Mandatory computer initiatives and their impact upon marketing strategy for colleges and universities.

Brunswick, Gary J. ; Zinser, Brian

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade, a significant number of colleges and universities have adopted some sort of institution-wide computer initiative (Chronicle of Higher Education, 2001). These initiatives span a wide array of approaches, impacting both the instructional and business operations of colleges and universities. To date, a broad range of colleges and universities have imposed a computer ownership/lease requirement on their student population (Brown, 1999; Olsen, 2001). An emerging approach is to focus more on a PDA-based strategy, such as the University of South Dakota has done (Carr, 2001). Whether or not future trends move toward smaller and more mobile computing, clearly an increasing number of colleges and universities are moving toward mandatory computer initiatives.

In approaching the decision to implement a computer-based initiative, it is critical for colleges and universities to understand key elements of the decision-making and implementation process, as well as the marketing strategy implications of this type of overall decision. By conceptually using an internal marketing (vs. external marketing) framework (Arndt, 1979), key decision-makers can better frame and understand both process / implementation issues, and the strategic implications of a university-wide mandatory computer initiative.

MANDATORY COMPUTER INITIATIVES - INTERNAL MARKETING

Institutions that have pursued the development of an MCI program appear to have done so for a variety of objectives, including improving student and faculty access to technology and enhancing the curriculum and pedagogy. Some institutions have launched MCI programs for market positioning reasons and have promoted features and benefits of the initiative as competitive points of differentiation. Likewise, many different types and sizes of institutions, both public and private, have successfully launched MCI-type programs.

Regardless of the type of institution or its objective for implementing a program, most campuses to this point have been market pioneers. As pioneers, internal marketing efforts are critical, especially those internal marketing efforts directed to current students, staff and faculty members. Furthermore, the development and implementation of an initiative has a profound impact on a variety of institutional resources. To obtain buy-in, it is necessary to seek an internal customer understanding of the initiative, both tangible and intangible components, as well as its value and economic benefits. It is plausible to project that at some point, institutions will no longer be pioneering, but following, and a majority of an institution's internal customers will be wanting or "needing" a campus-wide computing solution.

Successful implementation of an MCI requires a campus culture willing to accept change. It also relies on the use of traditional change management strategies, including having top administrative support, identifying current student, faculty and staff champions of change and using a cross-functional, campus-wide initiative development team.

During the early stages of the MCI development process, (i.e., idea generation, screening, concept testing, business analysis and program development), several issues affecting these internal customers and stakeholders need to be addressed.

These issues include, but are not limited to: will student participation be mandatory or optional, will either a PC and/or Macintosh operating platform be supported, will only one model or several be offered and/or supported, will students be required to purchase a machine or will a unit be leased, rented or provided by the institution as part of tuition and required fees? Other factors that need to be considered include what, and how, software will be provided and supported and will the faculty "buy-in" to the initiative and use the technology for instructional and course management purposes, enhancing pedagogy? A summary of these types of issues can be found in Figure 1.

A major component of a campus computer initiative is the variety of "customer services," both student and faculty, that need to be provided. These include the availability of a variety of support functions like a help desk and/or line, repair service, instructional technology support, and reliable and adequate network and Internet access. It also includes the adaptation of university student and business service functions to be conducive to digital access and laptop computer interface.

Another important aspect of an MCI is the need to either internally manage or form a strategic alliance with a direct supplier or retailer to manage procurement and inventory levels of desired models to ensure a unit is provided or available for purchase or lease by each participant. Equally important is creating a positive internal customer distribution or purchase experience and orientation, training and assistance with imaging and accessing campus computing resources.

Figure 1: Internal Marketing Issues - Mandatory Computer Initiatives

* What sort of computing platform should be used? Should more than
one platform be used?

* Should faculty, students and staff be required to have 1 common
model / type of computer, or can these groups choose their own?

* Is the computer initiative going to be mandatory, or voluntary?
Across the entire campus, or just parts?

* Should computers be leased vs. purchased? How many years before
machines are updated / replaced?

* Does adequate IT infrastructure already exist on campus? Will the
network be largely fixed wire vs. mobile?

* How will faculty and staff serve to assist in implementing a
mandatory computer initiative? How will teaching and learning
change on campus?

