The HEC Chairperson job criteria spark intensive debate in the academia
In Pakistan’s academic circles, leadership transitions at the Higher Education Commission (HEC) rarely pass without scrutiny. But this time, the conversation is not about who will lead the Commission – it’s about how we decide who gets the job in the first place.
The Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training’s recent advertisement for the post of HEC Chairperson has triggered a wave of discussion – and in some cases, outright criticism – among seasoned academics, former vice chancellors, and education policy analysts. While the advertisement lays out formal qualifications and expectations, critics say this may unintentionally exclude some of the most qualified and visionary candidates.
The Specifications of the position
The advertisement, now live on the HEC website and the National Job Portal, is clear about the basics. The Chairperson will be appointed by the Prime Minister for a term of two years, extendable once. Applicants must hold a PhD and have at least 15 years of experience in higher education, including 10 years post-PhD. They are expected to be internationally recognised scholars with a strong record of research, teaching, and academic leadership.
In addition, the advertisement stipulates an age limit of 65 years for the applicants – a detail that has become the most hotly contested aspect of the criteria. Beyond academic credentials, the ideal candidate should have experience in policy formulation, administration, and strategic planning.
On the surface, these requirements may sound uncontroversial. But in the academic community, where nuance and precedent matter, they have raised more questions than answers.
The Age Limit Debate
The 65-year age cap is, in many ways, the lightning rod for the current debate. Some of the former Vice Chancellors were among the first to voice concern via social media, arguing that this restriction is neither part of the original HEC Act nor consistent with past appointments. Their peg is that academia leadership is all about vision, stamina, and track record - not age.
Several incumbent vice chancellors echoed similar sentiment, noting that some of the past HEC Chairpersons were over 70 of age when appointed and performed effectively well. They also pointed out that provincial HECs impose no such age restrictions, suggesting that the federal criterion might be out of step with broader higher education governance practices.
There’s also a political undercurrent to the discussion. Some academics have suggested that the age limit could have been strategically introduced to keep certain candidates out of the running. Whether or not that’s true, the perception itself is enough to erode trust in the transparency of the appointment process.
Experience: Quantity vs. Quality
Another point of contention is the experience requirement. As a Vice Chancellor rightly noted that the requirement for 15 years in higher education, with 10 years after earning a PhD is nearly identical to the eligibility criteria for a full professorship. That comparison raises the question: is the HEC Chairperson’s job simply an academic position, or is it a leadership role demanding a different skill set altogether?
Education experts argue that while academic credentials are non-negotiable, leadership at the HEC also demands political acumen, negotiation skills, financial management expertise, and the ability to navigate complex stakeholder environments. Focusing too narrowly on years of service in academia could privilege candidates with long but undistinguished careers over those with shorter yet more impactful tenures in leadership positions.
The Problem with Short Tenures
The two-year term limit is another sticking point. For a role tasked with setting the strategic direction of Pakistan’s higher education system, critics say two years is barely enough time to get a reform agenda off the ground, let alone implement it. In such leadership roles, continuity is the key and if someone has only two years tenure, he is more likely to focus on short-term wins rather than long-term transformation. It’s worth noting that the two-year term wasn’t part of the HEC Chairperson’s job specification. It was added to the HEC Act a couple of years ago - a change some stakeholders believe should now be reconsidered.
What’s at Stake?
The leadership of the HEC is not merely a ceremonial role. The Chairperson sets priorities for funding, research, and institutional development; manages relationships with universities and provincial commissions; and represents Pakistan’s higher education sector on the global stage. The person in this role can either accelerate reform or preside over stagnation.
Pakistan’s higher education system is currently at a crossroads. Universities are facing financial constraints, quality assurance challenges, and increasing pressure to modernize curricula in line with global standards. A Chairperson with both vision and the institutional authority to enact change is essential. Critics worry that rigid criteria could inadvertently exclude precisely the kind of transformative leader the sector desperately required.
A Call for a Rethink
The emerging consensus among many in academia is that the government should revisit the criteria. At least the term for the position should be extended to at least four years to allow for meaningful reforms and broadening the definition of “experience” to recognize impactful leadership in related sectors, not just academia besides ensuring that the search process actively engages international talent pools.
Unfortunately in Pakistan, public trust in institutional appointments is often undermined by perceptions of political interference. In the case of the HEC, where the Chairperson is appointed by the Prime Minister, transparency and meritocracy are especially important.
And as any university professor might guide us, the right leadership, like the right research question, can set the course for decades. The wrong one? That is the lesson the sector cannot afford to relearn.
