Yield Programs

Whether good or bad, rumors can have a big effect on a college. Stories about your institution’s positive results can send its stock soaring with students and parents. Negative gossip can hinder yield programs and enrollment.
 
Rumors don’t have to be true to have impact. According to eminent social psychologist Elliot Aronson, PhD and colleague Anthony Pratkanis, PhD, in the 1980s the “Leaflet of Villejuif” began circulating in France. This plain typewritten pamphlet exhorted parents to boycott popular soft drink brands like Coca-Cola, Schweppes and Canada Dry, charging they contained dangerous chemicals that could harm children.
 
The power of rumor and innuendo
 
A survey of 150 French housewives found that 19% had stopped buying the brands mentioned. Another 69% said they intended to support the boycott. Elementary school teachers and physicians were surveyed; half of the doctors and nearly all the teachers agreed with the leaflet’s statements. Fewer than 10% of these educated professionals bothered to check the truthfulness of its claims. That’s sad, because virtually all of them were false. E330, the food additive claimed to be highly carcinogenic, was actually the European Union’s code for harmless citric acid, found in oranges and grapefruit.
 
Mark Twain wrote, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” It can do a great deal of damage along the way. Because we hear rumors from people we know or learn about them through trusted media sources many don’t bother to check their validity. But they can have a big impact on reputations, applications and yield.
 
One study asked participants to rate political candidates after reading fabricated headlines. Some contained a direct accusation (“Bob Talbert Linked with Mafia”), a damning question (“Is Karen Downing Associated with a Fraudulent Charity?”), a denial of impropriety (“Andrew Winters Not Connected to Bank Embezzlement”) or a completely neutral statement (“George Armstrong Arrives in City”). Aronson and Pratkanis relate:

The results showed, not surprisingly, that candidates linked with a directly incriminating headline were perceived more negatively.  Strikingly, however, merely questioning whether a candidate had performed an undesirable behavior also resulted in negative perceptions of the candidate – just slightly more positive than those evoked by a direct incrimination…The source of the innuendo made little difference. The candidates were still rated negatively even if the source of the headline was a newspaper lacking in credibility (the National Enquirer or the Midnight Globe as opposed to the New York Times or the Washington Post).

 What can you do about rumors?
 
According to marketing professor Allan Kimmel, one key to rumor control is: “Talk!...For the most part, a refusal to talk, whether it be to journalists, [students and parents]…or other concerned parties conveys the message that the [institution] has something to hide and adds to uncertainty, or sometimes merely serves to confirm the fears underlying the requests for information.”
 
But, “In order to stand a chance of succeeding," say Drs. Aronson and Pratkanis, “such refutations should not overstate the case, should embed the rumor in a negative context (or damn it, refute it, then damn it again and replace it), and should not repeat verbatim particularly memorable rumors.” Quick action by high-ranking college officials can limit the damage false factoids may cause. Institutions with established records of integrity and community service will find it easier to protect or restore their reputations.

The Allied Group is an innovative, award-winning marketing communications company offering Search, Conversion, Stealth and Yield programs as well as full-service fulfillment to colleges and universities.
 

The Boston Globe reported last Wednesday that  a federal judge blocked the new FDA requirement that tobacco companies put graphic images on cigarette packaging. The article outlined the judge's ruling that requiring the images, which include "a sewn-up corpse of a smoker and a picture of diseased lungs, on cigarette packs violates the free speech amendment to the Constitution.”

This raises a serious issue, presenting all, including educators, with a dilemma. On the one hand, evidence that smoking kills is overwhelming.  I had to watch it destroy my mother’s favorite uncle. Efforts to help smokers stop and aid teenagers to avoid smoking are commendable. Clearly, we’d all be better off if smokers quit in droves.

Reducing smoking-related illnesses is a worthy goal.  But is it worth eroding the cherished freedom of speech on which all Americans, especially educators, depend? That’s a question for the Supreme Court. Despite the health issues, the specter of government edicts forcing organizations to publicly say negative things about their activities is not a pleasant one. So, we must ask – is the reward worth the risk?  Do graphic, fear-arousing images actually help people quit smoking?

