Strategic Action Group Committee on Local, National, and Worldwide Recognition
An invitation for input
Please review the following report and offer your input before April 22, 2009.
This report presents proposed "Aims" and "Actions" for possible implementation at the University of Houston. These are intended to assist UH to achieve this goal:
You are invited to review this report and offer recommendations, comments, and suggestions to the Committee at: uhstrategicgoal5@gmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT, as of March 30, 2009
Recognition and reputation are important to universities because we are a reputation-driven industry. We do not seek to improve our recognition and reputation just for the sake of doing so, nor to satisfy our own institutional ego. We do so because the very best faculty, students, and staff are drawn to institutions with the best reputations. We further believe that a great city and region like Houston deserves a premier university with an outstanding reputation. Finally, it is believed that alumni giving is based at least in part on how the alumni perceive the University and how much they know about its activities.
Recognition and reputation do not come easily, quickly, or lightly to higher education institutions. They cannot be captured by a glitzy marketing campaign alone. The accomplishments of faculty and students have a direct impact. Yet in this age of information overload, universities must be intentional, consistent, and persistent in telling their stories over a sustained period with messaging that is authentic with the reality of the institution.
However, before any of that can begin, it is critically important that the University of Houston is analytical and honest with itself about its current reputation, and the present perceptions of various key stakeholders. It also must clearly and crisply identify what the key elements of its reputation ought to be. These are inter-dependent tasks. If, to use an unlikely example, it is determined that important constituencies believe that UH is flood-prone, it should become part of the image-research process to test responses to possible approaches to reversing that perception. Or, if we discover that the “cougar high” image persists, we must take steps to reverse it. In other words, because “image” is a composite of criteria that exist only in the minds of others, it is important not only to determine those criteria, but also to determine what actions relating to those criteria will be viewed favorably.
It is also necessary for the University to undertake a comprehensive analysis of what currently is being done to increase its recognition, at the University, College and Department levels, and measure the relative success of current practices. Finally, steps should be taken to insure that there is sufficient inter-action and transparency between the University, its Colleges and Departments, and that the retention and delegation of authority and funding be designed to produce the most efficient result. We believe that in many cases “centralized” efforts are not the best way to achieve the greatest recognition for individual Colleges and Departments, which are more familiar with their accomplishments and how they may best be conveyed to others.
The Aims and Action Steps below, then, emphasize an analytical approach with an emphasis on continuous assessment of results and impact.
Action Step E.1.(i). Conduct a current perception study of the University of Houston.
The first step in improving the visibility and reputation of the University of Houston is to establish a baseline of the current perceptions locally, nationally, and world-wide. Such a perception study should include the perception of the University of Houston in the national and international higher education marketplace. Previous studies should be reviewed and updated.
The metrics could include the on-time, on-budget completion of a quality perception study.
Action Step E.1.(ii). Establish the desired, authentic perception and conduct a gap analysis from the results of the baseline perception study.
This analysis would provide the University insights into what areas of emphasis will be required to bring current perceptions up to date with the reality. It will also enable the University to identify if any brand confusion exists. One key will be to establish the key messages and then be relentlessly consistent with those messages.
The metrics could include the on-time, on-budget completion of a gap analysis and key messages study.
Action Step E.1.(iii). Review and analyze all marketing and public relations activities of the University from the last two years.
This detailed analysis should include all activities, their cost, and any results from impact assessments. This should apply to activities at both the university and college levels.
The metrics could include the on-time, on-budget completion of a cost-benefit analysis study.
Action Step E.1.(iv). Based on the results of E.1.(iii), realign resources committed to marketing and public relations at the University to optimize reputation impact.
One central question that will need to be answered is the distribution of resources for marketing and public relations between a University focus and college-based activities. Whatever the balance, significant coordination and collaboration will be required.
The metrics could include cost-benefit analyses of central and college-based activities.
Action Step E.1.(v). Implement a culture of continuous assessment of the impact of marketing and public relations activities.
Many organizations market themselves extensively without ever measuring the results. It will be crucial that the University of Houston have a culture of continuous assessment and reallocation of resources and effort to those activities that are regularly showing positive results.
The metrics could include cost-benefit analyses and reallocations based on those analyses.
