The MIS sector in England continues to be in a state of flux and there are currently no signs of it settling down. Schools and MATs continue to switch suppliers, businesses and support teams are changing the way they operate, and new partnerships and being formed to enhance the value suppliers offer.

 

Is this a good thing for schools and MIS users? We certainly hope so, with change comes innovation, but I can see why MIS can feel like a pain in the backside as opposed to an opportunity to improve things for some schools and MATs.

 

Here are some of the big talking points in 2022 and our predictions for 2023

 

 

The challenges around ESS’ move to direct licencing and 3-year contracts continue

When ESS announced to all its schools that they required them to licence with them directly (as opposed to via an LA licence deal) and that all contracts would be for 3-years now as opposed to one, there was a great deal of pushback from schools culminating in a challenge from them and a subsequent investigation by the CMA.

 

ESS, having offered various incremental ‘break clauses’, is now proposing a ‘New Break Clause Offer’ which will allow some schools to apply to break their contract if they can provide ‘objective evidence of a clear intention to switch’. The application will then be assessed by an independent adjudicator. Whether or not the CMA feel this is fair and workable remains to be seen. At the time of writing, the investigation is still open but the decision is likely to be soon as the last CMA consultation period closed in December 2022.

 

Our predictions: given just how many schools are affected by the ESS decision to change their terms, it’s likely the CMA would have received many responses during the last consultation period – both from schools and suppliers alike. Is it realistic to ask schools to provide written evidence of conversations – that would have likely happened verbally – in order to be able to apply to move? Is the application process itself so complicated that it puts schools off and they simply stick with what they’ve got? All questions the CMA will be considering, but we can see this rumbling on into 2023.

(**UPDATE** on 10th Jan 2023, the CMA published its decision to accept commitments from ESS that enable certain schools (meaning those which had considered switching providers but concluded they did not have sufficient time to do so) to apply to an independent adjudicator for a 12-month break clause. If granted, the clause will allow them to exit their current three-year contract with ESS and choose an alternative provider, should they so wish. More details on our blog here, schools have until 10th Feb 2023 to make their application.)

 

 

The rate of churn in the market continues at an even higher rate than expected

The most recent census figures are out and show that, over the past year, 2,734 schools have moved away from SIMS to alternate MIS suppliers. It means they’ve lost 18% of their market share in one year, probably higher than anyone expected. It also means that lots of challenger MIS are gaining ground with Arbor and Bromcom being the big winners, and lots of other new and existing MIS suppliers continue to gain ground (I’d recommend checking out Josh Perry’s blog for a detailed breakdown of market share by supplier).

 

Our predictions: Is this likely to continue into 2023? Everything indicates that it will. The school census figures are a good indicator of what’s going on but they always give a slightly delayed view on the market; they tell us which MIS the school used to submit the census, but they don’t reflect any recent procurements or new contracts schools may have entered into (e.g. the recent West Sussex procurement).  In the face of an enforced 3-year contract, many SIMS schools scrambled to move to an alternate MIS and there are still migrations in progress. We know that more schools, academies and MATs also intend to test the market there but felt that they couldn’t run a fair and thorough procurement within a limited timeframe (we talk about this below).

 

The acceleration in churn we’re seeing is not just due to contract issues though. There is a real desire for new solutions which offer schools something different, and which better meets the needs of MATs.  Bromcom and Arbor have made significant gains, and the primary-focused cloud MIS (Scholarpack, RM Integris and Horizons/Pupil Asset) have held fairly steady.  There are also new players out there which schools are happily choosing to switch to. IRIS Ed:Gen was the next fastest grower, and Compass Education is already busy getting schools live here in the UK.  ET-AIMS and Go4Schools have new MIS offerings which are sparking interest, and Satchel recently announced that they intend to build an MIS too. There’s lots of potential for growth and a very high likelihood that we’ll see more churn.

 

 

What’s next for Support Teams

The role and nature of school support teams continue to evolve. As an LA team, only offering support for one MIS option feels more and more precarious as the level of churn amongst schools, academies and trusts increases each year. However, by and large, MATs, schools and academies often still want to buy into local support – they still want to work with the colleagues with which they’ve built such great relationships.  As a result, the number of support teams forming partnerships with MIS providers other than SIMS has increased drastically, and many now offer multi-MIS support. The progressive teams understand that the priority is helping their schools achieve their goals, and it’s something they plan to continue to do in the future – irrespective of the systems they use. They “support the process, not the product”.

 

Our predictions: unfortunately, those LA teams that only offer SIMS support to their schools are going to find it harder and harder in the future. LAs no longer hold a SIMS licence in perpetuity as was once the case as ESS mandates that all schools licence with them directly so LAs are no longer a route to a preferential SIMS licence deal. ESS is offering its own support contracts directly to SIMS schools at a favourable price so these teams may find that some of their schools won’t buy into their MIS SLAs at all. In addition, we’ve heard anecdotally that ESS plans to discontinue the annual entitlement rebate that has traditionally been available to LA teams in return for them supporting SIMS. For many, it may mean there is no longer a viable business.

