How the Education Inspectorate put TU Delft under heavy pressure

First act: the call

It is the afternoon of 22 December 2022 and the Christmas holidays are about to begin. But just as many employees are setting up their out-of-office replies, they receive an alarming email from the Executive Board: following a series of reports of transgressive behaviour, the Education Inspectorate is launching an investigation at TU Delft.

The Executive Board states that it has ‘no further information’ and will cooperate ‘constructively’ with the investigation. Behind the scenes, however, the Board has expressed its dissatisfaction to the Inspectorate regarding the timing of the call. Nor will constructive cooperation materialise immediately.

Fifteen minutes after the Executive Board’s email, another arrives: from the Inspectorate itself. Staff who have experienced misconduct can report it on the Inspectorate’s website, it states, anonymously if necessary. Over time, the Inspectorate will receive 148 reports.

Second act: behind-the-scenes turmoil

The Inspectorate’s investigation takes months, but in November 2023 it sends its draft report to the Executive Board behind the scenes. The Board reads that a lack of leadership, exclusion, sexism, sexual harassment, breaches of integrity, gossip, racism and bullying among staff lead to psychological and physical health issues, absenteeism and a general feeling of unsafety.

The Inspectorate further concludes that ‘safeguards for a socially safe environment’ are in place at TU Delft, but that they are ‘difficult to identify and insufficiently effective’. According to the inspectors, the Board ‘fails’ to ‘add it all up to form a complete picture’ and ‘does not sufficiently steer towards appropriate measures’. Meanwhile, the Human Resources department is said to be too focused ‘on preserving the organisation and existing power structure’, and a large proportion of staff are said to be afraid to voice their opinions.

The Executive Board and the Supervisory Board (RvT) face specific criticism in the report. For instance, the inspectors find it striking that both are ‘predominantly positive about the safeguards, whilst they also read the alarming annual reports from confidential advisors, the ombudsman and the company social worker’. Furthermore, through their statements and actions, (former) Executive Board members are said to have caused ‘a greater sense of social unsafety’. There are also said to be ‘a number of incidents of perceived intimidation and/or threats by (a) (former) director(s) and a former supervisor’.

The inspectorate can only conclude that there has been mismanagement.

The Executive Board asks law firm Stibbe to scrutinise the investigation methodology. In a voluminous report, the lawyers subsequently dismantle that methodology point by point.

They classify the Inspectorate’s report as ‘a collection of a limited number of anonymous reports that cannot justify conclusions about the culture or about TU staff in a broader sense’. On 12 January 2024, the Executive Board writes to the inspectorate: ‘For TU Delft, it is in any case clear that a report such as the one in question, or anything similar, must not be made public.’

Communications agency Confidant Partners confirms this. It had been commissioned to analyse the Inspectorate’s report from a reputational perspective. It concludes, as it later transpires, that reputational damage is inevitable and that this certainly applies ‘to those involved, often directors’.

Third act: publication of a damning report

The Inspectorate appears unimpressed by the backlash from the Executive Board. It makes hardly any changes to the draft report and intends to publish the final report in early March. The Executive Board decides to take matters into its own hands: if this report, which it considers flawed, is to be published after all, it would rather do so itself.

On 1 March, the Executive Board therefore hastily organises a staff meeting, where Rector Tim van der Hagen, Supervisory Board Chair Tijo Collot d’Escury, Executive Board member Marien van der Meer and EEMCS Dean Lucas van Vliet attempt to convey their message to staff: yes, it is terrible that staff have experienced inappropriate behaviour, but no, this investigation is worthless.

The Executive Board and the Supervisory Board even say they are considering taking the Inspectorate to court. When Delta asks the Inspectorate what it thinks of that threat, it remains stoic: we view that court case ‘with confidence’.

