Parenting constantly reshapes your expectations and forces you to make challenging decisions. Walking with my child through the college selection process was no different. Despite my professional experience, being on the other side as a parent revealed how complex and emotionally charged this process is. It also highlighted three major disconnects in how institutions serve families:

• Curse of Knowledge: Admissions professionals know their processes, deadlines, and jargon so well that they forget how confusing it can be for families. What’s second nature to you is a maze for us.
• Tuition Remission Blind Spots: Working in higher education creates a subtle but profound disconnect from the real financial impact families face. While you might understand the numbers, the emotional weight of paying for college feels different on the outside.
• Faux Empathy: True empathy requires walking in a family’s shoes. When processes are clunky or communication is lacking, it’s clear some institutions don’t fully understand the challenges families face. Ask yourself, “What does it feel like to be on the other side of us?”

As admissions professionals, you aren’t just promoting your institution—you should be helping make this difficult decision easier for families. Addressing these disconnects can make all the difference in how parents perceive your school.

Reflecting on this process with our son gave me fresh eyes, exposing five surprising realities. 

1. Impersonal communication was barely better than none at all: Simply having a parent communication sequence is not enough; personalization is the game changer. Schools that took the time to address me directly, as a parent, had a tenfold impact compared to those that didn’t. Generic emails or parent newsletters don’t build trust–they merely inform. CCs are fine but genuine “see me” communication, where the institution connected with me as a parent, made a big difference. Families want to feel like partners, not passive recipients.

Key Question: What is your communication revealing to students and families about your brand? 

2. Visits were often a missed opportunity: Institutions invest significant resources to get and host visitors on their campuses, yet many visits fall flat. When parents visit, they’re evaluating not only the campus but whether they can trust you with their most prized possessions—their children. It’s crucial to deliver a visit that has both personality and heart.

Details, such as poor communication before the visit, or a lackluster tour experience, can turn families off. One visit we took featured limited pre-visit communication and a two-hour tour without lunch—a hangry visitor rarely leaves with a great impression. The visit left us frustrated, and yet, a stellar faculty interaction nearly saved it all. This professor asked personal questions, gave my son career insights, and introduced him to students, completely transforming his perception of the school.

Key Questions: Are your visits truly differentiating your institution? Do they reflect the care you want families to feel?

3. Affordability was more stressful than you realize: Affordability looms large for families, even those who can afford tuition. Colleges sometimes forget that building shiny new facilities or launching programs don’t necessarily equate to value for families. This repeatedly happened in my son’s search.

This is where you must understand the value equation: the perception of benefits to students divided by the cost to students (perceived and actual). If costs are high without a correspondingly strong perception of benefits, families will quickly question whether your institution is worth the price. 

Key Question: How is your admissions experience affecting the perceived value of your institution?

4. Direct mail was effective but mostly underwhelming: Direct mail is expensive, yet often fails to leave a lasting impression. Our mailbox received plenty of it, but only a few pieces stood out. The schools that did it right consistently and frequently communicated a message that aligned with their distinct brand. Most of the mail we received, however, was simply glossy marketing.

One school set itself apart by sending a parent package that highlighted its educational philosophy and core values uniquely. Consistency across all communication made their institution memorable and helped establish trust. Targeted, meaningful communication can set you apart. Make sure your direct mail reflects your brand promise (assuming you have one) and speaks specifically to your target students and their families.

Key Question: Is your mail making you money or just costing you? 

5. Sometimes the small stuff felt huge: As families narrow their choices, even small missteps can have a big impact. These often show up as offices outside of admissions communicate with students. During one on-campus presentation, a speaker noted that expensive bikes frequently get stolen and that the weather can be a struggle for some students. In another instance, late communication about course fees (a.k.a. the Spirit Airlines of higher education) nearly derailed one of our finalist schools. As a parent trying to calculate costs, unexpected expenses—on top of tuition—added a layer of stress that could easily have been avoided. These small moments can erode confidence, and as Vince Lombardi said, “It takes months to find a customer, seconds to lose one.”

And consider this, you can’t charge like Nordstrom and function like Ross Dress for Less—experience matters.

Key Question: What small things, within your control, are costing you students?

