现代大学治理结构：真实命题及中国语境

大学治理结构的真实命题包括多重涵义:回应"冲突和多元利益"的治理需要,建构能够体现利益相关者组织属性和委托代理关系特点的决策权结构;大学自身不是完整意义上的办学利益主体,其"组织剩余"是由社会利益来决定的公共价值,每一种利益相关者都不应单独地对大学行使控制权;大学治理结构是比管理结构更为基础的制度结构,其根本目的是建立大学决策过程与社会权利主体的合理联系,实现社会价值平衡。大学治理结构的中国语境是:办学体制的变化为政府与高校建立具有委托代理性质的契约关系提供了法律依据和操作空间;管理体制的变化使大学决策责任骤然加重、决策权处于高度集中状态,风险也随之出现;办学经费筹资结构的变化表明大学的社会基础日益广泛化,其利益相关者组织的属性正从模糊走向清晰。我国大学已跨越前治理时期,但向治理阶段迈进必须依靠上层政治权威的推动,才可能突破"制度锁定状态",破解历史性难题。

Governance Structure of Modern Universities: Its True Connotation and Chinese Context

The true connotation of university governance structure embraces a lot of meanings. Responding to the governance needs for "conflict and multi -interest",it is possible to establish power structure of decision-making,which reflects the nature of stakeholders and principal-agent relationship. Because its organization surplus is a kind of public value formed by social interest,each university is not the only interest subject in running a university and therefore no stakeholder could control university solely. In a university,the institutional role of governance structure is much more basic than that of management structure,aiming at building reasonable connection in decision-making process between university and social subjects in order to realize social value balance. The Chinese context of university governance structure consists of three historical reforms: first, the university ownership reform brought the legal foundation and operational possibility for establishing contract or principal -agent relationships between government and university;second,the leadership system reform enhanced university's responsibility for decision-making,drove decision-making under high intense state and meanwhile was accompanied with high risk;third,the university's fund source reform gave university a more extensive social basis,and made its nature as a stakeholder more clearly. Obviously,China's universities have already experienced pre-governance,but they can only step into governance with the support from upper political authority to break through the deadlock on the way of institutional innovation.