August 26, 2025 · Episode 274
Enrollment Management Solutions in the Enrollment Cliff Era
24 Min · By Dr. Drumm McNaughton
Enrollment management solutions for higher education leaders to manage risk, align with finance, and strengthen long-term institutional resilience.
After years of warnings about the enrollment cliff, higher education leaders now need enrollment management solutions that address institutional risk and guide financial decisions in real time. This episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast is part two of a conversation with Bob Massa and Bill Conley of Enrollment Intelligence Now. Part one examined the scope of today’s enrollment challenges; this second discussion focuses on solutions—realistic goal setting, funnel transparency, authentic messaging, technology and AI, human interaction, risk planning, direct admission, and the future of enrollment leadership.
Why Boards and Presidents Must Rethink Enrollment Goals
Institutions that continue to set aspirational enrollment goals disconnected from historical performance invite failure. Too often, presidents and boards approve projections that far exceed the realities of the admissions funnel. These inflated targets may be driven by hope, pressure to meet budget gaps, or a reluctance to acknowledge long-term decline, but they erode credibility when they inevitably fall short.
Instead, leaders should ground enrollment goals in the last three to five years of funnel data. This means examining the actual relationship between applications, admits, deposits, and enrolled students. A campus that has consistently enrolled 500 first-year students with a yield of 15 percent cannot credibly target 650 without significant new investments or fundamental changes to its pipeline. Leaders who ignore this math undermine trust with CFOs, trustees, and faculty who depend on accurate forecasting.
Boards must insist that enrollment goals reflect empirical data, not wishful thinking. Presidents should frame conversations around what the institution can realistically achieve given market conditions, recruitment resources, and demographic shifts. Setting achievable goals is not a retreat—it is a foundation for trust and financial stability. Overpromising erodes confidence; realistic targets build it.
Funnel Data and Real-Time Transparency
Once achievable goals are established, leaders must ensure that the institution tracks progress in real time. Applications, admits, deposits, and net tuition revenue cannot be monitored passively or reviewed only at semester’s end. Dashboards are essential tools that give presidents, boards, CFOs, and enrollment leaders visibility into where the funnel stands week by week.
Institutions that ignore early funnel warning signs often face springtime crises when deposits fall short, leaving no time for corrective action. By contrast, schools that monitor inquiry generation in October or early applicant trends in December can intervene with targeted outreach, adjusted aid, or intensified recruitment in key markets. Acting early makes the difference between closing gaps and missing them entirely.
Equally important is the relationship between enrollment leaders and CFOs. These two offices must be “attached at the hip,” reviewing data together, modeling revenue scenarios, and making joint recommendations to presidents and boards. Treating enrollment solely as an admissions issue isolates it from financial planning. Integrated reporting builds accountability and ensures decisions are made with a clear view of both headcount and net tuition outcomes.
Real-time transparency also reinforces credibility. When presidents share funnel dashboards with trustees, they demonstrate proactive stewardship rather than offering vague assurances. Even when the news is sobering, the ability to explain trends with data and present responsive actions strengthens leadership legitimacy.
Building Credibility Through Clear Messaging
Enrollment management is not only about numbers; it is also about how institutions position themselves in a highly competitive and skeptical market. Families weigh credibility and trust as heavily as price. Institutions that continue to rely on generic platitudes—“We prepare leaders,” “We value diversity,” or “We provide a transformative liberal arts education”—risk being tuned out. Students and parents want concrete, authentic statements about what the institution stands for and how it supports its community.
This is particularly urgent in the face of widespread misinformation about higher education. Narratives about antisemitism, DEI, affordability, and campus climate circulate widely, shaping perceptions long before prospective students visit campus. Leaders cannot allow these narratives to go unanswered. Institutions must proactively state their values, policies, and commitments with clarity and conviction.
The most powerful voices are often not administrators but students and alumni. Authentic testimonials about campus climate, affordability, inclusion, and opportunity resonate more deeply than polished slogans. Prospective families want to hear from peers who faced the same questions and chose the institution with confidence. Embedding these stories in websites, tours, and outreach campaigns transforms messaging from institutional spin to lived reality.
Price transparency is equally vital. Families are sophisticated and wary of hidden costs. They want straightforward explanations of tuition, fees, aid, and the total cost of attendance. Institutions that fail to present this clearly create confusion and mistrust. By contrast, those who communicate costs honestly, while demonstrating the value of the degree, build confidence and reduce skepticism.