How can you address these gaps and improve the admission experience for families? You could take a “wait-and-see” approach, hoping things will improve on their own—but that’s not a strategy. True strategy involves making intentional, differentiated choices that align with the needs of the families you serve.

Here’s how you can shift your mindset and approach these challenges with fresh eyes:

• Think, and feel, like an Outsider – Empathy must be your starting point. To truly connect with families, put yourself in their shoes. It’s easy to overlook how your internal biases—the “curse of knowledge”—skew your perspective. As Paul MacCready famously said, “The problem is we don’t understand the problem.” The goal isn’t to solve your institution’s issues—it’s to address the students’ and families’ needs.
• Walk like an Outsider – Take the student journey yourself. When was the last time your leadership team took a campus tour, signed up for an event, or evaluated how your direct mail looks upon arrival? Walk through each step of the admission process and map out the emotional highs and lows students and parents experience. Identify the areas where you can improve the experience. 
• Partner with an Outsider – You’re often too close to the problem to see it clearly. Bringing in an outsider can provide fresh insights and help you identify blind spots. Whether you connect with K-12 counselors in your area or bring in external consultants, outside perspectives are invaluable in identifying gaps. No matter how polished your sales pitch and marketing materials are, they won’t drive results if you don’t address the underlying issues impacting prospective students.

At the end of the day, choosing a college is a human endeavor. Families need you to help make a difficult decision easier for them. Addressing these key areas will not only build trust but also help you differentiate your institution in a crowded market. The schools that truly understood and acted on these insights were the ones that stood out when my son made his final decision.

——–

To gain immediate and actionable insights from proven Christian higher education experts, partner with TG Three on a Needs Assessment. This is an affordable way to get fresh eyes quickly. Contact us today!

–Ryan J. Dougherty is the Principal Partner at TG Three with over 24 years of experience. TG Three is a strategy company exclusively serving Christian institutions to help get them from where they are to where they want to be.

A version of this article was originally published on Insider Higher Ed on October 7, 2024.

In this video, TG Three founder Rob Westervelt discusses the concepts behind successful innovation and how to use design thinking to develop ideas that will push your organization forward.

“Innovation is not for knowing the answer. If you already know the answer, then you just need to implement that answer. Innovation is the idea we don’t know, so we have to try.”

Key Points

1. Why Innovation Matters: Innovation is about gaining insight and finding solutions to challenges. It’s not limited to specific individuals or roles but is accessible to everyone.
2. What is Innovation: Stanford’s Bob Sutton defines innovation as creativity plus implementation. It emphasizes the importance of insight as the starting point for innovation.
3. A Practical Approach to Innovation: Design thinking is an approach to innovation that involves discovering insights, designing solutions for specific users, and successfully delivering them.
4. The Design Thinking Process:
   • Empathy: Understanding the needs and experiences of users.
   • Define: Creating a point of view based on user needs and insights.
   • Ideate: Brainstorming creative solutions, including wild ideas.
   • Prototype: Building representations of ideas for feedback.
   • Test: Sharing prototypes with users for feedback.
   • Implement: Taking ideas to market, monitoring feedback, and assessing effectiveness.
5. Importance of Empathy: Empathy is critical for understanding users’ perspectives and needs. It involves approaching problems without judgment and maintaining curiosity, optimism, and respect for users’ experiences and emotions.

To learn more about innovation and how it can strengthen your organizational strategy, contact TG Three.

–TG Three is the premier strategy company exclusively dedicated to Christian higher education. With over six decades of combined practical experience, our partners have navigated the transformative path within Christian organizations. Through strategic planning, enrollment strategy, brand strategy, financial aid strategy, executive coaching, and needs assessments, TG Three helps Christian colleges quickly get from where they are to where they want to be.

• The “Flutie Effect” refers to the significant increase in college applications experienced by Boston College following Doug Flutie’s iconic “Hail Mary” pass in November 1984.
• Investing in sports can attract students but might make non-athletes feel left out and overlook other enrollment challenges.
• Colleges should focus on meeting the needs of non-athletes and attracting male students without relying solely on athletics. This is a strategic priority and requires an examination of the value equation.
• Colleges should adopt a comprehensive strategy that goes beyond athletics, focusing on adding value for all students and creating a differentiated campus environment rooted in the institution’s mission and values.

