Marketing’s role in developing and delivering Corporate ... · 15 Being Informed and Guided by the Strategic Plan 15 Marketing’s Role in ... Not one marketer in the ... Marketing’s

Marketing’s role in developing and delivering Corporate StrategyWhat Vice-Chancellors really think about Marketing

2

Callen Associates Callen Associates (CA) is a marketing consultancy offering both strategic and operational expertise in breadth and depth with a proven record of delivery of successful solutions in the education marketplace.

Our overriding aim is to provide our clients with a clear advantage in setting and achieving their marketing, communications and business goals. We combine experience and understanding of the sector, its cultures and its needs with levels of professionalism and service developed in commercial sectors.

Assignments range from specific marketing tasks such as subject marketing, customer relationship management and internal marketing and communications to portfolio reviews, brand development and interim marketing. directorships.

For more information, please contact John Callen:T: 07903 757739E: [email protected]

Callen Associates LimitedSt John’s House54 St John’s SquareLondonEC1V 4JLwww.callen-associates.com

Marketing’s role in developing and delivering Corporate Strategy 3

Contents 4-5 Foreword

6-8 Executive Overview

9-10 Section 1: Outline of the Programme 9 Methodology 9 The Respondents 9 The Discussion Guide 9 About This Report 10 Terms and Titles

11-14 Section 2: Perceptions of Marketing and its Role 11 Defining Marketing 12 What VCs Currently Have and What They Want 13 Issues and Barriers

15-16 Section 3: Strategic Planning 15 Being Informed and Guided by the Strategic Plan 15 Marketing’s Role in Developing Strategy and the Strategic Plan 16 Provider of Research and Other Inputs

17-19 Section 4: Metrics, Monitoring and Market Research 17 A Growing Need 17 Roles and Responsibilities 17 Levels of Satisfaction 18 Challenges and Limitations

20-23 Section 5: Beyond Student Marketing 20 Business to Business Markets: An Area of Growth 21 Fundraising and Development 22 Internal Marketing and Communications

24-26 Section 6: Management Style and Culture 24 Style and Culture 24 Now and Then 25 Better Consultation, Better Progress 25 Vice Chancellors as the Drivers of Change 26 Preserving Core Values

27-34 Section 7: Observations, Conclusions, Recommendations 27 Management Context and Approach 27 Understanding of Marketing Principles 28 Growing Engagement of Marketing 28 Limited Application in Strategic Planning 29 The Development of Higher Education Marketing 29 Organic and Step Change Developments 30 From Promotional Communications to Business Solutions 31 Unresolved Challenges 31 Changing Marketing’s References for HEIs 32 New Conversations

4

ForewordIn the last fifteen years or so, there have been very visible changes in the way that Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have regarded marketing. Once rare, it’s now generally a mainstream function – though it may operate under various titles. It has also progressed beyond what was initially an operational role to a position of greater engagement so that senior professionals are established or are being recruited to lead functions which are, to some extent, considered to be both strategic and functional.

Such progress in marketing’s role has probably been inevitable. Marketing was, after all, created out of needs rather than opportunities, as major manufacturers such as Levers and P&G became concerned that consumers didn’t lap up any old product they just happened to be able to produce. Similarly, marketing in HE has grown in stature as there has been a growing recognition of the need to move on from the presiding producer-driven culture of a decade or so ago.

The processes of marketisation of HE are now largely a matter of history as most HEIs take the need to compete as a given. In core markets of student recruitment, developments in funding have made it clear that there’s a financial burden to resolve in which the state is playing a decreasing role and the consumer is playing an increasing one.

Consumer power is growing further with greater accessibility to information and advice through league tables (whatever we may think of them), the National Student Survey, advisory guides and the open sources and user-generated content of the Web. The prospect of uncapped ‘top up’ fees or any other financially liberating moves in the future will be tantamount to the final major step in the marketisation of HE.

Whilst not universally the case, many in HE are now quite comfortable talking about customers and clients and service. In some cases we can even slip into some of the militaristic argot of commercial marketing – talking of campaigns and strategies and even guerrilla marketing with impunity.

Despite these developments, discussions with marketing colleagues have continued to reflect a concern that they are still not able to deliver the real benefits of marketing; they just have not been allowed to get to grips with the real challenges and make the most significant differences. There was a sense that marketing was still marginalised and the strategic roles that marketers were accorded were quite heavily constrained.

One of the reasons often cited is that, even at the highest levels, marketing is a term often used but not properly understood. To caricature the situation, it was felt that marketing was still largely considered as being there primarily to ensure good presentation; to do the ‘flower arranging’. Too often, colleagues found themselves being handed the conclusions of high level discussions ... along the lines of ‘well, now we’ve decided what we are going to do, we’d better get marketing to make it happen’.

In order to gather some evidence of the breadth and depth of that feeling, I tested the views of around 130 delegates, mostly HE marketers and representing just over 50 institutions, at the inaugural conference of the Chartered Institute of Marketing’s Higher Education Market Interest Group.

I asked three simple questions which, by a show of hands and rough estimation at the time, revealed the following responses:

Question: Do you think your VC has a good understanding of the full role of marketing? Response: 25-30%

Question: Do you think your VC wants more from marketing? Response: 20-25%

Question: Does your institution enable marketing to make its full contribution? Response: 0%.

To the last question it’s true that one hand wavered in uncertainty, but none was actually raised. Not one marketer in the room felt that they were allowed to deliver the full benefits of the marketing role and capabilities.

Hence this Insight Programme; the aim being to talk to a sample of Vice-Chancellors to find out just what they really do perceive marketing to be and what they believe it could – and should – contribute to the development and achievement of corporate strategy.


Is there a need, for example, to raise awareness of marketing’s driving principles and especially the strategic contributions it can make? To what extent might HE leaders be hopeful or sceptical of the role of marketing in education? Conversely, do marketers need to rethink the potential – or even the fundamental nature – of marketing for HEIs; do they need to rethink the terms of engagement for their profession in HE?

So, here are the findings and our own observations and conclusions. Our aim is principally to open up the debate about the purposes and roles of marketing for HEIs and we hope that this will encourage greater dialogue and mutual understanding between institution leaders and marketing directors.

ThanksThanks are gratefully extended to all the respondents in this programme. Vice-Chancellors diaries are challenging and making time for such a non-mission-critical exercise such as this was especially appreciated.

Equally, we thank all those PAs who actually found a diary slot and made the arrangements – and the colleagues who made introductions and proffered commendations to respondents. In the interests of confidentiality you all remain unnamed, but you know who you are.

And finally, thanks to Vicky Annand of Goldsmiths, University of London, for taking the time and trouble to read, sub and critically appraise a draft – or two – of this report.

6

Executive Overview Background and PurposeThis Insight Programme was designed to investigate the extent to which marketing is engaged in the development and delivery of strategic plans in higher education institutions (HEIs). It seeks to assess concerns expressed by marketers that marketing is under-valued and under-used in the HE sector and prompt debate about the role of marketing in HEIs.

As a discipline that in principle needs to take an overarching view, the endorsement and support of institutional leaders was seen to be key. So we conducted in depth discussions with 11 respondents, being 10 Vice-Chancellors and one Deputy Vice-Chancellor, representing a broad spectrum of university types, sizes and locations.

In this brief overview, we refer to our definition of marketing (see page 27) and evaluate the extent to which marketing in HE is realising its main tenets, being: � An overarching business philosophy � Deploying a toolkit of professional practices � Understanding consumers needs and wants � Delivering to those needs and wants.

Marketing as an Overarching Business PhilosophyThere were indications that Vice-Chancellors of today are increasingly considering their organisation in a business context; moving towards more objective-oriented leadership and executive management approaches to deliver business imperatives. This is not to compromise academic quality and integrity, which remains at the heart of institutions, but seeks to provide a framework in which it can thrive and develop.

Respondents both recognised the need for marketing and appeared to want marketing to make a bigger contribution. They offered a very sound appreciation of the underlying philosophy and goals of marketing – being a discipline focused on understanding and meeting the needs of customers and stakeholders in order to secure organisational objectives.

There appears to have been significant progress of marketing from its relatively recent adoption in HE, often focusing on tactical PR and promotions activity, to a broader function considering strategic matters such as brand position and customer service. However, for all the progress being made, there was a great variability in the deployment of marketing and V-Cs who really are utilising marketing as an integrated and strategic business discipline are in the minority.

Deploying a Toolkit of Professional PracticesThe practical and operational emphasis in HEIs still appears to be heavily weighted to matters of advertising, promotion and PR – with corporate or brand image coming a reasonably close second. Marketing is also typically focused on ‘consumer’ markets for HE with undergraduate student recruitment being the most common focus of attention for the discipline.

Whilst expressions of marketing principles from respondents very often revolved around a core set of communications roles, the marketing function was seen – whether to a lesser or greater extent – to have wider concerns, capabilities and objectives.

Understanding Consumers Needs and WantsAll respondents indicated that marketing is asked to provide inputs – market data and other research – to the strategic planning process. All respondents here recognised, albeit in various ways, the importance and growing need for market research and the great majority of respondents considered that intelligence and insight through market research needed to be developed further.

Paradoxically, there is a tension here in that whilst Vice-Chancellors believe there is a much greater need for market research, it remains relatively underdeveloped and appears to be hindered for a variety of reasons, not least a number of (generally untested) preconceptions of the limitations on its value and impact.

Consequently, market research appeared to be an activity that was generally a high priority requirement in principle but a low priority for resources. However, a significant minority of Vice-Chancellors felt this needed to be reconsidered in the course of our discussions and we are aware of a small but growing trend for institutions to acquire a market research capability.


Delivering to Consumers Needs and Wants: Marketing and the Strategic PlanIn approximately half of the cases here, marketing’s role in developing the strategic plan was similar to all other departments, contributing reactively as part of a consultative strategic planning process. It appeared that marketing’s responsibilities in the final shape of the strategic plan were often limited to that of initial drafting of parts of the plan that were seen to be in its domain.

In the remaining half of cases, marketing had a greater role to some extent by acting either in a ‘key input’ or a ‘prime driver’ role. In the former, marketing provided a significant amount of the groundwork for the development of the strategic plan – in a predominantly informative way. In the latter, marketing was able to take a significant role in drafting the strategic plan which was then put out to consultation.

Marketing’s line management was the predominant channel for relating and monitoring marketing’s activities in relation to the strategic plan. In the majority of cases, this was via a Pro Vice-Chancellor role. In those institutions (a minority) where marketing was a ‘prime driver’, marketing was more likely to report directly to the Vice-Chancellor.

