Lund University - Lunds universitet

Lund UniversityPerspectives on Tuition Fees, Student Recruitment,Pricing, and Tuition-based Competition (II)The Illuminate Consulting Group 7 May 2010ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20101

AGENDAIntroductionFees and CostingBranding, Web 2.0, and Recruitment BrandAdmissionsMeeting with Lund RepresentativesMarketing, Recruitment, Regional StrategiesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20103

INTRODUCTION• This presentation is being delivered as part of a seminar at Lund on 7May 2010.• In the case of further questions, please contact Dr. Daniel J. Guhr bye-mail at guhr@illuminategroup.com, or by phone +1 619 295 9600.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20104

AGENDAIntroductionFees and CostingBranding, Web 2.0, and Recruitment BrandAdmissionsMeeting with Lund RepresentativesMarketing, Recruitment, Regional StrategiesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20105

A HOLISTIC DEMAND PERSPECTIVE ON TUITION FEESProspective StudentsSweden EU/EEA Non-EU/EEA (w)Non-EU/EAA (p)FactorsRankings- national- internationalBrand- academic- recruitingAlumninetworkStudyoutcomes(employ-ability)SocialprestigeSupply anddemand- subject- levelPolicy issuesandadmissionsrequirementsPremiumproductplacementOpportunitycostsCost of livingScholarshipsCourse costsTuition RangeLund UniversityICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20106

TUITION CONSIDERATIONS FROM A STUDENT’S PERSPECTIVETCA – Total Cost of AttainmentTotal cost includes all tuition, fees, and living expenses. TCA serves as acategorical cost/ benefit decision-making tool in the sense that it involves implicitand explicit spending caps. It also serves as a signaling tool.YieldACA – Adjusted Cost of AttainmentAdjusted costs reflect total costs offset by any non-personal (family) fundingsources which are provided on a grant basis. Funding category origin mattersand serves as a critical and at times exaggerated competitive lever.YieldRCA – Relative Cost of AttainmentRelative costs involve a calculation of TCA/ACA relative to feasible alternatives.Criteria are quality, reputation, funding, services, personal factors, etc. RCAserves as a prioritization tool.OCA – Opportunity Cost of AttainmentOpportunity costs reflect incurred individual social and personal costs as well aslost or diminished opportunities. Modulating factors include non-native languagestudies, career and social network access, cultural affinity, and others.ROA – Return on AttainmentReturn calculations encompass future return on investment expectations and„soft“ factors such as membership in a powerful alumni network. An additionalbenefit factor is leverage in the receiving institution’s job market.YieldYieldYieldICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20107

TUITION-BASED COMPETITITON IN A GLOBALPREMIUM SEGMENT (LLM DEGREES)1InstitutionGraduate Law Degree (LLM) Tuition (£, in 1,000s)1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0St. Gallen University2.1 2.5University of Toronto (1)3.19.6Bucerius Law School (2)Cambridge University (3)Melbourne UniversityKing’s College LondonUniversity College LondonLondon School of Econ.Oxford University (4)Harvard University (1)10.55.1 10.810.4 11.010.84.8 11.05.0 11.88.5 12.47.5 14.9 14.920.1Low Medium High(1) Included for comparison purposes.(2) Master of Laws and Business (MLB).(3) College fee set at the maximum £ 2,013. Select colleges charge less than the maximum fee.(4) Bachelor of Civil Laws (BCL). College fee set at the maximum £ 4,500. Select colleges charge less than £ 2,000 but charges are in a state of flux.Notes: Data as of April 2006. Tuition and fee rates for the 2006/07 academic year are expected to be somewhat higher.Sources: Universities, ICG.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20108

THE DEMISE OF UNSW ASIA1InstitutionUndergraduate Tuition (SGD, in 1,000s)2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0UNSW AsiaNUS domesticNUS internationalNTU domesticNTU international23.2 28.46.117.56.7 19.36.16.7The decision to close UNSW Asia in June 2007 was chiefly based on thelack of student enrollment. That should not have come as a surprise:UNSW Asia entered the Singaporean education market with a tuition levelwhich bore no relation to its competitive tuition situation.Notes:Sources:A prime example of amateurish tuition competitiveness behaviorTuition for the 2006/07 (NUS/NTU) or the aborted 2007 (UNSW ASIA) school year. NUS and NTU tuition take the MOE grant into consideration.Universities, ICG.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 20109

LUND’S INITIALLY PROPOSED TUITION FEE MODELWas a Partial Bottom-Up Cost Model• Proposed cost model• Government revenue per student and program• plus costs for orientation, services etc.• plus set off for scholarships (about 7.5%)• plus marketing and costs for agents (about 15%)• No consideration of the other factors driving tuition fee levels.• Step-up situation, coupled with the need to base price 3-5 years into thefuture, making tuition fee setting unusually complex.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201010