Full Blog:

In November 1984, Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie launched a desperate 60-yard “Hail Mary” pass improbably into the arms of his teammate as the final seconds ticked off the clock to defeat the defending national champion Miami Hurricanes. In the two years that followed, Boston College experienced a staggering 30% increase in applications – a phenomenon that researchers dubbed the “Flutie Effect.”

For small colleges and universities facing enrollment challenges, the Flutie Effect represents an alluring yet perilous strategy – using investment in athletic programs as a “Hail Mary” enrollment driver. Beyond the thrill of victory on the field, adding sports programs like football can attract prospective students, particularly males, to campus. For example, adding football may yield over a hundred more male students. Yet, it’s not just about football; institutions have expanded into diverse sports such as esports, bowling, bass fishing, and even varsity cornhole and synchronized skating.

An excessive focus on athletics as an enrollment strategy, however, fundamentally ignores the students who are being left behind. Higher education talks a lot about the demographic cliff, but little has been done to shrink the growing demand chasm where 1.2 million fewer students are attending undergraduate colleges than in 2011 – a million of whom are men. For colleges where 70% or 80% of the population is on sports teams, non-athlete students are starting to feel less welcome.

In this, there is an opportunity. Your institution can focus on meeting the needs of non-athletes and especially attracting men without jerseys. This should be a strategic priority on your campus. Understanding this opportunity requires a careful examination of the value equation (value equals the student’s perception of benefits divided by the cost to the student). How are you built to meet these students’ needs? In what ways do you need to change your offerings, processes, and messaging? Can you, and do you, even talk about this opportunity on your campus?

While athletics offer benefits in student life and community engagement, there are costs to consider. The arms race of college athletics can lead to substantial financial investments. Winning comes at a price as institutions navigate the pressures to compete at all costs. According to 2021-22 Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) data, across all athletic classifications, the top 20 teams in the Learfield Cup standings (which measures overall competitive performance) spend twice as much as the rest. Nearly 50% of Christian colleges with athletics compete in the NAIA, and the top 20 teams in that classification spend an average of $9.9 million on athletics. In NCAA Division III, the only non-scholarship-granting NCAA classification, the top 20 institutions spend $6.9 million. The rest of Division III spends $3 million on average.

In the face of escalating athletic expenses and shrinking margins, colleges must adopt a differentiated position and focus on a more comprehensive institutional strategy. Athletics can be part of this strategy, but it should not be the sole focus. Instead, colleges should strive to add value for all students, including those men without jerseys. Otherwise, growth for growth’s sake in athletics just becomes a Hail Mary, which statistically is very unlikely to be effective over the long haul.

–Ryan J. Dougherty is the Principal Partner at TG Three with over 20 years of experience building successful leaders, teams, and strategies. TG Three is a strategy company exclusively serving Christian institutions to help get them from where they are to where they want to be.

As you begin to navigate this new financial aid world, here are four important insights to remember as we bravely try to adjust to SAI:  

1. Students don’t make a choice to come to your institution based on your financial aid package.  If that were true, every student would choose community college – which is much more affordable. But, students do make the choice not to go to your institution based on your financial aid package. Trying to lure students with more money is not an enrollment strategy.

2. The goal of financial aid is to overcome the student’s financial barrier to choosing you. It is to make sure that a “yes” decision is on the table. It keeps you in the student’s choice set. It does not win you the student. The student is won on value, not on cost. To optimize where to price students, you must overcome the financial obstacle while at the same time not giving away the farm. This is a difficult balance for schools. The danger is that lack of interest can be perceived as not getting enough financial aid, so institutions add last-minute aid and unknowingly lose money that students were willing to pay.  

3. The best financial aid is the aid that means something to the student. Would you rather be awarded a leadership scholarship or a university grant? The way that you title financial aid awards might mean as much (or more) to the student as the award size. This is especially true at the higher SAI/EFC levels. Do not underestimate the power of making the student feel valued for who they are and their individual accomplishments.  

