Category: Uncategorised

  • Which UK regional economies are most reliant on international students?

    Which UK regional economies are most reliant on international students?

    Join HEPI for a webinar on Thursday 11 December 2025 from 10am to 11am to discuss how universities can strengthen the student voice in governance to mark the launch of our upcoming report, Rethinking the Student Voice. Sign up now to hear our speakers explore the key questions.

    This blog was kindly authored by Emma Prodromou, Global Business Expansion and Immigration Manager, the Mauve Group.

    The quiet engine driving local prosperity

    Across the United Kingdom, international students have quietly become a vital source of regional economic strength. Those who come to the UK to further their education go on to bolster local economies and public services.

    In fact, recent research reveals that UK regions now depend on international talent to a degree few policymakers fully appreciate.

    The growing economic footprint of international students

    The economic impact of international students in the UK surged from £31.3 billion in 2018/19 to £41.9 billion by 2021/22. On average, every parliamentary constituency in Britain benefits by £58 million.

    Some regions rely more heavily than others on this influx of global talent. In Sheffield, for example, international students contribute around £770 million annually to the city’s economy, while across Yorkshire and the Humber, that total exceeds £2.9 billion. In cities such as Leicester, Exeter, Nottingham, and Dundee, universities are among the leading exporters, accounting for up to 15% of total local exports.

    These figures show how universities serve as economic anchors, especially outside the Southeast. International students contribute through tuition, housing, local spending, and by supporting jobs in retail and hospitality.

    Policy pressures and looming challenges

    However, this success story faces rising challenges. Recent government policy changes, including visa restrictions and caps on dependents, threaten to undermine the financial stability of regional institutions. Such measures may disproportionately impact towns where universities are at the heart of the economic life.

    At the same time, course closures are accelerating — nearly a fifth in agriculture and food studies, and around 10–12% in sciences and social sciences. These cuts expose a structural issue: as universities adapt to funding pressures and shifting demand, they risk losing expertise vital to regional and national priorities.

    Competing for global talent

    Faced with financial uncertainty and increasing global competition, UK universities are adopting new strategies to attract international students. Many of these initiatives draw inspiration from the government’s broader Industrial Strategy.

    At the University of Southampton, a £4.35 million investment was secured through the Global Talent Fund, part of a £54 million initiative by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). The aim is to recruit top global researchers to strengthen the UK’s research base and reinforce its global reputation for excellence.

    Building regional innovation hubs

    Other regions are leveraging academic expertise to foster innovation ecosystems. Swansea University has played a central role in developing a semiconductor cluster in South Wales. This reflects Wales’s growing profile on the global stage. In 2022, just 21% of prospective international students noted familiarity with Wales as a study destination. By 2025, that figure had more than doubled to 44%, especially in key markets such as India and the United States.

    To help close skills gaps and boost innovation, Wales has opted to pass on the UK’s new 6% levy to international students. Welsh institutions are well-positioned to attract global talent, though graduates must still navigate the post-graduate visa landscape and local compliance rules when it comes to employment.

    The rise of ‘dynamic pricing’ and scholarships

    In an increasingly competitive global education market, British universities are also adopting more flexible pricing models to attract international students.

    The University of Birmingham, Birmingham City University, and Sheffield Hallam University offer regional discounts targeted at applicants from India and Southeast Asia. Keele University automatically awards £5,000 scholarships to undergraduates who exceed entry requirements, while the University of the West of England (UWE) provides a £3,000 annual Global Success Scholarship for students who complete a set number of ambassador duties throughout the academic year.

    These initiatives reflect a more entrepreneurial approach to recruitment, focused on affordability and global reach.

    Education as soft power

    Beyond economics, international education remains one of the UK’s most effective instruments of soft power. By attracting students from across the world, British universities build lasting global networks of alumni who go on to hold influential positions in business, government, and academia.

    Amid mounting financial pressures, many universities are expanding overseas through international branch campuses, exporting British education while diversifying income. In India, institutions like York, Aberdeen, and Bristol plan local campuses, aligning with the UK–India Free Trade Agreement expected to add $34 billion in annual trade.

    A delicate balance ahead

    As the UK reshapes its immigration and higher education policies, it must balance fiscal restraint with global engagement. Excessive restrictions could damage universities and the regional economies that depend on international students.