What the research shows

There is no question that graphic images on Canadian and Australian cigarette packs have proven to make smokers think about health hazards and consider quitting. A WHO bulletin stated, “The research on pictorial warnings show that they are: (i) more likely to be noticed than text-only warning labels; (ii) more effective for educating smokers…and for increasing smokers’ thoughts about the health risks; and (iii) associated with increased motivation to quit smoking.”

But motivation doesn’t necessarily translate into action. Consider how noted social psychologist and textbook author Dr. David Myers summed up the research: “Many people who have been made to fear an early death from smoking continue to smoke. When the fear pertains to a pleasurable activity, notes Elliot Aronson (1997), the result is often not behavioral change but denial.”

In fact, the eminent Dr. Aronson states that studies show smokers who’ve tried to stop and failed are the group most likely to deny or minimize the hazards of smoking. They rationalize it away. Aronson and his coauthors cite research showing ways that frightening pictures can actually reduce smoking. Smokers shown graphic images of lung cancer and then given a pamphlet outlining ways to quit lowered their daily cigarettes by 77% (from 69 to 26). Those who saw disturbing photos without specific instructions smoked less for a time, but soon returned to smoking nearly as much as they had before (64 daily cigarettes merely dropped to 54). 

But even the group who substantially reduced their cigarette intake continued to smoke during the three month study. I could locate no data showing that graphic images on cigarette packaging really helps people quit. In fact, a Prevention First report states that fear tactics are ineffective in deterring young people from smoking. Is it worth eroding freedom of speech for a smoking cessation strategy not proven to help substantial numbers to stop? 

An alternative

Influence expert Robert Cialdini, PhD told me in personal correspondence that one way to reduce negative behavior is to link it to a disliked or disrespected outgroup. Nicotine is a highly addictive drug. Perhaps we need ads comparing tobacco companies to drug cartels and cigarette dealers to those who sell dangerous drugs in neighborhoods and schools. That exercise of free speech might get results!

The Allied Group offers innovative marketing communications strategies, Search, Stealth and Yield programs, marketing support and full service fulfillment.
 

Many were shocked and saddened by the sudden, unexpected demise of singer Whitney Houston. Most wonder about the cause of death. While answers will undoubtedly come from the toxicology report, the news media tells of the presence of strong prescription meds in her hotel room. Those at her last impromptu musical performance testify that she had been drinking and appeared under the influence. Some medications combined with alcohol can be deadly, especially for those bathing in a hot tub. The singer takes her place in a long line of talented people whose lives were cut short or ruined by drug and alcohol addiction.

Perhaps Houston’s death can provide the vivid example needed to make changes in the drinking habits of many college students. Admissions officers and college marketers do a great job in helping young people from a variety of backgrounds get an education that can enrich their future. But the unrestrained party atmosphere on some campuses can prove to be a trap leading to alcoholism, squandered opportunities and wasted lives. According to a Center for Science in the Public Interest report:

• Annually some 30,000 college students overdose on alcohol, requiring medical treatment.

• 44% of students attending 4-year colleges engage in binge drinking.

• 19% of college students ages 18–24 met the criteria for alcohol abuse or dependence.

• Every year, 599,000 students from 18-24 are unintentionally injured while intoxicated  More than 696,000 are assaulted by another student who has been drinking.

• 5% of female students reported that they were the victims of sexual assault, 75% of them raped while under the influence of alcohol.

And although a number of institutions have made efforts to curb binge drinking, it is still the norm at campuses across the nation. CSPI further reports, “Low price and very easy access to alcohol are strong correlates of binge drinking.” When discussing ways to get college seniors to attend a campus event, one official observed that offering cheap beer would guarantee a large crowd.

The result

Research shows the habits learned on campus can last a lifetime. The American Journal of Public Health reports that binge drinking rates of college students closely correlate with those of adults living in the same state. “The rate of binge drinking among college students was about 32 percent lower–36 percent compared to 53 percent–in the 10 states with the lowest rates of adult binge drinking compared to the ten states with the highest.”

This could mean that students are imitating behavior they’ve seen at home. But studies also show that many enduring adult attitudes and behaviors were formed in the college years. Regardless of where they learned to drink irresponsibly, many promising young people may well experience the truth of Mark Twain’s statement, exemplified by Lindsay Lohan, Amy Winehouse, Chris Farley and Whitney Houston: “It is easier to stay out than to get out.”