* How will software purchase decisions be made? Who will make them?
When? Will standardized software be used on campus? How will
software be issued?

* How will the university provide network access both on and off
campus? Will bandwidth limitations be a significant issue?

* How will computers be distributed on campus? How will they be
serviced? What computer training resources will be made available
for faculty, students?

At some point, an institution will have to address the total cost of the initiative. The total cost will have a direct effect on internal customers. Many academic, administrative and student support departments will incur marginal costs to support the initiative. And, if implemented during a current student's program of study, he or she will see an increased cost of attendance.

The form or structure of an MCI-like program will develop over time with a series of interdependent development decisions being made. One strategy for managing the internal buy-in of each of these decisions and ultimately the whole initiative is to categorize issues into infrastructure, choice, hardware/software, customer services, price/costs, distribution, and training clusters and identifying the degree, if any, to which each issue affects internal customer segments (e.g. current students who already own a computer, art and design students and faculty who prefer Macintosh platform, etc.).

To a certain extent, major development decisions in each cluster chronologically fall into the following order.

Infrastructure [arrow right] choice [arrow right] hardware [arrow right] customer services [arrow right] price/costs [arrow right] distribution [arrow right] training

For instance, it would not be prudent to develop a laptop-based MCI program until a campus had a network and adequate network access to support a program. Likewise, decisions on which hardware and software to require or provide and support cannot be made until it is determined whether the computer requirement is mandatory or optional and whether one or more platforms will be supported, etc.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

A means for gaining internal customer understanding of an initiative, including its value, and each major development decision is the use of persuasion, negotiation, politics and tactics (Jobber, 1995). Top administrators and internal champions of change need to be persuasive in articulating to student and faculty leaders the objectives of the initiative and of each initiative development decision. If rejected or not "bought," an objective or decision may have to be negotiated, or politicked or another tactic used to obtain the necessary support or buy-in. Another possible approach is to provide a series of pilot tests, using key personnel or faculty and student groups who are willing to provide objective feedback data.

The use of a cross-functional, campus-wide initiative development team that includes representatives from each internal customer or stakeholder segment is a strategy for seeking widespread understanding of the MCI program and internal customer input. It is also a forum for early identification of areas of concern and potential obstacles to buy-in. Team representatives can provide valuable information to assist in the development decision process as well as seek immediate feedback about decisions that are made.

Several means exist on most college campuses to obtain additional feedback to determine the level of faculty and student support for an initiative. In a shared governance environment, several formal groups such as the faculty senate, student government and unions allow for open discussion and channels for formal action (i.e. resolutions) both in support of or against the initiative or a component thereof. Most institutions also have independent campus newspapers that will monitor the institutional pulse of the initiative. The Internet and the Web also provide a new medium for forums and discussion groups that can be effectively and efficiently used to obtain information. More formal research methods, both quantitative and qualitative, may also be used.

By initially focusing on the internal market, colleges and universities, that decide to implement a mandatory computer initiative can move toward a successful implementation of this technology-based marketing strategy. Achieving marketing success internally is a key component to also achieving success in the external market, as will be discussed in the next section.

MANDATORY COMPUTER INITIATIVES - EXTERNAL MARKETING

As the internal marketing efforts described earlier are key to the successful implementation of a mandatory computer initiative, well-planned and executed external marketing efforts are also quite necessary. A host of strategic and tactical issues also need to be considered.

Strategic Issues

During the early developmental stages of a mandatory computer initiative or MCI, it would be appropriate for the institution to consider the immediate and future significance of making such a strategic decision. For example, the institution should focus on a range of strategic questions, such as the ones found in Figure 3.

When considering the types of questions and issues found in Figure 3, the upper administration and board of trustees (or their equivalent) should also involve representatives of key stakeholder groups on campus (i.e., faculty, students, academic computing staff, etc.) to analyze these key issues. A key consideration here is how well a mandatory computer initiative would fit with the existing mission and strategy of the institution. In one sense, such an initiative can be used as a mechanism to reposition institutions that have not been technologically oriented.

Conversely, institutions that are already technologically oriented may be under increased pressure to move in the direction of a mandatory computer initiative. In this day and age, the impact on enrollments (and the enrollment management process) will also be a key consideration. Early experience with mandatory computer initiatives has been positive, with stable or growing enrollments being the result; it is possible, though, under certain circumstances, to have enrollments decline due to a mandatory computer initiative.

