海角视频

About this report

The panel

The panel included: Brian Rosenberg, visiting professor at Harvard Graduate School of Education and president emeritus at Macalester College; Dano Weisbord, chief sustainability officer and executive director campus planning at Tufts University; Kate Norian Loosian, senior director of planning and design at Harvard Business School and Ludmilla Pavlova-Gillham, senior campus planner at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

The questions

The panel was moderated by Elliot Felix, 海角视频鈥檚 higher education advisory sector lead and was guided by the following questions:

• What data are you collecting and how are you using it to make decisions?
• What does this say about how the higher education business model must change, and is the building boom is over?
• What new paradigms should we be planning for and how can our institutions change to adopt them?

In asking these questions, we were able to gather meaningful qualitative insight from our panel. The key takeaways are detailed below.

Key takeaways

I. Understand the spaces you have and use them more effectively

Many institutions continue to operate under outdated assumptions about space needs, often resulting in under-utilized buildings and inefficient layouts. Post-pandemic shifts in work and learning patterns have left many offices, classrooms, and labs partially empty.

For example, at Harvard Business School, occupancy data varied noticeably on certain days of the week and furthermore at certain times of the year. Similarly, Tufts University recognized that expanding research capacity without understanding existing space would be financially unsustainable.

Institutions must prioritize space utilization audits and masterplanning to assess current usage, deferred maintenance, and suitability for future needs. Tools like card access data, IP tracking and departmental space profiles can help identify underused areas and opportunities for coordinated or consolidated use. By focusing on capital efficiency – renovating rather than building new – universities can adapt existing infrastructure to meet evolving demands. Tufts鈥� approach of evaluating its four worst buildings to retain only two is a model of strategic downsizing and reinvestment.

We had a system that permitted our administrators to be able to look at departmental profiles, to look at the鈥� condition of the space and the faculty needs鈥� and how they’re utilizing the space that they’re responsible for, so that鈥� different deans can be truly informed about their assets – and then we work with them in order to try to solve some of their problems.

Ludmilla Pavlova-Gillham, senior campus planner and architect, University of Massachusetts Amherst

II. Combine real-time data with forward-looking planning

Institutions collect a wide range of data to optimize campus spaces. This includes usage data, financial data, food service covers, sustainability metrics and real-time data such as card access and IP address pings. The goal is to understand how the larger campus and individual buildings and spaces are being used, predict future needs and make informed decisions about building and renovating campus facilities.

Data is being used to make decisions about campus design, operations and future planning. Institutions are looking ahead to anticipate changes in teaching methods, student population and research needs. By understanding current usage and predicting future trends, they can build and renovate facilities that will serve their needs for decades.

Too often, campus planning is reactive, based on current usage patterns rather than future needs. This short-sightedness can lead to costly mistakes, such as building facilities that quickly become obsolete. For instance, lecture halls built in the 1990s with tiered seating are now ill-suited for certain modern pedagogies and retrofitting them can be prohibitively expensive.

Effective planning requires a dual lens; real-time operational data and long-term forecasting. Institutions like UMass Amherst are integrating diverse data sources 鈥揷lassroom utilization, greenhouse gas emissions, dining usage and student surveys 鈥� into enterprise systems to inform decision-making.

Predictive analytics and scenario modeling can help simulate multiple futures, enabling leaders to make resilient, data-informed investments. Asking faculty and researchers to envision their needs 10鈥�15 years ahead is essential to designing adaptable, future-proof spaces.

The most important point that I would make about looking at data is that you can鈥檛 look at data for today. You need to look at data for 10 or 15 years from now.

Brian Rosenberg, visiting professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education, President Emeritus, Macalester College

III. Partner with industry, community groups and peer institutions

Higher education institutions have often operated as self-contained entities, physically and culturally separated from the communities around them. This separation is rooted in historical models that emphasize academic seclusion and self-sufficiency. However, in today鈥檚 environment of financial strain, declining public trust, and shifting workforce needs, this insularity has become a liability. Many campuses are surrounded by communities facing economic challenges, workforce shortages, and infrastructure need – yet the potential for collaboration remains underutilized.

Institutions often duplicate services and facilities that could be shared with local partners, leading to inefficiencies and missed opportunities for mutual benefit. The lack of engagement also exacerbates perceptions of elitism and irrelevance, particularly as public scrutiny of higher education intensifies. Without proactive efforts to build bridges, colleges and universities risk becoming increasingly disconnected from the very ecosystems they depend on for students, funding and legitimacy.

Breaking down campus walls – both literal and figurative – can unlock new value. Allegheny College鈥檚 partnership with local manufacturers to co-develop workforce training programs is a compelling example. Similarly, UMass Amherst is leveraging its assets to address state-level challenges like housing and AI workforce development.

Public-private partnerships (P3s), such as Tufts鈥� dormitory project, offer alternative financing models while aligning institutional goals with community needs. Institutions should also consider co-locating programs with industry partners or community colleges to expand access and relevance.

What this all resulted in was a very large gift, the establishment of a new community college partnership campus where they’re not going to be teaching the traditional 18-22 year old undergraduates. Instead they’re going to be teaching a whole range of what we used to call non-traditional audiences but increasingly are becoming the traditional audiences for education. The funding for this is coming from multiple sources and it’s benefiting the community and the institution. I actually think the future lies in more permeable campuses.

Brian Rosenberg, visiting professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education, President Emeritus, Macalester College

IV. Question assumptions about calendar and space allocation

The higher education business model must adapt to changing demographics, financial constraints and technological advancements. Institutions need to be smarter about how they use their spaces and plan for a future with potentially fewer students. This means questioning traditional assumptions about space allocation and finding ways to optimize existing resources. Institutions must manage their spaces better and plan for long-term sustainability.

