SCUP
 

Learning Resources

Your Higher Education Planning Library

Combine search terms, filters, institution names, and tags to find the vital resources to help you and your team tackle today’s challenges and plan for the future. Get started below, or learn how the library works.

FOUND 67 RESOURCES

REFINED BY:

  • Tags: Environmental ScanningxTheoryx

Clear All
ABSTRACT:  | 
SORT BY:  | 
Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

Responsibility Center Budgeting and Management “Lite” in University Finance

Why Is RCB/RCM Never Fully Deployed?

Despite its promise of revenue generation, cost reduction, and a host of other benefits, what is it about RCB/RCM that leads universities to deploy it only partially?

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: After its first application nearly 40 years ago, responsibility center budgeting/responsibility center management (RCB/RCM) is now in place at nearly 70 major North American universities. An unstudied fact is that despite its popularity RCB/RCM is rarely deployed to its fullest extent. Instead, it usually exists in parallel with conventional planning and budget models. This study asks why, instead of fully implementing RCB/RCM, universities have chosen to apply it partially. The study finds multiple explanations. On the revenue side, some universities hold back a portion of income to create funds that are used to underwrite institution-wide strategies or subsidize mission-central academic programs that cannot be fiscally sustained under RCB/RCM. In other cases, revenue is held back to fund shared “public utility” services, while in still others the practice of holding back revenue for allocation by some other means is due to difficulty in drawing a functional line between the “academic” and the “non-academic.” On the cost side, some universities have limited the application of RCB/RCM in order to limit market behavior and forestall “fragmentation” (Burke 2007). The study points to several problems in both the practice and theory of RCB/RCM. For example, models meant in theory to complement RCB/RCM may in practice compete with it or promote monopolistic behavior.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Trends for Higher Education

Published
February 1, 2017

Featured Image

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Trends for Higher Education

Published
September 15, 2016

Featured Image

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Trends for Higher Education

Published
March 15, 2016

Featured Image

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Trends for Higher Education

Published
October 1, 2015

Featured Image

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
January 1, 2011

Featured Image

Planners as Sensemakers and Sensegiver

Reshaping Austerity in College and University Planning

Within the context of austerity, the future role of planning offices is uncertain.

From Volume 39 Number 2 | January–March 2011

Abstract: Before the recession, planning offices were the workhorses supporting institutional growth strategies by translating the ambitions of senior administrators into action. However, the recession derailed many institutional ambitions; austerity suddenly supplanted growth. The future role of planners seems uncertain beyond operationalizing short-term damage control. Yet this article asserts that planners are uniquely positioned to assume an essential role in colleges and universities: sensemakers and sensegivers. Through sensemaking and sensegiving, planners can focus institutional dialogue on the meaning of austerity. Instead of accepting resource constraints as a ubiquitous rationale for retrenchment, planners can guide institutional dialogue toward acknowledging that new constraints merely discipline earlier ambitions within new parameters.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
October 1, 2009

Featured Image

Enriching Planning Through Industry Analysis

The authors perform an ‘industry analysis’ for higher education, using the five forces model of M.E. Porter.

From Volume 38 Number 1 | October–December 2009

Abstract: Strategic planning is an important tool, but the sole dependence on it across departments and campuses has resulted in the underutilization of equally important methods of analysis. The evolution of higher and postsecondary education necessitates a systemic industry analysis, as the combination of new providers and delivery mechanisms and changing social parameters gives rise to increased competition and innovation. This article tests the applicability of Porter’s five forces model to the higher education industry. While the model provides significant insight into the industry, it has been revised in this article to incorporate government as a prominent sixth force in the analysis.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
October 1, 2009

Featured Image

University Strategic Planning and the Foresight/Futures Approach

An Irish Case Study

Dublin City University has taken the lead in Ireland in terms of its emphasis on strategic planning. Its 2005–2008 strategic plan, Leadership Through Foresight, was part of an ambitious foresight exercise that was aimed at informing subsequent strategic cycles. This article reports on this process in the context of the wider literature examining the value of foresight/futures thinking as applied to universities.

From Volume 38 Number 1 | October–December 2009

Abstract: The contemporary university operates within a global context characterized by ever-increasing uncertainty and complexity. Strategic planning must, therefore, be cognizant of future trends and how those trends will affect the university by creating both threats and opportunities. Our hypothesis is that an approach we refer to as “strategic foresight” can provide us with the tools, methodology, and process to creatively address uncertainty and complexity in our working environment. Dublin City University has taken the lead in Ireland in terms of its emphasis on strategic planning. Its 2005–2008 strategic plan, Leadership Through Foresight, was part of an ambitious foresight exercise that was aimed at informing subsequent strategic cycles. This article reports on this process in the context of the wider literature examining the value of foresight/futures thinking as applied to universities. The article commences with a review of current uncertainties and complexities in the current operating environment. It broadly outlines foresight/futures thinking and then examines universities specifically. It continues by focusing on Dublin City University’s foresight exercise as an example of how foresight operates in practice. Finally, the article concludes by exploring what a strategic foresight approach to planning might look like based on that experience.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access