Tag: Strategic

  • Strategic Planning for Legacy Programs: Rejuvenating Degrees

    Strategic Planning for Legacy Programs: Rejuvenating Degrees

    Don’t Let Legacy Programs Stall Your Growth

    In higher education today, generating buzz around new program launches is often viewed as the key to growth and market relevance. While there’s nothing wrong with investing in new programs when it makes sense, institutions tend to do so at the expense of existing offerings — including those that built their reputation. Yet legacy programs, when strategically audited and repositioned, can become some of the strongest assets in an institution’s portfolio.

    The challenge is that these programs often don’t receive the same level of attention or investment as new launches. Over time, many become overshadowed — not necessarily because they’ve lost relevance, but because the institution’s focus has shifted. Without consistent evaluation and modernization, the programs may begin to stagnate — enrollments flatten, marketing efforts diminish — while they continue to drain resources and faculty energy.  

    At the same time, legacy programs often hold unique advantages that newer offerings lack: established reputations, loyal alumni networks, and faculty with deep expertise. When they’re reexamined and repositioned through a strategic lens — leveraging internal data, market insight, and refreshed messaging — legacy programs can drive renewed growth in an increasingly competitive marketplace. 

    Auditing Programs for Their Growth Potential 

    A deliberate, data-informed audit of an institution’s programs can be the first step toward revitalizing those that are underperforming. A well-designed audit doesn’t just identify weaknesses — it also can uncover opportunities for renewal and growth. 

    A program life cycle audit assesses the current health of existing programs and tracks their performance over time. Key metrics in an audit might include:

    • Enrollment and retention trends, to gauge the program’s long-term viability
    • Course completion and graduation rates, as indicators of students’ satisfaction and support
    • Employment outcomes, to measure the program’s industry relevance and career alignment
    • Faculty-learner ratio, to ensure efficient use of instructional resources
    • Program search demand trends, to gauge the market’s interest in the program

    This process helps institutions identify whether their legacy programs are declining, stable, or experiencing renewed interest. These insights enable academic leadership teams to direct resources toward the programs that are most likely to drive growth — or sunset programs that no longer advance the institution’s goals.

    Audits shouldn’t rely solely on internal data. Comparing a program’s performance results with market demand data — such as regional job growth projections and competitors’ offerings — can clarify what the program’s challenges are and whether they stem from internal execution or broader shifts in the field. 

    Measuring Program-Market Fit 

    Analyzing a program’s market fit is just as important as evaluating its internal performance. It can help institutions decide which legacy programs need retooling, which ones are suitable for scale, and which ones should be phased out.   

    A program’s market fit analysis doesn’t have to be overly complex. It can begin with three fundamental questions:

    • Is there still demand?
      The analysis should start with a review of labor market data, industry trends, search trends, and alumni outcomes to determine whether a particular field remains robust or if demand is shifting toward other subjects or credentials.
    • How does our program compare?
      The next step is to assess what other institutions are offering in terms of delivery format (such as in-person versus online learning), curriculum, and pricing for similar programs. Understanding the competitive landscape helps identify areas where an institution’s program overlaps with others and where there may be opportunities to differentiate.
    • Does the program align with our institutional strengths?
      Legacy programs often reflect areas where the institution already has deep expertise or established credibility. If those strengths still align with current market demand, they can serve as a solid foundation for a program’s revitalization rather than a reason for its retirement. 

    Evaluating these three dimensions helps determine whether a program needs a full-blown relaunch or a more subtle refresh. The goal isn’t to reinvent for the sake of reinvention. It’s to make sure that each offering continues to serve students while also supporting the institution’s objectives. 

    Relaunching Programs With Purpose: Marketing Strategies 

    When a legacy program still holds value but needs renewed visibility, a structured relaunch can help ensure its continued relevance. Effective relaunches align academic updates, marketing strategy, and admissions communication so that all teams are working toward the same goal: positioning the program for growth. 

    A comprehensive relaunch checklist can help guide this process. Elements to consider include:

    • Program curriculum and delivery updates that reflect today’s learning preferences — such as hybrid or online models to accommodate adult learners — and industry expectations
    • Consistent messaging across marketing and admissions, ensuring that both internal and external audiences understand what’s new
    • Refreshed and tested marketing materials, including program pages and collateral materials that articulate outcomes, flexibility, and value to prospective students

    Refreshing a program’s branding and positioning is a crucial step. Students’ needs evolve, so the program’s story should evolve too. Simple adjustments — such as updating program names for clarity, refining messaging to align with search trends, or highlighting regional workforce connections — can make legacy programs more discoverable and relevant.

    Faculty also play a vital role in rebranding. Leveraging their expertise lends authenticity and authority to program relaunches. Featuring their research and industry partnerships in marketing materials reinforces the program’s real-world impact and signals that it’s grounded in experience, not just theory. 

    Key Takeaways

    • New program launches aren’t the only pathway to growth. Sustainable success also stems from repositioning existing programs.
    • Strategic audits of legacy offerings that assess their long-term performance and market fit enable your institution to relaunch them with intention.
    • Institutions that regularly review and refresh their degree portfolios are better positioned to achieve scalable, market-responsive growth while honoring the programs that built their foundation. 

    Reinvigorate Your Programs — and Your Growth Strategy

    Archer Education partners with dozens of institutions to help them launch new programs and revitalize existing ones to amplify their visibility and drive real growth. In a competitive market, data-driven program strategies enable greater institutional alignment and better market fit. 

    Contact our team today and let us help you rejuvenate your degree portfolio.

    Source link

  • Advice on Building a Strategic Digital Presence (opinion)

    Advice on Building a Strategic Digital Presence (opinion)

    For early-career researchers (ECRs), building a digital research space can feel like another burden piled onto an already demanding schedule. The idea of online professional networking often evokes images of overwhelming social media feeds and self-promoting influencers.

    Yet ECRs face a significant risk by solely relying on institutional platforms for their digital footprint: information portability. While university websites offer high visibility as trusted sources, most ECRs on short-term contracts lose web and email access as soon as their contracts expire. This often forces a hasty rebuild of their online presence precisely when they need to navigate critical career transitions.

    Having worked with doctoral and postdoctoral candidates across Europe, common initial hesitations to establishing a digital research space include: uncertainty about how and where to start, discouragement from senior researchers who dismiss digital networks as not “real” work, fears of appearing boastful and/or the paralyzing grip of impostor syndrome. Understanding these hesitations, I emphasize in my coaching the ways that building a digital research space is a natural extension of ECRs’ professional growth.

    Why a Strategic Digital Research Space Matters

    A proactive, professional digital strategy offers several key advantages.

