it. If he doesn't like it, he stops buying. Profits give the right incentive to make good bread. Customer does not know the quality of my wondrous research. He can't decide efficiently.

Interesting you bring up "experience". That's a pure consumption good with nothing to do with education. Why is it paid for by students with cheap loans? It's fun!

Balancing a budget is not enough. Question is what's the cash spent on.

[Kron3007]

They would if they could figure out how.

Yeah, pretty much.


The most egregious example, for me, is our international student recruitment, which is indiscriminate, immoral, and potentially illegal in some respects (e.g. taking their money but not having classes available for them to take). Recruitment is farmed out to headhunters who charge studeents an unregulated surplus fee on top of tuition. Some students are, I'm afraid, functionally illiterate in English (their third-plus language, mind you; their spoken English is okay). In pursuing this source of revenue, they've allowed domestic enrollment to plummet so low that our provincial funding is at risk.

We only offer, like, five majors and fewer minors, in "profitable" subjects like business, psychology, and music. Never mind that this is why we're bleeding domestic enrollment. (Also... accreditation?)

There is no tenure. We're all paid per-course, and don't have any guarantee of our course loads. And faculty are routinely shorted on parental leave (the contract says we're owed 85% of our salary, but since we're paid per-course the administration has decided we don't have salaries and aren't owed a cent for courses from which we're on leave... I, for example, am still owed ~$20 000 from my leave in 2022).

Seems really odd for a Canadian University.  We are also chasing international students, but for us it is really the only way to generate more funds.  This may sound like chasing profit, but we have had a tuition freeze for many years without any funding to compensate for inflation, so it is more just trying to raise funds to bridge the gap. 

That is the admin's story anyway, perhaps the truth is a little more nuanced.