Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Planning’ Category

The Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) held its seventh annual Summit for Advancement Leaders this week. This Summit, however, would be quite different for me. I was to receive one of those lifetime professional achievement awards.  

I had watched others receive this award over the years and thought I knew what to expect. But standing there before hundreds of my peers I found myself thinking, “How in the world can this be me?”  My mind was racing. “There are so many smart people out there,” I thought. “What must they be thinking about all this?” I became consumed with the thought that I had learned everything I know from these and other colleagues! 

Suddenly I was recalling what I had learned from two CASE board of trustee chairs, one of them also receiving an award this day. I had watched them both pilot the board through a particularly troubled time in the association and it became a very memorable lesson for me in skillful leadership and courage. I had written about leadership, but I had learned the really helpful lessons from them.

Then I found myself recalling when, as a very young faculty member, I had asked my academic dean at TCU for a promotion in faculty rank. He responded: “We better get you tenure while we can… I think you are going to need it!”  He was right. His insight paved the way for a long and rewarding future as a maverick who was destined to get involved in changing how things were done. It was my first practical lesson in strategic thinking and timing.

I also recalled the academic vice-chancellor who knew I was not headed into administration but nonetheless asked me to take a position directing the University’s evening college, summer school, and non credit programs. I had been complaining about the programs and so he challenged me to take the job and fix them. Later, when I went to him with my problems, he countered: “I hired you for solutions, Lauer, not to bring me problems.”  That experience became one of the most  important learning opportunities of my career.

Another major career-changing moment came when a development vice-chancellor brought me into this field, thereby enabling me to practice what I was teaching. It would require rethinking everything in the communication  division. But this would open the door for everything that would follow… my books, presentations, articles, travel, and literally everything that led to this award. 

Beyond those board of trustee chairs I mentioned there were many other strong professionals involved at the time in  CASE.  Talented volunteers and innovation-minded staff became my collaborators and teachers as we worked to bring new levels of sophistication to the communication field. Together we were able to inject strategic and integrated marketing concepts into our work. Timing was everything, and no one could have done it alone.

More recently I had a mentor-teacher at the American Council on Education (ACE) who taught me the importance of  advocating on behalf of the issues that are shaping the future of our industry. And with my academic hat back on, I found new collaborators at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). They helped me conclude that the internationalization of higher education would bring significant world problem-solving opportunities that we had never before even anticipated.

This moment of personal recognition clearly had me realizing that everything I know came from someone else. We all stand on the shoulders of many others, and it is especially during these moments that we fully understand and recognize that it is not ultimately about us. It’s all about our teachers and mentors.

Finally, I must confess that I also wanted to be giving a speech that day about how lucky our young professionals are to be in this field at this moment in time. Our industry is becoming global, governments are changing, and as a consequence advancement professionals are moving front and center in their institutions. We are in the middle of a major “sea change” in higher education, and the leaders in our field will literally have an opportunity to help change the world.

Read Full Post »

More than five years ago several key members of the board of trustees and professional staff of the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) could see a “sea change” coming in higher education, one that would thrust advancement professionals into a new level of leadership with a completely new set of performance expectations.

This “sea change” is both good and challenging news for the profession. The good news is that new and better rewarded opportunities will appear in the U.S. and abroad for the best among us.  The challenging news is that extremely high performance will be expected which will also require a new level of sophistication and understanding of the industry’s market issues, realities and trends.

Past CASE annual conferences concentrated mostly on the most current fundraising, alumni relations, marketing and communication tactics and cases. However, in order to meet the coming industry challenges an annual Summit was designed primarily to prepare advancement leaders to deal with the issues and competitive realities ahead.

This year’s Summit will kick off in Washington on Sunday. Here are eight “beyond tactics” concerns that are currently on my mind: 

1. How will today’s state legislative cutbacks change our core business, and what are the implications for advancement?  And how do for-profits factor into this equation?

2. How will essential increases in tuition be managed when the public thinks we already cost too much? What are the consequences of the recent questioning of the basic value of a college degree?  And what are the implications here for advancement?

3. How will internationalization effect competition for students, money and reputation at home? Will even the smallest U.S. institution be affected?

4. Are back-to-back comprehensive campaigns sustainable? How do we maintain donor loyalty when every nonprofit in the U.S. and abroad is out looking for philanthropic resources?

