The chapters profile the ways in which fifteen countries of the former Soviet Union are approaching governing their universities and what governance structures they put it place to undertake this essential task. What do they have in common? How are they different? Four different models emerged, that we lable academic focused; state-extended; internal/external; and civic. The models reflect notions of power and autonomy, and the levels of state control versus independence. The ways in which an organization, and in this case the university governance body, is structured shapes what information is collected and how it is sorted, transmitted, and made available; the ways decisions are made including which decision makers come together under what opportunities and constraints, and the ways in which decisions are addressed and actions taken. Organizational structure both determine outcomes and are shaped by external forces and beliefs.

University governance broadly construed is intended to make universities better by framing and solving problems, making decisions, ensuring fidelity to stated goals and holding institutions accountable, but also advancing strategy, counseling university leaders, advocating on behalf of the universities and serving as a bridge to relevant external stakeholders, which can be represented by the state, the community, or a combination of both, depending on the context. This chapter explores four dliemmas of governance and how the four models resolve them and it identifies a set of novel dilemmas from the post-Soviet context. Itts recommendations focus on developing policy contexts that are consistent between levels of autonomy and capacity and between autonomy and competition; and then aligning governace models with contextual factors to heighten governance effectiveness.