Opinion piece by Andiswa Msi, campus chief director of the Vanderbijlpark Campus at the NWU

A university should never cross borders simply to admire how another institution operates. The true power of benchmarking lies in what happens when we return home – armed not with photographs and impressions, but with sharper questions, fresh perspectives and the courage to challenge the way we have always done things.

The recent benchmarking visit by the North-West University (NWU) to the University of Arizona in Tucson was exactly that kind of journey. It was more than a visit to another university; it was an opportunity to step outside our familiar environment, see higher education through a different lens and return home prepared to look critically at ourselves.

Because sometimes, to see where you need to go, you first need to see how others are getting there.

The visit brought together discussions on residences, catering, campus operations, information technology, student services and internationalisation. At first glance, these may seem like separate areas of university administration. However, one important lesson connected them all: students experience one university, not a collection of departments.

A student does not necessarily care which department is responsible for a problem. If accommodation is not working, communication is poor, a digital system is difficult to use or a campus service fails, the student simply experiences it as a university problem. This should make all of us in higher education think differently about how we operate.

We may have clearly defined departments, responsibilities and reporting structures, but the student experience cuts across all of them. Our challenge is therefore not only to ensure that individual units perform well, but also to make sure that they work together.

That requires collaboration, information sharing and, increasingly, technology.

Technology must serve people

One of the valuable discussions during the visit was about StarRez and its use in the residence environment. Digital platforms have the potential to transform how universities manage accommodation, communicate with students, analyse information and plan for future demand. 

But technology alone does not solve institutional problems. A university can have an impressive digital system and still struggle if its processes are fragmented or if people are not properly equipped to use the system. The real question is not whether we have technology. The question is whether we are using technology to improve people's lives.

As an ICT strategist, I believe this distinction is critical. Digital transformation is not about acquiring the latest system. It is about using technology to make institutions more responsive, efficient and intelligent.

Our systems should help us understand what is happening on our campuses, identify emerging challenges and make better decisions.

Data can change the way universities lead

This is particularly important when it comes to institutional data. Universities collect vast amounts of information every day. Yet collecting data is not the same as using it effectively. Information about residence occupancy, student demand, facilities, service requests and operational pressures can provide valuable insight into what is happening across an institution.

The opportunity is to move from simply reporting what happened to asking what the information is telling us about what may happen next. That shift can help universities become more proactive.

Instead of waiting for problems to escalate, we can identify trends earlier, allocate resources more effectively and respond to students more quickly. That is where technology and leadership meet.

Internationalisation must include our professional staff

The Arizona visit also challenged the traditional understanding of internationalisation.

When we talk about internationalisation, we often think about students travelling abroad, academic exchanges and research partnerships. Those remain important. But internationalisation can also be about professional learning.

A residence official can learn from the accommodation practices of another university. An ICT professional can exchange ideas about digital transformation. Facilities teams can learn from different approaches to campus management. Student support professionals can compare strategies for improving the student experience.

This kind of exchange can strengthen our institutions from within. International partnerships should therefore not exist only at the level of agreements and ceremonies. They should create opportunities for people across the university to learn from one another. We should learn, not copy. There is also an important warning that comes with benchmarking. We should never assume that what works in Arizona will automatically work in South Africa. Universities operate in different financial, regulatory, cultural and social environments. The objective is not to copy another institution. It is to ask: What can we learn, what can we adapt and what can we do differently? That distinction matters.

Benchmarking should provide us with an external perspective, while our own institutional knowledge provides the context. Our staff understand our students, our campuses and our challenges. Their knowledge must be part of the conversation.

The real test begins after the visit

The success of a benchmarking visit cannot be measured by the number of meetings attended or facilities visited. The real test begins when we return home. What do we share with our colleagues? What conversations do we start? What practices do we question? What opportunities do we identify? And, most importantly, what changes? If the lessons from Arizona remain with the people who travelled, then we have missed an important opportunity.

The knowledge must be brought back into the institution and shared with colleagues across residences and catering, campus operations, ICT, facilities and maintenance, student life, internationalisation and other areas. Benchmarking should become a collective learning process. 

Building the university we want 

For me, one of the strongest lessons from this visit is that the university of the future will need to be both digitally capable and deeply people-centred.

Technology will continue to reshape higher education. Data will increasingly influence decision-making. International partnerships will create new opportunities for learning. But none of these things should distract us from the most important question: Does what we are doing improve the experience of our students and staff?

That must remain our compass. The University of Arizona did not provide us with a blueprint for the NWU. It provided us with a mirror. And sometimes, that is exactly what an institution needs – the opportunity to step outside its familiar environment and see itself differently. Benchmarking is therefore not about becoming another university. It is about learning from others so that we can become better at being ourselves. The true measure of our Arizona experience will not be what we saw in Tucson. It will be what we do when we return home.

Andiswa Msi is the campus chief director of the Vanderbijlpark Campus at the NWU, where she provides strategic leadership focused on strengthening the campus experience, institutional effectiveness and student-centred service delivery.