Chairs and vice-chancellors: the relationship

Following the performance of Crossing the Line that took place on Thursday 30 November 2017, David Williams, governance web editor, Leadership Foundation reviews the dramatisation of the exchanges and experiences between vice-chancellors and chairs of boards.

Performed by professional actors, Crossing the Line, explores the views and actions of primarily chairs of governing bodies and vice-chancellors. The name of the role-play reflects the boundaries between the responsibilities of chairs of governing bodies and vice-chancellors, and how different ‘voices’ interpret ‘the line’ in discharging their responsibilities.

Crossing the Line is based on sixteen interviews with chairs of governing bodies and heads of institutions on how they view the chair-head relationship. The writer has used the transcript of the interviews to construct a short play, which adopts the format used by Dylan Thomas in the writing of Under Milk Wood.

A recurring mantra is that the relationship between chairs and vice-chancellors should operate on the basis of ‘trust, affection and respect’. However, the characters in the role-play illustrate that the ‘the line’ is interpreted differently by individual agents. The distinction between ‘rowing and steering’ is the demarcation between the work of the executive and that of governors. An understanding of the boundary is important. In practice, ‘the line’ is either protected or transgressed.

Using different institutional contexts and characters, colourful examples of the intentions and associated actions of different chairs and vice-chancellors are introduced. Some chairs have strong predetermined views, and come to the role with a mind-set of what ‘should be done’ or ‘how’ the relationship between the two agents must operate. Some chairs or governors focus on ‘pet’ concerns, such as ‘finance’, ‘the need to have a dashboard’ or making sure “all the instruments are playing” (i.e. all members of the governing body contribute).  Similarly, some vice-chancellors are portrayed as viewing governors as a nuisance: who get in the way. A question of how influential is a chair is raised. In one case, they are described as a ‘glorified stool’.

Relations between the governing body and heads of institution vary. In some instances, the relationship is closed and too cosy, in others the relationship is more open and difficult. The question of ‘professional distance is raised’. The role-play suggests that the only ‘sanction of the Board’ if they believe they have a major problem with the institution’s head is to remove them.

The multi-faceted role of the vice-chancellor is recognised, and the role of the registrar/secretary briefly mentioned. Vice-chancellors are highly intelligent, as is the possibility that they can sometimes act in egotistical way. Constructive dialogue between the chair and the vice-chancellor is vital. The ability to raise issues in private conversations, rather than at the Board is important. Difficult conversations are sometimes needed. The possible role of the registrar/secretary to act as a ‘go between’ is noted.

Questions raised as to the membership of the governing body include, length of service, whether to seek new governors with a view to youth or experience and the need for business experience on Boards. The concern that governors don’t understand the academic context is introduced. This is tied to the risk that governors unfamiliar with higher education may believe ‘nothing is different’, when compared to how private sector Boards work.

Getting the balance between trusting and challenging the executive is important. The asymmetry of information between the executive and the governing body is captured by the phrase: “you do not know, what you do not know”.

Crossing the Line was deliberately provocative, but equally contains examples which many involved in higher education governance are likely to recognise. Those who watched the role-play commented that how the chair and vice-chancellor work together is essentially about the relationship between two people. Understanding the roles of each is critical, as is the emotional intelligence of both parties. Listening skills in particular are often important. Both parties have a responsibility to make the relationship work.

For more about this key university relationship read the new Leadership Insights Managing the Chair/Vice-Chancellor Relationship: www.lfhe.ac.uk/RushforthLI22

Coming soon 
A second performance of Crossing the Line is planned for 2018. If you are interested in attending, please complete the form below: 

More about our governance events:  http://www.lfhe.ac.uk/gdp

The 7 leadership blog posts of 2017

As part of our 12 leadership days of Christmas campaign, we are pleased to release our 7 leadership blog posts of the year.

Take some time out this festive season to read some of your colleagues’ favourite blogs of the year and take the opportunity to start thinking about the next steps in your leadership development.

You can follow the campaign by using the hastag #LF12Days 

1. Top 12 things those new to higher education need to know

Rita Walters, marketing and communications coordinator, Leadership Foundation shares the insights from colleagues at the Leadership Foundation on what they believe are the key messages for those new to higher education.

