Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Welcome to a new edition of Profile. My guest today is the CEO of ThiemeMeulenhoff,
Eric Razenberg Eric, welcome.
Thank you.
It's good that you are here today, for a number of reasons, but particularly because I'm really
interested in this topic. I'm interested in publishing and now you are also doing all
this with education. Those are two dynamic fields in my opinion, so you must be really
enjoying yourself.
Yes, absolutely. Exciting times, I think there's no better time to be working in this area.
Great that you've started by saying that, because you often hear a lot of complaining
in Publishing. "It's all doom and gloom", "books are going to disappear." And "the business
models are coming under pressure." But you start by saying that there has never been a better time...
No, I think if you look back at the past few decades, you can obviously see that there
have been some changes, but they haven't been large scale changes. And maybe that's part
of the problem that we now have with education, but I really do believe that at this stage,
with all the changes that we are now facing, it's really an exciting time to be working in this area.
We'll go into education in a minute. First let's talk about ThiemeMeulehoff, a company
that saw some turbulent times until you came along. You joined about a year ago...
Yes, I joined on the 1st March last year.
What happened to the company, and what's the current state of affairs?
Thieme has been sitting in a holding structure since 2008, when it was acquired by PCM from
NDC/VBK. It was bought at the peak of the market. Actually, in retrospect, everything
that changed ownership in 2008 changed hands for too much money. And that was the case
for Thieme too. The holding company experienced a number of difficult years with newspapers,
books and educational publishing, actually in all sectors, as you already outlined the
media world is changing fast. The holding company ended up in difficulty and was ultimately
sold off in parts. In January, ThiemeMeulenhoff was bought by
ING Corporate Investments, so now it's back on its feet.
Just to be clear, ING Corporate Investments owns 100%?
Yes, they own the shares.
So the bank is the owner?
The bank's private equity division is the owner.
And it's going to stay like that? What's the plan?
There are no twenty or thirty year timescales in the Private Equity business, so the expectation
is that at some point the bank will reduce its investment, either as a whole or in parts.
In any case, it's ING's intention to let ThiemeMeulenhoff work on a new phase, and to let it repair
its market position.
How big is ThiemeMeulenhoff in terms of employees or financials? Can you tell us something about that?
We have about 250 employees.
And what is the turnover of the company? Or is that a secret?
We are not completely transparent about that, but it's in the tens of millions of Euros.
That makes sense with so many employees of course. Absolutely.
I saw your Twitter profile and I really liked it. I'll read it out: Creative leader on a
mission to transform learning providing 21st century learning design and technologies.
Wow.
Nice isn't it?! I thought about it for a long time.
Let's start at the beginning. Are you a creative leader?
Yes I think so. I think the world needs a lot of leadership right now. Not because you've
been the best for the last twenty years, you've seen it all before and you can predict what
the next ten years are going to look like, but because, in my opinion, the world is undergoing
such a transformation right now, and that requires a new kind of leadership. A leader
that feels comfortable with the fact that actually right now, nobody knows what the
future is going to bring. That requires a different type of leadership in my opinion.
Vulnerable?
Vulnerable, open, also that you dare to take steps even though everything isn't completely
predictable. Of course there has always been a certain level of unpredictability, but I
think that with the speed of changes that we see around us today, we are encountering
change more rapidly. That requires another type of leadership in my opinion.
From the inside out, what have you changed inside Thieme in the first year?
Quite a lot actually. The question our shareholder asked was: look carefully at the strategy
of this company, what should the company be doing in the coming years? In the first three
months, we examined and redefined the company strategy, and as a consequence of that we've
changed the organisational structure in such a way
that we stand a much greater chance of executing this strategy.
And what is the strategy?
Traditionally we've been a content company of course. To put it bluntly, we consider
ourselves to have been simply "content resellers" in the past, if I may say so. But I think
that in the future, content in itself will have less and less value, so we have to look
for other sources of income. We think we've found those in learning design, the development
of learning processes. What we've traditionally done with books, putting learning processes
and structures into a book medium, but now that the medium has changed we are working
on learning design for new technologies and new media. So that's a new income stream.