    • Enhancing visibility and discoverability: A well-curated, current, consistent and coherent digital presence significantly improves discoverability for peers, potential collaborators, future employers, funders, journal editors and the media.
    • Networking: Strategically using digital platforms transcends institutional and geographical boundaries, enabling connections with specific individuals, research groups and relevant industry contacts globally.
    • Showcasing expertise and impact: Your digital space allows you to present a holistic view of your contributions beyond publications, including skills, ongoing projects, presentations, teaching, outreach and broader impacts.
    • Meeting communication expectations: As research advances, particularly with public funding, the demand to communicate findings beyond academic circles increases. Funders, institutions and the public expect researchers to demonstrate broader impact and societal relevance and a strategic digital presence provides effective channels for these crucial communications.
    • Controlling your narrative: Actively shape your professional identity and how your expertise is perceived, rather than relying on fragmented institutional profiles or database entries.
    • Ensuring information portability and longevity: Platforms like LinkedIn, ORCID, Google Scholar or a personal website ensure your professional identity, network and achievements remain consistent, accessible and under your control throughout your career.

    Getting Started: Choosing Your Digital Network Combination

    The goal isn’t to be online everywhere, but to be online strategically. Select a platform combination and engagement style aligned with your specific objectives and target audience, considering the time you have available.

    Different platforms serve distinct strategic aims and audiences at various research stages. Categorizing digital platforms into three subspaces helps map the landscape and can help you develop a more balanced presence across the research cycle.

    First, identify the primary strategic goal(s): public dissemination, professional networking expansion or deeper engagement within your academic niche? Your answer will guide your platform selection, as you aim for eventual presence in each space.

    Figure 1: Align your digital platform choices with your strategic goals and target audience.

    Next, consider your audience spectrum. Effective research communication depends on understanding your target audience and their needs.

    • Scholarly discourse: At the outset of your career, specialized academic platforms like ResearchGate, Academia.edu, institutional repositories and reference managers with social features (e.g., Mendeley) are key for engaging directly with peers. Foundational permanent identifiers like ORCID are crucial for tracking outputs across systems.
    • Professional network: As you seek to develop your career, LinkedIn, Google (including Google Scholar) and X (formerly Twitter) are vital hubs across academia, industry and related sectors.
    • Share for impact: TikTok, Facebook and Instagram excel for broader dissemination. Do adjust style and tone: While academics can process jargon and complex concepts, a broader audience will engage more in plain English.

    A strong, time-efficient and pragmatic starting point is to create a free and unique researcher identifier number like an ORCID, develop a professional LinkedIn profile and engage with a relevant academic platform (this would be in addition to your presence on a university or lab website). Because the ORCID requires no upkeep and a LinkedIn profile can leverage existing institutional and biographical information, with this combination ECRs can quickly establish a solid foundation for gradual digital expansion over the medium term.

    Make It Manageable: Time, Engagement and Content

    Once the platform combination is in place, effective digital management requires balancing three core elements: time, engagement and content.

    This figure displays different opportunities for digital engagement depending on factors including time engagement (with options including daily engagement, platform-specific and project-based campaigns, and regular content creation); engagement (e.g. active participation by commenting, sharing and asking questions or building relationships); and content type (including written, visual and multimedia forms of content).

    Figure 2. Key considerations for a sustainable digital networking strategy: balancing realistic time investment, meaningful engagement and appropriate content types.

    Time Investment

    Key message: Prioritize consistency over quantity.

    • Focused engagement: Allocate short, regular blocks (e.g., 15 to 30 minutes weekly) for specific activities like checking discussions, sharing updates or thoughtful commenting between periods of focused research.
    • Platform nuance: Invest strategically, recognizing that platforms have different tempos and life spans (e.g., a LinkedIn post typically has a longer life span than an X post).
    • Campaign bursts: Plan ahead to strategically increase activity around key events like publications or conferences, utilizing scheduling tools for automated posting.
    • Content cadence: Consistency beats constant noise, so plan a realistic posting schedule such as once a month.

    Engagement

    Key message: Focus on short but regular efforts.

    • Active participation: Move beyond passive consumption by commenting, sharing relevant work and asking insightful questions.
    • Build relationships: Genuine interaction fosters trust and meaningful connections.
    • Monitor your impact (optional): Use platform analytics to understand what resonates and refine your strategy.

    Content Type

    Key message: Your hard work should work hard online.

    • Written: Summaries, insights, blog posts, threads, articles.
    • Visual: Infographics, diagrams, cleared research images, presentation slides.
    • Multimedia: Short explanatory videos, audio clips, recorded talks.
    • Cross-post: Share content across all relevant platforms (e.g., post your YouTube video on LinkedIn and ResearchGate).

    Overcoming Reluctance

    If you’re hesitant, consider these starting points:

    • Start small, stay focused: Choose one or two platforms aligned with your top priority. Master these before expanding.
    • Embrace learning: Your initial digital content may not be perfect, but consistent practice leads to significant improvement. Give yourself permission to progress.
    • Integrate, don’t isolate: Weave digital engagement into your research workflow. Share insights from webinars or interesting papers with your network.
    • Give and take: Focus on offering value by sharing insights, asking stimulating questions and amplifying others’ work. Reciprocity fuels networking.
    • Set boundaries: Protect your deep work time. Schedule dedicated slots for digital engagement during lower-energy periods and manage notifications wisely.
    • Be patient: Recognize that building meaningful networks and visibility is a long-term career investment.

    Your Digital Research Space: A Career Asset

    A strategic digital research space is essential for navigating and succeeding in a modern research career. A thoughtful approach empowers you to control your professional narrative, build lasting networks, meet communication expectations and ensure your valuable contributions are both visible and portable.

    Maura Hannon is based in Switzerland and has more than two decades of expertise in strategic communication and thought leadership positioning. She has worked extensively for the last 10 years with doctoral and postdoctoral candidates across Europe to help them build strategies that harness digital networks to enhance their research visibility and impact.

    Source link

  • Strategic Approach to Mobility, Transfer, Academic Partnership

    Strategic Approach to Mobility, Transfer, Academic Partnership

    Serving approximately 100,000 students each year, Maricopa County Community College District is one of the nation’s largest community college districts. Many bachelor’s-granting institutions seek to recruit Maricopa students, but these institutions often fall short in serving them effectively by not applying previously earned coursework, overlooking their specific needs or failing to accept credit for prior learning in transfer. After years of requesting changes from transfer partners without seeing adequate response, Maricopa Community Colleges determined it was time to take action by establishing clear criteria and an evaluation process.

    A Legacy of Transfer

    Since its establishment, university transfer has remained a central pillar of the mission of the MCCCD. Transfer preparation is a chief reason students enroll across the district’s 10 colleges. In fact, 38 percent of students districtwide indicate upon admission that their goal is to transfer to a university.

    A significant portion of these students transition to Arizona’s three public universities under the framework of the Arizona Transfer System. Beyond that, Maricopa maintains formal articulation agreements with over 35 colleges and universities, both in state and across the nation, including private and public institutions.

    Developing Strategic Transfer Partnerships

    Each university partnership is formalized through a memorandum of understanding that outlines the roles, expectations and mutual responsibilities of Maricopa and the partner institution. Recognizing the need for a more strategic and data-informed approach, MCCCD developed a model years ago to ensure that both potential and existing transfer partnerships align with the district’s evolving strategic priorities. The model provides a structured framework for assessing new and continuing partnerships based on institutional relevance, resource capacity and student need.

