**3. Neoliberalism and the cultural changes in SUCs**

One of the most significant cultural changes in public higher education institutions in the Philippines that has evolved because of neoliberal infusion is the managerial prerogative of the administrators. The complete transformation of SUCs by CHED to operate like a private company provided its respective heads to define the kind of SUC they would be. The powers vested among the administrators to decide for the organization "substantially displaced organizational democracy" [2]. While consultations may be frequently elicited, and suggestions may be accepted, in the end, it is the managerial prerogative that prevails, making consultations sound more like a window dressing. It is in this context that the ideology of competition among members of the organization of every SUC becomes alive. Faculty members and staff must secretly and openly compete against each other to get a designation. The builtin perks, which include administrative powers, financial incentives, and prestige, drive and motivate many to clamor for a position as an administrator. The process disregards and undermines the spirit of cooperation and camaraderie, which are the primary requirements for an organization to work.

This spirit of competition, the core of a free market concept, together with the managerial prerogative, resulted in wide anxiety, disloyalty, and distrust among members of SUCs. Consequently, the commitment that everyone brought in from the first time they joined the SUC was now shuttered. Self-interest set in instead of doing work in the public interest. The love of teaching gradually faded, and the excitement of intellectual discovery was replaced by the quest for personal glory, craving for promotion, and monetary returns. Insecurity resided among those with designations, and factions emerged, making it difficult for programs and projects to be implemented or even planned [2]. To address this insecurity and ensure obedience and control, neoliberalism strategy of spiderweb-like, top-down organizational staffing was implemented. Getting permissions through a request to spend delegated funds, conduct research, and travel to a conference or training are neoliberalism managerial strategies that extend control, while the managers themselves are usually exempted. Yet, amidst these challenges, there are still members of the organization who continuously work honestly, sincerely, and with unwavering commitment. And despite these complications, SUCs have managed to undergo different accreditation tasks required by the Quality Assurance policy of the commission.

Competition is not limited within the institutions. SUCs also compete not only against each other but also against private universities. The market logic of getting an advantage over other institutions – public or private – prompted SUC managers to resort to a corporate technique of publicity. SUCs now deliberately create an image for themselves or a brand and a slogan that would boost their market presence. Public displays using huge tarpaulins of students, staff and institutional achievements, awards, and board exams results; even a motorcade to celebrate board top-notchers is a common practice among SUCs now. Further, limiting the workforce in the organization by outsourcing services like security and hiring casual or part-time employees have also become a strategy. The decline in the budget of SUCs and the normative funding approach forced them to create programs and projects that would potentially yield a profit that would increase their income. An irony, I believe, indeed, is that the organizations that were built to serve the public interest are now getting profit from the public. One thing is very clear here though; neoliberalism in public higher education has now deeply positioned itself, aided by the government's reforms.

## **4. Conclusion**

Neoliberalism has engulfed public higher education in the Philippines. Aided by quality assurance schemes and internationalization programs, CHED was able to integrate neoliberalism in the country's educational system. These policies have *Perspective Chapter: Neoliberalism, Quasi-Marketization, and the Cultural Changes… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109489*

completely transformed SUCs to operate like a private company, vesting powers to their administrators that led to permanent cultural changes in the organization. The transformation is still ongoing. While individual progress among Philippine higher education institutions is uneven, there is a common direction and a collective vision of becoming relevant globally, influenced and guided by neoliberal practices.