Another important issue relates to the teaching and learning process; in other words, how might a mandatory computer initiative impact the processes of teaching and learning on a campus? Does support infrastructure exist in order to facilitate an evolving model of teaching and learning (i.e., center for teaching and technology, etc.)? Faculty groups will also be aware of how technology can impede the learning process (e.g., while in class students are surfing the Internet, vs. taking class notes) and how the implementation of such a computer initiative will impact teaching evaluations (and in turn, promotion and tenure decisions (Young, 2002)). Somewhat related to these teaching and learning issues would be the question / issue from Figure 3 which focuses on 2nd and 3rd generation issues; in other words, how will a mandatory computer initiative change and evolve on campus? What will the initiative look like in 5 years? 10 years? What goals and objectives should the institution put in place for these future time periods?

The relative size of the institution is also an interesting strategic issue to consider. Smaller institutions (e.g., under 2000 students) as well as medium-sized institutions (e.g., under 10,000 students) may be in an advantageous position with regard to being able to implement a computer initiative more quickly, and with less overall difficulty. The more diverse the array of majors or programs on campus, and the larger the size of these programs, the more likely it is that key differences will emerge (i.e., platform issues, configuration of the computers, etc.). Some medium-sized and larger institutions may need a more flexible overall approach, considering the key decision groupings found in Figure 2.

Tactical Issues

Implementing a mandatory computer initiative, or MCI, will have an effect on all aspects of an institution's marketing mix. The product, or educational experience of its students, will more than likely be modified by changes in teaching and learning in both academic and co-curricular activities. Because the initiative is mandatory, all students will have equal access to the experience, too.

A requirement will probably affect the place or distribution of both academic and co-curricular activities. Some examples of benefits a student might accrue from attending a university with a requirement include more widespread 24/7 class discussion groups, use of online versus classroom courses, anytime anyplace access to library collections, and online student government elections and referendums.

Since public universities and most private colleges use cost plus pricing, tuition and required fees, or cost of attendance will increase unless the marginal costs of the initiative are funded by an appropriation, endowment or other private sources. Institutions will have to consider whether to bundle the price of the initiative with tuition or charge a separate fee. If a separate fee is charged, it is important that students and parents understand that the fee covers more than the computer itself. It may include many intangible benefits such as service, support, training and insurance, many of which the benefits are not readily apparent to the student (i.e., a turnkey solution). A real risk is the misperception participants may develop about the initiative being overpriced by simply comparing, in the Sunday newspaper or on the Internet, the marginal increase in tuition or separate cost to the student with retail computer prices on the market.

The institution will also have to manage the rapidly improving computing technology and corresponding rapidly declining market price of personal computers. Academic institutions usually operate on annual planning cycles while the computer industry's product model lifecycles have durations of months. An institution will have to decide at what point on the innovation curve it wants to be.

Because of the changes in an institution's marketing mix, a promotional plan will need to be developed to roll out the initiative to prospective students and other stakeholders. The roll out of an initiative will generally be a multi-year process. Therefore, the promotional plan may present university marketing and recruitment professionals with some difficult challenges given relatively long recruitment cycles and the high level and length of involvement of most prospective (traditional) students in the college selection process. Many colleges and universities begin searching for prospective students during their sophomore year in high school-a full three years prior to actual enrollment. Potentially, an MCI could be nothing more than a hypothetical concept when a prospective student first enters the institution's recruitment funnel, yet be fully implemented by the time the student enrolls. At all levels and associated marketing activities of the recruitment funnel, the roll out and promotion of the initiative will have to be considered as well as the impact it will have on enrollment objectives.

If an institution has more than one target market, as many regional comprehensive and large research institutions do, the impact may vary by market and/ or market segment. In the development of the promotional plan many questions need to be addressed. Some examples include: at what point in time does an institution introduce the concept of the initiative and the increased cost of attendance into the institutional image and recruitment advertising, public relations efforts, search mailings and view books? When do admissions counselors begin telling prospective students about the program? Does an institution equip recruiters with a similar machine to show the tangible clues of the initiative to prospective students?