    A Point of Evolution

    In 2022, the district overhauled its partnership model to better meet the needs of today’s learners, who increasingly seek flexible pathways to a degree. Many students now arrive with a mix of traditional coursework, transfer credit and prior learning assessment, including military service, industry certifications and on-the-job training, creating greater demand for clear, consistent and student-centered transfer pathways. The updated model ensures partner institutions complement, rather than counter, MCCCD’s efforts, particularly in recognizing learning that occurs outside the traditional classroom.

    The new model sets out the following criteria as minimum requirements:

    • Accepts and applies credits earned through prior learning assessment: The integration of PLA and alternative credit was a central focus of the redesign, recognizing the unique advantages these offer transfer students. Many students move between institutions, accumulate credits in segments and work toward credential completion. While some follow the traditional route from a two-year college to a four-year university, others take different paths, transferring from one two-year institution to another, or returning from a four-year institution to a two-year college through reverse-transfer agreements. These varied journeys highlight the need to embed PLA fully into the transfer agenda so that all learning, regardless of where or how it was acquired, is recognized and applied toward students’ goals. By making PLA a built-in component of the revamped model, MCCCD and its university partners can better meet learners where they are in their educational journey.
    • Provides annual enrollment and achievement data: To support this renewed focus, MCCCD asked all university partners to update their MOUs through a new university partnership application. This process gathered key institutional data and ensured alignment with updated partnership criteria and made it mandatory.
    • Accredited with no adverse actions or existing sanctions against the institution: Partner institutions must hold accreditation in good standing, accept both nationally and regionally accredited coursework, and recognize Maricopa-awarded PLA credit.
    • Aims to accept and apply a minimum of 60 credits: They are expected to apply at least 60 applicable Maricopa credits, academic and occupational, and accept Maricopa’s general education core.
    • Has a minimum of 50 students who have transferred at least 12 Maricopa earned credits in the last three years: This requirement is intended to demonstrate need and gauge student interest.
    • Surveys Maricopa transfer students annually: Partners must commit to administering annual transfer surveys and tracking student outcomes using jointly defined metrics.

    Institutions that do not meet this standard are not advanced in the partnership process but are welcome to reapply once they meet the baseline criteria. As a result, more partners are actively engaging and strengthening their policies and processes to gain or maintain eligibility.

    Key Findings

    Several themes emerged from the first year of implementation:

    Since the revamp, MCCCD is seeing promising results. Current and prospective partners have demonstrated strong commitment to the revised partnership model by elevating transfer and PLA practices, expanding pathways that accept 75 to 90 credits and participating in on-campus student support initiatives through goal-oriented action plans. They are using the model to facilitate conversations within their institutions to further advance internal policies and practices.

    Post-COVID, demand for online learning and support services remains strong, particularly among working students and those needing flexible schedules, as reflected in survey results. While participation in past transfer experience surveys was low, the district has made this requirement mandatory and introduced multiple survey options to better capture the student voice and experience. These insights enable MCCCD to collaborate with partners on targeted improvement plans.

    New criteria MCCCD is considering, several of which some partners have already implemented, include reserving course seats for Maricopa transfer students, creating Maricopa-specific scholarships, offering internships and other work opportunities and waiving application fees.

    MCCCD is currently assessing the impact of its revamped partnership model to measure the success of these efforts. Preliminary findings from the three-year review indicate that most, if not all, partner institutions are meeting or exceeding established metrics. These early results reflect a strong commitment to the agreements and reaffirm the value of the updated criteria in fostering more meaningful and impactful partnerships.

    A Model for Intentional Partnerships

    The Maricopa Community College District’s revamped university transfer partnership model is a strategic effort to keep partnerships active, student-centered and aligned with key institutional priorities. Through intentional collaboration, transparent policies and practices and shared responsibility, Maricopa and its university partners are building more effective, forward-thinking transfer pathways.

    Source link

  • Cost-smart campuses: Building financial resilience through strategic buying

    Cost-smart campuses: Building financial resilience through strategic buying

    Across higher ed, the financial squeeze is tightening. Between shrinking enrollment and uncertain funding, colleges and universities are scrambling to deliver value with far less cash. Every purchase, from lab beakers to toner cartridges, now faces intense scrutiny. After all, one way to uncover excess spending is to identify blind spots and inefficiencies in how organizations buy.

    That drive for savings puts procurement teams squarely in the hot seat. Seven in ten procurement leaders rank cost management as their most critical capability today and for the years ahead, according to Economist Impact. Yet decentralized purchasing, patchwork systems, and limited spend visibility continue to drain institutional resources.

    Savvy institutions are flipping that script, moving from reactive penny-pinching to proactive value creation by consolidating spend, leveraging supplier partnerships, and centralizing purchasing oversight.

    From reactive buying to proactive value creation

    Financial uncertainty now dominates the higher ed landscape. To navigate it successfully, universities must shift from tactical price checks to total-value management, leveraging lessons from other industries that have successfully implemented AI-powered automations to boost efficiencies and cut costs, University Business reports. It’s the difference between playing defense and offense—both matter, but one drives wins.

    This strategic transformation requires three foundational moves: gaining real-time visibility into campuswide spending patterns, establishing centralized oversight without bureaucratic friction, and building supplier relationships that deliver value beyond the initial purchase price.

    “Reducing spend is important, but increasing value matters more,” shares Rosie Grigsby, senior sales manager for higher education at Amazon Business. “When you’re looking at things only from a price perspective, you’re missing out on other value aspects like quality, lifecycle, support, training, and more,” she explains. “When thinking about total value, I’m thinking about how a supplier is enhancing student experiences while giving university employees time back through efficiencies.”

    To make that possible, procurement leaders would be wise to prioritize the visibility problem: You can’t optimize what you can’t see. Gaining visibility into campuswide spending starts with breaking down the silos that keep procurement teams in the dark.

    Visibility and control: Centralizing spend without adding bureaucracy

    Imagine navigating unfamiliar terrain with a GPS that only shows you one street at a time. When departments buy in silos, institutions lose their ability to see the bigger picture, eroding spend leverage, killing negotiating power, and complicating compliance. Each isolated purchase decision chips away at potential savings and strategic control.

    Consider the cascading impact: With fragmented purchasing, universities could be paying different prices for the same product across departments, missing significant volume discounts, and discovering duplicate software licenses only during audits. Worse yet, audits could reveal policy violations that were invisible until it was too late. 

    Unsurprisingly, research by the IBM Center for the Business of Government shows that centralized procurement correlates with higher savings, efficiencies, and compliance. Even so, many procurement leaders struggle with organization-wide visibility. 

    The solution isn’t building a bureaucratic fortress around every purchase decision. Rather, modern procurement solutions maintain centralized control while giving end users the flexibility they need, eliminating the process bottlenecks that drive departments to work around procurement entirely.

    Solutions could be lying dormant in tools you already own. “Universities often underutilize e-procurement systems and automations they already have licenses for,” Grigsby notes. “Electronic catalogs, automated approval workflows, single sign-ons (SSOs), analytics—tools like these cut time from sourcing to receiving while enhancing compliance and reducing errors.” What once took days of spreadsheet analysis can now happen automatically, freeing teams to focus on strategy, not data entry.