But actually that's got nothing to do with content? That doesn't need to have anything
to do with content?
It is of course strongly related to content. Content is what you ultimately pack into the
learning design. But in our opinion it's all about how you can use new media to add to
the learning process.
You predict that the value of content will decline?
Yes. I think that that's already started. If you look at our sector, educational publishing,
and at other media sectors, if you look at the value of news and you compare that with
ten years ago... I think it's the same with educational publishing. People are becoming
more creative with sharing things that they've made themselves. Sometimes it's not according
to the standards, but it's often good enough to use in a teaching environment. So that
means that customers and users are less afraid of using other forms of content.
Have you changed a lot of people inside the company? Have a lot of people left and new
people joined? Or did you carry out the transformation mainly with the people that you already had?
As I said, we changed the organizational structure, and that means that we mainly changed our
organisational model. Of the 250 people that we had at the beginning of last year
90 switched to new positions and had their old positions closed.
So that was quite a radical process last summer.
And that was a success?
I think we can say that it was a success. We have at least been able to implement the
structure that we envisaged.
And now the game begins.
We need to learn how to operate the new system, connect with each other, discover new ways
of working with each other. Most important for us this year will be getting the new system
working.
What's wrong with education? I mean... what's happening with education?
Education is maybe a little dated when you look at how it's put together. Public education
dates from the end of the nineteenth century, so since then we've had public education worldwide.
But of course it was designed specifically for an industrial age, with classes and students
who primarily only had in common the fact that they were produced in the same year,
you could almost say. It's pretty much a case of one size fits all, to put it bluntly.
And as far as you're concerned, that's the case in all levels of education? From primary
to secondary to university level education?
Yes look, there's a lot of differentiation needed, incidentally also needed in primary
education. And of course the degree of freedom increases as you progress through the system.
But if you look at basic education - primary and secondary - then you have a very tight
class system with groups and classes where everything is focused on the average. Every
pupil or student that performs above or below the average is, you might say, done a disservice.
They are done a disservice you say?
Yes, I'm describing it a bit euphemistically perhaps but...
I'm finding it increasingly difficult to motivate my kids to make use of the system. Or am I
an exception?
No, I think there are just as many exceptions as there are normal cases, both at the top
where students sit back in the classroom because they are bored in the current system, they
are not challenged enough and their talents are not optimally addressed. While on the
other hand, there are pupils who drop out because they struggle with dyslexia or other
learning difficulties, or maybe they are just a bit more restless than the other kids, and
they are immediately given the "problem" label under our current system.
While actually that could be a big compliment, due to an insanely creative mind.
Yes, we were just talking about creativity. Sir Ken Robinson, the great TED speaker has
of course... Schools kill creativity.
Exactly. He says that creativity is killed off in this system. I just stated that I think
that that's the future, and that the world needs creativity to make use of all the developments
that are coming, particularly in the area of technology.
And how are you going to do that?
Yes, how are you going to do that...
Tell us! Be competent...
I think that that's the quest...
But what are the plans? What's your timescale? How far ahead are you looking when you look
at the things that you want to do at ThiemeMeulenhoff?
Perhaps I should just explain the nuances: we are not under the illusion at ThiemeMeulenhoff
that we can change education on our own. But what we can do in our role as education industry
supplier and partner is to provide the resources and methods so that the industry, which itself
increasingly wants to change, is in a position to start taking actual steps.
How?
In my opinion the buzzword worldwide is personalized learning. Everyone is looking to do more justice
to the individual differences between students.
It's quite logical when you say that I think.
Yes you could almost say that it's a no-brainer, but it's still not a widely adopted concept.
No, tell me about it...
Hence the statement that our current system is perhaps unnecessary or somewhat dated.
End of life cycle.