LUND’S PROPOSED INITIAL TUITION FEE LEVELS INCOMPETITIVE PERSPECTIVELund-Peer Tuition Fee Comparison (Master's Level, in €)EnvironmentGeorgia TechEngineeringUniversity of QueenslandUniversity of LeedsBusinessFrankfurt UniversitySocial ScienceLund University0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000Notes: Tuition fees for 2010/11 but for Lund (proposed 2011/12).Sources: Universities, ICG.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201011

LUND’S REVISED TUITION FEE LEVELS: DISCLAIMER• Any comment rendered in the following discussion of the updatedversion of proposed tuition fees at Lund is not based on specificresearch on a given course/program• Therefore, comments should only be interpreted as general guidancewith the aim to trigger further researchICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201012

PROPOSED EHL FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS”EHL Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditMa. i Economics 40,608 50,608 58,108 65,608 77,188 7,719 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Economic Demography 36,999 46,999 54,499 61,999 72,942 7,294 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Econ. G. I. & S. D. 35,906 45,906 53,406 60,906 71,656 7,166 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Economic History 33,966 43,966 51,466 58,966 69,373 6,937 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i företagsekonomisk analys 27,760 37,760 45,260 52,760 62,072 6,207 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Finance 38,552 48,552 56,052 63,552 74,769 7,477 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Corp. and Fin. Manag. 39,087 49,087 56,587 64,087 75,398 7,540 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Economics 39,972 49,972 57,472 64,972 76,440 7,644 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Entrepreneurship 73,292 83,292 90,792 98,292 115,641 11,564 12,000 200 10,000 167Ma. i Econ. Research Methods 48,158 58,158 65,658 73,158 86,070 8,607 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Finans 33,719 43,719 51,219 58,719 69,083 6,908 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Int. Econ. with China 39,702 49,702 57,202 64,702 76,122 7,612 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Int. Market. & Brand Mang. 39,775 49,775 57,275 64,775 76,208 7,621 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i informationssystem 63,772 73,772 81,272 88,772 104,440 10,444 10,000 167 10,000 167Ma. i Manag. Peop., Know. & Ch 38,119 48,119 55,619 63,119 74,260 7,426 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i redovisning/ ekonomistyrn. 38,617 48,617 56,117 63,617 74,845 7,485 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i redovisning och revision 35,536 45,536 53,036 60,536 71,221 7,122 8,000 133 10,000 167Ma. i Sustainable Bus. Lead. 59,153 69,153 76,653 84,153 99,006 9,901 10,000 167 10,000 167Ma. i Statistics 78,883 88,883 96,383 103,883 122,218 12,222 12,000 200 10,000 167Fac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditSource: LundProposed Faculty price of € 10,000 appears to be at the low endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201013

PROPOSED HT FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“HUMANITIES”HT Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMa. i kognitionsvetenskap 41,982 51,982 59,482 66,982 78,804 7,880 8,000 133 12,300 205Ma. i litteratur - kultur - medier 34,227 44,227 51,727 59,227 69,681 6,968 8,000 133 12,300 205Ma. inom Religious Roots Europe 21,565 31,565 39,065 46,565 54,784 5,478 6,000 100 12,300 205Ma. i språk och språkvetenskap 33,558 43,558 51,058 58,558 68,893 6,889 8,000 133 12,300 205Ma. i tillämpad kulturanalys 37,095 47,095 54,595 62,095 73,055 7,305 8,000 133 12,300 205Source: LundProposed Faculty price of € 12,300 appears to be at the high endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201014

PROPOSED J FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“LAW”J Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMasterprogram i mänskligarättigheter37,232 47,232 54,732 62,232 73,216 7,322 8,000 133 11,500 192Masterprogram i sjörätt 38,502 48,502 56,002 63,502 74,710 7,471 8,000 133 11,500 192Source: LundProposed Faculty price of € 11,500 appears to be at low endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201015

PROPOSED K FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“ARTS, THEATER AND MUSIC”K Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditKonstnärligt ma. i fri konst 275,589 285,589 293,089 300,589 353,643 35,364 36,000 600Konstnärligt k.p. i musik 188,601 198,601 206,101 213,601 251,302 25,130 26,000 433KGSKÅ 392,407 402,407 409,907 417,407 491,079 49,108 50,000 833Proposed HoP prices of € 26,000+ are very high, but this is a special caseSource: LundICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201016

