Quality Assurance for Higher Education from the Perspective of a University’s Organisational Structure, Approaches and Challenges in the Somali Context ()
1. The State of Quality Assurance Evaluation
1.1. Introduction
This paper tries to define, measure, monitor, and improve the internal and external quality of respective institutions in relation to the national Internal Quality Assurance (IQA) framework in the context of international settings. The acquisition of sustainable advanced Higher Education (HE) became critical to aspirations and in the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge in rebuilding and reconstituting countries’ emerging institutions and industry. In a country, such as Somalia, that is coming out of protracted internecine civil strife, its employment generation potential is clearly dependent upon the availability of essential skilled personnel, and that is intertwined with an edification of post-secondary excellence.
But, as several recent studies revealed (Farah, 2020; HIPS, 2020; Ali & Farah, 2023), the overall state of Somali HE is contextually complex due to the absence of effective Internal Quality Assurance (IQA) and controlling bodies that deliver External Quality Assurance (EQA); thus, the privately owned and funded higher institutions, with the exception of the recently reconstituted sole government-owned Somali National University, have been left to cater for themselves (Eno et al., 2015). Consequently, this places a significant strain on the availability of skilled labour in order to meet the modern demand for trained workers with the necessary abilities of the economy’s producing sectors (Agarwal, 2006). Notwithstanding little or no progress in reforms covering a number of sectors and sub-sectors of the economy, there is little up-to-date debate on reorganisations in establishing and improving the quality assurance evolution for the HE institutions and their academic programmes. In that respect, this paper tries to highlight the level of required external quality assurance, if any, and institutional self-evaluation and its attendant academic programmes of the HEIs in Somalia, and then appropriately lays down an agenda for reforms in the HE sector in Somalia in order to fill the existing gaps.
1.2. Traditional Meaning of “Quality Assurance”
Quality is often referred to, in addition to its relevance to a myriad of private and public sectors of life, as a relative concept since different definitions of quality fit under different connotations and surroundings; thus, there is no commonly agreed-upon definition of the term (Elshaer, 2018; Williams & Harvey, 2015). Several definitions of quality are presented in Garvin’s (1984) criteria referenced by Elshaer (2018). According to Pfeffer & Coote (1991), traditionally, the idea of quality has been closely connected to the conception of distinctiveness, “of something different, superior, or ‘high class’ to its comparatively associated equal. The traditional idea of quality tacitly implies exclusiveness for a particular club” (Williams & Harvey, 2015). The idea of quality in HE is said to be measured through an appraisal of what is serviced but assumes that the distinctiveness and inaccessibility of elitist educational institutions had traditionally been a synonym of “quality”. Evidently, this sort of quality is earmarked for specific sectors of the community and not attainable for most people, barely offering standards against which to measure quality (Williams & Harvey, 2015).
There is a broad background of the traditional quality assurance insofar as HE setup and the possibilities obtainable to the Quality Assurance (QA) agency to plan and its mechanisms are concerned. The old-style interpretation in education is that universities exemplify quality and thus it is not essential to prove it. Consequently, it is inoperable in measuring quality in HE, for it was a nebulous entity for determining quality. A good example was the construction of quality in German tertiary quality assurance, as they adopted the unquestionable “apodictic” internal assurance to quality with an explicit role by academic staff who were at the time poised; the system works well. To summarise, it’s mainly academicians that are the vanguards of quality, synonymous with excellence here, adaptability, innovation, and continuous improvement to standards passed through a set of quality checkups to determine their accuracy (Williams & Harvey, 2015).
In recent times, Higher Education Quality Assurance (HEQA) has advanced as a relative notion that has different meanings for different people: students may concentrate on the educational facilities offered and the utility of education for future employment. Academic staff, instead, may be motivated by the teaching-learning method. Institutional management may give precedence to the current and future successes of the institution. On the other hand, parents may reflect on their children’s achievements and, as a result, their future employability. Lastly, employers may consider the competence of the graduates of the respective institutions (Timiras et al., 2024). In modern times, the term Quality Assurance (QA), in HE connotations, refers to the EQA cum Internal Quality Methods (IQM) within a formal structure for external appraisal and improvement authentication. Thus, obligatory inward performance assessment. The inner self-evaluation is being authenticated by the first external review. Secondly, requirements for monitoring and follow-up for EQA recommendations. This study draws attention to organisational mismanagement in the investigated institution through the allocation of power and authority and its negative impact on universities, as determined by the study’s findings. The study ultimately makes an effort to offer suitable solutions for successful HE leadership.