Technology as an Enrollment Solution — With Limits
Technology has transformed enrollment management, but it is not a panacea. Customer relationship management systems, predictive modeling, and AI-driven tools are valuable when used to sharpen recruitment efficiency. They can identify high-yield regions, flag students most likely to enroll, and provide admissions officers with real-time insights into where to focus their energy. Predictive scoring allows institutions to concentrate resources on applicants with the strongest likelihood of conversion, increasing yield without inflating costs.
AI has also improved student support. Chatbots now provide 24/7 answers to routine questions, freeing admissions staff for higher-level engagement. Predictive analytics help enrollment teams anticipate yield, refine scholarship allocation, and prioritize outreach. These capabilities reduce guesswork and support data-informed decision-making.
Yet technology cannot replace human interaction. Hospitality remains the most effective recruitment strategy. Families choose institutions where they feel welcomed, respected, and understood. A predictive score may tell an admissions officer which prospect is likely to enroll, but it is the personal call, the thoughtful email, or the campus visit experience that secures the decision. Technology should inform strategy, not substitute for empathy.
Institutions must balance investment in digital tools with reinforcement of the personal touch. A school that automates outreach but neglects the student experience risks alienating prospects. Conversely, one that combines predictive targeting with authentic human engagement maximizes both efficiency and relational strength. Boards and presidents should view technology as an accelerator of strategy, not its replacement.
Long-Game Enrollment Planning and Risk Management
Short-term fixes are insufficient in the face of demographic shifts and federal policy uncertainty. Presidents and boards must embed enrollment management into long-term institutional strategy. This means scenario planning that prepares for multiple futures—declines in federal funding, revenue losses from enrollment shocks, or sudden changes in state policy. Waiting until a crisis emerges is too late.
Risk planning in enrollment is not abstract. It requires institutions to model specific scenarios: What happens if enrollment drops by 10 percent in a single year? What if Pell Grant support declines? How would the institution respond to an unexpected surge in transfers? Leaders must build contingency playbooks that guide rapid response. These plans should be reviewed and updated annually to reflect shifting realities.
Transparency is central to effective planning. Faculty, staff, and trustees need to understand the assumptions and the risks being considered. Presidents who over-communicate, share funnel data, and invite participation build trust and alignment. Institutions that plan in isolation create fear and resistance. By contrast, when leaders involve faculty and staff in scenario exercises, they establish a shared vision for resilience.
Enrollment management is also inseparable from financial planning. CFOs and enrollment leaders should model joint revenue scenarios and present them together to boards. This integrated approach reinforces accountability and ensures that leaders act with a unified voice. Enrollment is not a back-office function—it is central to institutional survival.
Direct Admission and Pipeline Approaches
Direct admission is gaining momentum as a strategy, with states and institutions offering automatic acceptance to students who meet baseline criteria. The model promises broader access and earlier certainty for families. However, it carries significant risks for institutions that rely on yield predictability. Students who receive multiple unsolicited offers often view them as “soft admits,” lacking the relationship or commitment that supports actual enrollment. Predicting yield under this model is extremely difficult, and the results may take three to five years to stabilize.
Boards should approach direct admission with caution. While politically attractive and headline-grabbing, it does not solve the deeper structural challenges of recruitment. Without strong follow-up engagement, direct admits may never convert to deposits. Leaders must evaluate whether the short-term publicity outweighs the long-term unpredictability.
Pipeline programs offer more strategic promise. By identifying promising students early in high school and supporting them through preparation, institutions can build lasting relationships that increase yield and student success. Cambridge’s Lucy Cavendish College demonstrated this by shifting to admit 90 percent of students from public schools, an effort that began with targeted pipeline development. In the U.S., community-based organizations such as QuestBridge have long partnered with institutions to create similar outcomes.
However, pipeline programs face political and legal scrutiny, especially when they target underserved populations. Current debates around DEI threaten the stability of initiatives designed to support students of color or low-income backgrounds. Institutions must design pipelines that serve diverse populations equitably while preparing for potential court challenges. Boards should weigh these risks carefully and ensure programs are designed with legal resilience in mind.
Pipeline strategies remain essential for the long-term health of institutions, but they require investment, patience, and careful navigation of political realities.