2. Connected leadership: connecting people with purpose
Doug Parkin and Rebecca Nestor explore connected leadership and its applications to the Preparing for Senior Strategic Leadership programme.

3. 8 ways to be a better role model

We asked our Aurora facilitation team: Vijaya Nath, Phyllida Hancock, Rosemary Stamp, Rebecca Nestor, Jenny Garrett and Maeve Lankford how to be a good role model. Based on their experience of facilitating Aurora these insights will help you make the most of your experience and be the best role model you can be.

4. Our mentorship journey: Karen Twomey and Val Cummins
Karen Twomey is a Researcher at Tyndall National Institute, Cork who took part in Aurora in Dublin in 2014-15. Karen chose, Val Cummins, Senior Lecturer at University College Cork to be her mentor for the duration of the programme and the relationship continues to this day. We asked Karen and Val to reflect on their relationship as a mentee and mentor.

5. Coaching: The advice I would give my younger self
Jean Chandler, programme director of Transition to Leadership, shares her thoughts on coaching as a skill set, approaches to leading others, and her own leadership lessons.

6. Reflections from Leadership Matters

Rachael Ross is the course director of Leadership Matters, the Leadership Foundation programme for senior women in higher education. Two years on from its inception, Rachael reflects on why the programme is needed and how it was developed.

7. Up for a challenge: self-directed group learning for leaders

If our role as educators of adults is to enhance their capacity for self-directed learning, how does that apply to leadership development training? Doug Parkin, director of the Leadership Foundation’s Future Professional Directors programme, reflects on his experience of designing transformational self-directed group learning activities for leaders.

Let us know your favourite via Twitter #LF12Days or in the comments below.


You can read more of the Leadership Foundation blogs here. 

The full list of programmes at the Leadership Foundation can be found here. 

Being hefty

Dr Jennifer Leigh is a lecturer in Higher Education and Academic Practice at the University of Kent who is taking part in Aurora during 2017-18. Here, she reflects on how her own research and background in embodiment and somatic movement can help Aurorans present themselves as leaders.

When I attended the first Aurora day on Identity, Impact and Voice I was struck by how the facilitator, Phyllida Hancock, spoke about the need to be ‘hefty’. One of the exercises was to stand up and take on the physical presence of a role model whose characteristics we wished to emulate. This idea, that our bodies portray and instil us with certain traits is not a new one. It resonated with me because of my work on embodiment and creative approaches to research and I wanted to share with the Aurora community how to bring this idea of changing your physicality and movement into your everyday work life.

Before becoming an academic, I qualified as an accredited somatic movement therapist and educator and registered yoga teacher, and I used embodied anatomy, developmental play and movement patterns in order to work in private practice. Movement work can be used educationally, therapeutically, for research and just because it makes you feel good. Somatic movement therapy can be used therapeutically to deal with trauma or injury or it can be used creatively to stimulate material for choreography, improvisation or composition. Our bodies can incorporate and store all kinds of information that can tell us and others about what we are thinking and feeling, and how we might go about handling different situations.

What is somatic movement?

Whilst many people might be familiar with yoga, somatic movement therapy is a little different.  Somatic movement covers a wide range of different practices, but all focus on developing a sense of self-awareness and presence in the embodied self. That is, an awareness of the moving, breathing, sensing, feeling body and an awareness of the thoughts, feelings, emotions and projections that flow through our minds.

It is then important to bring that awareness into consciousness and to accept where we are and who we are in any given moment. From an educational or therapeutic point of view it is only when we have that acceptance that it is possible to facilitate change. By developing an awareness of ourselves, we are able to see the options we have, and choose how we want to move forward. This might be something very body based, such as the way that we hold our head, or move our arm. Rather than moving purely by habit in a way that might be causing tension and pain in our joints, by reacting to stimuli, we can choose how we respond. Perhaps we choose how to sit, maybe to use our internal organs to support our spines and to free our necks and shoulders to move gracefully and lightly, or to initiate a movement from the periphery or the core. Gaining access to these choices starts with awareness and acceptance of where we are. Interrogation into why we have developed habitual patterns that limit our movement or thoughts can release trauma, and shed light on past experiences. Somatic movement therapy and education can help us to increase our embodied self-awareness and give us freedom to choose about how we act.