    International education is crucial to economic resilience, both locally and nationally, as well as to regional regeneration and global influence. As the data show, from Sheffield to Swansea, Leicester to Dundee, the UK’s prosperity is deeply intertwined with its ability to attract and retain top global talent.

    Source link

  • From curriculum to career: why universities must lead the education–skills revolution

    From curriculum to career: why universities must lead the education–skills revolution

    This blog was kindly authored by Dr. Ismini Vasileiou, Associate Professor at De Montfort University. You can find HEPI’s other blogs on the Curriculum and Assessment Review here and here.

    When the Department for Education published its Curriculum and Assessment Review, billed as a Curriculum for Life and Work on 4 November 2025, it signalled more than a curriculum reform – it marked a national conversation about what education is for. For the first time, the school curriculum will explicitly combine knowledge, digital capability, employability, and citizenship – preparing young people not just for exams, but for participation in a complex, data-driven, and interconnected world. Crucially, this is not about replacing education with skills. It’s about redefining education as the process through which skills for life and work are formed. The message is clear: education and skills are inseparable, and the system must now be designed as one continuous journey.

    A moment of alignment

    This announcement completes the trajectory begun by the Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper (October 2025). Together, these two policy pillars – one focused on schools, the other on tertiary education – outline a vision of coherence across the learning lifecycle. The Post-16 paper’s introduction of V-Levels, simplification of Level 3 qualifications, and expansion of Higher Technical Qualifications now align with the Curriculum for Life and Work, which embeds the early foundations of employability and digital literacy in every pupil’s experience. For the first time in decades, England’s education policy points in a single direction: towards a joined-up system of education that builds character, competence, and confidence. But the success of this vision depends on one missing piece – universities, which sit at the intersection of learning, innovation, and the workforce.

    Education, not training

    Much of the public debate risks falling into false dichotomies: academic versus vocational, education versus skills. The government’s language – “life and work” – recognises that these are not opposites but continuums. Education remains the intellectual and moral foundation of a healthy democracy. But when delivered holistically, it also nurtures adaptability, creativity, and applied understanding – the very capacities employers now seek. Universities have a critical role in championing this integrated view. Their purpose is not to become training providers but to model what it means for education to produce confident, employable citizens who can learn, unlearn, and relearn throughout their lives.

    Lessons from cyber: integration in action

    This holistic approach already exists in one part of the education system: the cyber sector.

    The Cyber Workforce of the Future white paper (2025) called for a unified skills taxonomy, a shared definition of competence across education and industry, and seamless progression from schools through FE and HE into work. That model aligns almost exactly with what the new curriculum and the post-16 reforms now propose nationally: an ecosystem where education, employability, and innovation are interdependent rather than sequential. In cyber, this has already meant cross-sector curriculum design, embedded work experience, and a culture that treats technical and academic learning as equally rigorous. The next step is to scale that success across all disciplines – from green technologies to healthcare, design, and AI.

    Universities at the centre of reform

    Universities can make or break this national vision. Their position in the education–skills continuum gives them both responsibility and leverage. To succeed, they must:

    1. Anticipate the learners of 2028: The first cohort to study under the new curriculum will arrive at university at the start of the next decade. Institutions must adapt admissions, pedagogy, and assessment to students whose schooling will emphasise applied learning, digital literacy, and teamwork.
    2. Build local and regional partnerships: Collaborating with FE colleges, Skills England, and employers will be essential to map seamless pathways from school to post-16 and higher education.
    3. Integrate employability into education: Employability should not be treated as a bolt-on service but as an educational principle – part of how critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration are taught across disciplines.
    4. Champion digital confidence: With data, AI, and cyber understanding now fundamental to the new curriculum, universities must ensure every graduate – not only those in STEM – leaves equipped to operate in a digital society.
    5. Measure outcomes holistically: Success should not be judged solely by employment rates but by how graduates contribute to innovation, community resilience, and lifelong learning.

    Risks and responsibilities

    Reform at this scale brings challenges. Without alignment across sectors, the new curriculum could risk being a policy of aspiration rather than transformation. Schools may teach for adaptability, only for universities to assess for recall. Equally, the pressure to define “skills for work” must not narrow education’s scope. The aim is not to produce workers but well-educated citizens who can shape the future of work. Universities can protect that balance – ensuring that the education–skills revolution deepens, rather than dilutes, the purpose of learning.

