Tag: collaborative

  • Charting a Collaborative Course for Higher Education

    Charting a Collaborative Course for Higher Education

    • Mark Taylor is Chief Finance Officer at GuildHE.

    The concept of shared services in higher education is far from novel. In my early career, back in 1992, I witnessed the ambitious yet ultimately unsuccessful Management and Administrative Computing (MAC) Initiative. This early experience highlighted the deep-seated challenges the sector faces when attempting to collaborate. The MAC Initiative failed due to a ‘we are different’ culture which hindered standardisation, and possessed a lack of strong leadership and absence of clear governance, which allowed institutional size to dictate priorities, overshadowing mutual respect and trust. These factors still hinder collaboration in higher education, as confirmed by the recent Jisc/KPMG report.

    However, the current climate leaves institutions with no choice but to explore innovative solutions, focusing on collaboration and efficient spending, as highlighted by Jacqui Smith’s emphasis on these two areas:

    ‘These are difficult times for government finances, and there won’t be a large injection of public money. Therefore, there will need to be strong sector collaboration and much more effective spending’ – Jacqui Smith, Monday 20th January 2025

    Collaboration opportunities are, however, varied and each model has different governance implications and efficiency and risk/reward outcomes. Institutions must define their objectives, either simply cost reduction or a more strategic shift towards greater collaboration, and look at why and what they can change to find the best legal model to suit their needs.

    This blog delves into the complexities of collaboration and cost-sharing, examining the current obstacles and proposing potential pathways forward. It draws upon insights from sector stakeholders, whose perspectives illuminate the challenges and opportunities ahead.

    Does collaboration save money?

    The initial financial hurdles in collaborative cost-sharing arrangements are often significant. Management time and upfront costs for due diligence and legal fees are substantial. The VAT implications of shared services are frequently misunderstood, adding another layer of complexity, especially when budgets are tight. The relevant legislation focuses on cost-sharing between exempt bodies, not the provision of services from one entity to another. By operating on a non-profit basis and charging members only for expenses incurred, cost-sharing groups can effectively navigate VAT concerns. The BUFDG CSR submission proposes an amendment to allow universities to recharge costs ‘at cost,’ without VAT, recognising these as non-business activities.

    Joint procurement initiatives through sector bodies have been successful, as shown by Jisc regional consortia like the Southern Universities Purchasing Consortium (SUPC).  Our GuildHE Research consortium demonstrates the tangible benefits of collective purchasing by providing services such as an open-access research repository and HIVE tracker which smaller institutions would otherwise be unable to afford individually. However, the power of monopoly suppliers is a challenge, and procurement alone may not be enough for long-term financial resilience.

    Protecting institutional identity

    The risk of losing institutional identity through more formal collaborative approaches remains a significant concern, particularly for smaller providers. Structural change is also probably one of the most challenging things for Boards. Boards often take a position around defending the independence of an institution rather than taking a broader view of how collaborative structures could create different futures which need to be evaluated on the basis of student provision and choice rather than out-and-out independence. GuildHE does not believe that a homogenised sector is in the interests of the public, students or industry and will continue to advocate for a wide range of institutional types to be protected within the system.

    Group structures are an alternative to mergers, allowing institutions to retain their brand and identity while sharing resources. However, the OfS registration process demonstrates the difficulties in maintaining collaborative structures. Due to inflexible accountability requirements for providers in group structures, the long-standing Conservatoire for Dance and Drama consortium was forced to disband in order to join the register. To alleviate Governing Body concerns, a flexible approach to data and metrics is also required to accommodate short-term risks that may arise from merging two institutions with differing metrics. Regulatory reform is therefore needed to remove barriers to collaboration and innovation.

    Learning from Examples: Success Stories and Ongoing Initiatives

    Falmouth Exeter Plus, a joint venture between Falmouth University and the University of Exeter, demonstrates the potential of cost-sharing groups, particularly where campus assets are shared, such as library services. In another example, the Luminate Group is a tertiary structure encompassing FE colleges and Leeds Conservatoire. Brand identities have been firmly retained whilst allowing for real cost savings and synergies from integrated operations and leadership. A number of other GuildHE institutions also sit within much larger group structures, whilst retaining their own brand and identity. At a national level, the Advanced Procurement for Universities & Colleges (APUC) in Scotland is providing a model for shared service optimisation. Universities Wales is exploring deeper collaboration, recognising common challenges but potential benefits.

    These examples illustrate savings in overheads and cost efficiencies from shared assets and operations within collaborations and group structures. These are more complex and nuanced than traditional straight mergers, but ultimately retain the benefits of specialisation and variation in mission to maintain student choice.

    Charting a Collaborative Future: Recommendations

    Collaboration is essential for the sector’s sustainability. GuildHE has just launched a series of roundtables and a new development programme for our community to help foster the types of discussions and initial explorations needed to determine how to take first steps towards greater collaboration, including joint procurement channels.  There are undoubtedly other organisations in the sector offering similar help and support, which we’d be keen to hear from in our own efforts to role-model greater collaboration.

