By Jamie Warner, Associate Consultant, SUMS Consulting

This two-part series explores how behavioural “nudges” – small, lower-cost interventions that guide choices without mandates – can drive both efficiencies and incremental growth across key university processes. From student payments to procurement, nudges offer practical tools to reduce waste, influence positive behaviours, and foster a culture of smart spending.

Explore how this aligns with our SUMS Efficiencies campaign, which is supporting universities to do more with less, through smarter models and better decision-making.

Part Two: Procurement and cultural shifts

Building on Part One, this article explores how nudges can be used in procurement and institutional culture to drive smarter, more sustainable decision-making across the university.

Procurement in focus

Universities spend eye-watering sums on everything from lab equipment to IT software licences. In theory, tight procurement policies ensure value for money. In practice, human quirks seep through: convenience trumps value for money, brand loyalties skew choices, and many staff have a “preferred supplier”. The result? We spend just that little bit more. Maybe only a little on each purchase, but it adds up across thousands of transactions.

Let’s start with an everyday occurrence: a staff member ordering a laptop or a local administrator booking travel. We need to make the cheaper (or contract-approved) option the easy option. One simple nudge: pre-select the recommended choice in procurement systems. If the university has a deal with a certain supplier for, say, laptops at £500 each, whereas ordering a certain white laptop for creatives would cost £1,200, the online form should guide you to the £500 option by default. The second laptop shouldn’t appear unless you actively click “show all options” or something similar. People tend to go with default settings, often assuming it’s the endorsed choice. By curating the choices and highlighting “our best value”, you steer many purchases to frugal outcomes. It’s comparable to a healthy school canteen: fruit at eye-level, and cake nearer the bottom. Some staff will still find their way to the expensive stuff, but many will shrug and accept the nudge.

We can also use friction and prompts to curb expensive choices. Every time someone tries to purchase outside the preferred supplier route or above a certain price, the system throws up a message, but without requiring additional approval: “This choice is £2,000 more than our standard option. Briefly state the academic justification for this additional cost.” This isn’t outright blocking; instead, it’s a speed bump. Some will justify and go ahead (and sometimes, the pricier option may truly be needed). But many will think otherwise. This works by adding friction to the expensive path and you’ve increased the cognitive cost of the costlier option without forbidding it.

We can also leverage pride in the areas like university sustainability pledges. For example, promote default double-sided printing or recycled paper not just on cost, but as “the green choice that 90% of staff have adopted”. If most staff prided themselves on choosing the sustainable (cheaper) option, it normalises frugality. Likewise, encourage departments to designate a “value champion” who finds clever ways to save money.

Departments could also reduce red tape in their paperwork. Often, staff spot opportunities to save money here or there (like “I could buy these supplies on expenses for £100 instead of £120 through the usual supplier”) but don’t proceed because processes forbid it or claiming the difference is a hassle. Here we could allow some discretion: “If you find it cheaper up to X% difference, you may proceed and here’s a quick form to note it.” Removing bureaucratic barriers, or “sludge” (the opposite of a nudge), can nudge people to act more frugally. Right now, the path of least resistance might be to just order through the pricey contract because getting an exception is just too difficult.

Ultimately, procurement nudges are about steering choices, not strong-arming them. Lots of marginal gains here: 2% saved on printing, 5% on travel, 10% on equipment – it all adds up. And all without a single “Thou Shalt Not” edict. Instead, you create a culture where mindful spending is just what universities do.

Part Two ‘nudge’ summary:

Procurement

• Pre-select cost-effective options in ordering systems
• Add friction to higher-cost purchases (e.g. justification prompts)
• Use “value champions” and peer pride to normalise mindful spending
• Cut “sludge” by allowing simple, fast exceptions to bureaucratic barriers

Cultural shifts and everyday decisions

• Highlight sustainability choices as social norms (“90% use double-sided printing”)
• Nudge departments to consolidate space with transparent cost sharing
• Use pricing psychology (e.g. decoy pricing) for revenue-generating services
• Create dashboards and nudges that make savings visible and shareable

Conclusion

Let’s be clear: we’re not claiming that these small adjustments will miraculously fill a £20m deficit or solve a broken funding model. Structural problems demand structural solutions. But in an environment where big fixes are slow and sometimes counter-productive, marginal gains are not to be scoffed at. As British Cycling’s Dave Brailsford famously proved with his aggregation of marginal gains approach, lots of 1% improvements can add up to cumulatively significant changes. In HE, we aren’t looking to win Olympic gold, but we are trying to avoid sinking while we wait for rescue. And if each nudge we’ve discussed saves a percent here or there, that could indeed save some difficult decisions.

Crucially, nudges carry a low cost and low risk. They’re reversible, adjustable, and perhaps more politically palatable. At worst, a nudge might have no effect; at best, it could significantly change behaviour and outcomes with minimal pain. Given that many HEIs are already taking difficult decisions to secure sustainability, layering in some smart nudges is a no-brainer.

Many of these nudges aren’t just about saving money; they’re about modernising how universities operate. They make processes more user-friendly and encourage a culture of evidence-based decision-making. If a crisis is the catalyst to finally implement, say, a real-time budget dashboard or a sane default for payments, then at least something good comes of it. Behavioural insight, essentially, helps align individual decision-making with value for money without authoritarian diktats.

Herein lies a genuine optimism: that people, when nudged thoughtfully, often respond in positive ways. Academics usually don’t want to waste resources and leaders can achieve great things using the right toolkits. Behavioural economics assumes we are human, with all the cognitive biases and social influences that encompasses. By acknowledging that and designing policy tweaks accordingly, we can navigate these storms more effectively.

In the end, this is about hope. By being cleverer and acknowledging behavioural quirks, we can inch our way to stability. It’s not a grand rescue plan, but it is something we can start tomorrow. And given the choice between a thousand cuts and a thousand nudges, we may as well start with the latter. Onwards, and good luck.

Small changes, real impact with SUMS Consulting

If you’re ready to move from theory to action, SUMS can help. Our consultants work alongside university teams to identify where small, strategic nudges can drive meaningful change – from payment processes to procurement systems and everything in between. As part of our Efficiencies campaign, we’re supporting universities to embed smarter ways of working that respect institutional autonomy while delivering better value.

Nudging won’t fix structural funding issues – but it can soften their impact. These changes are quick to implement, low in cost, and high in potential. Let’s make good decisions easier, and let efficiencies grow, one nudge at a time.