PROPOSED N FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“NATURAL SCIENCE”N Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMa. i biologi 77,472 87,472 94,972 102,472 120,558 12,056 12,000 200 12,000 200Ma. i fysik 67,394 77,394 84,894 92,394 108,702 10,870 11,000 183 12,000 200Ma. i geologi 68,519 78,519 86,019 93,519 110,025 11,003 11,000 183 12,000 200Ma. i geografisk info. svetenskap 69,295 79,295 86,795 94,295 110,938 11,094 11,000 183 12,000 200Ma. i kemi 67,359 77,359 84,859 92,359 108,660 10,866 11,000 183 12,000 200Ma. i matematisk statistik 74,595 84,595 92,095 99,595 117,174 11,717 12,000 200 12,000 200Ma. i matematik 72,115 82,115 89,615 97,115 114,256 11,426 12,000 200 12,000 200Ma. i molekylärbiologi 71,192 81,192 88,692 96,192 113,170 11,317 12,000 200 12,000 200Ma. i naturgeografi/eko.analys 78,955 88,955 96,455 103,955 122,303 12,230 12,000 200 12,000 200Ma. i proteinvetenskap 78,785 88,785 96,285 103,785 122,103 12,210 12,000 200 12,000 200Source: LundProposed Faculty price of € 12,000 appears to be at low endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201017

PROPOSED S FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“SOCIAL SCIENCE”S Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMa. i utvecklingsstudier 38,540 48,540 56,040 63,540 74,755 7,475 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. i globala studier 37,732 47,732 55,232 62,732 73,804 7,380 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. i genusstudier 37,651 47,651 55,151 62,651 73,709 7,371 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. i European Affairs 40,135 50,135 57,635 65,135 76,631 7,663 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. i Int. Dev. and Manag. 39,774 49,774 57,274 64,774 76,207 7,621 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. i samhällsvetenskap 40,629 50,629 58,129 65,629 77,213 7,721 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. i Service Manag. 35,817 45,817 53,317 60,817 71,551 7,155 8,000 133 9,000 150Ma. in Welfare Pol. and Manag. 37,339 47,339 54,839 62,339 73,342 7,334 8,000 133 9,000 150Source: LundProposed Faculty price of € 9,000 appears to be broadly alignedICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201018

PROPOSED LTH FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“LUND INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY”LTH Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMa.bildning i bioteknik 81,759 91,759 99,259 106,759 125,602 12,560 12,000 209 12,000 200Ma.bildning i fotonik 69,208 79,208 86,708 94,208 110,836 11,084 11,000 185 12,000 200Ma.bildning i livsmedelstek/nut. 78,278 88,278 95,778 103,278 121,507 12,151 12,000 203 12,000 200Ma.bildning i nanovetenskap 79,147 89,147 96,647 104,147 122,529 12,253 12,000 204 12,000 200Ma.bildning i system på chips 76,999 86,999 94,499 101,999 120,002 12,000 12,000 200 12,000 200Ma.bildning i hållbarstadsgestaltning151,618 161,618 169,118 176,618 207,791 20,779 21,000 346 21,000 350Ma.bildning i trådlös komm. 79,160 89,160 96,660 104,160 122,544 12,254 12,000 204 12,000 200Ma.bildning i vattenresurshantering 82,952 92,952 100,452 107,952 127,006 12,701 13,000 212 12,000 200Source: LundProposed Faculty price of € 12,000 (+) appears to be at low endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201019

PROPOSED M FACULTY PROGRAMS AND PRICES“MEDICINE”M Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMa. i folkhälsovetenskap 119,536 129,536 137,036 144,536 170,047 17,005 17,000 283 17,000 283Ma. i idrottsvetenskap 72,394 82,394 89,894 97,394 114,584 11,458 10,000 167 14,000 233Proposed Faculty price of € 14-17,000 appears to be notably at the low endSource: LundICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201020

PROPOSED USV PROGRAMS AND PRICES“NO FACULTY/TRANS FACULTY”USV Faculty ProgramsFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditMa. i Asienstudier 37,823 47,823 55,323 62,823 73,911 7,391 8,000 123Ma. MESPOM 61,009 71,009 78,509 86,009 101,190 10,119 10,000 169Ma. i Env. Studies & Sustain. Sci. 62,747 72,747 80,247 87,747 103,234 10,323 10,000 172Ma. i miljöstrategisk styrning 62,166 72,166 79,666 87,166 102,551 10,255 10,000 171Ma. i samhälle, vetenskap/teknik 35,853 45,853 53,353 60,853 71,594 7,159 8,000 119Source: LundProposed HoP price of € 8-10,000 appears to be at low endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201021

