CMED 2015 Benchmarking

& Industry Trends Survey

2015

2015 Team

Debra Kennedy Director, Executive Education McCallum Graduate School of Business Waltham, Massachusetts

Tania Xerri Director, Health Leadership and Learning Network York University Toronto, Ontario

Calvin Tong Director, Professional Development Carleton University Ottawa, ON

2

Recognizing the contribution of past CMED member Jennifer Madden, Fashion Institute of Technology,

and current CMED member and Board member Tracey Maurer, University of Vermont

Benchmarking Study

Why is this valuable to you?

• Provides solid trends across a wide range of University Executive and Continuing Education locations that is not available elsewhere

• Use the data to shape appropriate strategy for your operation

• Use results for building a case for resource needs

• Valuable in communicating with Deans and executives about the industry, and cross-walking the data to your unit

• Data captures a cross section of the industry from the smallest units to the largest

POPULATION

4

Survey Participants:

Where in the World?

3%

21%

6%

70%

Location

Asia &Australia

Canada

Europe

UnitedStates

23%

8%

30%

26%

13%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Regional Locations for US Institutions Western (WASC-ACSCU)CA, HI, GU, AS, MP, FM,MH, PW

Southern (SACS)AL, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS,NC, SC, TN, TX, VA

North Central (NCA-HLC)AZ, AR, CO, IL, IN, IA, KS,MI, MN, MO, NE, NM, ND,OH, OK, SD, WV, WI, WY

New England (NEASC-CIHE)CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT

Middle States (MSCHE)DE, DC, MD, NJ, NY, PA,PR, VI

Western

Southern

North Central

New England

Middle States

Institutional Profiles

11%

32% 13%

12%

32%

< 100,000

100,000 - 500,000

500,000 - 1MM

1 - 2.5 MM

> 2.5 MM

Metro Area Population

59%

38%

3%

Public

Private…

Private…

Institution Type

49%

43%

8%

Management, Economics, orBusiness School

Continuing Education,Extended Education,Continuing Studies or…

Other (please specify)

Unit Type

CE

EE

6%

1%

3%

90%

We do not offer degrees

Associates degree orequivalent

Bachelor's degree orequivalent

Master's or Doctoraldegree or equivalent

Highest Degree Awarded

Roles of Benchmark Study Participants

Coordinator Marketing/Program/Operations

Operations Manager/Director

Program Manager/Director

Marketing Manager/Director

Asst./Assoc. Director

Director-Executive Director

Dean

1%

4%

14%

7%

18%

35%

21%

Main program Audience

29%

81%

61%

38%

Entry Level

Mid Level Management

Upper Level Management

Executive Level

FINANCIAL MODELS

10

Department’s Contribution to the

University

11

64%

14%

9%

3%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

We must make enough money to pay for allof our direct expenses, indirect department

expenses and contribute or pay a tax to…

We must make enough money to pay for allof our direct expenses, indirect department

expenses and that is all.

We must make enough money to pay for allof our direct expenses.

If we make enough money to cover some ofour expenses, we are doing well.

We are not required to cover any of ourexpenses.

* “Other” Represents 6% of responses.

Does your department/unit contribute to school

and/or university indirect expenses?

12

Yes 63%

No 23%

Not Sure 14%

How is the Contribution

Determined?

Executive Education

- Most share a percentage of their net revenue (or sometimes expenses) with the school

- Percentage varies, generally set annually with dean based on performance

- Based on yearly goals

- Many centers do not cover the staff’s salaries directly, but they have to share all the profits with the school, after their direct expenses are covered

Continuing Education and Other Centers Types

- Most Continuing Education Centers have to pay a “university tax” or other type of contribution towards indirect administrative and operating cost.

- Additionally, a few share a percentage of net revenue, with the school

13

Has the Financial Model Changed?

