This shares some information on models that public institutions employ as they attempt to scale fully online enrollments through online programs. If you would like more information, please visit edusasha.com.

1. STATE PUBLIC
INSTITUTIONS
ONLINE
ORGANIZATIONAL FEATURES
& ENROLLMENT

3. COMMONALITIES
what has contributed to growth for public
institutions
clear brand
identity
internal design
& development
teams
internal retention
& advising
services
technology
systems built to
scale
timely transfer &
admittance
processes
UNRELENTING
INSTITUTIONAL
COMMITMENT TO
GROWTH STRATEGY

4. COMMONALITIES
What has blocked growth
•Brand confusion
•Mix of outsourcing and
insourcing
•Lack of systems designed for
online students
•Inappropriate organizational
structure & decision-making
abilities
•Lack of institutional will or
commitment to scale
•Lack of marketing and
recruitment spend and
support
•Lack of appropriate technical
and data systems

5. CHALLENGES
•Extensive brand confusion
•One institution has the URL
umassonline.edu; the central unit has the
same URL at .net
•Has competing, duplicative programs at
multiple institutions
•Cannot centralize
•Brands compete against each other by
price; lack of sustainability long term
•Same SIS, CRM, across institutions, but
configured & maintained separately
•Each approaches recruitment differently
•Each institution has a mix of automation
and non-automation
UMass Online

6. RESULT OF
CHALLENGES
UMass Online
They are now creating a separate,
fully online institution, which will
then compete with their existing
University brands already within the
state. This online only institution is
designed to compete with Southern
New Hampshire University as it is
attracting many students from
Massachusetts.

7. CHALLENGES
•Brand confusion
•Competing programs; state now
will not approve competing
programs
•Processes not built for online
students
•Lack of centralized marketing
and recruitment
•Not able to move fast in the
marketplace
•Separately accredited
universities in the same system
•One of them owns the brand
University of Arkansas Online

8. RESULT OF
CHALLENGES
•Stood up an entirely
separate university -
eVersity
•Nationally accredited
•Part of the University of
Arkansas System
•Designed to compete
with for-profits and uber
universities
•Low tuition
•Fast growing
•Continued brand
coherence challenges

9. STATE INSTITUTIONS
WHERE IT WORKS
•No brand confusion
•Degrees conferred are from the
institution itself, the "campus location"
is not on the degree
•The engine is built and managed
internally (ASU has an external partner
for marketing)
•Streamlined processes & timelines for
admissions, enrollment and transfer
•Unrelenting support from the top
•Online programs are viewed as a
strategic asset essential to
institutional sustainability

10. BRAND TRANSITIONS
communicating a Global Campus versus a
Flagship online
•Fully online
•Strong enrollment & finances
•Separate degree, part of CSU system
•Cheaper than CSU Online
•More established in marketplace
•Now part of growth strategy
•Creates brand confusion
•Internal distinctions in degrees not
readily understandable
•Uphill challenge for growth

11. WHAT WILL GLOBAL
MEAN?
Will students make
brand distinctions when
the brand is actually
different?
Will those credentials
have the same value for
those students' future?
BUILD VS BUY

12. OUR MISSION
what we do and why it is working
High-quality learning
experiences,
with world-class customer
service,
in a sustainable financial
model.

13. COMBINING
BEST
PRACTICES
FOR AN
INNOVATIVE
STRATEGY

14. ➢ A pathway for every student
at an LSU institution
➢ Differentiated by admissions
standards, institutional type
and focus, price sensitivity &
program
➢ Strong brand identity that is
not fractured
➢ Complimentary, not
competing programs
➢ Strategic use of Credit for
Prior Learning
➢ Optimization of partnerships
➢ Micro to Macro learning
experiences
➢ High-tech / high-touch
concierge service

15. A Strategy for
Success
Across the
Family of LSU
Institutions