SimpsonScarborough: Intelligent Marketing for Higher Education

As the VP of Public Affairs and Government Relations at Indiana University, I recall sitting in senior staff meetings in the early to mid-‘90s debating the merits of online degree programs. Draped in academic tradition, we quickly concluded it wasn’t our cup of tea. Surely we would offer some programs, but as one of the nation’s top research systems, few around the table had appetites for the trendy online courses sans face-to-face meetings with students.

How wrong we were. The Washington Post recently detailed the surge in online degree programs in a half page story - that is getting much attention nationwide. Two out of three colleges and universities now offer online degree programs, and the surge in popularity is converse to the marketing effort we provide these revenue-enhancers.

The proverbial question is: why aren’t colleges and universities more aggressively marketing these programs to meet the exponentially growing demand? Surely it isn’t academic snobbery – offering the lucrative programs but shunning the limelight because it breaks the boundaries of traditional academia?

Note these facts:

65 percent of colleges and universities report using primary core faculty to teach online programs; only 62 percent of the same institutions use primary core faculty to teach face-to-face courses.

The overall percentage of schools identifying online education as a critical long-term strategy grew from 49 percent in 2003, to 56 percent in 2005.

The University of Massachusetts online program now offers 61 degree programs, which has quadrupled its online enrollment since 2002.

University of Maryland University College, which offers UMd’s online programs, had slightly less than 10,000 students in 1998. Today that number is more than 51,000.

It is likely that your institution is offering online courses. Many are, but like athletics departments and alumni offices often these divisions operate as islands unto themselves. Some thoughts on how to bring the programs into the marketing mainstream:

Note the future potential market for online degree programs and then include these offerings as primary services in your marketing efforts. For students who are unable to attend on-site classes regularly for a variety of reasons, this is the best option available. Tout it, underscore it and market it aggressively. University of Maryland has done this as well as anyone and it has proven to be a boon for them.

Work with your online program staff to develop an Integrated Marketing Communications and Branding program aimed specifically at the demographic that could benefit most from these offerings.

From a tactical standpoint, forget the publications, direct mail, billboards and more traditional outreach efforts too many of us cannot shake. Online programs should be marketed online using databases of alumni and potential students, for example, who contact your institution via email. Experiment with online advertising, which is the fastest growing form of advertising in the world.

Target influential business and government leaders. They are likely to have employees and colleagues interested in furthering degrees and can serve as your silent sales force.

Carefully track your marketing successes and add up the dollars you bring to the institution. It not only will be a feather in your cap, but it will illustrate the value of good marketing and the return on the investment.

Study the for-profit institutions and how they market.

Are you marketing online programs now? Tell us about it and give us your best tips, tactics and techniques.

Posted by Christopher Simpson at 03:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Over the years a great deal of discussion has occurred regarding the role of integration, from a marketing perspective, in colleges and universities. First, there was integrated communications, a comprehensive, coordinated effort to get the right messages to the right audiences with the right effect. This, however, is a subset of what has gotten more attention lately, integrated marketing. This is the process of coordinating the entire strategic marketing efforts across an institution involving the full spectrum of what is known as the “7 P’s” (product, price, place, promotion, physical evidence, processes and participants). I am convinced that we, as marketers, should take one more step and consider the integration of marketing and strategic planning.

A strong strategic plan serves as a communication device that identifies: where does the institution want to go; how is it going to get there; and why will the institution be better once it attains its goals. Marketing is a resource that is essential in accomplishing and communicating all of these objectives. Furthermore, consider the following similarities between marketing and the characteristics of an effective strategic plan.

Strategic Planning is:

1) Inclusive. A plan is developed with the input and assistance of constituents internal and external to the university. This not only provides insight and information that may have been missed but also assists in achieving buy-in when implementing the plan. Marketing plans and efforts require the same assistance and buy-in to be successful.
2) Information based. A strategic plan cannot be developed without a thorough understanding of the internal and external environment in which it operates. Institutional research provides some of this data while marketing research provides the external perspective.
3) Supported by the president. No plan will succeed without the complete buy-in and involvement of the president. Without his or her stamp of approval, the plan will not be taken seriously. The same is true of marketing efforts.
4) Continuous and adaptive. A good plan adapts to changes over time. One plan picks up where the last one left off and addresses environmental changes. Marketing efforts are similarly adaptive.
5) Focused. A successful plan rarely attempts to accomplish more than five objectives. Plans are resource driven and too many objectives require spreading typically limited resources too thinly to be effective. An effective brand platform never attempts to create the impression that a school is all things to all people. Good brands are distinctive and relevant to the intended audiences.
6) Aspirational yet rooted in reality. No plan or marketing program is a “magic bullet” capable of moving an institution beyond what the internal and external realities will allow.
7) Communicated at every opportunity in words and actions. This helps assure continuous buy-in and unity of efforts to accomplish the goals of the plan or the marketing program.

