Featured

Is the clock ticking for sabbatical officer roles as we know them?

It’s time for students’ unions to take a radical look in the mirror

You cannot be serious?

Here’s an unpopular opinion – I don’t think having a sabbatical officer structure is the best approach for every single HE SU in the UK, or maybe even most of them. I know, I know, urgh, how awful! What a terrible and unthinkable thing to say. It’s almost taboo or heresy; at least that’s how it feels. I set up my consultancy, Alkhemy, to respectfully challenge the status quo and try to bring some disruption to encourage innovation and creativity of ideas in the student movement. I think I’m taking somewhat of a risk by writing this article but I do hope you will please bear with me as I try to explain myself. 

Whenever I take a Belbin™ test I often am revealed as a “plant”, someone that is creative and easily distracted by shiny new ideas. So, when I see SUs reviewing their democratic structures and they go straight to copying off other SU structures it annoys me a little. It annoys me because there’s no creativity but they also blindly assume that we have to have sabbatical officers and quite simply, I do not think we do. Where is the creativity and innovation at the core of what SUs are about? I’ve often wondered what the student movement would look like if some SUs decided to go wild and not have full time officers – what could this kind of fundamental change achieve for students in HE? Could we refocus resources on grassroots organising as a core theory of change rather than an added bonus? Could we pay liberation and part-time officers for the physical and emotional labour of their roles? Imagine the possibilities – could we fund something entirely different that we have yet to think up? Could we invest in quality listening, research and insight resources (not just surveys!). I talk a lot about the need for democracy revolutions within SUs because, let’s face it, for a heck of a lot of SUs, democratic representation is not resulting in quality student participation and engagement.

Last summer I was conducting a democracy review for a SU and I remember meeting with the incoming President, and it was here where we discussed some of the pitfalls with the typical sabbatical officer structures. They were very candid, as was I and by the end of the meeting I was convinced that this SU should not have sabbatical officers – that, given the resources of the SU and the make-up of their members – a different model could work better. This led to a great debate with the officers, students, and staff about the utility of sabbs and at one point a “sabb-less” structure was on the table. Alas, it did not happen – it just wasn’t the right time to be so revolutionary. But, I haven’t been able to get the idea out of my head since.

A little about me

For over 10 years, I worked in four very different SUs. This was as a two-year sabbatical officer, coordinator, middle manager and senior manager. I’ve not had the perfect career; I’ve made mistakes and let people down, but I’ve also got a track record of achieving high participation from students. I now run a consultancy where a significant portion of my work and earnings come from the student movement. I get it, I speak “SU” and I know, as organisations, SUs are supposed to be student-led, democratic and representative. But, I guess what I’m saying is that the reality of the sabbatical officer paradigm does not necessarily result in SUs being student-led, democratic and representative. For many SUs this is now a distant aspiration as opposed to the bread and butter of what they do, and it’s difficult to see a way back.

“Honestly, some of my best friends were sabbs…”

Here’s what I’m not saying – I’m not saying all Unions should scrap sabbs (a “scrapabbitcal”, if you’d allow me a clumsy portmanteau). If it’s not broken then please don’t try to fix it, if you can say hand on heart that the sabb structure is working for you then congrats and keep going, please consider Alkhemy for your officer induction training needs. But if you’re curious about this idea then read on. 

I have worked with some amazing sabbatical officers in my time; very committed, highly skilled, incredibly capable, with an infectious energy to bring about positive change for students. However, for every amazing sabb there are more that are not getting the support they need to exceed, that develop bad habits early on in their term and that are then written off by their staff. There are also full time officers out there that are working incredibly long hours, who are not supported well enough to take that time back and are genuinely experiencing burnout. This is not said or recognised enough. Instead we normalise this, we talk about the “different hats of an officer” at inductions and can sometimes shy away from talking about the very real risk of burnout when trying to juggle the multiple roles.

The Emperor’s new clothes

There are some full time officers that aren’t given any real constructive criticism. I hear staff say, “it’s not my job to challenge officers”. How can an organisation survive if the people leading it are not constructively challenged? It doesn’t matter how senior you are on an organisational chart – nobody is infallible, every single leader in any organisation will benefit from radically honest constructive feedback, particularly those that, in the main, are lacking in full time work experience. The challenging thing is building a culture that respects their role as political leaders but encourages useful and creative conflict to balance their lived experience with the expertise and knowledge of staff. We also see SUs that are led predominantly by staff, particularly, senior staff – with the enthusiasm drained from officers and reps alike with “we tried that x many years ago and it didn’t work – so no”.  Too many organisations representing students fail to achieve the right balance, and in their inertia in dealing with the problem are willfully blind to the fact, it’s… not… working.

“It’s such a small world in the student movement, everyone knows everyone”

Funnily enough a lot of senior managers in SUs were themselves sabbatical officers in years gone by, who, like me, enjoy looking back on those days with a certain “rose-tintedness”. I’m terrible at saying, most often than not in a broad Yorkshire accent, “when I were a sabb…” But I hear SU senior managers saying, “it’s the best graduate job going”, “it’s only for a year” and “where else would they get this experience so early on in their career?”. I’m sorry but that does not wash with me at all, not anymore. This structure is not the only way to ensure students are developed as leaders and given real world responsibility – it’s just not. It’s not the only way to be student-led, representative or even democratic. Perhaps the number of former sabbatical officers in influential positions in the sector is providing something of an echo-chamber and perhaps we are engaging in a massive “group think” exercise and failing in creating new, working student-led models that are fit for a modern organisation representing students.

The difference between sab-focussed and student-focussed

Let’s take a look at the academic year for SUs, it’s all very similar:

  1. Officer handover, training and induction (June/July/August)
  2. Welcome Week / Freshers (September/October)
  3. *Insert thing that happens that takes up sabbs time* – delete as appropriate: senior/influential staff leave the organisation / PR disaster and Investigation / strikes are called / NUS call a demo or a national action/ etc/ etc. (October/November/Onwards)
  4. Winter blues (November/December)
  5. Winter break (December/January)
  6. Elections, elections, elections (February/ March / April)
  7. By Elections (March/ April/ May)
  8. Sink or swim (some officers thrive and some check out) (March/ April/ May/ June)
  9. Awards season (May/June)
  10. Officer handover, training and induction (June/July/August)

Taking a look at this, which I appreciate is heavily generalised, just how much of a SUs resources is spent on or focussed on the sabbs? How many staff roles are designed to support them? How much resource goes into induction each year? Only for the majority of them to leave in less than 12 months. How much time, effort and money goes into running elections with low voter turnout and a number of uncontested positions? 

Imagine if you took that resource and wide-ranging impact on the organisation and it was used to actually engage students directly? It is no wonder that you often hear from unengaged students “we only see the SU/officers when they are promoting something”, it’s because many SUs are stuck on a loop and the carousel keeps on turning without giving the sabbs (or staff) time to take a step back and think if what they are doing, in a broad sense, is still working.

It would also be fine if 40%-50% turnout in SU elections was considered average as opposed to best practice. There are SUs struggling to get 10% turnout – it’s time to consider alternatives surely?    

