Salvador Alemany: “In our everyday life, adopting pragmatic positions is the only way to go”

Salvador Alemany.
Salvador Alemany.
Interviews
(07/12/2016)

Last July, Salvador Alemany i Mas, president of Abertis, a Catalan corporation of communication and transport infrastructures, left his position of president of the Board of Trustees of the University of Barcelona, the same university in which he studied Economics. Over the course of his career he was also the president of the Advisory Council of Catalonia Economic Reactivation (CAREC), president of the Circle of Economy, Red Cross in Barcelona and Catalonia, and the basketball section of Futbol Club Barcelona. He was appointed new president of the Board of Trustees of Liceu. In this interview, Alemany comments on the management in the Board of Trustees of the University and gives his opinion on the work to be done yet regarding both the institution and society.

 

Salvador Alemany.
Salvador Alemany.
Interviews
07/12/2016

Last July, Salvador Alemany i Mas, president of Abertis, a Catalan corporation of communication and transport infrastructures, left his position of president of the Board of Trustees of the University of Barcelona, the same university in which he studied Economics. Over the course of his career he was also the president of the Advisory Council of Catalonia Economic Reactivation (CAREC), president of the Circle of Economy, Red Cross in Barcelona and Catalonia, and the basketball section of Futbol Club Barcelona. He was appointed new president of the Board of Trustees of Liceu. In this interview, Alemany comments on the management in the Board of Trustees of the University and gives his opinion on the work to be done yet regarding both the institution and society.

 

The Board of Trustees collaborates with the governing team of the University in defining criteria and priorities of the strategic planning. Which examples of this function would you highlight?

Taking into account that the functions are exactly the union between society and academics, the essential element of the Board of Trustees is trying to shape the acting line with the rectorʼs office team, and fix working plans and try to help the rectorʼs office team to fulfill them. There are aspects of this task that have an administrative role, which is very ordinary, and others that are more ambitious, and try to go further, making a qualitative step so that the university goes forward in the line in which society and the rectorʼs office team want to go.

When compared to the world of business, with which I am familiar, we would say the Board of Trustees plays the role of the Board of Directors, but the directive team is what really progresses, and reaches objectives. In this sense, we should recognize the merit of the governing team of the University with the things they have accomplished. Is there something left? Yes, I think that, with the things we had advanced, we could have done even more.

How would you value these four years leading the Board of Trustees?

I think it has been a good consolidation period of relations between the Board of Trustees and the Rectorʼs Office. We were coming from previous stages with certain levels of misunderstandings between one and the other, some personal conflicts between both, mistrust from the University with “these people who in some way may interfere in our objectives and aims”. I think today there is a good perception from the academic world about the role of the Board of Trustees -further than this one- benefiting society, and it can collect the worries of this University and bring them to the administrations, to society.

I resolved to evolve, precisely, regarding the consolidation of the system, giving accounts in an ordered way, having accounts in order and balance, and then there were other objectives, which were more qualitative, such as improving the student employment process when they finish University. In this sense, it is about working on the institutions. Some are specific boards of trustees of the University of Barcelona such as Bosch i Gimpera Foundation or the Institute for Lifelong Learning Foundation, which I think that have made a qualitative step in lots of things during this period. And I am very happy with this

We put in order the university departments and merged faculties, and the merit is not for having done so, but for having reached a common agreement to do so. Getting consensus done is always difficult in all fields, in universities too.
 
In 2003, in an interview for the magazine La Universitat, you said, for instance, that your generation had a permanent mobilized university and that nowadays it only gets mobilized in certain moments and for certain things. You also said that the good student is now more focused on knowledge while in your university times, the focus was on passing the exams. Do you still think the same?

