As the new year starts, I’ve been reflecting on what my years of designing and delivering change programmes across universities have taught me. Not in a big, inspirational way, but by noticing some familiar patterns that consistently show up: the search for silver bullets, discomfort with unglamorous work, and a tendency to judge success by visibility rather than durability. I’ve come to a slightly unfashionable conclusion: when everything is working well, delivering change rarely feels exciting or looks dramatic. In fact, it can often feel rather ordinary. Yet time and again I see institutions assume that if change is not visible, fast, or obviously impactful, it must not be working.
Universities are exceptionally good at thinking about change. They analyse it, debate it, critique it, and worry that they are not very good at delivering it. This makes sense in a sector built on challenge and peer review. The irony, of course, is that universities are constantly changing and adapting. Covid demonstrated that clearly. Yet the dominant story I hear is still one of resistance and failure, with past difficulties replayed in forensic detail while successes are quietly glossed over because someone, somewhere, really didn’t like the change. I’m not denying resistance or poor experiences exist, but I do question whether the sector is quite as bad at delivering change as it likes to make out.
The desire for quick wins
What I see more now is impatience rather than outright resistance, often expressed as a renewed search for quick wins or a silver bullet, driven in no small part by financial and operational pressure. Change is expected to be impactful almost immediately, sometimes before the ink is dry on the business case. There is a strong desire for early wins, less tolerance for delay, and greater scrutiny on value. This is all good stuff, but the danger is that speed and reassurance begin to trump sound judgement, allowing short-term decisions to weaken longer-term coherence and sustainability.
There is also far less enthusiasm for the scaffolding needed to deliver change well: governance that holds when pressure mounts, proper prioritisation that is prepared to stop things, realistic planning and risk management that actively shapes decisions. When this discipline is absent, we blame the inevitable fallout on methodologies and frameworks, rather than on how effectively we have used them.
The hard reality
The reality is that leading and delivering change is hard, unglamorous work. Academic, professional, financial, cultural, and political forces pull in different directions at the same time. It involves awkward conversations about trade-offs and honest discussions about capacity (because even when we agree something must give, the day job stubbornly carries on). In my experience, the most successful change programmes progress through steady, incremental improvement rather than dramatic transformation – and without active leadership, that progress is easily crowded out by louder, more urgent demands.
This brings some uncomfortable truths. You will not please everyone. You will not get agreement on what success looks like. Some change will not land as intended. Priorities shift, assumptions fall away, and events intervene at exactly the wrong moment. That isn’t failure; it’s reality – and it demands clear judgement, resilience, and the willingness to move forward without universal agreement.
It’s something I’m very conscious of in my role at SUMS. Much of the value we bring is resisting the pull of excitement and quick fixes, and instead focusing on steady, pragmatic delivery that holds under pressure and does what is right for institutions over time.
So what does all this mean in practice?
First, let’s be honest about how hard it is to lead and deliver change well. Good change leadership isn’t about projecting confidence at all costs. It’s about holding decisions under pressure, asking for help when needed, protecting disciplined execution, and doing what’s right rather than what’s easiest.
Second, let’s resist the urge to reset too quickly. When pressure mounts, the instinct to reach for a new solution is tempting. More often than not, what’s needed is not a fresh answer, but the resolve to see the current one through.
Third, let’s stop treating more analysis and critique as a substitute for decisions. Insight and lessons matter, but progress only happens when someone makes a call, stops competing activity, and accepts an imperfect answer over endless debate.
Finally, let’s give ourselves a bit more credit, without lowering the bar. Many universities have real lived experience in delivering complex change, even if they don’t always recognise this expertise. There is always more to learn and improve, but we should value the capability that already exists – and protect it.
When we stop chasing excitement and certainty, and lead with realism and pragmatism, we give ourselves a much better chance of delivering change that actually matters, even if it never makes the headlines.
Contact us to find out more about how SUMS can support you in looking at your strategic change options and implementing practical solutions to deliver your key transformation objectives. Email us at consulting@sums.ac.uk.
