300 million, expensive consultants, and upset guests: Here is the full University of Copenhagen administration reform story

Donald Trump had just become the new president in the United States, and the Danish Prince Henrik was sulking again about not being king. Thousands of women had come forward and spoken out about harassment in what became the #MeToo movement. Beyoncé was expecting twins.

This is what the world looked like at the beginning of 2017 when Henrik C. Wegener took on his new job as rector of the University of Copenhagen (UCPH). He came from the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and was the first rector in UCPH history that not had an education within the institution itself.

At the time, the chairman of the board, Nils Strandberg Pedersen, told the Danish media Altinget that the new rector had »an outsider’s fresh and new perspective on the tasks.«

A professor in English at UCPH Peter Harder had a slightly different interpretation. He aired his concern in the Danish media Information:

»Many of us are curious as to whether he will adopt a tougher administrative strategy and adopt top-down ideas that do not suit the old UCPH institution.«

Perhaps to alleviate this anxiety, the new rector said he spent much of his first year talking to staff and students at the different departments.

The University Post has spoken to Rector Henrik C. Wegener, and this interview is the common thread throughout this article.

New name, larger sums of money

There was one, overriding, impression remaining when the rector had visited the many corners of UCPH as part of this apprenticeship on the job.

»I thought, gosh, there is a real wish for our administration to improve. Among students, among academic staff and in the administration itself,« he says.

He cannot remember when the word ‘administration reform’ was first used. But when he looks back, the reform ideas started circulating already during his first year in office.

He mentions the merger of UCPH IT in 2017 and of Campus Service in 2020.

Do you consider these changes to be part of the administrative reform?

»Yes, I certainly do, These were changes to the administration. Back then, we just didn’t use that word,« he says.

At the beginning of 2020, Merete Eldrup took up the position as the chairman of the Board at UCPH. She has previously told the University Post how she also toured the departments – and observed the same weaknesses in the administration as the rector.

»So the question was whether we should just try to patch up the existing administration, or whether we should take on the full consequences of it,« she has said.

READ ALSO: Board chair: We are at a watershed moment. But we will end up with a better administration

The Board ended up doing the latter, and started off the work on a regular administrative reform. Work that the rector had in one way already begun several years before.

Now it was launched with a name and with even greater ambitions. And not least with much larger sums in terms of both the budget for consultants, and desired savings.

The 300 million

Among expensive law firms and five-star hotels on the Kalvebod Brygge harbour front in Copenhagen was the Danish division of the consulting firm Boston Consulting Group (BCG) in 2022. The consulting giant had not yet moved to its current headquarters in the Carlsbergbyen area, but had an office on the eighth floor of the green towers overlooking Copenhagen harbour.

It was winter, and there must have been long working hours in the team that worked full-time on an assignment for the University of Copenhagen. The analysis of how much money the university could save through a reorganization of the administration had to be ready in February.

Its brief was an overall assessment of whether there was potential for a reduction in full-time equivalent staff FTEs and what the savings potential was. The answers were to be found through a so-called benchmark analysis, where you compare an organisation with similar organisations to see if anyone does things better and cheaper. If they do, the assumption is that you must be able to do the same.

When the report landed, it turned out that, according to BCG, this was precisely the case. The consultants had compared UCPH with 61 European universities, including six Danish ones, and found that UCPH was right in the middle when it came to the proportion of full-time equivalent staff in administration. If UCPH were at the top instead, around DKK 300 million could be saved annually, BCG concluded.

It is not BCG that has made us implement this administration reform

Henrik C. Wegener, Rector

In August 2022, it was announced that UCPH would reform the administration. It was done in a letter from the rector to all UCPH employees – and the plans were accompanied by savings targets of precisely DKK 300 million. From the outset, there was therefore suspicion among employees that management was more focused on savings than on real improvement.

Henrik C. Wegener, why did you not start by reforming the administration, and then subsequently see how much you could save?

»It’s a kind of a chicken and egg situation, isn’t it?« he replies.

Surely there is a difference between whether it is the desire for improvement, or the desire for savings, that comes first?

»It is the desire to improve that is the starting point – and we are certain that in this connection funds will be freed up, which can then be used for research and education.«

But BCG was given the task of figuring out how much you could save. Isn’t that what is behind the phrase ‘potential for reduction in FTEs’ means?

»The brief from the Board to the UCPH management was that we had to create a better, simpler, more transparent administration, that was also more efficient. We believed in management that we could deliver on this – and we are in the process of doing so now.«

Notorious method

Professor of financial management at the Copenhagen Business School (CBS) Peter Skærbæk has previously told the University Post that benchmark analyses such as the one BCG has prepared for UCPH are notorious for having large unintended financial and professional consequences. Savings plans for the Danish tax authorities and for the Danish Armed Forces, which were assisted by BCG, ended in comprehensive scandals.

About the report from BCG to UCPH, Skærbæk told the University Post in June 2024:

»It looks like the plan that they had used in the Danish taxation agency, and which went so horribly wrong.«

What do you think of this quote, Henrik C. Wegener?

»I don’t think the two things have much to do with each other. We are not a tax office, we are a university. And we need to create a university administration that matches the university. And that’s what we’re doing.«

READ ALSO: University of Copenhagen spent DKK 57.6 million on consultants

But you do this on the basis of an analysis similar to the one that was the basis for the reforms of the taxation agency SKAT and the Danish Armed Forces, produced by the same consultancy. Isn’t there a small part of you that has been nervous about ending up in a similar public scandal after taking advice from BCG?

»No it is not BCG that has made us implement this administration reform. I am quite reassured that the Board has allowed itself to be informed by a, what can we say, third party. We just listened to the report as one input among many others.«

So you didn’t take the report’s conclusions so seriously?

»No. It was a kind of confirmation of something we already knew.«

That you could save DKK 300 million a year on administration?

»That we could create a more efficient and better administration by setting up a joint administration at UCPH for the benefit of us all.«

It looks like the plan that they had in the Danish taxation agency, and which went so horribly wrong.

Peter Skærbæk, Professor of Financial Management, CBS

So the CBS professor’s warnings about the use of this type of analysis are nothing to you?

»It is not nothing to me. We face all concerns and risks and try to deal with them so that they don’t materialize into an unfortunate outcome. We are not walking blindfolded into this. This is deadly serious.«

How do you specifically prevent yourself from ending up as yet another failed BCG project?

»We do this by involving and listening carefully and intensely to the voices that exist at the university. And by the fact that it is our own employees who make the specific systems and processes.«

… with consultancy assistance from BCG for DKK 46 million?

»When you have to make such a big transformation, and at the same time ensure that daily operations are not challenged, you need some extra manpower that you hire in from the outside.«

READ ALSO: Management: The administration reform is about the best use of our resources

During the conversation, Wegener emphasizes that the report and the subsequent consultancy services have not been as significant to the process as the critics make it out to be.

»The report was one input among many,« he repeats multiple times.

But this is the report that forms the basis for the university’s belief that it will be able to save DKK 300 million a year and shed almost 300 full-time equivalent staff positions. When you try to make it sound as if the report is just one of many inputs, it can’t be right?

»Well yes it is. I’m talking about what my experience is of what has been the foundation of it. I cannot speak for the members of the Board. It is the Board that decides what I do, so to speak. And the way they make decisions individually, I can in no way comment on.«

The chair of the Board Merete Eldrup, who in the rector’s own words decides what he does, did not wish to comment for this article.

Like something from a bank

Caspar Elo Christensen is a specialist consultant at the Department of Biology and is as an administrative employee affected by the reform. When he picks up the phone, he introduces himself as Elo.

»Caspar Christensen sounds like something that’s already been taken,« he says, referring to a Danish comedian with the same name.

That’s a ridiculous question to ask at a university

Senior Consultant Caspar Elo Christensen, Department of Biology

Just over one year ago, he was sitting in his office at the UCPH Biocenter when he got a questionnaire about the organisational and professional framework that he experienced in his workplace. He had heard that the administration reform was on the way, and he was pleased to be involved early in the process as an employee.

But after a few minutes, he realized that the questions were »really broadly formulated« and showed »so little insight into the workings of a university,« that it was difficult to answer them accurately.

As an example, he mentions the question: ‘In my department/section, we have a common understanding of what the purpose of our department/section is’, where you have to answer on a scale from one to five.

