‘Specialise in what you’re good at’: five ways universities can flex when times are tough

A university education, once the preserve of a privileged minority, is now enjoyed by ever-growing numbers globally. In Australia , the UK and Canada , universities educate more than 40% of school leavers.

But while widening participation is a celebrated success story of increased opportunity and social mobility, institutions must manage the responsibility of educating larger and more diverse student populations.

And they must do this alongside many other demands, such as financial pressures and academic workforce stress. Earlier this year, the Office for Students, the independent regulator of higher education in England, warned that 40% of England’s universities are expected to run budget deficits this year . While a survey of UK academics , carried out a couple of years ago, found widespread feelings of stress and overwork.

It’s a balancing act that is explored in a new report, Balancing Mission and Markets: the Future of the Higher Education Offer , by the international management consultancy Nous Group – which also offers some ideas for responding to these challenges.

Nous Group surveyed more than 200 university leaders and teaching academics in the UK, Australia and Canada, as well as more than 1,200 students, about challenges they were experiencing.

Growing expectations from governments, industry and students to produce “job-fit” graduates emerged as a key pressure point in the report, with students citing employability as the greatest influence on what and where they study.

More specialisation
In response to the survey, the report makes some recommendations. These include refining the courses a university offers to develop a distinct, sustainable portfolio. That means embracing greater institutional specialisation, says Julie Mercer, principal at Nous Group and one of the report’s key contributors.

“Know who you are as an institution, know what you’re good at, and focus on that,” she says. “We’ve had universities growing in terms of the size of the institution, but also in the comprehensiveness of their curriculum. [As a result,] they’re all offering broadly the same things.”

Mercer advises cutting out unpopular modules and those that are not high quality. This includes the plethora of courses developed based on staff research disciplines that are not always suitable for teaching. “We have a moral obligation to ensure we don’t offer substandard programmes to our students,” she says. She also suggests thinking carefully about the skills and capabilities that students and employers want in core subject areas.

“We’ve seen a lot of universities’ arts and humanities faculties starting to reimagine arts in a digital age and redesigning programmes and courses to be much more relevant to the world of work,” she says.

Too much choice can be overwhelming
This ties into what, for Mercer, was one of the standout findings of the Nous Group survey: that too much choice and flexibility can be overwhelming for students. Some 44% of respondents said they would be happy to select a major for their degree from one to three options.

“Choice is good, but too much isn’t good,” Mercer says. “Students don’t want a sweet shop array of choices – that is just too confusing.”

Rethink the traditional academic calendar
One of the more radical ideas in the report is a call for a rethink of the traditional academic calendar to better serve a more diverse student population – who may want more accelerated or flexible learning.

“There are more 25-plus-year-olds going to university than we had 20 or 30 years ago,” Mercer says. “They have jobs, they might have families, they’ll have caring responsibilities. Many of our 18-year-olds have jobs and caring responsibilities as well. We haven’t moved the model to reflect the shift in people’s needs and priorities.”

Innovations already being tried include short-term intensive courses through the year, as well as intakes across the year.

Considering AI tools
Only 3% of university leaders surveyed reported using AI tools in learning and teaching to a large extent. But Nous Group found that some institutions are using AI tools to improve student experience and reduce pressure on staff.

Mercer warns against the temptation to shun such technologies. She urges university leaders to instead consider their capacity to deliver – among other things – personalised support by acting as private tutors, providing feedback on students’ work and offering tailored suggestions to improve their performance. That, in turn, would reduce academic workload.

Get the right data
And “boring but fundamental”, as she puts it, is the need for institutions to have the right data available to make decisions about their portfolio. Only 41% of university leaders rated their access to data and insights as good or very good.

“Getting the data right reduces bureaucracy, it stops some delays, it reduces workload, and it helps things run more smoothly – including timetabling and space allocation, which are always the bane of university life,” Mercer says. “If you don’t get this right, then all the other stuff continues to be even harder.”

University leaders and staff said they were reluctant to change educational offerings in a way that’s too top-down heavy. So how can universities ensure that academics are on board?

Mercer’s advice for successful change is building trust in leadership, and demonstrating how any new measures can help ease academic workloads. “It’s about being really transparent about the situation that the institution finds itself in – what needs to happen, and what the consequences are of not doing anything,” she says.

“It’s not just about saying: ‘This is what we’re going to do.’ It’s about asking the community for ideas, and engaging academic leaders who can then authentically work with their teams to lead that change.”

To find out more about Nous Group and the future of the higher education offer report, click here