Two pieces of research into higher education leadership published by Advance HE/ Wonkhe and Strive Higher within a few months of each other have left me thinking about a deceptively simple question: Who counts as a leader in a university? What I found particularly interesting wasn't where the two reports disagree, but how often they independently arrive at similar places.

Universities are increasingly expected to deliver complex strategic priorities across diverse and decentralised environments. A well-designed target operating model helps create the governance, accountability, ways of working and organisational capability needed to turn strategic ambition into coordinated, sustainable delivery.

Taking responsibility for an academic department is a significant leadership transition. New Heads of Department must quickly build credibility, lead colleagues, manage competing priorities and navigate complex institutional relationships, often while continuing to contribute to teaching and research. Our client wanted to ensure that its leadership and people-management development reflected the different needs of its academic and professional services communities and build s

Based on recent actions, the OfS appears to accept the premise that public attention can shape provider behaviour. Its own principles, therefore, should require that attention to be leveraged according to evidence, risk and student interest.

HESA’s retirement of ‘non-academic’ is both welcome and long overdue, but it should be viewed as a beginning rather than an endpoint. The improved categories and language will certainly support better data collection and make hidden contributions more visible. But this alone will not be sufficient to dismantle the cultures and structures built around an outdated binary.

What does it really take to lead in higher education right now? We put that question to thirteen senior leaders across the UK sector and asked them to share their experiences. The result is our third annual sector insights report - Culture, context, complexity: Understanding leadership in higher education.

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?

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

Against a backdrop of constrained public funding, fierce competition for students and a crowded sector, UK universities must reimagine how they support research - not only to advance academic excellence, but to increase institutional income. REF, KEF, and innovation funding streams offer significant opportunities, but only if support structures are aligned with income potential. Optimising research support is no longer a back-office function; it is a strategic imperative.

In this fast-paced world with increasing cost of living, advancements in technology, such as generative AI, and changing student expectations, is it time to consider how the student experience is changing, how far it might change and where our attention needs to focus?

We cannot think of AI in terms of efficiency alone. If adoption is transactional, we could lose the qualities that make higher education transformative: empathy, trust, and human connection. The real challenge is not whether to adopt AI, but how to integrate it in ways that amplify the human experience.

The student–university relationship is too important to be reduced to a service contract. In a world where challenges are complex and change is constant, partnership is not just an ideal; it’s a necessity.

The future of higher education lies not in eliminating organisational structure, but in making it more permeable, responsive, and human-centred.

Of late, I find myself increasingly reflecting on the importance of empathy in everything we do. We live in an ever-changing world with ever increasing expectations, opportunities, noise and threat. I keep coming back to the urgent need for empathy to be baked into our service design and delivery, into how we deliver change and into our leadership styles and how, in these times, we need to lean into this as much as possible.

Comprehensive and accessible disability services are essential to remove barriers and support diverse needs throughout the student journey.

The process of collating and submitting data regulatory returns is not unlike a Traitors Round Table.

Successfully implementing organisational strategy requires collective accountability from leadership teams during times of change.

Moving to a service culture with a clearly defined service catalogue enables everyone to understand the ‘what, how, who and when’.

What does it really mean to be in the middle of a university league table?