There was often a sense, however, drawing from some of the comments received, that marketing functions tended to be held at arm’s length from the core strategic issues and the business of the university.

Beyond Student MarketingMarketing in these institutions was largely – if not exclusively – focused on what can be seen as the ‘consumer’ markets in HE – i.e. student recruitment. We considered three areas to evaluate the engagement of marketing beyond that.

Business to Business Markets: An area of growthThis is an area of high interest, one in which respondents believed that much more progress was required and in which marketing could and should play a strong part. Paradoxically, it was also widely accepted as an area in which marketing has not yet been greatly encouraged or involved. In addition, the majority of these V-Cs were not able to expand on how marketing may be better engaged or what its role might be in this area.

Fundraising and DevelopmentThis aspect of ‘third stream’ development appears to have progressed rather better than business to business engagement. Most HEIs are active in fundraising – and specialists are seen as essential in this area. Linkages between marketing and fundraising are seen to be important and are generally well established – with fundraising either being a part of the broader marketing function or through good working relations (and common interests) of two separate functions.

Internal Marketing and Communications Internal communications activity appears to have been developing well and was seen by some to have been effective in gaining support for broad goals or, more usually, specific developments. However, extending this into programmes with greater ambitions for the engagement of staff (internal marketing) was generally not well developed, though several respondents had such ambitions (though these were not yet articulated). It was unclear to most respondents where the respective responsibilities of marketing and human resources functions might lay in this.

Challenges in Developing Marketing’s RoleAs was the case through the programme, in a minority of cases respondents were confident that significant progress was being made – and these tended to be those HEIs where marketing was most widely and deeply engaged.

However, in general, whilst many VCs would welcome greater contributions from marketing it was seen as an area that was difficult to develop. Difficulties expressed ranged from academic-department-centric custom and practice to the difficulties of justifying greater resources when many areas have strong cases for investment from corporate coffers. In some cases there were also suggestions of a continuing discomfort in integrating academic and business cultures.

Marketing in many institutions is thus inevitably compromised in its ability to deliver its full potential. Most Vice Chancellors recognised that marketing would need to receive strong support from VCs themselves – and in those HEIs where marketing was more firmly established in a strategic context, it appeared that they already had.

It appeared that it was in HEIs where Vice-Chancellors had engaged in a strong development – or change – agenda, that both marketing and a broader business orientation were seen to be delivering significant benefits. These institutions appeared to have progressed further towards a more executive management style.

8

The Continuing Development of Higher Education MarketingMarketing is still a relatively new discipline for HEIs and in a relatively short period has progressed significantly, in simple terms, from promotional activity to brand activity. However, marketing’s greatest role is in the development of business solutions and if it is to deliver its fullest benefits HEIs need to find a way to enable marketing to engage more fully in the business issues of the institution.

Such a greater engagement appears to be both desirable and fine in principle but, as noted above, there are hurdles to overcome in relation to cultural clash, resource constraints and the relative complexity of marketing.

It seemed that for those VCs that were not already developing a greater engagement for marketing, the ways in which the discipline can be adopted and the ways in which marketing can actually deliver on its philosophy and principles remained unclear.

Changing Marketing’s References for HE MarketingIf marketing is to deliver more fully, there is a real need for an HEI’s management to open up a dialogue that enables marketing to address the strategic and business issues of an institution at least as much as the communications and image issues. This also necessarily extends to incorporate markets beyond those of ‘consumers’ to those of business to business and internal (staff) engagement.

In order to facilitate such a greater integration of marketing in the development and delivery of an institution’s strategic plan, we suggest that marketing’s traditional ‘4P’ model (the functions of Product, Price, Place and Promotions) needs to be maintained but be aligned with a more relevant model that blends marketing with broader strategic and business planning.

We suggest that the McKinsey 7S model is a useful reference and guide for such developments – though there may be others of equal merit. The 7S model lends itself well to service oriented organisations, it also delineates ‘hard’ factors of Strategy, Structure and Systems from the ‘soft’ factors of Shared Values, Skills, Staff and Style.

In the 7S model we can see that marketing will have some significant roles in relation to the harder elements of strategy and systems – ranging from market research insight and foresight to inform strategy, defining the needs of information management and establishing integrated communications systems for a wide range of audiences.

With regard to the softer elements of the model, marketing has a significant role to play in terms of developing shared values, style and staff engagement – all of which will help to deliver the essential experiences and satisfaction of various audience and customer groups.

Marketing’s Essential ContributionThe recommendations here should not be seen to be directed solely towards the upper management tiers of institutions. There are significant requirements falling upon the marketing function if it is to progress. The support and engagement of management is certainly key, but marketers have simple yet significant tasks to address to complete the circle.

Certainly, the broad role of marketing needs to be underlined. To this end, we recommend that the marketing community could helpfully redefine and restate the principles of marketing and the value they offer to HEIs.

As day to day marketing activity tends to focus on marketing communications activity, marketing directors – and marketing functions generally – need to strive increasingly to contextualise such communications activity within the broader strategic remit and definition of the discipline.

In the process, it is essential to justify engagement in business matters of their institutions – not least by presenting the business case and value for marketing ‘components’ – from web site development to market research.

And, perhaps above all, in order to emphasise the relevance of marketing to higher education and break down what seem to be continuing cultural barriers, marketers need to demonstrate an understanding and empathy for both education generically and the development – rather than degradation – of the values of their institutions.


Section 1: Outline of the programmeMethodology This was a programme of in-depth discussions with leaders in 11 HEIs across England over a period of six months from August 2007 to February 2008. The discussions lasted approximately an hour in most cases and were predominantly conducted face-to-face, with two by telephone.

The discussions were informal but were steered by a discussion guide. However, in order to explore the issues, the subject matter of the discussions was allowed to digress to a degree as respondents offered their views and opinions on related matters. As a result, the discussion guide beneficially evolved and expanded a little over the course of the programme.

Bullet-point summaries of the issues covered in each discussion were sent to the respondents who had the opportunity to comment or qualify or add any points. No substantive amendments were required by any respondent.

The RespondentsAll were Vice-Chancellors, with one exception being a Deputy Vice-Chancellor who clearly had full ownership of the issues for the purposes of this exercise.

The institutions represented here cover a broad range in terms of size and location – from small to very large and from green rural campus to urban multi-site locations. They also encompass the various institutional groups including Russell Group, 1994 Group, MillionPlus Group and the University Alliance. They almost equally spanned the ‘old’ and the ‘new’; 6 of the 11 HEIs here were post 1992 Universities.

Perhaps most importantly, they reflected a good range of the various stages of development of marketing, from HEIs that are just beginning to form such a function to those who have a much more complete approach – from structure and resources to systems and policies that ensure marketing value.

Other BenchmarksColleagues in the sector tend to want to know what the marketing functions of these institutions included, so we have provided some indicators of the components of the marketing functions in these HEIs: � Approximately half included International Student Recruitment � Approximately sixty percent incorporated Fundraising/Development and Alumni operations � Most, though not all incorporated Press, PR and Communications � Some included Admissions and Recruitment functions of some description (and this seemed to be growing).

The Discussion Guide � Defining Marketing: perceptions of marketing generally/generically � The role and position of Marketing at the HEI

� current � desired

� Issues arising in moving from the current to desired position � Strategic Planning and Corporate Management Approaches � What functions/disciplines are included currently in a marketing function � How the corporate agenda is received and understood by Marketing

� (inc. Relationship with V-C) � If and how marketing contributes to the Corporate Planning Programme � Metrics: Monitoring of Market/Institutional position � Monitoring of Market position/brand/image/reputation:

� External Audiences/Stakeholders � Internal, Staff

� Engagement/Deployment of Marketing in ‘Third Leg’ � Relationship with Fundraising/Development and Alumni functions

About This ReportAs with any qualitative programme, there are some caveats to underline and the approach to this programme carries others. The main ones to note are summarised below.

The discussions were conducted under the Market Research Society code of practice to ensure confidentiality for respondents. Consequently, the findings here are presented in anonymised and aggregated terms.

10

The intention here was to garner a broad spectrum of views from differing institutional positions and, hopefully, across a spread of different mindsets of their leaders. We believe this has been amply achieved but we must admit that we found it somewhat harder to engage with older institutions and with longer established Vice-Chancellors. As one response we received succinctly put it… “Your project isn’t really appropriate to us.”

There is no intention to provide statistical analysis here so any indications of proportions of respondents should be considered only as a rough guide.

We considered it would be inappropriate to record these interviews and hence these were written up from extensive notes made at the time of the discussions. For this reason, and because we also decided that readers should be discouraged from attempts to identify respondents, verbatim comments provided here may not necessarily be precise quotes but are fair representations - and, in any case, we have sought to disguise commentators in some cases.

Terms and TitlesAcross the institutions here, as is the case across the sector, terms and titles may vary for various personnel, groups and forums. For simplicity, we have used the following terms through this document:

Vice-Chancellors – refers to all respondents here, though one respondent is a Deputy V-C.

VCMG – the most senior management group within the HEI. Usually the core policy and decision making group. Typically a small ‘top table’ with a core of Vice-chancellorate and Finance. May then variously incorporate Deans and some other service function Directors.

SMF – the second-tier management forum. Usually, the informative council upwards to VCMG and, in return, from VCMG through to their respective functions. Usually incorporates a wide forum of Directors and other Senior Managers. In some institutions there may be an academic SMF and a service/non-academic SMF.

Marketing Function – the broad function that is responsible for at least the promotion of the University and contains a number of component functions. In addition to marketing, titles may include terms such as External Relations, Communications, and Public Affairs.


Section 2: Perceptions of Marketing and its Role In this section we explore Vice-Chancellors’ broad appreciation of marketing, their requirements of the function and any developments taking place in this respect.

Defining MarketingRespondents were asked to outline what, in their own terms, they believed marketing to be and what its driving purpose and principles were.

For some, marketing was a function in which communications was the core capability. Though this was always seen to contain additional roles.

“Marketing is a function trying to convey to the outside world what the university is, its mission; its full story. A subset of that addresses each particular audience. Marketing provides us with intelligence.

“Marketing is not single-facetted, its aims cover many aspects of the university, and both inputs and outputs, including… � Intelligence/market research � Communications, both external and internal � Advertising, promotions etc � Brand, beyond just logos and into meaning � Cultural aspects, from tone of voice to what you do and how you do it � Its role is also to promote and inform both internally and externally.”