(N.B. we have a new #FinnemoreFireside coming up with Catherine Tallis, Director Of Business Services at Herts for Learning Ltd where we discuss the challenges above – watch this space)

 

 

An increased focus on procurements

As indicated by the amount of churn, it’s clear there are likely to be more procurements underway than ever. Depending on the size of the school or trust, this can be a complex process involving stakeholders from across all areas of operations, teaching and leadership.  At any one time, an MIS supplier will also be responding to multiple tenders so we’d definitely encourage the use of a framework such as  G-cloud or Everything ICT. It helps the process run smoothly and helps guard against any legal challenges.

 

Our predictions: We anticipate school and MAT requirements becoming more high-level and strategic as it becomes clear what brand-new cloud-based MIS can help them achieve. While lots of requirements have tended to focus on functionality in the past (e.g. can you take a register, can you submit the census) these are things that all MIS can do. A decision which is made purely on basics and price rarely gets schools and Trusts what they need.

 

We’re starting to see Trusts ask more of MIS suppliers in terms of how they will help them meet their own overall strategy. For example:

 

• How will the MIS help them meet Carbon net zero targets by 2030?
• How will the MIS provide the insight on students we need to successfully run a national academy chain?
• How does the MIS help us allocate budget to staff resources accordingly based on effective pedagogy?

 

Being a straight admin/office tool is not enough anymore, Trusts are looking for software partners with long-term benefits.

 

 

 

The desire for cloud solutions continues

There has always been a strong case for a school to move all its systems to the cloud, and this was brought into sharp focus by the pandemic.  Anytime, anywhere access became absolutely crucial as school staff were unable to gain physical access to buildings. Even when they could, many students were still attending school remotely so there had to be solutions in place to cope with remote learning – it caught a lot of people out and accelerated cloud strategy.

 

The argument around TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) is now more important than ever as, once again, schools find their budgets being shrunk so any way to save money has to be considered. Cloud solutions mean that schools don’t need to buy or house a server so there are all the associated power and air-con cost savings that go with it.

 

Carbon targets and a successful net zero strategy are also becoming a higher priority for schools as we head towards 2030, they want to waste as little energy as possible and the cloud helps them get there.

 

Our predictions: schools will of course want to move to the cloud where possible and all the MIS suppliers understand this. The fast-growing suppliers are cloud-based as you would expect, and ESS has a cloud strategy with its Next Gen solution planned for the future.

 

For schools and Trusts who find themselves with a client-based MIS for the foreseeable future, there are other options out there to help your cloud strategy. For example, suppliers can sometimes help with this directly, and school support teams such as Scomis offer SIMS hosting so you no longer need to buy and maintain servers.

 

 

 

 

Partnerships, mergers and acquisitions

There has been so much acquisition activity around MIS in recent years and this continued in 2022 with RM announcing the sale of the division that includes the Integris MIS to The Key Group. When the deal goes through, The Key will have around a 33% MIS market share in the English-maintained sector (across Arbor, Scholarpack and Integris) which makes them a huge player, second only to ESS SIMS which currently has around 56%.

Suppliers of MIS-adjacent solutions have also continued to form fruitful partnerships as it becomes clear that there’s not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution for schools and Trusts, and flexibility is everything.

 

Our predictions: We’re seeing increased merger, acquisition and partnership activity amongst support teams too. For example, it was recently announced that School ICT Services Ltd had been acquired by Oxfordshire-based provider of education ICT services, Turn IT On.

 

We’re also seeing more and more LA support teams working in partnership with each other in order to pool expertise and deliver valuable services to their schools. For the reasons outlined earlier in the blog, we see this sector in particular as one to watch as the nature of SIMS support teams changes.

 

 

 

So, all in all, an eventful year in the sector and we can see more change coming in the future. While it feels like a lot of battles are currently being fought around contracts and agreements, we’d really like to see what’s coming next in terms of innovation.  Who’s out there redefining the role MIS will play in schools in the face of changing requirements?

 

 

We’d love to hear what’s next and look forward to working with suppliers, schools, Trusts and support colleagues throughout 2023.

According to DfE census data, the past three and a half years have seen an increased trend towards switching MIS amongst schools in England.

The headline story is that SIMS market share has dropped the most, from a huge 77% to a still healthy 60%, and three main challenger MIS have emerged, between them winning 27% of the market: Bromcom and Arbor across all phases, and Scholarpack in primary schools. There are also plenty of other challengers – each of them gaining ground in their own way (I’d recommend checking out Joshua Perry’s Bring More Data blog for details and analysis).

