How to trash a University’s reputation And demotivate the people you need to help you succeed

Leighton Andrews

Hey, please come to the ‘reshaped and reduced Cardiff Business School’!

It’s not the most obvious marketing slogan, is it?

Nor is it a motivating mantra for our academic staff, whatever the stage of their career.

Yet that’s a direct quote from the consultation document on Cardiff Business School’s future.

The same language – ‘reshaped and reduced’ – is applied in the consultation document to other leading Schools in the University as well. But then, this is a centralisation project in which the Schools are being deliberately undermined, with Heads of Schools learning in January only the night before their staff what was planned for their School.

I have no idea who wrote the consultation and other transformation documents which are stuffed full of technocratic management neologisms (functional alignment, anyone? I’m told the latest is ‘professional rehoming’). I’ve not heard anything like it since I worked in the BBC in the 1990s. But the University Executive Board (UEB) has signed off on this transformation psychobabble, so they own it.

Restraint

I need to say something about restraint and civility here. As I said in my last post, I don’t like the personalisation of some of these issues, whether of current or past university leaders. I will use robust language in this post about what is being done to Cardiff University, but I am not going to pick on specific individuals who are doing their jobs in difficult circumstances.

I disagree profoundly with them on much of what is being done to the University, and particularly the way it is being done. Some of the UEB may from time to time irritate me hugely. I have the capacity for irritating people too on occasion. I will stick to specific criticisms of the UEB’s proposals and the way they are and have been implemented – or in some cases, not implemented – and I will not hold back on what I think. But my criticisms are of the UEB proposals and their implementation, not of specific individuals.

I finished my teaching for this semester in late February. I had a great bunch of MSc students who from their social media posts seem to have enjoyed the module, not least the trip we made to Tramshed Tech to catch up with my friend Mervyn Davies, aka Lord Davies of Abersoch; the dynamic CEO of Tramshed, Louise Harris; and also staff at the TV production company Whisper Cymru.

It’s the fourth postgrad module I’ve taught this academic year – and all of them pass the target set by the University that postgrad courses should have at least 10 students. I’m scheduled to teach five postgrad modules in the next academic year, 2025-6. If I’m still at the University by then, of course.

Voluntary redundancy

We’re talking a lot about VR in the University at the moment. Not virtual reality, but voluntary redundancy. Those of us ‘in scope’ are entitled to apply for it. It seems to be more generous than the University’s previous Voluntary Severance Scheme.

I have had a 25-year relationship with Cardiff University. I taught in the journalism school for two years prior to my election to the National Assembly in 2003. I went from holding one of the lowliest ranks you can have as an academic – Teaching Assistant – to becoming a person the then Vice-Chancellor wanted to meet, when I was appointed to the Assembly Education Committee.

I held honorary professor status for a decade, published academic articles while I was a backbencher, and gave ‘keynote’ lectures at Cardiff University as Deputy Minister for Regeneration and as Education Minister. Since coming back to the University in 2016 I’ve published two books, academic articles in a wide variety of respected journals, and several book chapters. My research is inter-disciplinary. I teach in Politics (technically the School of Law and Politics) and in the Business School, where I am based, and I’ve contributed guest lectures and research seminars in other schools along the way.

What happens to Cardiff University matters to me emotionally as well as practically.

Consultation documents

With teaching over for the Semester, I’ve finally had time to read through the University’s consultation documents justifying both the cuts and the ‘in scope’ for redundancy letters issued to 1800 of us academics. (Although the University had originally refused to admit the actual number of ‘in scope’ letters when approached by journalists, the figure was eventually given to us by a member of UEB in a meeting on February 19).

Meanwhile, our brilliant professional services colleagues still wait to learn their fate.

I’ve also re-read several times the University strategy, ‘Our Future, Together’, which is aspirational and broad-brush to the extent of being hard to disagree with, other than with the somewhat Orwellian and centralising assertion ‘We will be one university, with a single strategy, a clear plan, and a shared understanding.’

YOU WILL UNDERSTAND. OR ELSE.

We are told in meetings that this strategy is our ‘north star’, there to guide us, and that it has been ‘co-created’.

In his essay, Politics and the English Language, George Orwell warned us about ‘stale imagery’ and ‘dying metaphors’: ‘By using stale metaphors, similes and idioms, you save much mental effort, at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself.’

You can include ‘the listener’ here, as well as ‘the reader’. Incantation of stale metaphors inspires no-one. And it certainly doesn’t persuade anyone.

Implementation plan

I learned quickly in government that a strategy is useless without an implementation plan. One thing that was always missing from the Cardiff University strategy was ‘the clear plan’. In place of that plan we have the transformation proposals, obviously not ‘co-created’ but imposed from the top.

All higher education institutions face real challenges at the moment, not least in Wales.

The problems are obvious. Undergraduate student fees don’t cover teaching costs. International student applications are down significantly for a variety of reasons, not least the last UK government’s ridiculous visa restrictions.

Much of what ails the University sector derives from the marketised system that has developed over the last 30 years or so, which has incentivised particular kinds of institutional behaviour.

It’s time for a reset, and the Welsh Government has agency in this too. I’ve told Welsh Government ministers and opposition members what I think needs to happen on the policy front.

