The document discusses trends affecting student experience and understanding users at SNHU. It identifies several trends, including students expecting a digital-first experience, viewing the university as part of a broader learning ecosystem, wanting voice and participation in their education experience, and empowered staff. The document also discusses different types of users, including career accelerators who are working adults advancing their career and career starters who are using their education to reach a specific career goal. It provides examples of these different user types. The overall goal is to understand external trends and users to help redesign services, spaces, and the organizational model at SNHU.

1. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
hello!

2. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 2
agenda 1. Student experience trends
with discussion
2. Understanding users
with discussion
3. Bring together services
with activity
5. Redesigning organizations
with discussion
Think about the future
of learning, libraries,
and student services
through discussions
of topics like how to
connect physical and
digital experience,
how to rethink service
delivery, and how to
foster collaboration.

3. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
about brightspot

4. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 4
we design engaging
experiences that use
learning to connect
people to a purpose,
a brand, information,
and each other.

5. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 5
we partner with
leading corporations,
universities, and
cultural institutions.

6. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 6
we guide practical
transformation of
your spaces, services,
and organization.
communicationsservicesorganizationsspaces serorganizationsspaces
research
+ insights
visioning
+ retreats
strategy
+ planning
servicesorganizationscommunications
spaces
organization
services
Our recent results include:
• 253% increase in net promoter score
• 89% employee engagement
• 91% team effectiveness
• 69% faster response times
• 30% reduced space costs

7. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 7
our services
research
insights
visioning
retreats
strategy
planning
implementation
coaching
research
+ insights
visioning
+ retreats
strategy
+ planning
spacesservicesorganizations
implementation
+ connecting
communications
research
+ insights
visioning
+ retreats
strategy
+ planning
spacesservicesorganizations
implementation
+ connecting
communications
research
+ insights
visioning
+ retreats
strategy
+ planning
spacesservicesorganizations
implementation
+ connecting
communications
research
+ insights
visioning
+ retreats
strategy
+ planning
spacesservicesorganizations
implementation
+ connecting
communications
• Employee and Customer
Research
• Industry Trend Research
• Competitive Research
• Opportunity Mapping
• Leadership
Employee Retreats
• Future Scenario Planning
• Purpose, Values, and
Vision Statements
• Brand Positioning
• Strategic
Business Planning
• Space Programming
Planning
• Service Delivery
Operational Planning
• Communication
Planning
• Piloting Prototyping
• Onboarding Training
Programs
• Organizational Change
Programs
• Post-occupancy
Assessment

8. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 8
our multidisciplinary
team brings together
diverse professional
skills and backgrounds.
organizational
development
business strategy
service design
architecture
planning
consumer
psychology
anthropology
product design
design research
brand strategy
interior design
industrial
engineering

9. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
trends affecting
student experience

10. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 10
georgia tech
brightspot led a
campus-wide research
project to inform the
renewal of their library
services, spaces, and
staffing model. We
looked outward to
trends to complement
internal user research.
http://librarynext.gatech.edu/

11. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 11
digital first
Think of the library
is a digital service,
complemented by
physical places.

12. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 12
part of an
ecosystem
Consider not just
our information and
services but connect
students and faculty to
the broader ecosystem
Global e-book projection (PWC)

13. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 13
experience
economy
Spaces, services, and
staffing should be
redesigned to create
better experiences for
users and staff, taking
cues from other sectors

14. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 14
users expect
a voice
A participatory process
is a must not only to
get the best ideas but
to build community
support.

15. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 15
empowered
staff
Top-down
organizations cannot
move quickly enough in
uncertain, ambiguous,
and dynamic situations;
only empowered teams
and individuals can.

16. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
What external trends
are affecting SNHU?

17. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
understanding users

18. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 18
online learning and
teaching at PSU
Portland State University
launched reTHINK PSU to
engage the campus community
in developing solutions
to challenges facing the
university. Online learning,
with a focus on adult learners,
was a key part of this initiative
building from an existing
Provost Challenge.

19. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 19
5
Recognizing the Diverse Needs of Today's Students
The Differentiated University www.parthenon.com
Typically older, Career Accelerators are going
to college with the aim of advancing their
career at their company or within their current industry. These are
primarily working adults with some prior college experience and
are likely to be most interested in institutions that award credit for
their previous academic experience, as well as their job experience.
These students value non-traditional delivery methods, particularly
online courses. Career counseling and career placement services
are strongly desired by this group.
The Parthenon survey revealed a third and
distinct group of largely traditional age-
students. These Career Starters are extremely job oriented and
use college to advance their specific career prospects. These
students are focused on life after college, and are looking for a
college that enables them to reach their ideal career position in
the shortest amount of time. Career Starters are one of the more
price-sensitive segments and value job placement rate and career
placement services in making their college selection.
Career Starter Career Accelerators
(Thinking Practically) (Advancing)
21%18%
Better
Job
Mike's Story–
A Career
Accelerator
Mike was stuck in his factory
job near Fort Wayne, Indiana.
He was passed over for promotion in
the past because he lacked a bachelor’s
degree. At 35 years old, he knew he had
to do something to advance in his career,
so he enrolled part-time at Indiana Tech.
“I am hoping that being one of a few
people with a bachelor's degree in my
department, that I will be considered
for higher paying jobs ahead of others
who do not have a degree,” he said.
With some credits from a previous attempt at college, Mike
already had a head start. Now he works the day shift at the
factory and takes courses online and on campus two to three
days a week. In two years, he’ll have his bachelor’s degree. “I
don't want to be overlooked for advancement again,” he said.
Michelle's Story – A Career Starter
Michelle is a 22-year-old senior at Cornell University majoring in
industrial and labor relations. She ranked in the top 20 percent of
her high school class and went to Cornell with her major already
in mind. During the application process, she avoided liberal
arts schools. “If it was too liberal artsy,” she said, “I wasn’t
interested.”
For Michelle, college is the means to an end:
a job. She said she places less emphasis on
using college to develop “a whole
toolset for life.” Now, with a
job offer already in hand from
a human resources technology
firm, Michelle wishes she could skip
her last semester at Cornell and start
work. “I would rather be working and
not paying to go to school for no
reason,” she said. Alternative
ways of earning a degree more quickly
would appeal to her at this point. “What
is this last semester getting me that the
other seven did not?”
22
For the first decade of the new millennium, American
higher education witnessed almost unprecedented growth.
Undergraduate enrollment jumped by 41% percent while tuition
steadily climbed, resulting in significant investments in every
corner of campus, from trendy academic programs to enhanced
student amenities.With students and families secure in the lifetime
value of a college degree, colleges and universities planned for
continuing price increases to support the institutions.
But the crash of the housing market in late 2008 and the
subsequent economic recession exposed cracks in that
confidence. The number of 18-year-old high-school graduates—
particularly the more affluent and academically well-prepared who
drove the revenue growth of previous decades—leveled off. Many
colleges and universities that had borrowed heavily to pay for their
expansion saw their net tuition revenue decline. Students and
parents began to question the value of a degree, in specific fields
and from certain schools. And government officials in Washington
and the states were demanding more accountability from the
billions of dollars they spent annually on student aid.
Before the recession hit, most campus leaders suspected a day of
reckoning would eventually come. But that didn’t mean they were
prepared for it or for the great demographic shift that followed.
Children under 18, who accounted for 36 percent of the U.S.
population at the end of the baby boom, today make up just 24
percent. By 2050, they will be 21 percent of the country. Coming
at a time of stagnant family incomes, these changes demand
colleges think differently about their student market.
As colleges have seen a slowing in demand among traditional-
aged students, many public and nonprofit colleges have shifted
their strategies to focus on a broader swath of the population.
These schools are taking a page from the playbook of for-profit
schools which use online classes and flexible degree programs
to reach non-traditional students, often working adults who are
seeking bachelor’s degrees. However, even these early innovators
are under pressure as the landscape of offerings for non-traditional
students is becoming increasingly saturated.
This traditional process of ‘segmenting’ the student market
by demographics—traditional vs. non-traditional students—
is no longer sufficient in providing college leaders with the
strategic understanding they need. Leaders need a more
nuanced understanding of what drives the enrollment decisions
of prospective students, and of what products and offerings meet
these students’ needs.
As flexible and online offerings have become closer to the norm,
