On the back of a LOT of requests from schools, academies, partners and MATS, this September we were pleased to independently host a series of MIS Discovery Sessions.

Who were the Sessions for?

What did the Discovery Sessions cover?

Bromcom MIS Discovery Session

Arbor MIS Discovery Session

IRIS Ed:gen MIS Discovery Session

Our final #FinnemoreFireside of this academic year is with Chris Kirk of CJK Associates. Chris’ work is varied and he and his team support the mission of education by providing strategy, business planning, organisation design, operations, procurement and shared service advice to education organisations.

Chris works extensively with multi-academy trusts on vision, strategy, operating models and governance/finance reviews, so our Q&A session focuses on MATs and their needs, and what this means for suppliers – both now and in the future.

It’s a really insightful discussion and we cover topics including:

• Fostering social responsibility in schools and achieving aspirations through clarity
• How schools can contribute to society
• Finding your mission: understanding and showcasing your unique capabilities
• Unlocking the power of professional networks: how Trusts can make a difference
• The challenge of ensuring adequate support for high-need pupils
• Establishing a culture of consistency: How do you ensure a similar mission statement in new schools/academies?
• The future of school groupings and the natural drift towards ten
• When MATs stand firm and refuse to uphold the Regional Commissioner’s agenda
• What is Collaborative Alignment? Achieving aspirations through group collaboration
• The challenges facing schools as the educational environments change

We’d love to hear your feedback and comments below. Enjoy!

Interesting to learn today that the CMA has now confirmed they are investigating ESS SIMS on the issue surrounding 3-year contracts.

As schools will be aware, they were required to sign a new 3-year contract directly with ESS by the end of last month if they want to keep using SIMS. What ESS has also said is that there is a 6-month break clause, so if schools do want to move to another supplier then they are free to do so, they just need to let ESS know before the end of September 2022 to leave the contract.

The big question is: is this long enough to conduct the necessary market testing exercise, and go through a satisfactory procurement process, in order to decide if staying with SIMS for the next 3-years is the right thing for your school?

Many schools have told the CMA that it isn’t long enough which has prompted the formal investigation to allow them to consider this matter properly.

Realistically, when a school has used a solution for several years, it does take time to properly assess the alternatives out there. There’s so much more to it than simply ‘getting quotes’ from providers. It involves taking a fresh look at how everyone utilises their MIS:

– What we would like an MIS system to achieve?
– What are our top priorities as a school?
– Is there a way of improving how we do things?
– How have solutions innovated and improved since we last looked at the market?

It was around last Autumn when schools were made aware of the new contract arrangements. The question around the procurement process is a tricky one. Physically making the purchase can be done quickly (there are frameworks, etc. out there) but undertaking a proper market testing exercise involving all the stakeholders in school is a LOT harder.

Any procurement process needs to be rigorous, and any decision justifiable as it can be challenged. And, should the school choose to switch MIS, adequate time needs to be available for a successful implementation.

It doesn’t help that, if a school has used one system for a long time (which tends to be the case for LA schools) they’re really starting from scratch. A lot of innovation has happened in the last 10 years alone; there’s no way of understanding what’s out there until you’ve had the chance to really dig into the possibilities. Creating requirements for an MIS can be equally challenging; just because something’s “always been done that way” doesn’t mean they want to continue with that process.

And then there is the implementation to consider. This is an area MIS suppliers have invested in like crazy so it’s possible to get a school up and running on their system really quickly. But there does need to be a plan for how the changeover will be managed. These are systems that are not just used by one or two people in school, they are used by operational staff, teachers, SLT and parents.

It’s also very difficult for schools to be able to look at things on a truly like-for-like basis as so much has changed. For example, it’s pretty usual for a SIMS school to have bought into the core MIS (inc. support from their LA team) and then, over the years, purchase additional modules to meet different needs (e.g. to manage dinner money, or offer an online payment solution, or a texting solution, or an app for parents/students, etc.). The more modern MIS solutions don’t usually require all these extra modules or products to be purchased at all, they tend to be part of the core MIS as standard and the whole thing is cloud-based so it’s a seamless, complete solution.  But this means it can leave schools with an even more complex procurement ahead when they realise there are far more factors at play  – and better potential savings to be made.

(What’s also interesting is that, as part of its investigation, the CMA has said they will also consider the pricing of some ESS product packages – specifically, it will look at how SIMS is being sold alongside FMS – check out our separate post on this thorny issue.)

What do you think? How long should a school allocate to procuring their school management system?

If you’ve gone through a procurement process, what’s your advice?

How do you know when it’s time to sell your business? Try asking yourself these questions:

1. Do my circumstances allow for the level of financial investment this company needs to keep it going?

2. Is my business model really viable? If not, is it going to be in the future and will I like it?

3. Do I have an amazing team of high performers? Am I willing and can I afford to recruit one?

4. What do I have more of: passion or exhaustion?

5. Will a sale solve my problems, and will someone buy us?

6. What happens if I don’t sell? What are my other options?

Have an honest conversation with yourself and your team. At the end of the day, selling your business is one of the most exciting parts of being a business owner – and it always opens the door for new opportunities.

