The Cost vs. Expectation Correlation in College Retention

A reader from Point Loma Nazarene University sent me an email that started this piece on school costs, expectations, retention rates and

customer service.

He wrote:

"I’ve enjoyed reading your blog and am currently reading your book, The Power of Retention. I have a question about the difference in responses of students in private versus public colleges and universities. Have you found that students who leave private universities do not leave for poor service as frequently as they do in public ones? Our retention rate is much higher than the ones in your examples."

No I don’t. In fact, customer service issues are a stronger reason for leaving a private college since there is usually more investment at stake. To start with, the higher cost of a private college or university over a publicly-affiliated college brings with it higher service return demands. There is an interesting correlation situation created by cost in reference to service provided. In all but the top schools, the higher the cost to attend, the higher the expectations. Or to be even more accurate, the greater the personal fiscal impact, the greater the expectations. If school costs are having a negative impact on a person’s budget, their expectations for the school will always be high.

It is the same as if you were going to an expensive restaurant versus a McDonalds. In a higher cost eatery or bistro.(don’t you love the way the name of the place often equals overpricing? Joe’s Diner versus Joseph’s Refectory? Also why so many colleges suddenly became universities….Same food just seems more impressive?) In the bistro where a burger, (excuse me) ground Angus steak costs $15.90 or more, one expects more meat, more quality and flavor and the burger or ground steak should be served with a side of pom frites (French fries would not do in a bistro), a side of vegetable perhaps, on nice dishes, cloth table cloth and really “your way.” The customer also expects some nice ambiance and surroundings. That guy on his cell phone on the table to the left is annoying because he is talking loud to make sure the listeners and the world hear him. But you sit on a comfortable chair, place a fresh cloth napkin on your lap and wait for a server to come to you. He or she takes your order and then presents the meal. If the burger is not cooked the way you want, you call the waiter over and expect a replacement to your satisfaction. You also expect that the waiter will be attentive to your needs as well as ask at least once if everything is okay? The waiter should be conscientious but not overly so. The bill is brought and with tax, the food and experience are $18 plus a $4 tip and an hour of your time

Now let’s say that in the bistro, the waiter was a bit slow to respond to your request for more water, or the burger was served cool; not hot but not cold enough to really complain. The frites were fine but there were just a few of them. And the vegetable side was slightly overdone broccoli. Was the burger and resta…uh bistro worth it?

At McDonalds, you stand in a line. Wait to shuffle to a counter where an underpaid young person waits for you to come to her. She asks for your order. You say what you want, stand and wait some more. A thin meat puck on a bun wrapped in paper and a small bag of thin fries is handed to you by the inattentive young person who simply may say “thank you” before turning to the next customer or friend behind the counter. You walk away; sit in a hard chair at a cold Formica-topped table wipe your hands with a small, paper napkin feeling just fine with the purchase. People around you are on cell phones, talking a bit loudly and there is a kid running around the place. The bill for the burger and fries - $4.96 and no need to tip.

Less than a third of the cost and likely a greater fulfillment level even if the burger and fries were actually not as good as at the Bistro. Why? Because the expectations were lower for McDonalds and they were fulfilled. The Bistro costs more so more is expected. The Bistro is expected not only to provide a good burger and fries but service equal to the cost as well as an ambiance to match. The noise at the Bistro is disturbing; at Mickey’D’s expected. The uncomfortable chairs, well what do you expect? It’s McDonalds. It is anticipated and there are lower expectations anyhow.

Of course, the expectation commands a great deal of the fulfillment of it. Even a very negative expectation in service can lead to fulfillment and full ROI such as at a restaurant like Durgin Park in Boston as explained in my book The Power of Retention. (C’mon, You should expect I will at least mention the book which is about to go into a third printing since the first two sold out!!)

So now to relate it to schools. A more expensive school produces greater expectations. If one is paying $35,000 a year, that student and family will expect a $35,000 experience. If they get poor service from people at the school and it feels more like “would you like fries with that course?” the feeling of return on investment fulfillment will be low. If a student can’t get required classes because the number of sections were cut, that’ll feel like “we’re out of burgers tonight even though we advertised them to you. We’ll have them again Fall of next year…” The response is simple “Hey we are paying $35,000 tuition a year. If I wanted to get a $5,000 experience, I’d go to Mickey D College down the road.”