 

 

What’s behind this trend and is it set to continue?

 

The reasons schools choose to move in the first place are varied.

 

• Many convert to academies and sometimes they join a trust where a different MIS is in use, so they switch as part of the joining process. Other times, they’ll use their change of status to academy as an opportunity to look at the MIS options available to them now that they are no longer under LA control.

 

 

• Maintained schools are switching MIS too. For many, the traditional model of them being able to buy into an LA-purchased and supported MIS has disappeared. Councils in England are rarely able to retain budget or mandate solutions, and the largest MIS supplier (ESS SIMS) has taken the decision to ask all their schools to contract with them directly instead of via an LA licence, for a three-year period¹. For many, this change in terms prompted a market-testing exercise which led to a new MIS being selected.

 

 

• Schools, academies and MATs are increasingly aware of the cost and efficiency gains they can make by switching MIS. Schools are looking to save money on multiple systems and save time on back-office processes, and MATs are looking to centralise more data and operational workflows. This is a huge driver and one that is likely to increase over the next few years.

 

All these factors are ongoing. Academy conversion continues to happen, and single academies are increasingly joining larger, more established MATs.

SIMS schools who wanted to go to tender for their MIS but felt they didn’t have time to complete a proper procurement exercise resulted in a large group of them seeking legal advice on the matter which is now being investigated by the Competition & Markets Authority (CMA).¹

There are countless case studies of schools and academies who will tell you about the huge improvements moving MIS supplier has brought about, almost always accompanied by big cost-savings.

It looks like change is set to continue. The question is: how fast?

 

 

How likely are schools to switch MIS supplier in the next 12 months?

 

In Spring 2021, The Key sent a survey to all primary, secondary, special schools and pupil referral units in England on the subject of MIS which produced some fascinating insights, including (amongst other things):

 

• What’s most important to schools when looking for an MIS, and how likely are they to move supplier
• How effective MIS are at saving schools time, and how well schools supported
• How intuitive are MIS solutions for new users, and do they give schools the right tools for the job in terms of collaboration and data?

 

The Key sent out a similar survey in Spring 2022 so, using these results, we’ve been able to compare how opinions on MIS have changed and gain some insight into what schools might do in the future.

 

 

The survey asked schools how likely they were to consider changing supplier in the next 12-months. The results indicate that almost 16% said they were either ‘likely’ or ‘very likely’ to move in the next 12 months which is around the same as last year – if this is a reflection across the whole market then we can expect the trend of switching MIS to continue in the next year or so (you can find the full results plus analysis by supplier in The Key’s blog post “What do schools feel about their MIS?”)

 

 

 

 

While the distribution of results was broadly similar to 2021, the trend compared to the previous year showed some polarisation towards either end of the scale. More respondents said they were ‘very likely’ to move than last year, but an increased number of respondents said they were ‘very unlikely’ to move too. There could be a few reasons for this:

 

• A sizeable group of schools have switched MIS recently so the appetite amongst this group for them to switch again will be very low; it usually makes sense to embed a new MIS fully and explore everything it can do before deciding to change again.

 

• A lot of schools will be in a multi-year contract with their MIS so moving MIS may not be an option they could consider in the short term. (However, some suppliers do give schools the option to switch to them mid-contract without double-paying, e.g. Bromcom and Arbor )

 

• At the other end of the scale, the increase in appetite amongst schools for moving MIS will likely be for the reasons outlined at the very beginning of this blog: when a new contract is required (be that through the school’s academisation, or an existing contract coming to an end with an LA or supplier) it prompts the need for a fair and rigorous tender process – even if that school, academy or trust is pretty happy with the incumbent supplier. There are a number of frameworks in place to help schools and MATs through this process e.g. G-cloud, Everything ICT, etc.

 

• Finally, the increase in schools saying that they are very likely to move MIS in the next 12 months could purely be down to the fact that they are not happy with their existing supplier. This could be down to the way it works (or doesn’t work) for them, the support they receive, cost, customer service, or any number of other reasons.

 

We’ll be exploring what’s important to schools, academies and trusts in future blogs – subscribe to stay up to date.

 

 

 

 

¹At the time of publishing this blog, the CMA has stated that they need further time to investigate and has not yet announced the action they intend to take.

 

Last month, Nick caught up with former Capita MD and creator of the SIMS MIS, Phil Neal, to discuss the various changes in the education sector. As the MIS market continues to evolve and Phil gives his view on:

• The ongoing tender in Northern Ireland and what might happen there in terms of MIS supplier, as well as Scotland and Wales
• The challenges of developing an MIS to meet specific, regional-based, statutory requirements: is this a distraction for MIS suppliers?
• The big changes in the England MIS market, with views on ET-AIMS, Compass Education, IRIS Ed:gen, Juniper Education, Bromcom, Scholarpack and Arbor
• The recent decision by ESS to move to three-year, direct contracts for all schools and potential ramifications
• How more MIS solutions within the UK market might actually lead to less innovation  in the long term
• How machine learning can be used within MIS to create something truly unique
• The importance of Support Units and the role they play alongside schools

 

As always it’s fascinating to get the views of someone who has worked in the MIS sector for so long and knows the various stakeholders so well.