4. Financial aid needs to be part of a bigger enrollment strategy. Financial aid is part of enrollment. It is one of the three legs of the enrollment engine (admissions, marketing, and financial aid). If you treat FA as a separate function from admissions and marketing, you are missing out on making your strongest, most cohesive value pitch. The highest functioning enrollment teams understand this.  

If you are wondering if your financial aid is working for you or against you as you move into the end of this crazy new SAI-driven award cycle, please give us a call for more information on a financial aid audit or financial aid optimization. Now is the time to make sure that your financial aid is dialed in.

-Nick Willis is a partner at TG Three, Mathematician and problem solver

The Paraprofessional Problem

In our colleges and universities, the presence of paraprofessionals – practitioners who lack the necessary training or experience of fully qualified professionals – is becoming increasingly common. While these individuals may possess valuable skills and dedication, their limitations can manifest in various core business functions, such as marketing, enrollment, financial aid and other key leadership roles.

Identifying Signs of the Paraprofessional Problem

Signs of a paraprofessional problem may include marketing departments managing brands that fail to make meaningful promises, enrollment teams lacking coherent visitor strategies and metrics, or financial aid offices struggling with turnaround times and sales strategies. These challenges not only hinder organizational effectiveness but also contribute to a sense of frustration and disillusionment among staff.

Challenges Faced by Paraprofessionals in Elevated Roles

Elevating paraprofessionals to leadership roles poses unique challenges, including steep learning curves in short timeframes, difficulties navigating complex tasks, and struggles with decision-making. Emotionally, elevating unprepared individuals can result in feelings of inadequacy, stress, and burnout.

Consequences of Elevating Paraprofessionals

The consequences of unprepared elevation on professional outcomes are significant, with paraprofessionals often falling short of expectations, leading to diminished job performance and low job satisfaction. This, in turn, erodes trust among colleagues and supervisors, resulting in workarounds, negative team dynamics, and challenges with execution, ultimately impeding institutional progress.

Addressing the Root Causes

Understanding the root causes of why paraprofessionals are hired is essential. Factors such as immediate hiring needs, budget constraints, and underestimating the complexities of the roles being filled often drive these decisions. However, it’s crucial to recognize that failing to address these factors strategically may result in long-term challenges.

Proposed Solutions

To tackle the paraprofessional problem effectively, I propose three solutions:

1. Build Capacity to Hire Qualified Professionals: Most Christian college cabinets are too large. Instead of emulating the costly structures of elite institutions, where student-to-employee ratios are much lower, consider adopting smaller cabinets to afford stronger vice presidents. This approach ensures that the institution’s resources are allocated efficiently and effectively, promoting sustainable growth through strong leadership.

2. Train Professionals from Outside Higher Ed: Provide coaching and development programs to professionals from other industries, leveraging their expertise to address critical challenges within the institution. A successful example of this approach can be seen at Bethel University in Minnesota, which recently increased enrollment after years of decline by leveling up an external professional leader through coaching.

3. Develop Internal Professionals: Invest in the development of internal talent through tailored coaching and mentorship programs. Northwestern College’s success story, where a former associate director of communication was coached to become a successful VP for enrollment and marketing, highlights the potential for internal growth and transformation.

Don’t Ignore the Problem

The paraprofessional problem is one that cannot be ignored. Even the best strategic opportunities cannot overcome operational ineffectiveness. By understanding the root causes, empathizing with the plight of paraprofessionals, and implementing targeted solutions, Christian college leaders can navigate this challenge and pave the way for organizational success.

In Their Own Words

Hear from Christian higher education professionals who leveled up their skills through TG Three coaching:

-Written by Rob Westervelt

About Us

TG Three is a strategy company serving Christian higher education. Learn more about how TG Three can help your institution achieve a brighter future faster.

• Best practices should not be confused with common practices.
• Consider the specific situational context of your institution.
• Avoid prioritizing operational effectiveness over strategy.
• Beware of blindly imitating practices from other institutions.

Full Blog:

In higher education, leaders are encountering more challenges to generating success. Best practices are often used as a guiding framework, but caution is necessary. This article explores the risks of relying too heavily on best practices and offers strategic advice for higher education leaders.

