3. Vision: to enrich business
education at the University of
Montana, acknowledging the
powerful impact of mentors and
role models on professional and
personal achievements.
4. Why Executive Education?
• 5% Annual Growth
– $3.6 M Average Gross Revenue
• Low risk opportunity: Gilkey Center
building as venue
• Expansion of UM/SoBA brand
• Creation of regional footprint
Scheurer, B. (2016, May 3). UNICON State of the Industry. Retrieved from http://uniconexed.org/2015/2015_UNICON_Industry_Survey_Release.docx
5. SWOT Analysis
Strengths
● Montana outdoor culture
● Alumni network
● New building
● Low cost programs
● Experienced &
multidisciplinary data
analytics staff
Weaknesses
● Geographically far from big cities
● Mid-tier university
● Lack of brand awareness outside of
Missoula
Opportunities
● Experiential Executive
Education
● Executive Education industry is
booming
● Very few EE startups:
Older players in industry losing
credibility as being “out of touch
and bureaucratic”
Threats
● Ivy league competitors
● Internal corporate training /
professional consulting a
sophisticated $70 B
industry.
● Regional competitors
InternalOrigin:
attributesoftheorganization
ExternalOrigin:
attributesoftheenvironment
Why SoBA?
Deloitte US | Human Capital. Global Human Capital Trends 2016. (2016). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/human-
capital/articles/introduction-human-capital-trends.html
6. Supplier Power:
Supplier Power is Moderate primarily due to suppliers’ product
differentiation, rivals information and ability to backwards integrate
Buyer Power:
Buyer Power is HIGH primarily due to low switching costs, high amount of
information available and high ability to backwards integrate
Threat of Entry:
Threat of Entry is HIGH
primarily due to low costs
of capital, high network
effects, and moderate
product differentiation
Threat of Substitutes:
Threat of Substitutes is
Moderate primarily due to
moderate levels of product
differentiation and relative
prices
Industry Rivalry:
Industry Rivalry is Low due to
the highly dispersed nature of
the industry, low exit barriers
and low strategic stakes
Overall Industry Attractiveness:
Overall, this is a Moderately attractive industry – High Threat of Entry and High Buyer
Power decrease the industry’s attractiveness while Moderate Supplier Power, Moderate
Threat of Substitutes and Low Industry Rivalry increase the Industry’s profitability.
Why Missoula?
7. Why? Missoula!
Industry Rivalry:
Industry Rivalry is Low
due to the highly
dispersed nature of the
industry and low
strategic stakes
Overall, this is a Moderately attractive industry
High Threat of Entry and High Buyer Power decrease the industry’s attractiveness while
Moderate Supplier Power, Moderate Threat of Substitutes and Low Industry Rivalry
increase the Industry’s profitability.
8. Competitor Analysis - Regional
$1,890 per day
5 days
Leadership
$400 per day
8 days
Project
Management
$612 per day
14 days
Banking
$872 per day
9 days
Gaming
$550 per day
1 day
Leadership
$883 per day
10 days
Management
Outdoor Element
$723 per day
19 days
Utilities
$400 per day
5 days
Big Data
Outdoor Element
UM
9. Disadvantages of General Programs
• Participants cannot fully relate to others in a
different industry
• Faculty may not be aware of the exact audience
of a particular program
• Programs cannot address issues specific to
certain industries
• It can be challenging for participants to adapt
and apply learning objectives to their respective
position and industry
Rogers, S. and Duening, T. (2013) "Vertical Market Strategy: The Case of an Executive Education Startup in a Medium-Sized Business School," Journal of
Executive Education: Vol. 12: Iss. 1, Article 2.
10. Product Offering
• Yearly overarching topic based on market demand and UM Strengths
• Multiple yearly offerings focused on industry verticals
– Year 1: Data Analytics focus
– Years 2+: Modified based on industry feedback / trends
• Adding 3 additional offering per year
• Adaptable, flexible offerings due to Just-in-Time Programming and
tailored value proposition.
Year One: Data Analytics
January February March
April
Mining
May June
Real Estate
July
Agriculture
August
Finance
September
October November December
11. Product Development
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: how today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses (1st ed).
New York: Crown Business.
● Less risky startup venture
● Experimentation vs. elaborate planning
● Customer feedback over intuition
● Iterative design
13. Why Big Data?
“One thing that is exciting, as an alum and
a big fan of Missoula and the University of
Montana, we are right at the cusp of this
becoming an academic discipline.
There is a real opportunity for UM to
create a path in an area of expertise that
famous business schools like Harvard are
lagging.”
