Parking - Losing More Enrollment in C-Lot 2of3

Losing Enrollment in C-Lot
part 2 of 3 (Full article is at University Business)
for Part 1 click here

We did the find the place, which was set off with a weather-beaten wooden sign and painted letters that had once been bright-white but were now faded and hard-to-read against a brown background. It was like a neglected drive-in movie sign from years ago.

We drove up the entry road and looked for posted signs telling us where visitors could park. We didn't find any. There were numerous signs like "A Lot--Faculty and Staff only--Sticker required--Tow Zone" and "B Lot--Faculty and Staff only--Sticker required-- Tow Zone". And my favorite "D Lot-- Parking for Senior Administrators ONLY-- Sticker required-- Tow Zone". It's nice that they helped out the elderly administrators. AARP would be really proud. This was particularly considerate since this small lot was right beside the main administration building where I supposed most of the senior administrators worked. Though there was not a noticeable wheel chair ramp, though, for those who might need one. This building also was where the Welcome Center for potential students was located.

We finally did what I suppose many visiting students do at the college--we asked another student where we could park. We were told there was a student and visitor lot just a little ways down the road. Oddly enough, it was a huge lot that was rather filled up so it was hard to find a spot to park at 9:10 in the morning. There were six marked visitor spots but they were filled already by what I supposed were students just visiting a class or two since these cars had active parking stickers.

We then hiked in from Lot C, which oddly enough was the one furthest away from the campus entrance. A, B. and D were closest to the buildings. I suppose Lot C was placed furthest away to encourage good health and exercise habits for the students. But then, why were the employee lots so close to the buildings? I would have thought that they would be further out to encourage walking for health for these those on the payroll. After all mounting medical insurance costs might be lowered if they were healthier.

I later learned that health, physical health, was not the issue. Political health was. The college's leadership did not want to take on the faculty and staff over parking. As we all know parking closest to the building is a God-given faculty and administrative right even if one is an atheist, or a student paying thousands of dollars for tuition and fees, and another thousand for books and supplies.

This upset me. Not that I had to walk, but that I had to walk because I might be a student.

Granted, in our society walking is considered work. And most people would be happiest if their office was a sort of a garage so they could drive right up to their desk and never have their walking or running shoes touch the ground for more than a step or two. That includes students.

Parking - Losing Enrollments in C -Lot- 1of3

Losing Enrollment in C-Lot
part 1 of 3 (Full article is at University Business)

Maybe I shouldn't be writing now. I have always been told not to go food shopping when I am hungry, or swim right after eating, or take action when upset. I am upset. But then is writing really action? Just for my fingers I think. So I will let my fingers do the squawking and write this while distraught. Besides, I don't want to lose the immediacy of the moment.

I was at a school to conduct a customer service audit. The school was losing enrollment and population was dropping. Sure, they planned on a 32 percent attrition rate in the budget. I think that a 68 is a D+. Passing but not by much.

And when translated into dollars and jobs, it seemed they were actually planning for failure. Easy to hit that goal-- a goal to fail, that is. Maybe failing to budget but failing nonetheless. So I was hired to come on campus with my team to find out why this college was failing so badly.

When doing an audit, my team studies every service and marketing aspect of a school. We act as would potential students and see what it feels like to attend the institution. So we do everything a student would do when coming on campus for the first time. Then once we're "in" we check out, explore, and measure every aspect of the service at the place except one--teaching. That's the one area that is most important, the central customer service finally, but almost always not open for review. I wonder why schools would not want potential students to preview or try out a primary aspect of their purchase? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

This particular college is primarily a commuting college with very little public transportation access. So, almost everyone drives his or her car to come to the campus. We started out in our rental car to find the place. Turns out, that was a real chore. The directions on the website were not clear. They included the usual false assurance that, "Oh, you know the way.-You'll find it." There was no indication of the correct exit off the highway or the correct road that leads to the college. There were no clear directional signs pointing the way once we did figure out what exit we should have taken.

Students cannot get to a school if they cannot find the way! Keep in mind that many students are quite tentative about college and are actually seeking reasons not to come. The surest way to be sure a student doesn't come is to keep them from getting there. "Uhhh Mom, I tried to go and register but I couldn't find the place. I drove around and around and finally saud the hell with it."

Try driving the route yourself as if you do not know where the school is. Just use signs along the way. Can you do it? Didn't think so. Just like the first time you tried to find your way for that job interview. Recall the anxiety? The angst? The distress? Potential students don't need any additional stress.

Make it easy for them to find their way to the school.

By the way if you wish to learn more about a campus customer service audit, just let me know. nealr@greatservicematters.com

Web Sites, Signs, Objective Correlatives Hurt Enrollment

Let’s take one of the first correlatives students see – the web site. Most school websites are, well since it is the holiday season I’ll say they are not as good as they can be in working as objective correlatives for students. Why? Because they were created by people who believe in words and in linear realities. Not metaphoric leaps based on correlating objects and images.

We create webs as if they were documents, packed with words and minimal graphics or pictures. We even include entire catalogues on web sites as if anyone would want to read them online. Students hate catalogues and their page after page of, you guessed it, words we believe are important. They don’t nor do they believe catalogues are helpful or speak to them. That’s why catalogue personalization programs such as Leadwise are being adapted by schools. They speak to each student’s personal world and provide graphics and photos students can identify with.

Just look at where students go to on the web-YouTube, Facebook, Shoutwire - and you’ll see few words and almost all visuals. Moreover, the pages are packed with small boxes and thumbnails of choices to click on and download. We may have some trouble with this visual overload. They do not. Nor do they have trouble with the crawls at the bottom of screens during TV shows that can drive us nuts. Not them.

And the web is one of the first contacts with a school. Thus it is a very strong objective correlative. It has the power of the law of primacy – that which is first encountered is first and most powerfully to come to mind. And what most college websites do is create a picture of a school as very “old school.” Not good.

Another powerful, primary objective correlative that is almost universally overlooked is the signage, a fancy way of saying signs. When a potential student first comes to a school or campus, the first material object they see are the signs used to direct them, to inform and to welcome them. If the signs are unattractive, too small or not quickly and easily informative, they generate a negative metaphor for the school’s concern for people.

When we do a college service audit, we find that schools usually don’t even have adequate or enough signs to guide people to locations. It is sort of like a test to see if you can find your way around to qualify for going there. After all, we who live at the school now got lost at first because there were no signs for us and we found our way around. If we could do it, new students can too. Dumb belief.

The lack of signs, uninformative signs, outdated signs and so on, create a very powerful correlative to how much the school cares about helping and assisting. So much so that we have found poor signage such a very dominant force in forming early metaphors that we would rank poor signs as a major negative factor leading to lost enrollment. We have found that if students can’t find their way around with signs, they often just trace their way back to their car and leave. Remember that as posted earlier, as much as 12% of enrollment is lost when students make actual contact with a school.

These are just a few examples of the objective correlative in customer service leading to loses in enrollment and retention. It is a topic we will come back to in later postings.