“I can’t change the direction of the wind, but I can adjust my sails to always reach my destination.”
– Jimmy Dean.
Photo: Andrew Neel, Unsplash.
The vision of top universities goes beyond the immediate impact of the solutions they provide. They also observe the unique perspectives that universities bring to different social situations. These valuable perspectives are the offspring of its people. With sophisticated powers of perception, a university maintains the capacity to influence and refine key sectors of society while also understanding and addressing the needs and demands of students, partners, entrepreneurs, business leaders, government, and the broader community.
The quality of this effort can set a university (indeed, any organisation) apart when it comes to deriving impact, and it is conspicuous among leaders who sense change, learn from change, and adjust accordingly when making decisions in the face of uncertainty. An effective implementation model makes this consistently possible by fusing the required organisational direction and organisational character into a cohesive framework.
How does a university effectively implement its organisational direction and by so doing, create great socio-economic benefit?
The place to start is to understand the nature of decisions required to be made – both strategy and implementation – and what influences these decisions; viz., external and internal environments (together, the ‘operating landscape’). Also important is the impact on decision-making that the operating landscape has, particularly in relation to the nature of information gathering and the required approaches to decision-making and implementation.
From there, it is essential to recognise the ‘anchors’ for decision-making which can be used to galvanise shared action. These anchors have been canvassed in earlier blogs. Anchoring strategy and implementation decisions that are heavily influenced by the external environment is 'intent' – a combination of direction and purpose. Anchoring strategy and implementation decisions that are heavily influenced by the internal environment are the elements of an operating model (viz., core processes, enabling systems and organisational functions). Anchoring all decision-making are the critical proficiencies – those factors which a university must master to achieve its organisational direction (viz., 'curate', 'shape', and 'deliver').
Through this prism, a matrix can be constructed, revealing five key realms of decision-making and associated system-based activities.
Strategic Decision-making
Two realms involve strategic decision-making.
The first, predominately impacted by the external environment, is the realm of ‘sensing’ and is anchored by intent and the critical proficiencies. Here, opportunity spectrum analysis - the process of positioning, prioritising and allocating resources accordingly - is a key approach to strategic decision-making.
The second, predominantly impacted by the internal environment, is the realm of ‘sourcing’ and is anchored by an operating model and the critical proficiencies. In this realm, understanding the knowledge-capital value chain is the approach to strategic decision making. This includes determining the nature of underlying resources, the addressable markets and paths-to-markets, and associated delivery mechanisms.
And, clearly, sensing and sourcing are interdependent. Strategic decisions involve detailed, creative and continual assessment of a university's capabilities and offerings relative to those of other providers, and of the opportunities and threats posed by external environments.
Implementation Decision-making
Two further realms involve implementation decision-making.
The first of those, predominantly impacted by the external environment is the realm of ‘marshalling’, anchored by intent and the critical proficiencies. Here it is paramount to understand the impact that the external environment has on an organisation’s operating context, and in turn the focus of leadership, and the nature of information gathering and required implementation activities. The operating contexts can span from defined (i.e. static, relatively certain and therefore predictable), to complicated (i.e. changeable, active and therefore variable) to complex (i.e. dynamic, uncertain and therefore unpredictable). Clealry, leadership foci and decision-making frameworks must vary depending upon the operating context. For example, in a defined operating context, leadership tends to focus on objectives and goals, skills and processes, with decision-making involving assessing facts, categorising tasks and administering accordingly. In complicated operating contexts, leadership focuses on strategy, management and frameworks, with decision-making involving assessing information, analysing options and selecting and implementing the best courses of action. In complex operating contexts, leadership focuses on orientation, empowerment and learnings with decision-making involving experimentation, assessing outcomes and responding or refining accordingly.
The second of the realms involving implementation decision-making, predominantly impacted by the internal environment, is that of ‘serving’ and anchored by an operating model and the critical proficiencies. Here, how to assemble the right people and teams to implement the required initiatives is key.
In a similar vein, marshalling and serving are interdependent. Implementation decisions involve detailed, creative and continual assessment, framed around a university's strategic decisions. Because strategic decisions change in response to changing operating landscapes, so, too, must implementation decisions change. The nature of the operating landscape associated with strategic decisions influences the operating context. The operating context in turn determines the required leadership foci and decision-making frameworks that must be marshalled. Leadership foci and decision-making frameworks then determine the allocation of people and teams, and the utilisation of organisational functions that serve the needs of the university and its partners.
All Decision-making
At the core of the implementation model, the fifth realm, is ‘harmonising’, the specific processes by which context is created in order for an organisation’s people to pull all decision-making and activities together. This realm must steadfastly keep the critical proficiencies as its anchor, and involves two key components, strategic conversations and values and behaviours.
Strategic conversations are those two-way exchanges between key stakeholders (internal and external) that are framed around the abovementioned components of the implementation model. These are the conduits to determining what needs to be discussed; who must be informed, addressed or pursuaded; what each audience needs to know; how each audience is best reached; and what is required from each audience. From these strategic conversations emerge tangible activities with goals (the results that are required); priorities (the high-impact issues that must be addressed); requirements (the specific resources required for each priority); actions (those that must be taken for each priority); and responsibilities (who takes the actions and by when).
Values and behaviours help people to make the right choices, and empower them to do extraordinary things. They can be utilised by universities to frame the organisational policies that lay out the obligatons of their people, and set expectations for their behaviours. Each realm - sensing, sourcing, marshalling and serving - and their constituant decision-making anchors and approaches, help identify and align the supporting values and behaviours. Importantly, values and behaviours must be framed around what people need to do, not what people need to think. They must reflect the nature of the choices that have to be made (strategic decisions) and the actions required to convert those choices into outcomes (implementation decisions). They must consider the factors that anchor all decision-making and the associated approaches that help frame the required information and actions.