Where do you think the MIS market is heading and who will be the long-term winners?

 

 

Is signing into a multi-year contract for your MIS a good thing?

If it’s something you’ve actively chosen to do as a school, academy or trust then, yes, it’s a great idea. It means you’ve had the chance to look at the options out there, and you’ve asked your suppliers for three-, four- or five-year pricing to guarantee a bit of budget certainty for the future.

If a multi-year contract is something you’ve had sprung on you in the small print – leaving you a very short window to either agree or cancel – well, it’s unlikely to be very popular. No one appreciates feeling like they’re being backed into a corner ☹

An unforeseen change in contract terms like this poses all sorts of questions for everyone involved in MIS:

❓ How does this affect the relationships schools have with the local support teams out there whom they’ve worked with and accessed their MIS licence through for years? It leaves Support Teams having to manage a difficult message from the MIS provider.

❓ How does this affect how Support Teams work with suppliers? More and more Support Teams have moved to be a multi-MIS support team, choosing to support their schools irrespective of the systems they use as opposed to only offering one option. All of the ‘big 5’ MIS have established Support Partner programmes (some useful links are below), as well as many of the newer entrants to the sector.

❓ How does this affect everyone (both schools and LAs) in terms of meeting procurement rules? Does everyone now need to get quotes and go through a tender process to even just stay with the MIS they already use?

❓ As academisation continues, what happens when a Local Authority maintained school is tied into a multi-year contract that converts to an academy?

Lots to think about which will hopefully become clearer soon.

 

If you’re a school, academy or trust and you’re affected by this and are wondering what to do, I’ve seen lots of posts on this already but it seems like the best advice is:

• Remember, YOU are the customer, so don’t be afraid of looking at alternatives and moving as it can all happen a lot quicker and easier than you think. Everyone is well-versed in migrating data from your system and it’s possible to be up and running very quickly.

 

• If there’s too much time pressure to look into things right now, don’t feel you have to lock in for a further three years, but do definitely contact your supplier to negotiate an alternative term length. They may be open to shorter contracts in the face of schools cancelling altogether, and this will give you time to plan for 2022.

 

• Talk to people! Get in touch with your local MIS support team if you use one, or with any of the MIS companies directly. They are all friendly and knowledgeable and will walk you through everything you need to know (or send a message to me or Nick as we’re more than happy to introduce you).

 

‘Big 5’ Support Partner programme links:

RM Integris https://www.rm.com/products/rm-integris/partner

Bromcom https://www.bromcom.com/LA-partners

Arbor https://arbor-education.com/become-a-partner/

Scholarpack https://scholarpack.com/who-we-help/support-partners/

ESS SIMS https://www.ess-sims.co.uk/products-and-services/sims-support-units

 

 

 

Our next fireside chat is with Schools ICT Service Manager and all-round MIS expert, Keren Wild.

Schools ICT is a fully traded service of NYCC working through North Yorkshire Education Services (NYES), which means they work with all types of organisations and education settings across the UK, not just in North Yorkshire.

We’ve known Keren for many years, and it’s great to speak with colleagues from MIS support teams as it gives such a unique and insightful view of the landscape. In this Q&A, we chat about a wide range of topics including:

• The North Yorks framework and how this has given choice to the schools
• The value that Support Teams offer to Edtech companies; how support teams protect their schools and take away the pain of IT
• How technology has encouraged primary schools to make different choices, especially with the added pressure of Covid closures
• How Support Teams will evolve in the future to include wider services, multi-MIS, more competition, and becoming being a partner to MATs
• Academisation and its role in moving Primary schools to cloud-based solutions
• The role of Senior leaders in the decision change MIS, and how this can be a challenge
• How well schools’ understand data and what an MIS can do for them
• Anytime, anywhere access to MIS and how this has become even more important since Covid
• How secondary schools feel about cloud MIS options
• Usability and change, and what challenger MIS could do to make their solutions slicker
• The difference between ‘one-stop shop’ and ‘best of breed’ solutions
• The opportunities for Edtech to partner with support providers as they have insights and connections which will give Edtech companies insights to the customer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What does it mean when we talk about MIS solutions being intuitive? The concept of something being ‘intuitive’ often gets mistaken for ‘basic’; there’s a belief that something is intuitive to use because it’s not rich functionally, but this is simply not the case. The smartphones we use today are some of the most sophisticated tech consumers have ever carried around – and they don’t come with instructions. We know how to use them because we’ve grown up with the more basic mobiles; one of the reasons we find them intuitive to use is because we learnt the old stuff the hard way!

