news & articles

More than 20% of British Universities are slowly dying. They are post-92 institutions who have seen their recruitment numbers fall every year since 2011. To read the Guardian and the Times Higher, you’d think this was all due to factors beyond their control.

The truth is that their decline is completely reversible because contrary to what the doom-mongers allege, the factors causing it are entirely within their control. Here are five steps which many other post-92 universities have taken with great success.

Step 1: Develop a distinctive and differentiated position – and stick to it.

How is your university perceived by students, parents & teachers compared to your direct competitor group? Do you know? Is the perception distinctive or is it blurry generic? What makes your university different? Brand distinctiveness will derive from the spirit of the institution. What do you want to be famous for?

These are just some of the questions you should ask. Too many universities look the same, feel the same, talk the same. If you want to stand out in people’s minds, you have to play to your strengths, you have to appear as distinctive as possible. People don’t have time or brain space to remember too much about individual brands, so remember that less is more, and try to sum up your distinctiveness in three words or less. A real challenge for anyone working in higher education!

Step 2: Understand what your ‘customers’ really want.

When was the last time you carried out market research on student wants and perceptions in your catchment area? To what extent do your institution’s subject strengths align with local demand? Or is your programme portfolio reflective of what you can teach rather than what students want to be taught? Have you strengthened your courses with pathway choices, years in industry or abroad?

You can only sell what people want to buy. So, it’s a useful discipline to hold a portfolio review on a regular basis, not just looking at what competitors are offering, but also conducting primary research in schools and amongst employers. Be prepared to innovate. Being the first in market is a powerful brand differentiator.

Step 3: Know your 20:80

In every business, 20% of customers account for 80% of profits. Apply this to your university and find out which are the 20% of programmes are generating 80% of your income. Ask yourself why? And what can you do to make them even more attractive to future students? At the same time, ask yourself why is worth persevering with programmes which consistently under-recruit.

Universities are famously weak at costing their programmes, working out the margins on each. And famously reluctant to cull the walking wounded, investing the savings in much more productive and attractive alternatives. Very few universities can afford to offer universal choice. Strategy is about making choices, and sometimes they are painful. But make the choice now, and you’ll be glad you did in three years’ time.

Step 4: Focus your research efforts

The same principle as above should apply to your research strategy. Conduct a research review and consider whether your university research effort & investment is spread too thinly. If 3 & 4 in the next REF is the goal, decide which of your academics have a hope in hell of reaching that level and focus on their strengths – and disinvest in the rest.

Are there any good reasons why other subjects should not become teaching only? How much academic time would be released? How much could you save, either to the bottom line or by investing in winners? In the battle for survival, hard decisions have to be made.

Step 5: Explore the potential of Degree Apprenticeships.

There’s a number of universities who have made degree apprenticeships really work for them – and 15 are in the Russell Group. 14,000 were available in September 2019 according to the Good University Guide. At the more vocational end of the educational spectrum, degree apprenticeships are a no-brainer. Offering your students a fully-funded education, being paid by their employer, with a degree and a guaranteed job at the end. What’s not to like if you’re a student?

Have you launched your own degree apprenticeships? If yes, how many key local, regional, or national employers are you working with? If yes, have you begun to develop courses beyond the original four? If yes, to what extent are you using degree apprenticeships as a differentiator in your student recruitment marketing?

Degree apprenticeships are a potentially powerful differentiator giving you a student recruitment advantage. Ignore their potential and a neighbouring university will exploit your indifference.

Our advice is to approach this fitness exercise con gusto, rather than just by cherry-picking the easiest. Successful universities in the post-92 group have developed a strong sense of mission and identity. They realise that we are all living in a world which is very different to that of a decade ago. A world where at least in the short to medium term, supply exceeds demand. And a much more competitive world where only the fittest will survive.

