7 years at University, and I still don’t have a degree.

Seven years ago, I got the strangest phone call.

 "Hey mate," Gus said as I was gazing out the windows of Maker+Co on a rainy afternoon in Bunbury, Western Australia. 

"Yeah? What's going on?" I replied.

"Would you ever do work for a University?"

"Fuck that". I replied. 

We both laughed while Gus Balbontin, who at the time,was a very new friend, agreed with me. We spoke for a while, discussing this crazy opportunity. Gus, who recently left his role as Executive Director of Lonely Planet, had been approached by Professor Peter Dawkings, AO, the VC of Victoria University, after hearing Gus talk about his vision of the future at a keynote event. Peter was looking for a fresh perspective on what the future of education might look like.

"So, yeah, basically, he wants me to figure out what kind of things are missing at Universities, and I want you to do it with me", Gus explained.

Gus and I only met a few months prior and have been in contact through text and the odd phone call ever since. From our first conversations, we both knew we wanted to tackle some business or problem together. We just liked how each other thought, how we could challenge each other's thinking and laugh about each other's shit ideas a few seconds later. It seemed like the problem had landed in our - well, Gus' lap.

Twenty-two flights across the country, and we were hooked. Our initial investigation phase had ended. We signed a contract, and Maddison and I relocated to Melbourne.

The challenge Peter Dawkins and George Papas, AO (the Chancellor at the time) gave us was to figure out what the future of education might look like. From looking at the built environment to commercialisation to what kind of subjects and skills should be taught - it was up to us to discover.

We worked on some crazy ideas. Some of them worked, and many of them didn't.
But that was the whole point. 

From moving a classroom to the cafe strip in a busy Melbourne suburb - to helping rebuild the way courses are delivered with the 'block-model'  - to developing and delivering a $22.5m research recovery strategy with 'VU RISE', it's been a wild ride.

I've gained some insights from 7 years of University life as the Entrepreneur in Residence and, later, a Director of Innovation in Research, and here's what I've noticed.

Speed is the enemy of education.

We live in a time where the speed of innovation and information is speeding up daily. So when a new startup, company, idea, process or even virus hits the public, we are often amazed at its impact - good or bad. 

We, as a society, now demand constant innovation, to a point where being 'innovative' is the norm - and to stand out of the crowd, you need to be doing something revolutionary - hi, overlord Elon...

For this to continue, the next wave of talent needs to be able to access the information or skill to build upon quickly. You know the saying, "standing on the shoulders of giants". Well, in the past, the giants were academics whose thoughts and theories had been torn apart by their peers before any impact on society took place... Quality control y'know. 

The system needs help to keep up with the speed at which information is being created and distributed outside the education system. Currently, it takes around three years to get new curriculum into circulation (18 months to write and review and another 18 months to develop it into a degree, market, and sell it). By then, the curriculum is outdated.

The problem here is simple, but the solution is not. 

Education needs a new delivery method.

3 years+ for a degree still works for people looking for a broad set of knowledge to develop a career from scratch (think Lawyers and Doctors). However, for a considerable population segment, the need is for a specific skill to be delivered instantly.

For example, if I wanted to polish up on the needs of a financial audit (my last google search), my pathway is currently scrolling through youtube until I have information that sounds right. This will take me 5 minutes before I understand the information and can implement it. The problem is that I don't know if I can trust the information from youtube, and it doesn't officially contribute to my educational skill set. 

Suppose I called a University for help understanding this topic. The best case scenario is they can tell me what degree that unit is in, I enrol, study it for three years, pay 80K+, and finally have the information I need. 

This is great if the learner is looking for a broad set of information delivered over years and only if the information in the course can remain relevant. But for the learner who needs a touch of information fast, this doesn't work.

A solution...

Imagine if I picked a University to subscribe to for $9 a month. When I need information, I watch it on the University's youtube channel or TikTok feed. At the end of the video, a quick multiple-choice question set pops up, confirming or denying that I understand what I have watched. If I have absorbed the information, it is recorded on my profile, contributing to my academic record. 