Sabbatical officers and wellbeing

I was lucky enough to work as a senior manager for Student Minds, the UK’s student mental health charity, before becoming a full time consultant. During that time I was very lucky to be given a platform to lead on creating the SU programme that the charity currently runs. As a part of that I co-wrote the charity’s assessment framework for what makes a “Mentally Healthy SU”. This gave me a great insight into just how SU democracy and wellbeing interrelate.

A survey (L Dickens, Full Time Officer Support Survey, August 2018), the results of which are not widely promoted, of the 2017-2018 cohort of sabbatical officers in the UK student movement found that work/life balance (or the lack of it) was a large problem. 147 respondents were asked a number of questions about their wellbeing and in response to being asked how they would rate their work/life balance 50% responded with either “poor” or “very poor” with only 30% indicating “good” or “very good”. This response is very alarming, in the years since this survey there has been the coronavirus pandemic and also the launch of a number of support programmes for sabbatical officers, therefore it would be interesting to find out how this may have changed in the last few years, I will wait to see the results of the NUS officer wellbeing survey that has been promoted recently.

Anecdotally, myself and a number of colleagues have reported seeing an increase in the number of sabbatical officers leaving their roles early for reasons related to the impact that roles have on their wellbeing. To demonstrate, here is an example from an officer exiting their role and posting about their experience on Facebook (TW: alcohol abuse):

“At times, it was impossible to clock-off, so for a period of 3 months the only way I could fall asleep was to knock myself out with alcohol. I have collectively overworked enough hours to cover 2 full months…” – Outgoing Sabbatical Officer 2020/2021

This is quite alarming and deeply upsetting. This SU is one that has a large block grant, 50+ full time staff and yet, even with a lot of organisational infrastructure and resource; we still see this occurring. This former sabb is not alone, far from it.

Officers and representatives are also having to deal with mental health disclosures at all hours of the day and night. Many of them are not trained or developed on how to handle such a situation, not only is this unsafe for the person seeking help it’s also a risk factor for officers’ wellbeing. There is also the abuse that officers are having to deal with, particularly online. Who can forget the great work carried out by 25 Dots and Glitch looking at officers and online abuse (September 2021), where 88% had experienced abuse as an officer and almost 3 in 4 experienced it at least on a monthly basis.

Political context and taking an honest, inward look

We do know that there is ever-increasing energy from the Government to intervene and review the role of students’ unions – the latest developments examine free speech on campus and the governmental response to covid 19 in 2020 proposed the need to ensure that SUs are not funding “…student activism and sabbaticals” as well as not “subsidising niche activism or campaigns”.

Generally, the response of the student movement is to be very defensive and trott out #LoveSUs all across social media platforms (a hashtag I too generally love to use), rather than to engage in meaningful debate. It is no secret that the political philosophy of those individuals of influence in the student movement is somewhat different to those in Government and so naturally when accusations are made many in the movement become defensive, very tribal and sometimes bordering on toxic. 

But what if the movement listened and tried to look at it from the point of view of an unengaged student? I’ve seen turnouts ranging from 5% to 20% from those SUs that are brave enough to publicly announce total voter turnout this year. So, let’s imagine that you have a number of uncontested elections, for some sabb roles and part-time/rep roles. If turnout is 15%, the successful candidates are then inducted and they go about trying to achieve their manifesto points. So, we’re saying that sabbs have a mandate based on 15% turnout? If the sabbs are then inducted during summer and just go about achieving those manifesto points without engaging the views of a diverse and substantial number of students then how is that not, by definition, “niché activism”? Pluck a random student from campus and ask them what campaigns the SU has run this year? Could they name 1 or 2? 

Whether you agree or disagree with those “niche activism” accusations or what your political beliefs may be there is a very real possibility that the future of SUs could be dramatically altered by Government intervention so any effort made to make SUs more representative of their student body could help us lean into and lead the change in the sector. Is taking a revolutionary look at the core democratic structures a way to lean in?

Old school

Sabbatical officers are a long standing tradition and institution of the student movement. Ironically, how often do we see students’ unions challenging tradition and structural inequity of other institutions? The concept of sabbatical officers is a throwback to before SUs were required to register as (or even considered) charities and prior to the 1997 Labour Government began a dramatic expansion of HE with a very deliberate focus on widening participation. The result of this? Student numbers almost doubled between 1992 and 2016 and continue to rise (ONS and UUK data). This has resulted in a very diverse student population in HE, so the question is whether the concept of sabbatical officers, which has only seen small changes and adjustments through the same time period, is still an effective model for students’ unions? Changing from a faculty/college sabbatical structure to an open structure or vice versa is not creative; it’s a small, incremental change at best. 

The part that privilege plays

There are definitely some SUs out there where elections are dominated by students that are involved with a particular area of the SU or clique, with those candidates more than likely to be elected, and with a low turnout this is even more likely to be the case. This can mean that the sabb roles are very inaccessible, given that the member of the clique has an unfair advantage if they are heavily involved in the SU. This can mean that the elections, in terms of participation, can be stuck in a vicious cycle; that turnout needs to increase in the student body in order to elect a more representative sabbatical team but that will only happen if people from outside of “the clique” vote and stand, but they are less likely to stand and therefore vote because of the domination of the aforementioned group(s). Therefore not only are we partaking in “niche activism” but are we also favouring those students that have the financial privilege and the privilege of time to build the necessary network connections and partake in the right activities. There is an unseen struggle that acts as an “outside premium” to candidates with lower engagement in the SU.  

Errr Ollie, isn’t it a legal requirement?

Great question – answers on a postcard. Let’s dust off my non-qualifying Law degree and have a bash. Part II of the Education Act does make mention to “major union offices” as well as “sabbatical union office, or paid elected union office”. It also says that sabbatical officers will only serve a maximum of 2 years. It’s also the responsibility of the institution’s governing body to ensure effective governance. But it is not stipulated as a legal requirement, as far as I can ascertain. The law assumes sabbatical officers will exist, kind of like the rest of us. It could be considered a legal requirement if it is mentioned in the SUs governing documents – but they can be changed, can’t they?

Covidwashing, it’s a thing apparently

The other day I came across the term “covidwashing’ which I’m told is when individuals and organisations choose to explain poor organisational performance by citing the pandemic and it’s impact. It can be really tempting to point to some of the issues outlined in this article and attempt to explain the problems by “covidwashing”. There is no doubt that covid-19 has had an incredibly profound impact on HE, SUs and students, but let’s not try to explain low engagement and participation on the pandemic when we were already on a downward turn. 

Conclusions

Obviously this is an idea that’s a bit “out there”, but take some time to think about it. Sure, we have many different kinds of interventions such as quality officer induction and ongoing development, support programmes for officers offering external mentoring or coaching, training on managing disclosures and signposting – but are these trying to plug an unmanageable leak? Is it now time for SUs to take a radical and transformative look at their core structures and try to bring in creative and innovative structures and processes to engage and represent students? Is it really so outlandish to suggest that some SUs in HE may benefit from a different model?

Is the clock ticking for sabbatical officer roles as we know them?