After the meeting, the inspectorate’s report is published on TU Delft’s website under the headline ‘Investigation by Inspectorate Education unsound and disappointing’. It soon becomes apparent that a mistake has been made: in the Executive Board’s response to the Inspectorate’s report, confidential information about individuals has not been properly redacted and is therefore legible. What stands out in the redacted sections is that the Executive Board seems more concerned with the fate of senior management than with that of staff.

In the report itself, the Inspectorate instructs TU Delft ‘to restore care for staff so that the organisation is socially safe and can grow socially’. TU Delft must draw up and implement an action plan addressing the areas where, according to the Inspectorate, things are going wrong: leadership, culture, management, and engaging in dialogue with staff.

Fourth act: commotion and censorship

The fact that the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board are attacking the Inspectorate does not sit well with many staff and students. An unusually vocal Works Council, trade unions and an initially anonymous action group are up in arms: drop the legal proceedings and accept the Inspectorate’s conclusions – because they are correct, whatever you may think of the investigation method. A petition is even launched to force the board to see reason. Ultimately, it takes three weeks for the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board to come to their senses.

In the meantime, shutters are closing. The student and staff representatives meet behind closed doors, and later a Delta journalist is turned away from a meeting between the Executive Board and the trade unions in the Local Consultation Committee. Meanwhile, Delta also finds itself forced to cancel an interview with Rector Tim van der Hagen, as he announces in advance that he wishes to look only to the future in it. The chair of the Supervisory Board, Tijo Collot d’Escury, is also reluctant to answer questions. He wishes to respond to them only via email.

It is all taking place in an atmosphere of conflict. Consequently, TU Delft’s legal department sees fit to summon that a Delta investigative piece on social unsafety at the Innovation & Impact Centre be taken offline. The editorial team complies under protest, which exposes the Executive Board to a fresh storm of criticism. Months later, the article reappears on the Delta website.

Fifth act: the action plan

Meanwhile, TU Delft’s Integrity Office is being expanded further and further. The Inspectorate had demanded an action plan, and this must be in place by the summer of 2024. As if that were not enough, the Labour Inspectorate is turning up the pressure even further. It is threatening to intervene because TU Delft (like all other universities) is not complying with the Working Conditions Act: whilst it is taking measures to combat high workloads and undesirable behaviour, these are often not based on actual analyses of the problems. Nor is there any indication of their effectiveness. Meanwhile, it appears that 37 per cent of staff are at increased risk of burnout.

At TU Delft, however, the view is emerging that it is too early for a full-blown action plan: problems must first be analysed. The Executive Board therefore decides that a so-called plan for change must be drawn up first and that this will be submitted to the Inspectorate.

However, the Inspectorate is not satisfied with this: call the plan what you like, is its response, but we will certainly assess it as an action plan. That assessment is published in early July and is, once again, less than favourable. According to the Inspectorate, the plan consists ‘largely of objectives and directions’ and too little of concrete actions. The Inspectorate also notes a lack of critical reflection on the role of the Executive Board.

Sixth act: sufficient measures

It appears the Executive Board has taken this to heart: together with directors and deans, they are attending a training course. In an interview with Delta, Rector Van der Hagen says he has put his indignation behind him. A first quarterly report to the Inspectorate follows in October. It contains more details on how TU Delft intends to resolve the issues regarding social safety.

One of the most important measures is the opening of a reporting point. This was even due to open as early as October 2024, but that did not take the staff representative bodies into account. They protested against the far too short consultation period. The trade unions also made their voices heard because they wanted a say. Ultimately, the reporting point opened six months later, in April 2025.

In the meantime, the entire Executive Board has been replaced, there is a new Chair of the Supervisory Board, a new TU code of conduct is almost ready, many managers have attended social safety training courses, numerous other measures have been taken, and the Integrity Office has grown significantly.

The Education Inspectorate now recognises this too, and believes that TU Delft is on the right track. Yes, there are certainly still areas for attention, it writes, but further supervision is no longer necessary. It is now up to the organisation itself to maintain this upward trend.