PROPOSED FREESTANDING PROGRAMS AND PRICESFreestanding CoursesFromGovernmentService/Reception(10,000)HousingFee(7,500)Scholarships(7,500)Marketing/agents(17.65%)Sum(in €)HoPProp.PriceHoPProp.€/creditFac.Prop.PriceFac.Prop.€/creditBiostatistik (MN) 84,341 94,341 101,841 109,341 128,640 12,864 13,000 214Bio.: Mikro.Bio-Imaging (MN) 83,471 93,471 100,971 108,471 127,616 12,762 13,000 213Int. Accounting (EHL) 36,379 46,379 53,879 61,379 72,212 7,221 7,000 120Intro./Multidis.Theme A. (ÖVR) 46,318 56,318 63,818 71,318 83,906 8,391 8,000 140Nyckelkompetenser för u. f. (MN) 79,911 89,911 97,411 104,911 123,428 12,343 12,000 206Soc. Sci. G.C.E.S. (S) 39,902 49,902 57,402 64,902 76,357 7,636 8,000 127Migration and Development (S) 32,298 42,298 49,798 57,298 67,411 6,741 7,000 112Epidemiologi med biostatistik (M) 102,935 112,935 120,435 127,935 150,516 15,052 15,000 251Sex./repro. Hälsa/rättigheter (M) 102,287 112,287 119,787 127,287 149,753 14,975 15,000 250Source: LundSome proposed HoP prices appear to be quite a bit at the low endICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201022

ADD-ON PROGRAMS AND PRICESKodProgram (120 HP)Föreslaget pris -euroYtterligarepåslag förmarknadspris -euroMotivering till påslag (tex. stipendier, merresurser till lärarledd tid, studiebesök ellerandra kvalitetshöjande aktiviteter inomutbildningen)Summaföreslaget pris +ytterligarepåslag - euroXAASIMasterprogram i Asienstudier (Centrum för Öst- ochSydöstasienstudier)8,000 1000 studiebesök och kurser i Asien 9,000XAESSMasterprogram i Environmental Studies and SustainabilityScience (Lucsus)10,000 1000 Delfinansiering av studenternas fältarbeten 11,000Int. Accounting (EHL) Middle Eastern Studies (Centrum för Mellanösternstudier) 8,000 3000 Nivån på nuvarande ersättning från staten 11,000Intro./Multidis.Theme A. (ÖVR) 46,318 56,318 63,8182. Bedömning av ökandeundervisningskostnader83,906Nyckelkompetenser för u. f.(MN)79,911 89,911 97,4113. Kostnader för studenten i samband medresor under utbildningens tredje och fjärdeterminer (praktik resp. fältarbete)123,428Soc. Sci. G.C.E.S. (S) 39,902 49,902 57,402 64,902 76,357Migration and Development (S) 32,298 42,298 49,798 4. Höjd avsättning för stipendier 67,411XAESPMasterprogram i Environmental Science, Policy andManagement (MESPOM) (IIIE)10,000 6000I MESPOM-konsortiet är det sedan tidigarebeslutat att detta är vad utb. kostar för icke-EUstudenter16,000XAMSS Magisterprogram i miljöstrategisk styrning (IIIE) 10,000 6000Utbildningen kostar redan idag mer, vi har ettpåslag från vår stiftelse för kvalitetshöjandeåtgärder (ex. mer lärartid, studiebesök,studieresor). 16 000 Euro är också vadMESPOM-utb. kostar för icke-EU studenter.16,000TFHS ATP utbildningen 10,000 - 10,000TFHS pilotutbildningen 115,000 - 115,000XASVT Masterprogram i samhälle, vetenskap och teknik (Circle) 8,000 119,787 HAR EJ INKOMMIT 8,000Source: LundNo commentary owing to late availability of informationICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201023

COMMENTARY: LUND’S REVISED TUITION FEE MODELREMAINS A BOTTOM-UP MODEL• Proposed cost model• Government revenue per student and program• plus costs for services and reception (SEK 10,000)• plus housing fee (SEK 7,500)• plus scholarships (SEK 7,500)• plus marketing expenses / costs for agents (17.65%)• Add-on components are largely flat. This should be reconsidered forservice and scholarship add-ons because flat fees do not capture costpositions adequately• Instead, these components could be priced as a percentage-based addonwith upper and lower capsThe result of this approach is a structural under-pricingICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201024

COMPARATIVE UPPER AND LOWER RANGE PRICINGTuition Fees per Year for Selected UniversitiesUniversityRangeBachelor's degreeMaster's DegreeDomestic International Domestic InternationalManchester University(UK)University of Sidney(AUS)University of Washington(WA, USA)lower bound 3,619 € 12,430 € 3,850 € 12,100 €upper bound 3,619 € 28,490 € 37,840 € 37,840 €lower bound 2,549 € 7,200 € 9,000 € 12,000 €upper bound 5,315 € 12,600 € 13,200 € 18,000 €lower bound 5,384 € 17,057 € 7,509 € 16,847 €upper bound 5,384 € 17,057 € 16,742 € 35,026 €Domestic to International = 1:3 / B.A. to M.A. = 1:1 to 1:2Notes: Costs cover only tuition fees, no room and board included. All prices are expressed in Euros. Assumed exchange rates: 1USD=0.7€;1£ =1.1€; 1AUS $=0.6€.Source: Manchester, UW, USYD.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201025