    From reform to renewal

    The Curriculum for Life and Work represents a rebalancing of the national education story: knowledge still matters, but so do capability, confidence, and contribution. This aligns perfectly with the model already tested through the Cyber Workforce of the Future initiative – where education, employability, and innovation are treated as parts of one system. That approach, proven in a fast-moving digital sector, now provides a template for reform across the entire economy. For higher education, the challenge – and the opportunity – is to lead. By embedding employability as a dimension of education, not its substitute, universities can turn these policy reforms into a sustainable framework for growth, equity, and lifelong learning. The UK has a rare moment of alignment: curriculum reform, post-16 reform, and national skills strategy all pointing in the same direction. If higher education steps forward now, this could become not just another skills agenda, but a true education revolution for life and work.

    Source link

  • The post-16 pivot: why higher education needs to lean into the skills revolution

    The post-16 pivot: why higher education needs to lean into the skills revolution

    This blog was kindly authored by Dr. Ismini Vasileiou, Associate Professor at De Montfort University.

    The government’s new Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper reframes how the UK prepares people for work, learning, and life. It promises a simpler, more coherent system built around quality, parity of esteem, and progression – introducing new V-Levels, reforming Level 3 and below qualifications, and setting out clearer routes into higher education and skilled employment.

    Within it there is an unmistakable message for universities: higher education is no longer a separate tier but a partner in a joined-up skills ecosystem.

    This direction of travel strongly echoes the recommendations of the Cyber Workforce of the Future white paper, which called for a unified national skills taxonomy, stronger coordination between education and employers, and consistent frameworks for developing technical talent. The government’s post-16 reforms, though broader in scope, now seeks to achieve at system level what the cyber sector has already begun to pilot.

    Reimagining pathways: from fragmentation to flow

    At the heart of the White Paper lies the ambition to create “a seamless system where every learner can progress, without duplication or dead ends.” The proposed V-Levels for 16-19-year-olds aim to sit alongside A-Levels, replacing hundreds of overlapping technical qualifications and creating a nationally recognised route into both higher technical and academic study.

    Reforms to Level 2 and entry-level qualifications will introduce new “Foundation Programmes” that build essential skills and prepare learners for work or further study. Alongside these, stepping-stone qualifications in English and Mathematics will replace automatic GCSE resits, acknowledging that linear repetition has failed to deliver progress for many young people.

    The emphasis on simplified, stackable routes reflects the very principles behind the Cyber Workforce of the Future model, which proposed interoperable learning pathways connecting schools, further education, higher education, and industry within a single skills continuum. What began as a sector-specific call for alignment in cyber is now being written into national policy.

    Higher education’s new context

    The White Paper links post-16 reform directly to the Industrial Strategy and to Skills England’s mission to align learning with labour-market demand. For universities, several themes stand out:

    • Progression and parity: Higher education is expected to work together with further education and employers to ensure that learners completing V-Levels and higher technical qualifications can progress seamlessly into Level 4, 5, and 6 provision.
    • Higher Technical Qualifications (HTQs): The expansion of HTQs in growth areas such as AI, cyber security, and green technology positions universities as key co-developers and deliverers of technical education.
    • Quality and accountability: The Office for Students will have powers to limit recruitment to poor-quality courses and tie tuition-fee flexibility to demonstrable outcomes, reinforcing the need for robust progression and employability data.
    • Lifelong learning and modularity: The commitment to the Lifelong Learning Entitlement demands interoperability of credits across further education and higher education – another concept long championed in the cyber-skills ecosystem.

    Taken together, these reforms require universities to move beyond disciplinary silos and become brokers of opportunity – enabling flexible, lifelong learning rather than simply delivering three-year degrees.

    From strategy to delivery: lessons from cyber that can scale

    The Cyber Workforce of the Future paper provides a live example of how the government’s post-16 vision can be delivered in practice. Its framework rests on three transferable pillars:

    1. Unified skills taxonomy – mapping qualifications and competencies against occupational standards to create a common language for education and industry.
    2. Education – industry bridge – aligning curriculum design and placements to real-world demand through structured partnerships between universities, FE colleges, and employers.
    3. Inclusive pipeline development – embedding equity and access by designing pathways that work for diverse learners and career changers, not just traditional entrants.

    These principles are not unique to cyber; they represent a template for how any technical or digital field can align with the White Paper’s objectives. The challenge now is scaling this joined-up approach nationally across disciplines – from advanced manufacturing to health tech and green energy.

