In the news this week, two stories on collaboration and shared services.
The first of these was the launch of Universities West. It is a new collaboration between Bath Spa University, the University of Bath, the University of Bristol and the University of the West of England – has formally launched. The grouping is intended to strengthen collaboration, support economic growth and improve opportunities for learners.
These sorts of collaboration can lead to more collaboration. Though the focus of Universities West is on supporting the (WECA) Skills Strategy, there are implications and possibilities for future collaboration, shared services, and potentially shared infrastructure to support student mobility to deliver on the skills strategy.
Up in Scotland, the staff at Napier and Queen Margaret universities have been told of plans to create a “multi-university” with Scotland’s Rural College
In Scotland, a staff briefing was “revealed” that detailed plans to share services between Edinburgh Napier University, Queen Margaret University, and Scotland’s Rural College.
Reaction from staff was that they fear this as a “merger by stealth”. Senior management have “categorically told the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) union that they are not planning a merger,” while an unnamed member of staff was reported saying that plans would “maintain each institution’s independence and autonomy, but provide some shared services.”
My reflections on this, having been involved in the collaboration agenda over the last few years, one concern not often expressed, is the impact of shared services on jobs. Collaboration and shared services are often seen as potential solutions to another problem, such as financial sustainability. This reaction though is interesting in that the focus is on how shared services would not just result in loss of autonomy, but the end game was merger.
Over on WonkHE, Vicki Stott the incoming senior strategic advisor to the alliance outlines the vision for the collaboration.
From the outset, the principals have been clear that this must be a genuine alliance of equals: three institutions, each with its own history, mission and place, choosing to test how far they can go together while remaining themselves.
She also talks about the ambitions of the alliance.
On the ambitious side, the alliance will deliberately explore shared services, aligned procurement, collaborative curriculum development (within the guardrails of CMA guidance, naturally), data-sharing and better student transitions across institutional boundaries.
As well as emphasising that this is not a merger.
It is, very explicitly, not a merger. It is an attempt to find out whether autonomy, identity and radical collaboration can coexist in practice rather than just in strategy documents.
Of course, we have seen with the London and South East University merger between Greenwich and Kent, that merger doesn’t always mean losing identity. We have seen that in the large number of FE college groups that exist, where the local campus has retained their individual identities despite being part of a larger group structure.
What both these news stories tell us, is that collaboration isn’t always straightforward, and isn’t always seen as a good news story by staff in those institutions.
Understanding the local culture and background is important, when we discuss collaboration with members, but also that there are potentially some negative reactions to news of collaboration or implementation of shared services.