FURTHER DISCUSSION POINTS• Scholarships as a recruiting tool• Affordability - Many international students more affluent than averageSwedish student• Top talent attraction• Agents are not necessary, but should be an option• Other channels of recruitment?Source: LundThe issue of Lund’s recruitment brand still looms largeICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201026

AGENDAIntroductionFees and CostingBranding, Web 2.0, and Recruitment BrandAdmissionsMeeting with Lund RepresentativesMarketing, Recruitment, Regional StrategiesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201027

RECRUITMENT BRAND: CONCEPT• A university's recruitment brand is defined by three components: Firstand foremost, the perception of potential students of a university'sattractiveness for study purposes• Second, the perception of potential students of a university'sattractiveness regarding outcomes (work force entry, alumni networks,ability to gain access to graduate programs, etc.)• Third, the university's general attractive-ness/desirability to a largercommunity (employers, parents, policy-makers, media, etc.)• Potential students may weigh factors differently, yet most behave withinrational, predictable behavioral patterns when selecting for or against apotential study destination/institutionSource: LundWhat is Lund’s recruitment brand?ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201028

BRANDING IN THE ACADEMIC WORLD: INTRODUCTION• Professional, active academic branding is a relatively recentphenomenon. Yet competition for talent, funding, and attention hasled to a strong acceleration of branding activities• Higher education institutions are both complex as well as granular –this makes a unified brand positioning approach difficult• Many faculty members – and entire academic cultures – still resistbranding in the academic world. This is nothing short of naive.Academic branding is real, it is important, and it will not go away• Branding in academia is often mis- or only partially understood. It isnot just a logo (“crest”), slogan (“world class”), or a ranking (THES vs.Shanghai)• It certainly is not simply based on academic reputation alone, thoughreputation underpins much of the an academic brandICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201029

ACADEMIC BRAND MATRIX – MEASURING AN INSTIUTUIONSEXTERNAL PERCEPTION-BASED POSITIONGlobalOxford HarvardCaltechBerkeleyUCLASorbonneLSEDukeReachETHLeidenWellesleyBonnSt. GallenLocalUTasOklahomaBochumRomeNoneDepthBroadNotes: Reach is broadly defined by geographic reach as measured by the level of general public awareness of a given academic brand. Depth isdefined by a combination of seven criteria: academic performance, innovation, financial strength, leadership, social/cultural contributions,athletics, and marketing/positioning efforts.Source: ICG.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201030

ABOUT THE ACADEMIC BRAND MATRIX I• Axes• Reach is broadly defined by geographic reach as measured by the level of generalpublic awareness of a given academic brand• Depth is defined by a combination of seven criteria: academic performance,innovation, financial strength, leadership, social/cultural contributions, athletics,and marketing/ positioning efforts• Factors• Quantitative (most)• Qualitative transformed into quantitative (some)• Qualitative (a few)• Placement• An institution’s position is driven by both axes. Regarding the depth axis, theAcademic Brand Matrix allows for customization (weighting)• Competitive Aspect• The Academic Brand Matrix’s main use is to establish an institution’s relative,competitive position – and to highlight brand development pathwaysThe Academic Brand Matrix is a conceptual and competition toolICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201031

ABOUT THE ACADEMIC BRAND MATRIX II• Internal world• Everyone• External world• Alumni and friends• Applicants• Communities and networks (online and offline)• Employers• Experts (rankings, assessments, etc.)• Faculty members• Government• Influencers• Media• Peer and competitor institutions• Prospects• Staff members• StudentsThe outside world matters (more)ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201032

ACADEMIC BRAND MATRIX: REACH• Definition• Reach is broadly defined by geographic reach as measured by the level ofgeneral public awareness of a given academic brand• Measurements / Factors• Direct surveys, interviews, contextual evaluation• Media coverage• Competitive Aspect• Global reach bestows significant competitive benefits – instead of reachingout, a global brand institution is being sought after• Branding Implications• Each institution needs to precisely define its reach and optimize for a realisticpositioningLess than 20 universities have a truly global reachICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201033