David Miller is a fellow of the Halpin Partnership, the higher education management consultancy

Halpin recently worked with a university who wanted to engage with stakeholders in relation to their research in a more strategic, targeted way. This is perhaps not a brief that universities set for themselves often enough. We loved working with the team, helping them make links to stakeholders who they might have otherwise overlooked, or not had a natural contact with. We also supported the preparation of materials and events they could use to take the work forward.

It left us feeling that there is a lot more that universities can do to engage a much wider audience with their research. After all, there are lots of policy drivers, as well as realpolitik context, to motivate universities to up their external engagement game, especially in relation to research.

Then there is the individual motivation. Research can be a lonely pursuit, but to you, the researcher, your project is fascinating – why wouldn’t you want to sing its virtues and curiosities from the rooftops?

Why should you boost stakeholder engagement?

These days the REF-driven ‘impact’ agenda, as well as growing attention for the extent of ‘public engagement’ in research, make the policy context pretty clear. But a good stakeholder engagement plan for your research project can help you do so much more. Stakeholders can help you find your next project funders, or they might become your next research project partners. Their feedback on your project might provoke the next iteration of research questions that you simply hadn’t had sightline on.

When should you start?

Right at the beginning! Stakeholder engagement is at its best when it’s thought of at the earliest opportunity and runs alongside your research plan. This way there are opportunities to engage stakeholders in the design of the research, and possibly use stakeholders as part of your data collection. For example, case studies from stakeholders are always a useful addition to the data you draw on, providing illumination or contrast or perhaps more stimulating quotes when it comes to write-up.

Who should you target?

There are plenty of stakeholders that you can consider targeting. A lot of research projects have a steering group of some description supporting the research throughout. If you have this – definitely the first place to start – ask the people who sit in this group about who they can suggest as stakeholders to contact and give them a role to initiate the conversation. This is a really easy way to get a conversation about your research amplified quickly.

Your research might have policy implications – so talk to the policy makers – the staff who work on policy teams in central and local government are usually keen to have contacts at the coalface. Professional and regulatory bodies often commission their own research and will certainly be interested in yours as it might relate to the development of the discipline or profession – hard for them to find you but you know who they are. You might even pay them an annual membership for your own affiliation, so feel free to pick up the phone and ask a few questions.

Pique their interest and make it irresistible

If you’re not a natural chatterbox (ahem, external affairs specialist) it can feel difficult to ‘cold call’ stakeholders and pitch your research. One of the easiest ways is to find a hook in relation to their own current interests – look at the news section on their website or recent events that they have hosted. Alternatively, consider if there are stories in national media that are of interest to them and that could relate to your research – tangential thinking is good here. When you’re thinking about a concise pitch of your research, start with why your research is important to them, not just a ‘what it’s about’ description. Really succinct briefing materials – the old academic conference poster format is an excellent form – will help you get your foot in the door. The depth and detail can come later.

Know what you want them to do

And once you’ve got their attention – what is your ask of them? It might be a speaking gig at their next conference/seminar/meeting. It might be a slot on the regular blog they publish for their audience. It might be a contribution to their practitioner forum where you get to debate the new thinking that your research uncovers in relation to standard practice. It could be a seat on their policy panel where they can take advantage of your brains and you can take advantage of how they position their wallet and decision-making powers. Whatever. You need to start with an open mind, a willingness to start a conversation and the determination and charm to get them to listen.

I promise that very few people will walk away completely free from your intervention, and your research will have stretched that little bit further.

Selena Bolingbroke is a Consulting Fellow for Halpin – the experts in higher education management consultancy.

The university sector seems confused about what is meant by safeguarding, and how far universities should go to ‘take care’ of their students. The debate seems to be taking us beyond the letter of the law to make campuses as safe as possible for students who choose to invest their time, future life prospects and future debt with us.

Staff in universities who manage services, or work directly with children and vulnerable adults, are aware of their responsibilities and reporting duties. Areas such as teacher education and outreach teams are comfortable working within child protection frameworks, and those in healthcare and social work understand the boundaries around working with vulnerable adults. It is known that particular attention needs to be paid to students who are admitted under the age of 18, and additional measures are put in place by accommodation teams and registry. There will be a safeguarding officer who knows the rules and can advise on incidents and risk.