Leadership Pipeline for Enrollment Management
The shrinking pool of experienced enrollment leaders poses another strategic risk for institutions. Many colleges elevate directors of admissions or financial aid into vice president roles without recognizing that operational expertise does not equate to strategic leadership. Running an admissions office is not the same as guiding enrollment as a central pillar of institutional sustainability.
Boards and presidents must acknowledge that the bench of seasoned enrollment managers is shallow and shrinking. Retirement, burnout, and industry churn are reducing the number of leaders who can bridge enrollment strategy with institutional finance, governance, and academic planning. Without deliberate cultivation of new leaders, campuses will face growing leadership gaps at precisely the moment when enrollment is most critical.
Mentoring and coaching are essential. Institutions should invest in leadership development for promising directors and associate VPs, providing them with exposure to boardrooms, budget processes, and scenario planning. Presidents can play a direct role by inviting enrollment leaders into cabinet-level discussions and modeling how to communicate with trustees and faculty. Consultants and former practitioners can also provide coaching to accelerate readiness for new leaders.
Ultimately, institutions cannot assume that admissions success translates into enrollment management expertise. Boards should evaluate succession plans for enrollment leadership with the same seriousness given to finance and academics. Presidents must prioritize building capacity within their teams to ensure continuity in this high-stakes role.
Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards
- Track funnel data in real time and act early. Waiting until spring to address enrollment gaps is too late. Use dashboards to monitor performance and intervene quickly when early indicators show shortfalls.
- Integrate enrollment management with finance and governance. Treat enrollment as a strategic function, not a tactical one. CFOs and enrollment leaders must collaborate closely and report jointly to boards.
- Invest in scenario planning and transparent communication. Model revenue and enrollment risks, share data broadly, and involve faculty and staff in developing contingency plans to build trust and alignment.
Bonus Takeaways
- Balance AI with human interaction. Technology informs strategy, but hospitality and personal connection remain decisive in recruitment.
- Be cautious with direct admission. Yield is unpredictable, and benefits may take years to materialize. Approach as an experiment, not a cornerstone strategy.
Quick Overview
- Enrollment goals must be based on three to five years of actual funnel data, not aspirational targets.
- Inflated projections erode credibility with boards, CFOs, and faculty.
- Real-time dashboards are essential for tracking applications, admits, and deposits.
- Presidents and CFOs should jointly monitor funnel performance and revenue implications.
- Clear, authentic messaging strengthens institutional credibility and combats misinformation.
- Student and alumni voices build trust more effectively than administrative platitudes.
- Transparency about price and cost is critical for families making enrollment decisions.
- CRMs, AI, and predictive modeling improve efficiency but cannot replace human engagement.
- Hospitality and personal interaction remain the most effective recruitment tools.
- Enrollment planning must be integrated with institutional risk management.
- Scenario planning should model revenue declines, federal funding cuts, and enrollment shocks.
- Faculty and staff involvement in planning builds trust and supports shared vision.
- Direct admission creates uncertainty in yield and should be approached cautiously.
- Pipeline programs strengthen long-term recruitment but face political and legal challenges.
- The leadership pipeline for enrollment management is shrinking, requiring deliberate mentoring and development.
Final Thoughts from Dr. McNaughton
Enrollment management is no longer a back-office task; it is a strategic leadership function that determines institutional viability. Presidents and boards must treat enrollment as inseparable from finance and governance. Institutions that integrate real-time funnel tracking, scenario planning, and transparent communication will maintain trust and financial stability. Those that cling to aspirational projections or siloed enrollment functions will likely falter.
About Our Podcast Guests
Co-Founders of Enrollment Intelligence Now
Dr. Robert Massa, a seasoned professional in higher education enrollment, began his career in 1974 at Colgate University and retired in 2019 from Drew University. His career trajectory included key positions at Union College, Johns Hopkins University, Dickinson College, and Lafayette College. Massa’s expertise extends to teaching, currently as an adjunct professor at the University of Southern California. He is known for his insights on data modeling in admissions, financial aid strategies, and non-academic criteria in admissions, contributing to several national publications and speaking at conferences. His educational background includes a BA from the University of Rochester and an EdD from Columbia University.
Connect with Bob Massa on LinkedIn →
William “Bill” Conley began his career in education as an AP History teacher and coach at Delbarton School, transitioning into higher education enrollment management in 1980. His notable career includes roles at Lafayette College, Drew University, Case Western Reserve University, and Johns Hopkins University, before retiring in 2020 from Bucknell University. Throughout his forty-year career, Conley significantly improved admissions metrics and developed strategic infrastructures for recruitment and retention at each institution. He has been actively involved in professional organizations, holding leadership positions and contributing to publications in the field of higher education. Conley is a respected voice in higher education, frequently quoted and sought after for his insights and expertise. His educational background includes a BA from Colgate University and an M.Ed. from Harvard University.
