Unrest, uncertainty and irritation. These are the feelings prevalent among education support staff faced with a potential savings target of 10 million euros for their column and chaotic management of the process. They also fear the consequences for student support at Radboud University.

Ten million euro. That is the potential savings target for the Education Support (OWO) column at Radboud University. The cost savings process may have been postponed until January, but the run-up to it is causing unrest and uncertainty among the staff in question.

Radboud University’s OWO column consists of all those who ensure that education at Radboud University runs smoothly, both in the faculties and at a central level. These include student counsellors and psychologists, study trainers, the Student Information Desks, student advisors, International Offices and the education and examination organisation.

Complex column

Like other parts of its operations, the OWO column needs to save costs. All the support services combined must save 20 million euros, according to the university’s policy letter – although that figure now seems to be much higher (see box below). It looks as if half of this amount will be taken from OWO.

The OWO column is apparently complex. An advisory report by external research firm Ernst & Young (EY) on the savings potential of Radboud University’s entire operations was published late last year. That report, seen by Vox, treats Education Support and Research Support as one column.

Unlike for other support services, the EY consultants did not mention a savings target for OWO in their report. Among other things, the consultants reported that the presence of “450 different roles complicates the comparability of activities per FTE”.

Kick-off

Radboud University also seems to be struggling with the cost savings in Education Support, three student advisors told Vox. They experience the process as chaotic, and appear uncertain how a 10 million euro savings target was calculated for their column.

At the end of August, all staff were invited to a kick-off meeting, where around thirty hypotheses, i.e. savings proposals, were presented. Staff were then given the opportunity to sign up for a work group to discuss a cost savings proposal in a so-called deep dive. By the end of October, all the hypotheses should have been assessed.

The cost savings programme has been postponed to January 2026

The hypotheses, prepared and collected by the column’s supervisors in a presentation that Vox was able to view, are diverse in nature. They range, for example, from “reducing the number of supervisors and the number of management layers” and “reducing external hiring by at least 20 percent” to “reducing and downsizing graduation ceremonies”.

In a digital kick-off meeting at the end of September, for which staff were convened last minute, they were told that the division into hypothesis groups had been done carelessly and that the number of questions received made it too difficult to hold a kick-off at this point. This was followed a week later by a notice that the cost-savings programme had been paused until 20 October. That date was adjusted shortly afterwards to January 2026.

‘No fair form of participation’

The plan is for staff to brainstorm on the cost savings proposals in small groups starting in January. Staff interviewed by Vox have mixed feelings about the process. ‘This does not feel like a fair form of participation as the proposed cost savings have already been drafted’, says Martine van Leeuwen, student advisor at the Faculty of Philosophy, Theology and Religious Studies. ‘Either you don’t participate or you try to have some form of say on the future of OWO’, her colleague Renée Wagenvoorde sums up the dilemma over participation.

Wagenvoorde has been assigned to a work group investigating whether certain work processes can be designed more efficiently and whether this process can be digitised in study information system Osiris. ‘I’m happy to think about that because it obviously makes sense to ask education support staff how you do that. But instead of discussing the way you do that, we need to specify what cost savings this will achieve and what effects this measure will have. These are questions I cannot answer.’

After the hypotheses are discussed in groups, they will go back to the project team. The supporters were not told who would decide which proposals would or would not be implemented. They also point out that it is not clear who is actually responsible for the savings. Responsibilities seem to keep shifting and it is unclear who is the point of contact. Emails about the process to which Vox had access were signed by different people each time: from an OWO project manager and a deputy programme director to the director of Radboud Services.

More study delays

The cost savings within OWO are bound to have a major impact on student support at Radboud University, according to student advisors. Despite the fact that a lot of money was recently invested in OWO with the programme Student guidance 2023. ‘A lot of what came out of that is now in danger of being scrapped again’, says Van Leeuwen. ‘One of the hypotheses, for example, is to stop appointing wellbeing officers: an idea that came out of this programme and only started in early 2024.’

According to staff, this cost saving will mean that waiting times for student counsellors and psychologists will increase. ‘The waiting time for student counsellors can be up to eight weeks, says a third student advisor working at another faculty, who wishes to remain anonymous. ‘If cuts are made to the number of FTEs there, that time will only increase.’

And according to student advisors, removing services like career services or STIP reception desks from faculties, two examples included in the hypotheses, will make services much more general and less focused on individual faculties.

It is still unclear whether student advisors will be removed from faculties as well, but this fear is prevalent among staff interviewed by Vox. This would have major implications for student supervision. ‘I specialise in certain study programmes and am approachable and recognisable in that capacity’, explains the third student advisor. ‘I can imagine, and I regularly hear this from students, that students find it harder to approach a student advisor if they are not a familiar face in that capacity.’

‘The student is responsible for the costs of study delays’

According to the advisors, there is then the risk that students will suffer (more) study delays due to the cost savings. ‘And the student is responsible for the costs’, says Van Leeuwen.

Not only students, lecturers will also be affected by the cost savings at OWO, according to student advisors. The third student advisor gives an example: ‘Students with a chronic impairment need a lot of attention with respect to their facilities or exam organisation. If there are fewer people in the examination organisation, lecturers will need to do that and I foresee that the students concerned will also be inconvenienced.’

Before Christmas

All in all, the cost savings are causing unrest and uncertainty among student advisors and other colleagues within OWO. ‘Nobody knows where they stand at the moment, it’s a frequent subject of conversation in the coffee corner’, says Van Leeuwen. ‘At the start of this academic year, President of the Executive Board, Alexandra van Huffelen said that staff would know where they stood this autumn, but apparently that does not apply to us.’

‘We understand that savings have to be made, but at least organise it properly and transparently’

‘There is discontent about how the process is being managed as well’, Wagenvoorde adds. ‘We understand that savings have to be made and that they will have an impact, but at least organise it properly and transparently.’

Staff are still left with many questions. Whether or not there will be a reorganisation, for example, and whether the savings can be achieved by colleagues leaving or retiring. ‘At the first meeting, they said that reorganisation had not been ruled out; at a second meeting that word was no longer used’, says the third student advisor. ‘Those conflicting messages create uncertainty.’

‘Extra time necessary’

In a response to Vox, Rector Magnificus José Sanders and vice chair Agnes Muskens wrote that there had been diverse feedback from staff following the presentations on the approach to the education and research column. ‘This has meant that a longer period of preparation had to be factored in than previously anticipated because more time proved necessary to carefully shape the investigation into potential savings in these columns and in coordination with supervisors and staff.’

The directors wrote that they were well aware that the past period of multiple schedule adjustments had caused unrest among the staff concerned. ‘This is obviously very unpleasant for those affected, but we feel the extra time we want to take for the run-up is necessary for a good and careful process. In the follow-up process, we will ensure transparent communication with all stakeholders.’