The Executive Yuan should Confront Taiwan's Brain Drain

The Executive Yuan should Confront Taiwan's Brain Drain
China News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 10, 2009

Recently the domestic media reported on the difference in starting salaries for beginning university professors in places such as Taiwan, Hong Kong, the Chinese Mainland, and Singapore. The discrepancy has many knowledgeable individuals worried. The data shows that accredited universities in Hong Kong, Singapore and mainland China offered starting Assistant Professors salaries three to four times as much as those offered by National Taiwan University. Even ignoring elite schools, 15% of all universities on Mainland China offer new teacher salaries higher than those offered by universities on Taiwan. National Taiwan University, the Academia Sinica, and other institutions are having difficulty recruiting outstanding professors. The Executive Yuan's Science and Technology Advisors have also warned that over time, talented people on Taiwan will gradually be lost. If we are unable to attract talent to Taiwan, we will wind up with nothing.
Over the past decade, the economic situation on Taiwan has not been favorable compared to other Asian regions. In terms of real wages, university professors have gone 10 years without a salary increase. But society on Taiwan is highly populistic. Many people demand coercive egalitarianism. But in a knowledge economy, the driving force behind economic growth is research and innovation. If we are unable to offer higher pay to R&D personnel, then our economy will decline. Everyone's income will decrease. Put simply, the consequence of radical populist refusals to tolerate salary increases for others, will be salary cuts for oneself.

In fact, enhancing R&D competitiveness on Taiwan does not require increasing the salary of every university professor. It only requires a small increase in budgets, a minor operation, in order to have an effect. This is how it can be done:

First, under current rules, universities may set up visiting professorships, and enjoy some degree of flexibility in setting salaries. Therefore, experienced, internationally sought after professors with outstanding teaching records, may receive higher than average salaries. But universities have no flexibility in how much they pay new, inexperienced professors. Our reforms call for increases in the salaries of some new, inexperienced professors, rather than a comprehensive, across the board salary increase.

Second, there are 170 universities on Taiwan. Perhaps fewer than 20 of these are competing with Singapore, Hong Kong, and other places for talent. Therefore only a few universities need to increase their salaries in order to compete for qualified personnel. In other words, not all universities require salary increases -- only those under international competitive pressure.

Third, not every professor has an objective need for a salary increase, even at internationally competitive universities such as National Taiwan University and National Cheng Kung University. Some disciplines are internationally unpopular. Some professors have less than outstanding records. Therefore only a few disciplines actually require salary increases.

In short, attracting talent does not require across the board salary increases. Distinctions must be made between experienced and inexperienced professors, between better schools and lesser schools, between better teachers and lesser teachers within each school. The problem seems complicated. But one merely needs to grasp two principles. (A) Distinctions must be made within schools, in accordance with university autonomy. (B) Distinctions must be made between schools, in accordance with school performance and international competitiveness. Grasp these two principles, and the details will be a simple matter. Because salary increases will not be across the board, any budget increases will be insignificant.

According to newspaper reports six months ago, the Academia Sinica made just such a proposal to the Executive Yuan. Its proposal was endorsed by the Ministry of Education, the National Science Council, the Central Personnel Administration, the DGBAS, and well-known universities on Taiwan. The proposal inclued even the necessary budget and the means of raising the funds. Alas, as soon as such motions encounter political obstacles, they are either stalled or derailed. Basically the Academia Sinica proposed to increase management budgets for university research projects. It would allow professors' salaries to vary. Allocations would be determined by each university, in accordance with its own internal procedures. But recently the Ministry of Education said it wanted to make fundamental changes in the payroll system.

Basically, we agree with making professors' salaries variable. This flexibility must be linked with the university's performance in research. Only then can salaries reflect the realities of international competition for talent. Even if the Executive Yuan intends to make fundamental changes in the payroll system, it must create a system that is flexible, that reflects the distinctions between one school and the next, between experienced professors and inexperienced professors, and between one discipline and the next. The approach proposed by the Academia Sinica reflects the aforementioned real world distinctions. Objectively speaking it is highly feasible. The Ministry of Education may wish to start from scratch, and come up with some other flexible system. But if one wishes to ensure the aforementioned three types of flexibility, one cannot avoid linking salaries with research funding. If the Ministry of Education cannot come up with a better approach, it should consider accepting the current proposal. Surely it cannot cite long-term planning as an excuse to do nothing for the next half year. Loss of competitiveness on Taiwan is a serious problem. The Executive Yuan must urge its agencies to work harder, and swiftly offer corrective measures!

