Diagnosing the independent-school admissions funnel
Photo: Christina @ wocintechchat.com
DIAGNOSING THE ENROLLMENT FUNNEL
There are many possible points of failure between advertising and realized revenue. This simple approach to sales analysis makes it easy to see where things are breaking down—and how you might go about fixing them.
HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT
For many people, January means new fitness routines, healthy eating, or getting serious about long-ignored ambitions. For admissions teams at independent schools, January means open houses, visit days, and the bare-knuckle brawl of yield season.
Whether there’s a long waiting list or an urgent need to fill seats, leadership is always interested in the performance of the business-development team. Depending on a school’s culture, this can spark a season of collaborative problem-solving or a fog of finger-pointing.
Blame and finger-pointing don’t deliver many answers. Collegial problem-solving is better for school culture, but is often equally ineffective. It can be frustrating to know you’re looking at the right data, but still not discerning where the problem is.
Several years ago, while leading communications and marketing for Moses Brown, an N-12 Quaker school in Providence, we experienced a 5% drop in enrollment. This triggered an extensive period of investigation and analysis to identify the cause and possible remedies. In that case, the primary issue was the price of tuition in a context of economic headwinds, and was addressed with increased fundraising for financial aid endowment.
At the same time, several byproducts of the analysis have turned out to have lasting value. In particular, it led to the creation of a simple tool to diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of a school’s sales ecosystem. This instrument doesn’t require special software, expensive subscriptions, or mental acrobatics.
OUR APPROACH
At Rustle & Spark, we work with clients who want to increase the effectiveness of their branding and marketing by making an emotional connection with the audience. We work in different industries so we can cross-pollinate between them. And while people in education sometimes feel itchy at the word “sales,”admissions officers are the sales team. As with any business, sales is key to survival.
In the corporate world, it’s common to hear two departments mentioned in the same breath: Sales and Marketing. Schools often say “Admissions” and “Communications,” but they’re functionally equivalent. And though the language may vary, the same misconception often shows up in both environments—namely, that sales and marketing are different. They’re both working to get new families in the door, and they work in tandem.
In essence, Communications sets ‘em up, Admissions knocks ‘em down. Of course, if the end result is unsatisfactory, both teams have numbers to show they’re working hard. Admissions teams can show open house attendance stats, detail how many interviews and tours they’ve conducted, and how many volunteers they’ve engaged to help close the deal with new families. Comms teams have stacks of Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) like website traffic, bounce rates, time-on-page, social media followers and subscribers, and more.
The reality is that diagnosing a school’s enrollment funnel can be done with just four numbers that most teams are already tracking: inquiries, applications, acceptances, and enrollments. Logging each one on a weekly basis allows us to follow the trend lines of these important functions.
The real story is told by the relationships between these metrics. In fact, the relationships are so easy to see at a glance that the actual numbers are primarily useful as a benchmark against year-over-year performance.
Here are four examples that illustrate how the interplay of these metrics can indicate what part of the enrollment system needs more support—and an example of what it will look like when everything is dialed in. Note that this hypothetical is based on rolling admissions, but works equally well even if all admissions decisions get made at once.
OFFER ISN’T COMPELLING
Communications teams are often evaluated on KPI’s like website traffic, bounce rate, time on page, follower counts, likes, shares, etc. These make for thick, data-laden reports that reassure the board the Comms team is earning their keep.
Unfortunately, none of these metrics actually matter. If website traffic is up and social media accounts have gone viral, but inquiries are barely trickling in, that’s all wasted motion.
There are reasons one might continue to track those data points, but if there’s one number that points to the effectiveness of marketing, it’s inquiries.
That’s because inquiries mean that, through their actions, people are saying, ”You’ve attracted my interest, given me the idea that this could have value for my family, and made me curious to know more.”
If people are responding to marketing with an inquiry to learn more, the offer is compelling. If that number isn’t growing, marketing may not be telling a strong story.
In example 1, the cumulative number of inquiries gets a boost from open house advertising, hence the big jump early in the year, and then grows modestly.
If inquiries are flat, that could mean marketing needs an overhaul.
The other places where it’s typical to see more inquiries are right after Thanksgiving, in the week leading up to the New Year, and surrounding a winter open house. Overall, though, this is a tepid curve.
One note of caution: each of the metrics we’ll discuss should be approached carefully when considered on its own.
A flat inquiry curve could mean the marketing is boring. It could also mean that the school is so well-known and in demand that people don’t bother inquiring—they proceed directly to an application. This is why it’s so important to consider each trend line’s relationship to its neighbor.
POOR TARGETING
Let’s say the communications team from the previous example has done some soul-searching and brought in a branding or marketing agency like Rustle & Spark to refine their messaging.
Suddenly, inquiry trend lines look much stronger. High-fives all around. Board reports are prepared with self-satisfied pride…but not so fast. The trend lines now reveal a different problem.
The communications trend line is much stronger. There are certain inflection points that will be fairly consistent—inquiry jumps around open house, for example—but the overall numbers are higher.
In example 2, the problem is that the inquiry trend line has gone up, but it’s farther away from the applications trend line. The proximity of these two lines reveals whether the communications team is targeting their audience well, and how closely their pitch matches the reality of the school.
