Skip to main content

Why the UCISA Capability Model is useful

What do Universities do?

This may seem a strange question to ask and the answer may seem obvious.  Universities educate students and undertake research.  And perhaps they work with industrial partners and create spin-off companies of their worn.  And they may work with local communities, and affiliation bodies for certain degress, and they definitely report on their activities to government bodies such as HEFCE.  They provide student services and support.  The longeryou think about it, the more things you can think of that a University does.

In business, the things that an organisation does are called "capabilities", which is a slightly strange term.  I think it is linked to the HR idea of a combination of the CAPacity and ABILITY to do a task.  Whatever the name, it is a useful concept.  A capability is more basic than a process: a University may change the way it educates students but as long as it remains a University it will educate them one way or another.

A capability map is basically a nested list of things the University does, starting with the very high level ideas such as "education", "research" and "support services", and with the nested levels expanded on the more detailed capabilities that comprise the high-level ones.  Last week, UCISA published a generic capability map that describes a typical UK University, accompanied by a set of explanatory videos.

The map is not an organisational structure. It does not describe which unit or units performs each capability.  It merely says that someone, somewhere - possibly many people - do this activity.

A capability map is useful in giving all the stakeholders of the University an overall picture of what the University does.  You can analyse who "owns" each activity - e.g. who is responsible for student recruitment in your institution, or for research management?  If several people are responsible for the same capability, you can start conversations about how the work is subdivided and whether the various teams work well together.  If no-one at all is responsible, you have a problem!

Business architects can map processes and services to each capability.  Stakeholders can create a heat map to reflect which areas are working well and which need attention.  Strategic planning can check whether they have management information about each important capability.  And so on and so forth.  The capability map provides a common framework that people may use to structure a variety of analyses.

The UCISA model is a stepping stone to creating a capability model for your own University.  It also establishes a common vocabulary, so people from different institutions can compare thoughts and observations.  I encourage everyone to take a look.

The news blog related to the release can be found here -
The model information and all related downloads are available here -


Popular posts from this blog

Business Model Canvas

A Business Model Canvas is a tool for mapping the core functions and capabilities of an organisation.  Compared to the Core Diagrams that I described in an earlier post, the business model canvas attempts to present more aspects of the business, starting with the value proposition – a statement of what the organisation offers to its users (in the business world, to its customers).  It shows the activities and resources, as Core Diagrams do, but also shows user relationships & channels, and also benefits and costs.  I’m not aware of any universities that have used this tool but you can find examples from elsewhere on the web.

We are considering business model canvases as a tool for mapping the strategic capabilities of units at the University of Edinburgh.  Phil Taylor, our EA contractor, sketched an outline of what a business model canvas might begin to look like for HR:
This is only intended to be suggestive: the real canvas would need to result from in-depth discussions about th…

Data governance at the core

Among all the topics discussed at the Gartner Data & Analytics summit, one undercurrent caught my attention.  It came up at least twice, in very different talks.

The first occurrence was in a presentation by an e-commerce company which made all of its data open to all employees and encouraged them to create innovative analyses of that data.  The introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) last year has caused the company to restructure its data platform with stricter access policies, as they can't reasonably make the personal information of all their customers available to everyone in the organisation.

The other time was in a talk by a Gartner analyst, about different data architectures (e.g. data warehouses, data lakes, & data hubs).   In an aside, the speaker remarked that, in the past, IT departments have tended to collects all their data together first and worry about governance later.  He said that design of a data hub should instead start with data …

"No more us & them"

WonkHE recently posted an interesting opinion piece with the title Academics and Administrators: No more ‘us and them’. In that post, Paul Greatrix rebutted criticisms of professional services (administrative) staff in Universites from some academics. To illustrate his point, he quoted recent articles in which administrators were portrayed as a useless overhead on the key tasks at hand (teaching and research).

This flows both ways, as Greatrix himself points out. As Enterprise Architect, I work with Professional Services colleagues and I have heard some of them express opinions that clearly fail to understand the nature of academic work. Academics cannot be treated as if they were factory workers, churning out lectures on a treadmill.

I think these comments reveal a fundamental clash of ideas about how a University should work. Some people who come into management positions for other sectors tend to frame the University as a business, with students and research funders as customers t…