Don’t Confuse Common Practices with Best Practices

Just because others are doing it doesn’t mean it is the best way to achieve positive results. The higher education landscape is filled with experts, vendors, conference speakers, and others who often mistake the most common practices for the best ones. Have you ever attended a conference where a presenter shared insights on a particular topic, only to later discover the institution they represented hadn’t achieved sustained success? Best practices should come from the industry exemplars, not just from those who have the microphone.

Consider Situational Context

Best practices are derived from institutions operating in specific contexts. What works for one college may not necessarily work for another due to variations in institutional mission, student demographics, and market dynamics. College presidents must consider their own unique circumstances when evaluating the relevance of best practices. Implementing these practices without considering contextual fit can lead to suboptimal outcomes and missed opportunities.

The Risk of Conflating Efficiency with Strategy

Best practices are focused on improving operational effectiveness. Operational effectiveness is about efficiency and execution, while strategy involves making integrated choices to position the institution for sustained success. Prioritizing operational effectiveness without a clear strategy can lead to a lack of differentiation and sustainable competitive advantage. It’s crucial to understand that while operational effectiveness helps institutions improve consistently, it alone is not enough for long-term success.

The Dangers of Imitation

One of the primary risks associated with best practices, as highlighted by renowned strategist Michael Porter, is the inclination towards imitation rather than differentiation. Colleges, universities, and seminaries that focus solely on replicating successful practices from other institutions fail to establish a distinct position from counterparts. True competitive advantage arises from unique value propositions and differentiation, rather than mere replication. By blindly adopting best practices, institutions undermine their ability to stand out and excel. 

The Risk of Commoditization

Widespread adoption of best practices without strategic thinking can lead to the commoditization of higher education. When every institution adopts the same practices, it becomes increasingly difficult to differentiate and offer unique educational experiences. This intensifies competition, diminishes value, and erodes competitive advantage. This is a “zero-sum game” according to Porter. Consequently, students end up making choices based primarily on price. 

College leaders must prioritize strategy in addition to best practices to improve and become more unique for a particular set of students. The essence of strategy is choosing a differentiated position and coordinating your decisions and actions to serve specific students with unique needs at a specific price. This approach will help leaders effectively navigate a rapidly changing landscape and set their institutions up for long-term success.

–Ryan J. Dougherty is the Principal Partner at TG Three with over 20 years of experience building successful leaders, teams, and strategies. TG Three is a strategy company that helps Christian institutions get from where they are to where they want to be.

The “Gold Rush”

During the California gold rush, thousands of people from all over the world flocked to California to get in on the dream of striking gold.  Some rushed out to California right away, others took years. People got rich, others lost everything.  They all had one thing in common – they all thought they might be the one who strikes gold.  Sound familiar?  This is the current story of online Christian higher education.  Other institutions have already struck it rich.  Could you be next?

How the Online “Gold Rush” Started

The online higher education “gold rush” began as universities and colleges recognized the potential of offering Christian higher education through distance learning or online platforms. These early pioneers in online education saw the opportunity to reach a wider audience and serve more students using new technologies. Quickly these new methods showed promise.  Students started showing up and the institutional overhead for online programs was low.  Money started flowing.

As the internet and online learning platforms grew in popularity, the online higher education “gold rush” began in earnest. The word got out. More and more universities and colleges jumped on board, offering online programs and courses in an effort to tap into this growing market. Just like the California gold rush of the mid-19th century, the online higher education “gold rush” attracted a wide range of participants, from established institutions to upstart enterprises. And like the California gold rush, the online higher education “gold rush” was driven by a combination of opportunity, innovation, and a desire to succeed.  Of course, like the California gold rush, there were also piles of cash to be gained for the organization.

The Early Bird Gets the Worm

The early adopters of online Christian higher education struck gold. By being among the first to offer online programs and courses, early adopters were able to attract students who were seeking the convenience and flexibility of online education. This made these early adopters a lot of money to quickly reinvest back into both their online and brick and mortar campuses. At the time they started “mining”, they were figuratively picking gold up off of the ground.  

The Latecomers are Losing

Latecomers to the market for online Christian higher education, much like the later prospectors who arrived in California during the gold rush, may face a number of challenges in trying to compete with established institutions. They may struggle to attract students and may face difficulties in terms of pricing, marketing, and technological infrastructure, much like the later gold prospectors who arrived in California and found that the most valuable mining claims had already been taken.  