    Six priorities for universities

    1. Redefine admissions and progression routes
      Recognise new qualifications such as V-Levels and HTQs as rigorous, valued entry points to higher education.
    2. Co-design regional skills ecosystems
      Partner with futher education colleges, local authorities, and industry to map regional growth sectors and align provision accordingly.
    3. Develop flexible, modular curricula
      Build stackable learning blocks that learners can access and re-enter throughout their careers under the Lifelong Learning Entitlement.
    4. Co-create with employers
      Move from consultation to collaboration, embedding placements, apprenticeships, and micro-credentials that reflect labour-market demand.
    5. Support learner transition
      Provide structured academic and digital-skills support for students from vocational or stepping-stone routes.
    6. Measure outcomes transparently
      Track progression, attainment, and employability by qualification route to evidence value and inform continuous improvement.

    Opportunities and risks

    The White Paper’s success will depend on genuine partnership between universities, further education providers, and employers. Without coordination, the new structure could replicate old hierarchies – leaving V-Levels or technical routes seen as second-tier options. Similarly, tighter regulation must not deter universities from widening participation or admitting learners who require additional support.

    The cyber-skills sector demonstrates what can work when these risks are managed: clear frameworks, shared standards, and collaborative delivery that bridges academic and technical domains. Replicating this across disciplines will require sustained investment and policy stability, not short-term pilots.

    A new social contract for tertiary education

    The Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper represents a genuine reset for tertiary education – one that values technical excellence, lifelong learning, and regional growth alongside academic achievement.

    Its goals mirror those already embedded within the Cyber Workforce of the Future initiative: building a national system where education and employment are continuous, mutually reinforcing stages of one journey. The cyber model shows that when universities act as integrators –  connecting further education, employers, and government – policy ambitions translate into measurable workforce outcomes.

    What began as a sector-specific experiment can now serve as a blueprint for system-wide reform. If universities across all disciplines embrace this pivot, they can help turn the White Paper’s vision into reality – a cohesive, agile, and inclusive skills ecosystem ready for the future economy.

    Source link

  • Building Bridges: Enhancing employability through practically-based higher education

    Building Bridges: Enhancing employability through practically-based higher education

    In the last few weeks we have heard the worrying news that the number of young people aged 16 to 24 not in education, employment or training (NEET) in the UK is close to one million. This is almost 300,000 higher than the same period in 2021 when the UK was contending with the scarred job market after Covid-19.

    The reasons for this trend are multi-faceted, including factors such as mental health issues and insecure and poor employment opportunities. However, in the face of a difficult and competitive job market, universities have their role to play in bridging this divide between higher education and the workplace.

    The need for innovative approaches to bridge this divide by enhancing graduate employability and addressing employer demands for work-ready graduates has never been more pressing. Recent research by the Edge Foundation, in collaboration with UCL’s Institute of Education, sheds light on the transformative potential of practically-based higher education models.

    The research took a case study approach using qualitative methods, looking at two post-92 higher education institutions in England, which included collecting empirical data using semi-structured interviews with a range of stakeholders from the two universities, including members of the senior leadership teams, teaching staff, other professionals and students. In this blog, I will go on to discuss some of the key findings from this research, including some of the challenges and opportunities for universities.

    Supporting employability through collaboration

    The creation of new staff roles has been pivotal in driving the employability agenda. These roles focus on developing opportunities such as placements, mentorships, and employer engagement, while traditional academic roles are evolving to integrate practical, work-focused elements. This holistic approach ensures that curricula are not only theoretical but also aligned with real-world applications.

    Industry partnerships play a crucial role in this effort. By involving industry advisors in curriculum design and creating spaces for students to engage directly with professionals through projects and networking, universities are building a meaningful ecosystem that bridges theory and practice. These collaborations enhance students’ employability and foster sustainable partnerships between education and industry.

    Creating effective learning spaces

    Diversifying learning spaces, both formal and informal, is important to ensure that students are not only taught subject-specific expertise but also equipped with the skills to effectively apply such knowledge in real-world contexts. From practical lab work and virtual simulations to client-facing projects and digital tools, these approaches provide students with hands-on, career-relevant skills. Broader assessment methods – like portfolio work, project-based evaluations, and even film development – align better with employer expectations, allowing students to showcase critical thinking, creativity and applied knowledge.

    Students highlighted how these methods built their confidence – often cited as a key attribute for career success. Exposure to professionals through guest lectures, career fairs and mentorship programmes was particularly impactful in empowering students to navigate the complexities of their future careers.