Developing Officers and Student Leaders

Our new and improved programmes for 24/25

Wrap around support for Student Leaders? Look no further. Alkhemy proudly unveils Gromentum 2024/25 and Elevate: Officers 2024/25, transformative programmes designed to redefine the landscape of student leadership development. Drawing from our rich journey, inclusive of both triumphs and lessons learned from past endeavours, we’ve crafted these offerings to align more closely with the ever-changing needs of Organisations Representing Students.

Gromentum is set to revolutionise the way we approach student leader development, integrating micro-learning with continuous development and, crucially, reflective practice. This all-encompassing, on-demand platform is meticulously designed for the bustling lives of student leaders, ensuring year-round growth for course reps, part-time officers, and committee members alike. With enhancements including bespoke content for second-year sabbatical officers, a comprehensive induction process, and a vibrant learning community linked through Slack, Gromentum is ready, bolstered by our support and guidance for facilitators and SU staff.

Meanwhile, Elevate: Officers introduces a bespoke concoction of coaching and mentoring, meticulously tailored to nurture and support elected officers. This programme transcends mere performance enhancement, delving into wellbeing, the establishment of effective working habits, and the unique challenges of these leadership positions. Accompanied by 2 hours per month of support sessions and complimentary access to Gromentum, Elevate: Officers promises a holistic learning experience that encourages networking and the sharing of best practices among leaders.

Embracing these programmes means not just investing in the potential of your student leaders but committing to cultivating a generation of impactful changemakers. Let’s transform the narrative, learning from every step of our journey—mistakes included—and equip your leaders with the tools, resources, and support they need to excel. Discover more about how Alkhemy can partner with you in this exciting endeavour.

For a deeper insight or to enrol in these innovative programmes, reach out to us at hey@alkhemy.org.uk. Need more convincing? See below

Elevate: Officers 2024/25

Looking for robust, personalised support for your elected officers? Alkhemy proudly introduces Elevate: Officers, a bespoke programme meticulously designed to support elected officers. 

Blended Coaching and Mentoring

At the heart of “Elevate: Officers,” we provide monthly support sessions that perfectly blend coaching and mentoring. Our focus extends beyond improving performance to enhancing wellbeing, fostering effective working habits, and managing the unique pressures of being a representative.Blended mentoring and coaching combine the deep, personal guidance of a mentor with the focused, skill-enhancing techniques of a coach, offering a comprehensive approach to personal and professional development.

Join the Gromentum Platform

As part of our commitment to providing exceptional value, we offer complimentary access to our acclaimed Gromentum Programme. This is a micro learning training programme for student leaders. 

What’s Included?

  • Two hours of monthly support sessions for your FTOs and PTOs
  • Complementary access to our Gromentum Programme for your organisation  This will also include the chance and opportunity to network and share best practice with our Gromentum partners
  • Regular feedback with reports and debriefs with key staff (this will be accessible through video recordings and uploaded onto Gromentum).
  • Three days of complementary Alkhemy support (usually to be utilised for in-person, in-house sessions)
  • Priority access to our retainer telephone support service for officers and staff supporting officers and favourable rates for other Alkhemy services and programmes.

Interested?

All these comprehensive services are available at an investment of £4250 plus VAT and expenses, bespoke packages available for different budgets and timescales.

Email hey@alkhemy.org.uk for a “no strings” conversation about this programme.

Gromentum 2024/25

Here’s to developing and training your student leaders. Here is what we want to do:

Innovate micro learning with student leaders

Build community

Save staff and student leaders time and money

How does it work?

We provide the content, deliver it through our online platform and then support your staff to help your student leaders to reflect and implement their learning. Our objective is to develop and support student leaders for the academic year through micro-learning, continual development, and most importantly, reflective practice.

This can be utilised for all student leaders; course reps, part time officers and committee members – and we’ll help you adapt our content to your context.

The Gromeuntum programme is on-demand, affordable, and designed to meet the needs of all kinds of Organisations Representing Students.

New and improved for 2024/25

Content for second year sabbatical officers

A thorough induction for student leaders and facilitators on using and engaging with the platform

New and timely content uploaded onto the platform

Community building through an interlinked Slack account

Ongoing support for facilitators and SU staff

Enrolling in Gromentum is a smart investment in the growth and development of your officers, and can pay dividends in terms of their effectiveness as leaders, their impact on your members, and their own personal and professional growth. Don’t wait – sign up for Gromentum today and give your student leaders the tools, resources, and support they need to become influential leaders and agents of positive change in your community. 

Gromentum costs £1895 plus VAT for each organisation and lower fees are available for smaller SUs with 2 or less sabbatical officers. 

Email hey@alkhemy.org.uk if you’re interested in discussing this innovative programme.

Campaigning Model Diagnostic Tool

Purpose: This tool is designed to help ORS identify the dominance and strength of their campaigning models: Advocacy, Mobilising, and Organising. By understanding where they stand, officers and staff can make informed decisions to enhance their campaigning impact.

**Organisations Representing Students (ORS): A collective term we use for Students’ Unions, Associations and Guilds**

Section 1: Model Dominance

For each statement, rate your organisation on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree. 

Advocacy:

  • Our ORS frequently uses expert opinions and research to influence decision-making. 
  • We often collaborate with academic departments for evidence-based campaigns. 
  • Our campaigns are primarily driven by a few experts or representatives. 

Mobilising:

  • Our organisation regularly uses social media and other platforms to rally students for specific events or causes. 
  • We focus on short-term goals and immediate actions in our campaigns. 
  • Large-scale student participation is common in our campaigns, even if it’s for a short duration. 

Organising:

  • Our organisation invests in long-term community building and grassroots empowerment. 
  • We have programs in place to train student leaders and advocates. 
  • Our campaigns prioritise deep relationships and community dialogues. 

Section 2: Model Strength (Campaigning Impact)

Instructions: For each statement, rate your organisation on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = Very Weak and 5 = Very Strong.

Advocacy:

  • Our evidence-based campaigns have led to tangible policy changes in the university.
  • Our expert-driven campaigns are well-received by the university management.
  • We effectively use research and data to back our advocacy campaigns.

Mobilising:

  • Our mobilising campaigns generate significant attention and raise consciousness.
  • We can quickly rally a large number of students when needed.
  • Our mobilising efforts often lead to immediate actions or decisions by the university.

Organising:

  • We has a strong network of trained student leaders and activists.
  • We have seen sustainable changes as a result of our organising.
  • Our community-building efforts have led to increased student participation and engagement.

Results:

Calculate the total score for each model in the Dominance section. The model with the highest score indicates the dominant campaigning model in your organisation

Calculate the total score for each model in the Strength section. This will give you an idea of the impact and effectiveness of each model in your context.

Interpretation:

  • If Advocacy is dominant but has a low strength score, consider diversifying your campaigning methods or strengthening your research collaborations.
  • If Mobilising is dominant but lacks strength, explore ways to ensure that the momentum is sustained and leads to long-term impact.
  • If Organising is dominant but its strength is low, invest more in community-building initiatives and leadership training.