Thirteen years have gone by since 2003 but my opinion is more or less the same now. I mean, we experienced a “opportunist” university. We had lots of challenges in social and political structure and the university was mobilized towards these kind of objectives: reaching Europe, democracy. When I studied at the University these were the elements that mobilized the student world, the university world in general. We had to pass the courses because our objective in our 20s was to have a degree and you got that by passing the exams, having class notes, etc. Now study programs are friendlier: students choose credits from here and there, they create a pack of knowledge they can agree with. This way of creating the study training of a person enables them to be more motivated and learn knowledge in these subjects. This is what I said thirteen years ago and what I still think. And this is good for the University, and for the country.

However, I am sure I had a more superficial opinion thirteen years ago without having been in the University. Now my view is more focused. In the Board of Trustees there are representations for all classes: students, lecturers, administration… Everyone is there and therefore, I am not talking theoretically but practically.

And do you think the university has advanced as well with the pending subject it had, the relationship with companies?

This is not an easy subject because two theories collide here. The business world has the idea that the university should do things thinking about what the company needs whereas the university world defends the idea that research on business solutions, solutions for a progress in a country, research, in general, come out of the reflection and creativity of a person, and if this creativity is trained by the market it will not work out.

It is not a minor problem, is a basic problem. I could tell you the anecdote referring to Jordi Naval, director of Bosch i Gimpera Foundation -which I respect a lot- and which is from Henry Ford. If at a certain moment, when Ford started the first engine vehicles up, had asked transporters “what do we need?”, they would have asked for faster horses and wheels that wouldnʼt rub the floor that much. This is because probably the view they had about what they needed to do with the cars, was the view they had about what they were doing. However, the creative person is the one who says “No, we donʼt need faster horses but an engine”. This is a bit anecdotic, maybe exaggerated, but it comes down to show that creativity has to create things and we shouldnʼt wait for someone who is probably not thinking about that.

In fact, everything lies in common effort, dialogue between society and university. In general, I think the path to be done, the effort of this journey that brings business and the University closer, has to be done by the University more than the companies. It is a matter of needs.

And do surrounding companies trust the University?

They have a good image of the University in general, but they donʼt know how to get in touch. We could say that big companies, big corporations, they have their own research teams. And the small and medium companies are the ones who have to look for some approach in order to work together and get closer to University. Now the Bosch i Gimpera Foundation (FBG) in particular, organizes research workshops in which they talk about the research they work on, with the attendance of investors or companies of the sector, who might think “I can invest in this idea”. This is how you get a win-win situation, the way to benefit from the effort and creativity from some people to make a market product for others. Right now the FBG is in a line, an orientation, which can bring good and exportable results.

You said that the University of Barcelona leads the main international rankings in Spain, but despite the good results in scientific activity, the industrial income is still a pending subject. How could we balance these two?

Itʼs what I said before about the way of progressing. We have a good position regarding basic science, but we are not that good in the territory of patents and licenses. Researchers make the first step. In the field of patents and bureaucracy, working on the research so that it gets access to the market, here is where we need the feeling of risk, the willingness of businesspeople, investment. When the first part is done, we need interaction between academics and the economic world.

Students, when facing the challenge of job searching, are suggested to look around, find out what they are good at, imagine, read, research, and be entrepreneurs. It looks like a version of “donʼt ask what your country can do for you”…

I donʼt want to copy the American saying of “what you can do for your country”. I think you has to ask himself, basically, what you can do for yourself. And by doing so, you will work for what the country needs, indirectly. When there is a situation like the current one, with difficulties entering and creating employment, is is clear that one has to be competitive, analyze strong points, realize which is the wished direction, where the enthusiasm goes, and this is a work that has to be properly done, but for oneself. In some cases, you donʼt have to think about the possibility of finding a job that fits, but instead, you shape it by yourself. I mean, creating your own company, your own project.

I think this is an assertive attitude, to adapt oneself instead of wasting time complaining. This is the idea: regardless of the situation, fair or unfair, one has to work to find a better future and adjust, depending on the circumstances, the expectations of happiness to reality. I have said many times that someone can be born in an unfair world and can find happiness with the right attitude, while another can be born in the best world, in a wealthy family, and be unhappy. Possibilities can be found within oneself. This is what I think.