If the university serves decent academic customer service and food like courses (which again is not just smiling and pretending to be nice though that does help) then the expectations might be met. Students will feel and calculate they are receiving return on their investments and complete the daily buying opportunities. They will go to classes and feel a part of the University.

Now to all that there is also difference in demand level based on the investment within a pricing band. A pricing band is a set of schools that are similar in what they offer within a similar price. Bands are often also governed by location since bands are flexible in whom they include. The bandings are often made by buyers much as they would consider another group of possible purchases by cost, i.e, 42 inch flat screen TV’s. from $700 to $1200. (Oh, right schools are not TV’s. Not a product that is decided by price and affordability….. And how did you decide what schools your child could look at? And you could afford?)

Schools within a price band are usually the ones that the customer compares one another. These are what we can afford and are located where the student and we have a comfort level while offering an Angus burger. The higher the cost of a school within a band, the higher the expectation of academic service and ROI of course. So, if a private college with a $35,000 tuition is in a pricing band of private schools ranging from $22,000 to $38,000 of more or less equal brand value, the investment in the $35,000 is thus considered to be higher than most, but less than others. So students and parents will expect ROI based on cost within band; better than some, less than others.

If a student chooses a lower level cost within the band the expectations will be lower for it. “It may not be quite as good as University A but we can afford it. The dorms are older, and it does not have as many major but it’ll give Janie a good education”. Expectations will be lower and the odds of meeting them will be higher.

Now should Janie have to drop all of the schools in the band and look at a public school or even a community college, the expectations drop of course but so does the probability of success. The expectations can be met surely but they have been dropped so low that they are not even really expectations as such. They are just acceptances. The immediate expectation of going to a private school has been replaced with an almost unpalatable alternative. So actually, the expectations are that the college will not be able to meet real needs and the original ROI. In the case of community colleges chosen as a low-cost alternative to a private school or even a public university, there is no way it can fully meet the expectations of a four-year degree. NO WAY! 

Students who originally decided they wanted the Bistro angus burger who have to get the McD’s will find it unpalatable. They will leave for the Bistro as soon as is possible. This partially explains why community colleges have such a low retention to completion rate.

There are indeed many cases in which students go to the community college which meets many parts of their multifaceted ROI such as getting their money’s worth within a caring and student-focused environment in which they feel welcome and a part. And there are numerous situations in which students find that the community college provides excellent teaching and learning which are of course central issues to a real educational ROI. They adapt to the McD’s of education and find that they are pleased and might even look forward to it keeping the Bistro burger for a later date. Some even find they don’t want the Bistro burger at all. In these cases, their expectations have shifted.

That said, schools that have a clear mission that is embedded in all they do such as a religiously-based school like Point Loma will often have a higher retention rate than one that is not focused. Point Loma Nazarene University being a religiously-based or focused college thus has an advantage in that its students sought it out for a faith-based reason as well as an educational one Their expectations of ROI are shifted a bit from financial to emotional and affective so the money issue lessens in favor of am I getting the spiritual and personal attachments I expected and need as well as the education? The singular and fulfillment of focus is helping Point Loma.

I recently did a customer service for retention audit at a very fine university that had lost its clear focus. It had moved from being one of the finest military-focused educationally universities to trying to accommodate too many focuses. Students came to the University because of the military corps culture. Both the military and civilian students selected this University because they either wanted to focus on military training and education or they felt that a school with an active military training program would be serious and safe. 

They were having retention issues starting in the sophomore year because of the loss of focus. Freshman cadets went through a training regimen that identified them and the University as the militarily-focused school they expected. Then after a full freshman year experience, the military dropped off enough to make too many students question the focus they had signed on for.

Our audit pointed out the perception that the University had strayed a bit as well as some other issues. Students did not feel as if they were getting the ROI they had paid for. The President of the University is a solid leader and has been issuing clear statements of focus and purpose that have been very well received by the corps of cadets and the non-military students. The message that maintaining excellent teaching and learning as it has over the years and attention to some other overt customer service issues are underway but we believe the most important finally will be the clarification of a unified and singular focus. That will retain many more students than in the past.