Bringing strategic conversations and values and behaviours to the heart of all matters, ensures cohesiveness, makes everything meaningful, and embeds and aligns all activities with deriving great socio-economic benefits. And, together, they provide the way to build a winning organisational culture.
Now is truly the moment in time when all organisations need to orient toward the delivery of great socio-economic benefits. It is no longer productive to ‘free ride’, leaving the heavy lifting to others. We all need to help. It’s time to go beyond talking and knowing, and start doing.
My book The University Imperative – Delivering Socio-economic Benefits for our World is a powerful opening move. There are some really insightful concepts and examples detailed throughout.
I hope the book will help. A lot!
I look forward to our continued journey.
Nick & The University Imperative team.
“What was happening could be described as a great ship being turned and blunted and shoved about and pulled around by many small tugs. Once turned by tide and tugs, it must set a new course and start its engines turning. On the bridge which is the planning centre, the question must be asked: All right, I know now where I want to go. How do I get there, and where are the lurking rocks and what will the weather be?”
– John Steinbeck, The Winter of our Discontent, Pan Books, 1961, p. 98
Ever since their establishment as institutions of higher education and research, universities have been different. Their evolution across the past ten centuries has seen them infused with an enduring ethos to benefit society. Irrespective of individual institutional personalities and their manifold geographical coordinates, this remains a distinguishing characteristic of any university. A university is still a community of teachers and scholars. It, therefore, remains a veritable epicentre of ideas, a concept factory, the rightful birthplace of innovations and products that make the world a better place in which to live. It is a think-tank for the betterment of society, an environment where the very practice of education is an exercise in social enrichment.
Certainly, that remains the intent.
However, we live today in a world of constant change, uncertainty and unprecedented challenges, a social situation accentuated by the global events of 2020 and 2021. We find ourselves in profoundly difficult territory.
While universities, on the face of it, continue to operate according to their broad traditional ethos, they are increasingly required to question whether they have the societal cut-through expected of institutions of higher education and research. Are the graduates emerging from universities today scholars in the truest sense of the word? Are they the thought leaders and change managers who are capable of not just meeting the demands of an uncertain environment but able and determined to transform it for the greater good? Are the products at the end of the university assembly line utilised in the delivery of social benefit?
Achieving that cut-through and hitting those societal targets is no longer a matter of course. The digital revolution has seen to this. Technologies have changed the ways we think and interact forever, not least in terms of information and know-how and how these are acquired and shared. A new currency is at play in the business of knowledge, and the modern value of higher education and research has come under pressure. The academic foundations and research rigour that once positioned the university on a higher plane are now under siege from easily accessed information (frequently camouflaged as expert knowledge). Multi-national tech companies have provided global platforms for the convenient proliferation of opinion in the absence of verified facts, and these often run counter to university endeavours and principles.
What of society-serving universities and the platforms they provide for scholars and researchers and the products of their academic enterprise? It is a prescient question which has risen ominously as the university funding model has been depleted and dented and ultimately damaged by a turbulent economic landscape, competition and the loss of traditional market-share, and ever tightening public funding available to support university activities.
Yet the need for universities to play their more than noble part in addressing societal issues has never been so clear. The onset of a global pandemic and its implications for health and governance into the future has amplified this need. Unless the role of the university is reinvigorated in proficient fashion, further challenges of profound import lie waiting for the people of this planet. There can be no doubt that the university – the institution of higher education and research, the community of teachers and scholars – is the entity best placed to meet these challenges. Society needs universities to stay relevant and provide benefit for all their stakeholders.
But staying relevant in a world of change requires change. And while a new or renewed way forward must be forged, it is incumbent on any university not only to do the right things, but to do them right. Staying relevant requires intent, focus, proficiencies, and organisational character. It means shaking off moribund shackles of intellectual isolation, and re-engineering the university mechanisms to harness the knowledge and energies of educators and researchers determined to flourish in the face of exponential change and challenges.
At the same time, the benefits of the educator’s and researcher’s work must accrue to the largest social cohort; otherwise a university will not achieve its mission and its relevance wanes. Educators and researchers must be provided with the platforms to nurture their sense of opportunity so it reaches tangibly beyond campus boundaries and seeks out collaborations that can optimise the impact of their work on a broad and meaningful scale.
The aim of The University Imperative is to present universities of all shapes and sizes around the world with a sense of what is required in this climate. It constructs a framework with which they can confidently calibrate their operations. The enduring goal of the university has not changed; delivering a beneficial impact for society remains the order of the day. What has changed is the emergent need for business disciplines in the delivery of social benefits.
Across ten chapters The University Imperative constructs a conceptual scaffold which considers the university’s bearings in this hectic social space while also keeping a measured eye on the resources at a university’s disposal. Any inclination to plot a way forward using rankings and recruitment like GPS coordinates must be resisted. Rather, the abiding importance of tertiary education and research must be reasserted, perhaps recalibrated, so that these staples of university can deliver the graduate and research outcomes that make our new world of perpetual flux a better place for all.
A university is an epicentre of ideas, a concept factory, the rightful birthplace of innovations and products that make the world a better place in which to live. It is a think-tank for the betterment of society an social enrichment.<br>
Yet universities find themselves in profoundly difficult territory, damaged by turbulent economic landscapes, intense competition and strained funding models. Unless the role of the university is reinvigorated in a proficient way, the ability to achieve its mission will be impaired.<br>
And with its mission impaired, relevance declines.
The University Imperative is a book that helps university leadership and management teams navigate today’s dynamic environments. It provides a framework for universities’ decision-makers to confidently attune their operations through identifying steadfast factors that, regardless of rapidly changing and complex environments, they must consider and master to deliver great socio-economic benefits