Connect with Bill Conley on LinkedIn →
About the Host
Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.
Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→
Read the Podcast Transcript →
Transcript: Changing Higher Ed podcast 274 – with host Dr. Drumm McNaughton and guests Bob Massa and Bill Conley
Introduction to Changing Higher Ed®
Welcome to Changing Higher Ed®, a podcast dedicated to helping higher education leaders improve their institutions. With your host, Dr. Drumm McNaughton, CEO of The Change Leader, a consultancy that helps higher ed leaders holistically transform their institutions. Learn more at changinghighered.com. And now, here’s your host, Drumm McNaughton.
[00:00:20] Introduction and Welcome Back
Drumm McNaughton: Thank you David. Folks, we’re back for part two of my interview with Bill Conley and Bob Massa from Enrollment Intelligence Now. We’ll pick up talking about what institutions can do in this new normal.
Gentlemen, welcome back to the program. We had a great conversation last week about all the challenges. Now we’re going to get into some of the solutions.
Bob Massa: I can’t wait. We’re ready.
Bill Conley: Yeah, and I do think, as, we often say, it’s no, not a problem to present problems. It’s a problem when you don’t bring solutions with it. So we’re happy to tag on to what we talked about last week.
Drumm McNaughton: Absolutely. I’m looking forward to it.
[00:01:05] Setting Realistic Enrollment Goals
Drumm McNaughton: We’re going to get into, starting with, what can a college president do?
Bill Conley: Now, that’s the long game. What do you have to do to start trimming your sails for the realities of the different headwinds? But, for the next class, a couple of things that, as former practitioners, number one, set an achievable goal for 2026 enrollment. And that is going to be a story told by your last three to five year funnel data, what has been your actual enrollment, what application number and admit numbers generated that enrollment class. It really is staggering to me how many institutions know that they’ve been in a decline, but continue to say, “well, next year it’s going to be different. Let’s set a higher target”. So I think if you’re going to earnestly fight against the headwinds, set an achievable target for 2026.
[00:02:03] Crafting a Core Message and Addressing Misinformation
Bob Massa: Yeah, no, I think that the next thing is to create and disseminate a core message that conveys the college’s benefits, and not, platitudes about the liberal arts. There’s so much misinformation out there about, for example, discriminatory practices in higher education, whether it’s DEI or antisemitism or transgender issues, whatever it is. I think it’s important for colleges to be very, very clear about what they stand for and what they believe in. And this goes back to the mission. They also need to be very, very clear about price and cost.
Drumm McNaughton: A comment or question along those lines. There has been so much information put out there, just like you said, Bob, on DEI, antisemitism, transgender, et cetera. Does it make sense from a marketing perspective to have things on your website from students talking about the climate, things like that, people that , prospective students can relate to?
Bob Massa: No question about it. And again as I said, the messages have to be genuine. They can’t be Madison Avenue platitudes, and the best way to make ’em genuine is to have student voices and alumni voices in there. You can say that we’re against all forms of discrimination, you could be very clear about that. But showing it is a different story and I think that’s more powerful.
Drumm McNaughton: Mm-hmm.
[00:03:23] Leveraging Technology and AI in Enrollment
Bill Conley: And, going to, for the enrollment leadership, is when you’ve got that target class in mind, too many in institutions don’t pay attention to the dashboard, the performance, in real time. And so when you set a target, you are going to have all these other targets going up. To get this enrollment, you need “X” admits, to get “X” admits you need “Y” applicants, and I just tell our clients and anybody who will listen, set those up and in October when you’re falling short on inquiries, in aggregate or in certain key areas that mean that you’re not going to hit these other goals, do something about it. Don’t think it’s just going to change overnight. , And use the tools, the technology, whether it’s a CRM or your modeling, but use the tools there to help you in real time, create tactics and execute tactics that change that trajectory, especially if it’s going down. If it’s going up, find out why it’s going up and double down on that.