-Dr. John Chandler
Erickson, D. (2014, October 21). Former Microsoft data analytics expert to teach at UM. Missoulian. Retrieved from
http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/former-microsoft-data-analytics-expert-to-teach-at-um/article_dc6128b8-f963-567c-a99e-
785855e1393e.html
14. Market Analysis
• Market analysis broken down into four specific industries:
– Mining/Oil
– Agriculture
– Real Estate
– Finance (Small/Medium Banks)
• U.S. Census and Bureau of Labor Statistic to identify largest industries within
the region
• Focused on specific addressable market needs that are currently unmet by
competitors
• Market analysis based on industry standards and conservative assumptions
Total Market Size assuming 5% executive level employees:
30,632
16. Why Mining / Oil?
● Geography
● Opportunity
● Need
● 2014 Bain Report:
○ “Analytic advantages could help oil and gas companies improve production by 6%
to 8%”
○ Indicated only 4% of industry currently uses data analytics to full potential
● Big Data Analytics in Mining Summit
○ “We’ve seen value immediately. The world is talking about big data and how you
use it.” — Sam Walsh, CEO, Rio Tinto
BAIN_BRIEF_Big_Data_analytics_in_oil_and_gas.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.bain.com/Images/BAIN_BRIEF_Big_Data_analytics_in_oil_and_gas.pdf
Big Data Analytics in Mining Summit. (n.d.). Retrieved May 9, 2016,
from http://www.bigdatainmining.com/
17. Why Agriculture?
● Geography
● Opportunity
● Need
“How Farmers are
Harvesting Big Data”
● Average use of
fertilizer was 25-
30 percent less
● Yields were 10-
15 percent
higher.
Broughton, J. (2015, July 6). How Farmers Are Harvesting Big Data. Retrieved May 9, 2016, from http://www.inc.com/jenna-
broughton/how-farmers-are-harvesting-big-data.html
18. Why Real Estate?
● Agents have potential to
see revenues rise, costs
drop and market share
increase
● Presenting a “whole
consumer”
● Who buys & who sells
what, when, where, why
and how
Ward, M. (2015, August 4). How Big Data is Transforming Real Estate. Retrieved May 6, 2016, from
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/04/how-big-data-is-transforming-real-estate.html
19. Why Small Banks?
● Geography
● Opportunity
● Need
2015 American
Banker:
“Data Analytics is
the Great Equalizer”
-Bryan Yurcan
Why Small Banks Should Be Thinking About Big Data. (n.d.). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from http://www.americanbanker.com/news/bank-technology/why-small-
banks-should-be-thinking-about-big-data-1077955-1.html
20. Marketing & Advertising Strategy
Corporate Outreach
● Direct B2B Corporate Calling Effort
● Partnership with local companies on series
of programs
Targeted Digital
● LinkedIn Ads
● Google Adword campaigns
● Website and SEO
Email
● Organic lists
● Alumni databases
● Associations
Nurture Existing
● Personal email campaigns
● Newsletter campaigns
● Calls and outreach (feedback)
24. Critical Risks
• Damage to UM brand
– Establish immediate legitimacy by addressing critical industry
needs
• Inability to find qualified instructors for year one
– Leverage UM Business Analytics program
– Leverage UM alumni network
• Failing to attract sufficient customers from outside of Montana
– Montana alone is not sufficient for long term success
– Mitigated by establishing reputation as value added / ROI-
centric program
– If we can’t attract .252% of the 5% of Mining customers, we
shouldn’t be in business
25. Conclusion
The Gilkey Center for Executive Education will:
• Provide world class education
• Meet industry needs
• Differentiate itself from the competition
• Improve the UM brand by providing ROI for industry customers
• Improve overall UM profitability
26. Citations
BAIN_BRIEF_Big_Data_analytics_in_oil_and_gas.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.bain.com/Images/BAIN_BRIEF_Big_Data_analytics_in_oil_and_gas.pdf
Big Data Analytics in Mining Summit. (n.d.). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from http://www.bigdatainmining.com/
BLS. (2016). “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics Survey (State & Metro Area) Home
Page.”. Web. 9 May 2016
Bradshaw, D. (2015, May 17). New market entrants create competition for business schools. Financial Times. Retrieved from
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/896cfdc4-f016-11e4-ab73-00144feab7de.html#axzz3e5g28KNN
Broughton, J. (2015, July 6). How Farmers Are Harvesting Big Data. Retrieved May 9, 2016, from http://www.inc.com/jenna-
broughton/how-farmers-are-harvesting-big-data.html
Brown, S. M., Garnjost, P., & Heilmann, S. (2011). Problem-based Learning Leadership Development Program in a Multi-
National Company. Journal of Executive Education, 10(1), 1–17.
