Motivations

Dear UCLouvain and University Hospital staff and students,

As you have seen from my presentation, I have graduated from UCLouvain three times, in medicine, in paediatrics, and as a doctor of medical sciences. My UCLouvain roots run deep. I was a student, then a teaching assistant, and am currently a dean, professor, researcher and clinician. In the course of my national and international experiences, the people I have had the good fortune to work with have generally recognised my character as a combination of empathy and determination, optimism and realism, honesty and kindness. They also appreciate my ability to avoid trying to convince at all costs, while at the same time knowing how to weigh risks and benefits. I am truly committed to our institution, and I am convinced that we are very lucky to work at UCLouvain. Academic freedom is a reality here, and each staff member represents an essential link in the performance of our missions.

I am a candidate because, at a crucial time in the history of our university, which is preparing to celebrate its 600th anniversary, I am convinced that for each and every one of us the time has come to (re)discover the meaning of what we do here, whether in our work or in our studies. Like many of you, I believe in the need to reinvigorate the university so that it once again becomes a place of fulfilment where independence and respect are assured, where we take the time to exchange our viewpoints and combine our multiple skills to better meet the challenges of tomorrow, where it is possible to fearlessly express our disagreement as a means of encouraging the confrontation of ideas as an instrument of reflection, debate and solutions. This is what I have been able to experience over the past 12 months through more than 100 individual meetings and dozens of hours of discussions in focus groups involving some 50 colleagues. This formidable process of collective intelligence has convinced me of the virtues of more participative governance, which I am committed to implementing in the university’s governing bodies. It has also consolidated and enriched the motivations that drive me today. These are based on an assessment and a vision; they underpin my two priorities.

An assessment

The University is facing a series of challenges that in recent years have grown in number, importance and urgency. While I see these challenges as a real opportunity to innovate and renew, I am fully aware of the pressure they bring and the damage they cause. Over the past year, I have met a considerable number of people on every campus and in every part of our great university community. While many of you are bursting with creative energy and infectious enthusiasm, I have also become aware of the gloom, concern and, all too often, real distress that afflicts a growing number of our students and colleagues. The increase in the number of students dropping out of courses and PhDs, of instances of long-term sick leave, and of decisions to leave the University are all alarms convincing me that, more than in the past, our university must give priority to the question of the meaning of its work, which requires clearly and collectively identifying its aims and preserving the conditions that make this possible. The efforts of each and every one of us only have meaning if they are directed towards an agreed upon goal that gives them impetus and coherence. And the efforts we exert year-round are meaningless if we do not take care, in a constant and coherent way, of our individual and collective well-being.

A vision

The University’s mission is often described in terms of the triptych “education-research-service”. And, just as conventionally, “excellence” is the objective it sets itself at all three levels. In the vision I am proposing, this way of defining a university’s policy is no longer appropriate. The division into three missions, and the “silo” thinking that often accompanies it, obliterates not only the necessary correlations between these missions and the actions they require but, even more crucial, the horizon of a common purpose towards which they should be striving. This is why I am determined to create a different perspective: to do things differently, including “less” and “simpler”, in order to do things “better”, according to standards of quality rather than quantity. “Excellence” becomes a consequence rather than an objective. This “better” can only be defined in light of the objectives we set ourselves together, in a genuine process of collective building, and can only happen if we give our full attention to our robustness, and particularly to preserving our community’s well-being. This is the vision that underpins my two priorities.

Two priorities

A PEOPLE-BASED UNIVERSITY. If you place your trust in me, I will ensure that I always give priority to people and their development and well-being at work or in their education. Governing our university means making choices. Mine will be guided by this principle. We urgently need to be able to act not only on personal well-being but also on collective well-being and living well together. I will ensure that the actions proposed are part of a clear legislative framework concerning the prevention of psychosocial risks at work, which indicates the five levers we can act on: work organisation, work content, working conditions, working life and interpersonal relations. I will ensure that staff and students are fully involved in this process as responsible actors in our UCLouvain community. By acting on these five levers, I will pay particular attention to ensuring that everyone can progress in their studies or careers while respecting their personal values, and at the same time take part in an exciting collective adventure in which their investment will be recognised.

This first priority will include the following measures:

• the redefinition of the measurement of the teaching load of academics so as to better reflect the diversity of situations and all load components, and the introduction of a multiyear plan for a modulated load reduction;
• a permanent increase in support for dissertation supervision, using methods that are specific to the diversity of practices;
• the creation of a budget envelope dedicated to administrative and technical staff promotions so as the waiting period for promotion never exceeds three years if this period is the result solely of the limitation of the current envelope;
• the harmonisation of research costs for all categories of PhD students;
• the creation of a “RESTART” research fund specifically designed to offer new funding opportunities to individuals or teams after a period of reduced activity (owing to family reasons, time-consuming institutional mandates, etc.);  the creation of a PEPS status for students who are obliged to work to finance their studies;  the implementation of an embedded internationalisation policy, with the urgent priority of improving conditions for incoming (“IN”) students and researchers and, more generally, all international students joining our community.

A TRANSITION-FOCUSED UNIVERSITY. In its general sense, the term “transition” refers to the passage from one state to another, slowly and gradually (unlike a shock). The socio-ecological transition that underpins my second priority will take full account of this temporality and ensure that it combines respect for planetary limits with the achievement of social objectives. I want us to create a collective narrative, because only the support of the entire community can achieve a development strategy characterised by strong sustainability. The socio-ecological transition will require a non-ideological combination of innovation and moderation. To this end, I want to rely on individual empowerment rather than shaming, and so encourage an institutional culture marked by trust rather than control.

This second priority will be reflected in the following measures:

• the creation of a Pro-Rectorate for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion with genuine resources;
• the acceleration of the Transition Plan where we deem it necessary, including in light of the conclusions of the Transition Assembly;
• the establishment of an Advisory Board for Social Responsibility and Sustainability to ensure a strong link between UCLouvain and economic, social and community actors on these issues;
• the creation of a new Strategic Initiative Research Fund that will give us the means to respond quickly and agilely to strategic opportunities that cannot be accommodated within the processes and timetables of traditional calls for tender;
• the redeployment of continuing education as part of a genuine lifelong learning policy, fully integrated into the university’s education and service missions, more in tune with transition challenges, and better connected to the regional socio-economic fabric;
• the formulation of genuine campus projects and reflection on the governance of a UCLouvain that must fully take responsibility for its eight campuses.

These two priorities form the basis of many other concrete proposals that make up the programme I will be presenting to you in the coming weeks.

I am standing for rector because I believe in our collective ability to meet the challenges ahead. If I am elected rector, I pledge to act as a catalyst for this collective momentum and to guide our efforts towards achieving this shared vision: a university that reflects who we are and brings us together.

Françoise Smets
www.francoisesmets.be