探花视频

Site disruption

We are doing some essential maintenance work and you will not be able to register or update your profile setting until we've finished, which should be at about 9pm this evening.

We apologise for any inconvenience - you will be able to register shortly. In the mean time you will still be able to log in as usual.

Will a mission group revival save universities or divide them?

Financial and political pressures have prompted universities to siphon themselves off into various groupings. Can such bodies help secure a fair deal for the sector, or are they destined to end up as either winners or losers?

Published on
January 9, 2026
Last updated
January 9, 2026
Pedestrians on a concrete floor with a blue and red Venn diagram, shot from above. To illustrate mission groups of universities.
Source: David Malan/Getty Images

The term 鈥渕ission group鈥 has somewhat gone out of fashion in recent years. Indeed, when the latest coming together of UK universities, ResearchPlus,聽launched in June 2025, organisers were at pains to avoid using the term at all. 聽

鈥淢ission groups have come to have rather a poor reputation because they have been seen to be quite sharp elbowed and as advocating for themselves,鈥 Sasha Roseneil, vice-chancellor of the University of Sussex 鈥 a founding member of ResearchPlus 鈥 said of the group鈥檚 focus on being seen as more of a 鈥渃ollaboration鈥.

But, formed by 10 UK research universities, the consortium鈥檚 launch was the latest evidence of a renewed interest in membership organisations across the UK sector.听

ResearchPlus has inevitably been compared with the Russell Group, perhaps the most high profile of all the mission groups. And the sector is already well served聽by other similar organisations 鈥 from the overarching umbrella body of Universities UK (UUK) to those representing specific types of institutions聽or聽united by being based in the same region.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

Financial and political pressures are pushing universities into more active collaborations, strengthening the role and standing of the mission group. Bournemouth University, for example, recently rejoined University Alliance 鈥 a group of which it was originally a founding member. Other new groupings such as the聽Universities for North East England alliance have also launched.

But the same factors also bring a heightened risk of fractures and factions developing among a sector that has traditionally agreed on much.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

Eyebrows were raised in the run up to last year鈥檚 autumn budget, when the Russell Group began聽lobbying for the international student levy to be a flat fee聽instead of a percentage charge 鈥 a setup that would benefit them and disadvantage universities with cheaper international tuition fees.听

It was a fight the Russell Group won, although there is debate about whether this was thanks to the group鈥檚 lobbying efforts or more down to civil servants鈥 view that a flat fee is simply easier to administer.听

And, with higher-tariff institutions聽seen to be scooping up domestic students聽that might once have gone to less-elite universities, the different groups appear more at odds with each other than would once have been the case. 聽

Ourania Filippakou, professor of education at Brunel, University of London, said she believed there will be a 鈥渞enewed visibility of mission groups鈥 in response to 鈥渟ector-wide stress鈥.

鈥淔inancial pressures, uneven reliance on international student income, and ongoing policy uncertainty are encouraging institutions to seek clearer differentiation and targeted representation,鈥 she said.听

鈥淚n this context, mission groups function primarily as mechanisms for positioning and risk management rather than as expressions of collective educational purpose.鈥

For ResearchPlus partners, the decision to form a new group stemmed from the feeling there wasn鈥檛 a voice for non-Russell Group research universities, said Roseneil.听

鈥淭here has been a bit of a danger that the Russell Group has been seen increasingly as representing the research-intensive universities, but actually it doesn鈥檛. It speaks for some of them. And it鈥檚 been speaking with a very effective voice for them.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

鈥淚f the UK is really to innovate and grow in the way that the government says is its aim, it needs much more than the Russell Group to do that.鈥

Recent changes to the distribution of research funding may have also added to the feeling that there needs to be a counterpart to the Russell Group.

鈥淭here are collective concerns over the research review framework, with continual down-valuing of anything that is not demonstrably of the highest internal excellence,鈥 said Ronald Barnett, emeritus professor of higher education at UCL.

鈥淚n this situation, unless checked, the power and influence of the Russell Group will grow, as will the gap between the Russell Group and the rest of the sector.鈥

He continued: 鈥淎 go-it-alone situation, with each university jostling for itself, just won鈥檛 do.鈥

UUK does play an important role in funnelling the views of a large portion of the sector to the government, but, with almost 150 members, forming a united front is a challenge.