»That’s a ridiculous question to ask at a university. Frankly, if you don’t know that the product is research and education, you’re not working at UCPH. The questions might as well have been directed at someone working in a bank.«

Indeed, the questionnaire had been based on an ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) framework tool provided by BCG, but adapted by UCPH employees. This is according to the administration reform’s programme secretariat.

Another example Caspar Elo Christensen highlights is the question ‘I generally have good opportunities
to perform my tasks in an appropriate way with the IT systems and digital tools that I have access to’.

»It’s difficult to give a number when there are many IT systems,« he says.

»I can answer ‘strongly agree’ because I mostly use Word and Excel, and they work fine. But when I need the university’s more specialised systems, they are slow or cannot always do what they should do. The statement should then have either a ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’. So what does the score actually mean here? How have other people understood the question?«

He is pretty sure that different members of staff have understood the questions completely differently because they are formulated in such broad terms. He says that even though the questions might at first glance seem reasonable, when he sat down to answer them, he experienced them as alienating.

»You could feel that those who had formulated the questions had not had insight into where the issues are.«

Is management listening?

Caspar Elo Christensen acknowledges the premise that there should be changes to the administration. But he would prefer a continuous adaptation rather than the uprooting of everything and the attempt to restart the whole thing afresh.

We need to try it to see whether it is perceived as more or less proximity

Henrik C. Wegener, Rector

»No one has a hold on this. You can’t design an entire administration – consisting of so many people and so many specialised functions – from above. You’re going to lose out on a lot of tasks, which the departments then have to subsequently do afterwards.«

READ ALSO: Administration reform: How will it affect the workplace?

During the analysis phase of the reform, management sent out ten questionnaires, divided between technical and administrative staff, researchers, managers and students – in total, it had almost 8,000 respondents.

Caspar Elo Christensen spent just over an hour answering his questionnaire. If this also applies to the other approximately 2,500 technical and administrative staff who responded, more than 300 working days – more than a whole full-time equivalent – have been spent answering questions in the administration alone.

Christensen does not consider this time spent as a problem in itself.

»It’s important to get input from users. But I would contend that greater insight could have been achieved with fewer questions if more use had been made of interviews or free-text questions. When you read the analysis, it is quite clear that they have not got much out of the 1-5 scale questions. On the other hand, the free-text responses showed some important things: That people prioritize proximity and do not want centralization. These were some important points that were made,« he believes.

The many questions across the many questionnaires generated almost 20,000 free-text responses. A machine learning model developed by the Department of Computer Science should have analysed the answers.

»But it didn’t work – and they ended up having to do it manually,« says Christensen.

The model was ultimately used to identify themes in the responses – but this was only after a team of employees had spent most of the spring of 2023 analysing the responses manually with the help of BCG consultants. The reason was that the machine learning turned out not to be good enough to stand alone, the programme secretariat says.

»It seems, nevertheless, as if no attention has been paid to [the responses] at all,« concludes Caspar Elo Christensen.

When the University Post asks Rector Henrik C. Wegener about the staff criticism that the wish for proximity and avoidance of further centralisation has not been heeded, he replies that he disagrees.

»I completely agree that people want proximity in the administration. But we are trying to ensure this by creating a physical presence on all campuses and making sure that there are administrative staff at the departments who work closely with all the academic staff.«

But there will be fewer administrative employees at the departments than there will be with the old administration — and therefore also less proximity?

»We need to try it to see whether it is perceived as more or less proximity. But we believe that it will be perceived at least as proximate as the old administration, because it will be much simpler and more welcoming to operate in,« the rector replies.

»There will simply be fewer places where you can get lost.«

No-one supports it

One year has passed since Caspar Elo Christensen and the other technical and administrative staff answered the questionnaires and overloaded the machine learning model with their thousands of free-text responses.

In the intervening period, petitions, opinion pieces, and frustrated staff representatives have given the impression of widespread dissatisfaction with the reform ideas among administrative employees.

There will be a round of layoffs in a few months’ time, but why? We are not short of money, we are not short of tasks

Alexander Memedi, staff representative for the Danish Association of Danish Lawyers and Economists DJØF

A non-essential hiring freeze has been imposed on administrative posts, and notice has been given of job cuts totalling 280 full-time equivalents. At the employees’ request, a risk assessment has been carried out which predicts a drop in productivity and more errors over a period of time. But management thinks that things will stabilise over time.