Business, R. H. S. S. of. (n.d.). Executive Education Growth Triples Industry Pace at UMD Smith School. Retrieved April 27,
2016, from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/executive-education-growth-triples-industry-pace-at-umd-smith-school-
300028527.html
Deloitte US | Human Capital. Global Human Capital Trends 2016. (2016). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from
http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/human-capital/articles/introduction-human-capital-trends.html
27. Citations
FDIC (n.d.). Community Banking by the Numbers Retrieved from
https://www.fdic.gov/news/conferences/communitybanking/community_banking_by_the_numbers_clean.pdf
Kennedy, D. Xerri, T., & Tonj, C. (2015). CMED 2015 Benchmarking & Industry Trends Survey.
Executive Education Industry Registered a CAGR of 17% in the Last 5 years: Ken Research. (2015, November 6). Retrieved April
27, 2016, from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/executive-education-industry-registered-cagr-17-last-5-namit-goel
FOSMOE, M. (2013, April 11). Open for business. South Bend Tribune (Indiana), p. C1.
UNICON. (n.d.). Future Trends. Retrieved from http://uniconexed.org/2016/research/Future_Trends-
Revised_Final_Report_Executive_Core-August-Jan.12.2016-v2.pdf
Gilkey Center for Executive Education :: Green Building Information Gateway. (n.d.). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from
http://www.gbig.org/activities/leed-1000002173
Gordon, A. (n.d.). Executive Education Looks At Its Future And Shudders. Retrieved April 19, 2016, from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamgordon/2013/05/09/executive-education-looks-at-its-future-and-shudders/
Klicki, B. R. (2015, June 27). Academic leaders: Executive education in “transformation.” Chicago Daily Herald, p. 1.
Lamb, D. (2013). Recommended Practices for New Corporate Learning Leaders. Journal of Executive Education, 12(1), 13–17.
Lockhart, J. C. (2013). Executive Education: Can it Be Too Good? Journal of Executive Education, 12(1), 18–29.
28. Citations
Manning, C. A., Waldman, M. R., Lindsey, W. E., Newberg, A. B., & Cotter-Lockard, D. (2012). Personal Inner Values: A Key to
Effective Face-To-Face Business Communication. Journal of Executive Education, 11(1), 37–65.
McGoldrick, K. (2016, May). Building a Center of Excellence in Executive Education for the Global Century.
McNay, W. R. (2010). Executive Education for a New Reality: The Stakeholder Theory Comes of Age. Journal of Executive
Education, 9(1), 1–16.
McNay, W. R. (2012). A Re-Interpretation of Leadership Aligns Human Capital and Business Objectives. Journal of Executive
Education, 11(1), 79–95.
MOOCs in 2015: Breaking Down the Numbers (EdSurge News). (2015, December 28). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from
https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-12-28-moocs-in-2015-breaking-down-the-numbers
New Business Models for Executive Education: Partnering for Impact. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2016, from
https://www.efmd.org/index.php/blog/view/217-new-business-models-for-executive-education-partnering-for-impact
OES. (2015)“May 2015 OES National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates.”. Web. 9 May 2016
Petit, F. (2012). Deadly Diseases or Innovative Practices: How Deming Would View Today’s Executive MBA Sector. Journal of
Executive Education, 11(1), 67–78.
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: how today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses
(1st ed). New York: Crown Business.
29. Citations
Roebuck, D. B., & Smith, D. N. (2011). Wisdom from Executive Female Leaders: What Can Organizations, Executive Education
Programs, and Graduate Students Learn? Journal of Executive Education, 10(1), 43–73.
Rogers, S. and Duening, T. (2013) "Vertical Market Strategy: The Case of an Executive Education Startup in a Medium-Sized
Business School," Journal of Executive Education: Vol. 12: Iss. 1, Article 2. Available at: h
p://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/jee/vol12/iss1/2
Rose, K. J., & Stiefer, T. W. (2013). Advisory Councils in Executive Education: Insights from Practice. Journal of Executive
Education, 12(1), 1–12.
Scheurer, B. (2016, May 3). UNICON State of the Industry. Retrieved from
http://uniconexed.org/2015/2015_UNICON_Industry_Survey_Release.docx
SISGeographyWIKI - Farming in the USA. (n.d.). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from
http://sisgeographywiki.wikispaces.com/Farming%20in%20the%20USA
To Be a Better Leader, Lead Like a Guide | The European Business Review. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.europeanbusinessreview.com/?p=6371
Uniconexed.org - “Are American business schools headed For a GM-like catastrophe?” John Byrne, Fortune Magazine, August 17,
2015. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://uniconexed.org/en/in-the-news-nav-link.html?id=541
Uniconexed.org - Chief Learning Officer Special Executive Education Edition, Kellye Whitney, February 22, 2016. (n.d.).
Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://uniconexed.org/en/in-the-news-nav-link.html?id=568
30. Citations
Uniconexed.org - The Problem With Executive Education, Bravetta Hassell, Chief Learning Officer, February 22, 2016. (n.d.).
Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://uniconexed.org/en/in-the-news-nav-link.html?id=567
Valle, M., & O’Mara, K. J. (2012). Targeted Instruction for Executive Education: Classifying Participants to Enhance Program
Delivery. Journal of Executive Education, 11(1), 1–13.
Why Small Banks Should Be Thinking About Big Data. (n.d.). Retrieved May 9, 2016, from
http://www.americanbanker.com/news/bank-technology/why-small-banks-should-be-thinking-about-big-data-1077955-1.html
Wynne, K. J., & Parker, J. M. (2013). A Survey of Team Teaching Effectiveness in Executive Graduate Business Programs.
Journal of Executive Education, 12(1), 30–38.
32. Value Chain
Firm Infrastructure: University of Montana support. Operational, administrative expenses, salary, capital
assets all covered by university.
Human Resource Management: Experience executive education director, strong UM brand recognition,
longstanding university
Technology Development: Potential for online development, CRM software, technology awareness, IT
support staff
Procurement: Private Donors, customized courses, open enrollment seminars, luncheons, private speakers
Inbound
Logistics: Faculty
resources, alumni
relations, community
relations, industry
contacts
Marketing & Sales:
Website, Griz Nation
Brand, corporate
outreach, SEM, SEO,
online ads, network push,
social media, events
Service: Executive
Education, tangible
benefit, tailored curriculum
Outbound
Logistics: Customized
content, industry specific
courses, experiential
learning
35. Supplier Power (Overall - MODERATE)
Price Sensitivity
● Cost of product relative to total cost: Low – Quick breakeven
point for most programs
● Suppliers’ Product Differentiation: Medium – Speakers have
wide variety of experiences and educational background
● Competition between rivals: High – Plentiful amount of
speakers and available
Bargaining Power
● Size and concentration of rivals relative to producers: Low –
Individual speakers typically represent themselves
● Rivals’ switching costs: Low – EE programs can switch easily
● Rivals’ information: Medium – Published EE speaker rates
● Rivals’ ability to backward integrate: Medium – EE programs
can leverage resident faculty but without the same gravitas as
industry speakers
Buyer Power (Overall - HIGH)
Price Sensitivity
● Cost of product relative to total cost: Medium – High cost for
individual buyer and small businesses, low for large
corporations
● Product Differentiation: High – Many various programs tailored
to various goals and focus areas
● Competition between buyers: High – Many EE programs and
alternatives to choose from
Bargaining Power
● Size and concentration of buyers relative to producers: Low –
Many customers, from small and large businesses to
individuals
● Buyers’ switching costs: Low – Minimal switching costs
● Buyers’ information: High – Easily available information online
● Buyers’ ability to backward integrate: High – Many
corporations offer internal EE programs
Threat of Entry (Overall - HIGH)
● Economies of scale: High - Larger EE programs
can leverage larger events for lower variable
costs (lodging / lunch / materials)
● Network effects: High – Existing Alumni base can
quickly be leveraged into EE speaker network
● Absolute cost advantages: High – Larger EE
programs can leverage parent University to
subsidize costs
● Capital requirements: Low – Primary costs are
speaker fees and a facility
● Product differentiation: Medium – Low for generic
Leadership courses. High for specialized industry
content
● Access to distribution channels: Medium -
Established EE programs have an established
customer base but new programs can leverage
alumni network
● Government and legal barriers: Low – No real
barriers
● Retaliation by incumbents: Low – Retailation
unlikely
Threat of Substitutes (Overall - MODERATE)
● Switching costs: Low – industry can easily
switch to other EE programs or other
alternatives
● Product Differentiation: Medium – Low for
generic Leadership courses. High for
specialized industry content. Various
retreats or adventures present also
● Relative Prices and performance of
substitutes: Medium – EE offers higher
prices than some adventure retreats but
more prestigious events
Industry Rivalry - (Overall - Low)
● Concentration (L) – Highly dispersed
industry wiith many EE programs
● Strategic Stakes (L) – EE represent
relatively low percentage of University
revenues
● Product Differentiation (M) – Various focus
areas allows for differentiation by industry
● Capacity increments (L) – Relatively easy to
scale up more programs per year
● Exit Barriers (L) – Low capital requirements
and infrastrcture
● Industry Growth (M) – Moderate industry
growth rates
