Content uploaded by Heather Nel
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Heather Nel on Nov 16, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
99
6
The Role of
Institutional Research in
Support of Strategic Planning
Heather Nel
Introduction
An academic revolution has taken place in higher education and the accelerated pace of
change requires transformative, not evolutionary, approaches to university planning and
decision-making. Higher education is increasingly challenged by “disruptive innovation”
which is revolutionising our approach to education, which impacts on increasing accessibility,
informing our delivery, and redefining the structure and function of learning environments,
from virtual classrooms to “flipped” instruction (SCUP 2014:13).
In this context, there is a strong emphasis on institutional effectiveness and higher education
is facing ever-increasing scrutiny to be accountable for results in achieving its purposes for
public good (Santiago, Tremblay, Basri & Arnal 2008:24). In a severely resource-constrained
environment, the involvement of planners and institutional researchers in supporting the
identification of new directions to respond to and shape transformative change has become
crucial. This is accompanied by widespread recognition of the importance of user-friendly
data analytics for accountability, performance assessment, and data-informed strategic
planning (Norris & Poulton 2010:1).
Government expectations as to what universities should deliver have also become more
explicit and higher education has become unequivocally linked to economic progress
and social well-being, including desirable outcomes such as poverty reduction, increased
income equality, improved health, civic participation, good governance and the protection
of human rights (Oketch, McCowan & Schendel 2014:9). Requirements for strategic and
performance-oriented management practices in universities have raised the prominence
and significance of institutional research (IR) (Klemenčič et al. 2015:2). This is supported by
Terenzini (1993:2-3) who asserts that the nature of IR and the role it plays continue to evolve
as a consequence of advances in computing, the shifting budgetary climate, the increasing
complexity and sophistication of decision making, and calls for increased institutional
effectiveness. Calderon and Webber (2015:7-8) add that these drivers have resulted in a
strengthened role for the practice of IR and decision support within universities. In this
regard, the role of IR is “…not only to collaboratively assist decision makers in navigating
through these complexities but also for IR practitioners to be agents of change…” for the
purposes of fostering institutional innovation and advancement.
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
100
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
The research objective underpinning this chapter is to assess the role of IR in supporting
strategic planning, organisational learning and renewal within a context of complexity. To
address this question, the chapter will firstly briefly conceptualise IR and outline its various
purposes, roles and functions. Flowing from this, attention will be devoted to exploring the
role of IR in supporting strategic planning and decision-making through transforming data
into knowledge that facilitates organisational learning. Thirdly, the tenets of the complexity
approach will be deconstructed to provide a framework for understanding the role of IR in
making sense of what Pascale (1999:91) refers to as “the edge of chaos”. The chapter closes
with a case study to illustrate the evolution of IR at a selected higher education institution
in South Africa with an emphasis on the important role IR practitioners fulfil in supporting
strategic planning.
Conceptualising the role and functions of institutional research
Peterson (1999:84) conceives of IR as research designed to generate information that
examines the interface between a higher education institution and its environment to better
understand how institutions adapt to complex challenges. In an often cited definition,
Saupe (1981:1) describes IR “as the sum of all activities…which are used for the purposes
of institutional planning, policy development, and decision making”. The primary role of IR
has changed over time from emphasising and requiring primarily descriptive statistics, fact
books, and reporting, to more analysis and evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative
(Volkwein 2008:8).
Volkwein (1999, 2008) and Serban (2002) note that IR is an evolving profession with a
number of interdependent “faces”. These “faces” of IR are diagrammatically depicted in
Table 1 below (see also Chapter 1).
Table 1: Five “faces” of institutional research
Organisational
role and culture
Purposes and audiences of IR
Formative and internal (for improvement) Summative and external (for accountability)
Administrative
and institutional
To describe the institution – IR as information
authority
To present the best case – IR as
spin doctor
Academic and
professional
To analyse alternatives – IR as
policy analyst
To supply impartial evidence of
effectiveness – IR as scholar
Knowledge
management
To gather and transform data into information and knowledge; to maintain an institutional repository
of data, information, and knowledge; and to facilitate the process of knowledge creation and sharing
– IR as knowledge manager
Source: Volkwein (1999:17, 2008:18) as adapted by Serban (2002:106)
Teodorescu (2006:78) cautions that IR is often consumed with responding to the information
requirements of diverse external constituencies which leaves little time for reflection and
yields minimal organisational learning. Consequently, the outcomes of IR tend to be skewed
toward providing data and information rather than creating knowledge. Mamta (2012:1357)
argues that effective IR requires the integration of data collected from various sources and
its transformation into knowledge – depicted as the path to knowledge in Figure 1 below.
The underlying premise is that IR plays a critical role in transforming data into information,
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
101
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
and information into knowledge to advance organisational “wisdom” (IUQB 2008:19). As
knowledge about universities becomes increasingly dispersed, IR practitioners serve as
“boundary spanners” by assisting others to locate knowledge when it is generated in other
parts of the university (Davenport & Prusak 1998:4-5).
Figure 1: The path to knowledge
Source: IUQB 2008:19
IR practitioners transform data into information by adding value through contextualisation
and by understanding for what purpose the information is required. Such knowledge is a
fluid mix of framed experience, values, and expert insight that provides a framework for
evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. IR practitioners need to
appreciate that an organisation’s most important knowledge often resides in individuals as
tacit knowledge that relates to experience and intuition. This needs to be tapped into in
addition to explicit knowledge that is readily documented and communicable (Clarke &
Rollo 2001:209).