the institutions that will thrive must differentiate themselves in a
competitive and national market.They will do this by tailoring their
recruitment and offerings to the specific motivations of distinct
student segments instead of providing a one-size-fits-all education
that is fast becoming financially unsustainable for most institutions
and their students.
The results of a new national survey conducted by The
Parthenon Group of some 3,200 Americans in college or
considering enrolling provides the foundation for a fresh approach
of how to view the increasingly diversified student market in
The Differentiated University
Recognizing the Diverse
Needs of Today's Students
Part I of a Two-Part Series
by Haven Ladd, Seth Reynolds, Jeffrey J. Selingo
work with
existing data
Gap analysis conducted
looking at current
systems, processes, and
staffing in areas critical
to online programs and
compared to industry
best practices. Also
built on Parthenon
Group study of student
typologies.
Accrediting Commissions (C-RAC) and State Authorization reciprocity Agreement (SARA).
This assessment utilizes a multi-faceted approach during the evaluation, which is modeled in Figure 1 below. Please note
there may be overlap between among services and program services.
Figure 1: Institutional Readiness Assessment Scope of Work
Regional and National Guidelines
A key challenge in the creation and success of online learning programs is ensuring that delivery of courses and services
meets or exceeds leading regional and national guidelines/standards for delivery of postsecondary distance education.
Portland State University will use the following sets of guidelines and standards for evaluating institutional readiness for
online learning: Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU) ​Distance Education Policy​, the Council of
Regional Accrediting Commissions (C-RAC) ​Guidelines for the Evaluation of Distance Education (Online Learning) ​and the State
Authorization Reciprocity Agreement Requirements (SARA).
NWCCU Distance Education Policy
NWCCU practice requires that an institution’s distance education programming be reviewed as part of its comprehensive
evaluation. Evaluators who visit an institution that offers distance education are encouraged to review the “C-RAC
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Distance Education (Online Learning)”.
2
Mission Alignment and Planning
In order to ensure that PSU’s online learning programs meets the Standards for Accreditation via adherence to the
University’s mission and purposes and integration within regular planning and evaluation processes, the University’s
governance process will be evaluated in the following areas.
Best Practices
Findings
Recommendations
The mission statement explains the
role of online learning within the range
of the PSU’s programs and services.
(C-RAC, 1)
Access to Learning is a key element of
PSU’s Mission and values document
“PSU is committed to providing access
and opportunity to learners from
regional, national, and international
communities in their pursuit of lifelong
learning and diverse educational goals.”
Maintain as is.
PSU’s statements of vision and values
inform how the online learning
environment is created and supported.
(C-RAC, 1)
PSU’s academic programs are aligned
with institution’s mission and must
demonstrate how they address PSU’s
mission and values as part of the
approval process.
Maintain as is.
As appropriate, PSU incorporates into
its online learning programs methods
of meeting the stated University goals
for the student experience at PSU.
(C-RAC, 1)
Yes, PSU incorporates the University
goals for the student experience at
PSU.
Example: OAI has sponsored number
of events to develop online Capstone
courses.
Maintain as is.
Senior administrators and staff, as well
as each unit within the university, can
all articulate how online learning is
consistent with the PSU’s mission and
goals. (C-RAC, 1)
Online learning is, by definition, related
to the following university goal =
Access to Learning:
PSU is committed to providing access
and opportunity to learners from
regional, national, and international
communities in their pursuit of lifelong
learning and diverse educational goals.
Maintain as is.
The recruitment and admissions
programs supporting the online
learning courses and programs
appropriately target the student
populations to be served and ensure
approach is specifically tailored to both
undergraduate and graduate program
needs. (C-RAC, 1)
Schools/Colleges prepare enrollment
plans as part of the unit planning
process. EMSA leads undergraduate
recruitment. Schools/Colleges are
responsible for graduate recruitment.
PSU’s lacks coordinated marketing and
recruitment effort for online programs.
Strategic Enrollment and Planning
Group (SEM) develop a
comprehensive marketing and
recruitment strategy for online
programs.
The students enrolled in PSU’s online
learning courses and programs fits the
admissions requirements for the
students the University intends to
serve. (C-RAC, 1)
University applies same admission
standards for online and on campus
programs.
Maintain as is.
Distance education programs are
integrated into PSU’s regular planning
processes. (C-RAC, 2)
Distance education programs are
located in Schools/Colleges and
Maintain as is.
6
Curricula and Academic Rigor
In order to ensure that PSU’s online learning programs meets the Standards for Accreditation, the University’s governance
and academic oversight process, course offerings and level of academic rigor, and online learning goal achievement will be
evaluated in the following areas.