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2009.11.10
社論－行政院應正視台灣人才流失的危機
本報訊

國內若干媒體最近報導了台、港、新、中幾地大學新進教師的薪資差異，相當令有識之士憂心。資料顯示，香港、新加坡以及中國大陸上軌道的好大學，他們給助理教授的起薪，大約是台灣國立大學的三至四倍。即使不看名校，中國大陸已有約十五％的大學其新聘薪給優於台灣，而台大與中研院等單位也逐漸感受到招募不到優秀教授的壓力。行政院科技顧問們也提出警告：長此以往，台灣的人才優勢將逐漸流失。坦白說，一旦台灣無法吸引人才，我們將一無所有。

過去十年，台灣的經濟情況相對於亞洲諸國不算好；以實質薪資來看，大學教授已經有十幾年不曾調薪。但台灣是個民粹極強的社會，許多民眾都要求齊頭平等。然而在知識經濟時代，研發創新幾乎是一切經濟成長的原動力。如果我們不能對研發人才給與較高薪酬，吸引他們加入，則台灣的經濟必將走下坡，每一個人的待遇都會再往下修。簡單地說。以民粹觀點極端地看不得別人加薪，其結果就是自己也會減薪。

其實，要提升台灣的科研競爭力，並不需對「所有」的大學教師加薪，只需要花點小預算、動點小手術，就能克竟其功。以下，我們就描述一下這局部手術要怎麼做。

第一，在大學法的規定下，各大學原本就可以設置講座教授，對他們提供彈性薪給。因此，表現優良、國際上爭相挖角的資深教授，原本就可以得到頗高的待遇，但新進資淺者的待遇卻是全無彈性。故我們想要改革的，是部分新進資淺教師的薪給調整，而不是全面性的薪水調整。

第二，全台灣一百七十幾所大學中，真正在與新、港等地爭搶人才的，也許不到廿所，故為爭搶人才而需要調整待遇的大學，為數並不多。換言之，並不是所有大學都需要調薪，而只有受到國際競爭壓力的才有此需要。

第三，即使在台大、成大等具有國際競爭力的大學裡，也不是每個領域、每個教授都有調薪的客觀必要。有些學域是國際冷門、有些教授表現也不見得傑出。故真正要有薪給彈性的領域與範圍，只有一小部分。

總之，為吸引人才而設計的彈性薪給，並不需要統統有獎，但必須要做到資深/資淺區隔、學校品類區隔、校內教師區隔。這裡的問題看似複雜，但只要把握兩個原則即可：（一）學校之「內」的區分，依大學自治原則由各校自行決定。（二）學校之「間」的區分，依各校研究表現、國際競爭情況決定。把握住這兩個原則，則其他細節就不難處理了。由於並不是全面調薪，故需要增加的預算金額並不大。

報載大約半年前，中央研究院曾經向行政院提出了一套符合前述原則的解決辦法，也得到了教育部、國科會、人事行政局、主計處、與全台各知名大學的支持，甚至連所需預算、挪籌方式都設想好了。無奈所有的動議一旦遇上政治，不是停擺就是脫軌。中研院所提辦法的基本概念，是以提高研究計畫管理費比例的方式，將新增管理費撥給大學，並指定用於彈性教授薪給，由各大學的內部程序決定其校內分配。但最近教育部表示，他們希望從薪給制度上做根本的改變。

基本上，我們贊成教授薪水的彈性化，而且這個彈性一定要與大學的研究表現掛勾，如此才能正確反映國際人才競爭的實情。而即使行政院想在薪給制度上做根本改變，也一定要創造出彈性，反映跨校之間、資深與資淺之間、跨領域之間的需求差異。中研院所提做法，其實就是一種實質反映前述三種差異的建議，客觀上頗具可行性。當然，教育部可另起爐灶，訂出其他的彈性做法。但平心而論，如果要照顧到前述三種彈性，恐怕也逃不出與研究經費掛勾的設計。無論如何，假若教育部想不出更好的做法，就必須要考慮接受現有的提案，總不能以從長計議為由，半年下來一事無成吧！台灣人才競爭力流失的問題如此嚴重，行政院應督促所屬加把勁，趕緊提出矯治的辦法吧！