    Building strategic supplier relationships

    Too many institutions treat suppliers as vendors, not partners. Transactional supplier relationships are short-term and price-focused: you buy something, and you’re done. Strategic supplier relationships, on the other hand, are ongoing partnerships built on trust and alignment with the university’s mission.

    “Without strong supplier relationships, you’re missing out on partners who help you anticipate needs, drive innovation, and uncover creative solutions,” Grigsby explains. “True partners embrace your university’s mission as their own and work to maintain or increase service levels through collaborative, strategic sourcing.”

    These partnerships prove especially valuable during budget crunches, Grigsby adds, citing the ongoing collaboration between procurement teams and Amazon Business account executives as an example. “Our higher ed clients often leverage the know-how, experience, and ideas we’ve gleaned from working with their peers across the nation,” she explains. “Whether they’re pursuing sustainability goals or 100% automation in procurement, we help them identify ideal partners or find solutions that have worked well for other institutions facing similar challenges.”

    Real results at Emory University

    Emory University faced the classic procurement challenge: fragmented purchasing and spend visibility. By adopting a centralized purchasing approach through Amazon Business, procurement leaders reclaimed oversight, optimized workflows for users across the organization, and uncovered dramatic savings.

    Guided buying and integrated search features brought the intuitive Amazon Business shopping experience right into Emory’s purchasing system. These integrations drove adherence to procurement policies while giving users flexibility to conduct price comparisons and complete purchases directly within Emory’s existing system. Plus, buyers enjoyed savings through Business Prime shipping and tax exemption on eligible purchases. 

    The payoff was significant, averaging thousands of dollars in savings each month. “Pretty hefty savings,” as one administrator put it.

    Roadmap to resilience

    As institutions rework purchasing strategies to boost value and savings, how can procurement teams position themselves as problem solvers instead of gatekeepers? Grigsby recommends three essential practices:

    • Proactive collaboration: Low collaboration with non-procurement buyers increases rogue buying risk, yet leaders currently rate collaboration as the least essential skill in procurement, according to Economist Impact. “When procurement reaches out to departments early to understand their pain points, especially in times of budget stress, they can engage, identify alternatives, and help internal customers reach their goals without being a blocker,” Grigsby advises.
    • Streamlined processes: Efficient procurement automates mundane tasks like recurring orders, approval workflows, and spend analysis while centralizing oversight. “Customers want to source, reconcile, and receive products easily so they can focus on mission-critical tasks,” Grigsby points out.
    • Broadcast successes: Procurement wins often go unnoticed despite their organizational impact. Share those wins—whether through newsletters, internal communications channels, or dashboards showing how much departments saved—to foster trust and collaboration.

    Looking ahead, the financial pressures facing higher education make procurement transformation a necessity, not a luxury. Modern, cost-conscious procurement isn’t about saying no; it’s about finding better ways to say yes.

    ▷ Learn how Amazon Business can help accelerate your procurement goals: business.amazon.com/education

    Source link

  • A Strategic Blueprint for University Administrators

    A Strategic Blueprint for University Administrators

    The higher education sector is navigating an era of rapid change. Shifting demographics, declining traditional enrollment and evolving workforce needs are redefining the value proposition for universities. Coupled with budget and staffing pressures, it can seem daunting to university leaders to understand how to begin the transformation that universities are being asked to undertake.

    Workforce-relevant credentials, such as microcredentials, certificates and industry-aligned badges, are emerging as strategic tools to expand institutional reach, respond to employer demand and deliver measurable career impact for learners. These can be delivered separately from your degree curriculum, embedded within the degree pathway or both.

    Universities face stagnant enrollments, skepticism about ROI and mounting pressure to innovate. Traditional degree pathways alone are no longer enough to address these headwinds. This blueprint provides university leaders with a road map to implement credentialing initiatives that align with market demand, institutional mission and long-term sustainability.

    The Why: Building the Case Internally

    Building the internal case to expend the time and energy to realign curricular offerings can be daunting at times of resource scarcity. But the reality is that from an enrollment perspective, it’s simply good planning to be looking ahead and identifying new markets for your institution. And the population that holds the most promise of growth for higher education today is the adult learner—a segment that is growing fast.

    These students are often midcareer professionals, job changers or individuals seeking rapid upskilling. They may already have a bachelor’s degree or a workforce credential, or they may be a part of the 43.1 million learners with some credit but no degree. Of those, 37.6 million represent working-age adults under the age of 65. These learners will value short, targeted, career-aligned learning experiences that fit into busy lives. How are you identifying and connecting with these learners and who are the employer partners that you can engage with?

    By integrating stackable, workforce-relevant credentials into academic offerings, institutions can diversify revenue, attract new learners and showcase agility in meeting labor market needs. Graduates gain targeted skills, boosting employability and alumni engagement. Their success positions the university as a trusted partner for every career stage.

    How to Start

    Exploring innovative credentialing is a great tool in your strategic enrollment management planning toolbox. Such initiatives can be supportive of your enrollment goals and also provide some answers to the public questions around the ROI for their tuition dollars. You might be well on your way on the journey to strengthening the connection between learning and the workforce, or you might be just beginning. The reality is that educational institutions may already have some of the building blocks in place, and a slight shift in how you package and document your educational programs could put you on the right path.

    While any credential could be industry-aligned, it might be easiest to begin with smaller, incremental credentials, either independently or aligned to current degree programs. For adult learners, short, skill-based and industry-aligned programs offer an immediate career payoff while potentially stacking toward degrees.

    A well-designed workforce offering needs to be aligned with industry-trusted credentials and certifications and should ultimately layer with your traditional academic programs and offer a clear connection to employment-relevant skills. Investing in this work today will create short-term enrollment gains and help you to build long-term relationships with learners and employers who will turn to you again and again to meet their upskilling needs. These will also speak to your undergraduate degree learners (and their parents) by creating a direct link to return on investment.

    Defining Workforce-Relevant Credentials

    • Degree: Academic credential or qualifications awarded to a learner who has successfully completed a specified course of study in a particular field or discipline.
    • Certificate: Official documentation indicating completion of purposefully collected coursework to signify understanding of a narrow subject or topic. May also confirm acquisition of specific skills.
    • Microcredential: Competency or skills-based recognition that allows a learner to demonstrate mastery and learning in a particular area. Less than a full degree or certificate; it is a segment of learning achievement or outcome. Should be certified by a recognized authority.
    • Badge: Digital visual representation that recognizes skills, achievements, membership affiliation and participation.

    Build a Cross-Campus Team

    To successfully build new innovative credentials requires a collaborative approach, the creation of a planning team that aligns academic, enrollment, tech, marketing and employer-engagement strategies holistically. At a minimum, this includes faculty, the registrar’s office, enrollment management, your continuing-education division, education technology and your finance officer.