14

Yes 24%

No 72%

Not Sure 4%

How Has the Financial Model

Changed? • Went from a profit center to a cost center. All expenses and profits

go to the college

• Shift in programs and pricing

• Larger central university tax rate

• Moving from a fixed contribution to a percentage contribution

• Overhead and rent charges have dramatically increased

• Paying university on activity based costing

• Have set up a wholly owned incorporated subsidiary of the university

15

Have Dedicated Staff to Perform

Sales Activities

16

33% of centers have dedicates sales staff! Higher revenue (3MM+) tend to have more dedicated sales staff

33%

36%

30%

1% Completely describesmy department

Somewhat describesmy department

Does not describe mydepartment

Don't know/not sure

MARKETING

17

0% 20% 40% 60%

Dedicated marketing person

Hire outside experts

Do some of it ourselves

Do it all ourselves

Support from school/university

2013

2014

2015

How are marketing responsibilities

handled for your programs?

18 Largest change to date – increase in dedicated marketing staff (2012 was 31%)

What is the amount of your

marketing budget?

0 5 10 15

zero

$1-10K

+10 - 30K

+30 - 60K

+60 - 100K

+100 - 200K

+200K-1Mil

+1Mil - 10Mil

# Responses

19

Average $ 500,000

Minimum $ 10,000

Maximum $ 9,000,000

US $

How is your marketing budge determined?

20

16.8

8.4

46.7

11.2

16.8

% Responses

Flat dollar amount

% of projected revenue

Other

Don’t know % of prior year revenue

Other: Program % or revenue, depends on the program, marketing divides it up, task based, we don't have a marketing budget, opportunistic, piggy back on what other areas are doing, we fund a good opportunity with no budget amount, based on needs, ad hoc - no set amount, allocated by sr. management

What % of gross revenue is

your marketing budget?

77

9

9 5

% Responses

1-10%

12%

15%

25%

% of Gross Revenue

21

How has the Marketing Budget

Changed?

22

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

54% more 20% same

48% more

32% more

47% more

56% more

22% same

51% same

33% same

37% same

70%

83%

80%

93%

Spend more or the same

73%

How has the Marketing Budget

Changed?

23

30%

17%

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011 30%

17%

20%

7%

SPEND LESS

20%

Don't know

Does not describe

Somewhat describes

Completely describes

Have and use a CRM System

24

2%

37%

30%

31% 61% have CRM

0 20 40 60 80

SalesForce

Intelliworks / Hobsons

Microsoft Dynamics

Ellucian / Banner

Have and use a CRM System

25

Very Satisfied Satisfied Neither Dissatisfied VeryDissatisfied

Satisfaction with current CRM system

10%

40% 23% 27%

Recruitment

Sales

Process / ProjectManagement

Main purpose of CRM system

58%

55%

38%

Marketing Mix: Tactics

Least important Print ads Purchased lists for email Collateral Information sessions Presence at industry events

Most important Website Corporate outreach SEO (optimization) SEM (search

marketing) Google Adwords Targeted Online Ads Comments: E-mail

marketing to existing pipeline: current or former students/clients as well as cultivation of inquiries.

Important (but not understood) Social media paid

advertising Social media activity

and content generation

Marketing: Most Effective Vehicles and Offers V

eh

icle

s

Corporate Outreach

• Direct B2B Corporate Calling Effort • Partnership with company on series of programs • Government training programs • Info sessions and presence at annual meetings of target groups

Targeted Digital

• LinkedIn Ads • Careful segmentation • Google Adword campaigns and SEO

Email

• Organic lists and past clients • Alumni databases • Associations • Primarily for open enrollment

Nurture Existing

• Personal email campaigns • Targeted email/newsletter campaigns • Calls and outreach

Off

ers

Events

• Breakfast with featured speaker • Lunch and Learns • Invitation only events to senior leaders • Information sessions

Discounts

• Early bird, special offer following event, corporate sponsorship

Regularly analyze effectiveness of marketing efforts

32

47

21 20

55 56

16

56

25 22

47

31

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Does not describe Somewhat Describes Completely describes

2012 2013 2014 2015

Social Media: What and How?