Even if only to a small degree, this was seen as a more complex role than simply producing outwardly-directed activity such as advertising, recruitment events and PR. The need here is to ‘unpack’ the terms used by Vice-Chancellors. A straight acceptance of an expressed focus on communications may have led us to the wrong conclusion. This respondent, for example, is indicating a greater potency and importance of the two-way role of communications.

“It’s all about communications - with all potential, future and past client groups. It’s communications in and communications out. Marketing needs to be a key part of decision processes about things like new products, processes and commercial things like fee-setting. It’s the University’s job to develop the right sets of things that meet the needs of the outside world. Consumer presentation needs to both spur and support engagement and action internally.”

Across these respondents, howsoever expressed, the overwhelming majority had a much deeper appreciation of the full role of marketing and the potential contributions which it could make than many might have imagined.

“It includes selling, advertising and research but is more than that. It centres around a (corporate) self-awareness. And, in relation to that, it’s about trying to understand the needs of ‘stakeholders’ – and delivering to those needs.”

“What I mean by Marketing is identifying what people who might want to use our services actually want and ensuring that informs our offer - and when we communicate these services we also take account of what we have learned.”

“Marketing is a key function that is critical to success and... � provides intelligence, � understands the university’s various markets, � drives the university’s communications and broader strategies, � monitors how well it is succeeding in achieving desired progress.”

“Marketing needs to be an integral part of planning and operations where appropriate – and in that respect Marketing has wide interests.”

“Marketing will ensure our vision and the market potential are aligned. It is the function that understands markets and that, in turn, feeds into product development.”

Indeed, on one occasion, this question elicited an almost textbook definition.

“Marketing is a philosophy that seeks to understand consumers’ needs and wants and develop products and services that meet them. We recognise many different constituencies as ‘consumers’ or key audiences

12

– from prospective students to businesses, suppliers and government departments.”

So, given that they have a fair view of what marketing can deliver, how did V-Cs feel their needs were being served by their own marketing functions? If less than they would wish, what - if any - challenges needed to be overcome for them to be achieved? And what context do they see for the role of marketing in the first place?

What VCs Currently Have and What They WantApproximately half of the respondents seemed to be content with the marketing function they have – though the main reasons were distinctly polarised.

At one end of the spectrum, there were those who were content with the output-oriented roles (prospectuses, literature, advertising, promotions, events, PR etc) fulfilled by the function. These respondents were not greatly seeking development of the marketing function beyond that. Though even here there were indications that the role was extending to address institutional brand development to establish some form of strategic underpinning to specific and tactical marketing activity. (See section 3.)

At the opposite end of the spectrum, other contented respondents were those who were already moving closer to achieving a marketing function that could make the fullest contribution. That’s not to say they were yet wholly satisfied in this respect, but progress was at least satisfactory.

The remaining 50% of respondents were seeking more from marketing. In one or two cases, marketing was starting off from a low base but, whatever the level, there were strong indications that this was changing. Most often, these discontented V-Cs were actively considering and enabling developments through changes in structure and increases in resources. In two cases here, this meant creating an integrated marketing department under a marketing director.

At the most basic level, across the discussions, it appeared that marketing had been most commonly focused on undergraduate recruitment and often had a strong promotions and communications orientation. That too was changing.

“Marketing’s role has been to generate applications. We need more than that now.”

“Student recruitment is viewed as a commercial operation and marketing is responsible for all aspects – from web to student recruitment. More generally, marketing is seen as a function that drives the university as much as delivers results.”

Indeed, marketing’s role was being considered anew quite extensively.

“Marketing’s full role and remit – and hence its value – is yet to be realised. HEIs are like any company and we need to aspire to achieving that level of expertise. It’ll probably take 5 years to get there.”

“We’ve wanted marketing to make a bigger contribution for a while but pressing short term needs had to be addressed. Now though, we’re organising so that Marketing can assist the University in making a step-change in profile and performance.”

“We need to join things up more, recognising overlaps in audiences – and it’s important when it comes to our ambitions in the employer engagement arena. We need Marketing to be spearheading where we’re going – but not always at the top level, it’s about engraining across the university.”

“We’re creating an integrated marketing function – yet to be named – that will be focused on marketing objectives and led by more than good intentions.”

“We have a number of functions pursuing their own goals and doing the right things, according to their perspectives. Communications work is very good indeed, otherwise it’s very process driven and all within a selecting culture – but most of our ‘selectors’ are really just recruiters competing at a higher level.”

In some cases it was apparent that marketing had stepped up a level to consider the university brand – beyond just the corporate identity.

“Marketing advises us on things we need to change with regard to perceptions of the university. It’s then responsible for communications to that end – both internally and externally.”

And, as before, it is apparent that some HEIs are already taking a robust approach to the development of a full marketing function as its roles and responsibilities were being extended.

“We have a strong corporate marketing unit and there are marketing personnel in every business unit


(faculty) with dotted line responsibility to the Marketing Director. This is designed to combine academic subject expertise with appropriate marketing and communications expertise.”

“Marketing drives customer service.”

“Marketing has a role in bringing objectivity to decision making and operational planning.”

Issues and Barriers For those respondents who wanted to develop their marketing functions there was some reflection on the challenges to be faced in getting there. These were most clearly expressed by the Vice-Chancellors with greater ambitions, but even those with lesser ambitions in this area also recognised that enabling marketing to deliver more effectively was a particular challenge.

“Recognising what Marketing is and what it should contribute is one thing, enabling it to fulfil on this is rather more difficult in an HEI.”

“There’s a balance as to whether marketing drives management or management drives marketing. It is a bit of both as marketing evaluates options to inform directions and also advises on how to pitch the university in order to achieve goals.”

There were also clear cultural challenges for marketing to overcome in order to secure the essential levels of engagement, support and compliance from colleagues. A significant barrier is the combination of custom and practice in HEIs for marketing (in some form) to be undertaken at the ‘local’ (faculty/school/department) level and the belief among academics that they don’t need (or perhaps simply don’t wish to pay for) a marketing function.

“This is all challenging because the supply side tradition of HE runs very deep.”

“Historically, responsibilities and resources have been allocated in a range of places and/or devolved across the university and that makes marketing’s ownership of key tasks difficult. There’s also the view that, traditionally, the faculties have done the marketing.”

“There can be issues and tensions with regard to the relationship between Marketing and Faculty. Some Heads of School see solutions as being almost solely related to appointing good people – rather than marketing.”

“[Academic] Colleagues have particular and different views that may need to be addressed - and they may also be right, in their way.”

In those HEIs where these issues were yet to be overcome, there were two clear requirements. The first was perhaps the most simple, but not always thought to be most successful, being the need for a (more demonstrable) level of support from senior management, and from the V-C in particular.

“This needs appropriate messages to be sent across the University from me and other VCMG colleagues.”

How the best effect should be achieved was often pondered and was almost always underscored by a concern that diktat was not the answer (or at least not the sole answer – see section 6). And perhaps marketing professionals need to be more open about what they need to be addressed; as one respondent put it: “... marketing isn’t telling me what they’d like me to do to help in that respect.”

Whilst these Vice-Chancellors recognised their own role, in most cases the real locus of responsibility for the engagement and development of marketing was thought to rest with the marketing functions themselves.

Most typically, respondents cited the need for the function to gain operational support by clearly demonstrating its powers and benefits – in its general achievements and in specific activities such as the value of a role in portfolio management/development.

“Much is likely to be achieved through operational successes.”

“It is a holistic approach – whilst every functional area says it needs a seat at the corporate ‘top table’, Marketing does genuinely want and/or need to get involved in many areas.”

“We need a marketing function that demonstrates its role as a driver for achievement and of the value of that. [To achieve that it] needs to develop its insight/foresight role and contribute more fully to development of

14

products, services and so on.”

There were also strong indications that tackling the task of building marketing’s role is somewhat easier today than was the case in the past. As we see later, (section 6) this would seem to correlate well with the changes in management approach and organisational culture that appear to be emerging across the sector.

Where marketing was establishing a more engaged role in these institutions, it was thought to be making headway under its own steam as a reflection of its demonstrable achievements. And where this was the case, there could be growing demand for what marketing can deliver.

“There is growing keenness for marketing; there is now one marketing manager per faculty and many faculties are wanting more ... [even so] ... marketing is on a journey and, whilst moving swiftly, it will probably take 5 years to reach maturity at the university.”

“More broadly across the HEI, there is a sense that Heads of Department are understanding that they need to undertake work to ensure that their products look right and that they are putting on courses that people want to buy.”

In a few cases, and especially in the more marketing oriented HEIs, a third lever for change has come about through the engagement and interest of Governors in marketing. In most of these cases this was driven by the Vice-Chancellor to ensure that Governors are aware of the business needs and hence the value of marketing - and thus support the change and investment that will be required.

“It is going to be essential to deliver value for money for students - and other clients. The need for good service and value for money are issues that have also gained the interest and support of governors.”

And perhaps, on occasion, it was the governors who were encouraging their V-Cs to develop the function.

“The Chair of Council had a strong role in advocating the need for a Director of Marketing; its place is seen as equal to other key corporate functions.”

Having established that there is a growing interest in marketing, later sections explore how that interest is manifesting itself. The next section specifically considers the role marketing is taking in the development and delivery of HEIs’ strategic plans.


Section 3: Strategic PlanningIn this section, we look at both how marketing functions are informed and guided by the corporate strategy on the one hand and how they are engaged – or not – in the development of corporate strategic plans.

Being Informed and Guided by the Strategic PlanFor the most part, marketing functions are informed and guided by the Corporate Strategy in the most traditional sense, through the line management channels and processes. In most cases, marketing’s line reporting was to a Pro Vice Chancellor or similar VCMG manager. Respondents here expected that this ensured marketing was suitably focused on supporting key strategic and operational goals.

Regardless of line management, a significant majority of these V-Cs felt, by their own judgement, that there was a good direct engagement between themselves and the marketing director and the various marketing functions as a whole. However, the frequency and nature of that engagement appeared to vary considerably.

All V-Cs asserted that they afforded direct access to marketing leaders when needs arose and in most cases they had a reasonably regular interface. In only a few cases was there a sense of VCs participating in regular monitoring and management of marketing as a key component of their schedules – perhaps fortnightly, though extending to rather less frequent meetings.

The VCs with more frequent and regularised engagement were invariably those who were the most avid in terms of their business ambitions and entrepreneurial style. In two cases (one with a forthcoming new senior level marketing post) this was becoming more firmly established with marketing directors reporting directly to the VC.