There was an important statement from the Minister this week on the way forward. More needs to happen to rebalance spending on higher education and student finance, but I particularly welcome what the Minister had to say about the her expectation that Universities should work closely with trade unions, staff, and student representatives and explore alternative options fully before considering compulsory redundancies.

Financial reserve

Cardiff University faces many of the same challenges as other universities, but its situation is also different. The University has significant available cash as well as investments, a strong balance sheet, low-cost long-term debt, and a helpful borrowing facility with its bank.

I’m told the university has a larger financial reserve than most other Russell Group universities, and it is certainly far better off than other Welsh universities.

It’s not a basket case and it doesn’t require a government bailout.

Which makes the cack-handed announcements on January 28 and the 1980s-style macho-management all the more unforgiveable.

This ‘shock and awe’ approach is being imposed at a high price to staff trust, goodwill and morale, and to the University’s reputation.

Discussions I have had over recent weeks with Members of the Senedd, MPs and members of the House of Lords, as well as senior journalists in Wales and outside, have confirmed to me how appalled they are with the University’s arrogant, high-handed, irresponsible and occasionally patronising behaviour.

Senior University figures apparently believe that the Welsh Government and the Senedd have no levers to intervene. Well, we’ll see.

The announcements on January 28 seriously damaged the University’s reputation domestically and internationally, undermined the contract of trust with staff, and sent morale through the floor.

The ‘in scope’ of redundancy letters, received by email the following day, destroyed the goodwill necessary to rebuild trust and morale.

The consequence is that the University will need longer to implement a transformation process genuinely owned by staff than it would otherwise have done; and the transformation project will undermine many of the expressed objectives of the University’s strategy.

The damage will last longer than the terms of office of several of those responsible for it.

I hope the University Council’s Audit and Risk Committee has re-evaluated the risks to the University in the light of this shameful assault on staff morale, trust and goodwill.

Expectations

I don’t disagree that the University needs to take action to tackle its operating deficit. There is nothing wrong with the University having expectations of Schools, including the Business School, that they should deliver a targeted contribution to the University overall, or that they should meet an expected Staff Student Ratio (SSR), although the University must always bear in mind the potential impact on the student experience.

It’s been obvious for some time that action would be needed.

When all the candidates to be the new Dean of the Business School gave presentations to their colleagues in June 2024, I asked each candidate one question: if the Vice-Chancellor asks you to address the £10m gap between our expected and actual contribution within two years, what would you do?

The process could have started earlier and more gradually. The challenge could have been put back to the Schools. Further savings would have emerged and helped avoid the deep cuts now demanded. Instead, decisions were delayed. Another thing I learned in government was that not taking a decision is also a decision.

The present attempt to impose unrealistic changes to the contribution level and to the SSR in a matter of months – what the university consultation document asserts as ‘major action in short order’ – is unsustainable and counter-productive. It will lead us into a spiral of decline.

What really gets me, however, is the blasé amateurism and casual incompetence of the process.

We are less than a week away from the first submission date for critiques and alternatives on March 14. Yet the University has still failed to provide some of the basic information promised in the consultation.

For example, the consultation for the Business School says this: “A ‘critical friendship review’ was initiated in November 2024 with the aim of identifying strategic priorities for the School, considering current performance, projected student numbers and income, and broader challenges and opportunities.

“The panel included staff from the School, College and wider University, as well as three external experts from leading UK Business Schools.

“The review will make recommendations for specific actions relating to: the achievement of ‘triple crown’ accreditation; maximising student fees; portfolio redevelopment and revalidation; partnerships and transnational opportunities; the sustainable size and shape of the School, including a reduction in its current size; and, better communicating our Public Value strengths to applicants and key stakeholders.

“The proposed actions will be shared with staff members, unions and other stakeholders and will inform discussions during the consultation.”

Actions

We are six weeks into the consultation and no such ‘recommendations’, ‘specific actions’ or ‘proposed actions’ have been shared with us. I have raised this particular issue face to face with a member of the UEB. I hope as a result we will get this information pronto. Its absence makes attempts to put together meaningful critiques or alternatives very difficult.

It also gives the impression that the consultation is essentially bogus.

Meanwhile, as one of my colleagues has pointed out, the University has conflated its transformation programme with its redundancy programme, running both consultations on the same timescale.

I suspect the University is heading for a series of employment tribunals if they carry on like this.

University productivity has been badly damaged. I’ve lost count now of the number of meetings at School, College and University level that have been called to discuss the January 28 proposals.

Aside from teaching, the University has been pretty much paralysed since the announcements of January 28. It’s certainly not a creative climate for anyone in the affected schools trying to do serious research that might count towards Ref ‘29. Instead, it’s thoroughly demotivating.

This whole episode will become a Business School case study on how NOT to do change management in higher education. Who knows, I might even write it myself. Or ‘co-create’ it with my colleagues.

For now, we are in a campaign to reset the University on the right course. There is an alternative, and we have to stand up for it. We are being balloted on strike action – and other industrial action – at the moment. Regretfully, I have voted ‘yes’ to strike action and other industrial action at Cardiff University.

Leighton Andrews is a former Education Minister in the Welsh Government and is currently Professor of Practice in Public Service Leadership and Innovation at Cardiff University.