Click here to receive your FREE subscription to Education Channel Partner

Redefining the Higher Ed Handshake

By: Glen McCandless

8/1/2008

Take a formal approach to measurement and accountability: Corporations tend to measure progress against quarterly revenue performance, while academia works at a slower pace and toward goals that are often not monetary- based. It is important for both parties to recognize and accept the differences between their success metrics, agree on measurement criteria, and also have processes in place for timely reporting and accountability.

Assign appropriate value to the institution's contribution: Suppliers tend to overvalue their contribution (dollars, people, equipment, marketing tools), and undervalue the institution's contribution (faculty, staff and student time, costs of facilities). Partnerships that do not equally value each side's contribution eventually suffer and, in extreme cases, can unravel completely. It's vital for a balanced channel relationship to have an agreement that articulates the value of each partner's contributions, including the time of the individuals who will be managing and implementing the program and related resources.

Think competitively: At the core of most successful channel relationships is a very good fit with the competitive strategy for both parties. Suppliers should enter into channel partnerships to meet their own strategic goals and so should the higher education entity. The best channel programs deliver competitive advantage, not just sales or marketing leverage. Corporate partners may be able to help the academic partner articulate their competitive goals (for example, improving student recruitment), even when the partner is individual faculty.

Leverage Cultural Differences

Regardless of the type of channel-partnership programs you develop for your higher education business, it is important not to ignore the traditional tension between academia and business, but rather to leverage it for positive gain. Channel partnerships with higher education constituents will suffer when either party makes assumptions about what is important to the other, allows cultural differences to obstruct mutual understanding, or expects the partner to behave in ways that run counter to its own interest.

For example, using faculty to staff your trade show booth opens the possibility for exposing your imperfections. Unlike commercial sales reps who paint a rosy picture of their products, end users may reveal shortcomings during their presentations. This type of honest sharing is a positive thing that educators really appreciate, and delivers more benefit than the typical corporate sales pitch. As a side benefit, honest appraisals are a valuable source of input for product development.

In sum, developing higher education channel partnerships is an attractive strategy worth serious consideration and attention. Partners should enter into written agreements; look for mutual advantage rather than philanthropy; define the expected outcomes; recognize the high value of the resources that institutions bring to the relationship; and take internal concerns seriously. Follow these proven methods and you will forge meaningful partnerships that use firm handshakes to drive corporate strategies and fortify competitive advantage.


Glen McCandless is principal of Focus Marketing, Inc., which provides strategic sales, marketing, and business development services to K-20 companies. He is also manager of SellingToSchools.com, a free online community for exchange of best practices, products, and resources in education sales and marketing.