Marketing’s Role in Developing Strategy and the Strategic PlanWe asked respondents to describe marketing’s role in the establishment and delivery of the Corporate Strategic Plan. We should point out here that we approached the subject around the issue of the University’s core strategic plan – though the discussions tended to consider a broader approach to strategic planning generally.

There was a wide range of responses to this question. However, these fell into one of three broad categories or conditions, which we have outlined below. The key differences are in the extent to which marketing is asked to contribute to the processes and conclusions in the strategic plan. Marketing as any other (non-teaching) department(a) In this role, marketing is little more than one among many departments/functions that are encouraged to contribute

views and recommendations to strategic planning – generally by way of a reactive response to any framework that may be posited by the institution’s management.

“Marketing has not made a particular contribution to strategic planning; it may be asked for specific inputs but is generally consulted as are other functions.”

Marketing as a key input(b) Here, marketing is asked to act as a source of information and intelligence that provides key inputs to the drafting

of the early stages of strategic plans, which may then go out for consultation across the HEI.

“Marketing isn’t part of the [core strategic planning] group but is tasked to do the background work in developing the strategic direction. Because marketing is all-pervasive, it provides intelligence and feedback in many respects.”

“The Marketing Director led the debate about the mission and the Strategic Plan follows from that – but the Marketing Director doesn’t ‘own’ the plan.”

Marketing as a prime driver(c) In these cases, the marketing function was one of the prime drivers or architects of a strategic plan (alongside

others) and was likely to be asked to make, at the least, a significant contribution to the production of a draft plan that would be commented upon more widely.

“Marketing is part of the ‘inner circle’ of corporate plan development; the outline of the plan was greatly informed by marketing prior to going out for wider consultation.”

16

“Our strategic plan is now a rolling document. Marketing input was considerable at its inception and was a fundamental consideration in its development.”

It appears that in approximately half of the cases here that marketing’s role fell into the first of the above categories – contributing reactively and in similar ways to any other teaching or non-teaching function. The remainder of cases were fairly evenly divided between the ‘key input’ and ‘prime driver’ categories – though, again, there were differences in scale in these respects.

In general, it appeared that marketing’s responsibilities in the final shape of the strategic plan were often limited to that of initial drafting of parts of the plan that were seen to be in its domain.

Provider of Research and Other InputsAs can be seen in all three of the above ‘conditions’, marketing is asked to provide inputs – such as market data and other research – to the strategic planning process.

These inputs ranged from a reactive provision against specific requirements of leaders of the strategic planning process to a broader responsibility to inform strategic planning and a proactive process of assimilation and provision of relevant intelligence. Inevitably, the extent of the inputs marketing made also appeared to vary considerably within each of these roles and across the whole.

In particular, some of the more forthright and more marketing oriented V-Cs were seeking a broader and more forward-looking contribution from their marketing professionals.

“When we’ve got it right, Marketing will actually shape the activity that informs the Strategic Plan – engaging with staff, students and other stakeholders.”

However, getting to the point where marketing can take a more significant role in strategic planning is not an easy task. This may reflect the broad management approach of each institution (see section 6) or some presiding expectations – or prejudices – of what can and should (and should not) lie in marketing’s remit.

“The development of the corporate plan is undertaken through a process in keeping with a broadly consultative management model (rather than an executive management model) in order to steer decisions. This reflects the sense of common ownership of, and engagement in, the university across the university and governing body. However there is usually a clear vision prior to consultation and VCMG will advise if they don’t agree.”

“Consultations takes place within the context of an already strong consensus of where the University is and what is needed; typically seeking contributions on how to achieve a direction/objective – not on determining the directions/objective.”

“Marketing informs decisions and prompts debate, it doesn’t make decisions. Portfolio matters are generally seen to be the concern of the schools and faculties and marketing is rather less involved in this area.”

“The University makes decisions because it is best aware of what is right for it.”

In the following section we consider more fully those issues relating to market research and intelligence.


Section 4. Metrics, Monitoring and Market ResearchIn this section we consider the ways in which institutions gather and use data, research and intelligence to inform, develop and monitor corporate strategy.

A Growing NeedThe vast majority of respondents here acknowledged that there is a significant and growing need for more and better data and research.

“A lot more work is needed in this area. Data analysis within the University is improving and externally benchmarked measures (NSS etc) are helpful. We’re even quite good at monitoring the impact of campaigns and conversion performances. However, we quite significantly need to develop a fuller university-focused view, as examples, more information on prospective and current student populations, the impact of WP activities and so on.”

Roles and ResponsibilitiesIn almost all cases, responsibility for monitoring the University’s position was largely, if not totally, vested in a ‘Planning’ function. It appeared that such functions were responsible for the production of institutional data for statutory reporting requirements.

“The planning function has a role for key data/indicators such as HESA et al.”

“We have little available beyond what’s provided in planning unit data.”

“This is undertaken [by the planning function] in various ways such as league table positions, published data such as HESA/UCAS etc.

By and large, it appeared that these functions produce and submit data to fulfil statutory requirements – e.g. for HEFCE and HESA – predominantly related to student data. Using similar sources, they generally produce data and reports at the sector and university level for internal monitoring of a university’s position in student markets.

A number also took the lead in the assimilation and production of other data for internal consumption, for example some reviewed the wealth of ‘external’ reports available such as league tables and the National Student Survey and KPIs to provide context for planning and benchmarking for progress.

In addition to the data provided from Planning Departments, marketing was often seen as the function that would (– or could – or should) contribute research and intelligence in strategic planning. There was also an implicit recognition of the differences between what a planning unit would typically provide compared to what a marketing function would wish to investigate.

“We have a strategic planning unit that addresses performance management and looks at internal KPIs. This isn’t a marketing function per se but has a wider remit than a stats unit.”

“Our planning function undertakes a lot of this – but it isn’t a marketing function.”

It was predominantly the case that marketing was in second place behind planning units in this respect. Paradoxically, however, the majority of respondents here felt that they needed more market research and market intelligence to inform their strategic planning.

“The macro picture is informed by intelligence from marketing as well as other sources.”

“Some metrics are available from marketing, such as call centre data. It also produces relevant data on markets etc.”

“The marketing function also undertakes or commissions broad market surveys, brand assessments and so on.”

Levels of SatisfactionThere were respondents at each end of the spectrum when considering how well their intelligence and insight needs were being met. Those Vice-Chancellors with more forthright commitments and ambitions for marketing were already enabling developments in this aspect of operations.

“Since the inception of the current Strategic Plan, business performance is evaluated in quarterly business

18

reviews addressing student numbers, commercial activities and international students. At first, this created some tensions and difficulties but is now very effective ... [especially as] these reviews involve governors to ensure [they too] appreciate the importance of business perspectives and that acts as a marker to others.”

The need for systematic data capture and market research was most frequently focused on portfolio management. Interest in market research programmes was often related to branding exercises - especially where an institution had recently undertaken a (re)branding programme.

“Marketing’s most prominent objective is about developing the University’s positioning, so marketing has a significant role in this respect. Market research budgets have received additional investment but this probably needs to develop further.”

On the other hand, a very small number – those that seemed to have fewer tough marketing challenges – were accepting of a trial and error approach – or localised solutions.

“At a ‘micro’ level, this is a very large and financially solid university ... it is therefore relatively easy to enter into new areas with minimal cost/risk and resources will follow as it develops.”

“In line with extensive delegation and devolved responsibility, local monitoring is predominant.”

However, the majority of respondents considered that work in this area needed to be developed further. It is important to note that respondents did not appear to be dissatisfied with the work of their planning functions, but there was sense that more was needed beyond that role to monitor performance and inform developments.

“This is not well developed. Whilst some work has been done in this area, it is episodic and piecemeal. It is not systematised – but needs to be.

“This is improving but is at a generally low level. Our planning function monitors corporate data, including HESA and so on, and other inputs are welcome such as the NSS. However, beyond this there has been no regular or systematic monitoring.”

“We’re not valuing our markets’ views and needs sufficiently to enable us to do the best job.”

Challenges and LimitationsWhilst there appeared to be a considerable level of expressed need for more market research, there were four factors that emerged in these discussions that appeared to act as hurdles to the development of work in this area. Whilst we have identified them separately, they are not mutually exclusive.

Research as a ServiceIn relation to market research focused on the course portfolio, marketing’s main role was often seen to be the provider of information for decision making by others – such as course leaders or Deans – rather than for marketing itself to engage in, or even take the lead role in, evaluating the viability and potential of current or proposed courses.

With planning and decision making vested in operational units within an institution, market research (in much the same way as for marketing generally in many of these institutions) is expected to react to the needs and requirements (and often the budgets) of internal clients. Conversely, proactive and predictive work by a marketing function may be an unwelcome intrusion.

Research LimitationsAmbitions for market research were often met with reservations about what it could usefully contribute – the greatest of these being that the vast bulk of research is reflective rather than progressive.

“So much research is history. As helpful as that is, what a lot of people want is forward looking research, telling us what to do – but that’s the most difficult to deliver.

Research ImpactFor a number of respondents, what seems to lie at the heart of the problem of use of market research and the assimilation of findings, interpretations and recommendations is the problem of dissemination.


As a part of this, there was some reflection on the need to ensure credibility in market research processes and programmes. However, above all, the concern focused on the need for market research findings and recommendations to be accessible and comprehensible for the key stakeholders.

“The problems here have been in commissioning the right research and ensuring research has an impact internally; the latter has been a particular problem.”

“It’s really hard to deliver the research that makes the cases and our decisions unequivocal. Somehow we still need to find ways for marketing to lead decision making in some areas.”

Market Research on MarketingAnd finally, at a much lower level, there was occasional reflection on the desirability – and difficulty – of monitoring the impact of marketing activity itself – though this was also seen to be particularly difficult.

“ it is hard to get hold of data that indicates marketing activity results.”

20

Section 5: Beyond Student MarketingThese discussions tended to focus on marketing for student recruitment purposes and most frequently on undergraduate student recruitment within that. Having anticipated this to some extent based on our experience, the discussion guide raised and prompted consideration of marketing in other areas of university operations. We set aside international markets as we believe that this is a very complex area which deserves particular attention. However, we focused on internal marketing and communications and two aspects of what is often termed ‘third leg’ activity being a) business to business marketing (B2B) and b) fundraising and development activity.

