A longstanding university practice is increasingly a cause for controversy.
THE late Shane Warne has one, the Minogue sisters have one each and Meryl Streep has several.
Julie Bishop and Mathias Cormann both have one.
Oprah Winfrey has four.
The Wiggles share one and Rolf Harris had and lost three.
The mid-year university graduation season is upon us.
Among the hundreds of students receiving their degrees, a handful of graduates will be handed a testamur without having submitted a single assignment; they are the recipients of honorary degrees.
Every year, hundreds of sporting legends, entertainers, movie stars, artists, politicians, business leaders and philanthropists are awarded an honorary degree – usually a doctorate – to recognise outstanding achievement in a particular field or service to the broader community.
While the business of awarding honorary degrees dates to 1400s, the practice is increasingly being doused in controversy and can create major problems for university chiefs and their governing bodies.
Universities award honorary degrees to build relationships with exceptional individuals.
While recipients are awarded an honorary degree based on their contribution to community, most universities secretly hope that, in return, the person will become a supporter of the institution.
The support might come in the form of future funding or through exposure to the recipient’s network of influential connections.
The acceptance of an honorary degree by a leader of note or well-accomplished individual often generates significant publicity.
The problem, however, is it’s not always the type of publicity that universities seek or desire.
Take the case of the University of Melbourne, which in March awarded a total of six honorary doctorates, all to white men.
While there is little doubt each recipient had made a significant contribution, the lack of diversity created a public relations nightmare for the university.
Snow Medical, one of Australia’s largest philanthropic donors to medical research, withdrew its support for the university on the grounds that (the University of) Melbourne’s “actions do not align with its values on diversity and equality”.
The donor reportedly had broader concerns that the university did not satisfactorily explain why only men had received honorary doctorates for three consecutive years.
The Melbourne saga is not the only example of an attempted reputation boost that backfired through the awarding of honorary degrees.
How is a university’s reputation affected, for example, when a prominent individual declines the offer of an honorary doctorate and this becomes public?
Queensland’s Griffith University famously offered Sir Donald Bradman an honorary doctorate for services to sport, only for the cricketing legend to decline.
Of course, the real public relations disaster arises when someone who has been awarded an honorary doctorate turns out to be less than worthy of the accolade.
The esteemed business leader is revealed as a paedophile, the wealthy entrepreneur is discovered to have stolen millions from others, the prolific author confesses to plagiarising the work of others, and the politician’s moral compass fails societal expectations.
The process of debating whether an individual should be stripped of an award often becomes public.
On top of that, it triggers questions about the judgement of the university’s decision makers.
Take convicted criminal Rolf Harris.
He had three honorary doctorates annulled, including one awarded by Edith Cowan University.
And only last year, following concerns linked to LGBTQIA+ discrimination, ECU revoked former WA politician Barry House’s honorary doctorate because the award contradicted the university’s inclusion policy.
Embarrassment triggered by the occasional awarding of an honorary doctorate to an unworthy recipient has, from time to time, led critics to call for universities to ditch the practice altogether.
There is little doubt some recipients of honorary doctorates are more deserving than others.
But universities also have a duty to ensure recipients continue to align with the institution’s values long after stepping onto the stage to receive their award.
It is also clearly risky for a university to award honours or awards of any nature, including degrees.
Even so, we should resist becoming so risk averse that we avoid recognising and celebrating the extraordinary and positive impact of some individuals on their communities.
So, this graduation season, let us look forward to a bumper crop of new honorary doctorates who have hopefully received their freshly minted degrees for all the right reasons.
• Professor Gary Martin is chief executive officer of the Australian Institute of Management WA.