1.3. Problem Statement
Somalia faces a severe shortage of qualified (PhDs from accredited universities) higher education-trained lecturers equipped with basic research and development skills to serve in the hundred or more universities which can be exacerbated by the high volume of student intake, lack of research, teaching facilities, duplicated programmes and funding impacting the quality of education delivered and research. In addition, the impact of the 1991 Somali civil war resulted in a substantial loss of higher-education-trained manpower. That specifically hindered the Somali federal government and federal member states’ ability to reach their vision 2025 targets. Furthermore, the Somali Education Policy Papers do not clearly indicate the government’s commitment to enhancing and improving the HE sector. For that reason, Somalia is still in dire need of an HE-trained workforce and, as aforesaid, skilled research and teaching staff to meet the demands of the market and reality of the workplaces. The lack of a robust governmental commitment and a clearly defined policy framework to steer the development and management of university education has intensified the challenges faced in Somalia.
Somali higher education competitiveness to achieve their goals and successfully track their progress towards the set of goals the Ministry of Education and Higher Education (ME&HE) developed KPI metrics such as graduation rate, to measure the organizational performance at the institutional level and be used inside the organization to support the strategic process. The quantity and quality of the expert human resources, entrepreneur human resources, basic research, applied research, research and development, evaluation research, action research, knowledge creation, accumulation, sharing, utilization and internalization for industries, and social and national responsibilities. Effective leadership in higher education is loosely organised, such as when ownership and administration are kept apart and tasks are delegated in a way that makes it clear to other bodies who is responsible for what. The Ministry of Education’s role is loosely structured, and successful management in higher education is organised informally in Somalia. For example, tasks are assigned in a way that makes it not obvious to other bodies who is in charge of what, and ownership and administration are kept apart (ME & HE; Farah, 2022).
1.4. The Aim
A governance structure with three major players—the Senate, the board of trustees, or the council-cum-academic board—is the prevailing form that is beginning to take shape (Fielden, 2010). Therefore, this study aims to determine if the aforementioned three-tier system is present in the target institutions and to what degree it is effective across all HEIs in the nation, given the recent federal parliament’s passage of the Higher Education Act (MoE & HE, 2025). Along with the absence of a cohesive and standardised curriculum and syllabus, the study tries to gauge if there are sufficiently trained university lecturers and if there is a clear discrepancy between their supply and demand in respective HEIs. The acquisition of sustainable advanced HE has become essential due to the goals of pursuing and exchanging knowledge in the restoration and reconstruction of expanding institutions and businesses in a distinct or unique nation that is trying to conform to the mainstream nation-state modality. The ability to create jobs in nations like Somalia, which are emerging from protracted internal conflicts, is obviously reliant on having qualified and experienced workers. The goal of the study is to support the effort to establish successful Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in Somalia.
2. Methodology
The target institutions comprise one state university (Somali National University) and a number of privately owned universities from the regions of Mogadishu, Baidoa, Bari, Gedo, Lower Juba, Nugal, Mudug, and Hiiraan. 54 universities were chosen as the study’s target population because they offered at least four-year undergraduate degrees (bachelor’s degrees) and were accredited by the Ministry of Education. The leadership frameworks, roles, and power dynamics of the chosen universities have been examined, as well as the ensuing effects on productivity and service provision. The size and kind of each HEI’s governing body structure in the five FMSs, the capital city of FGS, and the self-declared Somaliland government—including the senate, university council, board of trustees/general assembly, and student government—were thus investigated. Lastly, its effectiveness, completeness, consistency across various bodies, selection procedures, periodic convening schedule (the frequency of the distinct bodies’ annual meetings), their tenure and that of the president, chancellor, or rector, and responsibilities. We collected data from those colleges’ websites, distributed questionnaires, and polled 521 people in a cross-sectional study in order to achieve the aforementioned goals. The study employed purposive sampling, which relies on the researcher’s intuition and assessment to choose respondents’ components, factors, items, or attributes. The criteria used to select the 521 key informant’s demographic characteristics are, as per Table 2, their age, gender, education level, and years of experience. A structured interview schedule wherein all candidates/key informants, as per above, responded to nine predetermined questions in the same sequence and were evaluated in-person using a uniform scoring methodology. Key informants from both sole Public University and predominantly Private University with a variety of demographic characteristics were interviewed, including age, gender disparity, education level, and experiences as a representative from HEIs/universities. The interviewees’ response factors, such as frequencies (n) and proportions (percent), were analyzed and cataloged in a descriptive manner, and the results were reported in Tables 1-3).
