Rise of data empires signals the end of academic autonomy

Universities worldwide are quietly surrendering their autonomy to a handful of private data companies, creating what might be the most significant power shift in higher education’s history.

At the forefront of this transformation stands Times Higher Education (THE), whose evolution from an education magazine, to a rankings organisation, to a data provider and consultancy exemplifies the rise of these new data empires.

Owned by European private equity firm Inflexion, it maintains over 472,694 data points from 2,860 institutions (2025 rankings) across 155 countries. But this massive data repository represents just one facet of THE’s expanding empire.

THE, which generates US$95.7 million in annual revenue with 315 employees, has made several strategic acquisitions to expand its capabilities across multiple domains. It recently acquired the Education World Forum (EWF), the world’s largest gathering of education ministers, which hosted 120 education and skills ministers in 2023.

This adds to other recent acquisitions, including Inside Higher Ed (a United States-based news platform) and Poets & Quants (a graduate business school content platform). Through these strategic moves, THE has significantly expanded its capabilities across news coverage, data analytics, student recruitment, business education intelligence and now ministerial-level policy engagement.

Consolidation of power

This consolidation of power is not unique to THE. The recent acquisition of HolonIQ by Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) represents another landmark merger, creating an education intelligence powerhouse that serves 6,950 institutional and corporate clients.

Both companies have shown remarkable growth. The combined organisation represents nearly 900 employees across 15 offices worldwide, adding HolonIQ’s advanced AI-powered analytics platform and impressive roster of tech giants (Apple, Google and Microsoft), financial institutions (BlackRock and Goldman Sachs) and international organisations (the World Bank IFC, UNICEF and the Gates Foundation).

These mergers and acquisitions highlight how major ranking organisations like THE, QS and Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) have expanded beyond their traditional role as ranking providers to become sophisticated data analytics enterprises, offering comprehensive consulting services and maintaining vast repositories of institutional data.

Data analytics in higher education has transformed from a supplementary tool into a fundamental driver of institutional strategy, representing a significant departure from traditional models of academic governance. Universities have rapidly adopted business intelligence operations and information dashboards familiar from the private sector, while the digitalisation of learning platforms and student records creates unprecedented volumes of institutional data.

This shift in governance extends beyond data companies to include traditional consulting firms, creating a powerful nexus of private sector influence over higher education. Companies like McKinsey, Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PwC have strategically positioned themselves as architects of educational futures, publishing influential reports and frameworks on “the future of the university” that increasingly determine institutional strategy.

A recent National Tertiary Education Union report revealed that of 545 positions on university governing bodies in Australia, 143 were held by corporate executives and consultants, with about 30 consultants including more than a dozen from the ‘big four’ accounting firms (Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG and PwC).

Geopolitical influence

QS recently published another report, “How can higher education institutions become future-ready?”. Being “future-ready” appears to involve leveraging data from QS to inform institutional decision-making about everything from resource allocation and student support services to academic programme development.

This shift from academic to commercial decision-making frameworks raises fundamental questions about institutional autonomy and the nature of educational governance.

The rise of these new big data power brokers also reflects a broader consequential and fundamental shift in geopolitical influence, with tech giants becoming increasingly powerful non-state actors. In our new multipolar world order, these data giants have emerged as shadow regulators, wielding influence that often exceeds that of traditional state actors or academic institutions.

Consider the recent acquisition by THE of the Education World Forum. This strategic move transforms THE from a mere data analytics provider into a powerful intermediary between national governments and the global education market. Similarly, when QS-acquired HolonIQ serves both universities and tech giants like Google and Microsoft, it is not just providing analytics – it is shaping the interface between higher education and the tech industry’s workforce needs.

Analytics-industrial complex

This concentration of power has given rise to what might be termed an ‘analytics-industrial complex’ – a self-reinforcing ecosystem where private companies simultaneously generate evaluation metrics, control marketing platforms, provide performance analytics and shape policy discussions.

The impact is clearly visible in how institutions and nations respond to ranking methodologies. When QS’s 2024 rankings reduced Academic Reputation weight from 30% to 20% and introduced new employment metrics, universities quickly created dedicated employability units.

Nations like Saudi Arabia have even incorporated global rankings into national policy through initiatives like Vision 2030. A recent study in Nature confirms the effectiveness of such responses, showing how national higher education initiatives can improve universities’ rankings by 12.1 to 17.7 places in QS and ARWU.

The implications are profound: these companies are not just measuring educational quality – they are defining it. This creates a powerful feedback loop: the same organisations that rank universities also advise them on strategy and connect them with potential students, creating an unprecedented system of private educational governance.

Regulatory capture over global higher education

This dual transformation – the privatisation of educational governance and the rise of tech companies as geopolitical actors – represents perhaps one of the most significant power shifts in recent history, raising fundamental questions about institutional autonomy in an age of digital empire. The emergence of data companies as powerful non-state actors is reshaping traditional power dynamics in ways that transcend conventional nation-state boundaries.

The analytics-industrial complex has effectively achieved a form of regulatory capture over global higher education. When companies like THE simultaneously control ranking systems, provide strategic consulting and convene education ministers, they create a self-reinforcing cycle of influence that exceeds traditional regulatory frameworks.

This represents a profound shift from public to private governance, where commercial entities increasingly determine educational standards and priorities without democratic accountability.

Moreover, these educational data empires wield influence that rivals or exceeds that of national education ministries. When companies like THE can convene 120 education ministers while simultaneously controlling vast data repositories and analytics capabilities, they exercise a form of soft power traditionally reserved for state actors or intergovernmental organisations like UNESCO.

Perhaps most significantly, the analytics-industrial complex challenges fundamental assumptions about academic self-governance. Universities find themselves in an asymmetric relationship where they provide institutional data at no cost, only to become dependent on costly analytics services to interpret and utilise their own information.

This raises urgent questions about how universities can preserve their essential character as institutions of knowledge creation and critical inquiry while operating within these new power structures.

These interlocking challenges point to a fundamental restructuring of power in global higher education. Commercial data enterprises now function as supranational entities, wielding influence that exceeds traditional governance structures while operating largely beyond democratic oversight. This transformation raises urgent questions about the future of institutional autonomy and academic self-governance in an age of digital empire.

Chris R Glass is professor of the practice in the department of educational leadership and higher education at Boston College, USA, where he leads the Executive Doctor of Education (EdD) in Higher Education programme and serves as an affiliated faculty member in the Center for International Higher Education. Gerardo Blanco is academic director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College in the United States. E-mail: blancoge@bc.edu. This article was first published in the current edition of International Higher Education.

This article is a commentary. Commentary articles are the opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of University World News.