All Posts

Strive Higher thanks Melody Askari for co-hosting this webinar with Emma Bayne and Laura Jackson. Watch the full webinar for insight, challenge and optimism about the future of higher education in the age of AI.

The 2026 Code marks a clear shift: away from broad governance principles and towards more explicit expectations of board action, judgement and accountability. Its focus is no longer simply whether institutions can point to good governance frameworks, but whether governing bodies can demonstrate effective decisions, active judgement and sustained institutional viability in practice.

Higher Education news makes bleak reading right now. Funding pressures, demographic headwinds, the AI disruption, employer scepticism about degrees, falling applications in some markets. The list of structural challenges is long and pretty well-rehearsed – to the extent where there is an almost competitive quality to the collective pessimism. But pessimism, however sophisticated, is also a choice. And in 2026, there are genuine, non-trivial reasons for hope.

Treating empathy as a strategic lens shifts planning to a roadmap for real human outcomes, and that shift changes what we prioritise, how we measure progress, and fundamentally whether strategies are realised.

It’s fair to say it’s been a tricky last few weeks for England’s favourite Higher Education Regulator. Criticism has been coming thick and fast on everything from Free Speech to data returns, policy and process. And much of that criticism stems from the unanswerable question of what is the OfS actually for?

Given the Office for Students’ stated concerns regarding algorithm design and the credibility of degree outcomes, we were commissioned to provide external assurance in advance of implementation. The purpose of the work was to confirm that the revised policy operated as specified, that its impact on degree outcomes was understood in context, and that the change could be evidenced and explained if subject to regulatory scrutiny.

When universities talk about strategy, conversations often gravitate towards vision, ambition, and competitive positioning. Yet behind every successful strategy lies something quieter, more foundational. It's the ability to understand, trust, and use data with confidence.

With strategic foundations in place, UK higher education providers can turn their attention to how digital transformation is experienced in practice. This second insight builds on the principles outlined in part one of this series and focuses on redesigning end-to-end user journeys, developing organisational readiness, managing risk, and applying AI where it delivers tangible value. Together, these elements enable sustainable, phased transformation that improves both efficien

UK HE providers are operating in an environment of heightened competition, rising expectations, and increasing regulatory complexity. While AI, automation, and cloud technologies promise significant gains, their value can only be realised when institutions put the right strategic and technical foundations in place. The first of this two-part insight series focuses on the strategic prerequisites for digital transformation.

The universities making real progress are not those with the most polished strategies, but those that use strategy as a working discipline. In these institutions, strategy shows up in how money is allocated, how performance is measured, how data informs decision-making, and how leadership is held accountable.

Despite constant evolution, many institutions remain constrained by governance structures designed for circumstances that were perhaps once more predictable. This is what I call the governance paradox: structures created to ensure institutional continuity later become obstacles to necessary transformation.

Hiring freezes and voluntary severance schemes have become familiar, if uncomfortable, tools in the sector’s financial toolkit. But before resorting to measures that affect staff livelihoods and academic quality, responsible institutions are looking for other levers to pull. One of the most powerful and often overlooked of these is the non-pay (or discretionary spend) review.

Our experience of supporting multiple universities with a discretionary spend review process suggests that bringing in independent expertise is a pragmatic and strategic choice that can unlock millions in savings, strengthen institutional collaboration, and lay the groundwork for lasting cultural change.

Strive Higher’s latest sector insights report, Highlighting innovation in our sector, reveals how UK universities are creatively tackling today’s biggest challenges – from transforming services and reimagining experiences to reshaping culture and developing future talent.

Our first sector insights report examines the role of innovation within the regulatory framework for English HEIs. Using the institutional capabilities required to respond to regulatory change as a lens, we examine the relationship between regulation and innovation within this part of the sector.

With the regulatory burden increasing and institutional expectations rising, the resulting data skills gap is becoming critical for UK universities. Writing for WonkHE, Sophie Crouchman and Laura Jackson reflect on helping professional services become more data confident.

For many universities, improving how research is managed and supported seems like an impossible dream. Despite the UK’s global recognition for high-quality research and outcomes, as well as our reputable research frameworks, centres and universities, research management itself is still one of the hardest areas to get right. Why is this?

Innovation theatre is activity that looks like innovation, but doesn’t create lasting transformation. And it costs the sector a lot, not just in wasted time and resources, but in damaged trust, change fatigue, and missed opportunities for genuine innovation.

Space to Lead was a 12-month coaching pilot, offered at no cost to participating universities. Upon conclusion, 11 participants have received 115 hours of free coaching from Strive Higher.

The conversation reaffirmed something many of us feel instinctively: the old language of 'students as customers' simply doesn’t capture the depth, complexity, or potential of the student–university relationship. Yes, the consumer-rights framing sharpened standards and transparency, but as Jo noted, it has always felt a bit clunky, and it doesn’t speak to the personal transformation at the heart of higher education. Learning isn’t a transaction; it’s a developmental, human par