How does this relate to leadership, academia, or research?   

Anything that increases our self-awareness can help us to develop our reflexivity. Reflexivity and reflective practice are vital to leadership, teaching, and research. We need to be aware of how we hold ourselves and present to others and consciously choose how we act in response to people or events rather than blindly reacting out of habitual patterns. Learning to reflect isn’t easy, as it is not something that can be done in isolation.  Somatic or embodied practices give us material to reflect on, which allows us to then change what we do and consequently to progress (Leigh & Bailey, 2013).

On a purely practical level, this work can also help us day-to-day. First to notice and to become aware. For example: how are you breathing? Is it smooth, even, or less so? Where are your shoulders? Without judging, notice where they are and then choose where you want them to be. Be aware of your feet, of the points of contact with the earth. How does your body react to the people around you? What thoughts, feelings or images do you have in response to them? Can you unpick why or where they come from? Only once you are aware can you begin to change.

Our bodies, our meaty, breathy, visceral bodies, also inform our language and how we talk.  We speak of people getting under our skin, feeling touchy or sensitive, listening to ‘gut feelings’ or Phyllida’s idea of being hefty. What does this mean or feel like?

My own research takes a particularly embodied stance in that I use my background and perspective as a practitioner to ask and to answer embodied research questions. Rather than asking participants to answer surveys, or interviews, I have recently conducted a study funded by the Society for Research into Higher Education exploring embodied academic identity, where I met academics in studio spaces and used creative methods including film and visual materials to encourage them to share elements around their identity. These methods allow for a deep process of reflection, but do raise many questions, particularly around where the boundaries of this work are with respect to research and therapy, and where the resulting data fit on the line between art and outputs for analysis.

As someone new to Aurora I look forward to attending the next days as part of the London Autumn cohort. I’d love to meet fellow Aurorans who are interested in my research so please do get in touch. I would love to bring these embodied research ideas into collaboration with someone to explore how leadership is developed, using embodied research methods to ask embodied research questions.


About Aurora
Aurora is the Leadership Foundation’s women-only leadership development programme. Aurora was created in 2013 in response to our own research that shows that women are under-represented in senior leadership positions and identified actions that could be taken to change this. Since Aurora began in 2013 we have welcomed 3,477 women from 139 universities and sector bodies, with 1029 women attending in 2016-17 alone.

Dr Jennifer Leigh
You can follow Jennifer’s blog here and also learn more via her Twitter.

Dates, location and booking
Aurora will take place in Birmingham, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Dublin and London in 2017-18. Book a place here.

Onwards and Upwards study
The first year summary of the five-year longitudinal study of Aurora can be accessed here: Onwards and Upwards year one summary.

The Aurora Conference- Thursday 7 June 2018
We are delighted to be launching our fourth Aurora conference focusing on learning from others – examining what others outside higher education are doing, and what we can learn from them to support women in leadership within the sector.

Participants include, but are not limited to:

  • Aurora participants (current and alumnae)
  •  Aurora champions
  • Aurora role models
  • Aurora mentors
  • People working in/leading equality and diversity

Find out more and apply

Demystifying Finance for Aurorans- Wednesday 18 April 2018
Is for women in higher education who want to improve their understanding of finance in higher education and develop financial management skills.

Find out more and apply.

Contact us
If you would like to know more about Aurora please get in touch at aurora@lfhe.ac.uk.

Aurora Book Club

Anne-Marie Slaughter’s Unfinished Business

Following on from discussions with the Aurora community, this summer we launched the Aurora Book Club, an online community of Aurorans, role models, mentors and champions. The first book was chosen by the Aurora team which was Unfinished Business by Anne-Marie Slaughter. Here we reflect on some of the key discussion points.

Unfinished Business provided a rich topic for conversation amongst the Aurora community with discussion topics ranging from the half-truths of having it all, caregiving, being ‘time-macho’ in the workplace and whether the book being USA-centric impacted enjoyment.

Half-truths
Slaughter discusses three half-truths which affect working women’s lives.