Note: This tool provides a snapshot of your organisation’s campaigning approach. For a comprehensive analysis, consider seeking feedback from students and conducting periodic reviews.

Advocacy Model:

  • Dominant & High Strength:
    • Advice: Continue leveraging your strength in advocacy. Consider sharing your best practices with other ORS and look for opportunities to collaborate on larger advocacy initiatives.
  • Dominant & Low Strength:
    • Advice: While advocacy is your dominant approach, there’s room for improvement. Strengthen your research collaborations, diversify your expert pool, and ensure that your campaigns resonate with the broader student body.
  • Not Dominant & High Strength:
    • Advice: Even though advocacy isn’t your primary approach, it’s effective when employed. Consider integrating more advocacy tactics into your campaigns, especially when dealing with policy changes.
  • Not Dominant & Low Strength:
    • Advice: Explore opportunities to build your advocacy skills. Collaborate with academic departments, invest in research, and consider training sessions for staff and officers on effective advocacy.

Mobilising Model:

  • Dominant & High Strength:
    • Advice: Your ability to rally students is commendable. Keep the momentum going by staying updated with student concerns and leveraging digital platforms effectively.
  • Dominant & Low Strength:
    • Advice: While you’re good at mobilising students, the impact might be fleeting. Focus on sustaining the momentum, perhaps by integrating some organising tactics for long-term engagement.
  • Not Dominant & High Strength:
    • Advice: You have the capability to mobilise effectively when needed. Look for opportunities where mass mobilisation can make a significant difference and employ this model strategically.
  • Not Dominant & Low Strength:
    • Advice: Enhance your mobilising tactics. Engage with students to understand their preferred communication channels and invest in the right digital engagement tools.

Organising Model:

  • Dominant & High Strength:
    • Advice: Your grassroots approach is both dominant and effective. Continue investing in community-building and leadership training. Consider mentoring other ORS in adopting organising tactics.
  • Dominant & Low Strength:
    • Advice: While organising is your primary approach, there’s potential to make it more impactful. Focus on deepening community ties, enhancing leadership programs, and ensuring diverse representation.
  • Not Dominant & High Strength:
    • Advice: Your organisation is effective in organising even if it’s not the dominant approach. Identify campaigns or issues where a grassroots approach can be particularly impactful and employ organising tactics there.
  • Not Dominant & Low Strength:
    • Advice: There’s potential to harness the power of organising. Invest in community dialogues, leadership training, and create spaces for student collaboration.

General Advice for Mixed Scores:

  • If your organisation doesn’t have a clear dominant model but has strengths in multiple areas, it indicates flexibility. Harness this by adopting a hybrid approach, blending tactics from different models based on the specific campaign or issue at hand.
  • For organisations that score low across the board, it’s an opportunity for introspection and growth. Engage with students to understand their needs, seek feedback, and consider external training or collaborations to enhance campaigning skills.

For all those visual learners out there, here is a campaigns model matrix:

Remember, the diagnostic tool provides insights, but the real strength lies in adapting and evolving based on listening, changing student needs, and the broader socio-political landscape.

Bespoke Capacity Building

Facing mounting tasks with a tight team? Whether you need a hand for a short project or support over the long haul, we’re here to help. We provide tailored embedded support that slots seamlessly into your existing structure, bridging the gap between hiring and consultancy. Discover how our flexible, bespoke solutions can help spread the load and ensure your team always has the backup it needs. You may not know what you want or need, so feel free to get in touch for a no obligation scoping discussion.

Think of it as not quite a temp and not quite a consultant… somewhere in the middle.

Want to enquire? You can email us at info@alkhemy.org.uk or set up a call

Testimonials from partners

“Alkhemy have really hit the ground running with us with their MemBed programme, and I have seen the impact almost instantly. Their practitioner is highly skilled, professional and slotted into our team perfectly. My team and I have been really impressed with their ability to build our confidence and we would 100% recommend this service to other Students’ Unions and Universities”

Jamie Robertson, Student Voice & Representation Manager, Reading Students’ Union

“Working with Alkhemy for the past three months, they have been a wealth of knowledge and support, drawing from their widespread experience and skills. At a time of great change within our Student Voice and Academic structures it has been invaluable having an outside and knowledgeable perspective. Without Alkhemy we would have taken significantly more time to research and refine our plans and would have suffered from being to introspective.
I cannot praise this service enough and hope to work with them again in the future.”

Tony Catt, Academic Representation Project Specialist, University of Nottingham Students’ Union

Reintroducing Alkhemy

**Organisations Representing Students (ORS): A collective term we use for Students’ Unions, Associations and Guilds**

We have a track record of supporting and partnering with ORS of all shapes, sizes and budgets. Our team of five amazing staff members were born out of the student movement and also share a passion for doing things differently whilst embracing innovation where needed. We call it “polite disruption”, and it’s our way of challenging the status quo and bringing people together with accessibility and wellbeing at the heart of our beliefs. We build capacity, offer training and development opportunities as well as manage operational and strategics projects with empathy.

We love working with officers, and there are various ways in which we can support and build capacity around your officers that will complement your current approach and context.

Take a look and see 👈 👀

Do any of your staff need a developmental push to reach their potential?

Our blended coaching and mentoring programme for staff members can help your people reach their potential. We provide 1-2-1 support and development for all levels of SU staff and have had particular success with entry level staff, staff that are transitioning from being officers and staff members moving into new roles and responsibilities. Our team are well versed in student engagement, relationship management, officer/staff dynamic as well as other areas. If you’re searching for the right development opportunity for someone, look no further than above ☝️

We have have lots of experience in providing a fresh pair of eyes in many operational and strategic areas of ORS. We love embedding in teams to work with wonderful people to conduct reviews. We can provide democracy, advice service or other reviews. Our co-creation approach is innovative and unique in the sector. We can ask you the tough questions in a candid but caring way. If you’re not sure where to start we can also come in and provide scoping exercises to make recommendations on next steps for you.

It is no secret that there is a skills shortage in the student movement at the moment and despite the “Great Resignation” appearing in the rear-view mirror in other sectors, our sector is still experiencing challenges with staff recruitment and retention.

All of our team members at Alkhemy are experienced managers as well as possessing an array of expertise and experience in volunteer management, student voice/representation, quality enhancement, student advice, peer support, campaigning and team leadership. We can work out a bespoke model to supply you with the skills and capacity you need at better value for money than hiring. With Alkhemy you won’t just get one person, you’ll get the support of our whole team.

If employing a temp wouldn’t be a good fit and you don’t have the budget to bring in an expensive consultant, Take a look ☝️

We supply adviser capacity for your team

Our Adviser Programme is our flagship service. If your service is unable to keep up with demand or you are in need of cover, we can help. We offer different pricing models that depend on your needs. Take a look ☝️

Officers and staff working together ☝️

One of the most crucial success enablers in any ORS is the strength of the working relationship between officers and staff. Successfully navigating the officer/staff dynamic appropriately and having the joint understanding of “who does what” is absolutely key. This programme delves into some of the dynamics at play in your organisation and brings officers and staff together to explore different concepts and models of working successfully together. Thinking you have a clear protocol or policy in place can create problems without those deep discussions and developing a joint understanding of how that relationship works in practice.

