推行高等教育機構最高治理組織的變革，在國際間似乎已形成一股洪流，從歐美襲向東亞地區。在這波潮流中，政府扮演著推波助瀾的角色，透過立法的權威和資源的誘導進行著。外聘董事是此項變革的管道，政府欲藉此讓高教機構辦學更有效率，朝向知識經濟的發展和人力素質的提升，更能回應國家競爭力提升的需求。本文探析歐美國家外聘董事的功能，發現政府隨著國際經濟的競爭，將外聘董事的來源窄化為工商業企業代表，這些外聘董事常為了維護其代表團體的利益，而忽略大學的整體需求。外聘董事扮演角色的混淆，其利益保護和競逐的性質，反使得大學校園政治性活動增加，董事會的權限也受到影響。董事會要發揮預期的功能，尚須釐清其代表性的意義。再者，強化外聘董事的目的原在輔助和提升董事會的治理能力，使大學行政管理更具效率、彈性和回應力。但是文獻研究顯示，不僅系（所）學術人員仍為主要的決策核心，而且組織管理反趨向官僚僵化的現象。大學治理行政集權化的結果，導致效率低落的現象。這些狀況顯示，強加於高教機構的組織變革政策，其執行成效與政策目標有背道而馳之差異。高教機構為知識生產和傳遞的組織，一味地運用一般企業組織理論是有待商榷的。大學治理當然可以應用企業管理知能，但學校永遠不會與商場一樣，自己仍應保有主體性。由於大學具有知識機構的特殊性，以外聘董事加強大學治理過程中，學術人員也應賦予決策和執行的功能，內部和外部的分工合作是有必要的。

World widely there is a trend, blowing from west to east globally, of restructuring board of governance of higher education institutions, especially by reinforcing the roles of external stakeholders compared to the internal representatives. Governments are the agents of change and bring this up through the tools of legislative authority and funding inducements. It is hoped that the universities will become more efficiently managed and more responsive to the societal needs of international competition. This paper tries to find out answers for a few questions. The findings are: First, when the government’s delegated trustee are more coming from economy and business, they are found inclined to protect their field benefits, as representative status, over the needs of the university as a whole. The confusion of the role plays and interest competition increase the politics on campus. Second, the policy intention is to increase the governance and management capability. On the contrary, some researches find that, it is still in the department, the decisions are made by the academic staff and the university becomes more bureaucratic in operations. The administrative centralization results in lower efficiency. Third, institutional innovations cannot just impose on the institutions without negotiation, otherwise the gap between the policy implementation and intention will exist. Finally, based on the nature of higher education institutions as organizations of knowledge creation and diffusion, its governance cannot deemphasize the role of academic staff. Their commitment is critical to the success of institutional change. Although theories of business management still can be applicable, university should have its own methods due to institutional uniqueness. It is most optioned that the inside and outside representatives could corporately work together in governing.