Five Concerns That Can Interfere With Branch Campus Growth


If it isn’t apparent, my recent posts reflect growing concern and frustration with the way institutions administer their branch campuses.  Having spent some years working with online programs, as well as studying the implications of disruptive environments on organizations, I also see important strategic connections between branches and online delivery.

Moreover, virtually every consulting role I’ve filled was at least in part tied to a president who wanted to see enrollment growth at their branches and in their online programs.  Although I’m pleased and impressed that these presidents recognize the potential significance of branch growth, the press of day-to-day crises at the main campus makes it nearly impossible for presidents to personally lead specific initiatives.

I should add that, again in my own experience, provosts or academic vice presidents seem less consistently concerned than presidents about enrollment growth through new audiences.  Deans have been mixed in their engagement, as well, but typically seem most focused on their main campus mission.  (This is not meant as a sweeping generalization, but simply my own too-common observation.  I’ve known and worked with some terrific deans and vice presidents.)

Although this is understandable, given their background and priorities, it means that presidents and branch campus leaders may be on one page, whereas the administrators between them are, at best, less committed to branch growth.  That is just one reason for my belief that presidents and boards should create relatively autonomous units to attract and serve adult learners and others who prioritize cost and flexibility over a residential experience.

With that overview, in this post and the one to follow, I will raise five concerns I have about the way branch campuses are administered that will reduce the likelihood of enrollment and revenue growth.  Similar points can be made about online programs, as well.

The first concern is that branches typically are buried in an institutional structure that is designed for predictability, not entrepreneurship.  The branch structure should allow nimble, quick response to opportunities, assure that branches can offer the courses and programs for which they have local demand, and encourage deep, engaged partnerships with the community served.  Moreover, both branches and online program executives should understand entrepreneurship and be aggressive in pursuit of enrollment growth.

The second concern arises if the budget covering faculty salaries and the delivery of courses on branch campuses resides in the main campus academic units.  Truthfully, this seems so obviously wrong to me that I’m stunned by how often I see it happen. Deans and department chairs need to see clear financial benefit from supporting branch courses, or else they will see branch courses as a drain on their resources.  

Put the academic budget on the branches, and then let units receive a share of the revenue generated, outside of their normal operating budget.  If you choose to pursue responsibility-centered budgets, which I endorse, treat branch campuses and online programs as revenue centers, not as service units.  The dollars still can eventually wind up in the academic units, but it is those units that are serving the branch audience, not the branches that are serving academic units.

Next time, three more concerns!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Revisiting Revenue Sharing and Entrepreneurship as Tools for Branch Campus Growth

The second most viewed post on this blog is titled, “Revenue Sharing and Support for Branch Campus Growth.”   ( http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2010/02/revenue-sharing-and-support-for-branch.html ).   I tend to write shorter, more focused posts, these days, but so it goes.   Among other things, I described the approach to funding in Ohio, which worked well for a very long time.   Unfortunately, recent changes may make things harder for university branches; I am concerned about the long-term implications for enrollment. In the same month, I also wrote a post titled, “On Being an Entrepreneur in Higher Education.” ( http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2010/02/on-being-entrepreneur-in-higher.html )   That post stemmed from my frustration with institutional leaders who claim to be entrepreneurs, but do not appear to understand what it means to empower innovation, especially in a disruptive environment. Good information is available on how to develop...
Read more

A Leadership Dilemma for Branch Campuses and Online Programs

When I suggest that most institutions of higher education are in trouble, I am in good company.  Many people say the same thing, and most point to the remarkably rapid emergence of very low cost alternatives for earning credits, especially in the lucrative area of general education, as well as alternative ways of certifying learning that tie to the needs of employers. For example, at StraighterLine, one can earn a full year of general education credits for about $1000, and those credits will transfer to many institutions.   Companies, community colleges and a few universities are breaking new ground by providing free non-credit options that can be turned into transferable credits, through exams that may cost less than $100.   In short, the higher education financial model is breaking down. Moreover, because leaders are convinced that spending on “amenities,” (athletics, additional buildings, etc.) is necessary in order to compete for residential students, they are i...
Read more

On Being an Entrepreneur in Higher Education

Not long ago, I was speaking with an administrator at my own university. During the conversation, this person referred to another administrator as being “very entrepreneurial,” and I was stunned. In my opinion, that administrator is far from being entrepreneurial and is missing out on outstanding opportunities to grow enrollment through new programs and strategies for delivery. To be sure, the area for which this person is responsible is growing, and there are some good things happening in the unit, but I don’t see what I’d call entrepreneurship. Although I let the comment pass, later I started thinking about our different assessments of the same individual. I’m relatively certain that we have comparable knowledge about this person’s attitudes and behavior, and we can both see the same performance measures. So why would one of us see an entrepreneur and the other not? I can't speak for the other person's point of view, but from my perspective, entrepreneurship is about inn...
Read more