Reflections on the Search for the Foundation Commissioners of ATEC
At Future Leadership, we see moments of sector reform as tests of leadership at a system level. The establishment of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission is not simply a structural change, it is a defining opportunity to shape how capability is stewarded across government, institutions and communities.
As a capability ecosystem, we partner with boards and executives to examine not just who leads, but how leadership is exercised in complex, contested environments. Our Capability Compass identifies the capabilities most critical to navigating these moments, particularly when it comes to systems thinking, judgement and stewardship beyond institutional self-interest.
Our work with the Federal Department of Education on the search for ATEC’s foundation Commissioners provided a unique vantage point into the sector’s expectations of leadership at this level. What emerged was clear: success will depend less on structure or policy design and more on the calibre, judgement and system stewardship of those appointed.
Emergent Themes
At the end of 2025 and into the first months of 2026, we had the privilege of partnering with the Federal Department of Education in the search to identify the inaugural Commissioners for the Australian Tertiary Education Commission (ATEC).
The assignment was notable not simply because of the seniority of the appointments, but because it sat at the intersection of policy, institutional autonomy, tertiary reform and national productivity. The process commenced with extensive consultation across the higher education landscape, seeking advice, perspectives and recommendations from a broad range of stakeholders.
What emerged was not unanimity (nor should it have been) but several themes appeared consistently throughout the consultation process. Collectively, they provide an instructive insight into the expectations, hopes and anxieties surrounding the establishment of ATEC.
Educational Equity The search for “System Stewards”
One strikingly consistent message throughout the consultation was that the sector was not looking for Commissioners who would arrive with a personal crusade, ideological position or narrow institutional agenda.
The consultation clearly pointed to the need for individuals capable of operating at a “whole-of-system” level. There was a clear distinction drawn between leaders who had only operated successfully within the confines of their own institution and those who had demonstrated the capacity to think beyond institutional self-interest and contribute to the stewardship of the broader tertiary ecosystem.
The language used during consultation was revealing. Stakeholders spoke about the need for people who are “of the sector” but not captured by it. Individuals capable of offering frank and fearless advice to Ministers, while also understanding when consensus and pragmatism should prevail over personal opinion.
In many respects, the consultation highlighted a search for institutional maturity. Not simply leadership capability, but judgement.
Stakeholder Accountability
Another emerging capability is external accountability. Public trust in universities and residential institutions is increasingly shaped by transparency, governance and responsiveness. Cultural reviews, student activism, and media scrutiny have permanently altered expectations. College leaders can no longer operate primarily through internal authority structures or closed institutional cultures. They must be able to engage openly with regulators, university executives, parents, students and the wider public. Skills in crisis communication, character definition, stakeholder engagement and evidence-based governance are becoming essential components of effective leadership.
Representation Versus Understanding
An overwhelming sentiment from universities within the Group of Eight was concern that ATEC could potentially become overly committed to a singular policy orientation or philosophical approach to the sector.
Importantly, this was not framed as a demand for direct representation. Most acknowledged that ATEC was never intended to become a wholly representative construct. Rather, there was a strong desire for the Commissioner cohort collectively to demonstrate a deep understanding of the diversity of the Australian higher education system.
Research-intensive universities sought reassurance that the complexity of their operating environment, international positioning and research mission would be understood within the Commission’s deliberations. Equally, there was recognition that the credibility of ATEC would ultimately depend on its ability to engage meaningfully across all segments of the tertiary landscape.
This distinction between representation and understanding became one of the defining themes of the consultation process.
What’s Next? Experience Versus Fresh Thinking
Consultation also revealed an interesting tension regarding the ideal career stage of prospective Commissioners.
Some advocated strongly for individuals with a lifetime of experience in higher education leadership and public policy. Others argued equally persuasively for the inclusion of emerging leaders, individuals still on an executive trajectory who could bring fresh thinking, energy, persistence and contemporary perspectives to the work of the Commission.
There was a view amongst some stakeholders that a “whole-of-system” leadership role such as ATEC could itself become a formative experience for future sector leaders, broadening their perspective before returning to institutional leadership roles.
Underlying this discussion was a broader recognition that higher education has changed materially over the past decade. Funding pressures, geopolitical shifts, research concentration, student expectations, workforce alignment and technological disruption have reshaped the operating environment.
As a consequence, many stakeholders stressed the importance of currency of experience. Historic achievement alone was not viewed as sufficient. The Commissioners would require recent lived experience of the contemporary sector.
Independence and Trust
Sector leaders were particularly alert to questions regarding independence that emerged repeatedly during the consultation process.
A number of stakeholders expressed concern that the proposed construct of ATEC did not provide the degree of independence they believed was necessary. The fear articulated by some was that the Commission could become overly aligned with, or effectively an extension of, the Federal Department of Education.
This concern amplified the importance of trust in the Commissioner appointments themselves. If the legislative construct left ambiguity regarding institutional independence, then the credibility, judgement and sectoral trust vested in the Commissioners became even more critical.
In many respects, stakeholders appeared to view the Commissioners not merely as policy actors, but as custodians of the relationship between government and the sector.
The Importance of Analytical Capability
Another notable theme was the emphasis placed on analytical capability.
Stakeholders consistently highlighted the importance of Commissioners who could engage deeply with data, interrogate evidence and navigate complexity. As one contributor observed during consultation, “the devil is in the detail”.
This was not simply a call for technical capability. The desired profile combined analytical rigour with negotiation skills, administrative competence and the capacity to navigate competing priorities across a highly complex policy environment.