So if we are talking about creative leadership, it means that you need to look at how this
system can fit with modern times. At Thieme we believe that every child has a right to
its own learning process. That means that we want to ensure that the education that
the children receive is individually tailored as much as possible so that we can address
their talents. And if there's creativity, we let it flourish.
Then you have two products or tools that I read about, Schooltas and PulseOn. Those are
two things I come across here and there. These products are in line with what you're now
talking about, right?
In recent years, and before my arrival, ThiemeMeulenhoff carried out a number of really nice experiments.
And "Schooltas" and "Got It !" are I think the first two manifestations of new products
where some content, some learning design and some technology have been combined to produce
new learning solutions. And the education industry has grabbed them with both hands.
They said, "this is nice!". For example I recognize Schooltas as my traditional teaching
method, but now it's in a digital format. Schools can introduce tablets into the classroom.
And then you can add a lot of things, for example, learning from each other or working
more closely with each other. At least that facilitates a step in the direction that the
schools want to go. Got It ! is a tool for maintaining and remediating maths and language
skills. That's a mouthful, but the system is an adaptive system that adapts itself to
the level of the student and allows you to go faster if you can go faster, and provides
you with more practice if you're struggling with the material.
Does everyone eventually need to go through the same content, or can you imagine a system
where that's no longer the case?
My preference is for them not to. It's preferable for students to learn what they don't already
know, and not to have to go through material that they already know.
I mean, does everybody receive the same material? I can imagine that there are students that
are totally not suited to biology but are suited to languages. And another perhaps with
an affinity for maths. Or do you say, no, everybody gets the same material eventually,
although they might access it in different ways. How differentiated do you want to go?
Look, our current system is very inflexible. You're worst subject determines the level
of education that you can get. While in England, for example, you can choose your level per
subject. You can do A-levels or other levels there. If you can do seven subjects at VWO
level, but you need to do one subject at HAVO or even VMBO-theoretical level, then you can
do that in a system like the English system. I think it is worth investigating whether
that might not lead to something in the Netherlands.
Shouldn't you go even further... because say you now have a HAVO diploma, that means that
you're exactly the same as everyone else that's got a HAVO diploma. Couldn't you reach a level
of diversity where you have a "Ronnie diploma" that contains a lot of things. Building blocks
that say, "this is me."
Ideally yes. Of course it's not completely a case of one size fits all if you have a
HAVO diploma. Inside the diploma you have domains, packages and subject choices. But
essentially you're right. As far as I'm concerned, you should be saying, "what is this child
suited to, how can this child develop the best ?" And if that means that some things
need more attention and other things maybe less attention, so that the talents of the
child are optimally addressed, then it's good I think to have a specific baseline. Education
is a bit more motivating and more fun when children feel that their talents are being
taken into consideration.
And what next steps are you going to take to develop that sort of product or those learning
designs or tools?
You just gave PulseOn as an example. PulseOn is a platform that we are intensively collaborating
on.
Because it's not yours?
ThiemeMeulenhoff has an interest in that company. It was originally a technology company that
developed strong technology based on profiling and recommending, that reaches out to students
in precisely the right way, a way that suits them, so that they remain challenged in their
learning. And what we add as traditional educational publishers is some learning design, and as
I just said: how do you make that technology valuable for an educational environment so
that it can add something to the educational process? And on the other hand, the content
that can be played inside. The educational content that can be played inside, so that
schools really can start working with such a powerful technology, to be able to offer
to students a more tailored education.
I don't know if you want to say something about it, but it could help speed things up
if some big parties got involved.
We are currently building a prototype of the next release, and we are being supported with
it by a big player such as Microsoft. In January we will be attending a major conference in
America, and we will be showing our view to the world, together with PulseOn, of how new
personalized learning might look to help education to renew itself and to actually innovate.
And that will be an exciting moment for us.
What is the participation of Microsoft? How are they involved? Is it reasonably non-commital,
something like "this is cool and we are going to help them a bit?" Or are they getting involved
as strategic partners?
