I have certainly seen it happen, and I understand the skepticism.  I have had every possible range of experience working with consultants, from the very good to the very bad to the simply mediocre and useless.

Why use consultants?

A recent (September 2010) CASE article by Andrea Jarrell called “Help Wanted: Making the most of consultant expertise” identifies the following factors to help universities (or any organisation, really) identify when they might need a consultant:

Four factors generally cause institutions to seek outside expertise: scope, know-how, objectivity, and politics.  The first two are fairly obvious: Is the job simply too big for campus professionals to handle in addition to their regular responsibilities? Is the expertise required to accomplish your goals lacking on campus? If the answer is yes to one or both of these questions, you need help from a consultant. Even if you have the time and expertise on campus to handle the proposed project, you may need the objectivity of outside counsel to ensure success.

I recently helped co-ordinate the work of a branding agency to help Wales’ newest university re-name and re-brand, and despite expected complaints from some at how much was spent developing a “logo,” I know first-hand how much work was involved from the research and benchmarking stages through to the advocacy and lobbying and internal communications and then the part that everyone sees – the brand identity.  It didn’t go perfectly, and everyone learned from the process, which is to be expected.  But I also know for a fact there is absolutely no way either I or my team or even a working group of academic and administrative professionals could have achieved the necessary output without professional assistance, for all the reasons listed in the article above.

Working expectations – beyond the “brief”

And now I’ve moved from briefing and coordinating the work of consultants to being one myself. Reflecting on my experience, I think the key to a successful working relationship is to spent the time at the outset agreeing the terms of the arrangement.  And by this I don’t simply mean the contract and what constitutes breaches, setting deadlines, etc.  But rather a very frank discussion about working styles and expectations. As one of my favourite teachers used to say, “you can’t staple your head to the paper.”  Meaning, it may all be “up there” but if you don’t spell it out, how can anyone possibly know what you mean?

So talk about preferences – email vs. phone vs. chat; experience managing these types of projects (on the client side) – do they need help and guidance?; pros and cons of being fully involved in each stage of the project; time commitments and availability; learning/thinking/feedback styles – do you go with your gut or do you like to digest and think about it first? And so on…this can take place before the contract is awarded even, so that both parties clearly understand what they’re getting into.

I find it strange that so much time is spent hiring permanent or even contract staff in terms of the application process and interviews, trying to figure out if the person is the right “fit” for the organisation, but the same types of consideration aren’t part of the equation in hiring a consultant.  It’s understandable, but I think both the client and the consultant would benefit from similar discussions so that the decision isn’t simply based on previous experience/recommendations or cost/benefit but rather on the interpersonal relationship the partnership brings to the team.

The (near) future of consulting

It’s a tough time to try to work with universities – with massive budget cuts, it’s hard to imagine that financial resources will be made available for consultancy-based projects. However, with the increasing competitiveness and need to source and develop additional revenue streams, given the above criteria, hiring consultants and interim managers is a logical stop-gap measure when longer-term funding is unknown. The options are endless too – it’s no longer just a matter of having someone come in and do a bit of research and leave you with a 100+ page report for you to read and implement (although if that’s all you’re after…!) but rather consultants can be used in house where staffing gaps might exist or to implement particular projects or to train staff on new ways of working – or all of the above!

The right partner can be worth their weight in gold if used effectively, particularly if flexible and as committed to the success of your organisation as you are. In this way, you are not chained to them if it’s not working, but if it is – the link is solid, and they don’t just walk away at the end of the project with no concern for the effectiveness of the implementation of their recommendations and ideas.

Why not try looking at a career in Higher Education? It may seem strange at a time when University funding cuts are being widely talked about but for me the pros far outwiegh the cons.

I worked in a corporate environment before I took a job in Higher Education and the contrast is startling. To work in an atmosphere that was not entirely focused on making money was a refreshing change. Most of the staff in HE both academic and non-academic are focused on improving the students’ experience. This is becoming increasingly so as the students are expecting more for their increased fees.

There are a wide variety of jobs (As the blog title says it’s Not Just Teaching) that are required in order to keep a university functioning. From marketing and PR jobs, careers advisers, administrators and even graphic designers, so any job in a university brings you into contact with a wide range of people with differing skills.

The pay and benefits are also good at most UK universities – they haven’t suffered the pay freezes that the public sector have and wages are still competitive with similar roles in the private sector. Many universities offer cut-price childcare and gym membership as additional benefits.

Holidays too are generous with most universities giving around 5 closure days/concessionary days over the year including a long break at Christmas without any extra holidays taken.

Opportunities for progression are often very good with opportunities across various departments allowing you to develop a wide range of skills.

Of course there are downsides too and not everyone will have found their experiences as good as mine; Funding cuts are a cause for concern and some smaller universities may merge which would cause some job losses. However, I think for those of us who are lucky enough to work in Higher Education should take the time now and again to appreciate how much worse our working lives could be and how fortunate we are.

Enterprise seems to be the most neglected and underestimated area of activity for academics – especially the most traditional ones. It’s not teaching, it’s not research or publishing work, it sounds suspiciously business-y, so it’s not for them, they may think.

On the other hand, universities are spending substantial resources on the promotion of various forms of enterprise that will lead to third stream income generation. This supplements first and second stream income, which comes from government funding and tuition fees. With third stream activities, higher education institutions are looking to externalise their academic knowledge and expertise, and link with the public and private sectors to form mutually profitable partnerships. This is the big scheme of things, which universities hope will eventually make them more independent of government funding.

But how much do academics know about it?

Surprisingly, it seems that little is currently being done for this message to be communicated to academics, so many of them don’t even know about it. Compounding this problem is the fact that academics have little time to do anything other than research and teaching. Even more surprisingly, contribution to third stream income generation is increasingly becoming a pre-requisite for academic promotions, although many academics still don’t know about it.

And this is where the paradox lies: on the one hand, universities expect academics to participate in activities that will help their institution financially if they aspire to reach higher career levels more quickly. The higher the academic level, the higher the requirement for involvement in such activities is supposed to be. On the other hand, few academics are aware of this requirement and of the positive impact it can have on their career development. Also, contrary to what universities expect, it is usually the lower level academics who are the most willing to get involved in enterprise and income generating activities. Higher-level staff often appear much more reluctant. Traditional perception of their role as non-commercially-focused, resistance to change, lack of awareness about new trends in higher education, a busy workload and heavy responsibilities, or simply job burn-out are some of the most common reasons for their lack of involvement in third-stream activities.

Whose responsibility is it?

This is a difficult question with an equally difficult answer. It seems like it’s often left in the hands of Business and Enterprise Offices to “educate” academics on those all-important issues, inform them about the latest developments and find creative ways to communicate to them that third stream activities are worth a shot despite their time limitations. My office has dynamically started campaigning for enterprise with events, competitions, workshops, seminars and one-to-one meetings. It will be very interesting to see the outcomes and impacts of these efforts, and whether enterprise will become more of a familiar ground for our academic community in the years to come.