In contrast to the hierarchical view of knowledge as a higher form of information or data,
Makani (2015:350-351) views the relationship between data, information and knowledge
as constituting a continuous sequence of activities or tasks that are interwoven. As illustrated
in Figure 2, action is defined as the ability to respond to knowledge and thereby make the
best use of what is known. The gaps between information and knowledge and between
knowledge and action can be referred to as the “thinking gap; know-what” and “knowing-
doing gap; know-how” respectively. These gaps denote the IR practitioner’s ability or
inability to transform existing data, information and knowledge into meaningful action. This
is referred to as “know-how” that embraces the ability to put “know-what” into practice.
The practice-based perspective presents knowledge and knowing as inseparable from
human activity and practice (Jashapara 2011).
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
102
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
KNOWLEDGE
INFORMATION
DATA
ACTION
Thinking gap,
know-what
Knowing-doing gap,
know-how
LEARN
ANALYSE
COLLECT
APPLY
Figure 2: Relationship between data, information, knowledge and action
Source: Adapted from Musimwa-Makani (2012)
Terenzini (1993:3-6) is a proponent of viewing the role of IR as organisational intelligence in
three mutually dependent, but distinct, forms or levels, technical and analytical intelligence,
issues intelligence and contextual intelligence (see Chapter 1). Figure 3 below highlights the
need for IR practitioners to embrace all three levels of organisational intelligence, given that
they are mutually dependent and supportive.
Figure 3: Institutional research and levels of organisational intelligence
Source: Terenzini (1999) adapted by Nel (2015)
Contextual intelligence (history, culture
and evolution of the institution and
external environmental trends)
Issues intelligence (e.g. resource
allocation, staff workload, facilities and
enrolment planning)
Technical/analytical intelligence
(facts and figures comprising
institutional profile)
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
103
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
IR practitioners who contribute to generating organisational intelligence have the potential
to position universities as learning organisations where knowledge contributes to continuous
performance enhancement. The role of IR in supporting strategic planning will be elaborated
on in the next section.
The role of institutional research in supporting strategic planning
The emergence of strategic planning in higher education has been prompted by pressures
from governments through performance-based funding models, quality assurance and
accreditation regimes, and increased global competition (Klemenčič et al. 2015:8). This
gave rise to the application of strategic planning as a tool to respond proactively to the
challenges confronting higher education institutions (Hinton 2012:7).
Against this backdrop, Shawyun (2011:5-7) writes that there are three basic questions that
strategic planning processes seek to address, namely, Where we are now and where are we
going? This should address the institution’s current and past performance and capabilities
based on an analysis of both the internal and external environments. The next question is,
Where do we want to go or where could we be going? This question should address where
the institution wants to stake out a future position in the educational landscape. Lastly,
How do we get there? This question should address the resources and capabilities that the
institution needs to achieve its desired strategic positioning and outcomes.
Lapin (2004:106) adds that strategic planning emphasises that strategic planning is usually
undertaken in response to internal imperatives to ensure that the university operates as
efficiently and effectively as possible. However, he argues that it is even more important to
position the university in relation to its external environment – political, economic, social,
technological and environmental – to respond proactively to trends, events, emerging issues
and “wild cards” that will impact on their future.
Shawyun’s three questions clearly indicate a role for IR in all the phases of strategic planning.
Once a plan is complete, however, IR also contributes to comparing desired and actual
performance. It also provides feedback to explain deviations in achieving targets, should
such deviations occur. This requires that the plan includes measurable criteria for success and
clear accountability for progress or lack of progress (Hanover 2013:10). This is supported by
Hollowell et al. (2010:69) who assert that planning must include a sustained assessment of
progress toward goals and objectives to provide demonstrable evidence that the university
has successfully achieved what it set out to do. Stated simply, strategic planning is a journey
that begins best when appropriate quantitative and qualitative data are transformed into
actionable information (Voorhees 2008:79). Plans fail for all sorts of reasons, but breakdowns
in the planning process can often be attributed to shortcomings in monitoring and evaluating
a plan’s progress in achieving its desired outcomes (Rutgers 2010:5).
Dooris et al. (2002:10) add that strategic planning – if wisely used – can be a powerful
tool to assist a university to listen to its constituencies, to encourage the emergence of
innovative ideas, to recognise opportunities, to make decisions supported by evidence,
and to strive towards a shared mission and vision. Relatively recent conceptions of strategic
planning increasingly recognise that university leaders need to embrace flexibility, agility,
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
104
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
and inventiveness through a focus on imaginative strategic thinking as opposed to linear,
causal analysis (Mintzberg 1994:107).
Chaffee and Tierney (1988) explain that the transformation from a linear ("meet the budget")
to an expressive ("create the future") planning mode, is predicated on a university's ability
to maintain a dynamic equilibrium between its culture, its leadership, and the continuous
communication of values. As planning evolves, there are differences in the reactive versus
proactive nature of IR activities and their relevance to decision making for the future. This
progression assumes that meaningful analyses are built on a sound understanding of the
data and that insightful syntheses will incorporate both intuition and rigorous analysis.
Linear planning relies on historical trends, the status quo, and a static view of the future.
Expressive planning relates external variables to the university's culture and values and IR
practitioners are required to synthesise separately conducted analyses within an interpretive
strategic framework. There is greater emphasis on qualitative analysis to counterbalance the
quantitative and rational bias embedded in linear planning processes.
Dressler (1981:254-255) argues that, if universities are to maintain strategic flexibility,
innovation must be encouraged and there must be a sensitivity and a responsiveness to new
circumstances external to the institution. The achievement of strategic flexibility requires a
constant review of planning and those who do it. The linear model of planning has come
under heavy criticism, primarily because it often neglects the complex issues that usually
come to the fore during the execution phase of the plans. Research has shown that the most
successful organisations place significant emphasis on experience and the implicit knowledge
accumulated within the organisation, as well as their ability to improvise (Zechlin 2010).
