The application of the conceptual model of universities’ mergers: case study of the Université Grenoble Alpes
| The Conceptual Model of Universities’ Mergers elements | The Université Grenoble Alpes case study |
|---|---|
| Supporting factors | Homogeneity of the merging institutions stemming from the facts that they are all French Universities, are located in Grenoble and have a common history The involvement of employees in the merger was quite high due to the “Shanghai shock” which became a stimulus for change The opportunity to use central financial programs to co-finance the merger The sense of creating a valuable and to some extent pioneering organizational solution in France The merger date was announced early (in 2009) giving enough time for planning and preparation (until January 2016) |
| Inhibiting factors | Groups disturbed by the merger were formed Conservative attitude towards the merger was adapted by trade unions Attachment to the organizational structures and cultures of the separate universities was high Elevated ambitions of the decision makers representing the merging universities were exhibited |
| Change of university organization systems | As a result of strategic analyses, due diligence, research and negotiations, the following were agreed: the strategy and stages of the merger, the structure of the consolidated university, the new name and the authorities of the consolidated university |
| Strategies | In the restructuring process, a new strategy was created which was focused on cooperation with the society, innovation as well as internationalization and development of high-quality research and education within a comprehensive university. The mission underlined the growing role of international interdependence, innovation and interdisciplinary research. It also confirmed that the heart of the university’s activity was the combination of education and research |
| Structures | The university’s rector was chosen (Lise Dumasy, the rector of Université Stendhal for three tenures) as well as Vice-rectors who represented the merging universities New organizational structure was created. In total, 24 units such as departments, schools and institutes were distinguished in the organizational structure after consolidation. As part of the matrix structure, 6 large disciplinary research units were established The university developed also a number of major improvement projects, which in turn led to a faster development of research. EQUIPEX enabled furnishing of laboratories in order to allow to undertake the most innovative research. IDEFI focused on the innovative education of students and researchers. LABEX allowed to establish and develop scientific cooperation with the best world centers and researchers. Infrastructure was also being developed, using public-private partnerships. A center of creativity and innovation was built to serve interdisciplinary research and education focused on innovation. Other examples were the health education and research center as well as the buildings of the law and social sciences departments Deeper structural changes were introduced also in university-wide service units that cover various functional areas, such as finance and accounting, human resources, international cooperation, education and university life, research and innovation, information systems, logistics, cooperation with the environment and others |
| Processes | The merger was preceded not only by a long period of close and formalized cooperation, but also by a six-year planning and preparation process for merger implementation at the strategic and operational level In the consolidation process, a new information system was implemented, covering not only the university management, but also the entire scientific output of employees and units, international relations and education quality management. New websites for the university and all units were also created, which was coupled with marketing activities, oriented towards the internet and social networking sites in particular |
| Culture | A deepened specialization between research and teaching staff was introduced. Evaluation and remuneration and development systems rewarding higher productivity (performance based systems) were introduced. The positions, salaries and development opportunities of employees from different disciplines were differentiated. New branding and new identity were gradually being developed |
| Influence of the closer environment on the merger’s process | A wide consultation process was carried out, followed by communication, both among employees as well as students and other stakeholder groups |
| Competitors | Each merging university had different focus in their areas of studies so they saw themselves as complementary rather than competitive entities. The merger was seen as strengthening of all universities by creating an entity that could become a stronger regional, national and international player and competitor |
| Cooperation network | The merger of the universities into the Université Grenoble Alpes offered a new path that other entities and cooperation networks started considering as a strategic option |
| Internal stakeholders | The staff participated in the preparation of the merger through systematic meetings in the framework of inter-university integration teams for several years The Polytechnic Institute of Grenoble, although initially discussed the merger, retreated in the course, mainly due to social resistance. The Polytechnic staff did not know if the merger would bring them sufficient benefits to compensate for the partial loss of independence |
| External stakeholders | Negotiation and integration teams were established where representatives of all universities as well as central and local authorities and external stakeholders participated |
| Public policy | The ministry and local authorities favored consolidation and actively supported it. The merger required some specific laws and regulations that were prepared. The merger process was co-financed under the Ministry’s programs |
| Influence of the further environment on the merger’s process | |
| Economic | The conviction that the merger can lead to higher economic rationality and efficiency |
| Demographic | There was an opinion that merger offers new developmental opportunities for employees. At the same time there was a fear for human resources reduction. The fact that the merging universities were complimentary in the areas of study limited the lay-offs scope |