5. What is the future of on-line education?  Can it actually save money? How will it affect institutions that already have huge investments in maintaining a residential-based college experience?

6. Where will jobs in the future be found?  What will be the appropriate preparation for getting one of them? Is this sufficient preparation for a lifetime?  And does advancement have a role to play here?

7. What should liberal arts based institutions do now?  What happens to the “education for both a career and for a happy life”  philosophy?  How does advancement help address these situations?

8. Are boards of governance changing in make-up and expectations?  If so how?  Is there a trend toward more financial  risk taking?  Is there mounting pressure for a more corporate style management?  Is there a different traditional academic culture that should be maintained?  How should advancement respond?

In this new world of higher education there is little doubt that advancement will face increasingly high expectations, and will be required to play a key role in overall strategic planning and institutional problem-solving. Those professionals who stay focused only on tactics, even when those tactics are the cutting edge new media ones, will no longer qualify for the top leadership positions, or so I think.  Simply put, the coming “sea change” in higher education is bringing new very complicated, and in many cases institutional survival related, demands.

I suggest that only those advancement professionals who have moved beyond the tactics, and have developed the intellectual capacity to manage critical issues in a rapidly changing landscape, will qualify for taking on these new leadership opportunities. And the annual CASE Summit for Advancement Leaders is the perfect place to begin your immersion in these critical issues and to learn all about these exciting leadership challenges.

Read Full Post »

I spent a half-day this week with the institutional advancement officers in the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System. In the past my impression had been that many state systems were in a constant search for clarity of role and identity. But this week I collaborated with a highly energized group of professionals, and as I reflected on our time together I came to see more clearly just how they might function effectively in this current environment of government cut-backs and public criticism.

1. Who better than a state system can put together an impressive case for state support of higher education, and then to represent it in the legislature with one voice and ongoing persistence? Who better can make an effective case for insuring diverse access, meeting workforce needs, stimulating economic development, researching new products, solving community problems, and much more?

2. Who better can lead the rethinking of core business plans? Cut-backs are likely to remain permanent to some degree. What will  be the new ratio of revenue sources?  What proportion will now have to come from tuition, philanthropy, federal government, state government, fees, etc.?  How can we insure the needed amounts from each source will be available?

3. Who better can coordinate the best professional development programs, and provide access to the best experts in the fields of philanthropy, alumni relations, marketing and communications?  A new level of sophistication will be required in all these areas to meet future revenue and admissions needs, and the system can make sure this is available to every member.

4. Who better can assess the impact of globalization on the institutions in the state and guide a planned response?  Both opportunities and threats will have to be taken into account as a part of core business rethinking.  Does it make sense to have programs abroad?  What is the likelihood of foreign institutions successfully rasing money and recruiting students in this region?  How should each institution respond? 

5. Who better can help clarify where and how institutions can cooperate, and yet compete at the same time. For example, where might institutional student recruiting, and therefore marketing and communication initiatives, overlap? Where might the same donors, foundations, and corporations be solicited by individual institutions?  And what are new and better ways to build donor loyalty and avoid back-to-back campaign donor fatigue?

6. And who better can facilitate making an “everyone on the same page” case for higher education to the general public?  In this age of negativity and skepticism a strategic communication initiative to clarify higher education’s overall brand identity is essential, and a state system can lead the way. Even if a system is not in a “political” position to launch such a public campaign, it might help and encourage an outside group or association to do so.

Indeed, there are many roles for state systems to play in these uncertain times.  It’s exciting to think of the possibilities!

Read Full Post »

My primary contribution to higher education and the nonprofit world has been to adapt core concepts of integrated marketing to be used as planning tools to strengthen the effectiveness of strategic communicators.  And so I frequently get asked: “Do these ideas apply to just any organization, including businesses?”  And my answer clearly is always, “Yes.”

But as a matter of clarity let me first point out that I still find people defining marketing as selling. It is not. To understand my formula you must see marketing as a way of thinking. And I also find people in the field defining the term “integrated marketing” differently than do I. So there seems to be no uniform definition. 

What follows, then, is my hard “lessons learned” fundamental formula, the core concepts that I think define IMC as a way of thinking. And the formula applies to all organizations, sometimes with transformational results:

1. The very first principle of IMC: Simultaneously consider product, price, distribution methods, and communication tactics, as a fundamental way of thinking about communication strategy. A weak product that is priced and/or distributed poorly cannot be communicated effectively. This  is equally true in the nonprofit, commercial, and public service sectors.

