How strategic is your institution in considering the role of
its satellite operations? Based on my
experience, I’d guess that the answer for most is “not very.” (I'm not addressing the recent trend of some institutions opening overseas branches, which I assume involve more strategic considerations.)
Typically, branch campuses and other outreach programs were
created to serve some relatively specific purpose: To block expansion of another institution, to
respond to political pressure, or (most commonly) to pick up additional
revenue. In that context, branches have
much in common with main campus programs for adult learners, as well as those
sorts of online programs that represent a cautious exploration, rather than a
major strategic commitment. And none of
these efforts has been approached strategically at the highest levels of
leadership, at least at most institutions.
Given the relatively radical experiments that we’ve seen in
the past few years, it is easy to imagine that cash-strapped institutions might
prefer to focus on scalable online programs, investing in course design and
student support, rather than considering growth at branch campuses. Indeed, at first glance, main campus academic
units might imagine that online programs will do more for their budgets,
depending on how revenue is shared and expenses recognized. It’s that phenomenon of being drawn to bright
shiny objects: The new stuff seems
sexier than empowering growth on the branches.
As I’ve written many times before, the development of branch
campuses reflected the technology of the time.
Branches provided a space for faculty members to teach, advisors to
offer advice, and so on. Interactive television
brought an additional element of cost effective outreach, but branches remained
a relatively straightforward extension of what happens on the main campus, and
generally, institutional leaders didn’t expect them to grow all that much.
Today, a comprehensive enrollment strategy might well
include new recruitment and retention strategies at the main campus, as well as
the selective pursuit of online enrollment from students located almost anywhere
in the world. Nevertheless, I think most
institutions will find that branches still bring certain advantages that should
be developed, not marginalized.
At least at present, there is a strong argument to be made
that blended or hybrid programs are more appealing and tend to produce stronger
learning outcomes than fully online programs.
Note also that, with hybrid delivery, commuter campuses can expand their
recruitment radius to 75, or even to 100 miles.
We know that adult learners and other place bound students are
concerned about flexibility and price, in addition to getting access to the
program they want. All the pieces for a
strong branch strategy are in place:
Pick the right programs, develop focused services and an aggressive
marketing plan, and provide a facility that is comfortable and includes state
of the art technology.
Given the opportunity, branches can attract more enrollment
than ever. Institutions still can seek
growth online and at the main campus, but there is no reason to hand over your
potential branch enrollment to more aggressive institutions that recognize the
hybrid advantage.