Action Step E.2.(i). Fund one or more pilot projects at a significant level (for example, in the amount of at least $100,000) in a targeted college, program, or department aimed at increasing reputation of that unit nationally and internationally.
The University will need to make a substantial investment in building academic reputation. Before doing so comprehensively, it could benefit from one or more pilot projects that unleash the creativity of the units. The focus of these projects should be to increase rankings through the hiring and retention of key faculty. These pilot projects could well yield “best practices” and lead to the launching of a successful comprehensive plan. In fact, it may be determined that the best approach is to build on the reputation of just a few colleges and/or programs, rather than attempting to “comprehensively” build academic reputation.
The metrics could include one or more successfully completed pilot projects.
Action Step E.2.(ii). Increase faculty support for start up costs for new research and for participating in activities that maximize the sharing of their research and scholarship.
The University of Houston will need to continue to recognize the importance of quality undergraduate and graduate teaching and student success (See Aim B). However, it must also place increased emphasis on faculty scholarship and research if it is to increase its reputation in the academic marketplace. To do so it will have to demonstrate new levels of support for existing faculty research and scholarship, as well as demonstrate its commitment to potential new hires.
The metrics could include increased faculty satisfaction in the support provided for research and scholarship, as measured by a nationally-normed faculty survey.
Action Step E.2.(iii). Increase the public recognition given at the department, college, and University level to scholarly and research achievement.
A comprehensive plan will need to be developed to ensure that the University maximizes the impact on its reputation as a result of scholarly and research achievement. The University should determine whether some or all colleges and/or departments should play a defined role in recognition activities and in the communication and dissemination of the achievements of its faculty.
The metrics could include the establishment of a defined number of awards and recognition events for scholarly and research achievement.
Action Step E.2.(iv). Utilize acceptable forms of measuring faculty scholarly achievement and publicize the results.
Higher education has increased its attention to the measurement of research and scholarship. Funded research, of course, can be measured by both its success in attracting external funding and the impact of the research itself. Scholarship can frequently be measured by items such as the number of citations. In addition, a relatively new Scholarly Productivity Index is available to participating universities, which can provide data at the department level, comparing that data to peer and aspirant institutions.
The metrics could include the results from each of these measures.
Action Step E.2.(v). Provide support for faculty to engage in activities that increase their opportunity to receive faculty awards and/or national academy membership.
Both faculty awards and national academy membership are included in the measures used by the Top American Research Universities. A number of universities provide specific support for faculty who have the potential to earn such designations, thereby increasing institutional reputation and investing in the career success of its most promising faculty.
The metrics could include increases in the number of faculty awards and national academy members.
Action Step E.3.(i). Identify the University of Houston’s current reputation with high school students and high school counselors and teachers.
A perception study needs to be conducted to identify what barriers may exist that prevent UH from being the institution of first-choice for top-performing high school students. Colleges and departments may wish to do the same with graduate and professional students.
The metrics could include a completed study with tangible results.
Action Step E.3.(ii). Review and analyze all marketing and public relations activities of the University aimed at high school students, teachers, and counselors.
This review should provide a gap analysis between the expressed barriers top performing high school students perceive, and the messages currently delivered by UH’s recruitment materials and activities.
The metrics could include a completed gap analysis.
Action Step E.3.(iii). Redesign recruitment and admissions materials and University marketing and public relations activities to respond to the gap analysis in E.3.(ii).
The University will need to be intentional in responding to both real and perceived barriers that reduce the number of high-performing student applicants.
The metrics could include a specified increase in applications from high-performing students.
Action Step E.3.(iv). Implement a culture of continuous assessment of the impact of marketing and public relations activities aimed at recruiting high-performing students to the University of Houston.
Enrollment management has become a sophisticated and competitive operation in higher education, as more institutions seek top students and students from various geographic markets. As UH moves more into an enrollment management mode, the role of communicating with students and assessing the impact of those communications will increase in importance.
The metrics could include redesign of materials and effectiveness studies.
Action Step E.4.(i). Conduct a perception study with alumni and redesign alumni communications to improve perceptions.
The University of Houston’s low alumni giving rate (See Aim F.5.) and relatively low participation in alumni events suggest that the University needs to understand the reasons for lack of involvement and ensure that its alumni communications respond to real and perceived barriers to greater involvement.
The metrics could include increases in the alumni giving rate and in alumni participation.