Issue link: http://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/80527
Streamline recruitment. Most for- profits assign one recruiter to handle all phases of enrollment, from admissions to financial aid to course scheduling. Because these recruiters don't have to run to different offices or fill out redun- dant forms, they can process student applications more efficiently. Once students enroll, for-profits close the deal before students have a chance to change their minds. Recognize student needs. Tuitions at some for-profits are higher than those at some state-supported institutions, and yet many older students choose for-profit programs. Why? Because for-profits send this message to working adults: Earn a degree while you work, build a network, get that job or promotion, and get on with your life. Traditional schools that still rely on full-time residential programs send a different message: Quit your job, forgo a salary, neglect your family, and get on with your life—two years from now. For-profits also recognize that adult learners often cannot call or visit during business hours, so they arrange face- to-face meetings between 5:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. They use call centers to answer phones 24 hours a day. We too must extend the hours of our admissions offices to serve this group. We could even hire and train students looking for part-time employment to answer phones during evening hours. Rethink our real estate. Traditional schools can rent their classrooms and facilities to other users during off-peak hours. Face-to-face lectures can be tech- nologically connected to online students for a relatively small increase in cost per class. We can transform our high-cost real estate into a revenue generator. Contrast that with traditional programs that often intimidate applicants with inflex- ible deadlines and complex financial aid requirements. Is it any wonder working adults often prefer to deal with more effi- cient alternatives? Offer flexible intakes. Many for- profits use a cohort system, in which they present students with a schedule of courses from enrollment to graduation. Students often can begin taking their courses immediately. Traditional institu- tions often are lucky to produce an error- free semester schedule in time for reg- istration, and they often make students wait until the next semester—or academic year—to begin their courses. They would serve working adults better by providing flexible enrollment options not tied to a semester system. Get creative with marketing. For- profits advertise on the radio, on television, and on billboards. However, some admin- istrators at traditional schools—especially those that are publicly funded—balk at spending private funds that way. But they can investigate creative alternatives that can be done on campus. Is there, or could there be, an electronic display that can flash messages? Is it possible to join with advertisers or other academic departments to share the cost of signage that displays communications from both partners? Schools often brag about serving first- generation students, but then fail to invite the parents of these students to attend courses! They could re-evaluate their Web sites to ensure the content is not designed to appeal only to 18- to 24-year-olds. They could send e-mails to students' parents inviting them to enroll in part-time, adult- friendly programs. Traditional business schools need to make sure they're mining their extensive databases and using social media to reach the right audiences with the right messages. The Bricks-and-Mortar Advantage Even in today's recessionary market, most publicly held for-profits have actu- ally maintained and increased their profitability, while traditional institutions face budget reductions. That's unlikely to change unless traditional business schools do more to highlight what they offer that for-profits don't. For-profits, for instance, often have greater difficulty attracting and retain- ing qualified faculty, because they pay less than traditional institutions pay their adjuncts. For-profits can't offer the beauty of traditional campuses. Few possess the intellectual capital or facilities to offer public workshops, social networking events, or black-tie receptions welcom- ing new students and their families. They lack close-knit alumni and corporate partner networks, and they don't have the infrastructure to support interactions that foster a sense of community. The University of Phoenix tries to address this last deficiency by sending a professional magazine with articles about its students' successes to its stakeholders. However, the memories and stories that traditional universities have to share can certainly compete with that. We cannot afford to cede the grow- ing pool of adult learners to for-profit providers. Competing with for-profits head-on may be just the incentive we need to reinvigorate our institutions so they can better serve the changing needs of our market. Charles R.B. Stowe is professor of management and entrepreneurship and director of outreach initiatives in the office of the vice president of academic affairs at Lander University in Greenwood, South Carolina. He also is former dean of Lander's College of Business and Public Affairs. Doug Grider recently retired after returning to serve as interim dean of the College of Business and Public Affairs. BizEd September/October 2012 39