Finally, since Point Loma can boast of recognition in US News, it adds to the sense of value and ROI whether it is really there or not. Students and parents believe they are getting the ROI’s for the most part as a result of the external certification. For example, the 306 name brand schools have a higher retention rate than most other colleges not only because they can enroll those that fit their culture but also because students believe they will get the ROI and service based on the brand name. The difference between a Rolex and Timex. Each will tell time but people will invest more in the Rolex and believe its time is more accurate and thus worth the extra cost. The Timex will be accurate as well, but it is a Timex. But if the watch is a Timex and costs $25,000 it will not sell. This is due to a negative expectation. Timex belongs in a certain pricing band and if it wanders that far out of it, it cannot find a customer belief it is worth the price.

Finally, Point Loma and other schools that have a higher than average retention rate may be doing a good job of meeting student expectations and providing good academic customer service. That’ll of course increase retention rates. I was just on a university campus with an 86% retention rate. It is doing well considering some of its factors. It is well above the national six-year rate of 59% for four-year schools. It is doing some things really well to get there. But, we believe we can increase retention by attending to some customer service factors like how some offices work, scheduling set up, breaking done some silos, altering a couple HR processes, etc. Point Loma and other colleges and universities may well be in a similar position. Point Loma does exceed the national average in the past because of some of the factors mentioned above but it could still be many percentage points below what it could be.

So, start looking and thinking about what your university can do to increase its rate and meeting student expectations today. 

Get your copy of The Power of Retention referenced in this article today by clicking here. 

Mobile apps Can Provide Great Service to Students

I was eating lunch on a college campus the other day and watched as four students came and all sat down to lunch together at a table.  Now, this was not a monastic college but not one of them said

anything to another throughout their sitting together. Nor did they seem to acknowledge one another’s presence though it was clear they had chosen to sit together. They were all too busy looking down at their smart phones to engage one another.

It was amazing to see how they could scroll through the phone and even text with one hand while the other hand lifted food and miraculously found a mouthy to place it in.  I was saddened by the lack of communication with one another. It was equally frustrating to realize that students seem to be more engaged in their phones than anything else on campus.

But then it came to me. Why not use the phone as a college service device? Why not realize and accept that the phone has become more important to most students than for example the computer or conversation? That phones are not for talking on anymore but are for communicating in other ways such as texting and that email has been replaced by text? It dawned on me that rather than lament the dominance of phones and their capturing students’ attention, why not use the phones as a central point of service provision to students?

Mobile apps could be a very potent customer service delivery system as well as w ay to increase engagement with the school alongside great person-to-person customer service. Colleges could put a massive amount of information and access right in the hands of students who would be untethered to a computer or the campus. Considering that so many students have lives off campus and cannot always get to offices on campus, the ability to have access to services anywhere in the world was powerful concept. This would be especially great for commuters and community college students whose schedules often precluded being able to get to the campus to obtain services.

Moreover, providing a mobile app with as much information a student can use and want is also a sign from the college that it does care about making the student’s life at the college as easy as is possible and that leads to great service and engagement.

Why not harness the power of the phones attraction of students and use it as a main service provider on campus? This could, should be big. I thought about setting up a company to design mobile service apps for colleges but then realized I know nothing about mobile app development so I decided to do some research into mobile apps and college.

That led me to realize what I should have already known. This was such a good idea that it was already being done. There is a company named DubLabs that had already designed mobile apps for over 150 colleges and did so extremely well. The apps that they had developed met student needs and desires rather than those of the college or its IT department. Too often when a school decides to go mobile they try to develop it themselves and while this is helpful, it does not always mean it is useful to students. In fact, when investigating two mobile apps that were developed by the schools, students complained that they were “clunky” and “not very user friendly just like many website that were homemade.

I found that DubLabs had designed mobile apps providing service to large universities like University of California – LA mid-sized school like Bridgewater State University in MA and community colleges all over the country. And they had gotten very good reviews from students at the schools. They were able to put everything students needed and colleges wanted them to have in the hand of the student.  Their mobile apps gave students full information and control over their college lives from class schedules to lecture notes, grades, registration, ebills, add/drops, college forms, access to Blackboard , class cancellations, bus schedules and all else right in their back pockets that was easily accessible and immediate.  And the apps integrated with the college’s native IT system like People Soft.

Here is a list of what’s available to students on one example of a DubLabs mobile app.