INVESTOR NETWORKING & MENTORSHIP

Matching the right buyer with the right business is a painstaking process. In conjunction with CJK Associates, we support businesses looking to invest in or potentially acquire in the Edtech sector and can work with you throughout the whole process, from introduction through due diligence, to closure and transformation.

For businesses looking for VCs, investors or other methods of funding, we will get you pitch-ready and connect you to potential investors in the Edtech industry. We act as mentors throughout the process and will advise on how to plan growth strategy and allocate resources.

Get in touch to find out more.

We’re almost the end of term in what has been another weird year. We spent the first 3 months in lockdown so lost all face-to-face contact again (the fact we didn’t start the year by attending the Bett show was a novelty in itself!) so we’ve been continuing to catch up with people by video and share the recordings with you all – I really appreciate your positive responses!

As humans we all want to deal with other humans; it’s so important to have a real face and a real person behind your solutions. It’s been great to have so many people involved in our ‘fireside chats’ to talk education, management and innovation.

So thank you Martin Hall and Stephen Bilboe for giving us an insight into the MIS market which has continued to see big changes in 2021.

Thanks to Will Jordan and Luke Pargeter for talking to us about the things you do alongside the MIS solutions and the ways in which you help schools.

The insight Rowena Hackwood and Jeff Marshall provided into how MATs and academies work has been invaluable, both for edtech suppliers and education professionals alike, so thank you for this.

And finally thank you Phil Neal, Mark House, Andre Skepple and Priya Lakhani for your views and ideas on what might happen next and the big trends in edtech.

Sarah and I have thoroughly enjoyed making the series, and already have some great sessions ready to go in the new term with industry thought leaders Duncan Baldwin, Keren Wild and Tony Lockwood – watch this space!

In case you missed it, here’s a round-up of all our thought leader Q&A sessions from 2020.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel and get notified when new videos go live

One of the biggest changes to happen to the world of school MIS was the introduction of academies, starting back in the 2000s under the then Labour government, and becoming widespread following the Conservative/Lib Dem coalition Academies Act in 2010. The concept of schools becoming their own entities as academies and leaving Local Authority control had an effect on their MIS and support choices (which we’ve touched on in a previous blog), but it also created a whole new set of stakeholders: the Multi-Academy Trust (MAT) central team.

MAT central teams need certain things from an MIS which have not really been required before. It’s always been possible to aggregate data through feeds (this happens between schools and LA teams all the time) but MAT leaders need something completely different. They need a complete view of students and staff across the trust to enable collaboration, streamline communication and effectively target resources.

As a result, MIS suppliers have started to build MAT-focused functionality into their solutions and now offer a range of resources and dashboards aimed at making the lives of the MAT central teams easier.

It’s now been more than 10 years since the first MAT was formed so we wanted to explore how well MIS suppliers were meeting the specific needs of MATs.

A recent survey¹ asked 92 MAT central teams to rate how satisfied they were with their MIS from 1-10, where 1 is “Extremely dissatisfied” and 10 is “Extremely satisfied”. Their scores are outlined below; you can see that satisfaction is generally pretty good with the majority scoring their MIS a 7, and only a few MATs giving a score of 4 or less.

Chart: MAT Satisfaction rating of their MIS from 1-10, where 1 is “Extremely dissatisfied” and 10 is “Extremely satisfied”.

The survey asked respondents to briefly explain why they gave that rating, and the running theme amongst those who gave a perfect 10 was ease of use.

The survey delves into more detail. When asked about how satisfied they were with their MIS’ ability to provide actionable information, which is so crucial to trust central teams, they appear to be largely happy in this area. The biggest group (37.6%) responded saying were satisfied with what their MIS provides. It’s worth noting though that around 19% said they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, and a further 26% combined stated they were Dissatisfied or Extremely Satisfied. Would this be a reason for an academy trust to look for alternate solutions in the future? Maybe.

Question: How satisfied are you with the extent to which the MIS provides actionable information?

However, when asked how satisfied they are with the Trust-specific functionality their MIS offers, the results tell a different story. The majority of respondents said that they were Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied (28.26%), followed very closely by those saying they were Extremely Dissatisfied (27.17%):

Question: How satisfied are you with the Trust-specific functionality your MIS offers?

The fact that over a quarter of all respondents said they were Extremely Dissatisfied with trust-focused functionality should set off alarm bells with MIS suppliers. Trust-focused functionality always forms a key part of the requirements when MATs go to tender for an MIS, and it feels like there’s still work to do in this area.

In a previous thought leader session Nick recorded with Rowena Hackwood, CEO at Astrea Academy Trust, they discussed this topic in more detail. Rowena’s challenge for all suppliers, not just MIS, is for them to move towards creating solutions that work for a new customer base who need a different point of view:

“Increasingly in the sector, there is a move towards stronger and more sustainable groups of schools, which isn’t a national strategy for every school to be in a MAT, but it is a national strategy for every school to be part of a more sustainable group, as it were. And it’s absolutely critical that, in your thinking, you have that in mind.

