Jan Juillerat shares insights and stimulations from the recent collaborative event jointly organised by Advance HE and Universities UK (UUK).
As part of our Global Member Benefit theme 2024-25 Governing and Leading Transformation, Navigating the executive-governance boundary: an online workshop, explored how the executive-board relationship should be navigated to ensure fit-for-purpose governance in challenging times.
It’s 9am on a Tuesday morning, at one of the busiest times of the year for UK universities, and around 50 university leaders are engaged in lively discussions about the governance-management boundary. Using some ‘hypothetical and realistic’ scenarios, members shared their experiences and insights of leading and governing transformation, in and out of the boardroom. The governance-management boundary was not discussed as an abstract concept, but as a lived, dynamic interaction.
In presenting the sector and university context, I noted there is no shortage of views and opinions out there; in the scenario discussion there was no shortage of views from within. What I heard is engaged, insightful, energised leaders – listening and sharing, learning and offering – modelling the collaborative strengths of our institutions.
Good governance and leadership need ‘both/and’
Governance and leadership are fundamentally a people practice, and one enabled by good governance and organisational frameworks. One of the consistent areas of feedback from scenario discussions was the importance of both/and: people and systems; roles and processes; responsibilities and practices.
Figure 1
Scenarios and insights
In consideration of oversight and assurance of a Transformation Plan, the group identified that delegation of authority and a regular rhythm of consistent reporting from the executive, will support clarity of expectations. The principles of a RACI – Responsible, Accountable, Consult and Inform – matrix and the discipline of this practice bring process and rigour. Combined with behaviours of openness and transparency, early discussions, and ensuring visibility through informal meetings, the executive and governing body are creating the conditions not only for clarity of expectations, but more fundamentally for trust and assurance. In this context, the board is providing oversight and holding to account; the executive is able to operate with sufficient freedom to lead and deliver the outcomes.
Through transformation processes, the group identified a shared role for the executive and board in communication with stakeholders – students and staff in particular – to ensure timely, consistent sharing of information and spaces for engagement. From experience, members emphasised careful attention to the executive-governance boundary in stakeholder interactions.
Advance HE members can watch a recording of the session here and view accompanying slides here.
The group considering a Business School under recruitment/portfolio review scenario identified this as a core area of university activity delegated to the executive leadership, for board endorsement. The board will be looking for a clear plan, underpinned by a range of data and insights, options and impacts. Within the governance structures, the role of Senate/Academic Board in providing scrutiny and assurance for the board was raised. Are the roles of and relationship between academic and governing boards well understood and specified, such that they can be relied upon for effective governance and decision-making?
Perhaps the most fundamental outputs from this scenario discussion, and the scenarios session, were about timing, transparency and dialogue. Knowing when and where to raise early awareness of trends or concerns is founded on clarity of expectations, mutual respect (value), a shared understanding of risk and understanding the institutional context. These behaviours build trust (no surprises) and the foundations for agile decision-making.
Scenarios relating to philanthropic financial alumni donation are familiar to the sector and on this one all agreed the institutional policy and established delegations bring structure for decision making. So far so good.
Ethical decisions were cited as the most challenging to the executive-governance boundary, bringing to the table institutional and stakeholder values, different perceptions of risk, and impact. In these scenarios, broad consultation, especially with the Students’ Union, was advocated, acknowledging this can slow down decision-making. Wider committee considerations may also be desirable, for example, Audit and Risk.
These challenges test the ability of executive and governing boards to manage conflicting views through constructive dialogue, to reach balanced, replicable decisions and commit to taking collective responsibility and accountability for the outcomes.
One further governance-management scenario involved exploratory discussions with another institution about potential collaboration. Once again, the scenario brought in some complexity – in this case TNE partnerships – and the group explored at what stage informal discussions would become matters for consideration by the board and in this case, reporting to the regulator. Due diligence through the executive group and the governance committees and board formed the basis for consideration and this brought in a whole-institution and external perspective: risk appetite, resource implications, academic assurance, compliance and strategic alignment.