According to the overall plan for the reform, the administration will be organised into nine so-called corporate units as well as three large centres located at South Campus KUA, North Campus, and Frederiksberg/CSS. From here, so-called partners will go out to the many different departments, where there will still be smaller staffs for the tasks that have to be done locally.

The employees’ concerns include the greater distance between the administration and its users, and that the researchers will spend more time on administration. There are also concerns about how the work environment will be affected by the changes, and whether the technical and administrative staff have to work harder when there are fewer employees while the tasks largely remain the same.

Management says that proximity is one of the goals, and that it’s all about using your energy properly. They have a focus on the working environment, and there will not be the same number of tasks once the processes have been streamlined. Even though it is a difficult time, UCPH will have a better administration once it gets to the other side, is the message from management.

Hard to be a cheerleader

This was the context when the Board ended up adopting the reform plan on 19 June 2024. Two days later, an extraordinary session of the Board of the staff-management collaboration committee HSU, had been convened with representatives of many concerned staff.

One of them is the staff representative and deputy chair of the HSU, Ingrid Kryhlmand, who opens the meeting with a question that encapsulates the frustration that many seem to feel:

»How does management relate to the fact that it is overwhelmingly the university’s top management and board that think the reform is a good idea?«

Ingrid Kryhlmand’s questions and the subsequent dialogue appear in the minutes from the meeting.

In his response, University Director Søren Munk Skydsgaard says that this is »now a new chapter because the Board has made its decision«, and that they are now »in a different place in terms of communication.«

READ ALSO: Director after staff criticism: »We do not always agree, but it is a constructive dialogue«

»We have a joint interest in making it work as well as possible. We need to talk about how it can become a good workplace that supports the university well,« he continues.

The director admits that the reform is »largely on the initiative of top management,« but stresses that he does not share the impression that only management and the Board think it is a good idea.

His view is »that people out there can see that things are going well,« as he puts it.

Later in the meeting, DJØF staff representative Alexander Memedi speaks.

»What happened to the petition, the opinion pieces with concerns, and so on?« he asks: »There will be a round of layoffs in a few months time, but why will there be one? We are not short of money, we are not short of tasks It’s hard to be a cheerleader for this when we don’t have an explanation for it.«

It is not clear from the minutes what the response is. But when the University Post later asks the rector for his response to this criticism, he says:

»It is absolutely correct that there is no shortage of money. But UCPH should always use taxpayers’ money in the most efficient way possible at any given time. And as far as the tasks are concerned, the idea is precisely that by removing complexity we will make it possible to solve the same number of tasks in a more efficient way than we can today.«

What happened to the petition and the opinion pieces and the concerns?

»We have tried to address all the concerns. But there will always be someone who thinks that it has not been explained well enough, and then we need to try to do better.

READ ALSO: Involvement is not co-determination!

Have you been good enough at explaining it so far?

»No, clearly not,« the rector replies, but asserts that management is working continuously on communicating the reform to all employees.

Not a cost-cutting exercise

The extraordinary session of the HSU also revealed employee concerns in other areas.

Among the themes is whether more managers – rather than ordinary employees – should be dismissed than those envisaged in the adopted reform proposal. And then there is the concern about whether UCPH will live up to its social responsibility and not, for example, primarily fire employees who have been on long-term sick leave, or end up with a gender and age imbalance after the layoffs.

The latter is resolved by adding a clause to the material stating that »UCPH maintains its social responsibility«. It doesn’t cost anything. But it is reassuring, a bystander notes.

Management risks losing all its credibility

Anita Kildebæk Nielsen, staff representative for DM

The meeting is coming to an end, and only the ‘other business’ item is left on the agenda. Here, staff representative for the DM union Anita Kildebæk Nielsen addresses another, but not entirely unrelated, issue. She has noticed that the first round of layoffs will take place in the same week as the big annual commemoration event at UCPH.

She therefore proposes a more modest celebration in this light.