Best Practices Findings Recommendations
PSU’S faculty have a designated role in
the design and implementation of its
online learning offerings. (C-RAC, 3)
Course and program review and
approval process has clearly defined
role for faculty and Faculty Senate.
Faculty proposing the courses and
program are responsible for
implementing approved courses and
programs.
Maintain as is.
Curricular goals and course objectives
show that PSU has knowledge of the
best uses of online learning in different
disciplines and settings. (C-RAC, 4)
We feel that this particular requirement
is based on an assumption that there
are fields or disciplines wholly unsuited
for online learning. The committee
disagrees with this framing of online
learning.
OAI in collaboration with Deans of
Schools/Colleges should develop a
comprehensive plan for developing
and offering PSU flexible degrees
based on market research and
best-practice knowledge about
disciplines well-suited for online
teaching/learning
Curricula delivered through online
learning are benchmarked against
traditional courses and programs at
PSU (if provided), or those provided
by traditional institutions. (C-RAC, 4)
Not at institutional level. There are
very few examples of departments
addressing this question in
programmatic or departmental
assessment. Departments or Schools
with additional accreditation standards
sample from online as well as ground
campus courses for their assurance of
learning assessments, e.g. School of
Business undergraduate programs.
Address issue with Institutional
Assessment Council for
action/recommendation.
The curriculum is coherent in its
content and sequencing of courses and
is effectively defined in easily available
documents, including course syllabi
and program descriptions. (C-RAC, 4)
Curricular review by departmental,
college, governance committees and
Faculty Senate ensures coherence.
Maintain as is.
Scheduling of online learning courses
and programs provides students with a
dependable pathway to ensure timely
completion of degrees. (C-RAC, 4)
Established academic programs (ex.
AOJ, business, education) have
dependable pathways. Developing PSU
Flexible Degrees (reTHINK PSU)
requires additional planning and action.
OAI in collaboration with Deans of
Schools/Colleges should develop a
comprehensive plan for developing
and offering PSU Flexible Degrees.
Expectations for any required
face-to-face, on-the-ground work (e.g.,
internships, specialized laboratory
work, etc.) are clearly communicated to
Expectations are clearly identified in
the PSU bulletin and course
registration materials include clear and
uniform footnotes indicating any
Maintain as is.
11
Faculty
In order to ensure that PSU’s online learning programs meets the Standards for Accreditation via guaranteeing adequate
faculty qualifications and support and sufficient evaluation of student success, the online learning goals will be evaluated in
the following areas.
Best Practices
Findings
Recommendations
Online learning faculty members areappropriately trained, regularlyevaluated, and are marked by anacceptable level of turnover. (C-RAC,6)
Unknown at the University level.
Implement a strategy to ensure thatindividuals who teach online are heldto standards analogous to those usedfor individuals who teach face to faceand hybrid classes, in terms of training,evaluation and assessment of the levelof turnover.
PSU’s training program for onlinelearning faculty is periodic,incorporates tested good practices inonline learning pedagogy, and ensures
competency with the range of software
products used by the institution.(C-RAC, 6)
If the faculty member is using theOffice of Academic Innovation (OAI),this is true or training provided withinindividual Schools/Colleges thatemploy best practice standards.
Greater promotion and utilization ofthe services provided by OAI and thestaffing structure needed toaccommodate expansion of onlinelearning. Use of faculty expertisewithin colleges and schools to mentorand train fellow faculty members inquality online instruction.
PSU has faculty support services forthe design and delivery of onlinelearning. These services areevidence-based; they incorporate goodpractices in online pedagogy andensure competency with the tools andapplications of the PSU LMS.
Yes through OAI. Some programs orcolleges/schools have developed theirown allocated support for design,delivery and consultation on onlinecourse pedagogy and delivery.
Funding for the current level ofsupport offered by the OfficeAcademic Innovation should bemaintained and grown to match thegrowth of online distance learningopportunities. Support internal tocolleges/schools that is also critical andshould be consistently funded andmaintained. Software and hardwareneeds of faculty teaching online mustbe met completely and quickly. Facultyto faculty mentorship should beencouraged.
Faculty have access to a range ofservices such as:
-consultation services on teaching,learning and assessment for instructorsin online programs-faculty development initiatives, events
and trainings on the design anddelivery of online learning-a just-in-time teaching withtechnology 24/7 help desk
Primarily through OAI, these servicesare provide with the exception of a24/7 help desk which is run by OIT.
There have been concerns about thelevel and quality of support providedby the current 24/7 help desk and thiswill be an area where an expansion ononline learning will require anexpansion in the capacity andlevel/quality of service provided.Instructional support provided by OAImust be proactive and adequate tomeet the time-intensive needs of
14
INTERNAL DATA EXTERNAL DATA

20. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 20
dive deep
with users
The brightspot team
and Working Group
members conducted
in-home interviews
with students, created
a current experience
audit, and facilitated
workshops with
students and the
Working Group.
LISTENING LOOKING ENGAGING
hear stories
and mental
models
map
patterns
of use
externalize
ideas and
reflect

21. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 21
generate
insights
The team generated
pain points in the
current experience
and unmet needs
to outline an ideal
experience map for
student services.
Degree
Mapping
“The Blue List is 100% accurate
but it’s not always synced with the
degree maps. And on top of that,
the degree maps don’t really take
into account how quickly I want to
finish my degree.”

22. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
What do you know /
don't you know about
your users?

23. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
bringing services
together

24. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 24
service
design
brightspot designs
services by thinking
through the why,
what, when, where, and
how of services.

25. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 25
planning
services
The Service Center Canvas
is a tool to design the
future experience of a
consolidated service
point by understanding
the overarching goals,
outlining services
delivered, and identifying
next steps to pilot or
prototype. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
The Service Center Canvas is a tool to design the future experience of a consolidated service point by
understanding the overarching goals, outlining services delivered, and identifying next steps to prototype or pilot.
www.brightspotstrategy.com
The Service Center Canvas
(Start here!)
Organizational Goals
What is your organization’s
mission and goals?
Service Goals
What are you trying to achieve
with these services?
CONTEXT SERVICE CENTER
Service 1
Service 2
Service 3
Service 4
Service 5
NEXT STEPS
What
Describe each service in detail.
Who
Who is providing
the service (e.g., role,
department, partner)?
Where
Where or through
what channel will the
service be delivered?
How
How will users and
providers interact
(e.g., high-touch)?
When
When will this service
be offered?
Metrics
How will we measure
effectiveness?
Pain Points and Needs
What are the challenges to using
and delivering these services?
Vision: What is the driving vision for the service center?
Data / Assessment
What additional information do
we need to advance the center?
Challenges / Barriers
What challenges might we
anticipate running into?
Pilots / Prototypes
Where and how might we get
started to test the center?

26. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 26
total advising
at UVA
The University of
Virginia undertook
an effort to improve
the undergraduate
experience with an
advising model that
extends beyond typical
models to include the
full student experience
at UVA.

27. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 27
goals and
pain points
Objectives and focus
for the service center
builds from existing
organizational goals
and research conducted
to understand the
current experience.
Needs / Opportunity Areas:
Service Goals:
AWARENESS CONNECTIONS EXPERTISE CONVENIENCE
PHYSICAL AND DIGITAL
ADVISORS AS GUIDES
HELPING AND DIRECTING
FLEXIBILITY AND CHOICE
INTEGRATION
ENGAGE AND EMPOWER

28. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 28
service plan
Defining the what, who
where, how, when, and
metrics outlines each
service that needs to be
supported, highlights
opportunities for
coordination, and
sets metrics to track
effectiveness.
RAFT
MODE OF
DELIVERY
INSIGHTS INTO SERVICE DELIVERY
In addition to asking potential partners what kinds of services they would provide in the Total Advising Center, they were
also asked to describe the mode of delivery of those services. The chart above summarizes these delivery modes. Several
insights from this chart include:
Balance of 1:1 and large-scale events: Almost every partner wants to offer a mix of one-on-one services and large-scale

29. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 29
next steps
Identify additional data
or assessments that
can inform the service
center, anticipate
potential challenges,
and select areas to test
through prototyping or
pilots.
36
offers services half as often
visiting-programming partn
would be a “1.0” versus an
be a “0.5.For more details
view the “Ratio Assumption
The spaces recommended
of each partner, are then ad
that specifies what types of
academic support “partner
WHAT SPACES DO PAR
Each academic support grou
fit into, will have shared acce
types below:
Study / tutoring s
allocation of small-
Events / program
programming rece
small, medium and
flexible and techno
Service delivery s
services, partners r
on-one consultatio
Shared back of ho
integrated into the
frequently on a day
allocation of shared
will also have acce
Back of House refers to what “behind the scenes” staff space needs a group
has: the more fully integrated a group is into the Center / the more frequently
they deliver services, and the greater their back of house space needs are
relative to their overall mix of space use.
HOW ARE PARTNER MODELS ASSIGNED?
The many combinations of program scale and back of house needs are
divided into 5 partner models. Groups are assigned a partner model based
on an estimation of the types and amounts of services they will deliver in the
Center. The chart below shows how each of the five partner models fall based
on % of programming that are larger - events, info sessions, etc. (program
scale) and staff workspace needs (back of house).
back of house: % usage of “behind the scenes” staff
space relative to service delivery space
programscale:
%ofprogramsthatarelarge-scale
A. visiting-
programming
C. visiting-
recurring
tutoring
B. visiting-episodic
D. satellite
E. collab-
orative
If partner groups are delivering primarily
large-scale events and programs, their
staff will not need BOH staff workspace
because events are only offered at
limited hours in the Center space
10% 30+%
60%
30%
100%
mainlyprogramsmainly1-on-1
1-on-1and
programs
No / Min.
BOH space
Shared BOH
space
Owned BOH
space
FROM PARTNER
MODELS TO SPACES
HOW DO WE GO FROM PARTNER MODELS TO
DESIGNING THE SPACE FOR THE CENTER?
Each partner model is assigned a recommended mix of study, event
/ program, service delivery, and back of house spaces based on how
the groups within that model will deliver services to students.
Then, each partner is assigned a scale, which describes how
frequently they will be delivering services. A “1.0” partner offers
services as frequently as possible within their model. A “0.5” partner
offers services half as often within their model. For example, a
visiting-programming partner who offers 40 hours of events a week
would be a “1.0” versus another partner who offers 20 hours would
be a “0.5.For more details on how to assign scales to each partner,
view the “Ratio Assumptions” tab in the detailed space program.
The spaces recommended for each partner, multiplied by the scale
of each partner, are then added together to create a space program
that specifies what types of spaces and how many spaces the
academic support “partners” of the Total Advising Center need.
WHAT ARE PARTNER MODELS?
Partner models organize academic support service groups by how they
might deliver services in the Total Advising Center in terms of the scale of the
programs they’ll deliver and their back of house space needs.
Program scale refers to how academic support services are delivered:
comparing the % of events and group sessions that an academic support
group delivers (as opposed to one-on-one consultations) relative to the
overall number of hours they’ll be delivering support in the space.
Back of House refers to what “behind the scenes” staff space needs a group
has: the more fully integrated a group is into the Center / the more frequently
they deliver services, and the greater their back of house space needs are
relative to their overall mix of space use.
HOW ARE PARTNER MODELS ASSIGNED?
The many combinations of program scale and back of house needs are
divided into 5 partner models. Groups are assigned a partner model based
on an estimation of the types and amounts of services they will deliver in the
Center. The chart below shows how each of the five partner models fall based
on % of programming that are larger - events, info sessions, etc. (program
scale) and staff workspace needs (back of house).
Discuss
Programming
Interests
Translate interview
responses into partner
model assignments
Determine scale of
each partner within
selected model
Create a space program from the
partner model assignments and
recommended ratios of spaces
This one-pager explains what partner
models are and how they are used to inform
the spaces in the Total Advising Center.
In summary, partner models describe the type
of services that various groups will offer, and
specify the spaces each type of partner need
to support that work. Groups are assigned
a partner model based on anticipated
programming, and the spaces each partner
needs are added together to create the space
program for the Center.
ProgramScale
BOH Space 1.0 0.5
Engaging Partners:

30. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 30
let's practice!
Work in groups of three
to test a service center
idea for your campus.
Start by stating the
vision for the center
then work left to right
on the canvas.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
The Service Center Canvas is a tool to design the future experience of a consolidated service point by
understanding the overarching goals, outlining services delivered, and identifying next steps to prototype or pilot.
www.brightspotstrategy.com
The Service Center Canvas
(Start here!)
Organizational Goals
What is your organization’s
mission and goals?
Service Goals
What are you trying to achieve
with these services?
CONTEXT SERVICE CENTER
Service 1
Service 2
Service 3
Service 4
Service 5
NEXT STEPS
What
Describe each service in detail.
Who
Who is providing
the service (e.g., role,
department, partner)?
Where
Where or through
what channel will the
service be delivered?
How
How will users and
providers interact
(e.g., high-touch)?
When
When will this service
be offered?
Metrics
How will we measure
effectiveness?
Pain Points and Needs
What are the challenges to using
and delivering these services?
Vision: What is the driving vision for the service center?
Data / Assessment
What additional information do
we need to advance the center?
Challenges / Barriers
What challenges might we
anticipate running into?
Pilots / Prototypes
Where and how might we get
started to test the center?
For Total Advising Center
Bring together academic, career, and personal advice and support
- More efficient delivery
and more effective
experience via co-location
and coordination
- Increased awareness
and use of service
offerings
Create a multidimensional
process that combines
high-quality academic
advising, career advising,
and coaching, with online
platform and relationships
with alumni
Integrated generalist
support for welcoming,
basic assistance, and
specialist referrals
Academic advising
(Scholarships, coaching,
study abroad, library,
mentoring, tutoring)
Personal Support
(health, wellness,
mindfulness, financial,
etc)
- “Run-around between
locations and poor
coordination between
- Physical / digital
interface
- Lack of awareness of
services offered
- Roving generalist
student staff
- Shared consult rooms
and workshop spaces
- Unified data collection
and sharing on back-end
- Awareness and/or use of
roving staff
- Coordination and
collaboration across
providers
- Creating shared metrics
and platform
- Transaction data on
service usage
- Service satisfaction
data
- Correlation between
service use, satisfaction,
success
Career advising
(General, pre-professional,
Internships, readiness)
Marketing, outreach, and
assessment to increase
awareness and
effectiveness of services
Concierge
Deans
Peers
Centers
Counseling
Financial Svc
Registrar
Health Center
Career
Services
Marketing
staff
Entry
Consult space
Workshop
Study space
Consult space
Workshop
Study space
Consult space
Workshop
Study space
Staff areas
Side-by-side
Phone
Chat
Email
Consult
Workshop
Exhibit
Consult
Workshop
Exhibit
Consult
Workshop
Exhibit
Web
Print
Roving team
Center hours
and 24 x 7
monitoring
Center hours
Center hours
Center hours
9am-5pm
Check-in
speed;
Student
satisfaction
Student
satisfaction
Awareness,
impressions
Student
satisfaction

31. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
What is something
you learned from
using the Canvas?

32. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
redesigning
organizations

33. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 33
research
university
brightspot redesigned
the library organization
to better align with
and improve service
delivery so the library
could be more nimble
and connected.
old org
chart vs.
services
Special
Collections
University
Archives
Technical
Services
Digital
Scholarship
Center for
Information
Management
Collections
and Research
Services
Emerging
Technologies
Instruction
Access
Services
Gov Info
Instructional
Materials
Engineering
Library
Business
Library
Art Arch
Library
Music Library
Administrative
Services
Library
Systems
Committees
Digital Humanities
Digital Preservation
Personnel
Professional Development
Scholarly Communications
Library Publishing
Staff Appreciation
Sustainability
Clusters
Collection Development
Diversity
Emerging Technologies
Instructional Services
Outreach

34. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 34
service
design
brightspot designs
services by thinking
through the why,
what, when, where, and
how of services.

35. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 35
organization
design
brightspot redesigns
service organizations
from the inside-out and
outside-in, considering
roles, process, and
structure.

36. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 36
service
portfolio
we defined the
portfolio of service
offerings - existing
and new - named them
in plain english and
organized them into
categories users knew.
• Digital Scholarship
• Technology Discovery
• Makerspace
• Research Services
• Instruction
• Scholarly Communications
• Collection Development
• Access Services
• ILL
• SWORD
• Technical Services
• Preservation
• Special Collections
and Archives
• External Relations
• Communications
• Assessment
• Events
• Facilities
• Partnerships
• Library Systems
• Web Services
Create Innovate
Functions that assist in
the creation of work
Advise Instruct
Functions that support
research and instruction
Access Borrow
Functions that support
access of materials
Steward Sustain
Functions that support
preservation and
acquisition of materials
Share Showcase
Functions that assist
in the dissemination of
work
Tools Tech
Functions that support
technology across the
Libraries

37. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 37
roles and
structure
Together, we
developed the new
structure based on
the service model.
In the process, we
aimed not for perfect
but for safe to try

38. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 38
process
redesign
We identified core
processes to change,
redesigned them using
service blueprints and
taught staff a process
they've used again...

39. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
How well does your
organizational design align
with your service offerings?

40. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | 40
wrap-up Look externally and
internally, combining
external research
with internal user
research.
Think through why,
what, where, when,
who and how of
services to integrate
them.
Align the customer
and employee
experience as well as
service offerings and
internal structure.

41. SNHU SERVICE AND ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
thank you!