·         There is a dashboard for notifications, assignments, grades, class discussions, news and video;

·         Access to the college ‘s Blackboard

·         The book store where students could search for courses, required and non-required texts and even college clothing;

·         Courses where all classes, and locations are available for immediate view with the ability to pin them to a mapping ability to locate the classrooms

·         Course announcements and assignments;

·         Media where students can watch class videos or whatever video pertains to them or their classes if posted;

·         A student’s final exam schedule;

·         A campus directory with active links to all college employees with contact information;

·         One click calling for emergencies or student services offices;

·         All grades;

·         Register from the phone;

·         Pay bills through the app;

·         The library website;

·         Employment opportunities with internships available;

·         Dining information with dining hours;

·         Real time bus schedules for students who commute;

·         A calendar with events and where students can enter their own events.

A study by a company named Rapid Insight found that a mobile app by DubLabs increased communication between the school and student enough so it attributed a 2% enrollment increase to the mobile app.  That translated into 133 more students retained and an additional 2.6 million available for the college's budget  That is nothing to sneer at.

This is all great information for a student to have and it also shows the college does care about students having the information to be able to manage their days and lives all in one hand.

So now when I see students staring down at their phones I can believe they are using their college mobile app rather than just wasting time and ignoring one another.

Since 1999, NRaisman & Associates as been helping over 450 universities and colleges increase their admissions, retention and enrollment as the international experts on academic customer service through its consulting, training and campus service excellence studies

It's time for you to increase retention and customer service on campus.Call today at 413.219.6939 or email me at GreatServiceMatters.

How To Make Irritating Students Less Irritating

I keep receiving reports that students seem more irritated,less patient, quicker to anger and less tolerant these days. That makes it tougher to

work with them and help them. Though we may all realize that a student’s anger and even insults are not personal, they sure feel it. This is especially so since students keep pointedly using that second person pronoun “you” as if it were a weapon since they believe you are the school when they speak or even may curse at you.

They see you as the representative of that cold, impersonal money-grubbing abstract “the college” that has caused some disaster in their otherwise imperfect life. They have not learned how to separate the particulars from the universal. And when they are talking to you, you are a true representative of the college. As such, you equal the entire collection of bricks, mortar, people, rules and offices that is the university. So, at that moment, in that encounter, the student believes you are responsible for any wrong done; especially is the wrong may have been committed by the office that underpays you.

Thus when he or she is snide, nasty or even shouts and curses at you, that action is not really at you but as you as a symbol of the college - unless you have done something to call for it. Yes it is irrational and even misplaced but it is real because the student is feeling some hurt or harm.

(The following is excerpted from The Power of Retention) 

Social critics and we in higher education have found the general lack of civility in our culture also exists on our campuses. This should be no surprise. The people who live in our Happy Bunny “It’s all about me” culture are our students and even some of our employees. They are our faculty, administrators and lo and behold, they are also us.

As Walt Kelly had his cartoon character Pogo put it so well back in the 60’s We have met the enemy and they are us. The people who attend and work at our schools are the exact same people in the exact same culture we think we have left behind when we enter the retreat for intellectual and academic pursuit we know as a college campus. But what we find is that what attitudes apply in the so-called real world outside of academia also apply on a college campus.

This reality can also explain differences in the ways we perceive and act toward one another. Our students come from a cultural group that has been immersed in a cynical, smart mouth me first attitude which has eliminated most of what older America grew up knowing as social civilities and courtesies. The Captain Kangaroo/Mister Rogers world of please, thank you and general polite regard for one another has been replaced by a hip-hop attitude that revels and condones a general rude incivility toward one another. Radio shock jocks use language and casually discuss topics on the radio some of our generation may well be taken aback by and even find anti-intellectual or uncivil. Language that might have been thought of as anti-social and rebellious is now everyday colloquial use in casual discussion even in classrooms and offices. Attitudes that would have been unacceptable and considered rude such as taking a phone call in class or napping during lectures have become the norm according to many faculty members.

Our parents and their parents and theirs all the way back to Young Socrates in the Platonic dialogues had difficulty understanding and accepting the current younger generation’s music, hair, language, attitudes, mores, actions. Each generation knew the student group was more out of control than the last.

Or as Paul Lind sang about it in Bye Bye Birdy

Kids!