Business to Business Markets: An area of growthIn these discussions we encompassed the potential for commercial development: the main thrust relating to the generation of incomes from other organisations, whether commercial or not-for-profit.

This was an area of activity – and opportunity – that V-Cs felt to be largely underdeveloped and thus becoming increasingly high on their institution’s, and consequently on their own, agenda. Whilst recognising this as an area of great opportunity they also saw it as one that is difficult to address, not just for their own institution but for the sector as a whole.

“There are expectations and beliefs that all universities are doing such work, but there is great doubt as to whether many are doing this at all well. Actually, how to do it is really more of a concern than how to market it.”

“Not many HEIs are really tackling this area – and many don’t even understand the problem.”

“We’re not well developed in that area and universities generally are not good in business engagement.”

Some V-C’s recognised that they had relatively small-scale engagement in B2B developments and were considering how to address the challenges and opportunities in this area. Others considered that they often had a matrix of organisational components (some with clear commercial intent, some less so) that sought to engage with commerce and industry with mixed success.

Roles and ResponsibilitiesA variety of arrangements became apparent for the development of third stream incomes from commercial engagement. We identified the general features and models for these but did not explore them in detail.

In a small number of cases commercial development took place within the framework of a separate organisation that covenanted its incomes to the University. The relationship between the organisations was constitutionally embedded, though it would appear that commercial development took place outside the rhythm of these Universities’ core academic activities. This was generally the case for longer established and larger institutions - and such operations already had considerable scale.

“This isn’t particularly relevant here as such activity is undertaken through a separate company which covenants its incomes to the university and operates with its own marketing resource.”

In an equally small number of cases, generally from among the Post-92 Sector, there was a view that there was already a considerable integration of such work and opportunities were seen as being addressed as far as practicable already.

“Business markets are integral to our strategy. And they are further integrated in that employers are a key focus of the university; delivering highly employable graduates.”

In the majority of cases, there was a specific function operating within the University (whether a directorate, department or unit) that had responsibility for the development of commercial incomes. Yet there appeared to be great variability in the extent to which such a function had control of this area of work or even had a complete view of all such work across an institution.

“Early phase ‘hobbyism’, by those with a personal interest, is the main driver at the moment - and I don’t think we’re alone in this. It’s an area that we recognise is key for development.”

“Currently a lot is done by consensus and judgement. For the future, much is expected to follow through from a strategic review process that will take place in the near future.”


Moreover, the existence of a specific function did not, in itself, appear fully to address the challenges of commercial development or even make them appreciably less difficult and, as some respondents observed, it can bring further issues into the equation.

“This aspect of the University is undertaken by a separate entity with its own dedicated teams and has been developing separately with a positioning and branding to best address its audiences and markets. However, it is recognised that there needs to be some beneficial cross-referencing between the student and business to business areas of operations – that’s particularly challenging and needs further focus. So, levels of promotion have been trimmed back in the meantime.”

“It is undertaken by a separate entity but that entity does not have something as specific as a marketing function. However, it is recognised that there needs to be more vigour in developing business to business engagement. This is a tough challenge because this university is good at teaching and research at an academic level but finds it hard to engage in more applied and entrepreneurial and commercial activity.”

“This is not well developed and there is more to be done in this area. We have a dedicated unit which does its own (predominantly below the line) marketing but neither the marketing edge nor the commercial focus are as they need to be in this area of operations. This is not an easy area to develop and is one which needs much more marketing engagement and input.”

One V-C of a university with what appears to have been a clear strategy and operational plan for commercial development reflected that the plan was in need of review and that it had not enabled the optimal transfers of image, awareness and reputation between commercial developments and the core purpose and image of the university itself.

“There is a separate approach to work in this area but we’re reviewing that. We need better to work out how the university takes benefit from those areas of our operations.”

Marketing’s RoleFor most, the need to take a more managed approach to the development of commercial incomes was recognised and there was consequently some recognition that this was an area in which marketing could and should play a strong part. This was as much the case for those universities with relatively well established commercial operations as for those that were starting from a much lower base.

“Broad marketing work is successfully raising the university’s [general] profile, but there’s now a need to gain greater visibility and appreciation of the university’s offer and its services to clients. There is a significant role for marketing to play in this area; a different one to that of marketing in student markets.”

“There is a desire for marketing to make a much greater contribution; and we need to put some considerable effort into getting this area of activity right. There is, however, a big issue to be addressed with regard to roles and responsibilities in marketing to businesses.”

Whilst it appeared that the need for marketing in commercial development was recognised in principle, the majority of these V-Cs, at the time of these discussions at least, were not able to articulate what the role of marketing might be.

It will be evident that, here again, we found that marketing’s potential contribution is recognised in principle but making that an operational reality appears to be difficult to resolve. This is reflected in an almost universal recognition that this is an area in which marketing has not yet been encouraged or enabled to engage.

Fundraising and DevelopmentThis aspect of third leg development appears to have progressed rather better than commercial engagement. Alumni relations is an unquestioned need – though even here, in a small number of cases, the formal establishment of an alumni relations function may have been relatively recent (in one case in the last five years).

Most are active in fundraising – though the scale and extent to which this is an established and integral part of university operations varied considerably – from the large and long-established to those that are in the very earliest stages of operations. Just one university did not have a fundraising function at the time of the discussions – but was undertaking a scoping exercise with a view to establishing one.

Fundraising’s organisational location was almost equally placed within a marketing function as it was separately located. In some cases this recognised the strategic drives of marketing, focusing on the institution’s brand and reputation. In most cases though, this was for operational reasons as marketing was seen to provide the infrastructure and support in areas such as the design and production of relevant outputs.

22

“Marketing is seen here as the base discipline in which to locate fundraising activity – which will mostly be in the corporate sector – and will need to manage communications and orchestrate the many players who will need to be involved.”

“Fundraising is an integral and integrated part of our approach to the development of the university and all the relevant functions reside under [the same VCMG member].”

“This is a separate function led by a director of development, but marketing is engaged as a part of a small core fundraising committee. Marketing is mostly involved in the presentation aspects.”

“These are separate at the moment but the plan is to integrate them within a new broader-ranging function.”

“These are separate functions but there is considerable connection and co-operation between the two. Marketing is responsible for the outward facing aspects as that skill-set isn’t in the alumni team.”

Whatever the location, there was a recognised need for specialist fundraisers to optimise such activity and for them to work closely alongside marketing colleagues. This reflects a general view among these respondents that marketing and fundraising are, at their core, similar functions that consequently can and should work to mutual benefit.

In addition, whilst not probed in any depth in these discussions, there were a few suggestions that these functions also have similar (service) relationships with the core operations of their universities; a sense of being responsible for improvement without imposition.

Internal Marketing and Communications Our interest here was an evaluation of the extent to which HE leaders were considering staff within their institutions as a marketplace with an audience of stakeholders to be engaged and motivated (an internal marketing challenge) - or as an audience to which information is disseminated (an internal communications need).

All respondents recognised and reflected on the critical roles that HEI staff play in supporting and working towards their institution’s goals and ambitions - and the vast majority of these VCs had an interest in developing communications with or to staff.

In one or two cases, respondents considered that internal communications had not developed sufficiently – and in one case an internal communications strategy and the creation of newsletters was being established at the time.

“Internal communications is developing as a key requirement as the engagement and support of colleagues is important to our agenda. The marketing function is addressing some particular needs; a working group is also looking at this.”

However, for the majority of respondents internal communications channels and vehicles were reasonably well established and responsibilities were clear. The focus and/or benefits of these (at least as far as these VCs is concerned) is predominantly on communications so that ‘management’ is able to get its messages to the staff body – effectively a top down approach.

“Internal communications is a formally established role within Marketing. It tends to focus on people and success stories in keeping with the goal of raising confidence and setting higher objectives, benchmarks and ambitions – promoting our ‘be the best’ objective.”

“Internal communications is a specific function but has mostly focused on internal statements through one-off emails and the newsletter. There’s been little recognition of an internal marketplace of late.”

“Some internal comms activity is well established, such as the internal newsletter, regular email updates and one-to-one communications. This responsibility lies within HR though interested functions include marketing and PR. Internal dissemination is key and V-C visibility and engagement is an important factor.

“Internal marketing as such is not well established – but internal communications is very well established – from V-C blogs to newsletters and every department having an annual discussion with a VCMG member. Staff seem to appreciate being kept aware of corporate drives through good communications.”

Even though communication was the main concern, there was an underlying and implicit aim (though generally not with an articulated or established strategy) of building a greater understanding, and thus engagement, amongst staff.

“There is a strong ‘top down’ drive to ensure that information cascades effectively and swiftly and that this


creates a sense of awareness, involvement and transparency for staff – which in turn engenders faith in the university’s planning and operations and builds support for the management approach.”

Indeed many of the V-Cs here believed that internal communications improvements and particular ‘drives’ have been successful in gaining support for broad goals or, more usually, specific developments.

“This has all enabled the development of a beneficial management culture that has changed for the better in recent years.”

Whilst the majority of respondents recognised the desirability of internal marketing, this was an objective that was again seen to be difficult to address in university organisations. Though in a few cases, there was some apparent encouragement to address the challenge.

“It’s a difficult problem because of differing cultures. Admin staff tend to serve the institution whereas academic staff more usually serve their subject or department. That’s changing though as we are increasingly getting the sense that staff here want this institution to be seen as brand.”

Nevertheless, beyond the need to provide information to staff, only one or two respondents had notional ambitions for a broader engagement of staff. However, where these ambitions existed, progress from their current communications focus towards a more internal market facing strategy appeared to be slow.

“This is something on our radar for consideration, though staff here are considered as an audience and there’s a tacit sense of internal marketing.”

“Internal Marketing and Communications is a key theme for development in the future because the current focus is on the communications side and we wish to develop this further to encourage unification and support of all personnel.”

“We have a clear view of the organisational behaviours that are conducive to achieving the engagement of staff, such as how the University treats people, working conditions and so on. At present though there is neither a formal staff engagement programme nor a process of monitoring staff motivations, attitudes and so on.”

As one tool for staff engagement, one or two respondents had staff incentive schemes in place. Indeed one had a universal pay award scheme wherein all staff benefited from the University’s performance. The other had a partially developed scheme which served certain categories of senior management based on income generation, but was wishing to move to something broader and more formal.

“A staff incentive programme is in progress and the right framework agreement is being developed. Any incentives will be developed to reward colleagues who go the ‘extra yard’, not just for fulfilling their responsibilities. HR is also concerned to develop succession planning.”

