The Executive Board 'lost its touch' with staff members while determining the university’s new strategic direction, it tells Vox. That is something that needs to be addressed. 'It’s never pleasant to hear people say: "I’m worried".'

For over a week, the Radboud campus has been talking about consultants. According to critics, they are shaping the university’s direction rather than academics themselves. It was Faculty of Arts Dean Paula Fikkert who stirred the debate when, in a farewell email, she expressed her concerns about this development. How many consultants are there, exactly? And what do they do? For the first time, the Executive Board provides answers.

Alexandra van Huffelen, President of the Executive Board: ‘There were four external consultants who helped the strategic planning process. Ultimately, of course, they did not make any decisions themselves—let’s be clear about that.’

So what exactly was their role?

Van Huffelen: ‘Primarily facilitating the process. Gathering information, conducting conversations, and structuring information.’

José Sanders, Rector Magnificus: ‘They assign roles to staff and make sure tasks get done so that everyone contributes and progress is made. They ask questions such as: which Dean or director wants to lead this part of the process? Which policy advisers would like to help? When will this be completed?’

Criticism from the academic community is that people from within the organisation could have been chosen instead. Why wasn’t that done?

Van Huffelen: ‘That is also possible, but sometimes you need additional expertise from people who know how to guide such a process. You also need enough people available to do it. One challenge for us as an Executive Board was that the strategy had to be completed by the end of last year. We didn’t have a great deal of time, so we had to work efficiently while involving as many people from the organisation as possible, such as deans and vice-deans. We didn’t have a strategy team or a dedicated group that could support us.’

‘We mainly discussed how, substantively, we are not actually very far apart’

So internal staff were approached, but no one was able to take on this role?

Van Huffelen: ‘At the beginning, internal staff did take on part of the work and remained involved, but they also said: “We need additional support.” It has since become clear that staff did not find the support provided by consultants pleasant in every respect. But I also know several Deans who are working with them on elaborating the second strategic ambition—excelling in thematic focus areas—and who actually find the collaboration very valuable.’

The human dimension

Vox spoke with the entire Executive Board, as well as Dean Paula Fikkert, immediately after a meeting with Faculty of Arts staff on Thursday afternoon. The gathering, which journalists were not permitted to attend and which attracted around one hundred participants, was organized to discuss the unrest that had emerged. Dissatisfaction had spread from the Faculty of Arts to other faculties. Two open letters were addressed to the Executive Board in which hundreds of staff members and students stated, among other things, that they felt the current policy lacked “the human dimension.”

Looking back at the past week, at Paula Fikkert’s announced departure and the reactions to her concerns—did that come as a shock?

Van Huffelen: ‘It’s never pleasant to hear people say: “I’m worried, I’m unhappy, I feel something is missing.” We want to respond to that. That’s why we organized this meeting.’

Have you heard or read anything new over the past few days?

Van Huffelen: ‘Things we had heard before, yes, but now more broadly. And at a deeper level.’

Could you be more specific?

Sanders: ‘One thing you keep hearing is the term “tailor-made solutions”—that human dimension people talk about. During this afternoon’s meeting, we discussed how, if you want to centralise certain services for reasons of efficiency and cost reduction, you can eliminate places where the same work is being done twice, three times, or manually, while at the same time ensuring that faculty staff do not get lost in the process. You don’t want essential support to disappear, leaving people in specific research or teaching activities feeling unsupported and unseen. I think that is something we need to work on together. Processes are now being set up to address this.’

Van Huffelen: ‘We mainly discussed how, substantively, we are not actually very far apart when you compare the institutional plan and the faculty policy plan. But we somehow lost connection. We are looking for a way to rebuild that connection.’

Sanders: ‘We want to develop both the budget cuts and the ambitions in the institutional plan much more closely together with people from the faculties. That is the process we are facing now.’

Van Huffelen: ‘We have listened carefully to the concerns that have been expressed.’

Paula Fikkert, you also used the term ’the human dimension’ (‘menselijke maat’) in the email announcing your departure. Where exactly do you feel it has been lacking?

Fikkert: ‘I think the main problem occurred during the development of the strategy. It all moved very quickly and there was simply too much happening. No one could really keep up. As a result, not everyone was properly informed. There were sessions, but…’

She looks at the members of the Executive Board. Fikkert: ‘Of course, we speak with each other quite often, but what we discuss does not automatically get communicated back to the faculty. After such meetings, we could think more carefully about what was discussed and what should be shared within our faculties. Up until now, everything was always treated as confidential. Sometimes that is necessary, but other things can perfectly well be communicated.’

‘That may also have been my own struggle: two different worlds that do not always connect’

‘I think Deans should play a greater role as a bridge between the administration and the university community. That may also have been my own struggle: two different worlds that do not always connect. There is real progress to be made there.’

Sanders, nodding in agreement: ‘Many administrators were involved in the process: Deans and vice-deans, directors of divisions and faculties, and of course policy staff. But building broad support remains complex. One of the vice-deans raised the issue of how people within the organisation can disagree with one another. How do we structure conversations in such a way that we can conclude: ‘This is a difficult topic. We don’t fully agree, but how can we still reach a decision that allows us to move forward?’ Faculty leadership plays a very important role in that discussion as well.’

Van Huffelen: ‘That would be ideal, but there will always be things employees are less happy about. We are in a period of budget cuts. That is painful, but unavoidable…’

Fikkert: ‘In my first year as Dean, we also had to make substantial cuts, but we actually became more cohesive. So it is possible. But you have to actively work toward getting everyone aligned. That requires effort.’

Second open letter

José Sanders and Paula Fikkert then left for the opening of the Valkhof Museum. Alexandra van Huffelen and interim Vice President Marcel Wintels stayed behind to answer the remaining questions.

In the second open letter reported on by Vox this week, staff members and students wrote: “We ask the Executive Board to immediately open a dialogue with the entire university community (…) about how our university governance can once again respect core academic values and regain a democratic foundation with support from the academic community.” What is your response to that?

Van Huffelen: ‘This issue is really about how administrators are appointed. In the Netherlands, Deans are appointed through a procedure that involves many people from the faculty, including participation councils, staff members, and others. The same applies to appointing the Executive Board. But there are also countries where these are elected positions.’

‘We have agreed with Management Dean Saskia Lavrijssen that a delegation of Deans and the Executive Board will meet with the authors of the letter to discuss this specific topic. Radboud Reflects is also considering organizing a session on the issue. I certainly welcome that.’

Are there any other concrete lessons you are taking away from the meeting with staff?

Wintels, Interim Vice President: ‘We have noticed that KPI (Key Performance Indicator) is a loaded term in an environment like this. Here, it acts like a red rag to a bull. So it is probably not wise to use that kind of language. We need to explain more clearly what we mean by it: namely, that we want to monitor whether we are achieving our goals and ambitions. You want to know whether the finances are in order, whether you are operating at a surplus or deficit, whether student enrolment is rising or falling. You also want insight into student and staff satisfaction, for example through surveys.’

Speaking of those: the latest staff survey shows that confidence in the way the Executive Board governs the university is significantly lower than it was in 2024. Will you be addressing that as well?

Van Huffelen: ‘That is certainly something we need to work on. Fortunately, many other indicators have improved considerably. Especially when you look at how satisfied people are with working at this university. And let’s not forget that a great deal has happened recently. This used to be a university with much more stability. There was more funding and therefore more opportunities. Things have become more challenging, so we really have a job to do together.’