Also, companies (in particular gaming companies) have identified ways to make it easy for us to use their systems using clever software such as WalkMe; the goal is to reduce friction and allow users to play games or use systems starting with the most basic flows, then introducing you to the more complicated features later.

 

It’s a similar story with MIS, but the idea that something will be hard to learn still holds people back when it comes to looking at alternatives – especially if their recollection of learning the existing system was painful.

It’s rarely the case though, and a good analogy here is that of learning to drive. You don’t have to re-take your driving test every time you get a new car.  You know how to drive already; you just need to find out what’s different in the new car and get used to using it.  It’s easy, and the new stuff is usually the best stuff (hello sat nav and park assist!)

It’s the same when you change your Management Information System.  You don’t need to go on lengthy training courses or re-learn from scratch. You know how to use an MIS already; you just need to find out what’s different in the new system and get used to using it.

 

A recent survey¹ of 2,146 schools asked, amongst other things, how intuitive their MIS is for new users.  The pie chart below summarises the responses:

 

The vast majority of respondents (38.15%) fell into the satisfied category which is good to see, with a further 25.34% taking the middle ground saying they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. However, what’s surprising here is that over a quarter of respondents (25.39%) said they were either dissatisfied or extremely dissatisfied when asked how intuitive their MIS is for new users. It’s a worrying stat as no MIS supplier sets out to make a solution that’s prohibitively difficult to use.

 

According to the Interaction Design Foundation, members of the interdisciplinary research group Intuitive Use of User Interface offer the following definition of intuitive use:

 

“A technical system is—in a specific context of a user goal—intuitively usable to the degree the user is able to interact with it effectively by applying knowledge unconsciously.”

 

Based on this definition, there are a few reasons why respondents might not feel like their MIS is intuitive for new users:

• If the MIS you use now is the MIS you’ve always used, it’s likely that you may not consider it to be intuitive as you remember your first learning curve.
• Newer, SaaS MIS may be perceived as more intuitive as their users have used something previously so ‘know how to drive’ and won’t find it a challenge.
• Equally, solutions based on more recent technology will likely be easier to work with as they don’t have the old legacy-system hang-ups of having to navigate out of one module and into another. It will undoubtedly be an easier and more seamless experience.
• For brand new users, solutions built on more recent technology tend to require minimal training and are easier to learn. Older systems involved attending courses – which often made them all the more difficult to roll out to teaching staff given the time required.

 

The graph below shows a breakdown of the survey results for the ‘Big 5’ who, between them, they make up 96% of school market share² (namely Arbor, Bromcom, RM Integris, ScholarPack and SIMS):

Ultimately, how intuitive an MIS solution is perceived to be is down to a combination of things:

• How easy the solution is to access, and how quick it is to navigate
• How confident the user is with technology as a whole?
• How experienced the user is with MIS and the concepts of records, data dependencies and analysis
• How the user was introduced to the solution in the first place. For example:
  • Did they start the role when it was already in place, so they ‘had’ to use it? If so, what sort of intro did they have to the system?
  • Were they part of a team where the school started using a system for the first time? If so, what was their introduction to the MIS like?
• How well supported they are throughout, and the source of the support (local team, colleagues, provider, someone else?)

 

But most importantly of all, the concept of a solution being intuitive or not comes down to how well the product managers, designers and developers know their users, and how much time they spend listening and understanding.

The point is MIS users already know how to use intuitive software.  If they don’t have a basic understanding of how to use the MIS software by playing around with it for a few minutes then, as an MIS supplier, you’ve sadly missed the mark.  But if you work alongside your users on what’s important to them (and avoid the pitfall of developing something clever and technical just because you can), you can deliver a solution that users can take to without having to hesitate and wonder how they can execute an action.

 

 

 

¹The data was collected by The Key from a survey that went out to all primary, secondary, special schools and pupil referral units in England, by email. It was not sent to independent schools. The survey was completed by Headteachers, Deputy and Assistant Heads, and School Business Managers / Leaders between 29 March and 27 April 2021.

As part of the survey, respondents were asked which MIS they use. The results are outlined below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

²Market share statistics are sourced from two excellent blogs: Graham Reed’s Omega Pegasus https://www.omegapegasus.com/mischallenge and Josh Perry’s Bring More Data https://bringmoredata.blogspot.com/

 

 

 

When asked, the majority of schools say that functionality is most important to them when looking for an MIS. But what does ‘functionality’ actually mean?

 

The idea of functionality means different things to different users. If you’re an experienced MIS/data manager who users the MIS to undertake detailed daily/weekly/termly routines, then complex functionality might be your cup of tea. If you are an occasional MIS user who looks to the solution more for reports and analysis, your idea of perfect functionality is simplicity and intuitiveness.

