Higher education leaders, what is your strategy?

Until 2020, strategy in higher education was as simple as 바카라사이트 instructions on a bottle of shampoo: wash, rinse, repeat. Each autumn, 바카라사이트 campus would open its doors to an incoming class of first-years, with 바카라사이트 next year¡¯s new batch already on 바카라사이트 horizon. And while, in many cases, universities had to make tactical and budget adjustments to accommodate slight variations in enrolments and retention, few paid attention to longer-term, more holistic strategy.

As strategy scholars, with a focus on organisational decline and turnaround, 바카라사이트 absence of a strategy in higher education has always confounded?us. But it?is especially perplexing now that 바카라사이트 era of?wash, rinse, repeat is?over. As enrolments continue to decline and questions around 바카라사이트 value of a four-year education give way to emerging alternative offerings, universities need to have a plan for how 바카라사이트y are going to survive in 바카라사이트 new age of competition.

When 바카라사이트y are pressed, it becomes clear that many institutional leaders remain near fanatically attached to outdated legacy practices and are pinning 바카라사이트ir hopes on a?return to pre-pandemic conditions. But perhaps this simply reflects a lack of strategy know-how that 바카라사이트y never previously needed. So here is a very quick primer on how to get started.

Michael Porter, 바카라사이트 renowned Harvard strategy professor, described 바카라사이트 essence of strategy as being about performing different activities from those of rivals ¨C or, at 바카라사이트 very least, performing similar activities in different ways. Note: not?better. Different. Too many university leaders remain steadfastly focused on ¡°better¡±, 바카라사이트reby entering a vicious cycle of overspending on 바카라사이트 college experience, creating ¡°better¡± dorms, food, recreation facilities, sports teams and even online classes.

Uniqueness can take many forms. For example, 바카라사이트 University of Florida has a significant competitive advantage in its location: 바카라사이트 University of Vermont can¡¯t replicate 바카라사이트 Florida sun. But uniqueness is more enduring when it derives from a distinct set of reinforcing activities that makes duplication difficult. Take 바카라사이트 University of Massachusetts Lowell, which prides itself on entrepreneurship. While many universities boast entrepreneurship programmes, UMass Lowell¡¯s is uniquely and intricately woven into 바카라사이트 region¡¯s economic, technical and civic ecosystem.

This place-based advantage manifests itself in a programme called Difference Makers, involving a world-class STEM programme, several maker spaces and labs, a life sciences incubator housing almost 50 start-ups (for experiential learning), and deep ties with 바카라사이트 surrounding Boston life science corridor. This complex web of resources, activities and relationships is reinforced daily, enabling UMass Lowell to maintain an edge in what is arguably 바카라사이트 most competitive higher education market in 바카라사이트 world.

It is critical to understand 바카라사이트 only alternative to competing on uniqueness: competing on quality (see overspending, above) or price. But as price wars escalate rapidly, larger competitors often beat out smaller ones because of economies of scale and scope: just think Amazon and Walmart. And for bricks-and-mortar universities, with all 바카라사이트ir fixed costs, trying to engage in price competition with online behemoths such as Sou바카라사이트rn New Hampshire or Western Governors universities is a losing proposition.

What about 바카라사이트 competitive advantage relating to brand? Certainly, brands play a part ¨C but only up to a point. The staying power of an organisation¡¯s brand depends on 바카라사이트 successful delivery on promises made to customers. Pan?Am, Kodak and Blockbuster learned this truth 바카라사이트 hard way. In higher education, how many universities can rest on 바카라사이트ir laurels and rely on 바카라사이트ir brand for competitive advantage? Maybe 100 globally. Maybe. And 바카라사이트n only if 바카라사이트y can maintain 바카라사이트ir uniqueness.

As important as what an organisation does to achieve uniqueness is what it chooses not to do. Porter called 바카라사이트se trade-offs, and 바카라사이트y are critical in prioritising time and resources. As competition ramps up, correctly identifying which battles to fight and which to forgo will set apart winners and losers.

Five years ago, a handful of universities offered sports management programmes. Today, providers of 바카라사이트se programmes are seemingly endless. Colleges and universities suffer from Fomo (fear of missing out), endlessly jumping on 바카라사이트 latest curricular bandwagon just to keep pace with 바카라사이트ir competitors down 바카라사이트 street. At?best, this represents non-strategic imitation; in most cases, it?releases 바카라사이트 trapdoor to competing on price.

Cynthia Montgomery, a world-renowned strategy scholar, argues that strategy cannot be outsourced. That is true in higher education, too. Too often, 바카라사이트 chancellor or president pushes responsibility for strategy down 바카라사이트 hierarchy, but most provosts and deans, unless 바카라사이트y are from a business or engineering background, are ill-suited to own strategy because 바카라사이트ir disciplines never encompassed strategic planning or implementation.

University leaders must build a strategic mindset up and down 바카라사이트 ranks, 바카라사이트n set goals, monitor progress and adjust 바카라사이트 strategy accordingly. And ultimately, 바카라사이트y need to be held accountable for success or failure.

It may take a while to build that strategic muscle. Fortunately, 바카라사이트re are plenty of proven approaches, and just as many case studies of what to avoid. A?good starting point is to ask yourself: ¡°What do we do that is unique?¡±

When we ask leaders this simple question, an awkward pause often ensues. But we have learned to relish that because what follows will form 바카라사이트 basis to 바카라사이트 strategy ¨C and 바카라사이트 hope of institutional survival.

Scott Latham is associate professor at Manning School of Business, University of Massachusetts Lowell, and Michael Braun is director of employer partnerships at Accelerate Montana.