    A second layer to support learner success should also include advising, student services and career services. Chosen well, this team will be key to help ensure that you maintain compliance with accreditation or governance requirements in addition to designing an attractive and relevant program. Building the internal case across the campus with these leaders will help you to create the buy-in required to balance innovation and agility with compliance.

    Aligning Credentials With Institutional Mission

    Any workforce credentials offered by an institution should support and complement, not compete with, existing degree pathways. To ensure this alignment, consider embedding programs within academic departments and continuing education units. Be sure to involve faculty early to ensure rigor, buy-in and shared governance.

    And don’t forget to map credentials to degree pathways for seamless learner progression. Make it easy for an adult learner to become a lifelong learner. Innovative credentials can serve as entry ramps to degree programs, be embedded into degrees or stand alone. Start with pilots and focus on high-demand, high-return fields.

    Consider Technology

    Ultimately, when making learning and credential platform decisions, you should seek to prioritize interoperable, learner-centered technologies that enhance the portability of records and improve coordination across institutions. Digital solutions that prioritize transparency, accuracy and accessibility help to create a more connected and responsive learning ecosystem, ensuring that learners can move seamlessly through their educational and career pathways, with their achievements recognized and understood wherever they go.

    Building the Adult Learner Pipeline

    As in any new program, you must do your research. Review your institution’s most recent environmental scan to support prioritization of your best opportunities. If that scan is not current or doesn’t include market intelligence that leverages labor market analytics and employer feedback, you will need to collect that information to ensure offerings are demand-driven.

    • Outreach and messaging. Frequently, the effectiveness of the institution’s communications with prospective and current students comes under scrutiny: the quality of technology, the delivery modes, timing, the content and the coordination. Prepare for these concerns by outlining what the college is currently doing and who the stakeholders are. Messaging for innovative credentials will be inherently different than messaging for a degree. Promote credentials as high-value, low-barrier entry points for upskilling or career change.
    • Leveraging partnerships. Consider your service area and inventory your partnerships. Collaborate with employers, workforce boards and government agencies to co-design, fund or endorse programs. Convene regional advisory councils to keep offerings aligned with workforce trends. It is important that these relationships are current and agile so that credentials can respond to shifting workforce needs in real time. Explore grants, workforce investment funds and employer cost-sharing opportunities that may help defray your costs and those of your learners.
    • Developing support structures. All learners need support, which might need to look somewhat different for adult learners than your traditional degree support. Offer advising, prior learning assessment and flexible credit pathways to maximize learner success.
    • Considering assessment and data collection. Nationally, there is a call for more transparency and more data that proves ROI. This means that more data collection from learners up front and better tracking of outcomes will be required. Data collection in the workforce credential space will give you valuable experience that you can apply to your degree programs as federal student aid requirements shift toward proving workforce outcomes.

    A Call to Action for Institutional Leaders

    Universities that strategically embrace workforce-relevant credentials will not only meet the needs of today’s learners but also strengthen employer partnerships and stand out in a crowded market. It’s more than launching new programs. It’s about reimagining the university as a future-facing institution that delivers lifelong value. The time to act is now: Start small, scale smart and lead with vision.

    Source link

  • Humanizing Higher Ed Data: The Strategic Power of Student Digital Twins

    Humanizing Higher Ed Data: The Strategic Power of Student Digital Twins

    Higher education institutions are overflowing with data, yet many still struggle to turn that information into actionable insight. With systems siloed across admissions, academics, student support, and alumni relations, it’s hard to get a clear picture of the student journey — let alone use that data to enhance engagement or predict outcomes.

    Enter the “digital twin”: a transformative framework that helps institutions centralize, contextualize, and humanize student data. More than a dashboard or data warehouse, a student digital twin creates a living, dynamic model that reflects how students interact with your institution in real time. It’s the difference between looking at data and understanding a student.

    The data disconnect holding higher ed back

    Disconnected data is one of the most persistent obstacles facing colleges and universities. Key information is often trapped in different systems — student information systems (SIS), learning management systems (LMS), customer relationship management (CRM) tools, financial aid platforms, and more.

    This fragmentation makes it difficult to:

    • Personalize student communications
    • Identify at-risk students in time to intervene
    • Support seamless transfers or cross-departmental collaboration
    • Harness emerging technologies like generative AI

    The result? Missed opportunities, inefficient outreach, and limited visibility into student experiences.

    Demystifying the student digital twin

    A digital twin is a virtual representation of a physical entity. In higher education, that entity is the student. The student digital twin brings together behavioral, academic, and operational data to create a comprehensive, contextual profile of each learner.

    Unlike a static dashboard or data warehouse, a digital twin captures relationships, sequences, and interactions. It enables institutions to:

    • Visualize student journeys across systems
    • Model future scenarios
    • Generate predictive insights
    • Power real-time personalization

    Most importantly, a digital twin humanizes data by shifting the focus from systems to students.

    What makes it work: The Connected Core® architecture

    At Collegis, the digital twin is powered by Connected Core — a composable, cloud-native platform built specifically for higher education. The architecture includes:

    • Integrated data fabric: A higher ed-specific data layer that unifies SIS, LMS, CRM, and more.
    • Packaged business capabilities: Modular features like lead scoring, advising nudges, and financial aid workflows.
    • Composable platform: A low-code development environment that allows institutions to customize workflows and experiences.

    Together, these elements create an agile foundation for digital transformation and continuous improvement.

    Ready for a Smarter Way Forward?

    Higher ed is hard — but you don’t have to figure it out alone. We can help you transform challenges into opportunities.

    Use cases that drive institutional impact

    Digital twins aren’t theoretical. They’re already delivering measurable value across the student lifecycle. With real implementations across enrollment, student success, and digital engagement, Collegis partners are proving just how powerful a connected data foundation can be.

    These examples show how the digital twin moves from concept to impact:

    • AI lead prioritization: By integrating digital journey signals with CRM intelligence, one partner increased inquiry-to-appointment conversion by 38%.
    • Transfer credit evaluation: AI-driven transcript assessments delivered >85% accuracy in early evaluations, reducing friction for prospective students.
    • AI-powered website search: Semantic search functionality improved engagement by 250% during pilot testing, enhancing conversion potential.

    These outcomes demonstrate how digital twins don’t just aggregate data — they activate it.

    Implementation, integration, and ROI

    One common question we encounter about this concept is, “Can’t we do this with our own data warehouse?” The answer is not really.

    Data warehouses are optimized for reporting, not real-time personalization. The digital twin’s networked model is designed for operational use, enabling advisors, marketers, and faculty to act in the moment.

    Collegis typically helps institutions realize value within three to six months. Whether starting with a marketing use case or building a full student model, we work with partners to:

    • Identify quick wins
    • Integrate priority data sources
    • Build a data model tailored to their institution

    Why Collegis — and why now?

    Unlike generic analytics platforms, Connected Core is purpose-built for higher education. It’s not a retrofitted enterprise tool. The following features make it unique from other offerings:

    • AI-native and human-centered: It’s designed to deliver explainable, actionable insights.
    • Composed, not constrained: It’s flexible enough to integrate with legacy systems and custom-built tools.
    • A strategic partnership: Collegis provides not just the technology, but the advisory services and data talent to ensure sustained success.