I then get on with my life using my new tiny bit of knowledge.

Fast forward 4 years and countless hours of videos later. I received an email from my University saying that I have completed enough video credits for an MBA degree due to my watched videos... I then can complete an essay, exam or similar on each topic and pay the relevant fee to receive this official qualification - if I want to.

This last part is critical. Short bursts of information doesn’t make you an expert in a topic; it gives you tidbits of information to get you out of a jam. It’s through the implementation that a deeper connection to the information is made. Being able to demonstrate that you actually retained the information is needed to be considered proficient in a subject. A critical need for industry.

This is one of many ideas to transform the education system. It could work, but it has a high chance of failure too. The important thing is that organisations like Universities are experimenting with ideas to develop a future that keeps up with the customer. To run experiments, you must build a culture within an organisation that embraces change and is thrilled to try new things. And, as we all know, culture is just the collective vibe from the humans within it. To engage a workforce to think like this there must be some incentive.

But, Incentives are hard.

For those who haven't had the pleasure & pain of being immersed in the academic world, let me break down the 3 main groups of people you'll find.

1 : Teaching staff.

They deliver curriculum to students. Some do it because they love mentoring the future generation. Some do it because they have to provide a certain number of hours before they can get back to researching their area of interest.

Their incentive for doing good work is typically seeing future generations thrive - awesome.

2 : Hardcore Researchers.

They don't teach (unless they have to). All they want to do is think about a problem and analyse the situation and its impact - or they are developing a solution to the problem. 

This cohort relies on funding. 

So they either have to align with a strategic priority of the University and therefore can access internal funding. Or, god forbid, they need to commercialise their solution by selling IP, or partnering with someone who wants to pay for the outcomes.

This divides the researcher population dramatically. Some researchers I've worked with are magnets for funding due to having great solutions for problems businesses/industries face. Others have told me "I get paid to think, not to do"... 

The incentives here are divided. Some researchers want recognition by seeing their names referenced in academic journals (which adds to their 'street cred' and helps them stay employed). Others are looking for financial recognition through the commercialisation of IP as a validation of a valuable contribution to society.

However, a university's KPIs typically lean on citations rather than commercialisation. Thats the core problem.

I'm not saying everything needs to have a commercial outcome; I am saying that the measuring stick of the past isn't going to measure the future.

3 : Professional Staff.

This is where I lived. The professional staff at a University are trying to keep the doors open and the lights on. This is extremely difficult as you're constantly balancing commercial expectations while being sensitive and respecting the need for activities that don't contribute financially but on a societal level.

Within this cohort, you typically have academics who are now working on a professional level and business people who are trying to figure out what the fuck is going on on an academic level. Generally speaking.

This, without clear direction and leadership, leads to a divided cohort. 

Half will want to keep running the university the way it has been done for centuries (which isn't working anymore), and the other half is pushing for a new way to operate - which often comes across ad combative to the traditional operators.

As you can see, every path you go down leads to another conundrum. 

So, what missing? A common goal.

In my humble opinion, finding a common goal isn't hard. The common goal should be to contribute to a better future through education and research that impacts the earth.

Unfortunately, most people want to stay employed and pay their bills - so making big, bold moves isn’t anyone ones best interest. That’s why goals need to be set at an organisational level to engage the workforce on the same journey - In the short term, it’ll be bloody hard (and expensive), but in the long run, the payoff will be to contribute the society we all want to live in.

If this doesn’t happen, many educational organisations will cease to exist - and some poor buggar will be the last person holding the hot potato when it all crumbles. Don’t be this person.

I loved working with some fantastic thinkers at VU, and hey, I even loved the challenging times with people whose vision I didn't align with. Gus would say, "all ideas are shit until proven otherwise" and I think more people should take this approach. It'll lead to a space where current proof is valued higher than past accreditations, and collaboration through thought and experimentation will create a future we all thrive in.

But what do I know? I didn’t go to University.

J