Finally, the data was analysed using descriptive and bivariate logistic regression and presented in a table format. Finally, suggestions were made to improve any limitations in their current governance structures and bring them into compliance with globally recognised standards.
Table 1. Number of respondents and their respective universities by category number of respondents by category, along with the corresponding universities.
Sl. No. |
Types of University |
No. of Sampled University |
No. of Respondents |
Percentage of survey |
1 |
General Public University |
1 |
34 |
6.5% |
3 |
Private University |
53 |
487 |
93.5% |
Total |
54 |
521 |
100% |
Table 2. Key informant’s demographic characteristics. Number of Respondents from the selected Universities and their demographic characteristics.
Key informant of the selected Universities demographic characteristics |
Frequency
n = 30 |
Proportion of informants (%) |
Age: |
n = 521 |
(%) |
31 - 40 |
121 |
23.2 |
40 - 50 |
261 |
50.1 |
50 > 60 |
140 |
26.7 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
Gender: |
(%) |
(%) |
Male |
341 |
65.5 |
Female |
160 |
32.5 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
Education level: |
n |
(%) |
Bachelor degree |
143 |
27.5 |
Master Degrees |
322 |
61.8 |
PhD Degrees |
56 |
10.7 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
Experiences |
n |
(%) |
1 - 3 years |
331 |
63.5 |
4 - 10 years |
177 |
34 |
11 - 12 years |
9 |
1.7 |
13 years and above |
4 |
0.8 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
3. Results
3.1. Interviewee’s Responses
As aforementioned, after 521 relevant informants were retained in the survey, the majority of respondents in the study population were predominantly university-educated males. Of the 521 key informants who took part in the study, 93.5% came from the private universities while the 6.5% were from the sole public university that existed at the time of the study. According to demographic information and the respondents’ corresponding qualifications 27.5% had a bachelor’s degree, almost 62% held Masters, while a mere 10.7% held a PhD. The respondents were aged between 31 and over 60. Also, based on the tenure, 63.5%, almost two-thirds, had a maximum of three years in the academic environment.
Interviewee’s responses
As noted earlier, even when 521 important informants were retained, almost two-thirds of survey participants were males with a university degree. Table 3 shows the interviewees’ responses to the questions. As part of a predetermined scoring system, the nine options given to the respondents are sequentially categorised from 1 to 9.
Table 3. Interviewee’s response.
Variable |
Scoring |
Respondents (n) = 30 (%) |
1. The leadership’s understanding of the formal Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) mechanism and its execution is |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
58 |
11.13 |
Unsatisfactory |
241 |
46.26 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
59 |
11.32 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
81 |
15.55 |
Satisfactory |
61 |
11.71 |
Highly Satisfactory |
21 |
4,03 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
2. University’s specific objectives and KPIs of different areas are |
|
|
Highly Unsatisfactory |
76 |
14.59 |
Unsatisfactory |
102 |
19.58 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
87 |
16.70 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
160 |
30.71 |
Satisfactory |
66 |
12.67 |
Highly Satisfactory |
30 |
5.76 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
3. The HEI equipped with the required educational facilities is |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
117 |
22.46 |
Unsatisfactory |
230 |
44.15 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
34 |
6.53 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
133 |
23.42 |
Satisfactory |
12 |
2.30 |
Highly Satisfactory |
6 |
1.15 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
4. Your institution Cooperation Arrangements with other national institutions in different areas KPIs are |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
87 |
16.70 |
Unsatisfactory |
139 |
26.68 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
102 |
33.01 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
66 |
15.16 |
Satisfactory |
33 |
6.33 |
Highly Satisfactory |
11 |
2.11 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
5. Program Objectives, Structure, Course Content, Grading, and Graduates’ records are |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
201 |
38.58 |
Unsatisfactory |
119 |
22.84 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
101 |
19.39 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
56 |
10.75 |
Satisfactory |
32 |
6.14 |
Highly Satisfactory |
12 |
2.30 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
6. The Cooperation Arrangements with international institutions are |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
201 |
38.58 |
Unsatisfactory |
119 |
22.84 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
101 |
19.39 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
56 |
10.75 |
Satisfactory |
32 |
6.14 |
Highly Satisfactory |
12 |
2.30 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
7. Organization’s faculty or student’s engage in peer-reviewed publication research |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
297 |
57.0 |
Unsatisfactory |
104 |
20.0 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
59 |
11.3 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
33 |
6.3 |
Satisfactory |
11 |
2.1 |
Highly Satisfactory |
17 |
3.3 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
8. The curriculum relevance based on skills in demand in the market which enhances employability rate of the graduates |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
37 |
7.10 |
Unsatisfactory |
58 |
11.13 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
259 |
32.25 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
119 |
20.92 |
Satisfactory |
116 |
22.26 |
Highly Satisfactory |
33 |
3.33 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
9. The funding regime of all of the above matters in advancing HE institutions of the country |
Highly Unsatisfactory |
271 |
52.02 |
Unsatisfactory |
191 |
36.66 |
Moderately Unsatisfactory |
33 |
6.33 |
Moderately Satisfactory |
14 |
2.69 |
Satisfactory |
4 |
0.77 |
Highly Satisfactory |
8 |
1.54 |
Total |
521 |
100 |
46.26%, almost half, of the key informants expressed that the leadership knowledge about the formal Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) mechanism and its implementation is unsatisfactory.