    To ensure a more sustainable future for all institutions, the DfE and the OfS should reform regulatory structures to incentivise collaboration. This will help secure a more stable foundation for institutions and ensure that smaller-scale, specialist, and non-traditional institutions are not overlooked during the deepening financial crisis, which is most acutely affecting larger-scale, multi-faculty institutions. Furthermore, a culture of mutual trust and respect needs to be fostered between institutions and their governing bodies.

    As Walt Disney famously said, ‘The best way to get started? Quit talking and start doing.’

    Source link

  • Engaging Students in Collaborative Research and Writing Through Positive Psychology, Student Wellness, and Generative AI Integration – Faculty Focus

    Engaging Students in Collaborative Research and Writing Through Positive Psychology, Student Wellness, and Generative AI Integration – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • How might HEIs and government build collaborative advantage to address climate change

    How might HEIs and government build collaborative advantage to address climate change

    • By Professor Katy Mason, PVC Dean at the University of Salford’s Business School.

    We’re at a crucial moment in our fight to address climate change, with limited time to end the irreversible damage to our planet. However, higher education institutions (HEIs) could play a more pivotal role on the road to net zero.

    Climate-related challenges are considerable and require both technological innovation and the reorganisation of our society and economy. Universities are in a strong position to drive these transitions, but because of the required pace of change, they need to do so in collaboration with government. For example, universities are well positioned to mobilise the STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) and technical expertise required to evolve the way energy is generated, stored and distributed, as well as the SHAPE and social practice expertise to support the social transitions required to transform energy production and consumption. This broad range of expertise, uniquely perhaps, sits under one organisational umbrella: the HEI.

    Reducing carbon footprint with research

    HEIs have been working, increasingly over recent years, to structure and support multi, inter and transdisciplinary research, in ways that will ultimately support the reduction of our carbon footprint to deliver net zero.

    The formation of UKRI (UK Research and Innovation) has supported many of these initiatives. In April 2018, UKRI brought together the UK’s seven research councils, Innovate UK, and Research England, into a single organisation to support the distribution of government funding for impactful, interdisciplinary research.

    Accelerating a green growth economy through collaboration

    Climate change mitigation and building the UK’s resilience to climate change impacts has been a central tenant of UKRI’s attention, with funding calls driving collaboration between academics, industry and government. But interdisciplinary research, on its own, is not enough. HEIs and government will have to find new ways of collaborating if we are to accelerate a green growth economy.

    There are examples of successful collaboration. The Government’s Open Innovation Team is a platform that supports academic-policy collaboration, curating academic expertise to support and inform policy initiatives. Similarly, the United Nations PRME (Principles of Responsible Management Education) platform supports and accelerates the sustainability of current and future business leaders in Business and Management education. However, at present, its take-up is piecemeal and patchy.  Much more collaboration is needed if we are to make a difference to climate change. 

    Recognition of the advantages afforded by collaboration is long-standing. As far back as 2000, Vangen and Huxman were developing a theory of collaborative advantage, arguing that goals, trust, culture and leadership had to be aligned enough – despite differences and tensions – if advantages were to be gained.[i] In this regard, collaboration is often inconsistent, with inherent contradictions and mutually exclusive elements caused by inevitable differences between partners. While it is these differences that often generate advantage, they require time and investment in understanding. This is perhaps why we have not invested sufficiently in making such partnerships work.

    Breaking down barriers to collaboration

    The contrasting cultures of academics and policymakers may certainty make collaboration difficult: the epistemologies-in-use (how knowledge, evidence and rigour are framed) are different; the production and use of knowledge objectives is different; and the rules of identity and belonging to the home-culture are different.

    However, as Beech et al. argue, we can take advantage of these significant cultural differences if HEIs develop a new kind of platform that acts as a learning zone in which key cultural rules of academics and policymakers are suspended (not ‘solved’).[ii] This will enable different groups to contribute and extract learning insights as if they were collaborating with shared understanding, when this may only partially be the case.

    In pursuit of creating a new kind of learning platform, HEIs, particularly those leading knowledge exchange and engagement initiatives, might usefully adopt this set of design principles:

    • Valuing difference and not seeking to resolve it;
    • Having the purpose of supporting others’ endeavors in their home-culture by providing knowledge resources;
    • Be willing to aggregate and disaggregate ideas and evidence in novel ways; and
    • Be willing to suspend judgement of the other and the self to encourage people to step outside their normal modes of interaction

    These design principles will likely help knowledge exchange leads catalyse innovation and accelerate the adoption of cutting-edge practice by bringing local, regional and national policymakers together with academics to advance solutions to overcome climate change obstacles.

    ‘Making Britain a clean energy superpower’

    Academics and policymakers are explicit in their ambition to tackle climate change. The UK Government states one of its key missions as ‘making Britain a clean energy superpower’ by ‘creating jobs, cutting bills and boosting energy security with zero-carbon electricity by 2030.’

