International Education Services Group
Prepared
A partnership brief helps another organisation understand what your institution wants to do and whether a discussion is worth pursuing. It should be concise enough to use while making the important responsibilities and unresolved questions visible.
The brief is not a substitute for a contract, programme approval or partner review. Its role is to create a reliable starting point for those later decisions.
Give the brief a decision to support
Begin with the purpose. Is the institution identifying a recruitment representative, exploring programme cooperation, arranging a specialist service or reviewing an existing relationship?
A statement such as “we want more international partnerships” leaves the reader to infer the activity. A more useful brief identifies the intended provision, audience, locations and institutional objective. It explains what progress would mean at this stage: a relevant introductory discussion, an information exchange or consideration of a defined proposal.
Name the person responsible for the brief and its approval status. A working document can contain open questions, provided the reader knows they are open.
Describe the institution accurately
Identify the public institution and responsible legal entity. Provide enough information to understand its education activity and the role of the team making the enquiry.
Where a group name, programme owner or host institution is involved, explain the relationship. A prospective partner needs to know which entity could accept the proposed commitments and which decisions sit elsewhere.
Avoid unsupported scale or reputation claims. A relevant account of the provision, authority and resources is more useful than adjectives the recipient cannot check.
Set out the activity and boundaries
Describe what is proposed and what is not included. Relevant details may concern programmes, delivery methods, sites, learner groups, markets and the intended period.
Identify permissions already held separately from those still needed. An exploratory brief should not imply that a programme launch or representation right has already been approved.
This is also the point to record fixed constraints. If a particular mode of delivery, location or approval route is essential, prospective partners should know before investing in a detailed discussion.
Explain the partner role you need
State the work you expect a partner to perform. Specify relevant capability, market knowledge, resources and responsibility, distinguishing essential requirements from preferences.
A partner profile should reflect the proposed role. A firm suitable for professional introductions may not be suitable to deliver teaching or manage personal records. Broad sector experience does not remove the need to establish the specific contribution.
Describe the information needed to assess suitability and who will review it. A later formal check can then focus on the role actually proposed.
Record the contribution of each party
List the resources your institution expects to provide: staff time, programme expertise, teaching, systems, facilities, information, funding or follow-up. Then describe the contribution sought from the other party.
Separate a confirmed resource from an assumption. A plan dependent on an unapproved budget or an unavailable team is not ready to be treated as an implementation commitment.
For shared work, identify who can approve a change and who can resolve a disagreement. The purpose is to prevent important tasks from sitting between two organisations without an accountable owner.
Make the unresolved responsibilities explicit
Depending on the activity, questions may include academic oversight, programme rights, admissions, public information, fees, learner support, records, complaints, data and continuity.
Do not attempt to settle every legal term in the brief. Identify the decisions that need to be taken and the people entitled to take them. A responsibility table with an “unresolved” entry is more honest than a reassuring phrase about shared commitment that allocates nothing.
Describe timing and the decision process
Set out the institution's internal approval sequence, procurement requirements and intended decision dates. Identify dependencies on external permission or another organisation's response.
A planning date should not be presented as a promised launch date before the necessary conditions are met. Equally, a fixed institutional decision date should not be hidden if it materially affects what a prospective partner can offer.
The next step should be specific: a discussion, a request for documents, a presentation to a committee or preparation of a scoped proposal.
An illustrative editing example
The following is a hypothetical drafting example, not a client case.
Too broad: “We seek a strategic international partner to expand our global presence.”
More useful: “The institution is considering a recruitment relationship for its existing language programmes in a defined market. The first discussion will assess the prospective partner's operating role, programme knowledge and ability to manage enquiries under a documented appointment.”
The revised account still needs institution-specific details, but it tells the recipient what type of conversation is being proposed. It does not claim that the appointment has been approved.
Review before circulation
Ask whether a new reader can identify the institution, activity, contribution sought, material conditions and next decision. Check that the version approved for external use does not contain unnecessary personal or confidential information.
Keep the brief current as the discussion develops. If the programme, entity or partner role changes, revise the document rather than allowing earlier versions to circulate as though nothing has changed.
Tool and related services
This is an IESG working method, not a scheme requirement or legal agreement. The editable brief provides prompts for the fields above.
Download the partnership brief · Education partnerships · Programme partnerships