There was widespread recognition that ATEC’s effectiveness would depend not only on strategic vision, but on the ability to translate broad reform ambitions into operationally credible frameworks.
Teaching, Learning and the Academic Mission
A number of contributors highlighted the importance of deep expertise in teaching and learning.
The proposed mission-based compacts were viewed as requiring sophisticated understanding of pedagogy, academic quality, student experience and institutional educational strategy. Several stakeholders specifically referenced the type of experience commonly associated with the portfolio of a Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Education).
This reflected a broader concern that public discourse around tertiary reform can at times become overly focused on funding models, workforce alignment and research performance, while underestimating the complexity of the educational mission itself.
The First Nations Commissioner
The proposed First Nations Commissioner role attracted particularly thoughtful commentary throughout the consultation process.
Stakeholders consistently described the role as potentially “legacy making”. There was recognition that the appointment carried significance not only for ATEC itself, but for the broader First Nations agenda within Australian higher education.
Beyond capability and policy understanding, stakeholders emphasised the importance of trust, community engagement and future-focused thinking. The role was viewed as requiring someone capable of navigating both institutional systems and community relationships with authenticity and authority.
Importantly, the expectation was not that the First Nations Commissioner would operate solely within a First Nations portfolio. Rather, the role was seen as integral to the broader strategic direction of ATEC itself.
ATEC and TEQSA: Questions of Boundary and Overreach
Another recurring theme involved the relationship between ATEC and Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA).
Stakeholders questioned whether the operational boundaries between the two bodies had been sufficiently defined and whether there was a risk of duplication or overreach.
For some, the concern was not merely regulatory burden, but conceptual clarity. Would ATEC function as a steward, advisor and strategic planner, or would it gradually evolve into a quasi-regulatory body operating alongside TEQSA?
The issue was raised frequently enough during consultation to suggest it remains one of the sector’s unresolved questions regarding the future operating model.
Capacity and the Expansion to Five Commissioners
At the consultation stage, the proposed structure comprised a Chief Commissioner, a First Nations Commissioner and a further Commissioner in a fractional capacity.
The response from the sector was clear. Many believed that two full-time Commissioners and one part-time Commissioner would be insufficient to carry the scale and complexity of the proposed ATEC agenda.
When the legislation ultimately passed the Senate on 31 March 2026, the structure was amended to provide for five Commissioners. In many respects, this shift reflected the feedback emerging through the consultation process and the growing recognition of the breadth of ATEC’s mandate.
Tertiary Harmonisation and the VET Interface
The importance of tertiary harmonisation was another prominent theme.
Stakeholders repeatedly highlighted the value of practical experience within the vocational education and training system. At the same time, several noted the structural complexity created by the fact that ATEC does not directly influence VET funding arrangements.
As a result, there was strong support for Commissioners who understood not only higher education, but also the points at which the VET and university sectors intersect, overlap and influence one another.
This was viewed as particularly important in the context of workforce planning, pathways and lifelong learning.
The Research Voice
Finally, a clear tension emerged as several contributors questioned whether sufficient emphasis had been placed on research within the emerging ATEC mandate.
While the Universities Accord process emphasised participation, equity, skills and system coordination, some stakeholders queried where the national research agenda would sit within the Commission’s priorities and whether the foundation Commissioners would collectively bring sufficient research credibility and experience.
For research-intensive institutions in particular, this was viewed as a critical consideration.
Reflections
It should be acknowledged that many of these themes were reflected in the Terms of Reference provided by the Federal Department of Education and became central considerations throughout the selection process.
What the consultation ultimately revealed was a sector that understands the significance of this moment. There was broad recognition that the establishment of ATEC represents one of the most consequential structural reforms in Australian tertiary education in decades.
The consultation also demonstrated that the sector’s expectations extend well beyond technical competence. The foundation Commissioners are expected to embody judgement, credibility, restraint, analytical capability and an ability to operate in service of the broader national interest.
Whether ATEC ultimately succeeds will depend not only on legislation or policy settings, but on the quality of stewardship exercised by those entrusted to lead it in its formative years.
What next?
For leaders across higher education, the establishment of ATEC should not be viewed as a reform happening outside the institution, but as an invitation to think differently about the role each university plays within the broader tertiary ecosystem. The next phase calls for leaders who can engage constructively with complexity, contribute beyond institutional interest and bring evidence, maturity and imagination to the national conversation. Now is the time for university executives, boards and sector leaders to consider how their institutions will demonstrate system stewardship: through clearer mission, stronger collaboration, deeper engagement with teaching and research priorities and a willingness to shape reform rather than simply respond to it.
To discuss leadership, governance and executive capability in higher education, contact Andrew Norton.
About the author:
Andrew leads the higher education and vocational education practices at Future Leadership. He partners closely with government sector specialists, appointing and supporting senior executives, academics and board directors. Andrew has built enduring networks at a national and international level and is highly respected as a trusted advisor to clients and candidates alike.
For more than two decades, Andrew has worked for ambitious organisations, motivated by a commitment to delivering outstanding outcomes. Since joining Future Leadership’s cornerstone business, Jo Fisher Executive, in 2012, Andrew has continually brought his enthusiasm and passion to inspire and drive success. He works collaboratively to meet the diverse talent demands of the constantly evolving sectors in which he specialises. Andrew has also regularly partnered with client organisations seeking to identify next-generation leaders with the requisite skills, experiences and values to meet their strategic ambitions and future focus. Andrew is well regarded for delivering both in international talent searches and identifying high-quality First Nations candidates locally.
Andrew holds an Honours Degree in Arts from Oxford Brookes University and a Post Graduate Certificate of Education from Oxford University.