There are several problems with this approach, but of utmost importance is the nature of the fundamental entity. While the school may benefit from being affiliated with an entity that manages the co-location, it is probably not in the school's best interest to lead the effort. If this is true, the best way for the school to participate may be as an 'anchor tenant' in the effort, in which case there would be another entity in the leading role.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
My project will be to come up with a marketing plan for a local non-profit school (name kept private) that is trying to solve an enrollment vs capacity/location problem. In short, the school needs more students to be economically viable, but is constrained by the capacity of the building in which it currently resides. The school's mission has always been to integrate the children in the community and is considering solving it's capacity problem by co-locating the school with other entities in the child development and cultural growth spaces.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To be clear, this is actually a marketing problem in the sense that they are trying to solve an operations problem with a marketing solution.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the FE, I guess one of the considerations may be what the school may want itself to be 'associated' with (thinking association maps from branding). That may not only help decide which locations to co-locate at but also what it wants to market itself as (indenpendent or joint). There can be pros and cons in each approach. Or it may come just down to how many "bodies" you may be able to reach with each approach, keeping in mind the end goal of maximum enrollments. Just a few thoughts...
ReplyDeleteWhat is the schools core competence? It might be important to keep that in mind while deciding whom to partner with, and if they are aligned in skills (or can use each others skills, knowing what they can benefit from in partnership) or aligned in their missions.
ReplyDelete