ACADEMIC BRAND MATRIX: ACADEMIC PERFORMANCEExample• Definition• Academic performance is defined as the actual or perceived (halo) academicquality/reputation with a (strong) bias to research performance• Measurements / Factors• Rankings (Shanghai, less so THES; national rankings such as US News, CHE)• Media coverage• Surveys, interviews (perception-based)• Competitive Aspect• Institutions with a strong academic performance tend to out-brand strongteaching institutions; both out-compete weak institutions• Branding Implications• Academic performance (quality, reputation) serves as the very cornerstone ofan academic brandAcademic performance-based branding is well establishedICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201034

BEST PRACTICE ACADEMIC RE-BRANDING PROJECT IFrom……ToA holistic approach focused on unifying “logo, visuals and words”Sources: BU Brand Identity Standards.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201035

BEST PRACTICE ACADEMIC RE-BRANDING PROJECT I• Challenge• Boston University is geographically situated amongst some of the world’smost prestigious universities—Harvard, MIT and Boston College• In 2007, university leadership sought a re-branding campaign to helpdistinguish itself in the competitive New England atmosphere• Approach• BU’s rebranding strategy focused on definition—“Boston University as a21st-century university that is modern, urban, confident, diverse, anddynamic.”• By creating and applying “Brand Identity Standards” comprehensively, BUstandardized all communication outlets—from its transportation vehiclesand publications to admissions brochures and websites• According to the 2007 Shanghai rankings, BU was ranked 83; in 2009 theywere ranked 74ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201036

BEST PRACTICE ACADEMIC RE-BRANDING PROJECT ISources: BU Brand Identity Standards.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201037

BEST PRACTICE ACADEMIC RE-BRANDING PROJECT IIFrom……ToSources: Facebook, UQ.Personalized narrative for students, alumni and staffICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201038

BEST PRACTICE ACADEMIC RE-BRANDING PROJECT• Diverse, Market Research Driven Approach• By conducting extensive internal and external research, QU sought toincorporate a diverse set of perspectives, reflected in the cross-section ofstudents, alumni and staff used in the campaign.• A key part of the campaign is the “UQ” device which bridges the dividebetween old and new brand recognition. It complements the long-establishedUniversity of Queensland logo but also stands alone in new publications.Sources: UQICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201039

BEST PRACTICE ACADEMIC RE-BRANDING PROJECTICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201040

BEST PRACTICE COMPARISONS• Purpose• Both Universities undertook re-branding projects to better compete on theglobal marketSimilarities• BU sought to define itself through a more unified front– focusing onsolid narratives and consistent, modern images• UQ sought to re-create its image—carrying along its previous brandrecognition while creating new.• Highly publicized, sizable investment in re-branding campaign• Active involvement of staff in consultation and implementation of newpoliciesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201041

THE RELEVANCE OF INSTITUTIONAL WEBSITES ANDWEB 2.0 PLATFORMS• International students utilize a variety of well known information sources,ranging from alumni to agents to their universities to, of course, the Web.• Web-based information acquisition has become the primary mode for manyinternational students.• International students have become rapidly sophisticated with regards toretrieving information, evaluating it, and critically contextualizing it.• Engaging smartly and successfully on the Web continues to pose numerouschallenges to universities: Lack of control, content selection, tonality, rapidtechnology changes, etc.• Yet the global reach, informational specificity, level of interactivity, and mostimportantly target segment usage behavior require engaging on the Webimperative.Has Lund devised a competitive Web-based outreach and recruiting strategy?ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201042

LUND PRESENCE ON LINKEDINTop 5 LinkedIn GroupsName of GroupNumber ofmembersOpen/ClosedStatusType of Group Scope of Group CommentsLunds Universitet -Alumni GroupLund UniversitySchool ofEconomics andManagement -LUSEM Alumni1,790 Open Student-Led General117 Open Official Specific"As Lund does notcurrently offeralumni email or havea presence onLinkedIn."Owner MagnusLundqvist (Projectmanager at LundUniversity)Lund UniversityAlumni116 Open Official GeneralOwner MagnusLundqvist (Projectmanager at LundUniversity)DSF - DatalogernasSocialaForum/Förening28 no Student-Led Specific n.a.HNV - HallandsNations Vänner 22 no Student-Led Specific n.a.Very limited and shallow footprintSource: LinkedIn.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201043

LUND PRESENCE ON YOUTUBETop 5 Videos by ViewsVideoNumber of viewsNumber of textresponsesPostedComment"Electron in Motion" 133,620 views 256 Feb 2008Lund University Scientists filmed anelectron in motion for the first time."EkoBoys –Echo In My Heart"29,173 views 103 Jan 2008Environmental engineering students whohave formed their own boy band."Griffith CollegeDublin -AccommodationHalls"20,061 views 3 Jan 2008Summer Lund university Pakistanistudents studying at Jönköping University.N.B. The video does not actually relate toLund (misdirection)."Lund, Sweden -Home of LundUniversity"18,326 views 21 Dec 2008 Lund University video."No, Photos!" 16,288 views 0 Aug 2007Clip from a black and white movie in whichthe posts' caption reads: “Sten Stensson(Nils Poppe), an A-student at the Universityin Lund, comes to the big city Stockholm,where he unwillingly gets into a jitterbugcompetition as he tries to warn the youth ata night club, among others a young female,from the poisonous criminating swingmusic.”Content and misdirection win out over direct promotionSource: YouTube.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201044