Bob Massa: I think just to add onto that, colleges and universities cannot afford, to have sloppy practices, if you will, in the recruitment process. There’s really little room for error. So, using the technology, as Bill suggests, can help institutions focus in on areas of the country where students that they currently have come from, they can help them focus on students that have a much higher chance of enrolling versus students that don’t, you don’t wanna focus your energy on students who aren’t going to come or don’t have a chance of coming, but using AI and machine learning for that is going to be, I think, if not a lifesaver, it’s going to help institutions focus in very clearly on being efficient in the recruitment process.
Drumm McNaughton: Let’s touch on that just a little bit because this is the first time in our conversation that we’ve talked about AI and its impact. What are you seeing AI out there?
Bob Massa: Well, I think one way that AI is being used is, and Bill referred to dashboard earlier, is to help admissions officers, on boots on the ground people, focus on students who have the characteristics, if you will, to enroll. AI is also being used in other ways, like to answer questions, for example, and that’s been for a while, but now it’s much more sophisticated.
[00:06:06] The Importance of Human Interaction in Admissions
Bob Massa: But I would really be very, very clear, that there is no substitution for human interaction, unless we think that technology is the answer for everything. Recently, NACACs CEO, the National Association of College Admissions Counselors, recently published an article about a quote unquote secret weapon to successfully recruit students. And that was, and he needed to say this, that was hospitality. Making students and their families feel welcome and treating them with dignity and respect. There’s nothing new there. But sometimes because we get so involved in the technology and our numbers are so great and the pressure is so high, sometimes we forget that we’re dealing with people and individuals.
Drumm McNaughton: It’s the personal touch.
Bill Conley: I wanted to quickly connect Bob’s comment about no substitute for human interaction. And when I think about AI and the tools to help admissions. AI can be predictive, it can go into a deep dive in your inquiry pool and create grades on the predictive likelihood of this individual applying. But it takes an individual, a real person, to then unpack all of that. But it also, if it’s properly used, it’s prescriptive. It will help inform what do you need to do to change the predictive value that’s been assigned to this student. And again, those are people, real people looking at it and saying, “okay, here are the things we need to do over the next two weeks with this slice of our inquiry pool”.
Bob Massa: And AI can tell the admissions officers what those things are. Yep, exactly. But then they have to carry it out.
[00:07:50] Long-Term Planning and Risk Management
Drumm McNaughton: Where do you see the biggest impact coming from enrollment management right now? What are the things that folks can really do that are going to make a big difference?
Bill Conley: I’m a regular listener to your podcast because I think they’re really good. Hopefully this stacks up well against previous performance, but I would say, I know you like the idea of the takeaway. What can a college president take away from all that we’ve discussed?
And I would say number one is that the enrollment management leader needs obviously to be at the big table and he or she needs to be well informed, about their own performance and predictive, and share that and help the leadership understand if it’s not going in the right direction, what can we do about it, what do we need to do about it? What are our options? So I think that it’s not a reactive role at all. It’s really being the one who often sadly, needs to bring, if not bad news sobering news, to the leadership, but with recommendations, with some action orientation. So that’s what I would say, number one, the role of enrollment management now is.
Bob Massa: And I would say it’s up to us to work with our colleagues on the president’s staff, and the president, to facilitate serious attention to what we call long game planning. That just means that, for me anyway, that we need to plan for different scenarios. Like, major revenue hits, for example, or the decline in federal funding or enrollment hits, and to make contingency plans for those different scenarios.
Drumm McNaughton: Wait, wait, wait a minute. I’m hearing something that sounds very much like risk planning.
Bob Massa: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And in fact, part of the plan is maybe we ought to pivot from what we’re doing to doing something else that is going to be in demand, not only by the students out there, but by our nation. And you talked about workforce development a little bit earlier, Drumm, then maybe we ought to plan for that as a contingency. And the bottom line for me, in all of this planning, because people get nervous with planning, right? Is my job going to be cut? What does this mean for me? It’s a new thing. It’s change and change is hard. Over communicate to establish trust. Involve selected faculty and staff in the planning. Don’t make it just the major players in the administration. And to the extent possible provide some periodic updates to the community,
Drumm McNaughton: Mm-hmm. Yeah, those are very critical. Doing strategy work, we talk about achieving a shared vision, and unless you involve your stakeholders in that, in the development of it, you’re not going to have a shared vision and nobody’s going to execute in the same direction.
Bob Massa: Right.
So those are our takeaways. Is there another one, Bill?
