糖心Vlog

Fail to prepare, prepare to fail

Scholar says dislike of planning leads to poor choices by universities. David Matthews reports

Published on
March 7, 2013
Last updated
May 22, 2015

Crucial decisions about a university鈥檚 future are taken too quickly and are often dominated by the views of the vice-chancellor, according to an academic who has devised a new way to make choices about an institution鈥檚 direction.

Ashraf Labib, a professor of operations and decision analysis at the University of Portsmouth鈥檚 business school, is one of five authors of a paper that sets out how universities can make better-thought-out and more consistent decisions.

The technique, known as 鈥渁nalytic hierarchy process鈥, also gives staff a route to overrule the vice-chancellor.

It involves asking university decision-makers such as senior managers and heads of departments to rank pairs of priorities - research ranking and student satisfaction, for example - against each other. They are also asked to choose how to allocate hypothetical sums of money between different spending options: perhaps by deciding between installing a new IT system or developing human resources.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

The answers of staff members are weighted differently according to the circumstances: in a recession the finance director鈥檚 priorities would be taken into greater account, for example. The result is a 鈥渢ree鈥 of university priorities extending from 鈥渦ltimate goals鈥 at the top to specific plans at the bottom, Professor Labib explained.

A crucial feature of this method is that it checks to see if respondents鈥 priorities are consistent, he said, adding that current planning methods gave no feedback on this.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Professor Labib also argued that universities fail to conduct 鈥渨hat if鈥 analysis, which incorporates ways to alter a decision if external circumstances change.

The method allows for its outcomes to change if, for example, the economy tips into recession or the market becomes more competitive.

Under the technique, a university鈥檚 mission and future direction is decided by several people, unlike in group decision-making, where choices tend to be 鈥渋nfluenced by the most important person鈥, Professor Labib said.

In universities, 鈥渘ot enough time and money is spent making decisions鈥, he continued.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

The new method could prove time-intensive as each respondent had to rank 204 pairs of priorities, the research says.

But Professor Labib countered this concern by drawing a comparison between Japanese and Western manufacturing companies, explaining that because the former spend 鈥渓ots of time in planning, then the execution comes much faster鈥. In the West, however, less time was spent on planning, thus risking a 鈥渃ycle of errors鈥.

Universities in the UK devoted relatively little time to planning because of its 鈥渕onotonous鈥 nature or because of the 鈥渆go鈥 of those involved, he speculated.

Professor Labib said he hopes the decision-making method will be rolled out in faculties at Portsmouth and at other universities.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

The paper, 鈥淔ormulation of 糖心Vlog Institutional Strategy Using Operational Research Approaches鈥, was published in the journal Studies in 糖心Vlog.

Professor Labib鈥檚 co-authors are Martin Read, Charlotte Gladstone-Millar, Richard Tonge and David Smith, all academics at Portsmouth鈥檚 business school.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

david.matthews@tsleducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT