home / governance / key governance functions / strategy and measuring performance / strategic direction

Strategic Direction

There is a range of approaches within universities and colleges as to how a governing body undertakes its responsibilities for strategic direction. HEFCE Report 00/24 notes that such variations include the following:

Some institutions delegate much of the work to a planning committee composed of a small number of lay governors, senior managers, and the vice-chancellor or principal. The full governing body then tends to ratify the strategic plan recommended by that committee. However, there is no standard pattern of membership for such committees, nor whom they report to. In some institutions it will be a joint committee of senate/ academic board and the governing body. Such arrangements mean that, in practice, most of the work involving the governing body in strategic planning is undertaken by a small number of experienced governors in such a committee who will usually receive the strategic plan for discussion. The full governing body then tends to ratify the strategic plan recommended by the committee.
In other institutions management prepares a draft strategic plan and then discusses it with the governing body before seeking formal approval.
In some cases limited-life working groups comprising senior managers and selected governors are used to prepare the plan.

Whatever method is used it is important that governors recognise that their involvement should be strategic and not concerned with day-to-day management or implementation. In other words their focus should be on ends and not means.

Nonetheless, being effective in its strategic role is challenging for many governing bodies, and common problems include:

Finding time for discussions of strategy in meetings often full with more routine business.
The lack of knowledge of governing body members of key aspects of teaching and research on which a coherent strategy must be based.
Ensuring that the governing body has adequate information to guide its strategic discussions.
The governing body not being brought into the strategic planning and approval process at an early stage when it can still influence change, rather than acting at a later stage as a 'rubber stamp'.
Getting all governing body members to engage in discussions about strategy which can be difficult and challenging: it is often much easier for members to discuss small scale issues with which they are familiar than complex strategic issues.

One matter to note is that the large number of strategies that institutions are now required to complete runs the risk of strategy overload. It is generally recognised that significant institutional 'ownership' of strategies is required to ensure successful implementation, and strategy 'fatigue' is a significant risk to such ownership.

Powerpoint Presentations:

'The Strategic Responsibilities of Governing Bodies', David Ferguson, Chair of Governors, University of Portsmouth

<<Return to previous page To next page>>