I don’t know what’s wrong with these kids today!

Kids!

Who can understand anything they say?

Kids!

They are so ridiculous and immature!

I don’t see why anybody wants ‘em!... Kids! They are just impossible to control!.... Why can’t they be like we were, perfect in every way way? Oh,what’s the matter with kids today?

Actually, there is a difference in kids today. More than in the past perhaps and that is causing some service clashes on campus. We, the boomer and yuppie generations taught them too well. We encouraged them to take the next step in being more rebellious, more anti-authority, discourteous, disrespectful and become self-centered, demanding.

In a large sense, we created the college students we encounter. Our generations rebelled against authority and carried that forward by replacing much of the processes of etiquette with a sense of privilege for the next generations. They were taught that they are as good as anyone else. You can be anything they wish to be. Don’t let anyone tell you no. Age is not necessarily an indicator that a person warrants politeness or respect. On the one hand, students were inculcated with a media and marketing liturgy of their importance in the quest for class-free equality. The motto of “don’t trust anyone over thirty” has continued though the age threshold has dropped to anyone older than oneself. We also turned them into cultural and consumer cynics as we taught them not to trust advertising, marketing or promotional media. Unfortunately for colleges that cynicism does extend to the marketing they do. As a result, we created the consumer mentality we not find so offensive when a student tells us “hey, I’m paying for your salary.”

Additionally, technology has allowed the members of the current college student generation to isolate themselves from the larger community thereby greatly reducing the many social and face-to-face interactions one needs to learn social and cultural mores, codes and folkways. The Educause Center for Applied Research reported in 2008 that 80.3 percent of college students report using social networking sites regularly, up from 72.3% in 2006. The social networking sites are also the most used of all sites on the web attracting the largest amount of the average 16 hours of web browsing and usage per week. The social networks of YouTube, My Space, Hi5, Facebook, Friendster, chat rooms, download pirating networks like The Pirate Bay and Mininova allow students to be in a community without any need to ever be with someone physically. These communities have different mores, traditions, codes as well as greater tolerance for negative or boorish behavior than the analog world of higher education found on the campuses of colleges, universities or even career colleges where behavioral codes can be a bit more lenient. Emails also permit the student generation to communicate with others without ever having to deal with in live, face-to-face interaction.

As a result, they learn social codes that can tolerate anti-social behavior such as flaming. Wikipedia defines flaming as

…the hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users. Flaming usually occurs in the social context of a discussion board, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) or even through e-mail. An Internet user typically generates a flame response to other posts or users posting on a site, and such a response is usually not constructive, does not clarify a discussion, and does not persuade others. Sometimes, flamers attempt to assert their authority, or establish a position of superiority over other users. Other times, a flamer is simply an individual who believes he or she carries the only valid opinion. This leads him or her to personally attack those who disagree.

Flaming is not always tolerated on all websites or networks but it is common enough to be found on most interactive or participatory sites. Moreover, people can feel quite at ease with full freedom to flame without concern for retaliation since they can hide behind a user name or the oft used moniker anonymous that does not directly identify them in analog life. As a result of this anonymity flaming, bullying and an assertive nastiness that would not be well tolerated in a real face-to-face social interaction can be common. Furthermore, a communication problem can arise for student communicators when after either participating in or reading enough flaming messages the aggressive and mostly anonymous communication behavior transfers into real life interactions. Students do not necessarily learn or acquire the socialization needed to learn in person inter-personal skills. This lack of social communication skill development certainly limits them with the normative variations in successful inter-generational interactions. This can account for some of the clashes found in working with uneducated communicators and even trying to assist them on campus. Students with weak communication skills just may not know how to communicate appropriately with campus community members of a different age and role.

Technology is only one contributing factor that has blurred the distinctions between what the sociologist Erving Goffman described so well as front and backstage performances in his classic book Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. (1967) Goffman describes the social world of communication events as happening as if they were on a performance stage of a society. He divides the stage into its two major locations of front stage and back stage. As in a play, front stage is where the actors perform their formal roles. They are aware they are being observed and judged by the audience so they play the proscribed part. In society, front stage performers are aware they are being observed and thus perform using socially and culturally proscribed roles and language acceptable to the role they are playing and to the audience listening to it. For example, when a faculty member steps before a class to lecture, he or she does so using tone, language, gestures and the such that would be far different than when he or she is explaining how the day went to a spouse. He or she would use a very different tone, language and performance values when telling a child the same information just told to the spouse. The performance would be appropriate to the role and audience.