This notion is particularly well developed in Mintzberg’s work (1994:24-25) where he
explains that intended strategies can sometimes be implemented later as deliberate
strategies. Meanwhile, plans that were identified during the initial planning phases, but
remained unrealised, must be left aside. He refers to “emergent” strategies that develop as
a result of innovations within, and external to, the system. Realised strategies are based on
the sum of all of these approaches.
Figure 4: Mintzberg’s deliberate and emergent strategies
Source: Adapted from Mintzberg 1994:24
Non-realized
strategies
Emergent
strategies
Deliberate
strategy
Realized strategy
Intended strategy
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
105
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
According to Zechlin (2010:7), emergent models of strategy development require that
university leadership has to be able to cope with ambivalence and contradiction by attaching
increased value to observation and reflection. The role of leadership entails developing a
broad strategic framework that allows for self-determined actions by organisational sub-
systems. The reciprocity between strategic thinking and action are reinforced through
frequent and repeated loops of reflection on the process. Strategic planning shifts to becoming
a reflective, learning cycle that feeds back into the organisation, where the decisions that
are made remain alterable and opportunities for emergent strategies to evolve are opened.
In complex adaptive systems (CAS), strategic planning should be seen as an emergent,
interactive dynamic – a complex interplay from which a collective impetus for action and
change emerges when heterogeneous agents interact in networks in ways that produce
new patterns of behaviour or modes of operating. The complexity approach focuses on
identifying and exploring the strategies and behaviours that foster creativity, learning, and
adaptability (Uhl-Bien et al. 2007:303).
Globally, higher education institutions are being called upon to navigate increasingly complex
and uncertain terrains because of phenomena such as globalisation, international ranking,
shrinking government funding, and demands to widen access to marginalised groups. It is in
this context that the role of IR practitioners in supporting emergent and creative modes of
planning becomes important. This will be explored more fully in the next section.
A complexity approach to institutional research and strategic planning
It is widely recognised that successful organisations are adaptive and capable of developing
unexpectedly creative solutions to problems (Amagoh 2008). From a complexity perspective,
organisations as systems can be observed in two states, stable and unstable. The most
interesting behaviour occurs on the cusp of stability and instability, or what Pascale (1999)
refers to as the ‘‘edge of chaos’’. A complexity perspective embraces non-causal, non-
linear interpretations of systems with the awareness that the collective activity of the units
within the system is not fully explained by their sum, and that they may produce emergent
properties. These properties feature spontaneous, unpredictable and self-organised patterns
and behaviours (Smith 2005).
When it is at the edge of instability, a system is far easier to change because small actions of
agents within the system can escalate into major outcomes. The application of the complexity
approach to organisational life leads to the proposition that changeable organisations are
those in which the informal feedback networks are richly connected and sustained away
from equilibrium in a state of bounded instability. The disorderly dynamics of contradiction,
conflict, tension, and dialogue provide the driving force for emergent patterns of behavior
(Stacey 1995). A complexity approach emphasises mindfulness, mission-based and values-
based decisions, fostering relationships, and constructing possibilities that contribute to an
organisation’s resilience. A strategic plan itself is not a blueprint for a future desired state,
but prepares an organisation to be more mindful of, and responsive to, the constant changes
and possibilities emerging from its environment (Prewitt et al. 2012). In this context, IR
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
106
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
practitioners fulfil an important role in understanding that strategic planning is a dynamic
process the institution can use to deal with an unpredictable reality (Hilburt-Davis 2000).
Hummelbrunner and Jones (2013:5-7) outline three core principles that form the basis
of planning approaches that are suited to increasingly complex contexts. Firstly, there is a
need to move from static to dynamic and iterative planning where plans are regarded as
hypotheses about future developments. Secondly, a transition from prescriptive to flexible
planning modes is required whereby leadership formulates clear principles for action which
guide implementation while encouraging adaptive responses. Thirdly, embracing diversified
planning requires working with a ‘hierarchy of plans’ which stimulates the self-organisational
capacities of each level and improves ownership. In a multi-level planning structure, each
level should carry out its own operational planning and, at the same time, provide a strategic
frame for the level beneath.
Organisational learning can thus be conceived of as a principal means of achieving strategic
renewal. Renewal requires that organisations explore and learn new ways of knowing, doing
and being, while concurrently exploiting what they have already learned. This poses the
challenge for IR practitioners to be flexible in their choice of issues to analyse and the
methods that are applied to generate knowledge in support of strategic renewal. This will
be explored in more depth in the next section with reference to the role of IR in supporting
strategic planning and organisational renewal.
Exploring the role of institutional research in supporting
strategic planning and organisational renewal at Nelson Mandela
MetropolitanUniversity
The primary research questions underpinning this study have been partially addressed
through an exposition of pertinent conceptual and theoretical frameworks, such as
Volkwein’s and Serban’s faces of IR, Terenzini’s levels of organisational intelligence, as
well as the complexity approach to organisational learning and renewal. This part of the
chapter consists of a reflective case study with a special emphasis on how the tenets of these
theoretical frameworks can be applied to IR and strategic planning at a particular South
African higher education institution.
This case study focused on the role of IR in supporting strategic planning and organisational
renewal at a selected higher education institution in South Africa. In so doing, I have sought
to apply the relevant theoretical underpinnings to facilitate the exploration of contextual
conditions which pertain to the practice of IR within a complex higher education landscape
where there is a need to implement data-informed decision making and planning processes.
This enables me to assess critically the extent to which the office responsible for strategic
planning and IR at the selected higher education institution has contributed to strategic
planning and organisational renewal, the challenges encountered, and possible future
directions to explore.