When presented with their focus on the university’s specific objectives and KPIs of different areas, the result was nearly evenly distributed, with the highest score, 30.71%, falling on Moderately Satisfactory.
There is a debate that is coming back again and again while in the survey on the educational facilities and whether the HEI is equipped with the required educational facilities; thus, when presented with the question to the survey participants, most articulated 44.15, that it is moderately satisfactory.
The respondents’ answers on their institution’s cooperation arrangements with other institutions in different areas of KPIs were almost evenly distributed, and the highest score of respondents was 102 (33.01%), which is moderately unsatisfactory. This is pertinent in their cooperation with each other.
The question of the curriculum and syllabus, such as program objectives, its structure, course content, grading, and graduate records, indicated that almost one-third of the respondents (201, 38.58%) believed that it was highly unsatisfactory as far as the university management commitment is concerned, while only 12 (2.30%) expressed that it was highly satisfactory.
The cooperation arrangements with other international institutions were expressed by the participants of the survey as highly unsatisfactory (201, 38.58%) and unsatisfactory (119, 22.84%) in their verdicts. That is almost two-thirds of the participants’ opinion on the matter.
When asked if the participant is satisfied with the respective institution’s faculties or students engaging in peer-reviewed publication research, in other words, the level of academic publications, just over half of them expressed that they are highly unsatisfied (297, 57%) with the matter. Also, 104 (20%) expressed that they are not satisfied with the university’s job on the matter. That makes just over two-thirds of the participants.
Penultimately, regarding the relevance of the respective curriculum universities adopted, which is based on skills in demand in the market that enhance the employability rate of the graduates, most of the participants of the survey took the position of moderately unsatisfied. That makes 32.25% of the participants, while 22.26% were satisfied with the adopted curriculum by the universities.
Finally, the question that revolves around all the above parameters has been fielded to the participants of the survey, and they are asked if one is satisfied with the funding regime of all of the above matters in advancing HE institutions of the country. 271 and 191 expressed that the funding regime is both highly unsatisfactory and unsatisfactory. That is 462 (89%) of the participants.
3.2. Bivariate Logistic Regression Analysis
The cascaded hierarchy of university governance—the board, council, senate, and student governance was examined using logistic regressions. Of the 54 universities examined, the effect of each independent variable on the aforementioned university ascendency variables was analysed. As a result, in testing the effect of the board on the council/senate, the odds of not having a board were 0.6 (−0.35, 0.51) times lower with a χ2 of 0.72 and a p-value of 3.97 × 10−1 @95% CI. The difference was statistically significant. The same is true for the Board to Student governance and Council/Senate over Student governance with an odd ratio and confidence intervals of 0.79 (−0.06, 0.86) and 1.3 (0.35, 1.16) with p-values of 6.43 × 10−1 and 6.5 × 10−1 respectively. (Table 4)
Of those analysed, eight (14.81%) have a board of directors, trustees, or general assembly. This is much less than the average necessary, which is 10 (28%), the senate, 17 (31.4%) university council/board of management, and 4 (7.4%) student governance. However, on their websites, only six institutions described the functions of each governance cascade. Only one university provided comprehensive information about its governance structure, membership count, names, responsibilities, tenure, and yearly meetings.
