Head of Department’s Letter June 2026

We are currently in the midst of an intensive period of strategic discussions across a range of forums. At the time of writing, we have not yet held our dialogue with the physics review group, but we have already prepared material for the faculty development dialogues, where strategy and quality in research and education are key areas of focus.

The development dialogues can be seen as the department’s equivalent of appraisal meetings with the faculties. They provide an opportunity for us to highlight what we believe is working well and where we see a need for support. At the same time, the faculties can point to our strengths as well as areas where they see room for improvement. It becomes an iterative process in which, each year, we are able to raise our needs and challenges at the next level, contributing to greater dialogue on strategic issues and reducing the degree of top-down governance.

We hold separate dialogues with the Faculty of Science and the Faculty of Engineering, as they emphasise different aspects, but we also have a joint dialogue with both faculty management teams. In the joint dialogue, we address overarching issues that require a shared perspective (which we sometimes succeed in achieving…).

Ahead of the dialogues, the faculties have circulated background material and questions for us to reflect on and partly respond to in writing during June. This will be followed by meetings in August–September where the discussion continues.

What kinds of questions do we receive? For example, what risks we foresee in the coming year, how we are developing our course offerings, how we support staff who take on additional responsibilities, and what needs we have for new positions. There are also more open-ended questions, such as how we assess our research quality in relation to comparable departments, how we can maintain or strengthen our position, and how research is developing in relation to the needs of undergraduate and doctoral education.

We are also asked to comment on key indicators produced by the faculties, particularly those that appear problematic—for instance, declining numbers of doctoral students, fewer highly cited publications, and a low number of ETP teaching staff. In light of the financial challenges of recent years, there are also questions relating to five-year plans and possible measures.

Taken together, this constitutes extensive material that we could discuss for weeks—which we in fact do in the department’s various management groups and bodies. However, in the dialogues with the faculties themselves, we only have a couple of hours at our disposal, so we need to focus on what matters most this year.

The written material will be submitted in June, but as the dialogues take place after the summer, there is still an opportunity to contribute views.

What do you think we should particularly highlight to the faculty management teams this year?

Wishing you a pleasant summer!

Else Lytken
Head of Department