Bill Conley: I think the most important thing is transparency. And we’re hearing too often about, and I maybe dip into politics, that it’s a jobs report wasn’t good, so you fire the source. Right? If your funnel report is not going the way you built it, talk about it. And I think good leadership is going to understand that’s your role, that sometimes you’re going to bring not so good news, but as I said earlier, bring some solutions. But I think staying really current with the real funnel realities, and especially this, we didn’t talk much about the business officer in this, but Bob likes to say, “enrollment management and the chief business officer are attached at the hip”. He or she doesn’t want to hear that you knew that things weren’t looking so rosy, but you thought if we just wait a month and see how it turned out, it might be okay. That’s sloppy. That’s sloppy.
Bob Massa: Over the course of our, consultancy in Enrollment intelligence Now, we worked with a client and it was in the mid to late spring time, that all of a sudden realized that they weren’t going to make their class. But we could have told them that six months ago by looking at the funnel report. Obviously what we mean by that is how many prospects do you have? How many inquiries do you have? How many, do you have in different schools? How many applicants do you, eventually get? Because if the numbers are trending downward at the top of the funnel, you can pretty much guarantee they’re going to trend downward in terms of your enrollment. And the business officer could have been involved much earlier if they had been monitoring their funnel report.
Drumm McNaughton: Yeah. I’ve got a question, and this is just something that popped into my mind.
[00:12:48] Direct Admission and Its Challenges
Drumm McNaughton: What about these colleges and universities that are doing open enrollment. Where they’re sending letters out to people who are “qualified”. What do you think about that?
Bob Massa: That’s called direct admission, and basically, states have adopted that. Some private schools have as well. But, the bottom line is they look at test scores, they look at grades and they push out , an acceptance for all 13 of the state schools, for example, and then students have to choose between them. They know that they’re in, they don’t know what their financial aid is necessarily. Although there was one college in the Midwest that’s doing financial aid estimates early. Frankly I’m not going to go with the mainstream on this. I’m a little concerned about that as a strategy, because one of the complaints now that we hear from students is, I get so much mail from colleges I never heard of, and if this is scaled up, the complaint will be, I got so many acceptances from colleges I never heard of. So I’m a little contrarian on that side, but, I don’t know, Bill, what do you think?
Bill Conley: I think it’s a little bit of fool’s gold, and I say this because, one of the enrollment management roles is to predict yield at different stages. Right? And what direct admission is, what we call a “soft admit”, somebody who didn’t do any of the legwork to really understand our institution.
So if this is going to work, it’s going to take three to five years for colleges to determine the pattern of what happens when a kid is directly admitted and has no history with the institution. And how do you plan if you’re not sure what the yield is going to be on these admits, and many will do it to say, “Hey, we’ve got so many seats open on this airplane, we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it”. I don’t see it as a near term solution to the long term issue or even a long term solution to the realities we talked about today.
Bob Massa: Yeah. A lot of people are hyped up about it though.
Bill Conley: Yep.
Drumm McNaughton: Oh, there are. You’re seeing more and more of it out there. Another one just pops into my mind. Lucy Cavendish College, which is part of the University of Cambridge. I had Madeline Atkins on the program a while back, and they had the goal at Cambridge to admit 90% of their students from public institutions instead of the elite, prep schools, et cetera. Lucy Cavendish did it.
The way they did that was identifying promising students early on in their high school years and then working with them to make sure that they were ready. Have any institutions in the US started this? Has it been successful, and do you see this as a potential model?
[00:15:43] The Role of Community-Based Organizations
Bill Conley: My quick thing is, yes, there have been a lot of programs like that over the years. Pipeline programs,
Bob Massa: QuestBridge. Not necessarily colleges and universities, although there have been some, mostly public institutions, that have worked with students at the high school level. But primarily that work has been done by what we call CBOs, community-based organizations.
Bill Conley: But what I was going to say is if an institution decides to do that, I think that flies fully in the face of the political realities. Right where DEI and most of these programs, if they’re like the ones described, are going to, address students of color, students with economic shortcomings, et cetera, and according to the new playbook, if anything smells of giving special attention to underserved populations it will endanger your access to federal funds.
Bob Massa: I think we have a battle ahead of ourselves on that one. When you talk about trying to prepare underprepared students, there are white students in rural areas and in urban areas, who are under prepared and who are low income. And I think it’s important to show that we’re serving all populations.