LUND PRESENCE ON FACEBOOKTop 5 Facebook GroupsTitleNumber ofmembersScope Type Group Focus CommentsLunds Universitet 6,094 General Alumni-ledOrganizations -AcademicOrganizationsLargest group by far,but not accessiblewhen searching for“Lund University”International StudentsLund University1,600 Specific Not Official…Student Groups-GeneralThis group offers afrequently used forumfor internationalstudents. Thediscussion sectioncontained questionsabout life at Lund,study questions, andprograms.socionomstudenter 1,245 Specific Student-ledStudent Groups -Academic GroupsA interest groupwhose members arefrom a number ofuniversities (includingLund) who arestudying social work.Lund 1,147 General Student-Led Geography - CitiesAn interest group ofpeople who live in thecity (mostly Lundstudents).Juridiska fakultetenvid Lunds universitet965 Specific Student-ledStudent Groups -Classes &DepartmentsStudents/faculty of theFaculty of Law at LundUniversity.Facebook user base of 350+ million makes it a global outreach platformSource: LinkedIn.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201045

AGENDAIntroductionFees and CostingBranding, Web 2.0, and Recruitment BrandAdmissionsMeeting with Lund RepresentativesMarketing, Recruitment, Regional StrategiesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201046

LundROLLING APPLICATION• Open from Nov 15 – Jan 15• Results from Dec 15 (?) – March 15• Joint application EU and International applicants• Joint admissions• Joint competence and selection criteriasICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201047

LundROLLING APPLICATIONS CONTINUED• Every program has a set number of places for fee paying students• Applicants are admitted if they have a certain (highly talent) meritlevel and getadvanced notice and preference for scholarship even before Jan 15.• Applicants under this set merit level will be proccesed after Jan 15 and will getresult before March 15, lower preference for scholarships (based on talent, noton development reasons)ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201048

LundNEW APPLICATION AND ADMISSIONS PROCESSApplicationOpenApplicationDeadlineDeadlineSupportingDocumentsAdmissionsResultNov 15Jan15Feb1Mar 15ROLLING APPLICATIONICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201049

LSE CASE STUDY: BEST PRACTICE MARKETING, APPLICATIONAND ADMISSIONS INTEGRATIONApplicationSubmissionApplicationProcessingApplicationDecisionAdmissionsOfferAdmissionsFinalizationEnrollment…Timeline3-5 • Overall: Onsite 8 weeks?• Process Workshop moves I in one-week cycles• Faculty has 2 weeks to make decision on applicant• variesProcesses• Largely electronically driven/supported (incl. document conversion/upload)• Push and pull ability (i.e. notification and query tools)• No internal database to external database integration yet (e.g.; TOEFL)• OnlinemenusupportedOwnership• Process ownership by Academic Registrar’s Division• Process execution through the Recruitment and Admissions Unit (UG, G)• Admissions decision ownership by Faculties• AcademicRegistrar’sDivisionSystem• The LSE website serves as a central data and content management platform• The online application system has been in place since 2001 (Princeton Review Embark)• The LSE does not employ advanced Business Intelligence tools yetNotes: This overview constitutes only a high level overview. See www.lse.ac.uk/collections/graduateadmissions for general information andwww.lse.ac.uk/collections/graduateadmissions/decisionmaking/decisionprocess.htm for the selection decision- and time- frame.Sources: ICG, LSE.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201050

MARKETING, ADMISSIONS, AND ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT:DRIVER FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE• Successfully competing for talent internationally requires an integratedhigh performance approach• Governance• Culture• Organizational design• Systems infrastructure• Competitive intelligence• Resourcing• Admissions as a function serves as a binary competitive lever, cuttingfor or against institutions• Timeline• Timeliness• Clarity• Process integrity• Systems supportSweden’s national admission system is a competitive malusICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201051

COMMENTS ON INSTITUTIONAL ONLINE APPLICATIONPROCESSING FOR LUND (I)• Applications from international students are centrally collected andprocessed at a national level. This approach carries a number ofdisadvantages• Foremost, the current admissions decisions deadline is in mid-May• This is a couple of months to late to be even worthy of considerationby students who might have received an admissions offer as early asFebruary• An uncompetitive admittance deadline is the single most competitiveinhibitor for attracting talented students who can (and must) exercisechoicesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201052