Management is aware of the dilemma, says Prorector for Research David Dreyer Lassen, who deputized for rector at the meeting. But they want to maintain this important tradition, »also in light of the fact that the administration reform is not, as such, an exercise in cost reduction, but of reprioritization.«

Ingrid Kryhlmand does not like this answer. She says there is a risk that the party will be perceived as an expression of disrespect towards the colleagues who have just been fired.

Many of the people present agree with her, and Anita Kildebæk Nielsen gets the last word:

»Management may risk losing all its credibility.«

Party and farewell

The finale of this story of the administration reform has not yet taken place. But the University Post has taken the liberty of collecting some suggestions as to where we will stand in six months time when the reform comes into force on 1 March 2025.

By then, the University Post’s Danish-language magazine will have just been published – if it hasn’t been abolished by the cuts beforehand. Perhaps an annual commemoration has been held where UCPH management has been able to celebrate that it was not a question of cuts at all, but a reprioritization.

And then UCPH has to say goodbye to its current rector, and welcome a new one. Henrik C. Wegener will not reapply for his job when his second term ends.

If you ask administrative staffer Caspar Elo Christensen, the employees in the administration will spend a lot of time trying to find their way around the new situation rather than solving the core tasks.

He fears that instead of ongoing changes to what is in many ways a well-functioning administration, we will end up with a system that does not work at all. An administration that they will have to spend time and resources repairing for many years to come.

»We can’t make a complete solution. This is an illusion. The premises of what a university is are constantly changing, and we must continuously adapt. The complete solution does not exist,« he says.

Another thing that concerns him is whether enough money will be set aside for evaluation. Not least, whether it is even possible to evaluate such a comprehensive project.

»When you have carried out so many changes at the same time, it is difficult to see exactly what you are evaluating.«

»I don’t believe it for a moment«

Staff representative Ingrid Kryhlmand is not optimistic either. She believes that UCPH will lose cohesion under the new structure, where the administration will be gathered into centres which she refers to as »islands« and »bubbles«.

»There is no subsidiarity principle in this idea if you have to go in via some email and request a service instead of just being able to go over and ask your colleague,« she says.

READ ALSO: Is the reform a foregone conclusion — or do employees have a say in the decision-making?

According to her, it will be impossible, especially for new employees in the administration, to gain a solid understanding of the core tasks at the departments when you do not share any daily life with researchers and students.

»Management keeps saying that the people who are going to cycle around to the departments need to ensure that there is a sense of proximity.«

Here Ingrid Kryhlmand is referring to the so-called partners.

»I don’t believe it for a moment,« she says.

When asked whether it might not result in some positive changes, Ingrid Kryhlmand mentions better opportunities for career development.

»It used to be a bit of a struggle to get continuing education, because there was often no money for it – in the opinion of the departments.«

She hopes that the upcoming administrative centres will have better opportunities to prioritize this.

»Yes, apparently there still has to be managers everywhere,« she says, referring to the fact that the number of employees per manager does not seem to change significantly, despite the wish from staff representatives for fewer managers per employee.

»Then they should at least be able to use some effort to take care of the development of their employees,« she says.

Tradition is good

Rector Henrik C. Wegener is optimistic about the future of the university he will be leaving in March. Of course, there will be initial issues and teething problems in the new administration, he says:

»There will probably be a couple of years where we just need to find our feet in it. During this time, we must all have patience and help each other.«

But when he envisages the university that will eventually emerge from the process, he is optimistic:

We are not walking blindfolded into this. This is deadly serious

Henrik C. Wegener, Rector

»Then I will see a very strong UCPH that to a very large extent has freed its academic and educational activities from technical and administrative barriers,« he says.

»And which can contribute even more to solving the major challenges facing society and the world. But can also – even more radically – create new and unexpected solutions that will help us into the future.«

The rector has no doubts about holding the commemoration either. UCPH is sticking to the tradition, including in 2024, when it will coincide with the layoffs.

»It’s a very important academic celebration,« he says.

What do you think about the employees who have just been laid off at that time?

»I always find it sad when employees have to seek pastures new. But this is the way things are when we have to make an administration more efficient and free up funds.«

You don’t fear that it will be perceived as an expression of disrespect?

»No. The annual commemoration is also to show respect for the university’s traditions. And to help the university to always have the best position in society.«

Why is it so important, the annual commemoration?

»Because tradition is good at a university«.