Backstage communications occur when the actors are off stage, behind the curtains so they cannot be seen by the audience. They can be more of their so-called natural selves as opposed to playing a specific part in the play. Their language does not have to be that used in front of the audience for example. Granted they are as Goffman notes, playing the role of a person in a play but not on stage at the moment. As a result, they are under less pressure to perform in a particular approved manner or speak specific lines appropriate to their formal performance role. Behind the curtains, they can be more relaxed and speak and act in a more relaxed manner if they wish.

Front stage social roles place pressure on the people involved to perform their roles appropriate to the interaction of the situation, the audience and social norms. If a young person is talking with a priest for example, there are normally restraints placed on the use of language, tone and attitude. If the actors realize they are involved in a front stage performance. The interaction is one that most academics have come to believe should be similar to that of a student interacting with them. But if a person does not realize that he or she is in a front stage performance or has not learned normative social interaction behaviors called upon for the role, there will be a resultant clash between the expected and the actual.

For many students today, the separation between front and backstage has eroded. Students have not been taught the front stage social roles that many academics desire and expect. Whereas academics expect some level of respect for their positions and/or titles, students do not show much deference to either. For instance, just because someone has the designation of Doctor attached to the front of his or her name does not impress students much. Being a PhD does not place much front stage pressure to conform to behavioral models including an automatic show of respect for our educational labels. This is a learned indifference that we have some responsibility for by the way.

When educational attire went from suits, shirts and ties for men and dresses for female teachers, this shift in costume signaled a change in the way students were top address educators. The formal attire was a sign that the teachers were playing a formal role. It stated that we are dressed this way to signal to you that we are in our official front stage roles and you should be too. Just as a costume change in a play lets the audience knows that the character is in a different mood or role so the shift from formal to informal attire sent a message to the audience – students.

The change to more informal, more relaxed dress how one might away from the classroom backstage type of attire was a clear statement that the roles had shifted. The attempt to forge a less formal and more relaxed atmosphere worked. Perhaps too well because it also took away the pressures to perform in socially prescribed front stage roles and behaviors. That carried over to higher education in which the dress can be even more backstage than in K-12. Over time, the informal roles helped erase the academic lines between front and back stage roles. As a result, many of their communications with faculty and others on a campus are backstage behaviors which are similar to those they might use with friends. The college personnel might be using more front stage communication modes so there will inevitably be a clash which will be interpreted by the college member as a lack of respect when it is a lack of communication alignment.

If one realizes that what is occurring is a clash of front stage backstage expectations. It may become easier to deal with the clash. If one can understand the clash of communicating modes not as a statement of disrespect but what it really is - the variance in communication styles between generations. It should also be easier to predict the clash and it is hoped, not be taken aback by it nor simply believe the student is not being respectful and not deserving of one’s attention and help.

How to Cope and Overcome Irritated and Irritating Students

1. Smiling but do not overdo it. There are psychological and physical values to smiling at an irritated student. (Actually we should smile at everyone and even when there is no one there.) Smiling affects mirror neurons in the limbic system which is in the most primitive part of the brain. This is where the fight or flight response takes place. To keep it simple, when we smile, we tell another person that we do not plan to attack. The smile also turns mirror neurons on in the other person. They reflect the smile within the person to affect emotions that start to tell the person to relax and feel happier.

However when one person is angry and the other smiles too strongly, that can possibly trigger a negative response. An emotional reflection that “this other person is too happy while I am angry. Is that smile mocking me?” A fun if overdone example of this can be seen in a sequence from the movie Planes, Trains and Automobiles. Steve Martin has been dropped off by a car rental company at a car that is not there. He has to walk back to the counter through snow, slush and moving airplanes. When he gets there, the receptionist is on the phone having an inane Thanksgiving dinner planning session with someone. The combination of the no car and then her breaking most every customer service rule by making Steve Martin wait while she giggles on inflames him. When she finally gets off the phone, she turns to martin with an exaggerated, phony smile on her face. She asks the usual but wrong question” Welcome to Marathon, May I help you?’ His response “You can start by wiping that f’---ing dumb ass smile off your f---ing rosy cheeks”.

