A new way for universities to approach international engagement

It’s time for universities to assert why their international relationships matter.

COVID 19 has given rise to the idea that globalisation is over, and that Australia will draw back from its previous level of international engagement. Certainly, the strained relationship between Australia and China is adding to the perception that universities should focus on their domestic market and direct their budgets to local delivery.

The exception to this is research which is demonstrating the significant role Australia has in collaborating with international partners to respond to a global crisis. These connections with international universities, institutions and industry are more important than ever, but not just for research links.

In addition to enabling Australia to have a global impact, international partnerships enable our students to engage with the world to make a difference on a global scale. They facilitate a professional network, particularly in neighbouring regions, foster cultural appreciation and perhaps most importantly broaden a university’s industry base which is critical in helping shape curriculum that will be relevant for future employment.

Domestic students will increasingly look for ways to connect to the global economy. Industry relevance is becoming more of a concern for Australian students and for organisations seeking relevant skills in graduates. The traditional WIL (work integrated learning) model is unlikely to satisfy the need for genuine international networks that can only be achieved through internships.

Retaining the confidence of domestic students will become even more critical as private organisations begin to challenge the relevance of higher degrees and offer alternatives that entice industry to look elsewhere for the future workforce.

The current pandemic provides a unique opportunity to legitimise the importance of engaging internationally. This will require new thinking regarding the approach to international enrolments and will involve using improved online capability to reach growth markets in new ways. The benefits of this will be less reliance on China for revenue from international students, more agile online learning that is globally relevant and more opportunities for research collaborations with industry as it evolves in the new technological era. An international strategy that combines these features will protect Australian universities and maintain their global relevance beyond our shores.

A successful international strategy will include a deeper market knowledge which understands the target market and Australia’s place in this market compared to the UK, Canadian and the US universities. It must reflect a clear understanding of the future employment needs of learners in that market who will seek jobs in their own country.

This has not always featured in the thinking of Australian universities. The lack of understanding about Chinese students’ career prospects in China was already starting to impact Australian enrolments prior to COVID-19. For example, several universities were noting the traditional business degrees were experiencing a decline or a flattening of enrolments as the relevance of these courses no longer resonated with Chinese students. The significance of building a network in China while studying in order to secure a role in prestigious organisations in China, was making these students think twice about doing all their education overseas.

Pathway programs that feed into degree programs were beginning to note a decline as the Chinese market explored more cost-effective ways to engage in English language programs and foundation studies. Pathways has long been considered the ‘canary in the gold mine’ for higher education.

Strong and effective industry relationships have ensured that some universities have understood the career paths of graduates within Australia but understanding the journey of international graduates and how Australian degrees contribute to employment when that graduate returns home, has been less of a priority.

Couple that with the rapidly changing prospects as graduates face a future that will be influenced by what is being described as the fourth industrial revolution, the ability for universities to remain relevant and be recognised as bringing value for an international market will require a more in-depth understanding of overseas market drivers. The sophistication that has been applied to recruiting students to study in Australia will need to be applied to ensuring they achieve their employment goals after they graduate.

A second component to an international strategy which delivers value to a university needs to include engaging in a broader market. This is not to suggest that there is no longer a future working with China. Despite the geopolitics of a post COVID-19 world there may still be potential to attract Chinese students to Australia and respond to growth in the second and third tier cities in China which have significant population sizes.

However other markets which have potential to provide diversity to international student enrolments need to be targeted. There are several in South East Asia; Indonesia for example, which has long been recognised for its growth, technology focus (now recognised for the highest number of unicorns in the world) and proximity. Vietnam is another example; experiencing rapid growth and an increasingly affluent society whose members are looking for education options. Prior to COVID-19, data from Hewlett Packard suggested the average household disposable income in Asia is predicted to more than triple from 2001 to 2035.

Frequently Australian universities have judged these markets on their capacity for students to relocate to Australia and pay the high fees associated with tuition and living abroad expenses. This narrow view of the market means we are always competing with UK, US and Canadian universities which are also vying for the slender percentage of the market that can afford education overseas.

