Larry D. Lauer

Is there a best way to organize a marketing and communication operation in a university or nonprofit institution?  I am asked this question frequently, and the answer is no.

Every organization has differences in management and leadership styles, in immediate marketing and commmunication needs, in quantity and location of necessary talent, and in established ways of getting things done.  The best way to launch a new marketing initiative in this setting is not to immediately restructure. Rather, it is much better to use dotted lines and teams to create an integrated planning process that can begin working immediately. The best permanent organizational structure will then emerge over time.

Not long ago the university advancement profession argued that the best way to organize marketing and communication was to put it with alumni relations and fund raising under the leadership of the chief advancement officer.  The “model” was referred to as the “three-legged stool.” Admittedly, sometimes in some instutitions this structure works well.  But success depends greatly on the background and interests of the person in charge.

If the chief advancment officer is consumed with fund raising pressures, as many are, this structure will not work as well as it should. In addition to alumni relations and fund raising, marketing and communication professionals must also give significant attention to student recruiting, to promoting the schools and colleges, to institutional reputation building, to overall visibility activities and events, and to issues and crises management.

Marketing and communication professionals must be led by someone who will relentlessly champion their support throughout the institution, and will represent them enthusiastically on the president’s team.  For many academic institutions, the most effective structure will be for marketing and communication to be its own division with its own cabinet-level leadership.

I have recently been working with a professional association where many of the areas typically in a marketing and communication operation are spread over several administrative departments. Due to long established relationships, it was clear that the only way to move forward was to establish an association-wide marketing task force.  With this approach, I have no doubt that the best structure will emerge over time.

There is much to be learned about the dynamics of organizational processes, and the politics of gaining widespread support for sophisticated marketing and communication.  Experience teaches, however, that there is no one best model. Organizations that on the surface seem similar still have very different management cultures and marketing needs.