A too energetic and/or faked smile will be like the proverbial red flag in front of an angry bull. It’ll just make the student charge. A smile is correct and called for but it needs to be an empathetic one. A simple, small smile that says “I see you’re upset and I WILL try to help.” The smile you would use with one of your children with a problem. Students are someone’s children and will respond to this smile.

2. Give and Name- Get a Name This is a technique that asks you to do exactly what it says. You provide an irritated student your name and ask her his or hers. “Hi. I’m ________. And you are?” When you exchange names you create a small community of people who know one another. That makes it less likely the irritation will be brought into the discussion. Remember, the student is not irritated at you but the institution. The anonymous amorphous “COLLEGE”. It is also harder for a student to be angry at someone her or she knows by name.

3. Apologize This is a lesson that we learned from people like Captain Kangaroo on TV as discussed in much greater length in the chapter “How To’s: Good Morning Captain” in The Power of Retention. Captain Kangaroo taught us to use manners and be polite. One of the things we could learn is how to simply say “I’m sorry”. If for example, he thought Bunny Rabbit had played yet another trick but he was wrong, he would simply say “I’m sorry I thought it was you Bunny Rabbit. I was wrong.”

A simple statement of apology to a student can go a long way even if you are not at fault. Even if you had nothing to do with the situation. Often what the student is looking for is to have someone recognize that he or she is upset and may not be to blame. To hear someone accept the situation with a simple apology rather than turfing him to the next office can work wonders.

The apology does not have to be an acceptance of error or wrong either. Greeting an irritated student with “I see you are upset. I’m sorry for whatever caused it. How may I help you?” Or “Gee, I’m sorry something has caused you to be upset…” or “I’m sorry if it’s something someone at the school did to get you upset….”

The irritated student will not be expecting someone to accept any level of possible accountability. By saying sorry, you sort of accept some accountability not for you but for the student’s being upset. You are not admitting guilt or a wrong has been committed if you say “sorry you have been made so upset”. But you will be recognizing the student is emotionally stressed and the apology will start to lower the stress levels and in turn the resultant anger.

Sometimes the student’s response will surprise you. It may range from “well thanks, but you didn’t do it” to “about d—n time someone realized I was upset. Than you.”

4. Compliments This might strike you as the most odd thing you’ve read but believe me it works. When a student is approaching you, your desk or window in an irritated state one thing you want to do is to interrupt the flow of adrenalin flowing through the body that reinforces the anger. The adrenalin affects the limbic system’s fight or flight decision. The hormone pushes blood into the muscles to prepare for a fight or flight. The next set of signals the limbic system receives will determine the decision.

So the objective is to interrupt and lower the stress level and thus the adrenalin flow. What can cause that to happen most readily is to introduce a pleasurable event into the situation. A simple pleasure? Receiving a compliment!

Yes it may seem contrived or phony but so what? You will need not to encounter angry students or your own adrenalin level increases, providing stress that makes your heart pump faster. Blood pressure rises. Other hormones like cortisol are released adding physical and psychological stress that can and will cause physical weakening and make you more susceptible to illness and other health problems. So if you need to give a fallacious compliment to keep you and the student healthier, do it.

Here’s an example. “Hi, I’m _____ Just want to say that I like your tee shirt, blouse, hair, glasses, jeans, backpack...” whatever seems to strike your eye quickly. Say it casually too so it will sound less contrived. Then as the student’s anger is interrupted you can even follow it up with a normal secondary question such as “Where did you get the tee, blouse, glasses….”

The student will most often just tell you where the tee was bought or even stop and think about it. This absolutely interrupts the flow of stress and anger and opens up a much more comfortable and congenial path for you to then ask how you may help.

These four techniques are tried and true. Try them and you might just feel that this job is worth the short hours and high pay.

If this makes sense to you, get the full book The Power of Retention by Dr. Neal Raisman from which part of this article is drawn.

Looking for a speaker for you school, contact Dr. Raisman today at

nealr@GreatServiceMatters.com or 413.219.6939.

The Hierarchy of Student Decision Making in Choosing and Staying at a College

Over the past two years, we have been interviewing and speaking with students students to listen and better understand what motivates them to make their decisions to choose a school or leave it.