A significant reason to select Australian universities has also been the opportunity for migration, a feature that may well change as the Australian government reflects on the risks exposed by our reliance on China during the pandemic. There is, however, significant opportunity for universities to attract students by offering their programs in country. The key to success is the way that this is done.

Establishing a campus in a key international city has been one option adopted by some universities. However, the lag time between investment and ROI is often prohibitive as can be the regulatory environment which can create risk for the university brand. There is also a limit to the number of campuses a university can consider in its portfolio.

To achieve breadth and diversity, a better option is to look for partners which are already established in the target country and who are willing to collaborate to deliver programs on well-established campuses. Although the transnational model is not new, it has often not been considered core business next to incoming international students.

The establishment of a partnership has often been the result of academic relationships that are specific to a college, school or faculty. Partnerships have not been the result of university wide strategy, have not always been managed effectively and in some cases have not been profitable.

These symptoms suggest flaws in the approach rather than the model itself. Examples where partnerships have been effective provide insights to the potential these relationships present. What is needed is a holistic, commercial approach that harnesses the academic and financial value a collaboration can achieve and most importantly recognises and promotes its differentiator in the market.

An effective partnership model recognises that partner selection is critical to success and should be driven by quality, shared value and market position. Clear criteria need to be applied and the capacity for growth through the partnership ascertained. The goals of the partnership also need to be well understood by both parties. Expectations as to market share and enrolment growth need to be worked through and mechanisms in place to regularly update this understanding.

Markets are not static and too often in transnational relationships universities in Australia have failed to understand the threat and opportunity that competition in foreign regions presented. In some cases, partnerships have been unfairly judged, universities have failed to sufficiently leverage them and have not created ways to lifecycle manage them.

Another barrier to successful transnational activity has often been the commercial arrangements which have not been advantageous to either party. Costs associated with delivery have frequently been prohibitively expensive. The “fly in fly out” model has been hard to scale and, in some cases, provided a hollow experience for students resulting in high attrition. The immaturity of efforts to deliver learning online has been obvious to students based overseas with recent examples of students still only able to access lectures in audio form.

The pandemic is changing the sector’s approach to online learning more rapidly than could previously be imagined. Blended approaches to learning are being adopted to augment face-to-face tuition. Increasingly these reflect the growing need to prepare graduates for the technology they will experience in a workplace that has adopted AI, machine learning, virtual reality and the internet of things.

This, combined with close working relationships between partners, provides a unique solution to one of the problems that has sometimes been associated with offshore delivery. Harnessing this new capability will empower universities to balance costs and value in order to achieve learning outcomes that reflect the calibre of the university brand.

But more will be needed. Transnational activity needs to be professionalised and streamlined for it to become effective for universities. This involves vision and strategic leadership that will ensure commercial acumen is harnessed, diplomacy leads relationship management, those who support this activity are provided with cultural intelligence training and standards are applied to achieve consistency wherever the university operates. There are lessons from the corporate sector that can be adapted to university culture to achieve a multinational presence where brand and reputation are globally enhanced.

Now is the time for universities to reassert why international relationships matter and to embrace a global focus that recognises our place in the world and ensures the talent and expertise that we have to offer is shared and cultivated. Strong, innovative universities can contribute to society and position themselves in growth regions in select ways that enhance their brand and specialist expertise.

A post COVID-19 university can emerge more relevant than ever and use the crisis to leapfrog into a more secure position that is valued by national and international learners and industry. Three key actions they need to take are:

● Embracing a global outlook by developing a vision for international activity that delivers solutions in country

● Professionalising transnational activity to ensure commercial gains are achieved and brand is enhanced

● Recognising that global interaction is core business and needs to be embedded into the university identity

The clarity that a crisis prompts may never come again, and Australian universities have a moment in time to bravely reimagine their connections with the rest of the world. The global benefits have the potential to impact generations.

Rachel Holthouse is a former deputy vice-chancellor (global development) at RMIT University.