COMMENTS ON INSTITUTIONAL ONLINE APPLICATIONPROCESSING FOR LUND (II)• Second, the inability to reach into the application process in order toidentify desirable candidates early on (and offer early admissions),such as many competitor institutions can do, is another top talentattraction inhibitor• Thirdly, the lack of ability to shape the admissions process in amanner reflecting an institution’s strength is not helpful. Someuniversities have turned their superior admissions processing into arecruiting asset in itself• Fourthly, with application volumes, and the corresponding unqualifiedor fraudulent applications having increased notably worldwide overthe last decade, a solid online (software) application system will beimportant for many institutions to consider and eventually implement• This may involve forming one or more consortia which can shareexpertise and costs.Word DocumentICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201053

AGENDAIntroductionFees and CostingBranding, Web 2.0, and Recruitment BrandAdmissionsMeeting with Lund RepresentativesMarketing, Recruitment, Regional StrategiesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201054

AGENDAIntroductionFees and CostingBranding, Web 2.0, and Recruitment BrandAdmissionsMeeting with Lund RepresentativesMarketing, Recruitment, Regional StrategiesICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201055

LUND UNIVERSITY WEBSITETop 5 Facebook GroupsWell designed, but text heavy and not intuitive labelingSource: Lund University.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201056

LUND UNIVERSITY WEBSITE – EXCHANGE STUDENTSComments• Informative links• Lacks photos,profiles, ortestimonials• Only testimonialdates from 2007(an Australianstudent)• Student reviewslink to STARS –which lackscontents for LundLack of integration and relatable experiencesSource: www.lu.se/lund‐university.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201057

LUND UNIVERSITY WEBSITE – MASTER’S TUITION FEESUpdated, transparent – but difficult for students to understandSource: Lund University.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201058

SUMMARY COMMENTS• A high quality Web presence (both institutionally as well as on key Web2.0 platforms) is an attractor for students for a number of reasons:• Information acquisition• Contextualization• Networking• Proof of competence• Some students make the level of an institution's Web 2.0 sophisticationan admission criterion of their own• Any potential trade off when engaging online (e.g.; reach versus control)is typically well worth it• Much of Lund’s target audience is interacting on a few key platformswhich include Facebook, but also othersSucceeding without a defined Web 2.0 strategy will be difficultICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201059

REGIONAL STRATEGIES (I)• A 2006 report by the Swedish Trade Council identified China, India,Russia, Thailand, and Turkey as the Top 5 target markets for Sweden.• Rather than focusing on countries from the outset, a different, moregranular, bottom-up approach is suggested. The outcome of thisapproach may well amount to specific countries being identified assuitable markets-at-large• But even in this instance, any market engagement would have to relyon the aforementioned granular, bottom-up approach to in order tobest match Lund’s particular strength with the specific needs tostudent segments in a given country.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201060

REGIONAL STRATEGIES (II)• The market engagement approach, graphically detailed in the MarketOpportunity Matrix, builds on the following factors:• Geography (there are countries which will be promising source countriesper se, while others will be more difficult to penetrate)• Subject-matter (i.e. strong lead subjects - these include (bio-) medical, ICT,engineering, and a few others)• Existing Lund footprint (number of students on the on hand, and the brandfootprint of Sweden (largely business) on the other hand)• Competition levels (a mix of the likely range of tuition fees and activi-ties ofother destination countries)• Demand patterns (e.g. Indian students have a strong focus on Master'sdegrees, Chinese students on B.A./Ph.D.s)• Niches (a reflection on particular strength of Lund, may this be ties toindustries, gender, niche subject)ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201061

REGIONAL STRATEGIES (III)ICG Strategic Opportunity Matrix for Swedish Universities (Schematic),Fee-Paying Non-EEA Students, Master’s LevelMarketDevelopmentCompetitionLevelDemandPatternsSwedishFootprintSubject-MatterStrengthCommentsIndiaRapid buildoutofdomesticcapacityexpectedStronglyrising withthe USA andUK in thelead,AustraliafalteringFocus ongraduate,especiallyMaster’sleveleducationVery smallBusiness,engineering,ICTForinvestigation:In-countryprovision,ties withIndianindustryN-UUFUFChina … … …Notes: F = Favorable, N = Neutral, U = Unfavorable. Combinations are possible.ICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201062

REGIONAL STRATEGIES (IV)DiscussionICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201063

CONTACT INFORMATIONDr. Daniel J GuhrManaging DirectorIlluminate Consulting GroupP.O. Box 262San Carlos, CA9 94070USAPhone +1 619 295 9600Fax +1 650 620 0080E-mail guhr@illuminategroup.comICG © 2010 Lund University – 7 May 201064