MARKETING Marketing by Kim Kelly P
rofessionals in higher education–in particular, those responsible for enrollment marketing - are under enormous pressure. As schools struggle to keep up
with new technologies and a changing student demo- graphic, strains on funding and increased competition from non-traditional schools and programs are having an ever-growing impact on recruitment and enrollment. Tese pressures have left enrollment marketers in a posi- tion where change is not only inevitable–it’s necessary. In an effort to uncover how schools are responding to the many challenges by enrollment marketers, and to iden- tify trends, best practices and most pressing issues facing the higher education sector, CUnet conducted the 2012 Benchmarking Survey for Higher Education Marketing. Te survey, done in partnership with LeadsCouncil in the first quarter of this year, polled over 300 higher education marketing and recruitment professionals from both the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors. Historically, these two sectors have targeted largely
different markets and employed different marketing and recruitment tactics; however, the survey showed some surprising similarities in how these schools are now ap- proaching their enrollment marketing. As marketing and admissions teams from “both sides of the fence” com- pete to enroll the best and brightest students into their programs, it is clear they are all searching for new and innovative ways to connect with prospects online. “Tis year’s survey saw some very interesting trends
emerge,” says Todd Eicher, President of CUnet. “Te gap between recruitment marketing in the for-profit and not-for-profit higher education sectors appears to be nar- rowing, with schools increasing their investment in digital marketing across the board.” According to the survey, more and more for-profit
schools are taking enrollment marketing into their own hands, relying less on third-party affiliates and more on digital marketing tactics to generate inquiries. At the same time, not-for-profit schools appear to be taking a cue from their for-profit peers, exploring non-tra- ditional marketing and recruitment methods. In fact, the survey even showed a growing interest in third-party
34 SEPT/OCT 2012 •
TODAYSCAMPUS.COM Trends 2012
inquiry generation among traditional schools–an approach that was associated almost exclusively with for-profit schools in the past.
FOR-PROFIT SCHOOLS: MOVING AWAY FROM THIRD-PARTY INQUIRY GENERATION Over recent years, for-profit schools have directed the majority of their enrollment marketing dollars towards third-party inquiry sources. Tese affiliate providers con- nected schools with prospective students, providing a high volume of inquiries, and allowing schools to meet their enrollment goals while staying within budget. However, recent concerns over inquiry quality, regula-
tory compliance and increasing cost per enrollment (CPE) metrics have led many of these schools to cut spending on this channel. In fact, this year, the survey showed that among for-profit schools, just 44 percent of inquiries will come from third-party affiliates–a significant shift down from 66 percent of inquiries in 2011. Of the many factors driving this change, the most significant is likely driven by budget concerns. When con- sidered on a cost-per-enrollment basis, inquiries generated directly by schools are reported to be much less expensive than those generated by third-party affiliates. In fact, over 65 percent of for-profit schools reported an average CPE for direct/organic inquiries under $1,000; when you eliminate those that didn’t report on CPE in the survey, that percentage jumps to 84 percent of all schools with an average CPE for direct/organic inquiries under $1,000. Compare that to the average cost for third-party-gen- erated inquiries, and the difference is dramatic. Just 17 percent of schools report a CPE under $1,000, while over half (55 percent) report a CPE above $1,000. Unfortunately, these numbers are often misleading. Assessing the true costs involved with organic inquiry generation is very difficult, and few schools account for the many “hidden costs,” including staff resources, which are required to generate organic inquiries. Te result is an apples-to-oranges comparison that favors, on the surface, third-party inquiry generation.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44