Officer training all up to date?

So, are your officers all set for the year to come? Anything lacking? We have a number of programmes that cover the role of a representative, campaigning for change, officer wellbeing and more – take a look 👈 👀

We have a fabulous team of 8 staff members at Alkhemy, all of whom have worked in ORS and have experience working in various local SU contexts. They know exactly what it’s like to work to engage students to participate and make a difference. They now use that knowledge and experience to embed in ORS teams around the UK and Ireland to enhance the student experience.

Take a look below 👇

My Mental Health and Alkhemy’s Existential Crisis: Who even are we?

*** We refer to Students’ Unions, Associations and Guilds collectively as Organisations Representing Students (ORS) ***

It’s been a rough few weeks

This week’s newsletter from Alkhemy is a bit personal and philosophical. It’s been a strange few weeks for me. To be honest; I’m coming out the other side of an anxiety and depression spiral. This can happen every-so-often, and is absolutely something more men should feel safe talking about. Weirdly, for me, it’s only when I have had some reflection time that I realise that I’ve been feeling paranoid, defensive, impulsive, not as productive as usual and have had some real issues with self-doubt. I’ve been dealing with mental ill health for most of my life, I’m used to getting through it, talking to my family about it – it has taken years of practice, experimenting with lifestyle changes, therapy and medication, and I still feel like a complete novice. I’ve just come back from a few days break, where I never checked my emails, not even once – it was an amazing chance to rest, reset and reflect.

This period of personal ill health has coincided with a quiet summer for Alkhemy, many leads and prospects have run cold, it’s the nature of “consultancy”, but this was a case of all roads leading nowhere. Luckily, our fantastic team has rallied and we’ve come out of the other side, strong as ever. This quiet time has given us some space to be introspective, asking some key questions and having internal discussions about our “why” and our “what”. Before Alkhemy was set up, I can recall countless times in the past when I’d think, “I could do that…” when looking at other consultants in our sector. I remember being in the pub with former work colleagues (you know who you are!) planning out how we could disrupt HE and consultancy itself with a new approach. 

Alkhemy in 2.5 years 

Alkhemy was founded back in April 2021 as a side project. I had three fantastic months of shared parental leave with my daughter, Lily, when she was aged 6-9 months. It was one of the best experiences of my life to date. But, to keep my mind active and not turning to mush watching countless hours of Cocomelon and Peppa Pig I asked my wife if I could spend every Sunday afternoon in the office investigating what setting up a “consultancy” in HE would look like. Well, when it came time to return to work three months later, we’d set up the company and Alkhemy was born. Since then, we’ve grown to a team of five people and fashioned a bit of a reputation for mixing things up and practicing “polite disruption”. We’re made up of people that have worked in many different Students’ Unions, at the coalface of delivery. We work with ORS and Institutions of all sizes, budgets and reputations all across the UK and Ireland. I absolutely love it.

“Consultancy”: a loaded term

Back in’t early days the initial conversations with ORS staff were really interesting, a lot of people flat out did not trust consultants. Being honest, when you hear ‘consultancy’, what’s your gut reaction? Eye rolls? Sighs? Maybe a muttered “not another one”? I’ve heard it and understand. Some consultants in our sector seem to have tarnished the term. Overcharging and underdelivering has become a perception of some. It’s not all consultants in our sector, a great many of them are wanting to challenge the status quo, I see them as fellow travellers.

At Alkhemy, we’ve been grappling with this term. Do we give “consultancy” a makeover, or do we distance ourselves from it? The whole reason Alkhemy was birthed was to challenge the status quo, to be that breath of fresh air in a room that many feel has been stuffy for far too long. 

I’ve witnessed democracy reviews with price tags of £20K that have barely scratched the surface, with reports that merely tweak and tinker, yet drain ORS – charities, mind you – of thousands. It’s not just unfair; I’m sorry to say it’s borderline exploitative.

A “Consultancy” Case Study

So, picture this: I recently noticed a managerial role up for recruitment; the ORS in question was on the hunt for managerial cover, a temporary contract. I immediately see an opportunity to deliver more for less. A chance to innovate, to deliver something unique, efficient, and cost-effective. I approach them and ask if they’d be willing to talk about it as a possibility, they say yes and arrange a meeting in my calendar. I then go away and start to think about all the potential ways we can help meet their needs but also realising I really need to understand their context. So I’m looking forward to the meeting to discuss. But before I can even lay out this fresh perspective, I see, “meeting cancelled” and am told after some conversations with the team and board: “consultancy definitely isn’t for us.” Well, I never said anything about consultancy and I never even pitched what the offer was. Being seen as a “consultancy” certainly did Alkhemy no favours in this instance. Snap judgements and the aforementioned preconceived notions of “consultancy” were definitely at play. Of course, this is totally their choice, it’s just frustrating to be attached to this pre-judgement of “consultancy”.

Challenge Alkhemy

I genuinely believe that Alkhemy can help every ORS and institution, one of the reasons we ran our “Challenge Alkhemy” survey was to see what the barriers were to ORS staff working more closely with “consultants”. 40 ORS took part in this survey.

The biggest roadblock for ORS considering consultancy seems to be cost or the perception of the high cost. They feel consultants are just too pricey. Some more insight was offered through the survey, when asked about the barriers to working with consultants, here were some of the responses:

“Being able to afford them! Ensuring they understand the uniqueness of the SU”

“Cost sometimes, but more so the time to develop tight briefs that will deliver real change in a particular time frame”

“I imagine something along the lines of trusting that they will consider the SU as individual, and not try to deliver the exact same training/support for every SU they work with.” 

Why we may not be a consultancy

I get the fear of not understanding the unique needs of every SU. But that’s not us. We’re here to embed ourselves in your world, to truly understand your unique challenges. No one-size-fits-all solutions here. 

At Alkhemy, we believe in fair and transparent pricing. We adjust our rates based on your specific needs and our prior experience with similar projects. Regardless of your organisation’s size or budget, we aim to provide value that’s hard to match elsewhere.

Our embedded capacity model is designed to offer timely expertise without straining your finances. We may challenge you on your recruitment choices, finding the right talent is hard. With us, you gain access to a dedicated, talented team. Plus, when you choose our embedded capacity programmes, you’re not just partnering with a single expert; you’re collaborating with a cohesive team of five individuals.

Love me tender? Not so much…

I read this article on commissioning consultants through tenders the other week and hoped that people reading this didn’t think that Alkhemy should be engaged in this way, because the truth is, whilst we will take part in some tender processes – I am not a massive fan of them.