    Start humanizing your student data

    The digital twin helps institutions shift from reactive reporting to proactive engagement. It empowers colleges and universities to not only understand their students better, but to serve them more effectively.

    Ready to explore how a student digital twin could transform your data strategy? Contact us to request a demo!

    Innovation Starts Here

    Higher ed is evolving — don’t get left behind. Explore how Collegis can help your institution thrive.

    Bryan Chitwood is Director of Data Enablement at Collegis Education, where he helps lead data strategy, product development, and advisory services. With a Ph.D. in English and advanced certifications in data leadership and cloud architecture, he helps institutions harness data to drive results.

    Source link

  • Strategic planning pays off for MENA region in QS rankings

    Strategic planning pays off for MENA region in QS rankings

    Universities across the MENA region have made significant strides in the latest 2026 QS World University Rankings (WUR), reflecting a sustained push in attracting international institutions and students.

    From a previous list of 88 institutions featured in the rankings last year, the numbers increased to a total of 115 in 2026, with the region’s most notable climb being that of King Fahad University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia, which has been listed in the top 100 globally at a rank of 67 – a historic record for institutions in the region.

    The 16 MENA countries also added 27 new entries from across nine countries, second as a region only to Asia, which added 54 new institutions from across 19 countries.

    Among these, the University of Tripoli marked Libya’s debut in the QS WUR. Apart from Libya, only two other countries, Guatemala and Honduras, entered the rankings for the first time this year, each with one institution.

    When examining year-on-year changes, some 53% of institutions in the MENA region either maintained or improved their global ranking, while only 23% saw a decline.

    This is the lowest proportion of declining institutions among all global regions, outperforming Europe, where the maintain/improve versus decline rate stands at 52% to 44%, and Australia and New Zealand (AUNZ), where the rate is 36% to 61%.

    Countries that are part of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, all share a common approach in making significant investments in research and education, aligned with bold national visions.

    Collectively, GCC countries outperform the MENA region average across all nine QS World University Rankings indicators. Their institutions particularly excel under the global engagement lens, which looks at internationalisation indicators such as international faculty ratio (IFR), international student ratio (ISR), and international research network (IRN). This reflects their strong global appeal in attracting international talent and fostering cross-border academic collaboration.

    Saudi Arabia leads MENA region

    Among the top 25 countries by number of ranked institutions, Saudi Arabia leads the MENA region – with 22 universities featured in the QS WUR 2026, six more than in 2024. The overall average score of Saudi institutions increased by 38%, from 20.7 to 28.5, over the past two editions.

    These advancements are arguably a result of Saudi’s 2030 Vision, as the country promised to have at least five of its universities among the top 200 universities in international rankings, thus budgeting for substantial funding for research, university-industry collaboration, and global partnerships.

    The rankings come as Dubai expands its international branch campus ecosystem, aiming to host 50% international students by 2030 as a part of its Education 33 strategy, positioning itself as an international education hub.

    Qatar also finds itself in a similar position, as Qatar University moved 10 places up to reach 112 globally. The country’s investment in research infrastructure and faculty recruitment has improved its performance in citations per faculty – a key QS metric.

    The Qatar National Vision 2030 aims to establish a world-class education system aligned with labour market needs, offering high-quality, accessible learning for all stages of life. It emphasises the development of independent and accountable institutions, robust public-private research funding, and active global engagement in cultural and scientific domains.

    Meanwhile, outside the GCC, four other countries have shown particularly impressive performances: Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. These countries rank among the top six in the MENA region in terms of ranked institutions, sharing the spotlight with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

    According to QS’s Best Student Cities rankings, Jordan’s capital, Amman, is now the best city in the Middle East. Additionally, Jordan saw multiple universities ranked in the WUR this year, with the University of Jordan, Jordan University of Science and Technology, and the German Jordanian University improving in previous years.

    While none have yet reached the global top 400, the country is investing in STEM-focused faculty and expanding regional collaborations, especially with the Gulf.

    Meanwhile, Egypt now has 13 institutions featured in QS rankings, with Cairo University, Ain Shams University, and The American University in Cairo (AUC) leading the way.

    And in Lebanon, the American University of Beirut remains the top Lebanese institution and one of the top institutions in the MENA region.

    Despite geopolitical tensions in Lebanon, a surprise improvement occurred as the Lebanese University (LU) climbed from 577 globally in 2024 to 515 in the WUR 2026. And after the Lebanese American University placed round 701-710 globally in 2025, in 2026 it projected to 535 on the list.

    What’s next?

    Stakeholders discussed the potential reasons why universities from the MENA region have shown such a marked jump in the ranking yea on year.

    “From my perspective, key drivers include stronger institutional strategies around internationalisation, improved research output, and increasing collaborations with global partners,” Gulf Medical University academic quality assurance & institutional effectiveness specialist, Salaheldin Mostafa Khalifa, told The PIE News.

    “We can expect continued upward momentum for MENA universities in global rankings. Many institutions are investing heavily in research infrastructure, international collaborations, and faculty development,” he added.

    Meanwhile, QS broke down the “sustained progress” that universities in the regions have seen over the past year.

    We can expect continued upward momentum for MENA universities in global rankings. Many institutions are investing heavily in research infrastructure, international collaborations, and faculty development
    Salaheldin Mostafa Khalifa, Gulf Medical University

    “There are clear signs of upward momentum,” said product and research advisor at QS, Wesley Siquera, noting that the umber of ranked MENA institutions had jumped from 84 to 115 between the QS WUR 2024 and 2026 editions.

    “Finally, national development strategies provide strong indicators of where future progress may come from,” he added. “Several of the regional ‘visions’ explicitly set goals for placing domestic universities among the world’s top institutions. If these targets are met, we could see by 2030: three Omani universities in the top 500, five Saudi universities in the top 200, and seven Egyptian universities in the top 500.”

    Source link

  • Coaching can be a strategic act of research culture

    Coaching can be a strategic act of research culture

    In higher education institutions, we often speak of “developing talent,” “building capacity,” or “supporting our people.” But what do those phrases really mean when you’re a researcher navigating uncertainty, precarity, or a system that too often assumes resilience, but offers limited resources?

    With the renewed focus of REF 2029 on people, culture and environment, and the momentum of the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers, there’s a growing imperative to evidence not only what support is offered, but how it’s experienced.

    That’s where I believe that coaching comes in – as a strategic, systemic tool for transforming research culture from the inside out.

    At a time when UK higher education is facing significant financial pressures, widespread restructuring, and the real threat of job losses across institutions, it may seem counterintuitive to invest in individuals’ development. But it is precisely because of this instability that our commitment to people must be more visible and deliberate than ever. In moments of systemic strain, the values we choose to protect speak volumes. Coaching offers one way to show – through action, not just intention – that our researchers matter, that their growth is not optional, and that culture isn’t a casualty of crisis, but a lever for recovery.

