Is it just me that finds the analogy of a supertanker in higher education annoying. 

The story goes that changing things in higher education is like turning a supertanker.

Reality it is fun fact very easy to stop and turn a supertanker. If it wasn’t we wouldn’t be using them. Think about a supertanker is in port it needs to turn to get out of the port and will have to eventually stop when it arrives at its destination.

We use the analogy because where it is difficult for a supertanker to turn or stop is in an emergency. When the supertanker faces something unexpected then yes it can be challenging and difficult to turn or stop in time.

The reality is that when a supertanker moves, it is following a well defined process, outlined in a plan, along a pre-determined route. If higher education was a supertanker, it would be a highly efficient thing meeting all its objectives on time and to budget.

What does this mean for higher education?

If we say higher education is like a supertanker, what we seem to be saying is that as a sector we lack any kind of coherent plan, so when faced with a constant series of challenges we are unable to respond to them.

We should stop waiting for the disaster or the emergency and plan for the future in advance. A well planned route, an understanding of the potential hazard and adequate contingency planning to mitigate emergencies and disasters. If higher education is a supertanker then it is a well designed efficient thing which gets the job done. But only if they have a plan, a route, and good processes.

Maybe in the future, it will be a positive thing so say higher education is like a supertanker.