4. Discussions
The lack of funding, chronic shortage of qualified instructors and HE programs are seen as being largely male-oriented. That gender disparity is chronic compared
Table 4. University governance.
|
Variable Conditions University governance |
Bivariate analysis OR (95% CI) |
χ2 |
p-value |
Conditions |
Board |
Council/Senate |
|
Yes No |
8 46 |
17 37 |
Reference 0.6 (−0.35, 0.51) |
Reference 0.72 |
3.97 × 10−1 |
|
Board |
Student governance |
|
|
|
Yes No |
8 46 |
4 50 |
Reference 0.79 (−0.06, 0.86) |
Reference 0.02 |
6.43 × 10−1 |
|
Council/Senate |
Student governance |
|
Yes No Delivery cesarean delivery |
17 37 |
4 50 |
Reference 1.3 (0.35, 1.16) |
Reference 0.19 |
6.5 × 10−1 |
to the other similar HEIs in Africa in general and East Africa in particular. That needs to be attended to by the education authority, ministry of Education and higher education of both federal government and federal member states. Also, the survey highlighted that the leadership’s knowledge about formal Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) mechanism is compromised. That ascertains, though their KPIs awareness is moderate, the disparity between the years they existed and the lack of progress in terms of quality. Lack of university management commitment to the curriculum and syllabus exacerbated the matter. This must have a knock-on effect on the cooperation arrangements with other institutions, both national and international, thus the progress on the above matters. Almost all HEI’s contribution to academic research is pertinent in the shortage of institutions’ faculties or students’ peer-reviewed publications annually. The above will definitely have the employability rate of the graduates as the necessary skills on demand in the market are leveraged on them. Thus, KPI set out by Petrov and Kamenova-Timareva (2014) is pertinent here.
In general, there is no one perfect approach for the university governance structure (Eurydice, 2008; Magalhães et al., 2013; Bennetot & Estermann, 2018). The approach of this work here is a cascade one in which university governance, diversity and marketization, organisational culture and its steering approaches perception and adaptation of management reform, then based on the aforesaid. And due to the blurred or non-distinctive roles of each group (the board, senate, student governance), the major HE issues that have been studied over the past decade (Hartley, 2003). One of the central themes in this research is whether there have been any inroads the universities have made sense then (Farah, 2022).
Since the Higher Education Commission Act was recently passed by parliament, the only eight HEIs have a university board of trustees, and based on the interviews conducted, they are all nonprofits with multiple roles and responsibilities, such as overseeing organizations’ performance accountability, fiscal integrity, and regulatory compliance; they also share a leadership role with the senate to advance their universities’ missions (Chait et al., 2004). In Somali context, unlike the neighbouring countries such as Kenya and Ethiopia, the only public Somali national university conforms to a structure where the chancellor is the titular leader, with no board of trustees, and the council comes under his command (Muema, 2020). As for student governance, only four universities specified it on their websites. Nevertheless, it’s an essential body for the management of student affairs and overall university management supposed to address the challenges facing student roles in the university leadership (Bosire et al., 2008). Regarding the council, based on the universities listed on their websites and the findings of their interviews, the majority of its members are also on the board of directors. This suggests that there is overlap, which weakens and compromises the council. As per the respondent’s answers, weaknesses in governance, such as overlapping roles between boards and councils, could be what transpired their fragile cooperation among themselves as well as with other international institutions, as the respondents’ answers on their institution’s cooperation arrangements with other institutions in different areas of KPIs were unsatisfactory.
The University Senate is the executive branch of the institution, and is answerable to the Council and the Board of Trustees. As the most senior academic body at the university, the Senate is in charge of academic governance, which includes standards and quality of education. It also plays a crucial strategic role in determining the course of research, teaching and learning at the university. In order to guarantee uniformity and best practices in the administration of the university’s awards and of its enrolled students, it is in charge of creating and supervising the development of academic policies and procedures as well as the regulatory framework that faculties and departments function within (Teixeira & Middlehurst 2020). However, in the Somali context, the board of directors holds the ultimate power, as evidenced by the conducted interviews. Since there are only about 100 HEIs in a newly formed Somali FG emerging from a protracted civil war without a higher education act or implementing body in place to license a university that satisfies the requirements for a potential HEI that should open for business, this could once again be attributed to the institution’s physically and financially limited scale. Therefore, the sanest prerogative is only confined to the campuses of the institutions: internal management such as matriculations and fees levying, teacher and timetable arrangements, and ensuring the educational facilities are met for the corresponding modules.