  • You can have it all if you are committed enough to your career
  • You can have it all if you marry the right person
  • You can have it all if you sequence it right

Like Slaughter, the group agreed that these were not necessarily impossibilities but certainly beyond control.

One participant reflected that although all three were true in her case that she put this down purely to luck, and reflected that a member of her family had been less lucky. It was clear though that all participants career experiences were very different.

Slaughter discusses caregiving and parental leave when she writes about both sequencing it right and commitment. Book club participants noted that this was something that affected those living in the UK very differently to those in America. In the UK and Ireland paid maternity and paid paternity (UK only) leave are statutory whereas in the USA there is no statutory leave given. The participants reflected anecdotally on how in Scandinavian countries there is a greater gender balance of how this care is legally divided. Which may perhaps give a greater weight to the value of care as it is not something so gendered.

But there are clearly two sides to every story, as one member of the group cited an article in Time Magazine which suggested that increased maternity rights also increase how hard the glass ceiling is.

Time-macho
Slaughter discusses a half-truth in the workplace which is the idea that the ‘person who works longest works best’ and in some workplaces people are ‘time macho’ by being the first in and the last out of the office.

The participants absolutely saw the value of being seen to be working in the workplace, but not necessarily working all hours of the day. They discussed how flexible working can make practical things like arranging meetings a real challenge. Practical advice from the group included choosing events or moments to be seen outside of your working hours that work around your life. You are therefore seen to be going above and beyond, but are less likely to be pressured into additional work that doesn’t fit with you. Another suggestion was the need for institutions to change their culture to allow staff to be able to digitally switch off and concentrate on work, something that had been successfully achieved for some.

A men’s movement
Slaughter is clear that equality in the workplace is not just a women’s issue and that there also needs to be a men’s movement.

This was something that on the whole all participants agreed with and that men should be respected as caregivers. There was some issue with the phrase ‘men’s movement’ with the suggestion that simply Slaughter means more male feminists.

However, Slaughter argues that sometimes, as women, we use the wrong vocabulary and that men do need to be able to be respected in more stereotypically female roles. We remark on ‘halo’ dads who provide care for, or ‘babysit’ their children, but this is detrimental language as it suggests that women are carers and that men who provide care are unusual, or emasculated. Vocabulary is something to be more mindful of and one participant suggested that in her own area of expertise (economics), they needed to think more carefully about language and vocabulary to appeal to female students- the language needs to be less macho.

Conclusion
Despite cultural differences with the author, Unfinished Business seemed to be well received. Phrases that slaughter uses such as ‘work-life fit’ as opposed to ‘work-life balance’ were relevant changes to a UK and Irish audience.

The Aurora Book Club participants chose Fierce Conversations by Susan Scott as the next book for discussion. The online discussion will take place on Friday 26 January at MIDDAY.


About Aurora
Aurora is the Leadership Foundation’s women-only leadership development programme. Aurora was created in 2013 in response to our own research that shows that women are under-represented in senior leadership positions and identified actions that could be taken to change this. Since Aurora began in 2013 we have welcomed 3,477 women from 139 universities and sector bodies, with 1029 women attending in 2016-17 alone.

Dates, location and booking
Aurora will take place in Birmingham, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Dublin and London in 2017-18. Book a place here.

Onwards and Upwards study
The first year summary of the five-year longitudinal study of Aurora can be accessed here: Onwards and Upwards year one summary.

The Aurora Conference- Thursday 7 June 2018
We are delighted to be launching our fourth Aurora conference focusing on learning from others – examining what others outside higher education are doing, and what we can learn from them to support women in leadership within the sector.

Participants include, but are not limited to:

  • Aurora participants (current and alumnae)
  •  Aurora champions
  • Aurora role models
  • Aurora mentors
  • People working in/leading equality and diversity

Find out more and apply

The Aurora Book Club
If you are an Auroran, role model, mentor, or champion please do join us in the Aurora Book Club. The book club was created as a direct response to alumnae feedback, where Aurorans wanted an opportunity to continue their learning beyond the programme.

Every two months, Aurorans will be encouraged to read a different leadership book and discuss it in a closed Facebook group.

