Why don't Uni Management ask Business Schools for advice?

I'm a huge fan of Apple TV's Severance, and the Valley of Woe episode was a masterpiece in Sci fi. Perhaps it perfectly captures the situation some in the HE sector finds themselves in. Severance is also a useful metaphor for thinking about another oft-heard complaint, not just (or even often) from those within business schools, as to why university management never asks us for advice. Like the severed floor, the university seems happy to take the funds we provide, but that's where things stop.

Most recent, Professor Dylan Jones-Evans wrote a thought provoking piece on the present difficulties at Cardiff University, lamenting why, with all the world class experts in management practice, the University's leadership team seemed to failing to tackle their institutions problems effectively. Jones-Evans, a fan of Bananarama (we've all been there, Cruel Summer is perhaps apt), identified how the university's leadership team was failing to build strategies for growth, innovate, take people with them, engage in problem solving, all of which were things their business school could help with. The outcome he predicted would be less adaptability and lower competitiveness in the future. We can argue over the rights and wrongs of Jones-Evans view, but the general point, that universities rarely ask their business schools for advice is well made and all too common.

And that got me thinking as to why. While below the line commentators often dismiss such calls with claims that we'd all rather be writing irrelevant papers than engaging in practice, rarely is this fair. Like any academic we have pressure to publish and are motivated by a desire to advance theory. But we also are often at the front line of business practice in the major export industry that is international education. We are all too aware of the trade-offs faced by universities desperate for cash while being keen to maintain perceptions of quality. We know all about the dangers of ineffective marketing (strategically and tactically), as well as the impact of poor journey management, processes that stifle innovation, and the difficulties of turning around very large, old, institutions. Most of the mess the sector is in comes down to the decline in business school recruitment, but many of us saw this coming for years. We even filled in the risk registers.

So why don't VC's pop over to their b-school's for advice? I think there may be several answers but since this baffles me too, I'm keen to hear the views of everyone. My personal view is that there is an identity problem here - VC's etc are senior managers, professional leaders equivalent to their commercial counterparts in some way, and they may feel they should simply know all this stuff. It's one thing to ask academics for advice on the content of research strategies, populating themes such as sustainability for change for example, but quite another to ask for advice on how to devise an effective strategy in the first place. Maybe we expect too much of VC's and their teams; after all we place huge expectation on these people to be multiple subject experts without even so much as some MBA training in the core business basics.

Then there's the problem of abundance which I've detailed before. Maybe VC's never needed to consult business schools because numbers just kept growing. The spice continued to flow in a sense, and everyone was happy. Hell, the warnings by the business school often seemed like the boy who cried wolf, they were always wrong, so what did they even know about business, or the business of education, anyway?! It's a fair point, but most of us interested in strategy, economic cycles, branding, and so on, know nothing is guaranteed and also that problems can fester and create long term path dependencies that are difficult to shift.

I think there's also another problem. Business schools are not always that good at being university citizens. This cuts both ways, which I'll come too below, but there is often a sense that if we bring in the money, isn't that enough? I've worked at two business schools, wildly different in quality, that largely took this approach. In both cases, VC's were clear that 'there is more than just money' but one of those was also rather Harkonnen-like when it came to their desire for income (i.e., squeeze hard). The other forced the business school to define what role, beyond cashflow, it wanted to play in the university. When it did that, strangely the relationship got better, we got what we wanted, and it wasn't unusual to be asked for advice.

This is where it cuts both ways - there is a sense that business schools are also resented for their power. We enjoy riches, or did, unlike other departments. We largely don't need grant income because we have so much to invest in research directly (and need to), we used to eschew external engagement because we wanted to appear credible, we still have sabbaticals, research only semesters, and conference funds (or did). No matter how often we align ourselves with various UN development goals, and other feel good initiatives, we are still suspect in the eyes of other colleagues, maybe out of jealously, or maybe philosophical differences that lead some to question why we are at university at all. And some of us within even confirm those suspicions, highlighting our neoliberal nature and instrumentality.

VC's also face difficult choices. At one uni I worked at a common complaint was that the school of management always got everything it wanted. That meant that we missed out on getting a new building in favour of another school, largely because the VC had to be seen to say no to us. VC's need to manage large, diverse institutions, and although aware of cross subsidisation, the reality of it subsides when faced with multiple deans who may be allied against business schools or feeling left out. We can't always get our way and that does lead to difficult relations.

On that, business school deans also face difficulties, with HoDs (like me in a previous life) wanting them to take a tougher line with the university vs. their own need to play a longer game and work as part of a team. When the relationship between the university and business school gets too hostile, everyone suffers. But, it's still tricky balancing act for all to manage. Perhaps its why VC like consultants as a means to provide an external, objective validation of some plan, rather than getting the business school to do it. That would be seen as self serving, although in reality, many business schools are much more empathetic with other disciplines than outsiders think. We may rail against what we perceive as inefficient work practices (although we have plenty of our own), but that doesn't mean we don't want others to succeed, don't share values, or are opposed to cross subsidisation (we may argue about amounts and use, but that's different).

Whatever the reasons, can I suggest that now is the time for the severance to stop. We have an enormous array of challenges confronting universities and its time for the business schools to be allowed to shine. We were at the forefront of the good times but were also alert to the dangers. We were therefore very aware of internal challenges that could undermine reputation, student experience, the ability to recruit, retain and be resilient. And while we are at it, let's also practice what we preach. Maybe it's time business schools started engaging their own experts too. Our students and indeed government, expect it from us.