Where there was a desire to build a broader engagement programme, there were often difficulties in determining the locus of responsibility between Marketing and HR functions – and this also a challenging task for some to engage in:

“Marketing links with HR on this and there have been staff surveys in the past, though not the recent past.”

“Marketing leads on internal communications and undertakes staff surveys to garner internal views and these are generally favourable. However, there is no planned programme of staff engagement.”

24

Section 6: Management, Culture and Change One of the issues that emerged in the earliest of these discussions – and was consequently incorporated into the discussion guide – was the apparent relationship between the management style and culture of an HEI and its commitment to and deployment of marketing. Here we provide an insight into the changes in approach and we discuss the correlation between management approach and marketing in our conclusions.

Style and CultureWe asked V-Cs to appraise the management style and culture of their HEIs and, to assist in this, we asked respondents to indicate their approximate position on a scale for which we offered a simple model. Effectively, we described three different management approaches in a notional and variable scale and asked them to indicate where they believed their management culture and style was on that scale.

� A Collegiate management approach – where an HEI is largely run with high levels of consultation and democratic (or democracy-conscious) decision making. Perhaps with some senior personnel being elected as opposed to appointed.

� A Consultative management approach – where considerable consultation takes place in order to explore possibilities, then develop options and then refine the goals and direction of the university but where this process informs the conclusions and decision making of a management group

� An Executive management approach – where the VCMG leads the development of the strategic plan, most likely seeking and assimilating inputs from various relevant functions, to form a plan comprising objectives and directions/strategies. These are usually opened up for consultation across the institution – though this may be to relevant constituencies and for testing/refinement rather than redirection.

(It must be borne in mind when considering the findings here, that a respondent’s evaluations will be based to some extent on their own perspectives of the scale discussed.)

Now and ThenThe responses were almost always in two parts, being how things were and how they are now. This reflects the fact that most V-Cs considered that management styles and cultures were changing.

Such changes were taking place for a number of reasons, but generally because the tasks of management in universities is facing increasingly starker realities – from the financial challenges and ‘encouragements’ of state funding mechanisms to greater transparency and measurability of external league tables and the NSS.

Consequently, all observed that the management approach in their institution had moved along the scale we posited, but changes seemed to be especially marked where new Vice-Chancellors had arrived in post within, say, the last 5 years.

“Until a couple of years ago, the university was managed through a consultative approach. It has now moved to a more managed model, a leadership/executive approach (though a full executive management approach may take 10 years to emerge).”

“In recent years there has been a move towards the executive management end of the scale. It was seen as essential to move towards a top down management model in order to drive the necessary changes – both operational and cultural – within what is a significant business.”

“On the scale outlined, it was previously very collegiate here – and there remains a strong collegiate culture. However, it has changed to a more executive approach – but not an instructive one. So, whilst there is generally a clear view of direction and strategy from [the V-C and the VCMG], the implementation is achieved in a more engaged way; arriving at an informed decision; drawing inputs from appropriate areas and with appropriate consultation.”

“This is a business-facing university, with clear objectives and clear roles for internal units/functions within that and we’re seeking to be business-like in what the university does and how it does it. We’re somewhere between the consultative and executive management models on the scale – probably closer to executive.”

Collegiate Consultative Executive


“We operate on an Executive Management model but with ‘top down’ and ‘bottom up’ aspects harmonised and aligned. ‘Top down’ provides strategic direction but ‘bottom up’ comes first in many respects because the aim is for the designated (and quasi autonomous) business units to progress within their own business conditions – ensuring they are contributing to the desired direction/progress of the corporate whole.”

“We’re now tending towards an executive leadership/management model. Consultation takes place to garner views and opinions but the process is essentially led by the Vice-Chancellor with the VCMG.”

“There was previously an almost ludicrous level of collegiality and consultation in management and decision making processes which meant many extensive committees but few decisions. This is being moved to a more progressive management approach – somewhere in the middle of the range, just the executive side of consultative. However, there is a need to strike an appropriate balance. For example, it is unlikely that a research-strong HEI would be well served by a strongly executive approach: there is instead a need to steer – and benefit from – the wilful independence of a lot of very capable people.”

“Historically, the management model was entirely variable in application ... now the University is adopting a more consistent approach and position, somewhere between consultative and executive on the scale discussed.”

“The approach is for the development of a worked up plan or proposal, regarding the big issues rather than the detail, which is then presented for consultation and response. The execution of proposals and plans is managed on a much more executive model as the detail cannot viably be consulted upon.”

“The University’s management is near to the [consultative] centre of the scale as discussed – though on the executive side, certainly not in the Oxbridge and Russell Group’s consensual/democratic end of the scale. The approach is that of a collegiate group which leads six different businesses.”

Better Consultation, Better ProgressFor many respondents the general movement along the scale (toward more executive management approaches) was also succeeding in enabling a far better focus – and thus quality and value – of debate on issues that warranted it by colleagues who had the relevant knowledge and skills.

“In some respects, there is now no need for consultation – on matters of the estate for example. However, the new management model also benefits from constructive consultation that takes place which is much more focused on implementation than on the purpose and direction of the plan itself. So, for example, considerable consultation is taking place about the e-learning environment.”

In one or two cases, there was some reflection on the development of executive management approaches being a response to HEFCE initiatives which have been increasingly interested in streaming funding to HEIs in ways that are inter-related to management needs such as the various HEIF and Strategic Development Fund initiatives.

Vice-Chancellors as the Drivers of ChangeMany of the V-Cs here confirmed that these changes were – and indeed had to be – driven by themselves and the senior management of the institutions. However, having recognised the need and having addressed the challenges, in most cases they found support rather than resistance.

“Ultimately, change has to be driven by senior management – and senior management has to be led by Vice-Chancellors. So a V-C has to stamp his or her authority ... if the Vice-Chancellor doesn’t make it happen, it just won’t happen.”

“Times have changed – and that’s recognised by many academics now. So universities will follow strong leadership – even if they have doubts.”

“The shift to executive management had to be driven through – but was easier than may have been feared; there was a common desire for change and development within the university.”

“This change was led by [the VC] and was easier than it might have been because times have changed and this was recognised by many academics. This is, in any case, conducted within a context of positive opportunities as demand for the university’s courses and services is good. There are no major negatives; there are no jobs at risk.”

“Senior management needs to lead, to generate the big ideas and then push – until it finds a point of

26

resistance and then it needs to listen.”

However, whilst acknowledging the need, such change is not always entirely welcome.

“I think that for me and many other V-Cs, aspiring to lead a University didn’t carry expectations of needing to be a marketer and fundraiser. I do it to some extent, but that’s not why I came to be here – and it can be personally difficult when I have to engage with [external] people with cultures and attitudes to which I’m not sympathetic.”

Preserving Core ValuesIn parallel with these management style changes, we found that many Vice-Chancellors in this programme had also changed the ways in which they sought to work with their managers and staff in general. In cases of more recently appointed Vice-Chancellors, the reference points for change were those of the style of the previous VC.

Most commonly cited in this respect were the need to not only manage but also to lead – and to do so in a way that fostered trust and confidence from staff – and thus engendered considerable support. Openness and frankness, accepting some inevitable limitations and caveats, were both seen as key factors in achieving this.

“.... there also needs to be belief and trust in the value of such an approach among staff and this has to be worked for. A key to this is a basic honesty and openness with staff. That greater transparency led to greater empowerment for all, especially Senior and Middle Managers.”

“Open monitoring of progress and dissemination of management information also ensures that staff can see the benefits of change and management activity. E.g. research productivity is up, grant income is up, student recruitment is buoyant.”

Equally, there was full support and recognition – even from the most commercially minded of Vice-Chancellors – of the need to protect and preserve the essential underpinnings of academic quality and academic values through processes of change.

“It is important that business efficiency does not compromise quality and that is the role of an independent group within the University. Nonetheless, that group also has a stated (business-oriented) objective to ensure that the quality of the University is in the top echelons.”


Section 7: Observations, Conclusions, RecommendationsManagement Context and ApproachIt became apparent through this exercise that the broad management context is an essential consideration when reviewing the adoption and deployment of marketing in HEIs.

There were indications that Vice-Chancellors of today are changing considerably from those of the past. Today, Vice-Chancellors are most probably considering their organisation as a business and are consequently establishing more objective-oriented leadership and management styles to deliver business imperatives.

As a consequence we can see in the findings here that HEIs are moving towards more executive management styles and that the more recent post-holders in this programme have sought to move that furthest. As examples they might typically consider and manage ‘Business Units’ and use regular (monthly/quarterly) business reviews or ensure they can access business metrics on ‘dashboards’.

All the while, this is not to compromise the academic quality and integrity which remains at the heart of these institutions but seeks to provide a framework in which it can thrive and develop.

In order to develop their institutions, many Vice Chancellors have embarked on change programmes and they have found change easier to achieve than may have been anticipated. This is as much attributed to market conditions, with a growing recognition of a competitive environment among staff, as to the adoption of more open management styles that engender trust and support among staff.

Whilst not a specific area for discussion, it was clear through all the interviews here that there was a recognised need for marketing – in turn recognising that Higher Education has been going through a process of marketisation; a process that is expected to continue.

These Vice-Chancellors variously spoke of institution-specific challenges such as the development of subject areas or of, for example, the development of part-time and/or postgraduate provision. They also reflected on market-wide phenomena, such as: � The prospects of truly variable (uncapped) fees at undergraduate level � The forthcoming ‘demographic dip’ � The increasingly competitive home marketplace � Growing international competition.

Underpinning this, some expressed a broad concern about consumers’ perceptions and responses to the cost and perceived value of HE programmes – at both an institution and sector level.

Understanding of Marketing PrinciplesTo set a reference point for any understanding of marketing we need to ensure a separation of the discipline above and beyond sales, communication and promotional activities. Marketing does indeed manage many aspects of sales, communications and promotions, but the single most significant differentiator is that marketing needs to engage in developing the product’s performance and delivery in order to meet better the needs of consumers. Here are two definitions of marketing, either will do.

The Chartered Institute of Marketing’s current definition is:

Marketing is the management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably.

Our own, and our preferred, definition of marketing is:

A ‘business’ philosophy backed by a ‘toolkit’ of professional practices, that believes an organisation will better achieve its goals by understanding and delivering (and communicating according to) consumers’ needs and wants.