The kind of MAT dashboards that I want to be able to share with trustees align academic attainment and attendance data on the one hand, with HR, finance, governance, performance, on the other hand, and I don’t have any means at a MAT level to really draw all of those different elements in together. So my challenge, I think, to you is to move away from a school by school understanding of the English school system towards one where a huge chunk of the customer base needs a different point of view.”

Rowena Hackwood, CEO at Astrea Academy Trust

Ultimately, most of the MIS have the ability to offer reporting and insight in one way or another, using tools such as Power BI; it’s more a question of how easy and integrated these systems are, and the extent to which they provide the data the central teams need. It’s the central management issue that MATs would really like to see supported by their MIS providers, and the better they are able to help with this, the more MATs will want to work with suppliers as long-term partners across the trust.

What do you see as the main differences between what academies need vs what MAT central teams need? Do you think there’s a need for an MIS which has been built with MAT central teams in mind as the primary user (similar to IMP in creating a finance system)?

¹The data was collected by The Key from a survey that went out to all multi academy trusts (with two or more schools) in England, by email. These surveys were split by trusts that had just one MIS across the group of schools, and trusts that used multiple MIS suppliers. It was not sent to trusts in the independent sector. The survey was completed by central team staff such as CEOs, COOs, CFOs and others involved in MIS operations, between 29 March and 27 April 2021.

Next in our series of thought leader interviews is this Q&A session with Jeff Marshall.

Through J&G Marshall Ltd, Jeff’s core business is helping schools to convert to academy status. They cover everything a school needs to become an academy: legals, project management, finance system as well as post-conversion services for accounts, HR, School Improvement, governing body training plus much more.

They also conduct MAT Growth Audits to ascertain where a Trust is, where it wants/needs to be and how to get there through step-change growth. It’s this knowledge and expertise that I wanted to tap into to understand a little bit more about the specific challenges MAT leaders face.

Some of the things we discuss include:

• What’s the background to your education experience, and what do you find so attractive about working in education?
• What’s your approach to supporting a MAT; what do you feel are the greatest pain points in the first 6 months and what conclusions have you come to regarding what is required to get it right and wrong, as the first 6 months are very important?
• What do you think is important when looking at edtech solutions across a MAT? What issues do you find?
• Do you feel that there is enough innovation in Edtech, how would you like to see this tackled?
• What do you think is missing from what Edtech companies offer, do they act like strong partners in your opinion? What could they do more of or differently?

We’ve split the interview into three parts to make it easier to digest. Enjoy!

Continuing our series of business thought leader interviews, I recently caught up with Will Jordan, the visionary Co-Founder of IMP Software.

IMP Software has developed a budgeting, forecasting and reporting solution specifically for use by Multi Academy Trusts (MATs). They take a single database solution to market that is adopted by the entire Trust, rather than the traditional approach of an aggregation of individual school datasets. The solution is not a school system with MAT functionality added on top!

This data is used to drive future forecasts, whilst also factoring in and enabling ‘what if’ scenario planning on a host of potential drivers which can impact the viability of MATs.  It gives the Trust and its leaders the whole picture across their schools.

Some of the things we discuss include:

• IMP only launched in 2019 but has gained 600+ loyal customers in 20 months. What’s the reason behind forming the business and how has this been achieved?
• The most important current issues MATs and CFOs
• What makes IMP different from other budgeting solutions
• As a start-up business, the big areas of importance over the next 2-3 years to continue with current levels of growth
• With all the changes in the Edtech market, the effect of consolidation of solutions by Juniper, Iris, etc. and how this might affect customers
• Diversifying into other segments with the same solutions, or new solutions in the same segment
• What’s next for IMP?

We’ve split the interview into four parts to make it easier to digest. Enjoy!

Last month IRIS Software Group, one of the UK’s largest privately held software companies, announced it has acquired iSAMS, a leading, fully integrated, online school management system. I caught up with Winston Poyton, the Senior Product Director there, to talk about their education strategy and their most recent acquisition.

IRIS already has 11,000+ school customers, and their overall goal is to take the pain out of processes and let professionals working in schools focus on the work they love.

Some of the things we discuss include:

• What’s important to IRIS right now, and what are your plans in the education sector?
• What’s your strategy for IRIS and iSAMS? How does it sit with the other solutions you offer to schools?
• Who do you feel is your main threat, and what makes you different?
• How do you think the forthcoming sale of Capita ESS (SIMS) will affect the education market?
• Where do you see the future of MIS, what will make the difference, and what needs to change?

The next in our series of Q&As with edtech business leaders is with Barry Anns, Chief Executive Officer at Engage MIS and Group Head of International at Education Horizons Group.

Engage MIS has been widely adopted by independent and international schools in 60 countries across six continents.

In this interview, Nick talked to Barry about:

• What is important to Engage and where is your focus in the Edtech market?
• What do you think will be the impact of the sale of SIMS will be on schools and the market (including the international markets?)
• How is the international market different and how are you achieving success? Why would it be hard for UK based solutions to compete?
• If you were to predict the future, where would you see the MIS market shaping up to be in 5 years time?
• There are a large number of overlapping solutions HR/MIS/Learning tools; do you think will we ever see a consolidation of these solutions?

We’ve split it into two parts to make it easy to digest.  Enjoy!