    In the case study universities, confidence building and the development of transferable skills were further integrated into the curriculum through interpreting and tailoring practice to the sector that is relevant to individual students. Therefore, all courses were developed and updated in line with students’ ‘pathway to professionalism’.

    Yet this is manifested differently for different disciplines to ensure it is relevant and closely links the theory to practice. For example, in the business school at one of the case study universities, students establish a LinkedIn profile and begin to form professional networks through it whilst at university.

    By contrast, the professional landscape exists very differently in arts and media, with professional networks being established in different ways. Students in arts are taught the skill of networking in person and conversational skills. Activities in this discipline have included practice dinner parties with the aim to collect others’ business cards. The activities in these two examples are vastly different, but both help build the social capital of the student, which has the most currency for their industry.

    The challenges and opportunities ahead

    While we witnessed in our case study universities a promising shift towards a practical and collaborative model, challenges remain. Employer engagement, for example, can be fragmented when universities rely on individual academic links without coordinated efforts. Listening to employers as equal partners and ensuring mutual benefit is critical for sustained collaboration.

    Universities must also balance top-down initiatives with bottom-up innovation, ensuring that work placements and experiences are meaningful and adaptable. Structured dialogue and collaboration between all stakeholders—students, educators and industry partners—are vital to refining these opportunities.

    A vision for the future

    As the job market evolves, the traditional academic model must adapt to meet the demands of employers and the aspirations of students. Practically-based HE models offer a pathway to achieving this balance, ensuring that graduates are not only knowledgeable but also work-ready. In today’s dynamic and rapidly changing workplace, employability is no longer confined to the domain of careers service teams. Instead, it has become a strategic priority embedded across all disciplines and interwoven into teaching and learning. The findings shed light on how universities are reimagining employability as a broader part of their agenda, through fostering collaborations and creating innovative pathways between academia and the workplace.

    Furthermore, this research explores how universities can integrate theory and practice to better prepare graduates for the workforce. By fostering collaboration between academia and industry, these models not only enhance employability but also empower students with the confidence and skills needed to thrive in a dynamic job market. As students pursue diverse goals through their education, universities are tasked with striking a balance between career-focused preparation and academic enrichment. By embedding employability throughout the curriculum and fostering collaboration across industries, higher education institutions can empower students with the skills, confidence, and connections they need to succeed.

    Source link

  • Brand or Bust: How Universities Can Thrive in the Face of Crisis

    Brand or Bust: How Universities Can Thrive in the Face of Crisis

    Today’s weekend reading is by Zeenat Fayaz, Director of Brand & Strategy at The Brand Education, and Brian MacDonald, Chief Creative Officer and a co-founder at Zillion.

    Pandemics, enrolment cliffs, budgets, student mental health, social media disinformation: higher education in crisis, globally, and it sometimes feels like crises are the new normal. This article explores these challenges in three key markets – the US, the UK and Canada – and proposes a change in the way universities think about communications to overcome such hardships.

    The Challenge

    Universities develop institutional strategies for growth and sometimes invest in brand strategies for perception management. However, when crisis communications are not integrated into these strategies, they can become distractions from them. Often when crises arise, neither institutional nor brand strategies are equipped to address them effectively. Nor does addressing them support either strategy.

    With crises seemingly becoming more frequent, this is an unsustainable model – the longer crises continue, the longer the distraction from institutional and brand strategies.

    The Opportunity: From Survive to Thrive

    With crisis management becoming a continual need, universities need a crisis strategy that doesn’t indefinitely distract from institutional and brand initiatives – one that allows universities to address all the audiences of the crisis with messages and media relevant to each. If this sounds like a brand, that’s because it is! We propose a new approach, a “thrive mode,” in which brand strategy elevated to equal status with institutional strategy, and crisis management is integrated into both.

    This approach transforms crises from distractions into opportunities to clarify the institution’s distinctive position and enhance its reputation.

    Survive versus Thrive: A Deeper Look

    Survive mode is a reactive approach to crises, treating each as a unique, temporary problem. It focuses on short-term damage control with transactional communication, often disconnected from overall institutional and brand strategies. Success in this mode is merely the survival of the institution and its brand reputation.

    Thrive mode, conversely, is proactive, viewing crises as opportunities to reinforce institutional and brand strategies. It aims for long-term reputation enhancement through brand-based communication that leverages institutional expertise and core values. Success is defined as emerging from crises with an enhanced reputation and stakeholder understanding, measurable by existing brand performance indicators.