Measurement: • Emergent ( = not

sophisticated!) • Web Analytics (Google,

landing pages, unique URLs) • Social Media Metrics (from

within platform) • Anecdotes (feedback from

prospects and staff)

Yes 92%

No 8%

Use social media for marketing

purposes?

2015

7%

42%

22%

73%

94%

81%

0% 50% 100%

Pinterest

Youtube

Google+

Twitter

Linkedin

Facebook

14%

47%

30%

8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Critical Part of

Relatively New Initiative

Established presence

Basic presence

Implementing Lessons Learned for

Effective Use of Social Media for Marketing

• Create a Strategy

• Identify target audiences and platforms used by those targets

• Know what you want to gain from social media efforts • Brand awareness v. engagement v. lead generation are very different

• Prepare to Implement

• Build a publication calendar

• Allocate appropriate resources (financial and staffing time)

• Consider how to set and measure goals and impact

• Manage

• Continuous crafting and posting of relevant content

• Be adaptable and ready to change direction and approach

PROGRAM/INSTRUCTION

31

The Strategic Landscape

Competition

Shifting Program Interests

Visibility and Contribution

• Institutional Importance & Financial Contribution + Expenses - Continued increase

• Contract engagements - Continued Increase

• Open enrolment - Increased

Competition • From Internal & Higher Education –

Remained the same • From Professional

Development/Consultants – Continued increase

Demand • Credit-bearing, Hybrid,

Multiple Course/Certificates - Continued increase

• Online, and resume building – Remained the same

Number Open Enrollment Days per Year

4%

8%

38%

11%

11%

6%

13%

6%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Don't Know

None

1-49 Days

50-99 Days

100-149 Days

150-199 Days

200-299 Days

300-999 Days

1000 + Days

% of Responses

Number Custom Days per Year

4%

2%

33%

26%

15%

4%

9%

6%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Don't Know

None

1-49 Days

50-99 Days

100-149 Days

150-199 Days

200-299 Days

300-999 Days

1000 + Days

% of Responses

About the Faculty Bench…

39%

21%

40%

Faculty Pool Tenured Faculty

Non-tenured orAdjunct

Externalconsultants

63% 6%

15%

8%

8%

Instructors per Year

0-49

50-99

100-199

200-399

400 plus

How much do we Pay Faculty?

12

4

13

7

19

10

5

17

7

15

8

14

7

6

17

6

20

8

7

6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Less than $100

$100 - $149

$150 - $199

$200 - $299

$300 - $399

$400+

Don't Know/NA

Tenured Faculty Non-Tenured and Adjunct

External Consultants

What is in your Program Portfolio?

Non Credit Programs Offered Response

Rate

Leadership and Management 96%

Business 76%

Communications 58%

Project Management 58%

Finance and Accounting 61%

Business Process / Analysis 47%

Human Resources 40%

Information Technology 30%

What is in your Program Portfolio? Other Non Credit Programs Offered

Health Care, Languages, Paralegal,

Sales and Marketing, Social Media, Supply Chain,

Innovation, Operations, Arts, Humanities, Languages,

Governance, Hospitality, Culinary Sales,

Music, Coaching Safety, Accident Investigation,

Criminal Justice/Criminal and Judicial, Viticulture,

Social Innovation, Philanthropy, Cybersecurity

Do you have the right Program Mix? Represented in Portfolio

Most Successful (ranked by response)

Least Successful

Leadership & Mgmt. Business Communications Project Mgmt. Finance and Accounting Business Process Human Resources Information Technology

Leadership – 33% Project Mgmt. – 16% Business – 11% Management – 9% Finance, Sales & Marketing, Business Process, Paralegal/Legal – 3% Other areas represent 28% of responses

Leadership – 8% Finance – 8% Web Tech – 8% Logistics – 6% Communications – 6% Program Format – 8% Too new to tell – 6% Other areas represent 50% of responses

Most successful “Other” noted: Non-profit studies Supply Chain Certificate programs Custom programs emotional intelligence Engineering and technology Innovation safety Music Non-profit studies Communications philanthropy, healthcare

