The Academies Programme's transformation from 200 institutions in 2010 to circa 11,600 today highlights interesting learnings about large-scale educational reform for the higher education sector.
However, we need to bear in mind that one of the key differences between MATs and MUTs is that the former was borne out of a dedicated policy (and financial) push from the DfE.
Higher education now stands at a crossroads and, with the consideration of additional public funding conspicuous by its absence, the Academies Programme may provide an interesting roadmap and the MAT/MUT model an opportunity to achieve sustainable efficiencies.
Technically, the establishment of a MUT amounts to a merger of the participating universities and, as such, is subject to all the challenges associated with mergers and as noted above, university operating models will also be tied to their individual structures and strategic priorities.
Less radical options to "test the water" include informal partnerships, shared services, strategic alliances and other group structures. While MUTs will be a good route for some universities, they aren't a silver bullet for transforming the financial health of higher education. A very clear strategic rationale and business case will be needed to forge the best path for each institution.
If there is wider appetite within the sector for mergers, noting that the DfE and OfS have publicly welcomed this week's merger announcement, the Academies Programme highlights the benefit of formal backing from government, including funding and supportive regulatory change.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