As previously mentioned, many institutions will take the opportunity to integrate the attributes of their program into their branding and positioning strategies. The effectiveness of promotional activities can have a significant impact on whether branding and positioning goals are achieved and corresponding marketing objectives such as enrollment, fundraising and public opinion goals are met. If, for example, a strategic goal of an institution's MCI was to reposition the college or university as being technology-oriented, the initiative would not only need to be successfully implemented, but promoted and communicated to prospective students and other stakeholders to have an effect on the institution's position in their minds.

Depending upon the scope and structure of a program, if an institution forms a strategic alliance with a hardware and/or software provider, an institution may want to consider some degree of co-branding such as becoming an IBM ThinkPad[R] University. Co-branding may benefit an institution because of positive attributes of the strategic partner's brand such as innovation, quality, and customer service. It also has some risks, including the negative attributes of the partner's brand and the partner's ability and commitment to continuously align development of its product line with the institution's needs. Some academic communities also deplore long-term arrangements with commercial vendors based on a variety of ethical and academic freedom issues.

If an institution's initiative's short and long-term strategic MCI goals are to be achieved, the changes in its marketing mix need to be executed well. Because of the nature of academic environments, a key to the success of external marketing of an MCI initiative is dependent on the success of achieving internal marketing goals and objectives discussed earlier.

Figure 3: Key Strategic Issues Related to a Mandatory Computer
Initiative

* How does a mandatory computer initiative fit with the mission of
the institution, and its various colleges and departments?

* How does technology relate to the mission and/or strategic focus
of the institution?

* How would a mandatory computer initiative fit with the legacy
(marketing) strategy?

* How will this initiative impact future strategy?

* Is the institution serving as a market pioneer? Does the
institution have experience in serving as a market pioneer?

* How much of a sustainable competitive advantage will a mandatory
computer initiative provide?

* What are possible 2nd and 3rd generation issues, beyond the
initial implementation of a mandatory computer initiative (i.e.,
how will student learning change, how will pedagogy be impacted)?

* How will the mandatory computer initiative be priced, and how
will this pricing strategy be implemented? What is the magnitude of
the impact upon the existing tuition and fee structure?

* How might enrollments be impacted (either positively or
negatively)? Will some majors / programs derive more (or less)
benefit than others?

* How will a mandatory computer initiative impact consumer decision
making related to your college or university? What differences will
exist between parents and prospective students?

* What might competitive colleges and universities do in reaction
to a mandatory computer initiative by your institution? What is the
possible impact of these competitive reactions?

* How might relevant governmental officials (e.g., governor, state
senators and representatives) react to a mandatory computer
initiative?

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS

Clearly, a multi-year time period is needed in order to successfully implement a mandatory computer initiative, starting with high-level strategic planning along the lines of the questions posed in Figure 3. The development and implementation of a range of internal marketing efforts (e.g., Figures 1 and 2) are the next critical activities in this process. Following this, externally focused tactical marketing efforts can then be used in order to complete the process, and the implementation of the overall strategy. A well-designed and well-implemented marketing strategy, centered around a mandatory computer initiative, can serve as an important means to improve the quality of teaching and learning at a college or university. For this to happen, though, great care needs to be taken in terms of the process of both developing and implementing this overall strategy.

REFERENCES

Arndt, J. (1979). Toward a concept of domesticated markets, Journal of Marketing, 43 (Fall), 69-75.

Brown, D. G. (1999). Always in Touch, Winston-Salem, NC: Wake Forest University Press.

Carr, S. (2001). University of South Dakota will give freshmen wireless hand-held computers this fall, Chronicle of Higher Education, 18 May 2001, A40.

Jobber, D. (1995). Principles of Marketing, London: McGraw-Hill.

Olsen, F. (2001). Spending on information technology rises 13%, survey finds, Chronicle of Higher Education, 20 April 2001, A53.

Staff. (2001). Growing number of colleges require students to own computers, Chronicle of Higher Education, 3 November 2001, A39.

Young, J., R. (2002). Ever so slowly, colleges start to count work with technology in tenure decisions, Chronicle of Higher Education, 24, 22 February 2002, A25-A27.

Gary J. Brunswick, Northern Michigan University

Brian Zinser, Northern Michigan University