But not all organizations are going to serve all populations. So if there’s a CBO in, rural Missouri that’s working with students of low socioeconomic status and a majority of them are white, that’s serving that population. And if someone is working with Philadelphia Futures in that city, and they’re serving primarily a black population because that’s who’s there. I think we have many court battles ahead on this. Lawyers are going to benefit.
Drumm McNaughton: So gents, we’ve talked about the three takeaways. We’ve talked about a few other things. Just to quickly summarize the three takeaways, folks need to be thinking about the long game planning. You’ve got to ensure your faculty and staff understand the value propositions that are being conveyed to your prospective students. That they’re fully invested in the institution. And you’ve got to really be tracking the funnel performance. It was a great story that you gave a little while ago about being called in in the spring and when you could have made the call that they weren’t going to make their numbers.
Bob Massa: Yeah, that’s a great summary.
Drumm McNaughton: Yeah.
[00:18:02] Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Drumm McNaughton: What’s next for you? You guys, you’ve been doing this for so long, I don’t know if you’re like me, where you’re starting to contemplate retirement. Probably not. You’re older than I am, but you got a heck of a lot more energy.
Bill Conley: I think it. What’s interesting, Drumm, Bob and I talk about this as we’re, five years down with this and have had really wonderful clients of a variety. But I think, our role is we don’t actively advertise. We feel like what we talked about today and last week are out there. And if somebody, an institution, thinks that we might bring value to their situation and the questions they have about immediate or longer term, were around. But meanwhile I think we both just keep reading voraciously on issues in higher education and K through 12. And try like an AI to stay current with the fast pace of technology that’s being implemented at institutions. So we’ll continue to work on that and answer the phone when it rings.
Bob Massa: Yeah, and I think it’s important to tell your listeners why Bill and I decided to partner together in this little firm that we have called Enrollment Intelligence Now. We had long careers on college campuses. I was doing this work for 45 years. Bill would be just about as much, but he spent his first four years or so as a AP history teacher at a wonderful school in New Jersey. So, but you know, combined, we have 85 years of on-campus experience and we retired. I retired six years ago, Bill retired five years ago, and we just weren’t ready to completely hang it up. Because this is exciting work and believe me, it’s more exciting now than it was when we were active.
Drumm McNaughton: Oh yeah.
Bob Massa: in terms of the political environment. But here is one thing I think that will set us apart. We will not work with more than one client at a time because we wanna give that client our undivided attention, and we don’t wanna work 80 hours a week. But we do wanna give a hundred percent effort to the client. And it’s just Bill and myself. And if folks are interested in what we have to offer, our website is EnrollmentIntelligenceNow.com and that’s a good way to get in touch with us.
Drumm McNaughton: And you guys are one of our very few strategic partners that we have at The Change Leader, and I wanna acknowledge you and say thank you for that.
Bill Conley: Well, thank you. And I would say finally too, a lot of work we do is in coaching and mentoring and what we’re seeing, talk about long range, long term, and we didn’t really address this in our earlier comments, was where is the leadership going to come from in enrollment management? A lot of focus is on presidents as it should be, and academic leaders. But what we foresee is, it’s a shorter bench of people who have the kind of experience, politically, in the lower “p” terms. So what we often do is help the new leader, in real time, manage, as Bob said, yes, an exciting but also a very complex reality. Particularly on campus and all that has to be done.
So sometimes we just are there to be guides and saying, if I were in your seat right now, here’s a couple things I would think about”. And that has been a lot of fun for us, and I think of value to our clients.
Bob Massa: It really is very valuable and sometimes, when we have budget constraints we say, well I’ve hired a person who really has a lot of experience in admissions and financial aid. We’ll make ’em the, or her, the VP for enrollment management. They may know the technicalities, but not necessarily how to put them all together and how to lead in a way that will make the institution even more successful.
Drumm McNaughton: Yeah, well, gentlemen, like that old ancient Chinese curse, “may you live in interesting times”. We are in interesting times right now, and I want to thank you both for being on the show and even more so for the work that you’re doing with so many colleges and universities out there. Thank you.
Bob Massa: Thank you. Drumm.
Bill Conley: Thanks so much, Drumm. Take care now.
Drumm McNaughton: Folks, thanks for listening these past two sessions and a special thank you to my guests, Bill Conley and Bob Massa for their sharing with us higher ed enrollment, the challenges that they’re facing and what presidents and enrollment managers can do to change how they’re operating and thinking in this new normal higher ED finds itself in.
To my listeners, thanks as always for tuning in. I look forward to seeing you next week.