Even worse, some of the early adopters are starting to lose money on online education as it becomes clear that online education is not an unlimited source of students.  If the big mining operations are taking losses, what hope is there for the rookie prospector?

The Cost of Entry and Sustainability are Rising

As more and more students seek the convenience and flexibility of online programs and courses, online Christian higher education institutions have had to invest in increasing amounts of technology and infrastructure in order to meet this demand. This includes investments in things like online learning platforms, course management systems, and video conferencing tools, which can be extremely expensive.  The gold is not laying right out on the ground anymore!

Another reason for the rising cost of online Christian higher education is the increasing complexity of online education. As online programs and courses become more sophisticated and interactive, they require more advanced technology and infrastructure to support them. The technology is also changing every year and needs to be updated.  While this is great news for the providers of such services, it is bad news for Christian organizations that are late to the party.

The institutional costs are also being driven up by competition. As more schools enter the market for online education, there is increased competition for students and resources. This can lead to higher costs as institutions seek to differentiate themselves and invest in marketing for their online programs. The price to play the game keeps getting higher. Eventually only the very best “mining” operations will survive and everyone else will be forced to quit.

Proceed With Caution

Institutions of Christian higher education that are considering entering the online market should therefore exercise caution and carefully consider their strategy. They should be aware of the risks and challenges associated with online education and should ensure that they have the resources and expertise needed to succeed in this competitive market.  

The gold is now deep inside the mountains.  Do you have the time, energy, technology and strategic vision to reach it or would your resources be better spent elsewhere?  Don’t accidentally lose everything.  The gold rush is over.

–Nick Willis is a partner and a financial aid consultant for TG Three. 

All successful enrollment strategies I’ve seen begin with a common first step. The leader sits down with his or her team and takes an honest assessment of where they are as an organization. This involves being candid about the gaps, obstacles, and opportunities. This is why Albert Einstein once said, “If I were given one hour to save the planet, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and one minute resolving it.” Why is this step often skipped or hurried through?

First, it is more fun to ideate than reflect. New ideas bring hope, energy, and excitement while present realities reveal weaknesses and shortcomings. Second, it is difficult to do and think at the same time. Slowing down enough to fully think about the problem may reduce the perception that you’re making progress. People want answers and they want them today, especially when it comes to enrollment challenges.

Remember, you can’t get to where you want to be if you don’t really know where you are and why. And before you move to ideation, make sure you have a definition of the problem.

Here are three key tips as you seek to find clarity to start a turnaround strategy for enrollment.  

1. Think like your customer. Any worthwhile strategy starts by adopting the perspective of your customer; this requires you to overcome the curse of knowledge. When you assume people understand the things you do or think as you think then you are in danger of reaching incorrect conclusions. Students have changed and your strategies must adapt to their reality, not the other way around. Before moving to the ideation phase of strategy development don’t just empathize with your students but see things from their point of view. Ideation without a shared understanding of the actual problem is a bad recipe. To understand the problem, you must answer “Why are students not choosing us?” and “What obstacles are preventing students from buying what we are selling?” By working with your teams to adopt this mindset, you’ll be surprised at the valuable insights that bubble to the surface regarding student pain points and why your enrollment strategy hasn’t delivered the results you want. 

2. Get specific. Things are more complex than what you see on the main scoreboard. When looking at revenue or enrollment, it is tempting to stop before peeling back enough layers of the onion. If you have a revenue issue, is it across the board? Is it only in one high-margin graduate program? Is it a retention or incoming student issue? Resist the urge to jump to a conclusion based on the highest-level data available. In admissions, it is critical to evaluate your funnel on multiple granular levels. For instance, maybe headcount came in even this fall but when you look closer you find this class had 15 more tuition remission students and 35 more student-athletes. Next fall you could do the exact same things and come in 50 short. It’s best to know this before deciding how to move forward or make projections.