The option of early, informal discussion with a sub-group of the board was suggested, and while there was evident value in this early, exploratory approach, the risk of creating two-tier governance was also flagged. The boundaries and careful balance required to bring the opportunity through executive and governance decision-making brought in the need for consultation with internal stakeholders – trades unions and student union – and external stakeholders, including regulators, funders, partners and lenders. And the timing/sequencing of this?
The group determined the setting of the strategic aims, parameters/criteria and desired outcomes sat on the governance side of the boundary, and precede the management role and activities to develop a thorough, comprehensive and informed proposal to the board. It was also suggested that this scenario warranted a proposal to the board that includes options as well as recommendations; noting this is more common practice for boards in other sectors than we often see in university board papers.
Perspectives from the panel
The panel session, chaired by Steph Harris, Universities UK, opened with a clear message from the panellists; this is an existential moment for universities, we must embrace change and think differently about the HE sector.
We heard perspectives from Professor Wendy Larner, President and Vice-Chancellor of Cardiff University, Dorothy Mackenzie, Chair of the Board of Arts University Bournemouth, and Dr Amanda Wilcox, University Secretary at Durham University. How these key roles are enacted will shape and influence the practices of governance and management in leading transformation in universities. Panel members emphasised the interfaces and connections: the relationship of the Chair and Vice-Chancellor – ‘crucial’; the independent and nuanced role of the University Secretary, holding the dual aspects of accountability and horizon scanning for the bumps in the road.
Building relationships and trust is not limited to these roles, and must run through the executive and board and with the wider institutional leadership and governance – Senate/Academic Board, leaders in academic and professional services. The value of the university’s stakeholder relationships and institutional trust is another, important element. The challenges of change and transformation are acknowledged, and this is a time for dialogue, collective endeavour and joined up leadership from executives and boards.
Panel members raised the importance of board diversity. The more diverse the characteristics of the governing board, the more effective the decisions and outcomes for the institution; I would add that board diversity is perhaps more fundamental to stakeholder engagement and impacts. Members will be aware of the Advance HE leadership and collaborative work on Board Diversity, which has produced a range of insights and resources, including the Board Diversity Toolkit.
Building on this, the panel advocated for diversity of experience and expertise on the board from other sectors: to challenge embedded thinking; to broaden the horizon of potential; to support and encourage opportunities.
Reflections
Relationships, trust, confidence and judgement were the most cited features of effective governance-executive leadership. Governing boards and executive leadership boards need to be explicit about the culture and behaviours that are expected – and necessary – to govern and lead transformation; culture and behaviours that are modelled and enacted in and out of the boardroom.
In times of change and transformation, proactive, strengths-based leadership is the firm foundation for both stability and agility. Establishing clear parameters at the outset and ensuring regular flows of information through the process will create the conditions for good discussions and decisions, informed by a mutual understanding of risks and opportunities and aligned with strategic aims and goals.
Returning to the governance-management boundary (see Figure 2 below), the insights from the workshop identify a more fluid space for navigation in some contexts. And while there is regulation and compliance underpinning the relative accountabilities and responsibilities, leading and governing transformation requires more working out together, how to enact and respect the roles of executive and board. Can governors lean in, with their skills and insights, but not reach over? Can the executive reach out to (not step back from) the experience and expertise of the board members, of every category?
Figure 2
Find out more about our Global Member Benefit theme 2024-25 Governing and Leading Transformation.
Jan Juillerat, MBA, is an experienced Associate with Advance HE, leading governance effectiveness reviews for a wide range of UK institutions and contributing to governor development programmes, workshops and guidance. Jan has worked in education and research in the UK for over 25 years, with leadership and Executive roles in Further and Higher Education and the UK Research Councils/UKRI. Find out more about Jan here.
Find out more about our Governance Professionals in HE programme
Starting in January 2025 and designed specifically for clerks, secretaries and governance professionals, this programme offers a comprehensive learning experience that equips participants with policy updates, relationship-building skills, governance insights, tools/techniques and a supportive professional network. Book your place
Are you ready to take the next step in governance excellence?
Whether you’re looking to lead a board more effectively or deepen your understanding of Student governance, our tailored programs aim to meet your specific needs. Featuring events, conferences, and development opportunities designed to tackle today’s governance challenges head-on.
Explore our Governor Development Programme for 2024-25