2. Treat the corporate brand as your most important product.  Brand attraction is what establishes trust and builds confidence  in the integrity of your entire enterprise.  It incorporates assumptions about core values and reliability.

3. Also concentrate on sub-brand clarification for the key product/program and service divisions of the organization. Sub-brands should position divisions appropriately to their function, but also advance the overall brand identity.  This requires a relentless passion about carefully crafted and compelling words, as well as creative and consistent design.

4. An essential ingredient is a firm belief in the power of group dynamics. Only “bad” meetings are a waste of time.  Task forces and small groups should be used to mobilize the troops, getting key people on the same page inspired to help tell the story inside and out.  Action teams composed of the best available writers, designers, and strategic thinkers should  be used to implement key reputation defining initiatives.

5. Select multi-platform media tactics based on individual audience and target market preferences.  Then launch these tactics simultaneously to converge intensively on each target.   This is the only way to break through the confusing information clutter of today’s digital media world.

6. Always prefer interactive media. Feedback and response over time is the only way to achieve any level of understanding. Comprehensive surveys can mislead.  But today’s interactive communication is a form of market research that keeps everyone current about what works and what doesn’t.

In the final analysis, integrated marketing brings a broader way of thinking and planning to the profession of strategic communication. Simply put, incorporating this “value-added” subject matter better qualifies strategic communication professionals to function more impressively as a member of the top executive team.

Read Full Post »

Last week I met with a group of visiting educators on campus to help us review our graduate program in the Schieffer School of Journalism.  They ask me bluntly: What should be the “value added” benefit of a graduate program in journalism and strategic communication?

I confidently told them I thought that the “value added” of a professional school’s graduate program in these fields should be to help the students learn how to deal with the surprising and sometimes frightening workplace realities confronted by professional communicators in all organizations… all of those things we never get to cover adequately in lower level tactics and professional practice courses.

I also stressed that it is likely that these students will need to take more courses related to the topics they will be communicating. i.e. business, politics, international affairs, education, recent history, etc., and to become more exposed to how academic research in the various communication disciplines informs the practical world.  

But my list of the key “value-added” topics related to working in and with organizations includes to learn to think more critically, to manage complex issues, to make strategic plans that actually work in rapidly changing daily turmoil, to negotiate skillfully, to solve difficult problems, to lead innovative teams, to deal with corporate lawyers and management consultants, to manage and inspire creative people, to conduct really productive meetings, to make politically sensitive presentations, to deal with time-consuming and ever-present personnel problems, to make priority budget decisions in a competitive situation, and how to initiate research that actually  informs today’s critical decisions. But the most important topic of all is organizational politics–learning how to deal with the inevitable organizational barriers that can prevent you from doing what you now know how to do!!

Internal politics present problems everywhere.  The students may have actually learned something about politics in kindergarten and elementary school, but chances are they have forgotten all they knew!  And unless they were in that very rare undergraduate program, they didn’t get the refresher course.  So, a graduate program is a perfect place to address the specific workplace realities that communicators inevitably will confront head-on.

What do you do when your boss is actually threatened by your talent?  How do you get support from division heads who want to run their own show in every way?  How do you deal with the various leadership styles to be found from top to bottom in all organizations?  How do you get branding standards successfully  implemented?  Most importantly, how do you get widespread support for what you know how to do?  And the list goes on…

And one more point:  The line between journalism and strategic communication is blurring more and more every day.  Our graduates will work one day writing speeches in the White House and the next day in a news organization. They will use the same multi-platform communication tactics, and the best among them will strive to find and report truth no matter what side of the communication business they are on at the time. A properly shaped graduate program therefore is the perfect place to bridge the traditional divide between the disciplines and explore the full potential of a savvy, well-educated communication professional.

Read Full Post »

In preparing for a speech I will be giving in June about the future of university advancement I have become  acutely aware once again of the degree to which those of us in marketing, communication, alumni relations, fund-raising, and government affairs will find ourselves facing incredible challenges. But that said, these challenges will also present once-in-a-career amazing opportunities.

With state governments cutting back in the U.S. and  governments around the world changing their roles, it’s more and more clear everyday that increased responsibility for helping to chart the future success of educational institutions everywhere will be placed squarely at the feet of advancement officers. The good news is that we will have better paid, predominately placed executive positions. The scary news, however, is that we will have to be far more sophisticated in everything we do.