Participants are also encouraged to have face-to-face discussions on an institutional or regional level or online discussions via Skype or Google Chat.

Join the book club now.

Demystifying Finance for Aurorans- Wednesday 18 April 2018
Is for women in higher education who want to improve their understanding of finance in higher education and develop financial management skills.

Find out more and apply.

Contact us
If you would like to know more about Aurora please get in touch at aurora@lfhe.ac.uk.

 

Coaching: The advice I would give my younger self

In advance of the Transition to Leadership programme, which commences this December,  Jean Chandler, programme director, shares her thoughts on coaching as a skill set, approaches to leading others, and her own leadership lessons.

As a young manager in the NHS in the late 1980s, I recall conversations with my late father (who was also a trade union representative), about the challenges I faced early in my management career. Although I felt confident that I had the answers to the challenges my team was facing, I did not have that same confidence addressing those senior to me with solutions, even though they were without the benefit of ‘proper’ management training scheme.

My dad tried to convince me of the benefit of listening first to ensure I understood the challenges of my senior colleagues, before wading in with my advice and latest management thinking. Unfortunately, my dad was up against it, I was on a mission and determined change the face of management and leadership in Support Services in the NHS.

Since that time in my early management career, and now in my role as programme director of Transition to Leadership, I understand the importance of having a coach when you are making the transition to leading and managing others like I had my dad. Coaching is therefore a key programme component as it is a really practical and useable skill, which has earned its place in my management & leadership toolkit.

Why coaching and what can it offer?

What is coaching?
Jonathan Passmore defines coaching as “unlocking a person’s potential to maximize their own performance. It is helping them to learn rather than teaching them.”

It is also about future potential and building self-awareness, responsibility and self-belief.  As a leader, building the self-belief of others has the potential to transform the relationship you have with that individual and their performance.

When is coaching useful?
Coaching is particularly useful for people when they are transitioning from one role to another. As coaching can help individuals (coachees) to be more aware of themselves and their impact on others. Coachees become more willing to take responsibility for and be able to respond to situations, and be better able to learn from their experience and increase their self-motivation.

As part of Transition to Leadership, participants also learn about a coaching approach to leading via Daniel Goleman’s research on the six distinct leadership styles and, why a coaching leadership style is recognised as one of the most positive leadership styles. Participants also have the chance to practice coaching skills face-to-face and as part of the programme’s online peer coaching groups.

Once you understand the fundamental principles of what coaching is and, adopt a framework for a coaching discussion, it becomes essentially an exercise in attending to and listening deeply to the coachee to better understand them. To learn to not advise or give answers but to acknowledge that people are inherently resourceful and have the knowledge, insight and motivation within to make a decision.

This is something that we don’t always deploy as we have been schooled to believe we should have and that we must be the expert given our role or status.

I came to coaching quite late in my career, in my mid-40s but how I wish that as a young manager and leader I had listened to the advice of my dad or others to understand there is a better way to do this. I would have then learnt to develop key leadership attributes including listening deeply through asking helpful questions and attending to and allowing others in my team to personally develop while feeling supported with their particular challenges.

I also realise that as a young manager the challenges I found in trying to better connect and understand those I managed, could have been solved by adopting a more coaching approach to leading. This is something I hope that Transition to Leadership, with its focus on coaching and a coaching approach to leading, can help develop for others.

Personally, I apply the skills I have gained through coaching in many aspects of my working and personal life whether it be my ongoing challenges with my teenage son and his life choices about education and the future, or a close friend facing a personal crisis, I ask myself how can I help here? Is it to be in the moment and attend to their issue primarily or what question might help to reframe this or help to look at things a bit differently? I really try not to be the expert or give advice. It invariably does help both them and myself feel that we have made some progress and that they are choosing the best option for themselves.

So, the one piece of advice I would have given my younger self, apart from my dad was probably right about “that guy,” would have been to take his advice and listen hard, seek to understand and ask helpful questions to unearth the inner resourcefulness that we all possess when it comes to our challenges at work and elsewhere in life; to keep myself out of the way and support and enable others to find their own answers.