    By coaching, I mean a structured, confidential, and non-directive process that empowers individuals to reflect, identify goals and navigate challenges. Unlike mentoring, which often involves sharing advice or experience, coaching creates a thinking space led by the individual, where the coach supports them to surface their own insights, unpick the unspoken dynamics of academia, build confidence in their agency, and cultivate their personal narrative of progress.

    Coaching is not just development – it’s disruption

    We tend to associate coaching with senior leadership, performance management, or executive transition. But over the last seven years, I’ve championed coaching for researchers – especially early career researchers – as a means of shifting the developmental paradigm from “this is what you need to know” to “what do you need, and how can we co-create that space?”

    When coaching is designed well – thoughtfully matched, intentionally scaffolded, and thoughtfully led – it becomes a quiet form of disruption. It gives researchers the confidence to think through difficult questions. And it models a research culture where vulnerability is not weakness but wisdom.

    This is especially powerful for those who feel marginalised in academic environments – whether due to career stage, background, identity or circumstance. One early career researcher recently told me that coaching “helped me stop asking whether I belonged in academia and start asking how I could shape it. For the first time, I felt like I didn’t have to shrink myself to fit in.” That’s the kind of feedback you won’t find in most institutional KPIs – but it says a lot about the culture we’re building.

    Why coaching belongs in your research strategy

    Coaching still suffers from being seen as peripheral – a nice-to-have, often under-resourced and siloed from mainstream provision. Worse, it’s sometimes positioned as remedial, offered only when things go wrong.

    As someone who assesses UK institutions for the European Commission-recognised HR Excellence in Research Award, I’ve seen first-hand how embedding coaching as a core element of researcher support isn’t just the right thing to do – it’s strategically smart. Coaching complements and strengthens the implementation of institutional actions for the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers, by centring the individual researcher experience – not just a tick-box approach to the principles.

    What’s striking is how coaching aligns with the broader institutional goals we often hear in strategy documents: autonomy, impact, innovation, wellbeing, inclusion. These are not incidental outcomes; they’re the foundations of a healthy research pipeline, and coaching delivers on these – but only if we treat it as a central thread of our culture, not a side offer.

    Crucially, coaching is evidence of how we live our values. It offers a clear, intentional method for demonstrating how people and culture are not just statements but structures – designed, delivered, and experienced.

    In REF 2029 institutions will be asked to evidence the kind of environment where research happens. Coaching offers one of the most meaningful, tangible ways to demonstrate that such an environment exists through the lived experiences of the people working within it.

    Culture is personal – and coaching recognises that

    In higher education, we often talk about culture as though it’s something we can declare or design. But real culture – the kind that shapes whether researchers thrive or withdraw – is co-created, day by day, through dialogue, trust, and reflection.

    Culture lives in the everyday, unrecorded interactions: the invisible labour of masking uncertainty while trying to appear “resilient enough” to succeed; the internal negotiation before speaking up in a lab meeting; or the emotional weight carried by researchers who feel like they don’t belong.

    Coaching transforms those invisible moments into deliberate acts of empowerment. It creates intentional, reflective spaces where researchers – regardless of role or background – are supported to define their own path, voice their challenges, and recognise their value. It’s in these conversations that inclusion is no longer an aspiration but a lived reality where researchers explore their purpose, surface their barriers, and recognise their value.

    This is especially needed in environments where pressure to perform is high, and space to reflect is minimal. Coaching doesn’t remove the pressures of academia. But it builds capacity to navigate them with intention – and that’s culture work at its core.

    Embedding a coaching culture as part of researcher development shouldn’t be a fringe benefit or pilot project – it should be an institutional expectation. We need more trained internal coaches who understand the realities of academic life and more visibly supported coaching opportunities aligned with the Researcher Development Concordat. The latter encourages a minimum of ten days’ (pro rata) professional development for research staff per year. Coaching is one of the most impactful ways those days can be used – not just to develop researchers, but to transform the culture they inhabit.

    A call to embed – not bolt on

    If we’re serious about inclusive, people-centred research environments, then coaching should be treated as core business. It should not be underfunded, siloed, or left to goodwill. It must be valued, supported, and embedded – reflected in institutional KPIs, Researcher Development Concordat and Research Culture Action Plans, and REF narratives alike.

    And in a sector currently under intense financial pressure, we should double down on culture as a lived commitment to those we ask to do difficult, meaningful work during difficult, uncertain times. Coaching is a strategic lever for equity, integrity, and excellence.

    Source link

  • Cross-Functional Marcomm Teams Drive Strategic Success

    Cross-Functional Marcomm Teams Drive Strategic Success

    During my first foray into marcomm leadership, every project seemed on fire. If the project was due at 3 p.m., the first draft was ready at 2 p.m., giving little time for adjustments. I noticed this happened with almost every project. As I did some research into the production calendar, I realized there were more projects than time. That meant if one project got behind, there was a ripple effect that continued to impact more and more projects the team was working on.

    An initial strategy to address this involved offloading projects that were not the best use of marcomm’s time. The second strategy looked at increasing capacity through student workers and approved freelance partners. Despite implementing both, the team still struggled to accomplish all the tasks, finding many delays in the back-and-forth process with the campus partner. As I started exploring what would help the team, the idea of cross-functional teams emerged as a viable strategy to yield better alignment with key constituents, increase efficiency and create better products.

    Cross-functional teams are groups of people from various areas in an organization who work together to achieve a common goal. I have used these teams with key university partners including enrollment, advancement and athletics. Each cross-functional team has several members from the marcomm team (usually a representative from communications, marketing, creative and web) and two or three members from the other unit. Together, these groups meet regularly and work as strategic partners to meet institutional goals.

    Cross-functional teams are time-consuming but can have significant impact on outcomes, culture and organizational success when done well. Below are a few benefits of utilizing cross-functional teams when working with strategic campus partners.

    Moving From Service Provider to Strategic Partner

    One benefit of cross-functional teams is positioning marcomm teams as a strategic partner, not just an order taker. This shift allows marcomm to more meaningfully support institutional goals. Instead of executing someone else’s strategy, these teams can apply their individual expertise while collaborating on integrated strategies that support the partner and ultimately the organization. For example, the web team member can begin approaching the project thinking about the entire digital strategy, instead of just making a website pretty. This role’s shift helps improve relationships between the teams but ultimately drives results.

    Operational Efficiency Creates Wins Faster

    Familiar teams work faster. Less time is required to navigate procedural and relational decisions, such as who needs to review something or what the feedback process entails. In cross-functional teams, the members become comfortable with these aspects, allowing them to begin working faster. The speed comes not only from familiarity but also from intentionality. Shared institutional knowledge of the goals and the internal processes to complete tasks results in more thoughtful responses when adjustments are needed because of changes like enrollment shifts, market changes or budget adjustments.

    Consistency Builds Brand Equity

    Aligned teams also create consistent work. Regular collaboration leads to consistency in voice, tone and look on projects. For example, when cross-functional teams are collaborating on the goals for a piece, there is more likely to be synergy in the tactical execution of the piece or at a least a shared understanding of the approach. When there is no alignment, the teams may agree on the goal but are less likely to agree on the strategies and tactics, resulting in disjointed messaging and less effective outcomes.