If inquiries are growing—but applications aren’t—that suggests marketing’s good hook is not an accurate representation of the institution.
If inquiries are going up, that means people want a closer look. And if the application trend line stays close to the inquiry line, then people like what they’re seeing upon closer examination.
But if the application line is getting farther away, that means one of two problems is likely present.
It could be that the communications team enticed people to take a first look, but those people aren’t continuing in the admissions process. In other words, poor targeting. As an extreme example: “Free $100!” gets a lot of inquiries, but people who don’t have children will take the hundred bucks without applying.
It could also mean that Communications is making a great pitch that doesn’t quite match reality. People respond to the pitch by inquiring, but once they get a real look at the school, they say, “no thanks.”
Either way, this shape indicates the problem is in the school’s communications and marketing.
MISTARGETED APPLICANTS
Continuing our hypothetical journey, working with an agency has honed the marketing message so that it accurately reflects the daily reality of the school, and the thoughtful, consistent use of advanced technology means the message is getting to the right people in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Now lots of people are inquiring—and applying. Huzzah! Wait… hold the high-fives.
They’re inquiring, they’re applying…but they’re not getting in.
In example 3, the inquiries and applications trend lines are tracking together, so people who take a look enjoy what they see, and proceed with an application.
But the applications and acceptances trend lines have gotten farther apart. When this happens, it means there’s a messaging breakdown about the school’s requirements for admission.
If marketing is generating inquiries, and people are following through with an application—but getting denied—that suggests the messaging isn’t accurately conveying admission requirements.
People are curious, and they like what they hear, but they don’t have what it takes to get in. In other words, they’re not suitable applicants.
When this happens, it suggests the problem is with the communications team’s messaging, the admissions team’s clarity when speaking with prospects, or both.
It also provides a clue about what’s working and what needs to be addressed: applicants have been attracted by the pitch—what they can expect from the school. That part of the message is in good shape. But the messaging isn’t adequately communicating what the school expects from applicants—what it takes to get in.
CLOSING CHALLENGES
In response, our hypothetical team has revised website copy and produced new videos that include honest-but-not-off-putting information about what it takes to get into this school. Requirements may relate to academic performance, artistic prowess, athletic accomplishment, or other filtering factors that affect prospects’ chance of admission.
Now things are really cooking: Overall inquiries are up because the new marketing is connecting with audiences. Consistent messaging between marketing and admissions personnel means that people who take a look proceed to submit applications. And clear, consistent messaging has been updated with admission expectations, so those applications are a good match for the school’s enrollment goals.
“Now can we high-five?” Not quite yet.
Even with all that going right, the number of students enrolling has barely budged. What gives?
Example 4 shows what this scenario looks like: trend lines moving upward, and good proximity between most stages of the funnel, but too much distance between admitted students and those who choose to attend. In other words, the school is saying yes to prospects, but those prospects aren’t reciprocating.
If marketing is generating inquiries, close inspection is generating applications, and clear admissions requirements are generating acceptances—but people aren’t enrolling—that means the problem is most likely in the admissions team and/or volunteers.
That means there are problems in Admissions’ ability to close the deal. It could be that the professional staff is too hands-off, or that they’re pushing too hard. It could mean that parent or student volunteers are ineffective, or worse, oversharing about trouble at the school. It could mean a competitor is offering some incentive that needs to be matched or neutralized. The important thing is that the trend lines indicate where to look to find the problem.
ELITE COLLABORATION
In our hypothetical, the process for nurturing prospects has been improved. A competitor’s signing bonus has been matched, and better training for student and parent volunteers has made them powerful advocates for the school.
As a result, when students get an acceptance letter from this school, they post a video of their happy dance to Tik Tok, and those videos are going viral. Other schools seethe with envy. It’s yieldapalooza.
When communications makes an enticing pitch, inquiries go up. If that pitch matches the reality of what it feels like to attend, applications go up. If requirements are clear, only suitable candidates apply, and acceptances go up. And if the sales ecosystem is strong, most students accept an offer of admission, and enrollments go up.
Example 5 shows a marketing and admissions system in peak form—lines are going up and correlate well.
When lines are tracking together, the whole sales cycle becomes more efficient.
One caveat: Ascending trend lines always look good on a chart. And generally speaking, they present a positive picture. But the deeper meaning for the financial health of the school is told by the ways these trend lines relate to each other.
This means that a declining trend line is not necessarily a bad thing. It might feel uncomfortable to submit a board report with news that applications are down overall, but if those applications are a better fit for what the school wants, it could actually quite positive.
CONCLUSION
A less-than-thrilling enrollment picture is always a disappointment, but remedying the situation doesn’t have to be a mystery.
Most teams already have the relevant systems or data to perform an accurate in-house diagnosis of the admissions pipeline. For a spreadsheet to log running totals and generate charts, download this.
The best part about this approach to analysis is that it’s highly intuitive, which means that leadership and governance teams can focus on finding the problem and brainstorming solutions rather than wasting time trying to extract meaning from complex spreadsheets.
Good luck!
Adam Olenn is the CEO of Rustle & Spark, a branding and marketing agency that specializes in independent schools.