3. Take ownership. It is paramount to avoid placing blame and always focus on controllable factors. Blame is a culture killer and typically doesn’t reveal the root cause of your challenges. Maybe there is shrinking revenue at your institution, so it is tempting for a president to look at the enrollment leaders and determine this is the issue. Resist the urge to default to a “we have the wrong people” assessment. You might be correct with this determination but using a more rigorous approach will help you determine causation or correlation. Next, avoid blaming something circumstantial. COVID-19 is a prime target for ire at most institutions. The pandemic caused major disruption but to place all blame at the feet of the virus is ignoring the things on your campus that also led to your current situation. In most cases, COVID merely accelerated the realities that were already coming. High-performing teams come from leaders who act as coaches and avoid placing blame. All the best teams I’ve seen are aware of their challenges and focus on maximizing their people and the opportunities within their control. This point is especially important as leaders continue to worry about the “demographic cliff.”  

In strategy development, shortcuts equal shortfalls. Your winning strategy should always have a backbone of clarity, focus, and alignment. By incorporating these three tips from the start you position yourself to create the clarity needed to move forward on the rest of your strategy development. 

–Ryan Dougherty is the Principal Partner at TG Three with over 20 years experience building successful enrollment leaders, teams, and strategies. TG Three is a strategy company that helps Christian institutions grow their people and their enrollments through hiring, strategy, and coaching. 

But what role does financial aid actually play in a student’s choice to come to our institution?  

This question is an important one right now because many institutions are considering tuition resets, financial aid optimization projects, or an internal financial aid overhaul.  I would like to give you a few of my insights into this question as a financial aid strategy consultant.  

No One Really Chooses You for Your Financial Aid

We first have to debunk a myth.  The idea that students choose their institution based on their financial aid package alone.  You do not have to look around very hard to see that there are options for higher education that are extremely cheap (community college, online options, etc.) but students are not always choosing them over more expensive options.  Students are looking for total value, not the cheapest option.  Factors such as “how the college makes me feel”, academic programs, brand, and student experience all play an important role in making a college decision.  That said, you can use your financial aid as a tool to help students feel something positive about your institution when they receive their financial aid award.

Then How Does Financial Aid Play a Role?

I often tell institutions that I work with that students don’t ever choose you for your financial aid package, but they often don’t choose you because of your financial aid package.  This difference is important to understand.  Financial aid (cost of attendance) should be thought of as an obstacle for students, not an incentive.  If you have your marketing, admissions, and brand dialed in, a change in financial aid strategy could be a huge win for your institution’s strategic goals.  Students might really be choosing to go elsewhere based on your current poor financial aid package.  If, however, one of your marketing, admissions, or brand functions is broken, then a financial aid change (or even tuition reset) might do absolutely nothing (or worse).  Knowing when to implement a new financial aid strategy takes clarity around how your institution is performing in key revenue driving functions.  Financial aid must be seen as one piece of a bigger enrollment and marketing strategy.

Reality vs Perception

I tell clients that there are really two different types of financial aid: real financial aid and perceived financial aid.  

Real financial aid is important to students and parents.  It is what ultimately tells the student whether or not they can afford to come to your institution.  It is the students’ bottom line cost.  If you give out more institutional aid dollars, more students should be able to afford your institution.  If you made your institution 100% free, many more students would be able to choose you (probably too many and you could not afford to operate).  On the other hand, if you made the cost of tuition one million dollars per year, almost no one would be able to choose you.  So, the actual bottom line cost to students clearly matters. This also hints that there is a sweet spot that balances what the student can afford and what the institution needs to operate.  

Less thought of, but also just as important, is perceived financial aid.  Perceived financial aid is how the student feels about their financial aid package.  The way the aid is given out creates a feeling for the student around how much they are valued and wanted by the institution.  A student might truly choose a school that gives less of a total aid award because they feel more wanted based on the way that the award is given.  Let’s look at an example of how this works.  Here are two equal awards.  How do they make you feel?  

1. The institution gives out a “legacy” award to students.  Let’s call it a $1,000 award per year based on your parent or grandparent formerly attending the institution.
2. The institution gives out a leadership award to a student.  This is also a $1,000 award per year given out to a student because of the potential that they see in the student as a future leader on campus.