Jean Chandler is the associate director for membership in Scotland and contributes to a number of other Leadership Foundation programmes. Jean is also a qualified Institute of Leadership and Management level 7 executive coach with coaching experience both within and outside higher education. Get in touch with Jean, jean.chandler@lfhe.ac.uk 

Transition to Leadership is our blended leadership development programme for those who are new to leadership and looking to influence change. The next run of Transition to Leadership will run from Wednesday 6 December 2017 – Wednesday 11 April 2018 with face to face sessions taking place in Manchester.

Find out more: www.lfhe.ac.uk/ttl

Reflections from Aurora

Dr Klara Wanelik

Picture credit: Photo of ‘value map’ from Aurora 2016-17 in London by Dr Zenobia Lewis, Senior Lecturer in the School of Life Sciences, University of Liverpool.

Dr Klara Wanelik is a Postdoctoral Researcher Associate at the Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool.  She took part in Aurora in Leeds during 2016-17. She reflects on the two aspects of Aurora she found most interesting: core values and the importance of narrative and starting with why.

In March this year I embarked on a leadership training course for women in higher education, called Aurora. You might be thinking, why would I go on a course like this? Well, as an early career researcher (ECR) in science, I am very concerned by statistics like this:

“The proportion of female students (55%) and graduates (59%) in the EU exceeds that of male students, but women represent only 18% of grade A (professorial) academic staff” (Louise Morley, 2013)

The aim of Aurora is to take positive action to address this under-representation of women in leadership positions in higher education.

I attended four development days at the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds (quite appropriate really!) and met hundreds of women from the sector. It has taken me a while to digest all of this but I think I am finally starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel. I include some of my thoughts in this blog post with the hope of inspiring other female ECRs, and more generally inspiring others, to start questioning what it means to be a good a leader. I focus on two aspects of the programme that I found particularly useful. This choice is personal, and I’m sure that other women attending the programme would choose differently. But here goes…

Exploring core values

During the session, Core Leadership Skills, we were given a list of universal human values and asked to circle those that were most important to us: our ‘core values’. At the end of the session, each group pooled their results together on a kind of ‘value map’ (see image above), where values were grouped under terms like universalism, benevolence and power. What I found particularly striking was that our table had circled lots of values in the former two groups (like equality, honesty and loyalty) but the power section of the map (with words like social recognition, public image and authority) was completely empty. And it wasn’t just our table, a colleague of mine who attended the programme in London, told me the same happened there (see image above).

How could this be? How could these women who had come together for the sole purpose of developing their leadership skills (some of them already in senior leadership positions) not feel that they identified with any of these values? There are two possible answers: 1) they didn’t feel comfortable sharing these values, or 2) they genuinely didn’t prioritise them. Given the spirit of openness that Aurora encourages, I assume that the second answer is the most likely. This isn’t a gender-specific phenomenon – we heard that men in leadership positions who completed this activity also highlighted the non-power-related values. This, I think, calls into question what we think a leader should be. Many of us still hang on to a traditional view of a leader being a dominating individual, with full authority, who is driven to do what he/she does for the recognition, wealth and/or the power they receive in return. This is a view we really need to shift. By doing this activity, we were being encouraged to consider the individuality of leadership and the importance of authenticity; staying true to your values, while leading. As the facilitator, Rebecca Nestor, suggested, the best leaders are those that create the next generation of leaders. I think this is perhaps a more useful (and interesting) view of leadership than the traditional one.

Importance of storytelling and leading with ‘why’

In another session we learnt about the importance of storytelling in leadership. This sounded a bit odd to me at first, I’d never really put the two together but then I got talking to a woman on my table who proceeded to tell me about some charity work she was doing, somewhat connected to her work as a lawyer. The way she created a narrative about the people she was helping and what she was doing to help them captured my attention. I wanted to sign up straight away, even though I would have been of very little help (I’m a biologist not a lawyer!) It was at this moment though, when she was masterfully telling her story, that I realised how powerful storytelling could be in getting people to do what you want them to do.