How you rate the functionality of your MIS is personal to you and will be based on, amongst other things:

• Experience with systems
• Role within school
• Proximity to the system (e.g. a daily super-user v arms-length, occasional use)
• Previous use of alternate MIS to draw comparisons
• Understanding of what might be possible in the future within MIS
• Level of training received

 

Ultimately, different users require their MIS and data to do different things. To understand how effective an MIS is, it’s worth looking at it from the perspective of the user (not the system) and asking:

• Does the MIS give them the tools to do their job well on an individual level?
• Does the MIS help them work as part of a team of many people?

 

A recent survey¹ of 2,146 schools asked, amongst other things, how effective they felt their MIS was at providing the data they needed to do their job well.  The pie chart below summarises the responses:

 

To examine the findings in more detail, the graph below shows a breakdown of the survey results for the ‘Big 5’ who, between them, they make up 96% of school market share² (namely Arbor, Bromcom, RM Integris, ScholarPack and SIMS):

 

Over half of respondents scored their MIS positively, saying it was either Very effective or Extremely effective.  This is good to hear, and exactly what MIS solutions are striving to achieve in their functionality and user experience. In addition, only a relatively small percentage, 15.69% in total, scored their MIS negatively, saying it was Not so effective or Not at all effective (it would be interesting to understand what data they need to do their job which their MIS is not providing, it could be a great opportunity to develop something new!)

The survey¹ also asked how effective they felt their MIS was at helping them to collaborate with colleagues. The responses to this question tell a different story. As you can see from the pie chart and graph below, a much lower number of respondents scored their MIS positively (Extremely or Very effective) at only 35.51%, and a much higher number scored it negatively (Not so or Not at all effective) 29.76%.  The majority, however, scored their MIS neutrally, as Somewhat effective.

 

• The cloud-based MIS solutions scored highest across the board for both questions.
• Where MIS scored highly for collaborative working, cloud-related features such as ease of access are likely to have played a part.
• Where MIS scored highly for providing the data required to do their job well, a contributing factor is likely to be how well supported and trained the users are on the solution.

 

So what do these findings tell us?

Overall, respondents seem to be fairly happy with the data the MIS gives them to do their job, but less happy with how it helps them work with colleagues. As we move more and more towards using technology to work collaboratively (the pandemic-related lockdowns brought this sharply into focus!), it’s important for MIS to keep pace with its learning counterparts.

Collaboration is a key part of the success of any organisation and schools are no exception. Operational teams, senior leaders and teaching staff all need to be able to collaborate with each other, and also with other establishments. It will be interesting to see how MIS solutions help schools handle this tricky task in the future.

 

 

 

 

¹The data was collected by The Key from a survey that went out to all primary, secondary, special schools and pupil referral units in England, by email. It was not sent to independent schools. The survey was completed by Headteachers, Deputy and Assistant Heads, and School Business Managers / Leaders between 29 March and 27 April 2021.

As part of the survey, respondents were asked which MIS they use. The results are outlined below:

 

²Market share statistics are sourced from two excellent blogs: Graham Reed’s Omega Pegasus https://www.omegapegasus.com/mischallenge and Josh Perry’s Bring More Data https://bringmoredata.blogspot.com/

Continuing our series of edtech thought leader interviews, I recently caught up with independent consultant and former colleague of mine, Tony Lockwood.  Tony describes himself as having had a career of two halves: one in Education as Head of Science in a Nottinghamshire Secondary School, and one as Head of Product Management at Capita Education Software Solutions (now part of ParentPay Group).

Nowadays, Tony advises MATs and schools on getting more out of their Management Information and other Admin software systems, as well as subscribing to additional systems or changing suppliers. As an independent product consultant, he also provides help for EdTech companies to improve the performance of their products and develop new solutions.

 

In part 1 we discuss:

• the key changes Tony has noticed in the last 3 years
• the consolidation of businesses with Private Equity to provide a larger value proposition
• how, even though MATs came into the market some time ago, solutions are very much still fixed on schools
• MIS as a platform, and the future of MIS

 

In part 2 we cover:

• What’s next for the MIS market, and the challenges that SIMS has and that even though they have a loyal customer base
• The challenger MIS and which suppliers Tony expects to do well.
• What makes a good tech company and what we can learn from Spotify, where a lot of companies see themselves as tech companies but they should see themselves as service providers.
• The fact that educators and suppliers need to be more curious to deliver better value

 

 

 

 

The extent to which an MIS is used by a school is usually dependent on quite a few different factors:

 

• How well they understand what the MIS can actually do for them over and above standard pupil census type stuff
• How easy it is to use, but also how intuitive it is to learn for new users (which we’ll explore more in a future blog)
• The training the users received at the outset; did it inspire the implementation of new ways of doing things and leave the users enthused?
• How easy MIS companies and support teams make it for users to gain the value they are after? E.g., completing a process or gaining the insight they require.
• How easy it is to get help in the event of coming across a problem (or, looking at it from the opposite side, how soon will users abandon it if it feels too much like hard work)?