They are helping us and it not completely non-commital. In a sense they evoke a commitment
from us. Microsoft would like to have a large suite of various tools that can help education.
And what it lacks is precisely this thing, this personalized learning thing, and meanwhile
the world is looking at how you should do that. Here and there all kinds of initiatives are emerging.
I can't predict that, and I'm not going to discuss the acquisition policy of Microsoft,
but what is clear is that Microsoft wants to play a meaningful role in education, and
it is therefore looking for partners that can add something in this area. And it's nice
for ThiemeMeulenhoff, a company that's been working for two hundred years, particularly
in the Netherlands, that with our knowledge and skills we are now raised up onto a stage
by Microsoft so that we can come and put forward our opinions on new learning.
This is an important moment for us.
But I often miss something with this sort of route, with all due respect to Microsoft.
It's a pretty cool company. I know them a little bit, they are cooler on the inside
than they sometimes look from the outside. But at the same time I think a lot of creative
people in the world walk around with iPads and iPhones, and then I'm just mentioning
Apple. What I also see a lot of in this kind of product development is this. Connect it
ultimately to my boys. I have three: they are 14, 16 and 18 years old. They live in
an online world that's always next, next, next, next. That's the world of Snapchat and
the world of whatever. They still end up in digital learning environments that are very
Microsoft. Very seriously thought out by older people. So to what extent do you make sure
that you really get into the world of kids?
Therefore we work for example with good design agencies, good creative agencies that are
in tune with society. Where maybe actually not so young anymore but at least reasonably
young designers work freely with new media and social media, where they use their creativity
to come up with nice exciting concepts and processes for these target groups. We don't
necessarily have all that knowledge always completely in-house , but we know very well
what we want. And there are good creative agencies that can help us to make a good creative
design.
Will your business model become that sharp? The previous business model - we've got content,
we put it in a book and we send it out to all the schools - that's over. What will your
earnings model look like in the coming years?
Well, it's not over yet. Of course it's still a significant market.
I always paint things black and white.
Yes I noticed, but it's far from being over and it's going to continue this way for quite
some time, and therefore we are also going to continue to do that, but at the same time
we are saying...
Is it going to continue for long, the books and schools?
Our estimate is that schools are not going to adopt a different approach overnight en
masse, but if they are interested, then we're trying to reach them. But we will also try
to facilitate those schools that say they need to get there by following a more gradual
process.
But the new earnings model, what's in it? A license-like structure?
As I said, we continue to sell relevant content to schools so that the schools can teach the
subjects that they choose or can teach the subjects chosen by the students themselves.
In addition, we believe that particularly learning design, our way of incorporating
new technology in a teaching process, what we are now doing, has value abroad. For example,
for other publishers abroad. But maybe also whole ministries that say that they want to
organize education in a modern way more quickly. Maybe we can inspire them, maybe already reach
them with something that meets their needs. And at the same time, and that's the third
stream, which is about technological solutions, learning platforms. Content is not that scalable.
It 's not even scalable to Flanders, they have a different curriculum there, and they
can't do anything there with our curriculum. But technology and the beliefs about learning
design, these are things that are scalable, and if there is interest in other countries
for these things, then we will not hesitate to get involved.
Clearly an international focus then for ThiemeMeulenhoff.
I wouldn't say it's our focus. Our main focus continues to be to help with the renewal of
education in the Netherlands.
But if you look at growth in the coming years...
You could almost call it an Endemol strategy. If it works here, then we are available if
it also leads to demand from abroad.
And then you have a nice bride strategy, in a few years time, ING Private Equity can park
the whole business under a large international publisher. Or am I now going a bit too far?
My view is that we are there for our customers and users, but if we create value and add
value to what they want to achieve with education, and schools are also willing to pay for it,
then that ultimately leads to value for the company and therefore for the shareholder
too.
Are you giving a yes or no answer?
Our goal is to be of greater value to education.