Implicit in our definition – with marketing as a philosophy – is that it is an approach that requires the whole organisation to recognise, and ideally adopt, in order for marketing’s strategic value to be fully realised. This addresses and overcomes the danger that marketing as a ‘management process’ is a separable strand of management activity – even when it may be well integrated.

28

Whichever you prefer, set against these references, most Vice-Chancellors have a very good appreciation of marketing, providing a fair description of its role and at least recognising its remit extends into areas such as product management and customer relations. A significant proportion also recognised that this logically extends into marketing’s potential role in informing strategic and operational plans.

Growing Engagement of MarketingIn general, it appears that marketing’s position is developing and is being better recognised and utilised across the board. Respondents appeared to want marketing to make a bigger contribution.

To some extent, longer-established Vice-Chancellors are embracing the discipline and welcoming the benefits that marketing can deliver. However, the greatest advances appear to be made when there is a change of Vice-Chancellor as many appear to have a much more business like view (and increasingly business related experience) of the management of a university. It perhaps inevitably follows that new Vice-Chancellors are more likely to have marketing quite high on their agenda.

Whether or not this is a consequence of governing bodies seeking Vice-Chancellors with such a business approach is not something we can answer here. However, it does tend to support the view that marketing is often targeted for action by aspirant and new Vice-Chancellors. It can be perceived as a good target because, as demonstrated in the findings here, it has generally been constrained and developments in marketing can be relatively swift and are quite visible.

The majority of V-Cs also recognise the need for the development of key components of marketing within a holistic approach, including, as we covered them here: the need for analysis and research to underpin corporate strategy; the need for staff awareness, engagement and support; the need for commercial development – although, as we have observed, putting these into practice may be a different matter.

The sum of all these developments would seem to suggest that now is a very good time to be a marketer in HE and, based on broader observations, we suggest this is evidenced in part by the increasing seniority of marketers that the sector is recruiting.

Correlations with University TypeWe found there may be some correlation between the type of organisation and the extent to which it had a marketing orientation. As might be expected there was some tendency towards stronger marketing engagement and orientation in former polytechnics and other ‘new’ universities – and very often this might mean large, urban institutions in areas where there is relatively high competition. However, such a correlation was relatively slight.

As noted above, a stronger correlation towards marketing orientation was suggested in the recency of appointment, background (especially with regard to previous commercial engagement) and general attitudes of the Vice-Chancellor. It appeared that more recently appointed VCs had marketing on their agendas at an early stage.

Limited Application of Marketing in Strategic PlanningIn contrast to the expressed appreciation of, and commitment to, marketing’s fundamental role and remit, in practice there was great variability in the deployment of marketing within these HEIs. Even with the above in view, the proportion of V-Cs who really are utilising marketing as an integrated and strategic business discipline are relatively few.

Among a small proportion of universities here there appeared to be a significant integration of marketing, not only in the drafting of the strategic plan but also in the regular day-to-day achievement of the plan itself. This reflected the nature of the VC and their approach to the business planning of the University.

However, by and large there seemed to be a less than complete involvement and deployment for the vast majority of marketing functions here. And typically, marketing tends to be focused on ‘consumer’ markets for HE with undergraduate student recruitment being the most common focus of attention for the discipline – with corporate or brand marketing following close behind.

Whilst the expressed understanding of marketing and its value is sound, in practice it does predominantly seem to be the case that marketing is not fully engaged in the business processes of an institution and is thus inevitably compromised in its ability to deliver its full potential – whether that is to the broad corporate planning process or to more specific needs.

There was a sense, from some of the comments received, that marketing functions tended to be held at arm’s length from the day to day business of the university.

“Marketing informs decisions and prompts debate, it doesn’t make decisions. Portfolio matters are generally seen to be the concern of the schools/faculties and marketing is rather less involved in this area.”


“The University makes decisions because it is best aware of what is right for it.”

The Development of Higher Education MarketingThere is an interesting paradox here. On the one hand marketing’s remit has been developing and expanding, yet on the other it remains limited. It is important to put these observations into context.

As we have seen in this report, V-Cs have been increasing their commitment to marketing and the vast majority of those who have been in the sector for some years will certainly testify to the growth of departments and to rather easier engagement in their institutions than was once the case. But marketing is being constrained in comparison to its ultimate role. We suggest that ultimate role is to deliver business solutions – but in HE it is predominantly required to produce communications solutions.

To illustrate this, we have identified three stages of marketing’s development in HE:

These are inevitably imperfect characterisations but they serve to illustrate both the progress and the tensions arising in marketing fulfilling its ultimate potential.

Promotional MarketingMarketing’s task here is to raise the profile and promote the institution and its offer. The focus is generally on communications to promote the University’s provision – predominantly for prospective students. Typically, activity is in advertising, key literature, PR and the application of corporate identity (logos et al). It may also be asked to enhance presentation of materials for bids etc.

Brand MarketingMarketing’s task in this case is generally to create an overarching proposition and position for the institution. This extends beyond promotional activity by enabling marketing to understand consumers’ views of the institution as an entity and develop a tone and style in its communications – and sometimes its operations – that imbues the organisation with a desirable brand position and image (reputation may be the preferred [though less compete] term). This will entail a growth in market research, the development and application of a cohering corporate style and the development of greater consumer responsiveness in operations such as customer relationship management (CRM) through the recruitment, admissions and enrolment phases.

Business Solutions MarketingThis builds further to enable marketing to engage in developing a greater understanding of the many different markets in which an HEI operates (from corporate to courses) and to develop business solutions that include the shaping of the product and service. Some HEIs appear now to be moving towards such an approach to inform course/subject marketing and portfolio management decisions. As we have seen in this report, extension into areas such as internal marketing and business-to-business marketing remains very limited.

The evidence here – and also from broader observation – suggests that marketing’s role has been progressing steadily, if not rapidly – but that marketing’s enagagement to deliver business solutions is not well established in the sector.

Organic and Step Change DevelopmentsIt appears, both from this programme and broader observations, that as marketing has become better established it has achieved an organic growth – whether because markets have been more challenging or because it has demonstrated a real benefit.

In addition, the suggestion in this programme is that marketing functions are experiencing step change development in their institutions. This was especially evidenced by the changes that more recently appointed Vice-Chancellors made – and/or have been making – since taking up their posts. Those V-Cs who had arrived within the last five years or so appear to have been a) more than typically interested in the commercial conditions of their institution and b) more engaged in development strategy.

In effect, we suggest, there are two complementary dynamics at work. The first is the progression of management style towards more executive approaches. Secondly, following in the wake of those developing management approaches, marketing is moving towards more business oriented purposes.

Promotional Communications Brand Marketing Business Solutions

30

To illustrate this we have produced a hypothetical map – a dialectic – that shows the changing trends in, and the relationship between, management culture and marketing in HE.

Referring back to how VC’s often reflected on management developments on a ‘then and now’ basis, the dark blue stars indicate where the management culture was ‘then’ and the light blue stars indicate where the management style is ‘now’. The arrows indicate the ‘organic’ progress of marketing. The diagonal grey lines indicate the step-change effect that is arising.

This step change has also helped to shift the nature of marketing in HEIs – moving from a predominantly reactive ‘client serving’ function to a more proactive and significant role in establishing the corporate response to the markets in which the institution is operating.

From Promotional Communications to Business SolutionsFor all the progress being made, it remains rare for marketing to be engaged in the development of business solutions and to this end the majority of respondents recognised that there were significant difficulties in actually embedding marketing principles and practices into HEI operations. There seem to be a number of issues to address in this respect.

Cultural ClashWhilst marketing is normally not now the pariah it may have been in some HEIs, we would expect that both corporate managers and marketers in HE will agree that marketing and academia are seen as diametric opposites in terms of both character and purpose. To some extent tensions still arise when attempting to bring the two together.

We also have to question whether, deep down, some Vice Chancellors may themselves be reticent to see a shift to commercial operations in HE or perhaps find some of the activities within marketing as unsuitable or inappropriate.

“I think that for me and many other V-Cs, aspiring to lead a University didn’t carry expectations of needing to be a marketer and fundraiser. I do it to some extent, but that’s not why I came to be here – and it can be personally difficult when I have to engage with [external] people with cultures and attitudes to which I’m not sympathetic.”

“We’re very suspicious about advertising in the university – it’s inappropriate and sends the wrong messages; it is generally an admission of defeat.”

Resource ConstraintsIn the resource constrained environments of most HEIs, corporate managers are invariably balancing resource demands from many areas. Marketing invariably has a high demand for both cash and people. As we have seen in this programme, there are significant needs for HE marketers to develop their capacity and capability in areas such as market research, business-to-business marketing and internal marketing.

In the commercial sector, marketing may justify its case/s with a measurable return on investment, but this is rather harder to achieve in HEIs. To some extent, this is a ‘Catch 22’ for marketers and VCs alike. In order to deliver its business benefits, marketing needs more resources – but it won’t be able to demonstrate its business case until and unless business metrics are better established and that requires more resources – and probably an expanded marketing function.

Marketing ComplexityMarketing is neither simple nor self-contained. Marketing solutions are a response to complex matrices of needs in changing times and generally require the orchestration of complex matrices of activities that spread widely across an HEI (and well beyond the marketing function itself) in a sustained and evolving way.

Whilst some aspects of the marketing toolkit – like advertising and PR – can be readily seen and measured against their specific and generally short term goals, marketing in the round has no magic bullet; there is no single aspect of its activity that completes the virtuous circle of a) understanding needs and b) shaping products and services to meet them.

Promotions Brand Business Solutions

Collegiate Consultative Executive


In addition, evidences may appear to be circumstantial. As an example, in one institution recently, we reviewed five pieces of research, not one of which, on its own, could stand sufficient scrutiny to make a case stand up. However, when viewed together, the consistency of findings – from different perspectives – made a case most persuasively.

Paradoxically, whilst marketing aims to increase the opportunities and likelihoods of organisational success, it is dependent on much outside its direct control. Some marketing successes may not be immediately obvious or will require time to become evident.

Unresolved ChallengesWe believe that whilst the philosophy of marketing is recognised and relatively easily assimilated, the ways in which the discipline can be adopted within an HEI are unclear to many VCs, accepting the respondents here are typical representatives. More specifically, the ways in which marketing can actually deliver the benefits of its principles appeared to be unclear to these V-Cs.

This is neither a unique nor new problem. Much of marketing and its subset of disciplines have a vagueness that is difficult to overcome for the ‘lay’ observer. This is amply evidenced in the famous quote of Lord Leverhulme: “I know half of my advertising is wasted, but I can’t tell which half.”

