Presentation By Enora Pruvot, Deputy Director for Governance, Funding & Public Policy Development at the European University Association EAIE, Sevilla, 13 September 2017

1. University mergers in Europe
Enora Bennetot Pruvot
Deputy Director
Governance, Funding & Public Policy Development
European University Association
EAIE 2017 Conference
Sevilla, 13 September 2017

2. Content
1. Context
2. European overview
3. Typology
4. Expected benefits
5. Cost-benefit analysis
6. Role of public authorities
7. Managing a merger process
8. What’s next

3. Desiging strategies for efficient funding of universities

4. 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
University mergers in Europe (2000-2014)

5. 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
total
BE-fl 1 5 6
BE-fr 2 2 4
DE 1 1 1 1 4
DK 2 5 1 8
EE 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 11
FI 1 2 1 4
FR 1 2 1 8 4 16
HR 1 1 1 3
HU 1 1 1 3
IE 1 1 2
IS 1 1
IT 1 1
LT 1 1
LV 1 1 1 3
NO 1 1 1 2 5
PL 1 1 1 3
PT 1 1
SE 1 1 1 1 1 5
SK 1 1
UK 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 11
Total 1 2 3 3 3 5 5 7 5 7 7 7 8 12 14 4 92

6. EUA University Merger Tool
Pilot tool including about 100 university mergers
from across Europe so far
www.university-mergers.eu

7. Types of merger & concentration processes
 Mergers
 Clustering
 Other types of concentration processes: Alliances,
consortia, strategic partnerships...
0
0.5
1
Similarity in
size
Profile
homogeneity
Integration
depth
System
restructuring

8.  Horizontal
• Creation of a new common identity
• Need for important ressources
 Vertical
• Often integration of specialised institutions
• Persistance of the “mother” institution’s
name/trade-mark and identity
• Needs less resources
0
0.5
1
Relative size of
the institutions

9.  Complementary
• High complementarity of academic offer =
less duplication, lower impact on personnel
• New identity and “trade mark” needs to be
developed
 Homogeneous
• Managing duplication / rationalisation of the
offer
• Easier to create a new common image and
identity
0
0.5
1
Profile/status
homogeneity

10.  Complete merger
• The previous institutions disappear and a new legal
entity is created
 Federation
• The participating institutions keep their own legal
status
• Resources are put together and shared
 Clustering
• Following from a centralised approach at system level
• Linked to the objective of a system-wide restructuring
0
0.5
1
Degree of
integration

11.  Policy of restructuring
• Ex. Belgium, Denmark, Finland,
France, Wales
 Independent mergers
• Strategic considerations of the institutions
involved
• Ex. Manchester, Lisbon
0
0.5
1
System
restructuring

12. Expected benefits
• Enhanced national and international profile /
attractiveness
• Expanded opportunities for teaching and research
cooperation
• Stronger negotiating position with authorities / partners
• Economies of scale
 More public funding
 Rationalisation of academic course offer
 Potential to enhance research income
 Staffing efficiencies (long term)
Not always achieved and difficult to plan

13. A focus on internationalisation
• A commonly cited expected benefit
• Expected to increase capacity to attract more staff and
students from overseas
• Expected to give added opportunities to undertake
international collaboration
• Particularly salient in system-wide restructuring approaches
 Necessity to build a strong name & brand, especially for
horizontal complementary mergers
 Combined with ‘excellence schemes’: quality label helping
attracting international doctoral students

14. Difficulty to calculate costs due to:
• Breadth of effects
• Timescale
• Unexpected challenges in merging process (financial,
managerial, HR etc.)
• Association of costs to the merger process
• Too short a time span to evaluate full economic impact
A cost analysis is rarely ever undertaken, neither
before nor after a merger
• General risk: diversion of resources from core activities
hampering the institution in fulfilling its mission
Cost-benefit analysis

15. Different approaches:
• Estimation of the cost curve
• Identification of areas in which economies can be made
• Limit/compensate costs by newly achieved economies
• Estimation of costs due to the status quo
Do not only look at costs in financial terms!

16. Recommendations
• Reasons and aims of a merger should never be purely
economic.
• Academic vision is crucial!
• Merger should not be pursued at any cost,
alternatives should be explored before.
• Estimate costs as far as possible and try to secure
additional funding and support from public authorities.
• Identify areas where efficiency gains and synergies
can be achieved.

17. Role of public authorities
• Key concept: university autonomy
• Responsibility of public authorities
• Need for a dialogue about questions linked to rationalisation
and consolidation of the system
• Different degrees of involvement exist:
Approval Encouragement /
support
Obligation
“non-obstruction” Academic incentives Legislative requirement
Passive approach Financial support
Political imperative

18. Recommendations
• Public authorities need to understand that university
mergers are complex processus which require
considerable resources and planning.
• Bottom-up approaches work best!
• Public authorities should support universities by:
 Favourable regulatory framework
 Incentive mechanisms
 Financial support

19. Managing a merger
Internal governance
• How to steer the process and by whom?
• Governance of the new institution:
 Composition of the new leadership team
 Timing of taking office
• Organisational structure:
 Preserve the old components or establish a new
structure?
 Centralisation / decentralisation?

20. Planning and management
• Transparency
• Need to find a balance between the involvement of
staff in the process and the need to limit the diversion
of resources from core tasks
• Possible structure:
Transformation
teams
Working
groups
(thematic)
Commentators Reference groups

21. Communication
• Leadership with a common vision
• Absolute necessity in order to convince all different
actors concerned about the project
• Identification of target groups
• Strategy:
 #1: Academic case for the merger: develop a
narrative and coherent action
 #2: Focus on added-value: prove that gains will
outweigh losses
 #3: Identification of « quick wins »
• Development of a coherent institutional identity

22. Key elements
• Academic vision
• Assessment of alternatives to a full merger
• Financial aspects
• Estimation of costs and allocation of resources
• Establishment of a work structure
• Establishment of a governance model
• Leadership
• Development of a communication strategy and tools
• Set up a monitoring and evaluation process

24. What’s next
• Public Funding Observatory
Latest trends in public funding to universities
Edition 2017 – released in October!
• USTREAM project– next peer-learning seminar “national
and institutional approaches to delivering efficiency” 4-5
December 2017 (registrations open)
• 4th to take place in Barcelona, 4-5 October
2018

25. Thank you for your
attention!
For more information:
www.eua.be
Enora.pruvot@eua.be