Both strategic planning and marketing are tools designed to further the long-term success of the university. In an age of integration, brought about by increasingly better management skills and the desire (and sometimes necessity) to be more efficient with one’s resources, integrating these processes seems to make a great deal of sense.

Posted by Tom Hayes, Ph.D. at 09:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The release of the U.S. News rankings are one of those annual occurrences that incite much loathing, cursing, fear and anxiety across almost all segments of higher ed. On the other hand, one can easily find positive college rankings splattered across admissions materials and websites across the country. What gives?

I mention this because of a conversation I had with a partner institution just a few days ago, one that may be familiar to you. The synopsis: a key staff member is extensively lectured by the then president on the evils of the U.S. News rankings. The university did not endorse or support the rankings or their methodology in any way, shape or form. Then one day the institution was favorably positioned on the list and its ranking was quietly added to the front page of their website. A few years pass and a new president sits behind the big desk. In a conversation with a consultant, the president asks the staffer what the institution is doing to influence the reputation vector of their ranking. The staff member says, “nothing,” since they believe they should avoid U.S. News. The consultant then asks, “isn’t your ranking on your website homepage?” The president responds, “isn’t that a bit schizophrenic?” Perhaps more than just a little.

The heart of the debate seems to center on fairness and accuracy – do the rankings really attest to the quality of education a student will obtain from an institution? One of my mentors in higher education used to frame the question like this: which hospital would you say does a better job – one that takes the most hopeless cases and produces miraculous results or one that treats mostly well patience and keeps them healthy? I would opt for choice one. In that sense, it should be fairly easy to look at inputs and outputs and determine the benefit the learning environment has on students to determine which schools are 'best.’

And there is the rub. Why is so much of the ranking score based on institutional reputation as perceived by other administrators? Is Harvard ranked at the top because it provides the best education – the best turnaround from point A (entry from high school to college) to point B (entry into the world after graduation), or because it admits top students and has to do little to make them successful? Is it possible to obtain a ‘better’ education at XYZ State U than Harvard?

Additional questions – if every other school in our category is sending nice, glossy vanity pieces to higher education opinion leaders, even if we don’t agree with the concept, are we conspicuous by our absence? Although we say we don’t value the rankings, why do we spend significant sums of money annually in an attempt to find the golden ticket to raise our rankings? These just point again to the duality of our thoughts and feelings toward the rankings.

This issue is one that is not soon to be resolved. There are many pieces/presentations to be found on the topic, yet I would love to delve deeper and write a comprehensive white paper. For now, let me provide you with a few places to find current thoughts and opinions on the rankings: U. of Chicago Magazine , CollegeConfidential.com, Black Excel , Top Law Schools Forum, Collegenews.org, Chronicle.com .

As a final tidbit, I want to ensure everyone knows about NSSE – the National Survey of Student Engagement , though Dr. George Kuh would probably cringe to see NSSE and marketing mentioned in the same piece. NSSE administers a sophisticated instrument and analysis that looks at student learning and engagement at participating institutions. NSSE’s survey and resultant data provide a different approach towards assessing turnaround from point A to point B. By combining NSSE’s efforts with a whole host of other surveys and analyses, perhaps we can reframe the conversation of what it means to be the ‘best.’

Posted by CT Turner at 12:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I’m on a flight back to NYC from an Academic Impressions conference I attended this week in San Diego. “Strategic Market Research: From Formulation to Implementation.” It takes a lot to get me to take the time to fly all the way to the West Coast but this conference really delivered. Kudos to Academic Impressions they really know how to put on a good show.

If I were any one of the associations that offers conferences for folks in the fields of marketing, recruitment, development, advancement, communications, public relations, enrollment management, etc., I would be watching Academic Impressions like a hawk. They have refined the process of putting together a stellar conference to an exact science. Actually, it’s a pretty simple formula. Hand pick great speakers to cover specific topics of interest to your audience. And I’m not just saying that because I was one of the speakers.

The very best part about the conference for me was meeting my two co-presenters; Lo DeJanvry, Director of Market Research for the Annual Fund at UC-Berkeley and Jerold Pearson, Director of Market Research at the Stanford Alumni Association. Lo used to work for Prophet Brand Strategy and has actually done some work with David Aaker. You probably have a couple of Aaker’s books in your office. Or, if you are like me, they are in your bedside table.

Lo has great stories of successful branding projects and some really funny ones of projects that failed, which reminds us all that our work in the area of marketing research, specifically as it relates to branding, is as much art as it is science. If you can get Lo to stop teasing Jerold just because he works for his arch-nemesis institution, he can also tell you some cool stories about being on the Olympic field hockey team.

Jerold is so well-versed in the principles of market research, I think he could have presented the entire two-day conference on his own without any preparation whatsoever. The only problem would have been that he’s not really cogent until about noon. Knowing that, we put him on first thing each morning.

If you ever find yourself at a conference where either one of these fine gentlemen are on the agenda, count yourself lucky and go to their sessions. And, if you are looking for a good resource for market research, put Jerold’s Web page in your “favorite places” folder.

Posted by Elizabeth Scarborough at 03:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)