To address the research questions, I have relied on insider experiences of, and immersion
in, the field of higher education strategic planning and institutional research for the past ten
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
107
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
years (2005-2015). The challenge was to be aware of the potential for bias which required
a reflexive approach. I drew upon auto-ethnography as one of the few insider research
methods available for ‘studying one’s own culture and oneself as part of that culture’ (Patton
2002:85).
Observing and participating are integral to understanding the breadth and complexities of
the human experience (Mack et al. 2005:14). In this case, participant observation assisted
the author to form an in-depth understanding of the challenges and benefits associated with
strategic planning and the roles that IR can fulfil in supporting organisational renewal within
a context of complexity.
An historical overview of Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) is one of six comprehensive universities
in South Africa established through the incorporation of the Port Elizabeth campus of Vista
University into the University of Port Elizabeth (UPE) in January 2004 and the subsequent
merger of the Port Elizabeth Technikon and UPE in January 2005. The processes associated
with integrating three sets of organisational structures, systems, policies, and cultures,
along with finalising the governance framework and mapping the strategic direction
of the University constituted early challenges for the newly merged university. This was
accompanied by a strong focus on securing the university’s financial viability through the
development of the university’s institutional operating plan (IOP) which was submitted to
the national Department of Education in 2006 to qualify for recapitalisation and merger-
related funding.
Ten years after the merger, in 2015, NMMU had a total student headcount enrolment of
27 664 and its 2 300 permanent staff members were distributed across five campuses in
Port Elizabeth and another one in George. Its vision is to be a dynamic, African university
recognised for its leadership in generating cutting-edge knowledge for a sustainable future.
Given its distinctive niche as a comprehensive university, NMMU’s mission is to provide
access to diverse educational opportunities through a wide range of general formative and
vocational, career-focused programmes across various fields of study. To achieve this vision
and mission, a dedicated planning and IR capability was required to support university
decision makers in implementing evidence-based policies, strategies and practices.
The evolution of IR in support of planning and organisational renewal at NMMU
As an acknowledgment of the significant organisational renewal interventions that were
required as a result of the merger, the post-merger restructuring made provision for the
establishment of a central office responsible for four functions, (a) supporting strategic and
academic planning processes at institutional and divisional/faculty levels; (b) conducting
data analytics, institutional surveys and selected research studies in support of decision-
making and planning; (c) monitoring and evaluating institutional effectiveness; and (d)
coordinating reporting to internal and external stakeholders. Despite undergoing some
structural adaptations since 2005, the Office for Institutional Planning (OIP) has retained
the oversight of these functions and is optimally positioned to impact on planning, policy
development since it is situated within the Office of the Vice Chancellor, and its Senior
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
108
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
Director is represented on key senior management decision-making structures. The
establishment of the OIP was thus a direct response to the need of the merged institution for
evidence-based, analytical decision support to key academic and administrative decision-
makers at various levels.
NMMU benefitted from the organisational renewal and innovation that was unleashed
through the bounded instability of the merger processes. The university leadership was
able to analyse and retain good practices inherited through the merger whilst grasping the
opportunity, where necessary, to develop entirely new approaches that aligned with its
strategic intentions. During this period, extensive IR studies were conducted, using multiple
methods, to inform important planning processes. These included crafting the vision,
mission, values and strategic priorities for the newly merged university; allocating faculties
and administrative divisions to various campuses in a multi-campus context; preparing the
Institutional Operating Plan (IOP) to secure the financial sustainability of the university;
and outlining the principles and criteria for restructuring and integrating academic and
administrative structures.
A crucial dimension of the strategic positioning of NMMU as a comprehensive university
was the development of a consolidated academic qualifications and programme profile.
From 2006 to 2009, a collaborative research project, funded by the South Africa Norway
Tertiary Education Development Programme (SANTED), was undertaken by NMMU
and the University of Johannesburg to develop a new academic qualifications structure
and programme profile that would enhance access and articulation between various
qualification types. As a result of intensive research conducted by curriculum experts, a
conceptual framework relating to programme and curriculum models was developed for the
two universities to inform the development of access, articulation, progression, and transfer
pathways within and between qualifications in cognate fields of study.
The crafting of the ten-year Vision 2020 strategic plan was initiated in 2008 and was
developed through a highly consultative process. Formulating Vision 2020 provided a unique
opportunity for the university community and its stakeholders to define NMMU’s distinctive
academic purpose and identity and to determine strategic priorities that would secure the
long-term sustainability of the institution. As part of consultations with key internal and
external stakeholders, focus group and in-depth interviews were conducted to spark future-
focused dialogue in respect of three key questions, namely: What kind of university would
you like NMMU to be by 2020? What will make it possible for NMMU to achieve this?
What are the key uncertainties in the external environment that could impact on NMMU
achieving this?
Responses to these questions were analysed and the emerging themes formed the basis for
crafting NMMU’s Vision 2020 strategic plan. Representative task teams were convened to
inform the process of developing a detailed institutional strategic plan. The plan included
strategic goals, objectives, outputs and key performance indicators to monitor progress
towards achieving NMMU’s desired future state. This strategic planning process was
underpinned by ongoing, thorough environmental scanning as well as various IR studies of
the strengths, challenges, opportunities and threats confronting NMMU.
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
109
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
As part of co-creating a transformative institutional culture and unifying organisational identity
at NMMU, the Vice Chancellor (since 2008), Professor Derrick Swartz, conceptualised and
allocated considerable institutional resources to implement a pioneering “institutional culture
enlivening process” at all levels of the university. This innovative organisational development
process commenced in 2014 to encourage staff and students to grapple collectively with
important questions of transformation and the implications of living the values and principles
contained in Vision 2020. This encompassing process for culture change touches on every
aspect of university life, including curriculum and pedagogical transformation, diversifying
staff and student demographic profiles, encouraging values-aligned behaviour, engaging
in difficult dialogues about inequality and social justice, promoting sustainability, and re-
engineering institutional systems and processes.