The tables were turned on another occasion, after I watched a TED talk by Simon Sinek, which was recommended as part of the pre-work for an Aurora session. In his talk, Simon Sinek talks about inspiring action by leading with why we’re doing something, rather than how or what exactly we’re doing: “people don’t buy what we do, they buy why we do it”. Soon after watching this talk I had the opportunity to re-formulate my ‘elevator pitch’ about the research that I do. There is a real diversity of women on the Aurora programme, from professional services to academics, and from all different fields. On this occasion, I happened to be sat next to (another) lawyer, and to be honest, I was pretty sceptical about being able to really (genuinely) get her on board. To my surprise, my pitch did get her genuinely excited about my research and asking multiple questions. I still remember the look on her face! I’ll be trying my best to lead with ‘why’ from now on.

Thank you

I would like to thank the Institute of Integrative Biology for funding my place on the Aurora programme, all the inspirational women I met during my time on Aurora, and my colleagues for supporting me along the way. Special thanks to Dr Zenobia Lewis, who provided much needed encouragement and support and pushed me to re-apply for Aurora after I was initially unsuccessful in securing a place.

If you are a female ECR like me, I hope this post will encourage you to give the Aurora programme a go and to start thinking of yourself as a leader!

This is an edited version of a post originally published on the ‘Institute of Integrative Biology and the School of Life Sciences at the University of Liverpool’ blog on 6 November 2017. The original version is available here.


About Aurora
Aurora is the Leadership Foundation’s women-only leadership development programme. Aurora was created in 2013 in response to our own research that shows that women are under-represented in senior leadership positions and identified actions that could be taken to change this. Since Aurora began in 2013 we have welcomed 3,477 women from 139 universities and sector bodies, with 1029 women attending in 2016-17 alone. 

Dates, location and booking
Aurora will take place in Birmingham, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Dublin and London in 2017-18. Book a place here.

Onwards and Upwards study
The first year summary of the five-year longitudinal study of Aurora can be accessed here: Onwards and Upwards year one summary.

The Aurora Conference- Thursday 7 June 2018
We are delighted to be launching our fourth Aurora conference focusing on learning from others – examining what others outside higher education are doing, and what we can learn from them to support women in leadership within the sector.
Participants include, but are not limited to:
• Aurora participants (current and alumnae)
• Aurora champions
• Aurora role models
• Aurora mentors
• People working in/leading equality and diversity
Find out more and apply

Demystifying Finance for Aurorans- Wednesday 18 April 2018
Is for women in higher education who want to improve their understanding of finance in higher education and develop financial management skills.
Find out more and apply.

Contact us
If you would like to know more about Aurora please get in touch at aurora@lfhe.ac.uk.

 

11 Key Insights from Higher Education Governors



Following the recent launch of our updated Framework for Supporting Governing Body Effectiveness Reviews, Helen Baird discusses some of the findings emerging from analysis of survey data from our governing body effectiveness reviews, and outlines our new comparative analysis and insight service. 

Last year we reviewed and updated the Framework for considering the effectiveness of higher education governing bodies. The drivers for the review were changes to higher education governance since the Framework was first introduced in 2010, broader sectoral developments and the evolution of ideas on good governance more generally.

The main conclusion from our research with the sector was that the three elements of the Framework remain an effective basis for considering governing body effectiveness. These are enablers of effective governance (processes), working relationships and behaviours, and outcomes of an effective governing body. We also found that as well as looking internally at their own governance, universities would value better comparative information to assess the relative effectiveness of their governing bodies and learn from peers. However, they required meaningful information and insights, rather than simply comparisons of what can be easily measured, such as size or composition of governing bodies.

Consequently, the Leadership Foundation has developed a new and unique comparative analysis and insight service, making use of the growing dataset we are building from the anonymised results of surveys as part of effectiveness reviews we undertake. As our new dataset develops, there will be potential to add other more ‘descriptive’ data from providers or from that collected by HESA, to enable more sophisticated analysis to benefit the sector and individual universities.

While our current dataset is relatively small at present, early analysis (carried out by Kay Renfrew, a Leadership Foundation associate consultant) has enabled us to produce some emerging findings which are worth sharing. These should be treated with caution and they will be subjected to further testing and analysis as the dataset grows. Some notable findings from surveys of 232 governors within eight institutions are as follows.