    The change from survive to thrive offers numerous advantages. It allows for pre-crisis planning and offers efficiency by integrating with existing strategies. It allows for quicker, more coherent responses that align with overall brand and institutional messaging using existing brand communication tools. It involves broader stakeholder groups and leverages institutional expertise to provide a more valued response, resulting in trust and enhanced reputation beyond the immediate crisis.

    Case Studies: Putting Thrive Mode Into Action

    Survive mode has been displayed across headlines and news sites around the world since the inception of encampments and campus protests around the world since the advent of the Israel/Gaza conflict. Numerous university presidents provided testimony in front of Congressional hearings that reflected badly on their institutions. And the universities did survive, albeit with varying degrees of damaged brands, dismissed presidents, irate donors and declining applications.

    With thrive mode responses, instead of preparing, as in some cases, to offer legal testimony, consider the many different outcomes that could have been achieved by placing university experts in Middle Eastern studies, philosophy and ethics, comparative religions, history, or many other relevant fields at centre stage. Thrive mode would have prompted a response about higher education’s and individual institutions’ leadership in education on Middle Eastern issues, or how they are preparing students to participate in civil discussion and achieve breakthroughs in understanding. Such discussions would have haloed positively on these institutions by reinforcing their brand values with audiences outside the university, and by clarifying their roles in supporting dialogue, tolerance and understanding.

    Issues around academic freedom have been increasingly roiling universities in the UK, with the Academic Freedom Index (AFI) recording declines in each of the last nine years. The assessments measure interference by politicians, externally appointed management, and activists. Numerous crises have arisen involving scholarly censorship, the mainstreaming of racism and transphobia, and the stifling of academic pursuits that do not demonstrate profitable impact. The universities’ responses focused much negative attention on higher education, as a whole, and individual universities, in particular, in government, news media, and public opinion. And the responses allowed these negative stories to effectively lead the conversation, placing the universities in a reactive position. Survive mode squandered the opportunity to highlight universities’ research successes and student outcomes as well as to demonstrate leadership on important topics.

    Thrive-mode responses could have allowed institutions to talk about important discoveries that would not be possible under recent restrictions on academic freedom. About alumni who have made important contributions to the economy or society who would not qualify for student support today. About the universities’ missions and their historical relationships to government and society. About brand values that the universities rely on to drive their results. These responses would allow the universities to participate in, guide, and lead these conversations, putting their brands in positions to make an impact on important external audiences.

    With ongoing budget crises and newly imposed restrictions on the number of foreign student visas, universities in the UK and Canada are in uncharted territory. It’s not merely threatening many institutions with declines in funding, hard choices, and in some cases closure, but potentially reforming the entire higher education landscape. In a leaderless crisis where nobody knows what it will look like in the end, acting on coordinated institutional, brand, and crisis strategies effectively demonstrates leadership: with students, faculty, staff, alumni, and most importantly with the government. The opportunity is to talk about the budget crisis as a new lens through which to view the institutional strategy. A budget crisis does not change objectives like entering The Russell Group or becoming Canada’s premiere STEM educator. It may change the process of how an institution gets there – the timeline for milestones, the need for partners, the establishment of fundraising goals, etc. And brand strategy lays out ways to discuss how the crisis will affect its implementation with key audiences. This is what thriving looks like in the face of this crisis: opening and leading important conversations with governments, reassuring parents and inspiring students.

    Conclusion

    As Warren Buffett noted, “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.” In today’s media environment, a brand can be severely damaged in seconds. By integrating crisis management into overall institutional and brand strategies, universities can transform crises from threats into opportunities for growth and reputation enhancement. While crises may be inevitable, this framework offers a path for universities not just to survive, but to thrive in challenging times..

    Zeenat Fayaz is Director of Brand & Strategy at The Brand Education. Zeenat’s experience working with QS and THE gives her unique insight into the way institutions are evaluated and ranked. Today, Zeenat helps top-tier universities understand the power of branding and use this to enhance their global reputations. You can find Zeenat on LinkedIn here.

    And Brian MacDonald is the Chief Creative Officer and a co-founder at Zillion. He has worked on strategic, creative, and branding projects for dozens of universities in the US, Canada, and overseas. His work focuses on how branding can drive institutional revenue, and his work has raised more than $6 billion for his clients. You can find Brian on LinkedIn here.

    Source link