Least Successful “Other” includes: Managing teams, Law, Marketing, Finance, Human resources, grant writing, Public Service, Humanities, Environmental Health and Safety, Culinary arts

Course Development Compensation

5

42

30

20

3

60

29

9

3

7

44

30

19

"canned"courseware

pay a fee fordevelopment

instructional feeincludes

development

We don't paycourse

development

Other

Open Courses

Custom Courses

Online Courses

% of Responses

How much do you pay for Course

Development? Hourly Rate $40 $250

Flat Fee per Course $600 $7,000

Daily Rate $750 $3,000

Hourly Rate $40 $333

Flat Fee per Course $800 $3,000

Daily Rate $500 $2,000

Hourly Rate $50 $200

Flat Fee per Course $600 $10,000

Online

Custom

Who Owns the Intellectual Property?

24

49

4

3

10

10

% Responses You own it

Instructors own it

You own it andinstructors have firstright of refusal

Shared ownershiplimited license

Shared ownershipunlimited license

IP Ownership

Don’t Know

REVENUE

43

Business Performance in

Most Recent FY

44

2015

3%

11%

19%

41%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Grew Significantly

Grew Somewhat

Flat

Declined Somewhat

Declined Significantly

Contributing Factors to

Business Performance

45

18%

15%

18%

14%

9%

8%

19%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Economy

Growth in Custom

Additional Opens

B2B Outreach

Leadership Change

Change in Marketing

Other

NET Profit Margin

What is your Organizations NET Profit Margin from the most recent fiscal year

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

80-100%

70-79%

60-69%

40-49%

30-39%

20-29%

10-19%

1-9%

% Reponses

46 NET profit margin = gross revenue less direct and indirect expenses divided by gross revenue

Most survey respondents between

1-3 Million

47

Average $ 5,333,241

Minimum $ 10,000

Maximum $ 130,000,000

2015 Survey

24%

6%

29%

19%

6%

17%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Gross Revenue per FTEs 2015

48

$121,228

$232,768

$320,279 $418,178

$589,733 430,274

4.9 7 16 22 66 FTES 2.5

Gross Revenue per FTEs 2014

49

$132,751

$216,667

$280,437 $302,189

$432,943 $468,208

3.3 8.1 16 20 40 FTES 2.8

Number of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)

51

Under 3 Million Dollars 3 to 10 Million Dollars

-

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

120,000,000

140,000,000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Revenues $10Million and Above

-

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

0 5 10 15 20

Series1

-

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

10,000,000

0 20 40 60 80

Series1

2015

Compensation to

Sales/Business

Development Staff

74

15

12

0 20 40 60 80

Salary only

Salary plus bonus orcommission

Don't know/not sure

% Responses

52

Average Response for

% of Gross Revenue from Face-to-Face, Online or Blended Programs

53

Face to Face 77%

Online, 17%

Blended programs,

11%

2015

Average Responses for

% of Gross Revenue from Open Enrollment, Contract or Conferences

54

Open enrollment,

55% Contract training,

41%

Conferences/events/other,

10% 2014

Average Responses for

% Gross Revenue from Open Enrollment, Contract or Conferences

55

Open Enrollment

51% Contract Training,

47%

Conferences Events Other,

2% 2015

Average Responses for Percentage of Gross

Revenue from Credit vs. Non Credit-Bearing Programs

56

Credit-bearing

programs. 28%

Non-credit

bearing programs,

72%

Other sources,

1%

2015 28/72

2014 19/84

2013 33/74

2012 20/80

Average Responses for the

% Gross Revenue from New and Existing Customers

57

Returning Customers

56%

2015

2014 42/58

2013 43/58

2012 42/56

New Customers 44%

Average Responses for %

of Gross Revenue By Participants’ Location

58

INTERNATIONAL AUDIENCES

NATIONAL AUDIENCES

LOCAL/REGIONAL AUDIENCES

15%

22%

67%

59

Questions? Comments?

We are happy to help you!