 

For all MIS suppliers, providing an innovative but intuitive product is only half of the story. It’s the support that goes around it which makes it a solution that will really satisfy your customers and embed the solution throughout the school with staff, parents, governors and students alike. Every supplier offers direct user and tech support to their customers – either included as standard as part of their cloud MIS or, for some, via the purchase of an additional support contract.

However, there is another very important group of stakeholders here who play an important role in supporting the use of MIS, and that’s local support teams. It’s a relationship that has evolved over the years, so this blog aims to look at the role of support teams, the MIS suppliers, and schools’ views on the support they receive.

 

Historically, the concept of who provided MIS support to a school was closely tied to how the MIS licences were procured to begin with. Back when all schools were LA-controlled maintained schools, the majority of Local Authorities in England and Wales, plus Northern Ireland, procured MIS on behalf of their schools on the basis that it would be them who provided the support those schools needed in the use of the system. The LA support teams would only then contact their MIS supplier (the majority were SIMS users) for 2^nd and 3^rd line support.

 

As the way in which authorities and schools are funded has gradually changed, and especially with the introduction of academisation over a decade ago, the dynamic between schools and support teams has changed (check out this blog post for more on this subject). Independent teams have formed out of the old authority-schools-only teams; commercially-focused, multi-MIS support teams are building great support partnerships with schools and MATs alike.

 

Everyone is happy to work with schools and academies outside of the traditional LA boundaries, and schools are no longer beholden to their LA choice of MIS offering when they are able to procure any MIS direct from any supplier they wish at a competitive price. The dynamic has changed, and more choice will undoubtedly benefit schools and users.

 

What impact has this had on where schools get their MIS support?

A recent survey¹ of 2,146 schools asked, amongst other things, who they contacted most often for support with their MIS. The chart below shows the survey results for the ‘Big 5’ who, between them, make up 96% of school market share² ( Arbor, Bromcom, RM Integris, ScholarPack and SIMS):

Chart: Response to the survey question “Who do you contact most often for support?”

 

The first thing that stands out here is the big chunk of respondents who said a colleague was who they contact most often for support, ranging from around 28% to 52% across the suppliers). It most likely accurately reflects the people it was sent to, who were Headteachers, Deputy and Assistant Heads, and School Business Managers/Leaders. Many of these would ask a colleague for support with their MIS instead of calling/emailing a support team – it tends to be only one or two main MIS users who log cases and place calls. You can draw a couple of conclusions from this:

• Having an MIS expert or superuser in-school is SO important as it is likely they will be relied upon by other staff; working closely with your customers to ensure there is a champion is a good thing!
• A lot of questions/issues with MIS are being dealt with in-school and never reach MIS suppliers or even their support partners. This is a good thing in terms of metrics such as case volumes, but it would be interesting to understand exactly what people ask other colleagues for help with, as it may be that an opportunity is being missed to develop or improve.

(N.B. It’s worth noting here that the schools the respondents are from will have a support arrangement of some kind, either with a local support team or the MIS supplier themselves. However, it’s not possible to tell which it is from this data).

 

The second thing that stands out is the fact that a much larger number of RM Integris and SIMS respondents (around 41%-42%) contact their local support unit for support compared to Arbor, Bromcom and ScholarPack. This is probably due to the fact that these suppliers have very long-established relationships with LA support teams which combines their MIS with other solutions including infrastructure, hardware, security, and other services³. The other MIS are catching up though, with each developing their own Partner Programmes and working with local support teams to help them become accredited support providers.

 

We can also gain insight into how happy schools are with the level of support they are getting – irrespective of the route they choose to take it.  The chart below outlines the survey results for the Big 5 when the respondents were asked how they rated the quality of support they receive:

Chart: Response to survey question “How do you rate the quality of MIS support you receive?”

 

Towards the top end of the scale with the highest proportion of respondents stating that they were ‘Extremely satisfied’ were Arbor (43.14%), Scholarpack (38.31%) and RM Integris (34.57%).  RM Integris and ScholarPack also recorded the smallest proportion of respondents stating they were ‘Extremely dissatisfied’ – both were below 1% (0.62% for RM Integris and 0.65% for ScholarPack).

 

The Evolution of Support

If we were to compare how and where schools take MIS support from to say, even 10 years ago, the landscape has changed dramatically. Depending on the supplier, anything from 19% to 64% of their customer base are taking support from the MIS supplier directly; this would have been more like 5% to 15% in the early 2000s.

 

So where does this leave the concept of local MIS support contracts? Is this something schools no longer feel they need if they can go straight to their MIS supplier?

