Abstract:

Introduction:
The university under review is located in Berlin, Germany. It is one of the largest state universities for Social Work, Health, Education and Upbringing in Childhood (SAGE) in Germany. It promotes opportunities for potential development and competence development in the spirit of lifelong learning for staff at all levels in SAGE areas. The university's mission statement therefore explicitly anchors the building of bridges between educational areas. Scientific SAGE continuing education is intended to promote subject-specific and interdisciplinary performance as well as the exchange of experience between practitioners, participants and lecturers.

Research Problem:
In future, the three sub-areas:
a) alumni network,
b) continuing education master's programmes and
c) centre for continuing education are to be organised as a central institute at the university.
The offerings in eight continuing education master's programmes, around 130 certificate courses and seminars, and the alumni network are geared towards social changes and increasingly individualised and flexible career paths with vertical, horizontal and sinusoidal careers.
In order to meet this need in a future-proof manner, an investigation was conducted into which aspects are relevant for a quality-assured structure of the central institute with the working title ‘Scientific Institution for Continuing Education – Lifelong Learning’ for long-term value creation for the life cycle-oriented development of personnel in SAGE areas.

Results:
Different organisational models were examined in terms of their suitability for this central institute, and advantages, disadvantages and best practices were derived. The article presents the findings and results of the research project. A top-down matrix organisation was identified as the best model. Various aspects, such as implementation costs, disruption to the existing organisation, and internal and external communication, are included in the discussion. Possible structural friction losses at the interfaces can negatively influence the quality of individual offerings, e.g. new or developing offerings. After analysing all the data and facts collected, an organisational form that is less agile than the matrix organisation, e.g. the divisional organisation, is optimally suited for this university.

Discussion and Implications:
The quality-assured structure of the central institute must be part of the overall concept, which includes processes, interfaces and descriptions of activities, among other things. The overarching goal must be successful implementation through change management in the area of conflict between project management and ongoing university operations. Structural development requires a truly participatory approach and is determined individually by the conditions at each university. It is therefore imperative that the university management, in the sense of the top management of the university, is aware of its responsibility for strategic decisions regarding the organisational structure.

Keywords:

Structural quality, matrix organisation, divisional organisation, organisational development, institutional concept, change management.