Building trust and governance in a neglected organisation

Case study: Amsterdam institute of lifelong learning in education (CNA)

A partnership of University of Amsterdam and University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam

Agenda

• Development phases• What about trust?• Exercise• Current dilemmas• Way ahead

The first phase: growth

• 1994: first development of “commercial” teacher training activities for vocational schools

• 1994: merger of various higher education institutions to University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam

The second phase: consolidation

• 2001: establishment of CNA VOF: partnership of the departments of education of the University and University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam.

• All commercial activities (third-party funded activities) in teacher training: competition by departments not allowed.

• Governance: a board with representatives of both departments and the central financial officer.

The second phase: profile

• Focus on sustainable development of professionals in education and educational institutions

• Through training programmes (including MEd degrees) and consultancy

• In the disciplines of didactics, coaching, and leadership• In all sectors: primary, secondary, vocational, higher

education• In Amsterdam and all of the Netherlands

The third phase: neglect in management

• Growth in income, but even more staff was hired• Support staff not managed, and not managing• Ineffective assessments of teachers/advisers• No time recording; no integrality in administration• Ineffective financial/project administration

The third phase: neglect in governance• 2007: Decision of the Executive Board to transform CNA into a private company

under the Holding• 2007: appointment of new director• Meetings of Board discontinued• 2011-2013 Responsibility for CNA within Executive Board transferred three times (rectorUoA-> rectorUAS-> vicepresident –> rector UAS)

And: 2013: professional development activities by departments of education subsidised by Ministry

The fourth phase: unsuccessful reparation efforts

• Consultants hired to draft business plans; interim financial management

• Director asked to step aside; team leader promoted to director ad interim, for less than a year

• New external interim director removes middle management from positions, has new business plan drafted, Employee Council strongly disagrees, deadlock threatens

Impact on business

A glance at the students in 2012-14

And what about trust?

Determinants of trust in (financial) institutions

• Competence (knowledge of products and services)• Stability (predictability, security)• Integrity (honesty)• Client orientation (having the client’s interest at heart)• Transparence (clarity of information on products and services)• Congruence of values (of client and institution)• Reputation

(Van Raaij, 2014)

Exercise

• With your neighbour..• Explore how these determinants apply

to your university/ the department you belong to. Which are the two most important ones?

The fifth phase: rebuilding connections and cohesion within

• Personal interviews with all staff members• Decision on organisational structure, agreed

with employee council• Recruitment of new management team • Introduction of time recording, agreed with

employee council• Motto: stability; integrity

The fifth phase: rebuilding connections without

• Exploring strategic alliances, competitors• Engaging with departments of education of

UoA and UAS• Engaging with Executive Board and

administration/staff• Motto: competence, transparency

Trust…

Current dilemmas

• Size• Quality of administration• Time necessary to rebuild all determinants• Degree programmes (business, reputation)• “Monopoly” on commercial activities• Equal conditions – market regulation

The way ahead

• Executive Board choice: business model– Assessment of resilience of organisation– Alternative models

• Scenarios

Criterium: trust