So far, the rough draft of my speech argues that marketing as “a way of thinking” will have to influence and possibly change all areas of advancement. Brand clarification, multi-platform interactive communication, and internal support mobilization must be a part of what everyone does everyday.  Alumni relations will need to provide a “portal” to lifetime  educational and social connections for entire families, and fundraisers will have to find interactive, creative ways to maintain key donor loyalty for the long-term. And all of this must work effectively in an industry that is rapidly becoming global, with changing student migration patterns and fundraisers roaming all over the world with new and imaginative cases for support. 

The fact is that donors with formerly local only interests are now becoming global in their businesses and outlook. And foundations and corporations that have also been largely local or regional operations are now thinking differently about their world and influence.

For many of us in advancement it has been challenging enough to deal with internal silos and traditional academic attitudes about our work.  Getting everyone on board and accepting an active role in telling a unified identity clarifying story has been difficult enough.  But now the game is changing again!  Developing a total culture of philanthropy, and an appreciation of marketing as a legitimate and respectable way of thinking, will simply be essential to institutional global success. 

Make no mistake, there is clear evidence that forward-thinking institutions are already gearing up all over the world to meet these challenges.  Past superiority is certainly no guarantee of future success in this new world.  So the basic message of my speech in June will be:  Don’t let your short-term problems (or even successes!) cause you to miss the simple fact that everything is changing right before your eyes!

Read Full Post »

On an airplane to Washington this week I found myself reading an article on happiness. The author was discussing the work of several scholars who are spending their careers researching the topic.  Obviously,  this got me thinking: What have I learned about happiness?

Is happiness reaching that moment when you can say: “I have done what I set out to do. My work is finished.”  Or, is that not what it is at all?  And if not, just what is it?

The thing about teaching and writing is that you learn early on that you only clarify your thinking about something when you have to explain it to someone else. 

How do I go about analyzing this topic?  Do I merely list my life goals and how I will know when I achieve them?  Or is it more a matter of listing those times I felt really pleased about my day and trying to understand why? 

Quickly I was able to say I felt happy when I was leading an important project that I thought was making a difference. But I  also quickly had to admit that perfect conclusions never really happen. There always has been a kind of  “incompleteness” about completing anything. 

And so is it the completion of something important, or is it something in the process itself, that produces this state of “being happy?” 

Ultimately I decided that finding my best talents, engaging in activities that use them, and  putting myself around other people who share and appreciate them, is the  key to my achieving personal bliss. For me it therefore is a condition of “the process” more than the completion of a job, or even a career.

Family and best friends factor into this equation in very essential ways. It is being around compelling people professionally and socially who we find stimulating that in the final analysis brings us the greatest joy. Right relationships matter. Who we put ourselves around determines much of how happy we feel.  

I finally concluded that when we identify the professional colleagues, best friends, and family members who make us feel good and surround ourselves with them; and conversely, when we remove the  activities and people we don’t like from our lives; happiness magically appears.

Happiness therefore is a state of being that we can arrange, and not the grand ovation we get at the end of the road!

Read Full Post »

It is not unusual for volunteers on the board of an organization to suggest that it might be time to change its name or identity.  They can often  think that the name is too long or that it does not say what the organization does clearly enough. Or, it might be that they just don’t like it. To the inexperienced, it seems like changing a name is a relatively simple and easy decision to make. A new and upbeat name will certainly bring new life to an old institution. Experience teaches, however, that it is probably the last action that should be considered.

There are many reasons not to change a name: First of all it is much like starting a whole new organization from scratch.  A new name has no identity until it is developed over time. It therefore is very expensive to do.  It costs a lot of money, takes a lot of staff time, and requires enormous amounts of communication and advertising to get the word out to everyone. All the history of your institution goes out the window with your name, and now you face what amounts to a new start-up.

Another reason is that all donors and supporters relate to the old name and know what it stands for well enough to be engaged. Many of them are tied to its traditions, operational style, mission, and vision. With a name change they can now feel disenfranchised and uncertain about the future. Foundations, government agencies, and even some individuals that support mostly established and proven organizations  may now feel that this one has become insecure and unstable. It certainly is now communicating that it is no longer comfortable with its long-established identity.