As part of this intervention, the IR practitioners within OIP have been challenged to
think afresh about the frame of reference and methodologies to be applied monitoring,
evaluating and advising management as it pertains to the pace and depth of organisational
renewal and transformation. Peterson (1999:84) correctly asserts that an institution
undergoing extensive transformation needs to mount efforts to assess both the readiness
and capacity for institutional redesign. In this regard, it is important that IR contributes in
qualitatively meaningful ways to organisational intelligence by ensuring that fundamentally
transformative renewal processes are not reduced merely to quantitative data and logical
framework models. A complexity approach requires that the rich narratives and experiences
of various stakeholders are captured and interpreted to promote learning and reflection.
This constitutes a particular focus for OIP going forward and will necessitate a paradigm shift
that contributes to understanding the transformation journey in deeper, more contextually
informed ways.
As indicated by Volkwein (2011:11), the classic Janusian challenge for most IR practitioners
is to resolve the potential tension between their internal and external roles. He suggests that
this should be viewed as distinguishing between inspirational and pragmatic orientations
– doing something because you want to versus doing something because you have to.
The inspirational orientation aims to enhance institutional effectiveness to achieve an
organisational climate characterised by ongoing reflection and continuous improvement.
The pragmatic orientation recognises the need to be accountable to external stakeholders
such as regulators and funders to position the university strategically and to secure funding.
This constitutes a particular challenge for the OIP since the limited IR capacity is largely
consumed by responding to external regulatory and reporting requirements which leaves
little time for the scholarly research that facilitates organisational learning and creativity. This
seems to be a problem at most South African higher education institutions (see Chapter 4).
Roper and Pettit (2002:14) note that, despite an emphasis on learning and knowledge
creation, IR practitioners often feel trapped in a vicious cycle. As organisations learn by
doing, real learning becomes even more important. Increased complexity, however,
intensifies demands on staff, resulting in even less time for reflection and learning. When
and how can this vicious cycle be transformed into a virtuous one of reflective practice? This
will be explored in more depth in the next section.
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
110
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
Reviewing the role of IR and strategic planning at NMMU from a
complexity perspective
Improved planning in the face of complexity relies on more than awareness and knowledge
of tools. Enabling leadership fosters interactions of complex organisational systems with
environmental dynamics. Uhl-Bien et al. (2007:303) argue that “creativity and learning
occur when emergence forms a previously unknown solution to a problem or creates a new,
unanticipated outcome (i.e. adaptive change).”
Planning practices that foster organisational learning and renewal embrace adaptive planning
approaches that are responsive to contextual changes and focus on providing feedback on
lessons learned from implementation (Hummelbrunner & Jones 2013:9). A key question
worth framing is: Does planning enable or inhibit non-linear emergence? The short answer is
that planning for creativity should be a continuous learning process to adjust for the changes
and unknowns that are certain to arise. The complexity lessons for those ordinarily engaged
in strategic foresight and IR are twofold, namely, that responsiveness must take precedence
over preparation, and that it is important to recognise that the “edge of chaos” can provide
a platform for the emergence of innovative ways of addressing complex organisational
challenges. In essence, the task of IR practitioners and planners in this context is to cultivate
an environment in which innovation and creativity are likely to emerge (Smith 2005:26).
Peterson (1999:84) concurs by asserting that IR has flourished as an institutional function
because it has contributed to the adaptive capacity of institutions and has played a major
role in fostering and assisting institutional change. In the years ahead, the role of IR will be
to assist higher education institutions to address changing conditions that require not just
improved effectiveness, but institutional redesign and transformation.
At NMMU, planning officers and IR practitioners have been grappling with the need to think
afresh about their role in enabling creativity and the emergence of strategies to enable the
university to adapt to a rapidly changing environment, particularly within organisational
sub-systems such as faculties and administrative divisions. The complexity approach views
organisational change as comprising a non-linear, integrated, and socially embedded process
affected by a variety of causes and concepts. As the complexity of a system increases, the
ability to understand and use information to plan and predict strategic outcomes becomes
more difficult. The complexity theory paradigm rejects the mechanistic ontological models,
which assume linear causality between events and effects. Systems that operate near a
threshold of instability are those that tend to exhibit creativity and produce innovative
behaviours at the level of the whole system (Amagoh 2008:6).
In this regard, Stacey (1995:493) points out that:
“If innovative organizations are nonlinear feed-back systems operating far from
equilibrium then reductionist approaches to researching them are likely to
produce seriously misleading conclusions. Cross-sectional tests of linear causal
hypothesis will simply be interesting exercises in hindsight. Instead, research will
have to focus on the meanings of the irregular patterns of behavior observed and
on reasoning about the kind of system those patterns are being generated by.
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
111
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
Instead of looking for causes and effects it is necessary to look for patterns and
their systemic implications.”
This will require that IR practitioners need to create optimal conditions for organisational
learning and renewal by moving beyond Terenzini’s technical and issues intelligence to
embrace contextual intelligence in an effort better to understand complex challenges and
opportunities confronting their universities and to contribute meaningfully to flexible and
adaptive planning approaches. This speaks to the development of “organisational savvy and
wisdom” (Terenzini 1999:25), especially in terms of the complex challenges confronting
higher education nationally and globally.
NMMU’s OIP functions effectively as the hub of technical/analytical intelligence for the
university and is responsible for providing reliable, accurate institutional data and information
timeously to internal and external stakeholders. Examples of data that are continuously
monitored include enrolment patterns, student staff ratios, retention rates, graduate
outcomes, financial viability, and space utilisation patterns. These data are converted to
information and are accessible to decision makers through a homegrown, web-enabled
Business Intelligence (BI) system called IntelliWeb. Such information is critical to planning
and institutional effectiveness processes, and enables the OIP to act as both a knowledge
manager and an information authority. Using this system, reliable information is centrally
accessible to users through various reporting tools and dashboards. Additionally, the system
facilitates consistent data interpretations and reporting standards, and helps to maintain data
integrity across the university.
As depicted in Figure 5 below, the OIP has developed an institutional monitoring, evaluation
and reporting framework in terms of which institutional performance is systematically
monitored and reported on. This serves to ensure that NMMU’s strategic directional
statements are translated into action at all levels of the institution and that Council is
provided with comprehensive quarterly performance review reports which outline progress,
or the lack of it, in respect of strategy implementation. This comprehensive M&E framework
is underpinned by indicators that assess institutional effectiveness in terms of four key
pillars, namely, (a) NMMU’s strategic positioning and identity as a comprehensive university;
(b) teaching and learning excellence; (c) the productivity and impact of research and
engagement; and (d) organisational capability and sustainability. These pillars are monitored
and evaluated using student success as a lens; in other words, the contribution of the core
missions of teaching and learning, research and engagement are evaluated through IR to
assess the impact they have on enhancing student success. This ensures that IR is focused
and targeted to provide rich information for the purposes of decision support, planning and
resource allocation.
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
112
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
Figure 5: NMMU monitoring and evaluation framework
McChesney et al. (2012:32) refer to “wildly important goals” as those strategically significant
goals that need to be systematically tracked through the use of a compelling scoreboard. In
the NMMU context, as is evident from Figure 5 above, holistic student success is an example
of a wildly important goal and the monitoring, evaluation and IR endeavours are largely
focused on tracking multi-dimensional indicators of student success. Interestingly, Volkwein
(2011:19) advocates for the assessment of student performance at critical points during the
educational process to enable higher education institutions to build a culture of evidence
and to become more effective learning organisations.
Student success is monitored at NMMU through ongoing data analytics and cyclical IR
studies, including surveys such as the South African Survey of Student Engagement (SASSE)
and the Graduate Destinations Survey. NMMU has also been selected as one of five higher
education institutions in South Africa to participate in the Kresge-funded Siyaphumelela (it
means “together we succeed”) project over a four-year period to design and implement a
data analytics tracking system for the early identification of academically vulnerable students.
The challenge is to ensure that the narratives and personal experiences of students that
lie underneath the quantitative data are adequately surfaced through appropriate research
methodologies (see Chapter 13).
According to Glover (2009:1), universities that invest in integrated systems to collect
and effectively provide data for interpretation are far better positioned to deepen their
understanding of student progression and identify strategies for improving student success.
This is supported by Williford (2009:5) who notes that, as advocates for student success,
Teaching &
Learning
Research Engagement
NMMU BRAND AS A
COMPREHENSIVE
UNIVERSITY
• An African University reflecting the
values of Nelson Mandela
• Comprehensive PQM with diverse
range of quality educational
opportunities
• University of choice for staff and
students
TEACHING AND LEARNING
EXCELLENCE
• Humanising pedagogical approach
• Epistemic access
• Improved throughput/retention rate
• Use of technologies to enhance
learning
• Reflective teaching practice
• Improved staff: student ratios
• Diverse academic staff profile
• Integration of Internationalisation
• Self/employable graduates
ORGANISATIONAL
CAPABILITY AND
SUSTAINABILITY
• Surplus budget – diversify income
streams
• Integrated planning, budgeting and
reporting
• Improved infrastructure & business
processes
• Effective talent management strategy
• Embedded sustainability principles
RESEARCH AND ENGAGEMENT
PRODUCTIVITY AND IMPACT
• Increased research outputs – M&D
graduates, publications, patents
• Growing next generation of academics
• Research sustainability – diversified
funding sources
• Strategic partnerships
• Integration of Internationalisation
• Contributes to improved socio-
economic conditions
Living & Learning
spaces to facilitate
holistic development
of staff & students
Staff & Student
Recognition and
Reward Systems
STUDENT ACCESS AND
SUCCESS THROUGH
EXCELLENCE IN:
Vibrant campus life
Internationalisation
Co-curricular activities
Inclusive institutional
culture
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
113
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
IR practitioners can help the university community to understand students’ characteristics
and needs better, with a view to enhancing the visibility of student attrition and retention
challenges, and thus reinforcing best practices. Through systematic data analytics and survey
research on incoming students, student experiences, and graduate destinations, the OIP is
able to evaluate critical dimensions of student success – thereby fulfilling Volkwein’s role of
IR as researcher or scholar.
By being a proactive provider of organisational intelligence, IR practitioners assist the
university leadership to be adaptive and responsive thereby benefiting both the institution
and the profession. (Peterson 1999:103). In leveraging off the data and information gathered
for the purposes of technical and issues intelligence, it is evident that the Office responsible
for IR at NMMU is well positioned to fulfil a scholarly knowledge-management role in
supporting planning and quality improvement interventions at various levels of the university.
A perrenial challenge for IR practitioners is, however, to enhance the extent to which the
findings of IR studies positively impact on practice, and ultimately, on student outcomes.
This provides scope for strategic experimentation in exploring innovative dissemination
strategies which are customised to the particular needs of various stakeholders in a quest to
ensure that the trends emerging from data analytics and IR studies are more readily engaged
with and responded to.
Conclusion
By referring to theories of IR, planning, complexity and organisational change as a frame
of reference, this chapter analysed and reflected on the role of IR and planning within
a dynamic and unpredictable higher education context. This was complemented by the
use of a case study whereby the roles of IR at a selected higher education institution were
discussed in-depth using a participant observation method.