| Social | The concept of creating the Université Grenoble Alpes involved the assumption that also other universities from the Rhone-Alpes region can be involved in the merger. The discussions were held, however, in the end no more than the three institutions decided to participate in the consolidation process. The public entities, authorities at local and national levels as well as employers saw the merger as an opportunities-generating undertaking for the region. New entity was expected to be followed by the creation of new identity among the stakeholders |
| Cultural | Merger was perceived as a mixture of opportunities and threats. New branding contributed to developing new identity of the institution and its stakeholders |
| Scientific and technological | One of the consolidation motifs in France was to build strong links between universities and enterprises, which was supposed to fuel economic, scientific and technological development. There was an expectation that Grenoble merger could result in the “Silicon Valley” type of solution |
| Global | The beginning of the 21st century in France brought “Shanghai shock,” which was associated with the poor positions of French universities in international rankings. Achieving the “critical mass” in science through merger was to be a springboard to becoming a world-class academic institution with high international recognition |
| The Conceptual Model of Universities’ Mergers elements | The Université Grenoble Alpes case study |
|---|---|
| Supporting factors | Homogeneity of the merging institutions stemming from the facts that they are all French Universities, are located in Grenoble and have a common history |
| Inhibiting factors | Groups disturbed by the merger were formed |
| Change of university organization systems | As a result of strategic analyses, due diligence, research and negotiations, the following were agreed: the strategy and stages of the merger, the structure of the consolidated university, the new name and the authorities of the consolidated university |
| Strategies | In the restructuring process, a new strategy was created which was focused on cooperation with the society, innovation as well as internationalization and development of high-quality research and education within a comprehensive university. The mission underlined the growing role of international interdependence, innovation and interdisciplinary research. It also confirmed that the heart of the university’s activity was the combination of education and research |
| Structures | The university’s rector was chosen (Lise Dumasy, the rector of Université Stendhal for three tenures) as well as Vice-rectors who represented the merging universities |
| Processes | The merger was preceded not only by a long period of close and formalized cooperation, but also by a six-year planning and preparation process for merger implementation at the strategic and operational level |
| Culture | A deepened specialization between research and teaching staff was introduced. Evaluation and remuneration and development systems rewarding higher productivity (performance based systems) were introduced. The positions, salaries and development opportunities of employees from different disciplines were differentiated. New branding and new identity were gradually being developed |
| Influence of the closer environment on the merger’s process | A wide consultation process was carried out, followed by communication, both among employees as well as students and other stakeholder groups |
| Competitors | Each merging university had different focus in their areas of studies so they saw themselves as complementary rather than competitive entities. The merger was seen as strengthening of all universities by creating an entity that could become a stronger regional, national and international player and competitor |
| Cooperation network | The merger of the universities into the Université Grenoble Alpes offered a new path that other entities and cooperation networks started considering as a strategic option |
| Internal stakeholders | The staff participated in the preparation of the merger through systematic meetings in the framework of inter-university integration teams for several years |
| External stakeholders | Negotiation and integration teams were established where representatives of all universities as well as central and local authorities and external stakeholders participated |
| Public policy | The ministry and local authorities favored consolidation and actively supported it. The merger required some specific laws and regulations that were prepared. The merger process was co-financed under the Ministry’s programs |
| Influence of the further environment on the merger’s process | |
| Economic | The conviction that the merger can lead to higher economic rationality and efficiency |
| Demographic | There was an opinion that merger offers new developmental opportunities for employees. At the same time there was a fear for human resources reduction. The fact that the merging universities were complimentary in the areas of study limited the lay-offs scope |
| Social | The concept of creating the Université Grenoble Alpes involved the assumption that also other universities from the Rhone-Alpes region can be involved in the merger. The discussions were held, however, in the end no more than the three institutions decided to participate in the consolidation process. The public entities, authorities at local and national levels as well as employers saw the merger as an opportunities-generating undertaking for the region. New entity was expected to be followed by the creation of new identity among the stakeholders |
| Cultural | Merger was perceived as a mixture of opportunities and threats. New branding contributed to developing new identity of the institution and its stakeholders |
| Scientific and technological | One of the consolidation motifs in France was to build strong links between universities and enterprises, which was supposed to fuel economic, scientific and technological development. There was an expectation that Grenoble merger could result in the “Silicon Valley” type of solution |
| Global | The beginning of the 21st century in France brought “Shanghai shock,” which was associated with the poor positions of French universities in international rankings. Achieving the “critical mass” in science through merger was to be a springboard to becoming a world-class academic institution with high international recognition |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.