International Strategy for Higher Education Institutions
International Strategy for Higher Education Institutions
UK universities' international KPIs - PART 8 Posted on by Vicky Lewis
This is the eighth in my series of blogs sharing insights and emerging ideas on ways to measure international success, based on a review of university international strategies. Links to earlier blogs in the series are provided at the end of this one.
When I’ve been involved in developing institutional strategies for global engagement, the theme of internationalised research and knowledge exchange has often been challenging to integrate.
This is partly because there’s usually a core institutional strategy for research (which may already be in existence or may still be in development) and generally a dedicated PVC / VP (Research) with ownership of this area. And – certainly for research-intensive universities – there’s an assumption that world-leading, internationally oriented and collaborative research is ‘core business’. In some institutional cultures this can lead to a slightly territorial approach, questioning the need to mention this area in an international strategy.
I try to turn this around and show that it’s an opportunity to reinforce certain research (and knowledge exchange) priorities and to shine a spotlight on those actions that make a specific contribution to building global impact.
But when there is a clear research dimension in an international strategy, how does this translate into KPIs?
An analysis of the KPIs of six published international strategies with an end date between 2024 and 2030 shows that four include explicit KPIs relating to international research. Between them, they list five such KPIs. None of these has a knowledge exchange dimension.
Three of the KPIs relate to collaborative research and associated outputs:
Another KPI is:
The final one is:
The indicators proposed in the Education Insight Global Engagement Index to evaluate level of international Research and Business Engagement focus on income and impact:
Extending the analysis to include those international strategies reviewed in 2020, some additional measures (and new angles on existing ones) come to light.
Research collaborations
One institution had a KPI to increase the number of research collaborations with institutions in top 300 of THE World Rankings.
Business collaborations
Success is measured by one HEI via increased links with global businesses / companies working in international markets (indicated by live KTPs [Knowledge Transfer Partnerships])
Capacity building
One university aspired to grow partnerships addressing capacity building needs in target ODA (Official Development Assistance) countries (linking this to future funding opportunities).
Income
A typical income-related KPI is to increase income from international research (and commercial) collaborations.
Some HEIs had more specific success measures, such as increasing international Knowledge Exchange / commercial income through activities like Executive Education, CPD (Continuing Professional Development) and other short courses, or consultancy projects.
Others focused on grant funding success, whether that’s internal pump-priming funding or external funding schemes run through national bodies, foundations or institutional networks.
Outputs
Beyond KPIs linked to the number (or proportion) of internationally co-authored outputs, some institutions focused on improving the quality of their outputs with international co-authors (one measures this via position in the Leiden Ranking). Another had a KPI linked to the international reach of ‘open access’ outputs. And another had a target of doubling the number of staff with international or world-leading outputs in its REF (Research Excellence Framework) submission (presumably starting from a low base).
PhD students
One HEI aimed for an increase of 35% in non-EU postgraduate research students (PGRs). Another for a rise in dual PhD degrees with key partners. And a third sought to grow the number of non-UK research students – both those registered to the university and visiting PhD researchers.
It’s surprising not to see any KPIs linked to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They certainly feature increasingly prominently in the narrative of many UK institutions’ strategies – and they offer a helpful framework for evaluating the impact of research and knowledge exchange (both globally and locally).
This University World News article on How the SDGs are redefining internationalisation in HE argues that ‘as challenges become more interconnected, universities are uniquely placed to link research with practical solutions, connect local initiatives to global frameworks, and strengthen ties between academia and society. The SDGs provide a useful framework that enables higher education institutions to advance internationalisation through cross-sectoral and intergenerational partnerships that drive real change.’
While current international KPIs include ‘number of international research partnerships and collaborations’, these are rarely explicitly linked to institutional research themes. This may reflect lack of alignment between the international strategy and the research strategy.
There also appears to be little focus on collaboration via international networks and consortia of like-minded institutions pursuing shared priorities, despite recognition that these can amplify impact, as well as supporting institutional distinctiveness and reputation.
More attention could also be paid to industry and governmental collaborations that have an international dimension. These might include connecting local and global businesses; contributing to policy change through academic diplomacy; or helping to build the capacity of another country’s HE system (or repair that capacity in conflict-affected regions).
Some KPIs around international PGRs and dual PhDs exist but, given the role that international research students can play in diversifying an institution’s academic talent pipeline, strengthening institutional partnerships, and providing connections to academic networks around the world, I would expect them to feature more prominently.
It may be that some of these KPIs sit better in a research strategy than an international strategy. However, I suspect that (at many institutions) they just fall between the cracks. We’re missing a trick if we don’t have conversations in our universities about where the international strategy overlaps with the research strategy (and other core strategies) and how best to ensure a set of objectives (and KPIs) that are mutually reinforcing.
In my next blog, I’m going to share insights into KPIs associated with having an international staff base and opportunities for professional development with an international dimension.
Part 1 – What sits below the top of the iceberg?
Part 2 – Characteristics and key themes
Part 3 – Good KPIs, traps and tips
Part 4 – TNE students, programmes and partnerships
Part 5 – Attracting international students to the home campus
Part 6 – International and intercultural experiences and exposure
Part 7 – International student experience, success and alumni engagement
|
|