This chapter has pointed to the evolution of IR as a practice in terms of its important
role in supporting continuous organisational renewal and improvement. It is clear that IR
practitioners have gone beyond the collection and analysis of data for information generation
and have taken on the role of scholars and knowledge managers who can harness creative
emergence and learning for the purposes of assisting their universities to thrive within a
context of ever-increasing complexity.
References
Amagoh, F. 2008. Perspectives on
Organisational Change: Systems and
Complexity Theories, The Innovation
Journal: The Public Sector Innovation
Journal, 13 (3):1-14.
Calderon, A.J. and Webber, K.L. 2015.
“Institutional Research, Planning, and
Decision Support in Higher Education
Today”, in K.L. Webber and A.J.
Calderon (eds.). Institutional Research
and Planning in Higher Education:
Global Contexts and Themes, New York,
Routledge, pp. 3-15.
Chaffee, E.E. and Tierney, W.G. 1988.
Collegiate Culture and Leadership
Strategies. New York: Macmillan.
Chan, S.S. 1993. Changing roles of
institutional research in strategic
management, Research in Higher
Education, 34 (5):533-549. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1007/BF00991918
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
114
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
Clarke, T. and Rollo, C. 2001."Corporate
initiatives in knowledge management",
Education + Training, 43 (4/5):206 –
214, Access online at http://dx.doi.
org/10.1108/00400910110399201
Davenport, T. and Prusak, L. 1998. Working
Knowledge: How Organisations Manage
What They Know. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press. Excerpt available
online at http://www.kushima.org/is/wp-
content/uploads/2013/09/Davenport_
know.pdf
Dooris, M.J., Kelley, J.M. and Trainer, J.F.
2002. Strategic Planning in Higher
Education, New Directions for
Institutional Research, 116, Fall 2002.
Glover, R. 2009. Strengthening Institutional
Research and Information Technology
Capacity through Achieving the Dream:
Principles and Practices of Student
Success, Lumina Foundation for
Education, pp.1-10. Access online at
http://www.achievingthedream.org/docs/
guides/ATD_IR_IT.pdf PMid:21814634
PMCid:PMC3147290
Hanover Research. 2013. Strategic Planning
in Higher Education – Best Practices and
Benchmarking, Washington, DC. Access
online at http://www.hanoverresearch.
com/media/Strategic-Planning-in-Higher-
Education-%E2%80%93-Best-Practices-
and-Benchmarking.pdf
Hilburt-Davis, J. 2000. Learning from
Complexity: Is Strategic Planning
Obsolete? Practice Paper, The Family
Firm Institute:141-144. Access online
at http://www.familybusinessconsulting .
com/resources/strategic_planning.pdf
Hinton, K.E. 2012. A Practical Guide to
Strategic Planning in Higher Education.
Society for College and University
Planning.
Hollowell, D. Middaugh, M. and Sibolski,
E. 2010. Integrating Higher Education
Planning and Assessment: A Practical
Guide Digital Version, Society for College
and University Planning.
Hummelbrunner, R. and Jones, H. 2013.
A guide for planning and strategy
development in the face of complexity.
Overseas Development Institute
Background Note, March 2013. pp.
1-12.
Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB).
2008. Good Practice for Institutional
Research in Irish Higher Education.
National Guidelines.
Lapin, J.D. 2004. Using External
Environmental Scanning and Forecasting
to Improve Strategic Planning, Journal
of Applied Research in the Community
College, 11 (2):105-113. Access
online at http://www.kvcc.me.edu/
CMSContent/Departments/Institutional_
Assessment/2004%20Env%20
Scanning%20and%20Forcasting%20
to%20improve%20strategic%20
planning%20-%20Lapin.pdf
Klemenčič, M., Šćukanec, N. and
Komljenovič, J. 2015. Decision support
issues in Central and Eastern Europe. In
K.L. Webber and A.J. Calderon (eds.).
Institutional Research and Planning in
Higher Education: Global Themes and
Context. New York: Routledge. Access
online at http://www.routledge.com/
books/details/9781138021433/
Mack, N., Woodsong, C., Macqueen,
K.M., Guest, G. and Namey, E. 2005.
Qualitative Research Methods: A
Data Collector’s Field Guide, Module
2: Participant Observation, North
Carolina: Family Health International,
Access online at http://www.fhi360.
org/sites/default/files/media/documents/
Qualitative%20Research%20
Methods%20-%20A%20Data%20
Collector%27s%20Field%20Guide.pdf
Makani, J. 2015. Knowledge management,
research data management, and
university scholarship, VINE, 45 (3):344-
359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/VINE-07-
2014-0047
Mamta, B. 2012. Institutional Knowledge
to Institutional Intelligence: A Data
Mining Enabled Knowledge Management
Approach. International Journal of
Computational Engineering Research 2
(5):1356-1360.
McChesney, C., Covey, S. and Huling, J.
2012. The 4 Disciplines of Execution:
Achieving Your Wildly Important Goals.
Franklin Covey Co, Access online at
http://www.midlandsonestop.org/public_
docs/The%204%20Disciplines%20of%20
Execution.pdf
Mintzberg, H. 1994. The Rise and Fall of
Strategic Planning: Reconceiving Roles
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
115
The Role of Institutional Research in Support of Strategic Planning
for Planning, Plans, Planners, New York:
Simon and Schuster. PMid:8089715
Musimwa-Makani, J. 2012. Knowledge
management in knowledge-intensive
organisations: an investigation of factors
influencing choices of knowledge
management systems. Doctoral Thesis,
Dalhousie University.
Norris, D.M. and Nick L. Poulton, N.L. 2010.
