For many universities, internationalisation begins with an office.
There is an International Relations Office.
There is a Director of International Relations.
There are partnership managers.
There are MoUs to be signed, delegations to host and international visits to organise.
All of this is important.
But there is a bigger question that universities increasingly need to ask:
Is internationalisation the responsibility of one office — or the responsibility of the entire university?
The answer will determine whether internationalisation remains a collection of activities or becomes a genuine institutional capability.
The global higher-education landscape is expanding rapidly. UNESCO reports that global higher-education enrolment reached 269 million students in 2024, while international student mobility has grown to nearly 7.3 million students. Yet international mobility still reaches only a small proportion of the global student population.
That tells us something important.
Internationalisation cannot be built only around students travelling abroad.
It has to become part of how the university teaches, researches, collaborates, innovates and engages with the world.
An international office can coordinate.
It can identify partners.
It can facilitate agreements.
It can support mobility.
It can organise delegations.
But it cannot independently internationalise the entire university.
Consider what internationalisation actually touches.
The Academic School
Curriculum, teaching, faculty and student learning.
The Research Office
International research, publications, grants and collaboration.
The Placement Office
Global employers, internships and international career opportunities.
The Faculty
International teaching, research and academic networks.
The Student Affairs Team
International students, cultural integration and global student experiences.
The Industry Relations Team
Multinational companies, international projects and corporate partnerships.
The Alumni Office
Global alumni networks and international opportunities.
The Leadership
Institutional strategy, investment and partnerships.
The international office therefore should not be the owner of internationalisation.
It should increasingly become the connector of internationalisation.
That is a very different role.
Imagine a university signs a partnership with a leading institution overseas.
The International Office celebrates the agreement.
But the academic department does not have a programme to develop with the partner.
The faculty have no research collaboration.
The students have no mobility pathway.
The placement team does not engage the partner’s industry network.
The research office does not explore joint projects.
Nothing happens.
The MoU remains a document.
This is one of the reasons international partnerships often fail to create lasting impact.
The problem is not always the partner.
Sometimes the university itself has not created the internal structure required to activate the relationship.
A global partnership needs an internal ecosystem.
A more mature university should think about internationalisation as a system.
At the centre:
Institutional Leadership
Around it:
International Office
Academic Schools
Faculty
Research
Industry & Placements
Student Affairs
Alumni
Marketing & Communications
Finance & Administration
All of these functions should connect.
For example:
An international university partnership should not end with the International Office.
It should move into the relevant academic school.
Then into faculty engagement.
Then potentially into student mobility.
Then research.
Then industry.
Then alumni.
That is how a partnership becomes institutional rather than departmental.
Internationalisation cannot become a university-wide priority without leadership.
The Vice-Chancellor, President, Provost, Deans and senior leadership need to answer a basic question:
Is it primarily about:
There may be several answers.
But they need to be connected.
Internationalisation should have clear institutional objectives rather than becoming a collection of disconnected international activities.
Every Academic School Needs a Global Strategy
This is where the conversation becomes more interesting.
Instead of having one university-level internationalisation strategy, universities should increasingly ask each school:
For a School of Business:
For Engineering:
For Computer Science:
For Fashion and Design:
For Hospitality:
The global strategy of the university becomes much stronger when every school knows what global engagement means for its discipline.
Universities sometimes focus heavily on institutional partnerships while underestimating the role of individual faculty.
But faculty often create the strongest international connections.
A professor may already know:
These relationships can become institutional partnerships.
That is why universities need to support faculty through:
The international office can open doors.
Faculty often determine what happens after the door opens.
Internationalisation Must Reach Students Who Never Travel
This is particularly important.
UNESCO’s latest data shows that while international mobility has grown significantly, it still benefits only around 3% of the global higher-education cohort.
Therefore, a university cannot define internationalisation purely through study abroad.
The larger opportunity is to create international learning for everyone.
This can happen through:
India’s NEP 2020 explicitly identifies “internationalization at home” alongside academic and research collaboration, credit recognition and international mobility.
That means internationalisation does not have to begin at the airport.
It can begin in the classroom.
Research Cannot Be an Afterthought
A university’s international strategy should also answer:
International collaboration can give universities access to different expertise, datasets, laboratories, methodologies and research networks.
And increasingly, major challenges are international by nature.
AI.
Climate change.
Cybersecurity.
Energy.
Public health.
Urbanisation.
Future skills.
These problems do not fit neatly within national boundaries.
India’s Ministry of Education also identifies research collaboration, student exchanges and programmes between Indian and global institutions as mechanisms for strengthening research and innovation in Indian higher education.
The international office should therefore not only ask:
“Which university can we sign an MoU with?”
It should also ask:
“Which global research capability can this relationship create?”
Industry Must Be Part of the Conversation
There is another stakeholder universities cannot ignore: industry.
Internationalisation should connect students with the global workplace.
A university can create partnerships with companies for:
This is particularly important as the skills demanded by employers continue to change rapidly.
The global university cannot prepare students for a global workplace while remaining disconnected from that workplace.
From “International Activities” to Institutional Outcomes
Perhaps the biggest change universities need to make is in measurement.
Instead of asking:
How many international events did we conduct?
Ask:
What changed because of them?
Instead of:
How many MoUs did we sign?
Ask:
How many became active collaborations?
Instead of:
How many students travelled?
Ask:
What did students learn and how did it influence their academic or professional development?
Instead of:
How many foreign universities visited us?
Ask:
The metrics should move from activity to impact.
A Simple Internationalisation Scorecard
Every university could track five broad areas.
1. Global Learning
How many students experience international learning?
2. Global Faculty
How many faculty members participate in meaningful international collaboration?
3. Global Research
How many international research projects and publications are being created?
4. Global Industry
How many international companies engage with students and faculty?
5. Active Partnerships
How many international partnerships generate recurring outcomes?
This is much more useful than simply counting MoUs.
The transformation does not require creating a complicated new structure.
It can begin with five steps.
1. Define the institutional objective
Why does internationalisation matter to your university?
2. Map the existing network
Identify current partners, faculty relationships, alumni, researchers and companies.
3. Create school-level internationalisation plans
Every academic school should have specific global priorities.
4. Build cross-functional ownership
Internationalisation should connect leadership, academics, research, industry, students and alumni.
5. Measure outcomes
Track what partnerships and international activities actually produce.
The objective is not to make the International Office bigger.
It is to make the entire university more internationally capable.
The University of the Future Will Not Have an “International Side”
This is perhaps the most important shift.
The mature university will not think:
“We have our regular programmes, and then we have our international programmes.”
International thinking will increasingly become part of the regular academic experience.
Business students will study global markets.
Engineering students will collaborate internationally.
Researchers will work across borders.
Faculty will build global networks.
Students will engage with international peers.
Industry projects will cross geographies.
Internationalisation will become part of the university’s DNA.
That is when it stops being a department.
And becomes an institutional capability.
Internationalisation should not be a function sitting at the edge of the university.
It should run through the institution.
The International Office has an important role — but its greatest success may ultimately be when it no longer has to carry internationalisation alone.
Because the real measure of a university’s global maturity is not how busy its international office is.
It is how many parts of the university are able to think, teach, research and collaborate globally.
The future university will not ask:
“Who is responsible for internationalisation?”
It will ask:
“How can every part of our university become more connected to the world?”
That is the shift from international activity to institutional internationalisation.
And that is where the next generation of globally connected universities will begin.
— Sultana Khan
Founder & CEO, UnTechEd
Connecting Institutions for Higher Growth