If you are a registered HEi-know user, please log in to continue.
You must be a registered HEi-know user to access Briefing Reports, stories and other information and services. Please click on the link below to find out more about HEi-know.
The Westminster government should wake up to the full potential of higher education to help it meet its ‘levelling up’ goals, argues Professor Martin Jones, Deputy Vice-Chancellor at Staffordshire University.
Jonathan Baldwin, managing director of higher education at Jisc, reflects on a week that’s felt the force of people power – and says it’s time for university leaders to respond to students’ calls for change.
Alison Johns, Chief Executive of Advance HE, reviews another week in which higher education found itself in the spotlight, even when a royal funeral dominated the headlines.
Charlie Ball, Head of Higher Education Intelligence for Prospects at Jisc, reviews a week of higher education news which felt much like every other since lockdown, as new research on graduate earnings and university admissions was published.
Stephen Isherwood, chief executive of the Institute of Students Employers, reviews a week of HE news in which student accommodation, fee refunds, graduate jobs, and research funding surfaced as key issues.
Reviewing a week in which issues affecting women’s lives were in the spotlight, Sandra Booth, Director of Policy and External Relations at the Council for Higher Education Art and Design (CHEAD), sees hopeful signs of moves to address gender equality in higher education.
As UK higher education faces a period of exceptional change, the prospect of more mergers and acquisitions may arise. Ewan Ferlie and Susan Trenholm from King’s Business School have examined the implications and identified issues the sector may need to consider, following a research report for the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.
UK Higher Education is shifting from its previous form as a planned and nationalised sector and is undergoing pluralisation by becoming more market driven, globalised, focused on students as paying customers and also (somewhat) more diverse. The recent extension of Degree Awarding Powers sought to stimulate new market entrants and disrupt incumbents - and may well be doing so.
What are the implications for higher education institutions? Obviously, market pressures may stimulate mergers and acquisitions activity as ‘squeezed’ HEIs merge with stronger institutions. There have been some mergers in the sector, and more may well follow. Our review¹ found risks attached to such mergers, not only in loss of institutional independence but also threats to the acquired organisation’s underlying culture and identity.
We also looked at mergers and acquisitions literature in related knowledge intensive sectors (e.g. bio pharma and professional services) suggesting many mergers did not improve the acquiring firm’s financial performance. Where there was good organisational fit between the two parties, outcomes were better. Where the partners bring complementary knowledge assets (rather than similar or dissimilar ones), the prognosis was also better.
The literature suggested that the post-merger period as well as the decision to merge needed to be managed carefully. The mismatch between two different organisational cultures could be a powerful change blocker in mergers. The active presence of key leaders acting as knowledge brokers and lateral linkers across organisations was important. So we were cautious about a headlong and ill thought out rush into mergers and acquisitions across the HE sector.
As well as reviewing mergers and acquisitions literature, we developed a five category typology of collaborative working ranging from: modest exercises with shared services, through strategic alliances and joint ventures to alternative and cooperative organisational forms. This radical scenario does not assume a simple state/market binary. While for profit universities are indeed growing in the sector, we can - and should - imagine alternative futures.
We then suggested that intriguing (if small scale) experiments with cooperative organisational forms are emerging. We consulted relevant organisations’ filing histories in Companies’ House and their websites to retrieve information in the public domain.
Organisational developments in the UK HE sector cannot be isolated from wider public sector reform ideas. The Cameron government (2010-2015)’s ‘Big Society’ narrative favoured mutualised and staff owned organisations, rather than either State or PLC based ownership. While it is unclear whether this narrative survived a wider post 2010 austerity drive, it supports third sector providers. The limited evidence we have suggests the mutualisation agenda progressed more rapidly in the local government and health and social care sectors than in HE, but relevant HE examples could usefully be identified and tracked.
The not for profit form is long established in such sectors as social housing and social care as an alternative to market and hierarchical governance. It typically produces a collective clan-like culture, a strong sense of mission and weak hierarchy. Some HE non profits are now emerging with DAP extensions: Regent’s University London is a not for profit provider governed by a Board of Trustees (rather than a Board of Directors). There are examples, too, of non-profit colleges operating online.
Another alternative form is the professional partnership where the organisation is owned and managed by partners, usually senior professionals. Managers and non-executives at Board level (or what we term the Council in HE) are here weaker: power lies more with the partners. This form is apparent in other knowledge intensive sectors, including law and primary health care. The recently founded New University of the Humanities exhibits traits of a professional partnership form as its filing indicates senior academic staff have (small) equity stakes and its website indicates these some of the same people also manage the university.
The ‘virtual University’ uses powerful Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to change education provision radically. This theme is underexplored in the current HE literature. Examples include UK Arden University which offers online and blended learning programmes, and Capella in the USA. Different partners within HE networks are now collaborating within online alliances to deliver programmes jointly and electronically. The traditional university as a vertically integrated, physically present and hierarchical organisation shifts to a more ‘heterarchical’ and virtual network of allied organisations. Speed, flexibility and innovation become more important than the traditional search for scale and predictability, with scaling, in particular, not an issue for virtual organisations which are generally “global” at launch.
‘Social enterprises’ are mission driven organisations addressing unmet social needs, sometimes through radical and disruptive innovation (not favoured by cautious HE incumbents), often using new ICT technologies. Social enterprises are weakly developed in HE, but do exist. Founded in 2009, Peer2Peer University (P2PU) describes itself as a non-profit organisation that facilitates learning outside institutional walls and uses a virtual platform to facilitate face-to-face, peer-led learning, usually in public spaces such as libraries. Designing and leveraging open education tools and resources, P2PU offers a novel high-quality, low-cost, model for lifelong learning.
The Khan Academy is an American social enterprise providing free, high quality, high volume online education globally. It attracted major investments from such organisations as Google and the Gates Foundation and develops and delivers content in collaboration with the likes of NASA, MIT, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. We expect major philanthropists and charitable foundations, especially those connected to the high tech sector, to drive further online based HE innovation.
Within the UK, the Wellcome Trust is a major charitable funder that invests in developing science education and an ‘inspiring science’ programme, alongside its traditional base in biomedical research. Much funding is for work in schools, but possibly with HE spill-over.
In conclusion, the UK HE sector is undergoing significant organisational change. It can expect more mergers and acquisitions activity, but this response is by itself too limited and conventional. There is prima facie evidence of alternative organisational forms which transcend conventional public and private sectors alike. We should trace these intriguing organisational innovations as they evolve.
¹Ferlie, E. and Trenholm, S. (2017) ‘The Impact of Mergers. Acquisitions and Collaborations in Higher Education and Other Knowledge based Sectors: A Rapid Review of the Literature’, Research Report, London: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education
This article was first published on HEi-know on 8 November 2017
© 2013 Media FHE, all rights reserved