The irony is that Alkhemy got our start through a tender bid, but it’s not always the best route. Tendering can inadvertently bottleneck the true potential of consultancy engagements. The issues often manifested include:

  • Short-sightedness: A competitive tendering environment sometimes forces consultants to prioritise the ‘win’ and ‘sealing the deal’ – presenting instant gratification solutions that might overlook the organisation’s long-term sustainability and vision, as well as complex issues. I often think, “shall I say what I think or what they will want to hear?” It’s always the former and rarely does that “win” the contract.
  • Relationship Strains: Instead of seeing consultants as allies, the tendering process inadvertently places them in adversarial roles. This rivalry can erode the foundational trust required for successful, long-term partnerships between ORS and consultants. A lot of us don’t view our fellow consultants as rivals.
  • Resource Drainage: The tendering mechanism, with its exhaustive paperwork and evaluative steps, often syphons off valuable time and resources, which can strain the limited budgets of many SUs.
  • Lack of Innovation: The rigid structures of tendering processes can often stifle creative thinking or give the wrong impression that the commissioning organisation lacks creative flair. In the quest to meet strict tender requirements, consultants might opt for ‘tried and tested’ approaches over innovative solutions, leading to generic and potentially suboptimal outcomes for SUs.
  • Choosing Process over People: Much like job interviews can be, tendering might select those best at navigating the process rather than those best suited for the task. If an SU already has a rapport with a consultant, the shared history and trust can often outweigh the consultant’s prowess in mastering tender procedures. I would rather commission a person or organisation that I trust to deliver over someone that is, often subjectively, perceived as “the most qualified”.
  • Just a Waste of Time: Some of the time, people running tenders will already know who they want to work with, but they will be obliged through policy or convention to field multiple quotes in an almost performative way.
  • … and Energy: I’ve known and worked in SUs that have gone out to tender, taken all the best bits from the bids and completed the work in-house. This is challenging for the plucky solopreneur whose cash flow is limited. 
  • You may not understand your problem: When commissioning a consultant, you’re often getting their expertise in to deliver some training, to develop a strategy, perform a governance review, etc. But, if you can be proactive in sharing the problem before commissioning the “solution”, a trusted consultant could help you analyse the issues at play and offer feedback to strengthen your perspective of the problem. 

Let’s be more embedded, more relational

If we strive for a more relational approach to engaging consultants, what would that look like and how would it be better? Here, mutual respect, collaboration, and vision could reign supreme. The key benefits of this approach include:

• Tailored Innovation: A genuine understanding of each SU’s unique challenges allows consultants to devise bespoke strategies that cater specifically to their needs.

• Emphasis on Relationships: Relational consultancy is rooted in mutual trust and understanding. It’s about aligning with the SU’s culture, ambitions, values and constraints.

• Beyond Transactions: Relational approaches see beyond one-off engagements, focusing instead on lasting partnerships and shared visions for the future.

• Co-Creation: By fostering a collaborative spirit, these consultants and SUs can co-create, leading to outcomes that resonate more deeply and are more effective in the long run. We can also bring your members into decisions, not just consultation, offering their lived expertise.

This approach places the emphasis on mutual understanding, trust, and collaboration. It recognizes that a successful partnership is about more than just deliverables and costs; it’s about shared values, vision, and a commitment to growing together. 

Does it take too much time? Probably the same amount of time as going out to tender, and much less than commissioning the wrong consultant. But if you really are short of time, you can commission a consultant you trust to do this process for you or at least to scope a project out for you whilst offering extra capacity and a fresh pair of eyes.

While tendering has its place, its inherent constraints might not always serve the eclectic needs of your SU. Before you dive into another potentially tedious tender process, pause, and ponder: is there a more relational, rewarding route worth exploring?

It’s out of my hands

Internally, here at Alkhemy we are going to phase out references that we are a “consultancy”, you’ll see on our homepage that we refer to ourselves as a “social impact company” and we offer “embedded capacity” for organisations. Sure, we do traditional consultancy but we are sympathetic to those that view consultants in the space being “too pricey” for one-size-fits-all approaches. But we can’t do anything to control how people perceive us externally. 

Are we a “consultancy”? I’ll let you know when we figure it out 😜…

Officers, have you met Alkhemy?

Read on to see how partnering with Alkhemy can help elected officers in your roles:

☝️ Our approach is to integrate an Alkhemy practitioner within your team, providing consistent support and enhancing the performance of your officers ☝️

👇 Coaching, Mentoring & Support Programme 👇

Alkhemy’s coaches have years of experience supporting and leading the delivery of both campaigns and projects for organisations representing students. We can work with your staff and officers delivering 121 or group coaching to help deliver your organisation’s priorities.

Alkhemy’s leaders boast an extensive background in managing and leading Students’ Unions and educational charities. Our new MemBed Manager Programme allows us to become an part of your organisation, whether as interim senior management, middle management support, or a bespoke arrangement tailored to your specific needs.

Organisations representing students are awesome places to work and volunteer. With a wonderfully diverse mix of people as well as the sometimes difficult to navigate officer/staff dynamics it’s no surprise we can often run into conflict. We can help you navigate conflict ☝️

We have a free Support Line for folks that work in SUs. Whether you have a question, need advice, or just want to vent, SU Support Line is here for you. To make things easier, we’re just a call or a WhatsApp message away. Let’s start the conversation.

Organising before it was cool

We need to put all our democratic eggs in a new basket. It’s time to organise and mean it!

Last week I was lucky enough to attend a webinar run by Citizens UK on Broad-Based Organising for Organisations Representing Students (ORS). It was a great event and I was really energised to see so many people from our movement in attendance, with staff and officers talking about implementing community organising (CO) approaches locally. It evoked memories of my time working with Nottingham Citizens as a Union staff member back in the day (2011-2015), times where engagement and student leadership were at an all time high in my career. It also made me think how the majority of senior managers in our movement are missing a trick here.

When I speak to people about CO, I often feel like I cannot do justice to the impact that it can have on political activism and participation for students. If I mention CO to senior managers in ORS I’m often met with glazed eyes or they’ll cite an example of “organising” that they know of that didn’t work very well. I see a kind of automatic ambivalence to the concept. Or I’ll get, “isn’t that what NUS have tried to do a few times?”. This attitude is both valid and understandable because, save a few different organisations within, our movement has not given CO a fair go. I’m here to say that now it’s time to change that.

Just what is it?

As an experienced campaigner and organiser, I can tell you that CO is a powerful approach to creating social change by empowering communities to identify their common concerns and unite to address them collectively. Rooted in the principles of democracy, equality, and cooperation, community organising emphasises relationship-building, shared leadership, and active citizenship. The origins of community organising can be traced back to several traditions, including the early labour movements, civil rights campaigns, and the pioneering work of Saul Alinsky in the United States during the mid-20th century. Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” laid the foundation for contemporary community organising, teaching activists to engage with communities, identify local power dynamics, and leverage grassroots support to challenge existing structures and achieve tangible improvements in people’s lives. Over the years, community organising has continued to evolve, with countless successful campaigns worldwide demonstrating its enduring relevance and effectiveness as a catalyst for positive change. We also shouldn’t forget a young Barack Obama started out as a Community Organiser on the streets of Chicago.

I believe that the essence of CO lies in the art of connection, built on a simple concept of one-to-one conversations that can bring diverse communities together to improve the world. It’s about discovering people’s values, aspirations, and the underlying motivations that drive them to take action. Just as Simon Sinek famously emphasises the importance of understanding the “why” behind everything we do, successful community organising begins with a deep understanding of people together with their personal stories and “whys.”

