Hood staunch in the face of Oxford dons' hostility

Former University of Auckland vice-chancellor John Hood has defended himself against staff claims that he is destroying academic freedom in his new role as head of Oxford University.

But Dr Hood, who took over at the 800-year-old British institution last September, is not backing down on his controversial plans.

The former business leader told the Herald that Oxford was undergoing a period of review and change "designed to ensure that academics have even greater freedom to pursue the world-class research and teaching for which the university is renowned".

Dr Hood has proposed an overhaul of governance and working conditions, which include Oxford's 39 colleges losing much of their autonomy to a single, 150-strong academic council. He has also proposed creating a board of trustees made up of 13 outsiders to oversee finances and investments.

The plans were to create the "financial stability and collegial decision-making processes necessary to retain our position as one of the leading universities in the world", Dr Hood said.

Some staff have referred the issue to the university's 3552-strong governing body, Congregation, to which all academics belong.

They have submitted three motions which, if passed, could force Dr Hood to drop parts of his plan.

The former ASB Bank and Fonterra director said there had been widespread consultation already.

"Congregation is another mechanism for debate, and we will use the opportunity to explain further the principles behind the proposals."

The last Congregation debate took place in March last year on tuition fees. The approaching Congregation debate marks the first run-in between staff and Dr Hood, the first vice-chancellor from outside the university's academic body.

Other contentious plans include a performance review of academics by their line managers, and a shake-up of the libraries that could see the 8 million books of the 400-year-old Bodleian distributed across the city.

But his "more cost-effective service" reasoning is unlikely to satisfy many academics. In a letter to Oxford Magazine, David Palfreyman, bursar of New College, said: "Will we dispose of 800 years of genuine academic self-governance to curry favour with folk ill-informed about just what is a world-class university?"