Which of these awards would make you feel more valued by the institution?  Very likely the one that sees something special in you and not something special in your parent or grandparent.  Today’s students want to be valued for who they are, not for who their parents are (or what their church is, etc.).  Many institutions completely whiff on this idea.  They give out lots of aid in many different small awards, but the awards don’t really mean anything to the recipient.  Every line of a financial aid award letter should make a student feel valued by the institution.  If it doesn’t, that money should be repurposed or the award renamed to make them feel something.  Students are not calculators.  They have feelings.  Make sure that when they read their award letter they perceive that they are highly valued by your institution.  

Two Final Thoughts

I would like to leave you with two key takeaways:

First, financial aid should always be thought of in terms of a bigger enrollment and marketing strategy for your institution.  It is not a strategy unto itself.  Don’t think that shifting a little money around in your award packages is going to get you many more students.

Second, you have to have a strategy around both real and perceived financial aid.  If you address the former without considering the latter you will be less than impressed with your results.

–Nick Willis is a partner and a financial aid consultant for TG Three.  If you are thinking about changing your financial aid strategy, please give us a call and learn how TG Three thinks differently about financial aid strategy.  We would love to help you grow your enrollments.

Part 1: Your Brand and Your Academic Quality

Before we get into a discussion on brand, it is important that everyone understands your brand is not a logo, font set and color scheme. It is not even a short catch phrase like “Building Leaders Together”. Brand is simply defined as what people think about when they think about you.

Let’s think about the relationship between brand and quality by taking a quick trip to the grocery store. When I go to the grocery store to get some soda (which I should probably never do), I have some options. I can get a name brand soda like Pepsi or Coke, or a generic cheaper version of the same product. There are certainly arguments to be made around which soda tastes better, but often I buy Coke even though I would agree they are basically the same. Why would I get a more expensive product when they are the same? It is not because I am stupid or foolish. I am buying soda but I am also buying the reliability and feeling I have associated with the brand. The actual taste of the product only comes into play in my decision making if the generic brand’s taste is far superior to the name brand product (which is basically never), or the taste of the name brand product becomes horrible over time (which doesn’t happen with a consistent product). So, Coke it is. 

How does this help us think about our academic quality and how people make decisions about coming to our institutions? Academic quality is the taste of the product, not the product itself. People are looking to buy an experience. They are buying a feeling, reliability – a brand. As the feelings people have about Coke get better, people buy more Coke even though the taste of Coke is the same. Colleges and universities often don’t understand this idea when it comes to selling to undergraduate students. They think that increasing their academic offerings and providing more majors (making the taste slightly better) will bring in more students. I have sad news. It won’t. Why? Because students choose colleges based on feelings not facts. If you want to be the institution that everyone wants, then your brand must be built up, not your academic portfolio (and especially not your general education package!). Here is the crazy part though: as your brand increases in value, the perception of your academics will rise without you doing anything to change them! And it gets even better. Over time, great faculty will be drawn to be a part of your brand and your actual academic quality will get better over time. So building a strong brand affects both the perception and the reality of your academic programs. 

Does this phenomenon work in reverse? If you increase your academic experience and offerings will your brand value go up? Yes, but to a much lesser extent. You want your academic offerings to be in line with the marketplace needs – this is important.  If you are out of alignment with the market, change is needed. As your university makes real changes to make its academic programs better, the brand will get stronger as there are more people talking about their great experience with your programs. But the time it takes to move your overall institutional brand using this method is extreme. It is not a good solo strategy for building a brand. If it were, we would buy a lot more generic cola (assuming that generic colas have gotten better in taste over time). Unfortunately, your academic quality can quickly ruin your brand. If you actually have weak academic programs and students don’t have a great experience in your classes, you will quickly have a negative brand around having weak academics.   

Here are the two relationships between brand and academics that we need to be aware of:

1. Great brands raise up academic programs – both in perception and in reality. 
2. Poor academic programs can ruin brands.

Just as important, here are two false relationships that will cost us many hours of work and a lot of money:

1. Adding and/or changing academic offerings will make more people buy our brand.
2. If people are not interested in coming to our institution it is because something is wrong with academics.

Hopefully this is helpful to you as you think about building an academic portfolio in your institution or academic division.  You may be making the institution better by adding a new major or program.  You may even bring in more money.  But your brand will lift your overall academic quality.  Spend some time in your next division meeting thinking about your brand!

-Nick Willis is a partner at TG Three