Being president of Abertis, and regarding the problems with Catalan tolls, you said that they are product of an “inharmonic model” which creates “hostility” among their users but at the same time, people understand that these payments are invested in first order front-line services in a moment when basic needs such as health, education or dependence have received many cuts?

Perhaps what I said a bit ago gave the idea that we had to have an accepting attitude towards the situation in which we are now. No, I didnʼt mean that. I really think that when facing an unfair situation -and now inequality is shaping unfair situations- we donʼt have to be okay with it. I am not claiming this kind of conformism. One can find happiness if working for it, this is what I meant, without conformity.

Regarding the fact of whether we can trust that unfair situations reach a solution, whether money spent on something can be used to reduce the problem of societyʼs vulnerabilities -I think your question was leading to this- I think it all depends on the level of trust, credibility, on public affairs. If we think budgets are like this because it is hard to find more income or to cut from other fields, and we are aware of the fact that assigning more money to one place means paying more or losing them from another field, if we enter this, if in this field we pressure public affairs so they make a fairer distribution, we will certainly believe in their effort. In this case, I would easily go into the field of paying to use highways, but it is a bit circumstantial.

Regarding the new political parties you said “When there are new responsibility positions, there is pragmatism”. And what does that bring, if anything?

I donʼt know, it depends on each case. The way to pragmatism is done by all ideological profiles. Deciding involves quitting in some way, because if one keeps on optimizing an objective, thatʼs not taking a decision. I mean, at a specific moment, with the available information, a decision is taken and this may be left with a capacity of analysis which could have been improved if we had invested one more month in thinking about it. This is pragmatism. But that does not mean that people donʼt aspire to the ideals we have always wanted. It is a very personal position, but our everyday adopting pragmatic positions is the only way to go forward.

You have lived sport very closely (president of the Barça Basketball Section for 17 years), and make a distinction between the dream of winning and the need to win……

This is a sentence I got from my experience in the world of team sport, and maybe individual one too, which said “He who has the need of winning probably has some handicap to do so”. I mean, the eagerness to win is necessary but the need of victory is a way of stopping you from getting it. The one who overcomes the fear of losing has lots of possibilities of winning. This would be the experience I want to share. Letʼs be able to control our emotions to purchase the victory, assuming the possibility of loss and not falling down. This is my resilience. Well, we can fall down but we have to get up. In sport and in life, this rule is essential.

Is this also appropriate for the social and political moment we are experiencing?

It is always applicable, but these are individual attitudes. Collective attitudes are sums of different things. Saying “this society is resistant”, well we can say so, because a society can be resistant if it shows, when facing difficulties, that it keeps on fighting. In any case, I am more able to identify resilience in people than society itself, because here is where internal tensions lie.

Is success knowing how to manage luck?

I would go more for Schopenhauerʼs “Fate shuffles the cards and we play”. Do you have those cards? Then play! In sport this is clear. When I was the president of the basketball section in Barça, there was a player, a very interesting three-pointer, Xavi Fernàndez, who said “The more I train, the luckier I get”. Where was that luck? Basically, after practice, he stayed in the court practicing three-point shots until he got the number he wanted. Luck? Yes, he was lucky of having a good wrist, but if he was a great three-pointer it was because he expected more from practice than from luck.

Regarding the team management, you said “If the star is not happy, it all gets distorted”. Who is the star in our society? And at University?

There is not a star in the university, like in a company or in the team, and if there is, itʼs not always the same. I actually think that, dissatisfaction is what creates distortion. When someone, in some way, doesnʼt reach his/her objectives and is not happy, regardless of the level, whether s/he is a star or not, everything will tend to be distorted. Everyone has to have incentives, dreams, and individual denials have to favour the collective. If this doesnʼt happen, dissatisfaction creates distortion.