For the majority of programme areas, it was and arguably still is, the general view that most students are adults, and that they should be treated as such. It is also the general view that it is the tacit role of the university to help them grow up by leaving them alone to experiment, make mistakes, test boundaries and mess up as they transition away from parents and into independent living.

But that was then, and this is now. Students are not all just 18 and not all of them have been launched out of stable family nests, well equipped to make their next fledgling adult steps. Students are diverse and bring very different life experiences that university staff cannot understand. The archetypes of students which we currently hold should be questioned. We need to build services and support around the needs of students by finding out who they are, in order to create an environment that guards the safety of all students and staff.

The non-academic experience is now as important as the academic credentials of a university. When students are ‘shopping around’ they will be paying attention to many aspects of their imagined life at each place they consider. The quality marks for teaching and learning are becoming easier to read with Bronze, Silver and Gold badges shining out from university websites. Universities make their destinations attractive and boast various unique selling points, but safety is not a popular one in the highly competitive environment in which we find ourselves now. ‘World class’, ‘excellent’ – definitely, ‘sustainable’, maybe, but safe – not often

Tragic incidents and accounts of students who have struggled highlight how vulnerable students are at times. Coping with the responsibility of responding makes some staff vulnerable too. It has become apparent that guarding safety is a concern for all of us in the sector.

The higher education minister’s recent statement that part of the purpose of universities is to provide emotional support is welcome. It puts mental health high up on the education agenda. However, his assertion that universities are in ‘loco parentis’ is not; it only furthers the confusion about safeguarding and responsibility.

A Mental Health Charter may be a good way to provide a baseline for provision, so that students and universities are clear about what is expected in terms of service levels. For Student Services teams who work hard to respond to demand with the resources they have, a Mental Health Charter may help them make the case for a standard of provision that copes with student need and expectations.

Governing bodies need to be aware of how formal safeguarding risk is managed. Increasingly they are being expected to be aware of other risks relating to student safety. For example, UUK advises that data about incidents of sexual violence and harassment must be reported to university councils, and change programmes around mental health are recommending a ‘whole institution approach’. To begin to achieve this in a genuine and informed way, and build an environment that is safe for all a university’s members and participants, more information and data should be provided on the work of support services.

A sector-wide way of evidencing how universities make efforts to ensure the safety of its students and staff would allow ‘soft’ student and staff support services to provide an accountable picture to senior management teams and governing bodies, so that resources can be allocated where they are needed. If the proposed Mental Health Charter sets out helpful, student-informed standards for the sector, we might find ways to be the best for being safe – and be proud of it.

Sara Doherty is a Consulting Fellow for Halpin.

The Halpin team includes experts in student experience, equality and diversity, safeguarding, governance and risk management. If you need support to develop your policies and practices in this area contact [email protected]

Our flagship Governance Review at the University of Bath was commissioned following the high-profile coverage that the University was receiving regarding its remuneration policies and Vice-Chancellor pay.

This coverage developed into a brief to review of the effectiveness of Council and its sub-committees, which Halpin was selected to lead based on our breadth of experience both inside and outside of the higher education sector. Best practice across HE and beyond was a key aspect of the brief, as well as identifying areas for improvement in the current governance model and communicating these to the University community.

Our work found an institution already making improvements to its governance effectiveness, strengthening the way in which it consults and communicates with University stakeholders. Our final report was essential in guiding the University from governance compliance to governance best practice.

Download the full Halpin Governance Review for the University of Bath here.

Outcomes

• Consultation with a large base of stakeholders: 1,392 survey responses, 49 individual interviews and 52 individuals in groups sessions,
• A comparison of higher education sector best practice,
• 15 Primary Recommendation and 55 Supporting Recommendations towards effectiveness and becoming an exemplar of good practice in the higher education sector, and also learning from other sectors.