Traditional academic calendars and space allocation models are increasingly misaligned with modern needs. Buildings often sit empty during summers, and rigid space assignments – like one desk per staff member or large faculty offices – contribute to inefficiency. These outdated norms persist due to cultural inertia and governance challenges. Institutions must challenge the 鈥渨e鈥檝e always done it this way鈥� mindset.

Dartmouth鈥檚 trimester system, which maximizes year-round space use, offers a compelling alternative. Flexible work arrangements should be matched with flexible space policies – such as shared staff neighborhoods instead of assigned desks. Faculty offices, long considered untouchable, must be reimagined in the context of hybrid work and collaborative research. Piloting new models and using data to demonstrate their effectiveness can help overcome resistance and build momentum for change.

I have the hope that the paradigm of office size and hierarchy鈥� becomes something that can be considered in the context of a larger ecosystem. In the new hybrid work experience, can we take the ‘one person, one desk’ equation off the table? Many individuals are not on campus five days a week. With the benefit of flexible space, perhaps we cede the old reality of a desk with your name on it, or a picture of your kids. Instead, focus on creating neighborhoods of unassigned desks that allow people to predictably show up to work together.

Kate Norian Loosian, senior director of planning and design at Harvard Business School

V. Share space across disciplines and departments

Siloed space allocation leads to duplication, inefficiency and missed opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration. Many buildings are designed for single departments or rigid functions, limiting their adaptability and long-term value. This is especially problematic in research-intensive institutions where space is both scarce and expensive.

Colleges and universities should be planning for new paradigms that include more flexible and adaptable spaces, partnerships with industry and community groups, and interdisciplinary collaboration. This involves breaking down silos and sharing resources across departments.

Institutions should also consider the impact of AI and automation on research and teaching spaces. Ludmilla Pavlova-Gillham discussed the importance of designing spaces that can adapt to different teaching styles and research needs.

Designing for flexibility and shared use is critical. University College London鈥檚 new building, which eliminates didactic lecture halls in favor of flexible, shared labs and classrooms, exemplifies this approach. At UMass Amherst, even seemingly inflexible mid-century buildings have been successfully repurposed through creative renovation and user engagement.

Institutions should prioritize high floor-to-ceiling heights, modular infrastructure and adaptable layouts in new construction. Encouraging faculty and departments to co-develop shared spaces can foster innovation and reduce capital costs.

Flat is the new up. It’s about using what you have better and partnering with companies and community groups and sharing resources across disciplines. It鈥檚 about questioning anything we’re stuck on the way we’ve always done it: we always have two semesters or we’ve always had 140 square foot offices, or whatever it is. Those are the areas that we need to rethink.

Elliot Felix, Partner, 海角视频

A new operating model for higher education

The traditional model of continuous expansion is no longer viable for most institutions. Instead, the future lies in optimizing what already exists – through better data, smarter design and deeper collaboration. As Elliot Felix noted, 鈥淔lat is the new up.鈥� Institutions must become more agile, more integrated with their communities, and more willing to question long-held assumptions.

Institutions can adopt new paradigms by embracing hybrid work models, developing trust within their communities and involving faculty and students in decision-making processes. This requires a shift in mindset and a willingness to experiment with new ideas. Kate Norian Loosian suggests piloting small-scale projects to test new concepts and gather feedback before implementing them on a larger scale.

To succeed in this new paradigm, leaders must:

• Pilot and test new ideas before scaling.
• Engage faculty and students as co-creators of space and policy.
• Use data not just to describe the present, but to shape the future.
• Break down silos – organizational, spatial and cultural.
• Be resolute in the face of resistance, while building trust and alignment.

Institutions may encounter barriers such as resistance to change, financial constraints and regulatory challenges. Overcoming these barriers requires clear communication, strong leadership and a willingness to challenge traditional assumptions. Brian Rosenburg emphasized the importance of being resolute and not letting negative voices stop good ideas from developing.

There’s a whole world of what is the business of the administration the institution should look like as well. We’re always competing for capital just to fix stuff, and the cost of construction inflation has been outpacing regular inflation for a long time. But that’s part of the unsustainability of the business model.

Dano Weisbord, chief sustainability officer and executive director campus planning, Tufts University

Institutions should focus on understanding their spaces and using them more effectively, combining real-time data with forward-looking data, partnering with industry and community groups, questioning assumptions about calendar and space allocation and sharing space across disciplines and departments. Elliot Felix suggested that institutions need to be flexible and adaptable in their planning and design processes.

By embracing this new model and principles, higher education can transform its campuses from static assets into dynamic engines of learning, innovation and community impact.

Optimizing your campus starts now

Assessing and optimizing spaces and systems across your campus requires a process that combines insightful analysis, inclusive stakeholder engagement and forward-thinking technical expertise. It also requires experience that is broad and deep so that teams are well-versed in the challenges and changes facing higher education and the solutions to address them.

For example, the types, quantities and configuration of research spaces are all changing. Renovating lab spaces for the future of automation involves integrating robotic work cells, reinforced flooring, increased electric capacities, increased storage and hybrid lab-office layouts to support evolving workflows for people and machines.

海角视频鈥檚 advisory and engineering teams work with institutions and design firms to optimize buildings and campuses from insight through implementation. We help people answer questions like 鈥淗ow well are our spaces utilized? How well are our systems performing? Are we getting the most out of our space? Do we need more space or can we grow in place?鈥�

We help college and universities optimize their buildings and campuses at a time when funding, enrolment, technology and our climate are all changing.

Contact us to find out how we can help you.