Building trust and governance in a
neglected organisation
Case study: Amsterdam institute of
lifelong learning in education (CNA)
A partnership of University of Amsterdam and University of
Applied Sciences Amsterdam
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
Development phases
What about trust?
Exercise
Current dilemmas
Way ahead
The first phase: growth
• 1994: first development of “commercial”
teacher training activities for vocational
schools
• 1994: merger of various higher
education institutions to University of
Applied Sciences Amsterdam
The second phase: consolidation
• 2001: establishment of CNA VOF: partnership of the
departments of education of the University and
University of Applied Sciences Amsterdam.
• All commercial activities (third-party funded activities) in
teacher training: competition by departments not
allowed.
• Governance: a board with representatives of both
departments and the central financial officer.
The second phase: profile
• Focus on sustainable development of professionals in
education and educational institutions
• Through training programmes (including MEd degrees)
and consultancy
• In the disciplines of didactics, coaching, and leadership
• In all sectors: primary, secondary, vocational, higher
education
• In Amsterdam and all of the Netherlands
The third phase: neglect in
management
•
•
•
•
•
Growth in income, but even more staff was hired
Support staff not managed, and not managing
Ineffective assessments of teachers/advisers
No time recording; no integrality in administration
Ineffective financial/project administration
The third phase: neglect in
governance
• 2007: Decision of the Executive Board to transform
CNA into a private company under the Holding
• 2007: appointment of new director
• Meetings of Board discontinued
• 2011-2013 Responsibility for CNA within Executive
Board transferred three times
(rectorUoA-> rectorUAS-> vicepresident –> rector UAS)
And: 2013: professional development activities by
departments of education subsidised by Ministry
The fourth phase: unsuccessful
reparation efforts
• Consultants hired to draft business plans; interim
financial management
• Director asked to step aside; team leader promoted to
director ad interim, for less than a year
• New external interim director removes middle
management from positions, has new business plan
drafted, Employee Council strongly disagrees, deadlock
threatens
Impact on business
7000000
6000000
5000000
4000000
turnover
3000000
result
2000000
reserves
1000000
0
2000
-1000000
-2000000
2003
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Q1-2 2014 Prognose
2014
A glance at the students in 201214
700
633
600
500
400
300
282
293
271
176
200
64
100
0
PO
VO
MBO
HBO overig HvA
UvA
And what about trust?
Teachers management
CNA – (some)
clients
Management –
Executive Board
Broken
trust
Support staff teachers
CNA - department of
education UAS
CNA- department
of education UoA
Determinants of trust in (financial)
institutions
•
•
•
•
•
Competence (knowledge of products and services)
Stability (predictability, security)
Integrity (honesty)
Client orientation (having the client’s interest at heart)
Transparence (clarity of information on products and
services)
• Congruence of values (of client and institution)
• Reputation
(Van Raaij, 2014)
Exercise
• With your neighbour..
• Explore how these determinants apply
to your university/ the department you
belong to. Which are the two most
important ones?
The fifth phase: rebuilding
connections and cohesion within
• Personal interviews with all staff members
• Decision on organisational structure, agreed
with employee council
• Recruitment of new management team
• Introduction of time recording, agreed with
employee council
• Motto: stability; integrity
The fifth phase: rebuilding
connections without
• Exploring strategic alliances, competitors
• Engaging with departments of education of
UoA and UAS
• Engaging with Executive Board and
administration/staff
• Motto: competence, transparency
Trust…
Current dilemmas
•
•
•
•
•
•
Size
Quality of administration
Time necessary to rebuild all determinants
Degree programmes (business, reputation)
“Monopoly” on commercial activities
Equal conditions – market regulation
The way ahead
• Executive Board choice: business model
– Assessment of resilience of organisation
– Alternative models
• Scenarios
Criterium: trust