One of the most significant (but perhaps least discussed) changes in TEQSA’s new Application Guide for Initial Registration as a Prospective Higher Education Provider is the elevation of independent governance reviews from good practice to a core component of regulatory assurance.
For the first time, every prospective provider must submit an independent review of the effectiveness of its governing body and its corporate and academic governance systems. More importantly, providers must also demonstrate how they have responded to the review through a documented action plan, clear accountabilities, implementation of improvements, and subsequent review of those improvements.
This is much more than another compliance requirement.
It reflects a broader shift in Australian higher education governance. The Expert Council on University Governance’s 2025 report argued that governing bodies should move beyond compliance and focus on demonstrable effectiveness, continuous improvement, independent evaluation and robust institutional self-assurance. Governance should not simply exist; it should be capable of showing that it works.
TEQSA’s new guidance aligns closely with that philosophy.
Historically, governance reviews often concentrated on whether institutions had the right committee structures, policies and delegations in place. Increasingly, the more important questions are different:
- Does the governing body receive meaningful information?
- Does it effectively oversee strategic and academic risk?
- Can it demonstrate that academic quality is being assured?
- Are decisions supported by evidence rather than assumptions?
- Is governance continuously improving?
These are fundamentally questions about effectiveness rather than compliance.
Having recently completed independent governance reviews for two universities, I’ve been reminded that the greatest value of an external review rarely lies in identifying compliance gaps. Instead, it lies in providing governing bodies with an objective assessment of how well governance is functioning and where it can be strengthened.
The most valuable governance reviews are developmental rather than judgmental. They validate strengths, identify emerging risks before they become regulatory concerns, and provide boards and academic governing bodies with practical recommendations that improve institutional capability.
For prospective providers, this new requirement should be viewed as an opportunity rather than another regulatory hurdle. A robust governance review can strengthen an institution well before an application reaches TEQSA. It provides confidence to directors, shareholders, executive leaders and regulators alike that governance arrangements are mature enough to support sustainable higher education operations.
The quality of the review, however, matters enormously.
Independence is essential, but so too is experience. Effective reviewers need to understand not only governance theory but also the realities of higher education regulation, academic governance, institutional risk, strategic leadership and the Higher Education Standards Framework.
Independent governance reviews have long been recognised as an important element of effective higher education governance. The Higher Education Standards Framework expects governing bodies to evaluate their own effectiveness regularly. What is changing is the emphasis on independent evidence that governance is not only well designed, but demonstrably effective.
That is a positive evolution.
The strongest governing bodies do not commission governance reviews because they are required to. They commission them because independent evaluation provides fresh perspectives, validates good practice, identifies emerging risks and strengthens institutional capability.
The purpose of a governance review should never be simply to satisfy a regulator.
Its real purpose is to help governing bodies govern better.
Emeritus Professor Clive Smallman is a non-executive director, Academic Board chair and advisor working with several independent higher education providers.