 

Not at all! Good support teams help schools with so much more than simple button-pressing when it comes to their MIS. The progressive, dynamic teams are also more than happy to support their schools irrespective of which MIS they use. As they will tell you, they ‘support the process, not the product’ which means their schools and academies have choice. On top of that, many local support teams have longstanding relationships with schools going back 20 or 30 years; they support them in everything from creating and implementing assessment policy, preparing for last-minute Ofsted visits, developing overall school/academy/MAT strategy, delivering budget savings, creating the right reports for SLT, governors and trustees, rolling out new tech and devices so everyone can access, the list is endless.

It’s true, not all support teams are created equal, and there will be differences in service levels across the country, but many work in genuine partnership with their schools in everything they can. Where the MIS suppliers provide excellent direct school support, but then also build great partnerships with support teams to help them work with their schools, is where you’ll likely see the most customer satisfaction and loyalty.

 

 

 

¹The data was collected by The Key from a survey that went out to all primary, secondary, special schools and pupil referral units in England, by email. It was not sent to independent schools. The survey was completed by Headteachers, Deputy and Assistant Heads, and School Business Managers / Leaders between 29 March and 27 April 2021.

As part of the survey, respondents were asked which MIS they use. The results are outlined below:

 

 

²Market share statistics are sourced from two excellent blogs: Graham Reed’s Omega Pegasus https://www.omegapegasus.com/mischallenge and Josh Perry’s Bring More Data https://bringmoredata.blogspot.com/

 

³This may not necessarily be the case for ESS SIMS following acquisition but, for the period 1994 to 2021, SIMS was owned by Capita who provided a large portfolio of services and solutions to Local Authorities.

 

“It saves you time.”

This is something that is often said about MIS, but what does it mean? More importantly, how effective do schools feel their MIS actually is at saving them time?

 

A recent survey¹ of 2,146 schools asked, amongst other things, how effective they felt their MIS is at saving them time. The overall results are outlined in the pie chart below:

As you can see, the majority of respondents (just over a third at 38.85%) went for the middle ground and said it was ‘Somewhat effective’. That said, a combined total of 43% did say they felt it was either Very or Extremely effective which is good news for suppliers as it indicates users must be feeling some time-saving benefits from their solutions.

 

We can also break this down further by MIS; the chart below shows survey results for the ‘Big 5’ (who, between them, they make up 96% of school market share²):

 

But what does the idea of ‘saving time’ actually mean when it comes to systems and users? There are a number of ways of defining it, here are just a few:

 

1. The MIS literally takes a basic, manual process and uses software to make it easier. A good example of this would be the school census; it has to be done in a certain timeframe, it’s very data-heavy, and the role of MIS in this is to make it as automated as possible, therefore saving time.

 

2. The MIS brings an automated element to improve a process and create a more complete view. A good example of this is the ability to record and manage behaviour within MIS; it’s something that all schools have (and use things such as paper report cards in secondary) but, once they start to utilise their MIS for this, the increased shared knowledge means teachers have the info at their fingertips and don’t need to waste time searching for it.

 

3. The MIS completely replaces the way something has always been done to make it easier and slicker. For example, communicating with parents used to be via letters and reports. MIS’ offer the ability to email, text and direct message via apps, plus parent portals. Another good example is the handling of money; everything from school dinner management to online trip payments can now be done online, completely replacing the original processes and saving time.

 

4. The MIS provides insight that would otherwise have been time-consuming to find out. A good example of this is analytics and dashboards which draw on data from a number of sources to help leaders ask questions, and also provide answers.

 

5. The MIS suggests courses of action based on data. This is something we have yet to see in use in a big way, but the idea is that your MIS can make some suggestions to you using machine learning based on a combination of what it has seen work in the past, plus your usual actions. Think about when you shop online at Amazon, the site makes suggestions for other products based on your purchases and what other customers go on to buy. A school-based example could be that various intervention suggestions are made when behaviour incidents are recorded, and these could be based on past actions combined with, say, the MATs own intervention policy. The time savings here could be enormous – as well as getting a strategy in place sooner to help the child.

 

So there are definitely ways MIS solutions can save time, it’s really a matter of understanding how.

As an MIS supplier, saying you “save schools time” isn’t a meaningful statement anymore that sets you apart from the competition. It’s a given that a solution will do that; your unique value proposition should focus on how it will do it, why it’s important, and what benefits the school will get as a result.

 

 

 

 

¹The data was collected by The Key from a survey that went out to all primary, secondary, special schools and pupil referral units in England, by email. It was not sent to independent schools. The survey was completed by Headteachers, Deputy and Assistant Heads, and School Business Managers / Leaders between 29 March and 27 April 2021.

As part of the survey, respondents were asked which MIS they use. The results are outlined below:

 

²Market share statistics are sourced from two excellent, independent blogs: Graham Reed’s Omega Pegasus and Josh Perry’s Bring More Data