The student governance in a university, public or private continues to face a major challenge to university administrators in many parts of the world including Somalia, and is feared by the respective administration. But, in Somali context it has been a mellowed modus operandi that students have no feasible role in the education system of the country. Parents also inadvertently assume it’s the leadership and managements’ role in governing the education institutions, and the HE environment is no exception. Thus, unlike the neighbouring countries (Bosire et al., 2008), the student union plays almost no role in the management of student affairs and overall university management, and thus does not contribute to decision-making on matters affecting students. Their job encompasses co-ordination of University and College development plans, the efficient management of University resources, both human and material, and making proposals to the Council and the Senate on policies that have a University-wide application. The study concluded that challenges experienced by student leaders may impede effective discharge of their duties and may result in poor service delivery leading to incidents of riots. The study recommends that student leaders should be assisted to solve internal problems that may affect the effective discharge of their duties as a way of addressing unrest in public universities
Conclusion and Recommendation
As evaluation and improvement in HE are necessary and gradual, they should foster improvement, provide accountability records, and promote increased understanding of the phenomena under review (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 1985; Mehari, 2016). Since this is the second round of study on the improvement of the governance of HEIs in Somali FG and FMSs (Farah, 2022) the FG parliament ratified the HE act, it is incumbent for MoE & HE (2025) to quickly set up the commission for higher education nationwide, and the secretariat to develop the quality assurance regimes (Manyukwe, 2024). These entities should be able to establish priorities and clear direction regarding what and how to progressively achieve the intended outcomes. Relevant to the study, the KPI implementation process can therefore be developed when the specific goals of all stakeholders have been identified. In Somali HEIs, KPIs are to be implemented in a way that assesses the accomplishment of structural objectives and long-term organisational goals. As a result, KPI requires university management to gather data from both internal and external sources, which should then be arranged into databases using the management information system. The program of setting up the commission is part of UNESCO’s Campus Africa project, an emblematic education effort that strives to create a high-quality, harmonious, and inclusive postsecondary education platform and network for the advancement of fair and welcoming societies throughout the country. Therefore, in order to get the intended result, managers’ and leaders’ expertise is significantly more crucial in creating strategic models that are gradually implemented throughout the entire organisation. Consequently, the most successful HEI environment evolution is achieved by flexible planning procedures that are implemented through the complementary roles of managers and leaders/owners at practically almost all privately owned universities (Taylor & Machado, 2006; Farah, 2020; Ali & Farah, 2023). A strong corporate governance framework that ensures an equitable distribution of power between various shareholders and executives is essential to achieving the aforementioned goals (Milosevic, 2015). Furthermore, capacity-building initiatives are required because of the difficulties, which include limited institutional capacity and disparate quality assurance procedures among nations (Manyukwe, 2024).
The HEI stakeholders must think about and swiftly establish digitalization, though it poses challenges as well as concerns (Maguire & O’Neill, 2024), policies to incorporate digital tools into their quality assurance procedures in order to develop a policy that will address the existing shortcomings and guarantee efficient institutional practices that enhance governance (leadership and management) as well as instructional and research leadership. Also, another recommendation was the implementation of robust assessment strategies and the development of action plans to ensure that learning outcomes are aligned with quality assurance standards and institutional values and goals. Functional corporate structures that are responsive to expectations are delineated into supposed structures, namely stakeholders/board of trustees, university council, the senate, and student governance (Fielden, 2010; McGillivray, 2012). In order to make up for the time lost during the civil war and strengthen the provision of high-quality university education, there needs to be an educated discussion on how to develop and enhance the leadership quality advancement and administration for HEIs and their academic programs (Farah, 2020; HIPS, 2013; Ali & Farah, 2023).
More specifically, in the majority of nations, this kind of sustainability has been pursued in accordance with a few specific goals, such as (Eurydice, 2008) expanding public funding for HE; giving institutions greater control over their financial resources; creating clear connections between the public funding allotted and the results; and promoting funding source diversification. The approaches mentioned above might be readily incorporated into Somalia’s HEIs’ strategic management procedures. It provides a thorough tool for evaluating performance at the departmental, faculty, or university levels. The application procedure should include the primary areas that need to be watched over and be in line with the particular objectives of the HEIs.