1

Managing an “e-University”

Critical Success FactorsCosting, Planning, Pricing

Professor Paul Bacsich

Dipoli, 23 March 2004

2

A global problem

Most commercial e-universities have failed, downsized or overspent their development funds

Many public sector e-universities have also had problems

These have affected both single-institution and consortia models

The problem is neither purely a dot-com issue or confined to the “English” world

So what is going wrong? And how can it be put right?

3

My background Worked on telewriting and videotex for learning

in UKOU in 1977-83 Analytic work for EU and EADTU in 1980s Early CMC work from 1984: Australia and UK Introduced FirstClass to UKOU in 1991 (JANUS

project under EU FP3 “DELTA”) Set up Virtual Campus Sheffield Hallam U: 1997 Consultancy work for “e-U” then UKeU: 2000 on Analytic work on “Virtual U’s” - UNESCO: 2001

4

National eLearning rhetoric

“A successful knowledge-based economy depends upon availability of skill sets”

“The government is determined to deliver step change in higher education outcomes”

Growing competition for in-demand skills In-country provision important for recruitment and

retention

“Growing use of technology-based learning”

5

e-universities in UK

Open University (UK)

University for Industry (UK)

UK eUniversities Worldwide Limited (UKeU)

NHS University

Russell Group consortia: WUN and U21

Post-92 universities – Virtual Campuses

Scotland: Interactive University

6

UK: Oxbridge and Russell Group

World University Network (WUN) Sheffield, Leeds, York, Bristol, Manchester,

Southampton – plus US partners

Universitas21: Birmingham, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Nottingham

Cambridge-OU alliance (UKeU pilot) Oxford with Stanford, Princeton, etc

7

UK: New Universities Sheffield Hallam

early Virtual Campus Robert Gordons (Scotland)

early Virtual Campus Ulster (N Ireland)

later Virtual Campus Glamorgan (Wales) Middlesex (London) Global University Alliance: Derby+Glamorgan

plus others non-UK hosted by NextEd

8

And around the world

Australia: Deakin, Edith Cowan, USQ… Canada: Athabasca, [OLA]…. Germany: FernUniversitat Dutch Ou, Dutch Digital U Finnish VU Swiss VU India: IGNU Mexico: Tec de Monterrey China: CCRTVU

9

Types of e-university

Green fields/new build – e.g. UOC, TechBC Consortium “Orange skin” – Virtual Campus Those run or serviced

by non-HE organisations

10

Purposes behind e-universities

Government initiative: national or regional or local

International initiatives: AVU; ITU; UN VU (environment)

Business opportunity: Publisher Broadcaster IT company

11

Critical Success Factors for e-Uni Consortia

Binding energy

Organisational homogeneity

or managed diversity

Stratification

Linguistic homogeneity

Bacsich, for UNESCO

12

Other issues

Many national responses still confused Increasing consensus on e-pedagogy

but big national differences on how seriously cost-effectiveness issues are addressed

Truly international consortia do not yet exist E-learning still growing through DL

But many institutions slow to change

13

The problems

Few big successes: Phoenix Online, UMUC

Many failures or problems US: WGU, Fathom, NYUOnline, US OU Even Cardean much shrunken Canada: TechBC, OLA Dutch Ou >> Dutch Digital U Scottish Knowledge >> Interactive University England: HEFCE statement on downsizing UKeU,

current adverse comment on Ufi cost-benefits

14

Reasons for failure of e-Unis

They - or their funders? - did not understand the existing CSF literature - likely

New CSFs are emerging - also likely Bad luck - not likely for all Bad management - likely for some

15

Commercial e-Unis need to learn that...

Market-led courses are essential, even though market research is hard

Minimal “Time to market” is crucial “Quality” not a differentiator; price is; brand may be MLE functionality is not now a differentiator It is not really an English-speaking world in HE It is not even a 56 kbps world E-Unis must be both a university and a company,

but few can bring that off

16

Public-sector e-Unis need to learn that...

There still must be a business model even if not commercial; funds do not just appear!

Flow of funds to partner unis is always an issue Open source is part of an answer not the

answer (e.g. Malaysia) Consortia are hard to manage, especially large

ones (earlier CSFs are still valid) While a single MLE may not be acceptable in a

consortium, interoperability is not yet “there”

17

Hard data on demand “Hard data on student demand for distance

learning in [overseas] countries is difficult, if not impossible, to locate” (Fielden, 2000, for HEFCE)

Commission your own research, do not share Do not be a slave to market research. A lesson of

the dot.coms: products can create markets “Brand” is elusive, time-lagged and subject-

dependent What would you do if you found 1,000 students? Do not assume your (uni’s) pedagogy will transfer

18

Competitor research Whatever the size of the market, it will usually be

contested - there are few unoccupied niches Attractive subjects, eg MBAs, are over-contested

Focus on student preferences, views, including value proposition to them

Make sure you compare like with like - what is an MSc? An MBA??

Try to track non-sales (dept store analogy) global pricing is rare; global syllabi also