  1. While in some areas questions remain, there is almost universal agreement amongst the governors surveyed that there is a genuine and shared commitment by the governing body and the executive to ensure effective governance.
  2. There are variations in the extent to which governing bodies review their own performance and demonstrate a commitment to continuous improvement, from a low of 60% of governors agreeing that this takes place at one institution to 92% in another. Governors in small institutions (65%) were less likely to agree that this takes place, compared with those at medium-sized or larger institutions (80% and 81%).
  3. Although there are high levels of agreement that there are effective arrangements in place for involving staff and students in the governing body, this view is more prevalent amongst lay and co-opted members (93% and 100%) than with staff and student members (83% and 80%).
  4. Staff members are less likely to agree that there are mechanisms in place to give the governing body confidence in the arrangements for monitoring the quality of teaching and learning. Only 67% of staff members agree with this statement, compared with 78% of lay members and 80% of student members. There is also variation between institutions in terms of their size, with governors in larger institutions more likely to agree this is the case (82%), than in medium or small institutions (62% and 69%).
  5. Governing bodies were confident there are mechanisms in place to enable assurance to be derived about financial stability, data integrity and value for money, with 100% of governors from four of the institutions agreeing this was the case. The lowest figure for an institution was 74%. However, there was variation between the views of lay and staff members with 93% of lay members agreeing compared with 78% of staff members.
  6. There was considerable variation in the views of lay and staff members that there are processes in place to ensure the recruitment of governing body members addresses equality and diversity requirements. While 90% of lay members agree, only 56% of staff members do.
  7. There is also variation at institutional level on whether recruitment, succession planning and reward is effectively undertaken, with only 56% agreeing in one institution and 92% at another. Lay members are more likely to agree this is the case than staff members, but the difference is less pronounced than in the case of equality and diversity.
  8. Individual institutions varied greatly as to whether the contribution of all members is reviewed regularly (lowest 35% of governors agreeing and highest 75%). Variation was also found in the responses as to whether regular performance reviews of the Vice Chancellor are undertaken. At one institution only 54% of governors agreed, rising to 92% at another (although at most institutions under 70% agreed).
  9. Most governors agreed that the governing body was provided with reliable and up-to-date information to ensure it is fully informed of its legal and regulatory responsibilities. However, they were less convinced that there is effective communication between the governing body and key stakeholder bodies. In one institution only 46% agreed, with the highest percentage agreeing reaching 83%. While staff and lay members had similar levels of agreement (78% and 74%), only 33% of student members agreed.
  10. There is also variation at institutional level on whether the governing body actively reviews the extent to which existing corporate governance arrangements will be appropriate to meet long term strategic plans, ranging from 45% of governors agreeing at one institution to 90% at another. Lay members are more likely to agree than staff members, and in this case small sized institutions are most likely to agree.
  11. It seems existing arrangements for academic governance to meet long term strategic plans are not reviewed in the same way as matters of corporate governance. In one institution only 36% agreed that they were reviewed, with the highest level of conformation being 75%. Lay members were slightly less likely to agree (61%) than staff members (67%). A higher percentage of respondents at large institutions agreed (72%) compared to medium (56%) or small institutions (53%).

In summary, it seems that not all institutions regularly undertake reviews of their own performance, including the contribution that individual members make. Similarly, there is variation in whether reviews of the vice chancellor’s performance or the quality of teaching and learning take place, or are reported to the governing body. There is however general agreement that governing body members are committed to effective governance, and that working relationships are in the main positive. Interestingly, the views of Lay and Staff governors can vary considerably. Overall, Staff members were less positive than Lay members, perhaps suggesting that they perceive the governing body to be less effective in its role.

Further analysis will be undertaken and the results disseminated as we develop our comparative analysis and insight service. For further information please visit www.lfhe.ac.uk/en/governance-new/governing-body-effectiveness/index.cfm

Helen Baird is a Managing Consultant in the Leadership Foundation’s strategic consultancy team and led the recent review and revision of the Framework for Supporting Governing Body Effectiveness Reviews.

Take a look at our next Governor Development Programme, Governance professionals in higher education for clerks, secretaries and staff in the professional support teams. The programme starts on Tuesday 5 December 2017, London. For more information, click here