A Guide to Planning for Change. Society
for College and University Planning.
2010. Access online at https://www2.
cortland.edu/dotAsset/90d13b15-af02-
4732-a13f-0b2c5f81b958.pdf
Oketch, M. McCowan, T. and Schendel, R.
2014. The Impact of Tertiary Education
on Development, t: A Rigorous
Literature Review. Department for
International Development. Access
online at https://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/
Portals/0/PDF%20reviews%20and%20
summaries/Tertiary%20education%20
2014%20Oketch%20report.
pdf?ver=2014-06-24-161044-887
Pascale, R. 1999. ‘Surfing the edge of chaos.’
Sloan Management Review. 40 (3):83-94.
Access online at https://learning-change.
wikispaces.com/file/view/Pascale+R+-
+Surfing.pdf
Patton, Michael Quinn. 2002. Qualitative
Research & Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Peterson, M. W. 1999. The Role of
Institutional Research: From
Improvement to Redesign, New
Directions for Institutional Research.
104:83-103. Access online at http://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/
ir.10408/pdf
Prewitt, J.E., Weil, R. and McClure, A.Q.
2012. A Complex Adaptive Systems
Approach to Strategic Planning, Asian
Journal of Business and Management
Sciences. 1 (11):94-99. Access online
at http://www.ajbms.org/articlepdf/
ajbms201211i11111.pdf
Roper, L. and Pettit, J. 2002. Development
and the Learning Organisation: An
Introduction, Development in Practice
12:258-71. Access online at http://
www.developmentinpractice.org/
sites/developmentinpractice.org/files/
LearningOrgFullTextEN.pdf http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/0961450220149654
Rutgers 2010. Strategic Planning in Higher
Education: A Guide for Leaders, Centre
for Organisational Development and
Leadership, Rutgers, The State University
of New Jersey. Access online at https://
ddq.nu.edu.sa/ddq1/files/35.pdf
Santiago, P. Tremblay, K. Basri, E. and Arnal,
E. 2008. Tertiary Education for the
Knowledge Society, Volume 1, Special
Features: Governance, Funding, Quality,
OECD Publishing, Paris. Access online at
www.oecd.org/edu/tertiary/review
Saupe, J.L. 1990. The Functions of
Institutional Research. 2nd Edition.
Tallahassee, FL: Association for
Institutional Research.
Serban, A. 2002. Knowledge Management:
The ‘Fifth Face’ of Institutional Research.
New Directions for Institutional Research.
113:105-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
ir.40
Smith, A.C.T. 2005. Complexity theory
for organisational futures studies.
Foresight 7 (3):22-30. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1108/14636680510601959
Society for College and University Planning.
2014. SCUP Academy Report 2014.
Access online at https://scup-framework-
production.s3.amazonaws.com/cms/
asset_version/file/11/24/112434.pd
f?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJYNXXD
GIQEC64CEQ&Expires=1448528
524&Signature=0KaFYF82jtd8FS
EyFSpLczNMojQ%3D&response-
content-disposition=inline%3B%20
filename%3D%22SCUPAcademy
Report2014.pdf%22& response-content-
type=applicati on%2Fpdf
Stacey, R.D. 1995. The Science of
Complexity: An Alternative Perspective
for Strategic Change Processes. Strategic
Management Journal. 16 (6):477-
495. Access online at http://www.
jstor.org/stable/2486790 http://dx.doi.
org/10.1002/smj.4250160606
Teodorescu, D. 2006 Institutional
researchers as knowledge managers in
universities: Envisioning new roles for
the IR profession, Tertiary Education and
Management. 12 (1):75-88. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/13583883.2006.9967161
Terenzini, P. 1993. On the Nature of
Institutional Research and the Knowledge
and Skills it Requires. Research in Higher
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
116
InstItutIonal ReseaRch In south afRIcan hIgheR educatIon
Education. 34 (1):1-10. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1007/BF00991859
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R. and McKelvey, B.
2007. Complexity Leadership Theory:
Shifting leadership from the industrial
age to the knowledge era. Leadership
Institute Faculty Publications. Paper 18.
Access online at http://digitalcommons.
unl.edu/leadershipfacpub/18
Volkwein, J. F. 1999. The Four Faces of
Institutional Research. New Directions for
Institutional Research. 104:9-20. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/ir.10401
Volkwein, J.F. 2008. The Foundations and
Evolution of Institutional Research. New
Directions for Higher Education. 141:5-
20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/he.289
Volkwein, J.F. 2011. Gaining Ground:
The Role of Institutional Research
in Assessing Student Outcomes and
Demonstrating Institutional Effectiveness.
National Institute for Learning Outcomes
Assessment Occasional Paper 11,
September 2011. Access online at http://
www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/
documents/Volkwein.pdf
Voorhees, R.A. 2008. Institutional Research’s
Role in Strategic Planning. New
Directions for Higher Education. 141:77-
85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/he.295
Williford, A.M. 2009. Institutional Research
in support of Student and Institutional
Success, Ohio University Working Paper
Series: CHEWP. 1:1-20. Access online at
https://www.ohio.edu/education/
centers-and-partnerships/centers/
center-for-higher-education/upload/
Institutional-Research-in-Support-of-
Student-and-Institutional-Success.pdf
Zechlin, L. 2010. Strategic Planning in Higher
Education. In E. Baker, B. McGaw
& P. Peterson (eds.). International
Encyclopedia of Education, 3rd Edition,
Athens: Elsevier Ltd. pp. 1-15. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-
7.00885-X
Botha J & Muller N (eds) 2016. Institutional Research in South African Higher Education. Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS
DOI: 10.18820/9781928357186/06
© 2016 AFRICAN SUN MeDIA