鈥淢ission groups resulted from similar institutions wanting to lobby on their shared interests at a time when they felt their voice was diluted within Universities UK and that the lobbying of UUK became too vanilla and trying to please 鈥 or at least not upset 鈥 all universities,鈥 said Alex Bols, chief of staff at the University of East Anglia.听

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

Roseneil, who is on UUK鈥檚 board, said she valued the work that the national body does, but added it has 鈥渁 very difficult job of trying to represent a very wide range of interests鈥.听

Instead, Filippakou said that fragmentation allows 鈥渋nstitutions to articulate more tailored narratives about their role, contribution, and constraints, particularly in a policy environment that increasingly rewards differentiation鈥.

Bols, who previously led the now-defunct 1994 Group as well as serving as deputy chief executive at GuildHE, believes that mission groups 鈥渃ould make a comeback鈥 but only 鈥渋f they deliver real policy wins鈥.听

鈥淲hen resources are tight, universities want sharper, more targeted advocacy,鈥 he said.听

Vanessa Wilson, chief executive of University Alliance, said she felt universities were becoming more selective and thinking carefully about which groups they pay membership fees to at a time of聽intense cost cutting.听

She said the group was thinking carefully about its offer to members, including networking subgroups and discussion events.听

Nonetheless, one of the most important roles of mission groups and membership bodies is being able to provide insights on government thinking.听

鈥淢ission groups succeed when they provide intelligence and early warnings,鈥 said Bols. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 gold dust for universities planning in uncertain times.鈥

Crucially, they must not just listen to but influence policies in a way that is beneficial to their members.

Wilson said: 鈥淲here I see my role鈥s to make sure that, when I鈥檓 in the same room as [other groups], the voice of my members is represented in front of ministers and officials in all the departments and agencies across government, so that there isn鈥檛 one view that is represented.鈥

Policymakers 鈥 particularly civil servants and ministers in the current Labour government 鈥 are perceived to be very open to listening to mission groups and representative bodies, not least because it saves them from having to speak to hundreds of individual institutions in order to glean a coherent viewpoint.

But the influence of these groups over politicians is 鈥渦neven and highly dependent on context鈥, said Filippakou.听

鈥淢ission groups can exert influence when their priorities align closely with government agendas, such as skills, regional development, or research concentration,鈥 she said. 鈥淗owever, their impact tends to diminish when multiple groups advance competing messages and weaken the sector鈥檚 ability to speak collectively.鈥

Brooke Storer-Church, chief executive at GuildHE, said she had, at times, 鈥渜uestioned the value of various small lobbying groups if they are pulling in different directions鈥.

鈥淚 hold close relationships with the mission group CEOs in the hope of helping to align messaging where helpful and smooth out some of those potential tensions in the interest of the broader sector.鈥

As well as advocating for the universities in the group, Roseneil said ResearchPlus sees itself as 鈥渨anting a better deal for the sector鈥 as a whole.听

鈥淓very university is facing the same financial challenges because we all have our fees capped by the government,鈥 she said. 鈥淲e鈥檙e all facing the same restrictions on international students, the same kind of hostility and concerns about migration that are playing out through government policy.听

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

鈥淲e don鈥檛 want special treatment or to take money away from other universities,鈥 she continued. 鈥淲e are about the common good [and] about working for the public good.鈥澛

helen.packer@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (2)

Certainly 10 universities will have more clout as a group than 10 individual voices.
Sasha Roseneil's distinction between a collaboration and a mission group is well made. At the launch Research Plus, she also paraphrased Kennedy saying that Research Plus's role would be to send a message to the government of 'ask not what you can do for us, but what we can do for you'. From these comments, I take it that the aim of Research Plus is not a 'mission' to further the interests of its members, which, by implication, suggests that it would be at the expense of other institutions (in the way that the article, with some fairness, suggests the Russell Group has been doing). Rather Research Plus seems to want to get out of the zero-sum-game way of thinking. By putting our heads together, the HE sector can make enormous contributions to society, to the economy, to regions, to culture and to policy-making. This creates more benefits for all and justifies either greater investment in universities or at least a fairer deal when it comes to government's ability to influence universities' operating environment. The government wins. The country wins. The HE sector win. This is achieved more effectively when institutions group together because they can access the wisdom of the crowd and they can be more easily heard over the noise. It would be fair to say that all the mission groups (and membership bodies like UUK, GuildHE and IndependentHE) try to do this and, at their best, they succeed. Any bad reputation arises from when they act in a self-interested and divisive way instead. The challenge for Research Plus (and other groups) will be to stay true to the principle of collaboration for the wider good and to avoid getting dragged into divisions. This will be especially hard given that expectations from outside the collaboration will be sceptical. That said, the challenge won't be met by assuming it's too hard. I for one am delighted to see a new kid on the block with a potentially different approach.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT