Universities ‘overlooking’ digital competence in promotions

University leaders have been accused of “overlooking” digital competence in hiring and promotions.

A global survey of more than 3,000 academics and higher education staff conducted by Times Higher Education’s consultancy arm found that while respondents believed that they engaged in professional development activities and stayed up to date with digital technologies, they were less likely to believe that digital competence was given due recognition by managers.

Universities in North America, Australia and New Zealand were regarded as being least likely to pay attention to digital competence in hiring and promotions, with only about six in 10 respondents saying that it was recognised.

Institutions in Europe, Africa and the Middle East performed more strongly, with about seven in 10 respondents saying that digital competence was recognised.

Elizabeth Shepherd, managing director at THE Consultancy, said digital competence was often “overlooked” in university promotions, with more emphasis placed on traditional achievements, such as research publications and teaching evaluations.

“While some universities have been incorporating basic digital skills into faculty or staff training, this usually focuses on essential tasks rather than encouraging innovative use of technology,” she said.

“Recognising digital competence and cultivating digital leadership can be the key in enabling universities to lead – rather than lag behind – digital transformation, bridging the gap between technology and its effective use, equipping future generations of students in critically engaging with technology.”

Seventy per cent of respondents said their universities had implemented a digital transformation strategy.

However, universities in higher-income regions were regarded as tending to prioritise technology acquisition over its utilisation, suggesting a need for universities to maximise technology use through better established people and strategy development plans.

Conversely, universities in lower-income regions scored higher on use over technology acquisition, indicating a need for more technology investment.

Ms Shepherd said the gap between acquisition and use might point to a “misalignment between strategic objectives and technology investments, poor integration between legacy systems and new technologies limiting their effectiveness, or insufficient technology training for staff.

“On the other hand, universities in lower-income regions may utilise technology more effectively as they focus on tools that meet their critical needs. These universities may rely on open-source software and low-cost or free digital tools.”

The results come from the report Digital Equity, Cybersecurity, and Digital Competence and Leadership, due to be published later this month.

juliette.rowsell@timeshighereducation.com