There is much we learned from the 818 students we interviewed and spoke with. One of the things we came to understand is that there is a hierarchy of student need that guides a great deal of their decision-making in choosing a school, then deciding to stay or leave. This hierarchy takes the form of five questions they consider when looking at a college or consider leaving one.

1. Can I get in?
2. Can I afford it?
3. Can I graduate?
4. Can I get a job? (or get into a good grad school)
5. Will I enjoy it?
   

In some ways the questions parallel the organization of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Need. They proceed from Primary Concerns, basic issues of necessity and immediacy, to practical considerations of Return On Investment to finally a Personal consideration.  But, the question of a satisfying experience is the last issue for consideration by students after all others have been sarisfied. This placement suggests a parallel to Maslow’s self-actualization. It can only be an issue after the very practical survival issues are addressed. Yes, the initial reaction and desire to attend a specific college is there but it is a first response to a school which is over-ridden in most all cases by the hierarchy of student decision to attend or stay.


The most obvious initial basic concern is getting in to the college. Potential students first decided if the school is one they will be accepted into. This even applies even if one of the ones they apply to is a "stretch school", one in which their acceptance is not assured. They know if they can't get into the school, there is no reason to consider other issues in the hierarchy.

Next they stay with basic concerns and decide if they can afford the school. Granted some miscalculate out of their initial enthusiasm for the college, but if students can not answer the question of "Can I afford the school?" positively they will not go further in the application process or will drop out when the answer to the question become a no.. 

Then they face the practical question of "Can I graduate" from this school. Students generally all believe they will do well and graduate but if they think that the school is too much of an intellectual stretch, they will pass on it for or drop out due to a fear that they will not make it through to graduation. 

This is followed by another practical question that deals with can I get a job if I do graduate from this school? If a student does not believe he or she will be able to get a job after graduation in the chosen major (except for some majors such as theater arts where there is a recognition going in that a job is not necessarily there at graduation) they will not go to that school or drop out from it. All students attend a school to complete the program, get the degree and get a job.

It is only after the basic and practical considerations are answered that a student proceeds to the more personal issue of "Will I like going to this school?" It is quite usual that after the practical needs are answered, students can convince themselves, at least initially, that they will "love" the college or at least have a good time. But if this final concern is not a positive on or in the case of a student who is already attending who finds he is not enjoying school, he will not go or drop out in most cases.  But if the preceding hierarchical questions are all positive, I can get in, I can afford it, I can graduate and I can get a job, they are often strong enough to keep a student in school even if the experience is not what he had hoped for. This is especially so in a "brand name", top tier school with a record of getting employment by its graduates.

This issue translates itself once a student in is in the school and all other issues are resolved. It becomes "Do I like it here? And most importantly "Do they care about me?" as we have seen in the results of the study of why students leave a school.

Keep in mind that initially the students come to the school because they have made an engagement with it similar to when a couple gets engaged once they have answered the basic and practical issues positively. The students have decided in advance (for the most of them) that they will "love" the school. Therefore, they will enjoy their stay. But that decision is one we can either support or defeat with the way we treat the students and the service we do or do not provide. We are the ones who can reinforce or break the engagement.

So what does this hierarchy tell us. It says that students have a very practical view toward their college experience. They are going to school to "get a job" after all and that is a very practical matter. And so customer service needs to focus on their concerns and how they see college. They see it, as we already know from the UCLA Freshman Attitudes study, the CIRP, as a means to an end. For students, that end is quite practical. A job. It also says that when we focus too much on trying to make students enjoy their experience, we are not serving them as well as we could. 

Yes, they wish to enjoy their time at college but they cannot do that until we serve their other more pressing concerns – paying for it, getting what they need to graduate and finally, an assurance they can get a job or get into a good grad school on the way to a career from their college experience.


If this is helpful to you, please consider having NRaisman & Associates help you reverse the student and revenue loss from students dropping out. We are the leaders in increasing retention through graduation through our workshops,training, presentations and full campus audit of academic customer service.and other retention strategies. We guarantee results.

           Contact us today at nealr@GreatServiceMatters.com    or  call 413.219.6939

Get a copy of the bestselling book The Power of Retention by Dr. Neal Raisman and find out how you can increase service excellence on your campus. Just click here.