The University’s Staff Code of Conduct opens with a powerful declaration: “It’s what you do that defines who we are.” (See http://mystory-myvoice.blogspot.com/2025/10/its-what-you-do-that-defines-who-we-are.html).
Not what we say. Not what we publish. Not what we brand.
What we do.
The Values section of the Code of Conduct is not aspirational poetry. It is meant to be an ethical contract — a living standard that governs behaviour, power, decision-making and responsibility across all levels of the University.
Truth. Academic excellence. Service.
These values are described as “the principles behind all our actions.”
Not some actions.
Not only junior staff actions.
All actions.
So the question must be asked — carefully, respectfully, but honestly:
Where is the accountability when senior executives and governance do not apply these values to their own conduct, particularly toward employees, alumni, and their families?
⸻
Truth: When Silence Replaces Inquiry
Truth, according to the Code, is a commitment to lifelong pursuit of knowledge, critical inquiry, and active discovery. It is something to be freely sought, shared, and engaged with.
Yet truth becomes fragile when those who raise inconvenient facts are ignored, sidelined, or treated as problems to be managed rather than voices to be heard.
What does “freely seeking truth” mean if:
• serious concerns are met with silence,
• evidence is minimised or reframed,
• and staff are left to carry the burden of proof alone?
Truth is not upheld by branding statements or glossy reports.
It is upheld by listening, investigating, and responding with integrity, especially when doing so is uncomfortable.
If truth is a value, then truth-telling must be protected — not punished.
⸻
Academic Excellence: Integrity Beyond Output
Academic excellence is described as the pursuit of the highest quality intellectual, educational and learning experiences, grounded in innovation and creativity.
But excellence is not confined to research metrics or teaching awards.
It is also expressed in:
• ethical leadership,
• sound governance,
• procedural fairness,
• and the courage to admit when systems fail people.
A university cannot credibly claim academic excellence while tolerating:
• organisational cultures that silence critique,
• governance practices that deflect responsibility,
• or decision-making that causes foreseeable harm.
Excellence without integrity is performance.
Excellence with integrity is leadership.
⸻
Service: Who Is Being Served — and at What Cost?
The organisation rightly describes itself as “a university of service”, committed to the common good, the dignity of all people, and the sacredness of life.
Service, however, is not selective.
It does not stop at the campus gates.
It does not exclude staff once they become inconvenient.
It does not evaporate when families are impacted by institutional decisions.
If service is a core value, then:
• harm must be acknowledged, not managed away;
• people must not be left isolated while institutions protect reputation;
• and those in positions of power must be held to the same - if not higher - standards as everyone else.
Service without accountability is not service.
It is symbolism.
⸻
The Unanswered Question of Accountability
The Code of Conduct is explicit:
“Our managers should be modelling proper and principled behaviour in all that they do.”
This is not optional.
It is foundational.
So when senior executives, including the Vice-Chancellor and governance bodies:
• fail to apply the Code consistently,
• fail to act on known risks or harms,
• or fail to uphold dignity, fairness and compassion,
who holds them to account?
Values that apply only downward are not values.
They are control mechanisms.
⸻
Living the Mission Requires Courage at the Top
The Code speaks repeatedly of courage — the courage to act ethically, to admit mistakes, to respond to wrongdoing, and to treat people with dignity.
Courage is most meaningful when exercised by those with the most power.
If the University is serious about its Mission, then accountability cannot stop at middle management. It must extend to:
• senior executives,
• governing councils,
• and those entrusted with stewardship of the institution’s moral authority.
Because what they do — especially when no one is watching — defines who the University really is.
⸻
Values are not proven by words.
They are proven by accountability.
And until the Staff Code of Conduct applies equally to all — including those at the very top — the question will remain:
Are these values being lived, or merely recited?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.