{"id":7476,"date":"2026-10-21T10:05:53","date_gmt":"2026-10-21T03:05:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/audithink.com\/?p=7476"},"modified":"2026-10-21T10:37:58","modified_gmt":"2026-10-21T03:37:58","slug":"good-university-governance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/audithink.com\/en\/blog\/good-university-governance\/","title":{"rendered":"Good University Governance (GUG): Principles, Practices, and the Role of the SPI"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Good<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Photo by Vitaly Gariev on Unsplash<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Universities hold great responsibility: public or student funds, assets, data, and academic reputation. That is why the way a campus makes decisions, oversees itself, and accounts for its results is under scrutiny from the government, accreditation bodies, and the public alike.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article discusses what it is good university governance<\/em> (GUG), its principles in regulations and accreditation instruments, the structure of campus organs that oversee one another, practice and evidence examples, and the role of the SPI in maintaining good governance. Regulatory references were checked as of October 21, 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What Is Good University Governance?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Good university governance is good governance of a higher education institution: how a campus exercises authority, manages resources, and accounts for its performance based on clear principles. The term is widely used in higher education, including in the BAN-PT accreditation instrument. Laws and regulations more often refer to it simply as good governance of higher education institutions and spell out its principles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the business world, a similar concept is known as good corporate governance<\/em>. It is discussed in the article on examples of GCG implementation in companies<\/a>. The difference is that a campus carries out academic and non-academic missions at once, so its governance needs to cover both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What Are the Principles of University Governance in Regulations?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The following three references are often used by campuses. The wording differs slightly, but the direction is the same:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reference<\/th>Principles named<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Law 12\/2012 on Higher Education, Article 63 (principles of management autonomy)<\/td>Accountability, transparency, non-profit, quality assurance, and effectiveness and efficiency<\/td><\/tr>
Ministerial Regulation 39\/2025, Article 67 paragraph (2) (governance in developing the SPMI)<\/td>Accountability, transparency, non-profit, effectiveness, efficiency, and continuous quality improvement, balancing one another<\/td><\/tr>
BAN-PT accreditation instrument IAPT 4.1, Accountability criterion<\/td>Good university governance covering credibility, transparency, accountability, responsibility, and fairness, as well as risk management<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The BAN-PT instrument adds that GUG practice includes preventing and acting against corruption, sexual violence, bullying, and intolerance within the campus, as well as enforcing the code of ethics and ensuring safety, comfort, and well-being. Instrument details may be updated, so check the official BAN-PT website<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How Are Those Principles Translated into Campus Practice?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Principle of<\/th>Example practice<\/th>Examples of evidence<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Accountability<\/td>Annual performance report and follow-up on auditor findings<\/td>Annual report, follow-up status of recommendations<\/td><\/tr>
Transparency<\/td>Budget information, new student admissions, and services are published<\/td>Public information page on the campus website<\/td><\/tr>
Responsibility<\/td>Compliance with regulations, the code of ethics, and quality standards<\/td>Compliance audit results, code of ethics enforcement<\/td><\/tr>
Fairness<\/td>Selection, scholarships, and performance appraisal use written criteria<\/td>Selection guidelines and decision minutes<\/td><\/tr>
Credibility<\/td>Academic integrity and consistent handling of violations<\/td>Complaint procedures and records of their resolution<\/td><\/tr>
Risk Management<\/td>Key risks are mapped and monitored by leadership<\/td>Risk register and risk monitoring reports<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The examples above are illustrations to help prepare evidence, not a standard list from the regulations. Risk management is discussed further in the article on university risk management<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Which Organs Oversee One Another at State Universities?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Article 29 paragraph (1) of Government Regulation Number 4 of 2014 states that the organization of a state university consists at least of a senate, the head of the institution, an internal supervisory unit, and a board of trustees or equivalent. Article 29 paragraph (9) states that these organs perform their functions through mutual checks and balances (checks and balances<\/em>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Organ<\/th>Function under Government Regulation 4\/2014<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Senate<\/td>Setting and considering the implementation of academic policy<\/td><\/tr>
Head of the institution<\/td>Setting non-academic policy and managing the institution<\/td><\/tr>
Internal supervisory unit (SPI)<\/td>Non-academic oversight for and on behalf of the head of the institution<\/td><\/tr>
Board of trustees or equivalent<\/td>Non-academic considerations and other functions set in the statute<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

At legal entity state universities, Article 30 of Government Regulation 4\/2014 sets a different form. The board of trustees (majelis wali amanat) carries out general policy setting and non-academic oversight, the academic senate governs the academic field, and the board of trustees forms an audit committee or equivalent for non-academic oversight. The legal basis of the SPI for each type of institution is discussed in the article University SPI<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How Is Accountability to the Public Achieved?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Article 78 of Law 12\/2012 states that university accountability consists of academic and non-academic accountability. It is achieved by meeting the National Standards of Higher Education, carried out through an annual reporting system, and the annual report is published to the public. In other words, transparency is not optional: the annual report is an obligation.<\/p>\n\n\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"cta\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\n\n\n

What Does Accreditation Assess About Governance?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In IAPT 4.1, the assessment of governance falls under the Accountability criterion. The instrument states that the emphasis of the assessment includes, among others:<\/p>\n\n\n\n