During the “deep dive kick-off meeting”, various questions were asked regarding the hypotheses. This was a meeting attended only by colleagues from the deep dive groups. These questions and answers are of interest to the entire OWO column, which is why we are sharing this information with everyone.
The questions are divided into the following categories:
- Sharing information
- Hypotheses
- Process
- Team composition
- Student supervision
This document is updated regularly. Would you like to add questions? Discuss these questions with your manager.
1 - Sharing information
Research has also been conducted into the hypothesis surrounding alumni vouchers in a Marketing and Communication deep dive. Can these results be shared in the team channel of the relevant deep dive team?
We will ensure that the available information is shared or included in the deep dive for the restart.
For some hypotheses, a link to the Marketing and Communication deep dives may be necessary, for example with regard to the impact on student intake. Can this information be shared?
We will ensure that the available information is shared or included in the deep dive before the restart.
Can we get an overview of pension trends?
The information needed for the deep dive will be shared in the deep dive.
Sometimes there is talk of the “Target Operating Model”. Can that be shared?
The Target Operating Model has not yet been determined, but it can be shared with the groups at a later date.
Can you also make the results of the previous column review available?
The results of previous reviews/projects will be shared in the deep-dive teams. As the actual situation may have changed in the meantime, reducing its relevance, this will be determined by the project manager.
2 - Hypotheses
The hypotheses often include an expected saving in material and/or personnel costs. This is an estimate made in the summer of 2025. Is there an underlying calculation available for these estimates that we can rely on?
This was a rough estimate. A more detailed and realistic estimate will be drawn up in the deep dives.
Other hypotheses do not include any expected savings at all. What exactly should the team in question assess?
At the restart, all hypotheses will have expected savings.
How do you prevent people in their hypothesis team from thinking about situations in which they ‘eliminate their own jobs’? Because that never gives a neutral picture. Some hypotheses already mention a decrease in FTEs or positions/roles that could be eliminated.
This cannot be prevented. The hypotheses are developed in teams, so we expect the outcomes to be realistic and achievable. There is also room to include any concerns in the development of the hypotheses. At the same time, we are aware that this can create uncomfortable situations. We are paying attention to this in the new approach.
Can all those involved access the formats or templates?
We ensure that all employees involved in the hypotheses have access to the formats and templates.
How often and for how long are meetings scheduled for each hypothesis?
This can vary per hypothesis. The total average time commitment required per person is 16 hours per hypothesis. More complex issues may require more time, while less complex ones may require less time.
3 - Process
After the deep dives, what is the follow-up process? What will happen with the results and what will the decision-making process look like?
The project manager will incorporate the results into a final report and test them with focus groups. This will be followed by the decision-making phase, during which we will determine which hypotheses we will proceed to implement. The report will be sent from the column contact persons to the steering group. The steering group will present it to the Board of Deans and the Executive Board. Before this happens, various bodies will review it, such as RUDO, the education platform and MESA.
When we actually start, will we meet again in a Start 2.0 meeting, so that we can work in more or less the same way in the various deep-dive teams?
We will ensure that there is a more detailed explanation of the process, templates and formats, so that it is clear what is expected of whom and how the data is generated.
Can the Start 2.0 meeting be held in person, so that we can also see each other live within the subgroups?
The deep-dive teams can choose to meet in person. This may depend, for example, on the complexity of the hypothesis. However, the team itself is in charge of choosing such an approach.
Is it clear how the role of the steering group relates to the various hypothesis groups?
The steering group, including the column contact persons, is responsible for the planning, progress and quality of the savings programme.
Do we want to indicate that testing the hypotheses may take longer because we are in the review phase, and is central communication possible in this regard?
The deadline remains unchanged. We have now paused the savings programme relating to educational support. We are looking at an appropriate approach and structure and then at the planning.
Efforts relating to hypotheses will be coordinated with the manager. This manager is responsible for any communication within the organisational unit.
Is it possible to share the hypotheses that have been extracted?
We will ensure that the available information is shared before the restart or included in the deep dive.
Team members have registered for points that are important to them, but they are not in this meeting. Does that mean they will no longer be involved?
We have invited the colleagues we have added to the deep-dive teams. If these colleagues are not included in the deep-dive teams, they have not been invited. It may be that we have inadvertently forgotten some colleagues, but we do not need everyone who has registered for the deep-dive.
4 - Team composition
Certain faculties are overrepresented in some hypotheses. Is a critical assessment being made of how to achieve a better balance and how to ensure that no single faculty's voice is dominant?
This depends on the available capacity of staff and their interest. The deep dive teams consider whether the size and composition of the team is appropriate for the hypothesis.
The participant overview mentions an intended process supervisor. Can I assume that this person will take the lead in organising the group and, among other things, planning and convening the meetings?
We will provide further explanation of the process, templates and formats, so that it is clear what is expected of whom and how the data is generated. We will also provide a description of the role of the process supervisor.
It may be that people who have not registered are needed. Has sufficient consideration been given to a workable team composition so that a good result can be achieved?
This depends on the available capacity of employees and their interest. The deep dive teams will consider whether the size and composition of the team are appropriate for the hypothesis. The deep dive teams will consider whether the size and composition of the team are appropriate for the hypothesis.
What support is offered to process supervisors and is it sufficiently clear what the deliverables should be?
We will ensure that there is a more detailed explanation of the process, templates and formats, so that it is clear what is expected of whom and how the data is generated. We will also ensure that there is a description of the role of the process supervisor.
We lack seniority and people with support within the teams. How is the education sector itself involved?
This depends on the available capacity of employees and interest. In the deep-dive teams, consideration is given to whether the size and composition of the team fits the hypothesis. The education sector is involved in the decision-making process.
In the context of the “neutrality” requested in several comments, might it be wise to have coordinators who are not linked to a hypothesis in terms of content?
We will take this point into account in the restart. We will ensure that there is a more detailed explanation of the process, templates and formats, so that it is clear what is expected of whom and how the data is generated.
If a hypothesis does not have an (intended) process supervisor but is bundled with another hypothesis that does have an intended process supervisor, is the latter also the supervisor for both hypotheses? And does this also mean that the groups will investigate both hypotheses?
When we restart, we will look at the composition. We will ensure that there is a more detailed explanation of the process, templates and formats, so that it is clear what is expected of whom and how the data is generated.
A hypothesis regarding student supervision has been deleted because the Executive Board wants to link it to a different timeline. Why, then, are hypotheses directly related to this being started now?
We will ensure that the available information is shared before the restart or is included in the deep dive.
5 - Student guidance
Can you share more information about the process of hypotheses regarding student guidance? And perhaps about other “strategic” hypotheses that were not shared during the kick-off meeting?
We will ensure that the available information is shared before the restart or included in the deep dive.
To what extent will the results, for example with regard to ratios, from the SB2023 project be included?
The results of previous reviews/projects will be shared in the deep dive teams. Because the actual situation may have changed in the meantime, reducing its relevance, this will be determined by the project manager.