This is not to say that many organizations would not benefit from an uplift.  But rather than a name change, consider abbreviating it.  For example, will it work to use the letters in large type as the main name, and retain the traditional name under it in smaller type?  For some organizations its letters can become it’s name. Or, if possible, just shorten the name. Edit some of the words, but keep most of it.   

Another approach might be to slightly update the logo and brand design.  Changing these too dramatically, however, can have the same negative “start over” repercussion of a name change.  And many old timers might not like it. But a slight update in design can take the familiar and give it a bit of a contemporary or forward-looking twist. Small adjustments can indeed signal a new day and establish a new spirit for most organizations, especially when accompanied with exciting and newly inspired leadership.

Usually, if you do a pro and con discussion exercise with your group you will list more cons than pros. But sometimes a new start with a new name might be the best answer. It’s very rare, but it could happen when an organization has been allowed to fail too long, or when a consolidation requires that a new name be found.

In general, however, changing the name is the last thing you should consider. Simply put, it will usually end up meaning that you, your colleagues, and your volunteers, will be starting up a whole new organization.

Read Full Post »

As I prepare to once again teach a graduate seminar in integrated marketing communication I am reminded of my ongoing challenge to make sure that these advanced students go out into our profession fully prepared to be “proactive” professionals.

In the past, many of my graduate students come to my seminars from jobs where they are assumed to be reactive tactics experts. Managers come to them when they want to get out a press release, or need a new brochure, or want to produce a video, or promote a special event. New communication  practitioners find themselves in the role of taking orders for products.They constantly hear: “Here is what I want, when can I have it.”

My challenge always is to show my students the potential for being able to counsel managers, and eventually senior executives, about new and powerful possibilities. Indeed, experienced thinkers in our profession have the power through strategic communication tools and integrated marketing processes to literally transform organizations with their planning advice. I must show them how this works, but then also teach them the political skills essential for getting themselves in a position to function on this higher level.

The implementation steps are really simple: (1) Clarify the organization’s competitive advantage, usually referred to as “big idea” or unique brand identity. (2) Use ongoing group processes to get a critical mass of internal managers and staff “on the same page” with regard to this positioning messaging. (3) Use multi-platform communication tactics simultaneously, and select them based on researched media preference of each target market. (4) Influence management presentations by preparing talking points and offering speechwriting services. (5) And focus on high visibility initiatives, based on immediate opportunities, and implemented using carefully formed action teams.

With this understanding of the power of the profession mastered, the challenge now becomes how to use political savvy and strategies to get into a position of being able to use what we know. This involves having a “teaching plan” in mind  to help others understand our potential. It also involves imagining how to accomplish this “teaching” one step at a time– in one-on-one interviews, in regular meetings, and in other groups we can form for this purpose. And finally, it involves understanding the simple basics of grassroots politics, and how they apply to organizations.

This last topic, internal politics, is what we never seem to teach in typical academic programs, or even in professional development seminars. But, I have now come to think that it is actually the most imporant topic I can bring to these students.

Read Full Post »

Once in a while those of us who work in the field of strategic communication must stop and remind ourselves that we do not ever really send complete messages to audiences.  Rather, we make a “sign,” or “noise,” that pulls a previously established meaning out of each person’s brain.

For example, when I say the word “dog” I am only making a funny noise. The receiver attributes  a meaning to that “noise” out of  prior experience. For dog lovers, that noise will bring a pleasant impression. For those who see dogs as dirty animals, or threatening to their safety, it will be a negative impression.  One of my students offered: “For me today, that word reminds me of a bad date I had last night.”

It is a bit depressing sometimes to realize that each and  every word we use is processed in this way by each individual.  Therefore, it is only where our experiences completely overlap that effective communication can take place.  The further apart our geographic and cultural experience, the less likely we will completely understand each other. No wonder communication across economic levels, ethnic cultures, and nationalities is so complicated.

The lesson here is clear: It is essential for the sender and receiver to know each other as thoroughly as possible before attempting serious communication. “Experience overlap” must take place so that each “noise ,” or “sign,” will have the same meaning to both parties.  Wherever possible, finding opportunities to create this overlap with our target audiences should become a part of our overall strategic communication plan. This reality also underscores the critical importance of  message feedback and repetition, thereby establishing dialogue and giving us an opportunity to correct misunderstandings.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »