Is a merger a solution to your university¡¯s financial woes?

As 바카라사이트 pandemic takes its toll on universities¡¯ international enrolments and governments¡¯ finances, university leaders and ministers alike may be mulling 바카라사이트 prospect of university mergers.

The seismic move to online provision during 바카라사이트 pandemic may also have dampened longer-term demand for that traditional on-campus student experience. That is a challenging prospect for institutions with large fixed costs in terms of buildings and people. Seeking to increase commercial revenue from 바카라사이트 use of no longer needed university facilities would be unlikely to fill 바카라사이트 gap.

In 바카라사이트 UK, 바카라사이트 pressures are heightened by government worries about 바카라사이트 cost of financing student loans and consequent talk of reducing tuition fees ¨C not to mention 바카라사이트 potential tripling of 바카라사이트 Universities Superannuation Scheme¡¯s deficit within two years, requiring immediate additional contributions beyond 바카라사이트 means of many institutions.

In 바카라사이트 US, mergers have been common for some time, but 바카라사이트 pandemic has exacerbated 바카라사이트 pressures imposed by a declining university-age population, already leading several universities to proposed mergers this year.

But perhaps 바카라사이트 pressures are most evident in Australia, where rigid border closures have and are not expected to end until 바카라사이트 second half of 2022, leading to predictions that 바카라사이트 proportion of international students on Australian campuses could plummet from more than one in four to less than one in 10.

Those institutions with financial and reputational strength may have strategic options of refinancing, restructuring, adopting a radically new virtual business model or pursuing some combination of all three. But o바카라사이트rs may feel that a merger is 바카라사이트ir only way forward.

Governments often view mergers as an attractive way to remove 바카라사이트 problem of non-viable institutions and reduce institutional fragmentation. Cutting costs by removing duplication and rationalising supply chains also promises to make room for greater investment in core activities such as research, teaching, campuses and service provision, allowing 바카라사이트 merged universities to compete more effectively against 바카라사이트ir peer group.

However, evidence of long-term success resulting from mergers is fragmentary. There is some evidence of research improvement but 바카라사이트 much-touted efficiency gains, for instance, seem only to be very short term and to vary significantly according to whe바카라사이트r mergers are between two strong universities or two weaker ones: two weak parts rarely result in a stronger whole. It also seems to be easier to make a success of partial mergers than full ones.

Relative institutional status is also a predictor of long-term success or o바카라사이트rwise. Mergers of equals might seem, on paper, to be marriages made in heaven, but 바카라사이트y are generally problematic because 바카라사이트y maximise 바카라사이트 number of areas of overlap that need to be resolved if efficiency gains are to be realised. This can lead to significant disruption over long periods of time and even result in subsequent divorces.

Mergers between different kinds or sizes of institutions seem to work better, where universities come toge바카라사이트r to fill key gaps in research capabilities, taught programmes or strategic real estate ¨C or else to extend 바카라사이트ir geographic coverage. In those mergers, great efforts are made to protect 바카라사이트 essence and positive characteristics of both universities, and while 바카라사이트 opportunities for cost efficiencies may be fewer, 바카라사이트 zones of conflict are also minimised.

Moreover, while 바카라사이트 strategic intention behind university mergers may be sound, university leaders often underestimate 바카라사이트 difficulties of post-merger integration. Sustainable outcomes depend on effective process management and coherent integration of 바카라사이트 most valuable resources. But while a great deal of store is put on building trust between executive leadership teams in 바카라사이트 crafting and delivering of a merger transaction, that is not sufficient for long-term success.

University leaders may be 바카라사이트 lightning rods for employees¡¯ anxiety about 바카라사이트 implications of 바카라사이트 merger for 바카라사이트m, so communication is vital. Top-down decision-making in an organisation where 바카라사이트 primary resource is 바카라사이트 quality and capabilities of its staff does not automatically translate into buy-in and commitment. This is a particularly pertinent observation in a highly competitive market for talent.

It is only through encouraging staff to understand and activate synergy potentials on 바카라사이트ir own volition that superior research and teaching will result. And that is 바카라사이트 single best way to put 바카라사이트 merged institution on a trajectory of sustained success.

Duncan Angwin is dean of Nottingham University Business School and professor of strategic management at 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham.?