For example, where might Vice-Chancellors find answers to such reasonable questions as: � How can marketing progress beyond producing the front of house image and promotions to become both a

welcome and valued function which focuses on returns on investment? � How could marketing really assist HR in developing staff engagement and commitment? � How can marketing deliver credible research and intelligence to inform (say) portfolio development? � Is it conceivable that marketing could guide us to be better providers of Higher Education? � What could marketing do to enable us to develop our commercial incomes?

And perhaps underpinning this is the most significant unanswered question: � How indeed could marketing as a commercial practice really understand higher education with its many subtexts

and complex inter-relationships?

We suggest, from our experience, that these concerns and challenges are generally not answered for either Vice-Chancellors or marketers, but these are the debates that need to take place – and hopefully through the process we will find practical solutions that meet the ambitions of all. The case is well evidenced in the following exchange that took place in this programme.

Respondent: “Most marketing led Universities are post-92s. You see, we can’t be like that because there’s something about this type of university that needs to be preserved in order to maintain its position. And besides, we need to be agile to stay afloat.”

Interviewer: “But marketing is about understanding – so can’t a good marketing function understand what needs to be preserved and embed that into both strategic and marketing planning to enable that agility?”

Respondent: “Good point, I hadn’t looked at it that way.

Changing Marketing’s References for HEFrom the comments made in virtually all these discussions it was apparent that the Vice-Chancellor is a key figure in shaping the culture and approach of an HEI and a key figure in adopting and empowering marketing as a key function in their organisation.

Such Vice-Chancellors are certainly ambitious and are increasingly looking at their organisation as a business that needs to be managed to meet increasingly important goals. It naturally follows that they seem to be developing a more objective-oriented leadership

As we have concluded above, those Vice-Chancellors have various questions to address about their organisation’s development and implicitly about marketing’s role in that.

Our suggestion here is that the dialogue needs to change if marketing is to take its optimal role in developing business solutions. We also suggest that this new dialogue needs to embrace, reconfigure and integrate both marketing and management philosophies.

Marketing as a Business ProcessIn order to progress from its current position, it is essential for both marketers and senior managers in HE to recognise that marketing is first and foremost a business process.

32

To this end, marketers themselves need to present the marketing processes more forcefully and clearly. It would also help to position their more visible tools such as advertising and promotions within the business process and underline that they are best deployed after the process has defined their goals: ready, aim, fire – rather than ready, fire, aim!

Equally, as a business process, it is vital that the organisation’s most senior management engage with marketing in that context. Only by fully briefing marketing on the organisation’s challenges and objectives can marketing determine its optimal contributions. And managers will need to consider what is an appropriate level of investment in both time and resources that will in turn enable marketing to deliver those contributions.

We have offered below a number of suggestions as to how these complementary goals can be achieved.

The Outmoded 4P modelThe most commonly used mnemonic to both describe and direct marketing concerns is that of the ‘4Ps’, where marketing is described as focusing on developing:

The right ProductIn the right PlaceAt the right PriceWith the right Promotion

This has been developed, embellished and extended (some colleagues prefer a 7P version) over time but the core principles remain as valid today as when it was first developed. However, we suggest marketers in HE need to reconsider the validity of this rubric.

When considering this mnemonic it may not be surprising that marketing appears to have a rather limited role to play for HEIs. Three of the Ps would seem to have limited relevance:

Product responsibility is largely vested in academic colleagues and processed through academic quality/validation processes. A marketing opinion may be sought in that process, but this is often constrained by a lack of research capability/resource.

The Place of delivery seems rather fixed – or inevitable. Operations may be inextricably rooted in their geographic ‘home’ location (and thus institutions are generally named). Secondary locations across the UK and overseas are often developed through circumstantial partnerships and distance and e-learning strategies seem agnostic on location. In all these cases, strategic planning and targeting with regard to Place is rare because it is seen as a given.

Whilst Price has been a subject of increasing interest and concern, experience suggests that institutions have tended to make value judgements rather than strive to assess price elasticity and the impacts on their business. This is changing but, as typical examples: � institutions have tended to move to negate financial price competition – as seen when the prospect of variable

fees for undergraduates in 2002 was effectively negated as nearly all HEIs in England moved to the same ceiling price-point at the £3,000 fee limit. � many institutions have tended towards a cautious attitude to pricing (perhaps because there is often no clear

indication of demand) – tending to seek the lowest price possible, believing this will optimise the volume of demand.

In view of the above, it is perhaps not surprising that Promotion has tended to stand out as the one strand of activity that marketing can feasibly address. It is also the most visible of strands and the one which the world at large so often believes marketing to be.

New Conversations To return to the key issues, we propose that there is a more relevant stratagem for the development of marketing in HE – and one which necessarily integrates the marketing philosophy (or process, if you prefer) with an overarching strategic management approach.

We suggest this can be achieved through the complementary development of four factors: � An open engagement in the business issues of the HEI � Redefining marketing for HEIs � A common management and marketing framework � Demonstrable understanding and empathy from marketing functions.


Open Business EngagementA starting point in this new approach is the need for marketing to be engaged in discussions about the business needs and challenges of an HEI. Without such an engagement, business solutions simply cannot be developed – and institutional leaders cannot have the opportunity to evaluate them.

This needs to go far deeper than a mission-driven desire to increase, say, part-time student recruitment or the establishment of more successful relationships with feeder/partner institutions or the raising of profile for CPD provision. This obviously requires a more open review of the implications of various strategic and tactical options – and access to key information relating to both human and financial resources.

(Re)defining Marketing for HEAs many colleagues will attest, meetings (let alone debates) within HE often start with a need to define the question and/or the terms of engagement. Taking this as our guide, it seems especially important that marketing develops and adopts a definition of marketing that is most appropriate for the sector, its culture/s and needs.

There is a clear need for the processes and practices of marketing to differentiate themselves from advertising and Promotion. To this end, we suggest that marketers and corporate managers might jointly develop definitions that enable a better engagement of the discipline. This might build on or adapt one of those previously provided such as (using our own):

A ‘business’ philosophy backed by a ‘toolkit’ of professional practices, that believes an organisation will better achieve its goals by understanding and delivering (and communicating according to) consumers’ needs and wants.

The (re)defining process can take place within HEIs, or it may be that the sector as a whole could usefully develop a fresh definition that better serves complex service organisations with social and ‘not for profit’ goals. This will ideally provide a reference point for corporate leaders and marketers alike across the sector. In so doing, this could usefully professionalise marketing appropriately for the sector - establishing relevant professional standards and capabilities.

With the establishment of the Chartered Institute of Marketing’s HE Market Interest Group (CIM HEMIG) in the past year, we suggest that this is a group that could usefully lead on such a task, if this was seen as helpful, engaging appropriately with VCs and/or other senior academics.

A Shared Management and Marketing ContextA shared model of management and development would facilitate a significant integration of marketing into strategic planning and delivery. We suggest that the McKinsey 7S Model is a management and marketing approach that is better suited to service organisations.

The complex nature of HEIs and the challenges of ‘matrix management’ (achieving operational goals without direct line authority) bring the relevance of this into sharp focus. We do not propose to review its relevance in detail here but the top three ‘hard’ components of Strategy, Structure and Systems are all supported, informed and delivered in a completely interrelated way with the ‘soft’ organisational components of Skills, Shared Values, Style and Staff.

Structure

Systems

Style

Staff

Skills

Strategy

Shared Values

34

As far as the 4Ps of marketing is concerned, these remain relevant considerations – and changes across the sector may yet see matters of price and location become more significant factors for marketing in the future.

However, these can be better viewed and contextualised for HE by considering the aspects of organisational relevance and purpose in the McKinsey model. Implicit in this model are many of the key components of a holistic approach to marketing that is relevant to the sector.

As far as the hard elements of the model are concerned, there are many aspects of direct relevance for marketing inputs and outputs. As examples: market research and foresight that informs corporate strategy; communications and information management needs – and consumers use of new and emerging information technologies - that informs systems needs.

For the softer elements of the model, perhaps the aspects of style and shared values will be clearly seen as areas in which marketing has much to offer and, when appropriately engaged, can take a significant role. However, the greatest opportunity is for marketing to be engaged and integrated into all aspects of the model to to deliver its optimal benefits.

As simple caricatures, to illustrate the integration required: � the establishment of a clear and adopted set of shared values (the brand) should drive the establishment of

service and communication standards to current customers and be apparent (attractively so) to prospective ones (developments that should be informed by market research)

� the recruitment and development of staff to deliver those values and experiences to prospective and current customers requires an understanding of staff motivations and interests

� within the organisational structure there would helpfully be clear locii of responsibility and appropriate control for key processes

� the systems need to enable appropriate delivery – and be embedded across the organisation where appropriate � all of the above should be informed by the Corporate Strategy which necessarily pursues the organisation’s key

goals.

Marketing that ‘Understands’We have reflected in the observations here that there may be some reticence among corporate leaders and others to engage with marketing. The reasons may vary but marketing perhaps needs to recognise that it is operating with colleagues who may have an overwhelming sense of self-determination within an HEI. When coupled to the concerns that marketing is culturally at odds with HEIs, there is a real need to change perceptions of marketing.

If marketing is to be allowed to engage and to be a significant agent of change, we suggest that marketing needs to demonstrate that above all it understands, empathises and wants to preserve the essence of Higher Education generically and the outstanding characteristics and benefits of institutions themselves.

To this end, marketers could usefully reflect on how they might better market marketing, considering both perceptions and experiences of those it serves. We suggest some themes for consideration could include:

Ensuring the definition and role of marketing is embedded, understood and valuedPresenting and promoting the benefits of a holistic approach to consumers/customers... and above all ...Change preconceptions of marketing doing things to colleagues to doing things with colleagues.

However, it is also necessary to position professional marketers appropriately within an organisation – for this is a profession in which everyone considers they have a valid view or even think themselves as capable as the ‘experts’. Marketers have a key role to play – but there are times when the view from the top needs to remind colleagues appropriately. We can do no better than to borrow a quote from the top – from one of our respondents.

“Everybody is a marketer – but good amateur marketers recognise, respect and work with the capabilities of the professional marketer.”

Callen Associates LimitedSt John’s House54 St John’s SquareLondonEC1V 4JLwww.callen-associates.com

Marketing’s role in developing and delivering Corporate ... · 15 Being Informed and Guided by the Strategic Plan 15 Marketing’s Role in ... Not one marketer in the ... Marketing’s

Documents