And if that can be in an international setting with another parent company, so be it.
Well...
You're a commercial guy, right? You're already working on this? You're in a position where
you're looking where the ship is headed over the next few years? Because eventually the
ship needs to be moored somewhere, at least it has to head somewhere.
We have a shareholder with whom we are completely satisfied. We are unbelievably well supported
by our current shareholder.
But it's still a bank.
But when we reach the point that the shareholder wants to sell some or all of its shares, we
will...
But then an international publisher that is busy innovating in this area could be a logical
step?
Yes, or a company or a shareholder that believes in the direction that we are headed.
Could it also be a technology company? Microsoft for example?
It could in principle be any investor that is willing to invest money.
You see it more as an investor's role rather than as an acquisition by a company that is
working with content?
That could also be the case. Of course you have different types of investors. Some are
more financial, some are more strategic. I can imagine that in the future it could be
attractive to both types.
The last thing I want to talk to you about is, what are the biggest inhibitors? Maybe
it seems like we are ending on a negative note, but it's also a kind of call to arms.
I believe that you have the determination and the courage. But I find it extremely frustrating,
particularly secondary school education. It just can't go on like this. It's also extremely
frustrating for the kids. What are the biggest inhibitors now, the ones that make you think
"hurry up."?
There are many complaints about the people in the field, the teachers providing the education.
But I think that these people actually do not deviate much from you and me. These are
also people that are on the internet in the evening, taking out insurance policies or
booking their next holiday. I'm not a great believer in the image of teachers and lecturers
as people who cannot do anything with technology. But it is true that we are stuck with a system
that was designed a few hundred years ago. And I don't think it's going to work if we
try to squeeze current innovations into an old system. It's really about the fundamental
point of daring to discuss and ask questions of the current system.
So then you're going to be sitting almost at government level?
Yes. I think that the ministry is going to start moving on this. I already see some movement.
People are orientating themselves. People can see that the system is slowly but surely
coming to an end and they are orientating themselves towards what we should do in this
new reality. So that's a good sign, but as far as I'm concerned, in the best interests
of our children, it simply cannot go fast enough.
And can you suggest a timescale? What do you think? How long is it going to take - let's
take secondary school education as that's the most relevant for me - How long is it
going to take before we have a secondary school that's designed around the individual, where
everyone can do their things digitally? If somebody wants to read a book, they read a
book, Where everything is as we have designed. I could go and design it tomorrow.
It can be fast, but innovations are often overestimated when it comes to speed. I can
imagine that big steps could be taken in the next few years. That's really very close if
you ask me. But a fundamental change in the education system, if it would come to that,
I estimate that you would then need four to eight years, two governments, before you would
really see big steps being taken. Policymakers are not reckless, and that's a good thing.
But creating the conditions for schools so that they can actually start reforming education
in a way that they want themselves, arising from within, because the teachers and schools
really want to do that...
Is that true?
Yes that's the impression I get. I think that all the schools can see that the model is
slowly but surely on its way out, and they are looking for new opportunities. It's a
question of helping and creating the right conditions for it, and then the movement will
really get going, that's my assumption.
And what can we do out in the marketplace to speed things up?
Every parent that asks the school what the strategy is when it comes to these sorts of
things is playing a part and is contributing I think. And I think that the pupils themselves
and their parents increasingly asking the school, "what is your plan when it comes to
innovation and modernization?", that's going to help of course.
And we haven't even talked about vocational training and universities. Is it easier or
more difficult there?
What makes it a little easier there for example is that in higher education, the schools create
their own curricula. Therefore you are less bound to predefined plans and patterns. The
room for experimentation there is in a sense slightly larger. So that could go a little
faster.
May I wish you every success with this important task that you need to do?
Please.
I hope you enjoy it. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for watching an episode of Profile. You can watch all episodes on 7ditches.tv
or download the app on your mobile phone or tablet, or watch on YouTube or wherever you
want. Thanks for watching. Goodbye.