Since 2024, there have been many opinion pieces and analyses on the volume of change in HE and the scale of restructuring and cost cutting.
And there is much comment on how to ‘do’ change (see also my previous blog restructuring Realities)
But rarely do you hear the view that change is simply not the answer.
The received wisdom is that change is necessary in the face of challenge or opportunity or, well, anything really. Change is perceived to demonstrate ‘action’, ‘purpose’ and ‘responsiveness’. Hm.
New VCs set out their vision for change and governing bodies play their part by seeking reassurance that the top team are ‘on it’, digesting number heavy business cases which chart the pure path of change and purport to save the day.
But the hard and unpalatable fact is that this sort of change simply doesn’t work!
The evidence shows 𝘂𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗯𝗶𝗴𝘂𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗹𝘆 that – for the most part – major change programmes materially damages the prospects of any organisation.
Why? Because it renders the very core of its value – its people – productively inactive due to profound uncertainty, loss of agency, fear and lack of clarity. And often, poor health.
In truth, the deep and permanent loss of motivation, loyalty, innovation and wellbeing that follows most major change programmes hits the bottom line far faster than any projected returns.
McKinsey research shows that 70% of change programmes fail to achieve their goals.
In universities, where success relies on intellectual capital and institutional knowledge (and I’m talking academic AND professional services staff here!), the cost is even higher.
One university reported a 40% increase in staff turnover following a major restructure – taking with it decades of expertise and institutional memory.
There is another way.
Purposefully holding an unswerving focus on the value, creativity and energy of the staff in HE can highlight opportunities for growth and evolution which 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 on human strengths and capabilities rather than depleting them.
To illustrate this in the context of AI adoption – recent evidence from McKinsey showed that 90% staff were active and enthusiastic adopters of AI in their working practice. It also showed that companies are slow to tap into and facilitate this developing talent.
Mckinsey concludes that this sets out the need for ‘moving from individual experimentation to strategic value culture’. Terrible sentence! But you get the point….
Staff in universities are the most powerful source of change ideas that will actually make value – and which will work in the complex ecosystem that define higher education.
I’ve seen universities thrive through:
• Incremental improvement driven by staff expertise
• Team driven innovation programmes
• Investment in existing talent
• Focussing on core strengths rather than wholesale transformation
This takes time, belief, and many brave pills. But it has to be worth it.
Ashley Goodall explores this brilliantly in his latest book ‘𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘕𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘏𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦’.
Goodall offers compelling evidence that successful organisations focus on amplifying what works rather than fixing what doesn’t.
𝗛𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗻𝘂𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗴𝘁𝗵𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗽𝘂𝗿𝘀𝘂𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗯𝘆 𝘂𝗽 𝘁𝗼 𝟯:𝟭. That’s quite a multiplier.
So if you’re reviewing business cases right now, maybe consider what’s not being measured. The human costs and opportunities rarely appear on spreadsheets. But they are real and of paramount importance.
Gauntlet thrown!