    Cohesive messages also build trust and recognition with external audiences, which is critical to support for university objectives. Ultimately, consistency across teams strengthens the university’s voice in the market and amplifies the impact of every communication.

    Internal Alignment Supports Goals

    One of the biggest benefits of cross-functional teams is how they strengthen internal alignment within marcomm. By collaborating closely with colleagues across disciplines, the marcomm team is better equipped to align its work with the goals and priorities of campus partners. For example, telling our story takes on an enhanced meaning when it is viewed through the lens of growing enrollment or raising private institutional support. In addition, this cross-functional collaboration fosters greater accountability and trust within the marcomm unit itself. From my experience, the team often internally aligns on the approach and presents a strategic (and united) front when pitching concepts or suggesting strategy shifts.

    Empowered Teams Create Elevated Outcomes

    Cross-functional teams facilitate learning from all members. Hearing new perspectives from other divisions creates new understandings, both within marcomm and outside of it. For example, web team members learn about graphic design and enrollment best practices. This occurs because cross-functional teams are collaboration-based, so all team members are empowered to contribute ideas instead of only giving feedback on their traditional roles. More broadly, the entire marcomm team benefits from cross-functional teams if there’s a way to share these learnings with the full group instead of just those in a specific meeting.

    Working Toward Success

    When I first stepped into marcomm leadership, the team was running full speed just to keep up, racing from one fire drill to the next with little time to pause, reflect or align. What initially seemed like a time-management problem turned out to be a deeper issue of structure, communication and partnership. Through the intentional creation of cross-functional teams, we began to shift from reactive executors to proactive strategic partners.

    Cross-functional teams require time investment to create shared mission, collaboration frameworks and understanding of the work at hand. However, these teams generate shared ownership and strong trust, central to ongoing collaboration, partnerships and organizational innovation. Most importantly, the outcomes are usually a more agile, aligned and high-performing organization—better equipped to meet both immediate goals and long-term strategic priorities of the institution.

    Carrie Phillips, Ed.D., is chief communications and marketing officer at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.

    Source link

  • Negotiating the Future: How HBCUs and MSIs Can Leverage Strategic Enrollment Management for Institutional Resilience

    Negotiating the Future: How HBCUs and MSIs Can Leverage Strategic Enrollment Management for Institutional Resilience

    Dwight SanchezIn today’s hyper-competitive higher education landscape, the challenges facing Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) are immense. Declining birth rates, changing student expectations, shifting public sentiment, and persistent underfunding place extraordinary pressure on institutions that have long served as lifelines for students of color and first-generation learners. Yet amid these challenges lies an opportunity. By reimagining Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) through the lens of negotiation theory, HBCUs and MSIs can increase their strategic agility, strengthen institutional partnerships, and yield more robust enrollment outcomes.

    SEM as Negotiation

    Strategic Enrollment Management isn’t merely about admissions and financial aid—it’s about aligning institutional mission with market realities in ways that are both student-centered and data-informed. Viewed through the lens of negotiation, SEM becomes a dynamic system of interdependent relationships: with prospective students, families, community influencers, K-12 schools, alumni, faculty, and internal staff. Drawing from 3D Negotiation: Powerful Tools to Change the Game in Your Most Important Deals by David Lax and James Sebenius, and Essentials of Negotiation by Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry, three principles become especially relevant: setup, deal design, and tactical interaction.

    • Setup involves determining who needs to be at the table, what interests are at stake, and which parties have influence over enrollment decisions. For HBCUs, this means engaging not just students, but parents, clergy, high school counselors, and community mentors who shape the decision-making ecosystem.
    • Deal Design refers to how institutions create value through the student’s experience. It’s not just about price; it’s about crafting offers that resonate emotionally and practically with underserved populations. This might include mentorship programs, clear career pathways, and intentional support systems.
    • Tactics, while often emphasized, should follow—not lead—strategy. Scripts matter less than systems, and strategic enrollment leaders must know when to pivot from persuasive messaging to coalition-building and issue reframing.

    The Cultural Context

    The diversity within HBCUs and MSIs also means that enrollment negotiations occur across varied cultural, economic, and generational dimensions. Chapter 11 of Essentials of Negotiation reminds us that in international and cross-cultural negotiations, assumptions can be fatal. For instance, assuming that all Black or Latino students respond similarly to recruitment strategies ignores regional, familial, and economic differences. Strategic enrollment leaders must develop cultural humility and data literacy to avoid overgeneralization and instead build nuanced personas that guide outreach.

    Equally important is the political environment. Public perceptions of DEI initiatives, affirmative action, and federal funding can dramatically alter an institution’s appeal and perceived legitimacy. In this context, setup becomes a shield—anticipating changes, diversifying recruitment pipelines, and framing the institutional value proposition in ways that transcend political cycles.

    Leadership and Accountability

    Leading enrollment through this lens requires a shift from short-term performance metrics to long-term strategy. Enrollment managers must adopt a leadership posture that blends transformational vision with collaborative execution. As Lewicki et al. note in Chapter 10, multiparty negotiations (such as cross-department SEM committees) require clear roles, shared goals, and open channels of communication. Leaders must foster psychological safety while holding teams accountable to institutional KPIs—bridging the often-siloed worlds of marketing, academic affairs, and student support.

    Professional development plays a critical role here. Too often, enrollment teams are equipped with tactical training (CRM usage, phone scripts, event planning) but lack exposure to systems thinking, data storytelling, or negotiation dynamics. Embedding professional learning communities and creating leadership pipelines within SEM units allows HBCUs and MSIs to develop internal change agents who can sustain innovation over time.

    The Path Forward

    HBCUs and MSIs are more than educational institutions—they are engines of social mobility and cultural affirmation. But to thrive, they must adopt a strategic posture that sees every element of SEM as a negotiation: from brand positioning to student engagement, from financial structuring to internal alignment.

    Consider this: An HBCU looking to boost STEM enrollment among underrepresented males recognizes that traditional outreach and scholarship packages have limited impact. Instead of only increasing merit aid, the institution reframes its offer through negotiation theory. They partner early with high schools, launch a summer bridge program co-led by STEM faculty and alumni, and guarantee every enrolled student a faculty mentor and paid internship by year two. They also engage parents and community leaders as ambassadors—tapping into local trust networks. At the internal level, they align academic and student affairs teams through shared enrollment metrics and regular scenario planning meetings, increasing accountability and cohesion.

    This isn’t just marketing—it’s “setup” and “deal design” in action. It expands the scope of stakeholders, adds value beyond dollars, and creates a win-win proposition for the student, family, and institution. It also reflects a broader institutional willingness to act as a proactive negotiator in shaping its market position.

    By leveraging the principles of negotiation—particularly setup, value creation, and coalition building—enrollment leaders can develop strategic enrollment plans that are not only adaptive but transformative. In doing so, they ensure their institutions remain vital pathways for generations of students yet to come.

    Dwight Sanchez is the Executive Director of Enrollment Management at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy.

    Source link