By engaging in meaningful 1-2-1 conversations, we create a foundation for building relational power – the ability to influence and create change through connections and shared interests. It’s a form of power that grows exponentially as relationships strengthen and trust deepens within a community. This relational power, in turn, enables us to approach those who hold institutional power, fostering constructive dialogue and collaboration. Here is an old, but still epic video from Citizens UK explaining community organising.

What sets CO apart is its unique focus on empowering individuals to recognise their inherent power and capability to drive change. By cultivating relationships, you can create an environment in which people can support one another, collectively identify issues that matter to them, and develop strategies to address these challenges. This collaborative, bottom-up approach harnesses the energy and passion of communities, ensuring that the solutions we create are not only effective but also resonate deeply with the people we serve. So when people ask, “will students even want to be involved?” – of course, because the process creates a connection and resonance with the issues campaigned on.

In essence, community organising is a powerful and transformative process that starts with understanding the “why” of each individual and culminates in the collective power of a united community working towards a common vision. It’s about nurturing authentic relationships, fostering collaboration, and, most importantly, inspiring people to believe in their capacity to change the world around them. Of course this takes time and capacity, but at times such as this, isn’t this exactly what we need?

Case Study: University of Nottingham Students’ Union 2010-2015

This may be hard to believe, but there was a time when I was a stubborn democracy geek, hesitant to give students much control over their own representation. I believed that the status quo was the best way to ensure effective governance within an ORS. However, a turning point came when I witnessed the incredible impact of successful community organising firsthand.

The pivotal moment occurred when our President and officers expressed their desire to take part in an accountability session for the Police and Crime Commissioner candidates. At the time, I was sceptical and told them that I did not have the capacity to support such an initiative. Undeterred, they went ahead, holding 1-2-1 meetings with student leaders to listen to their concerns about community safety. Their efforts paid off, as many students attended the event, eager to have their voices heard.

During the session, each candidate committed to ensuring that CCTV would be mandatory in hackney carriage cabs, addressing a pressing concern for our students. It was at this point that I learned a sobering fact: more students had turned out for this single meeting than had attended our democratic meetings for the entire previous academic year.

This realisation hit me hard, forcing me to confront the limitations of my previous outlook. I had underestimated the potential of community organising to engage and empower students in a meaningful way.

From that day forward, my perspective underwent a paradigm shift. I recognised the value of CO and began to embrace its principles wholeheartedly. This is why I now champion this approach.

Here’s what happened next:

  1. Power to the students: We hired a full-time organiser and I had amazing support from our senior managers. Through community organising and some top-notch training, students at UoNSU found their voices and learned the ropes of creating change. The result? A bunch of confident, skilled students ready to make a difference that worked with stakeholders to create the “Notts Student Manifesto 2015” that all PPC candidates promised to help deliver.
  2. Organising like a boss: UoNSU didn’t just sit in their own little corner – they built solid relationships with other organisations and stakeholders, pooling resources, swapping ideas, and raising the bar for everyone.
  3. Election turnout? A lovely, intentional by-product: Over a span of four years, UoNSU got more and more students to participate in our democratic processes, giving them a sense of ownership and investment when campaigning on the issues facing them. The highest we got was nearly 40% of the student body turning out to vote for their student leaders.

That’s what I call a success story. And it just goes to show that when you give community organising a real shot, we can become more effective, representative, and impactful powerhouses.

So, what can we learn from this apparent triumph? For one, let’s get creative when it comes to overcoming challenges and limitations. We should also keep the conversation going, sharing knowledge and best practices among ORS. 

The UoNSU case study is living proof that CO can be a game changer for students. So let’s embrace it, and create some real, lasting change for the better. Together, we’ve got this.

Stop hitting yourself

You know that awful game that bullies play in school, “stop hitting yourself”? Where the bully will overpower you and use your own hand to strike you in the face? I often think that sometimes we play this game in the student movement, but the difference is there is no bully, we’re just hitting ourselves in the face without realising it. We willingly adopt overly bureaucratic, inflexible processes and structures as well as electing roles that are less and less relevant. Then, and this is the kicker, we complain that they don’t work and students don’t engage. Please stop hitting yourself, just stop. We can decide to do things differently, so please consider starting again. Stop tinkering and copying each other – and start innovating. 

Don’t generalise Ollie, it’s not all SUs

Of course, every seemingly ill thought-out generalisation that I come up with comes with some exceptions. There are many ORS that have implemented a version of CO with great success and on the flip-side of that, there are many ORS that believe this doesn’t apply to them as the traditional structures and roles are working well. Not sure if this is you? Here’s a checklist:

  • You’re achieving 35%+ turnout in your main/leadership elections ⬚
  • Every position that you elect is not only contested, but there are 3+ candidates for each role ⬚
  • Your democratic meetings are not only quorate, but flowing with ideas and contributions from students from a diverse range of identities and communities ⬚
  • Your sabbatical officers are thriving, creating lots of change and known by the majority of your membership ⬚
  • All part-time officers are also thriving, well supported and active, creating lots of change and opportunities for their communities ⬚
  • NSS scores are through the roof and your members understand the role that the Union play in enhancing their experience ⬚

Now, if you are checking every tick-box then please stop reading this – this article is not for you and apologies for wasting your time. Go forth and put pen to paper – you need to share all of your best practices with the rest of our movement.

The above checklist would be best practice right now, but really this should be standard or decent practice in this day and age for 2023 organisations representing students. It’s not that high a bar – just sayin’.

Oh you’re still here? Let’s carry on then…

We’re too reliant on one type of democracy, and that is representative democracy; through sabbatical officers, part-time officers, course reps, councils committees, hall reps, community reps, etc. We are currently putting all (or certainly most) of our eggs in one representative democracy basket, isn’t that a massive risk? This approach is becoming more and more out of touch with students and engagement figures across the board seem to back that up.

We elect officers, on a small turnout, talk about their “mandate” and then have them work tirelessly on delivering election promises on behalf of students (and they work hard!). Election promises are not good data and they are not good listening – they are fundamentally flawed. We wonder why students don’t know what officers do – it’s because the nature of representative democracy that we adopt does nothing to build connection and that connection starts with actual listening, listening to the student body, one student at a time. (Don’t say you represent thousands of students if you don’t mean it).

When a student comes forward with an idea for change, how often do we send them a form to fill out, direct them to a webpage or send them an email that dryly explains all of the inflexible hoops they have to jump through just to be heard? What if, instead, we went for a coffee with them and found out their story and their “why”, and started building power with them and students that feel a similar way? That’s organising, or at least part of it.

“We can’t ask for additional resources at the moment, the Uni won’t increase our grant. We don’t have the capacity to organise.”

That’s kind of fair, but ORS should redirect resources and capacity to CO instead of throwing good money after bad engagement. If I was a University CFO and I saw low NSS scores, low election turnout, officers that go rogue or turn up to committees unprepared, I’d probably be questioning the return on investment. I know that’s controversial; but let’s start to get our sh*t together, shall we?

