Learning Resources

Abstract: Securing financial viability requires an engaged board that is monitoring the right trends and campus indicators, asking the right questions of campus leaders about the institution’s finances, and doing the scenario planning and stress testing necessary to transform a business model under stress.

The governing board’s fiduciary duty to steward the institution’s financial health requires that boards and leaders consider business model transformations, and plan for a range of scenarios like mergers, affiliations, strategic partnerships, and even—when all other options are exhausted—final transformations such as campus closures when continued mission fulfillment is impossible.

This is part two of a two-part webinar series delivered in partnership between SCUP and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), “Higher Education Business Models Under Stress: Planning for Successful Transitions”. This series will help build your fiduciary understanding of your institution’s business model as you prepare the campus for a range of possible business transformations, from mergers, strategic affiliations, corporate partnerships, or even the ultimate scenario of a campus closure. View the recording for part one, “Board Oversight of Finance and the Business Model: Key Indicators and Trends for Scenario Planning and Stress Testing”.

Abstract: Securing financial viability requires an engaged board that is monitoring the right trends and campus indicators, asking the right questions of campus leaders about the institution’s finances, and doing the scenario planning and stress testing necessary to transform a business model under stress.

The governing board’s fiduciary duty to steward the institution’s financial health requires that boards and leaders consider business model transformations, and plan for a range of scenarios like mergers, affiliations, strategic partnerships, and even—when all other options are exhausted—final transformations such as campus closures when continued mission fulfillment is impossible.

This is part one of a two-part webinar series delivered in partnership between SCUP and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), “Higher Education Business Models Under Stress: Planning for Successful Transitions”. This series will help build your fiduciary understanding of your institution’s business model as you prepare the campus for a range of possible business transformations, from mergers, strategic affiliations, corporate partnerships, or even the ultimate scenario of a campus closure. View the recording for part two, “Graceful Business Model Transitions: Planning and Executing a College or Campus Closure”.

Abstract: The global COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally changed the world of higher education. As institutions look to the future, beyond the end of the pandemic, significant uncertainty exists. There is little question that colleges and universities will have to do a better job at planning, and boards at governing, to flourish in the years ahead. In this article an integrated model centered around three different time horizons, three areas of planning, and three types of governance is presented. The model can serve as a framework to demonstrate how these are all related, self-reinforcing, and usable as an aid for institutional leadership.

Abstract: We’ve organized Trends using STEEP: Social, Technology, Economic, Environmental, and Political. Each trend includes a brief trend summary, a footnoted source, and discussion questions to help you analyze and act on the trend.

Abstract: In turbulent times, visionary leaders and their committed crews recognize the winds of change, reset their sails and change course so they emerge in a better position than before. The global pandemic of 2020-21 has been a once-in-a-century disruption for education at all levels, which has magnified pre-existing inequities and vulnerabilities, and compressed a decade’s worth of social and technological change into a year. Even once this threat has past, many of our campuses will see recurrent disruptions from extreme weather events, other zoonotic viruses, geopolitical conflict, wildfires or flooding. We know now that business and academic continuity will demand flexible, lower density approaches and an integrated, omnichannel approach to student services, scholarship and learning. It can be challenging to step back from moments of crisis and see them in perspective, as moments also brimming with opportunity to regroup, rethink our strategies and refocus our resources to lead positive

Abstract: Entrepreneuring the Future of Higher Education: Radical Transformation in Times of Profound Change
by Mary Landon Darden
Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, MD: 2021
202 pages
ISBN: 978-1-4758-5494-7

Abstract: SCUP defines integrated planning as a sustainable approach to planning that builds relationships, aligns the organization, and emphasizes preparedness for change. Over the past several years—and particularly in 2020—the world has experienced significant shifts in its sociocultural, economic, and political landscapes. How can higher education institutions use integrated planning to respond nimbly and flexibly to these changes? In this session, three college and university presidents from the United States, Canada, and Europe will reflect on how we can transform and reimagine higher education for the future.

Abstract: We’ve organized Trends using STEEP: Social, Technology, Economic, Environmental, and Political. Each trend includes a brief trend summary, a footnoted source, and discussion questions to help you analyze and act on the trend.

Abstract: In difficult times, planning and the successful implementation of that planning require the buy-in and support of a whole range of stakeholders–but particularly the faculty, since they carry out the institution’s teaching and research missions.

Faculty can make or break successful planning.

An institution must be very circumspect in their choice of representative faculty for planning groups, how they are engaged in the planning process, and how they interact with other campus constituencies for maximum buy-in. This endeavor is particularly difficult when the new planning process follows previous attempts that have failed because of faculty resistance or lack of meaningful involvement. This session details successful planning initiatives at two regional universities, one in the Midwest and one in the southern Northeast, where earlier planning efforts failed because of “the faculty factor.”

Join us to explore the successes and failures involved in these two planning initiatives that required broad-based faculty support in order to reverse issues with programmatic quality, student success, and institutional accreditation.