    Driven by government monies directed towards UKRI for this purpose and by researchers’ concerns, passions, and expertise, some universities have built up significant industrial and third-sector networks to support the development and transformation of our greening economy.

    For example, researchers at Lancaster, Swansea, Imperial, and Salford have been studying the farming sector and its potential transformation through agrivoltaics. Agrivoltaics co-locate high-quality food and green energy production on the same land while simultaneously aiming to secure biodiversity net gain. This is a complex and ambitious agenda that will contribute to more than the ‘clean energy’ challenge.

    Agrivoltaics requires expertise in physics to understand solar panel efficiency, reliability and maintenance, while plant science knowledge is essential to understand food nutrition and biodiversity complexities. In addition, social science expertise is required to understand the design and transformation of the farming sector, the development of a circular economy for solar panels, and how the proliferation of markets might reconnect across the entire food and energy production and consumption systems to ensure sustainability.

    To uncover ‘what works’ will ultimately require us to collaborate with those seeking to use agrivoltaics and all those involved in solar panel production and management upstream and downstream of the supply network.

    My involvement in this project has been exciting, frustrating and demanding. I suspect that we could have significantly accelerated our impact if we had not lacked access to a platform that systematically supported policy-academic engagement. In line with our research that shows the desire and difficulty for policymakers to engage with researchers, it seems there is much more we can do, as HEIs to support this.


    [i] Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2013). Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. Routledge.

    [ii] Beech, N., Mason, K. J., MacIntosh, R., & Beech, D. (2022). Learning from each other: Why and how business schools need to create a “paradox box” for academic–policy impact. Academy of Management Learning & Education21(3), 487-502

    Source link

  • Realising the collaborative advantage of the Healthcare Education Consortium

    Realising the collaborative advantage of the Healthcare Education Consortium

    • By Darryll Bravenboer, Director of Apprenticeships and Professor of Higher Education and Skills, Middlesex University.

    We have all seen the media coverage with packed A&E departments, patients waiting for hours and being treated in corridors. Last week was the busiest for the NHS in England so far this year, with more patients in hospitals than at any other point this winter, and yet without action the situation will get worse.

    The NHS currently employs around 1.5 million people, making it the biggest employer in Europe. However, the NHS clinical workforce is not enough to keep pace with demand. The population of England is projected to grow to 61.7 million by mid-2043, and we are living longer which often means more complex illnesses.

    There are currently over 112,000 NHS vacancies, the population of England is projected to be 61.7 million by mid-2043, and when combined with demographic changes, a shortfall of between 260,000 and 360,000 health service staff by 2036/37 is predicted by 2036/37.

    The NHS Long Term Workforce Plan (2023) has set ambitious clinical workforce commitments with the aim to significantly increase the number of health staff, including doctors, nurses and midwives by 2032.

    To achieve this, employers and universities delivering degree apprenticeships need to work together and develop innovative programmes that benefit students, the public sector and ultimately the public.

    The University Alliance (UA) represents leading professional and technical universities, educating around 30% of all nursing apprentices in England, plus a substantial number of allied health professionals and healthcare degree apprentices.

    Several UA members* have formed the Health Education Consortium to coordinate and expand healthcare degree apprenticeships to meet the NHS Long Term Workforce Plan goals.

    By collaborating, we aim to increase the number of apprentice starts, reduce duplication and pool resources, creating a joined-up programme for local, regional and national apprenticeship provision. The Health Education Consortium will work with NHS England to scale operations in partnership with NHS Trusts and Integrated Care Boards, co-designing programmes to meet their needs.

    The key benefit for healthcare employers of a higher education collaborative approach is that by working together, we can increase training places while minimising costs.

    • A comprehensive degree apprenticeship offer – working on their own individual universities are unlikely to have the resources to meet national employer needs. By joining forces, we can pool our funds and expertise and offer a broader range of healthcare degree apprenticeships to meet NHS requirements.
    • Driving innovation: a commitment to share innovative practice is at the heart of the Health Education Consortium and ensures that we work as an innovation engine creating solutions to the growth barriers employers identify.
    • Scalability and growth: working together means it is possible to scale up provision to meet the increasing demand outlined in the NHS Long-Term Workforce Plan.
    • Towards a one-stop-shop for healthcare education: providing a ‘one-stop-shop’ for NHS, employers save time and money as they do not need to communicate and work with a range of universities.

    The benefits outlined above make the case for a more collaborative approach to delivering higher education, which, at the same time, better meets the needs of NHS employers. This aligns with the government’s ambition for greater collaboration to drive efficiency and contribute towards economic growth.

    At a time of financial challenge for the higher education sector, the significant growth of degree apprenticeships within the NHS, made possible through effective university collaboration, could address government expectations while contributing to the financial sustainability of providers in the sector.

    *Middlesex University, Birmingham City University, Oxford Brookes University, University of Hertfordshire, Kingston University and University of Greenwich.

    Source link