I understand that financial constraints are a concern, but by reassigning resources to CO, ORS can actually maximise their return on investment in the long run. It’s important to consider that a more engaged and empowered student body leads to better decision-making, higher satisfaction rates, and improved outcomes for both ORS and the university. By investing in community organising, ORS can not only increase student participation in elections and committees but also develop stronger relationships with university management, making a more compelling case for additional funding in the future. Furthermore, community organising can foster a sense of shared responsibility and ownership among students, potentially unlocking untapped volunteer resources and encouraging greater collaboration on campus initiatives. Ultimately, reallocating resources to CO is not just about spending money differently – it’s about investing in an approach that empowers students, enhances our impact, and strengthens the university community as a whole.

Nobody said it was easy

Let’s be real – I get that implementing CO isn’t all sunshine and rainbows. There are challenges that come with it, and we need to be upfront about them. But no worthwhile change comes without its fair share of hurdles, right?

For starters, staff training and support is crucial to ensure that your team is on the same page and equipped with the skills to effectively carry out community organising. This may require a shift in mindset and new training programmes, but the investment will pay off in the long run. To overcome this challenge, you can look for affordable training options, seek partnerships with organisations experienced in community organising, or even tap into the knowledge of their own students who might have experience in this field. And, you know, Alkhemy can help as well with that training and support 😉

Another challenge is the initial allocation of resources. We know that money doesn’t grow on trees, and getting the necessary funding for new initiatives can be tough. But remember, we’re talking about redirecting existing resources, not finding a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. ORS can consider reallocating funds from low-impact or underperforming areas, collaborating with other organisations to pool resources, or even exploring external funding opportunities such as grants or sponsorships.

And then there’s the elephant in the room – resistance from stakeholders. Change can be scary, and not everyone will be on board with a radical shift in the way we operate. But instead of shying away from these conversations, let’s embrace them. Open and honest dialogue with stakeholders, including university management, students, and staff, is key to building understanding and addressing concerns. By demonstrating the long-term benefits of CO and involving stakeholders in the process, we can gradually gain buy-in and support for this new approach.

Implementing community organising comes with its challenges, but if we’re smart and strategic about it, we can overcome them. It’s time to roll up our sleeves, face these challenges head-on, and get to work – because the potential rewards for our students and our movement are just too great to ignore.

“What do they even do all day?”“What do they even do all day?”

“What do they even do all day?”

For Sabbatical Officers we know that two days are never the same, but really what should officers be doing on a day to day basis?

This issue resurfaced during a recent democratic review that Alkhemy carried out, and I’ve taken some of the thoughts from that review and reflected on them below.

Here at Alkhemy we like to consider and question things that may seem mundane, ordinary and a bit basic in the world of ORS (organisations representing students). One of those things that I often ponder is the day-to-day duties of sabbatical officers and just what they should be doing when they are not in a meeting, talking to students or at some kind of event. Yes, I really am that cool. You could say any sabb worth their salt would be checking emails, writing emails, setting up meetings, checking their calendar, reading papers, writing agendas, etc, etc. But actually has anyone questioned the day-to-day duties of sabbs in your organisation? Is there a distinction between duties that are for staff and those for officers/reps?

So many hats to wear, too little time 

Sabbatical roles are elected of course and in executing their overall duties they have to wear many hats. As we know sabbs are charity trustees, figureheads of the organisation, representatives, politicians (although they often don’t like being described this way and who can blame them?), they have duties and responsibilities for their specific areas that they inherit from predecessor teams that they may not have appreciated at election time, and they have objectives and projects that they will want to implement based on their election promises. With such a steep learning curve there is often an imbalance between the volume of the expectations that their roles demand and the actual time there is to develop and learn before it becomes more of an “on the job” learning environment. 

Electoral osmosis

With this, time, capacity and an understanding of the resources available are very important for both officers and staff and so we can see an argument for officers carrying out mainly representational work and for staff carrying out operational work. In theory, staff have been appointed based on a recruitment process designed to ensure that the best candidates with the requisite skills, experience and expertise are appointed, whereas officers are elected with no such process to determine their skills and experience, it is therefore wise to expect officers to bring their lived experience of student life to the role in representing students and not to expect some kind of “electoral osmosis” to have occurred after the votes have been counted where somehow elected students are consequently imbued with expertise, skills and professional experience to aid in delivering their duties. 

Operational, representational and “prepresentational” duties

It is also important to note that this “electoral osmosis” can also be an issue with representational work of the elected officers; in expecting that because a student was elected they automatically become the font of knowledge and are suddenly able to represent the complexities of the student experience to the University and wider stakeholders. Officers therefore need staff support so that they can be representational and here at Alkhemy we call this work “prepresentational”. These kind of duties are carried out by both the staff that support representation (or “engagement”, “student voice”, etc) within the Union and the officers/reps.

In the main the expectation of the sabbatical officers should be to carry out representational duties and not too much operational work. The categorisation of duties is displayed in the table below:

The categorisation of duties concerning representatives

Operational“Prepresentational”Representational
Room and venue bookings
Setting up regular meetings
Budget management
Responding to & fielding individual student enquiries
Helping student groups with their budgets
Ordering supplies and materials
Designing training for students
Writing policies and regulations for student groups
Minuting and clerking meetings
Dispensing advice
Designing different types of research 
Copywriting
Coordinating and managing social media channels		Writing up an analysis and briefing of student research
Completing a policy briefing on national issues
Reading through committee papers and briefing the officer/rep
Briefing and debriefing committee meetings
Coaching and mentoring of officers/reps
Writing up a campaigns strategy/plan
Utilising project management tools to aid the delivery of an officers/rep project/campaign
Training officers on key skills and attributes
Analysing student feedback
Working to prepare agendas for internal meetings, such as student council
Writing up a report for officers/reps on advice case statistics
Briefing officers on training content delivery

*Officers utilising or receiving this support is also “prepresentational”.		Talking/listening to students
Championing and representationally leading campaigns 
Prepping for committee/board meetings 
Attending and lobbying at those meetings 
Advocating on behalf of students 
Working with students to empower them to create change
Regularly meeting with key influencers and stakeholders from the University and wider community
Creating content completing the feedback loop, such as blogs, vlogs and posting on officer profiles on social media

The diagram below is a continuum that looks to explore these duties and where SU personnel should broadly fall within the continuum. We see that officers fall within all 3 but in the main are representational and prepresentational. It should be noted officers are not expected to have no operational duties at all but these most likely fall into everyday administration and logistics. The reality is also that a lot of SUs do not have access to vast resources and so it may be that on occasions officers and reps are required to work in the operational area of the continuum, but the aim should be for this to be an exception and not the general rule.

Categories of duties

Is this even a thing?

So what do you think? Is this something that is even considered or debated in your organisation? How do the day-to-day duties of officers in your organisation compare? I know there’s bound to be a real difference between SUs that have relatively large staff numbers and those that do not?
If you’re interested in working with Alkhemy to review the dynamic between staff and officers in your organisation please get in contact on ollie@alkhemy.org.uk.