Possible solutions

Colleges already make commendable efforts to stop binge drinking. Can they do more? Raising liquor prices at campus pubs might be a good start. Also, making effective use of social psychology research can increase the impact of student information programs. Renowned communication psychology expert Dr. Robert Cialdini suggested to me in private correspondence that one tactic to lessen the allure of excessive alcohol consumption is to link it to “a disliked or disrespected outgroup.” He wrote, “One way to reduce binge drinking among college students might be to inform them that binging is the norm for high school students.”

The Allied Group is an innovative marketing communications company offering personalized direct marketing, Search, Conversion and Yield programs along with along with full-service fulfillment.
 

“Why Won’t People Listen to Good Ideas?” discussed research showing that those with strongly ingrained views won't mentally process sound evidence presented by the other side. Is there anything we can do to encourage parents, students, colleagues or faculty to consider solid facts we raise?

First, it’s important to understand why many won’t listen. One reason became apparent in a series of studies starting in 1959. Eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson explains that research began in a southern town deeply divided over racial segregation. Most today clearly recognize the evils of apartheid, but in 1959 it was a burning issue, particularly in the South. Researchers selected people with strong feelings for or against segregation. Then they presented a series of arguments on both sides of the issue. Some were plausible, others were lame. A survey on the points each recalled was telling. People remembered the logical arguments supporting their position and the illogical arguments that backed the opposing view.

A number of follow up studies produced similar results. The answer was clear. People ignored or quickly forgot points that might prove their opinion wrong. They focused on the opposition’s lame arguments because these strengthened their position. This phenomenon is called Confirmation Bias. Finding the right answer took a back seat to proving they were right. The highly respected Dr. Aronson explains:

During the past half-century, social psychologists have discovered that one of the most powerful determinants of human behavior stems from our need to preserve a stable, positive self-image. Most of us want to believe that we are reasonable, decent folks who make wise decisions, do not behave immorally and have integrity.

Thus, when confronted with factual information that might show us mistaken or foolish, we automatically tend to ignore or dismiss it, focusing instead on any piece of data that might prove us right.

One study found smokers who tried but failed to quit were least likely to recognize the dangers of smoking. Clearly, dismissing inconvenient facts can prove destructive to individuals and businesses. It’s important, then, to recognize that while those on the opposite side of an issue may ignore sound evidence, we too are fully capable of making that mistake.

Removing the blinders

First, we must realize that every party in a discussion, including us, may display confirmation bias. How can we combat it? One way is to remind ourselves that our willingness to honestly consider all evidence takes moral courage and strength, highly admirable traits. That realization may help us past the tendency to protect our ego by defending a position. Researcher Dr. David Myers recommends that senior managers require their staff members who present arguments to give one good reason why they could be wrong.

To help others avoid ignoring valid evidence, we can try a psychological technique called “labeling.” We could begin a discussion by praising our associates for the open-mindedness and fairness they’ve previously shown. This technique was used to great advantage by former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Communications psychology expert Robert Cialdini, PhD relates,

Before international negotiations began, Sadat would assure his bargaining opponents that they and the citizens of their country were widely known for their cooperativeness and fairness.

Did his technique work? Despite the notoriously entrenched positions in the Middle East, Sadat and former hard-liner Menachem Begin negotiated the only modern peace treaty between an Arab nation and Israel.  I rest my case.

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company providing integrated marketing communications programs and full service fulfillment services including Search, Stealth and Yield programs as well as publication design, printing and distribution to colleges and universities.

Senior administrators, admissions officers and college marketers frequently have to persuade others to agree and act on their point of view. At times that can prove extremely difficult. Senior staff members may want to include important new initiatives in their institution’s priorities for the coming year. Admissions officers need to influence colleagues, faculty, guidance counselors parents and students. Senior marketers are required to come up with marketing communication strategies to achieve the college’s goals and evaluate plans for individual campaigns.

In each case, the key players involved must agree. But at times agreement can be extremely hard to achieve. Sometimes it seems that people just won’t listen to good ideas. Researchers have carefully studied this phenomenon using controlled scientific experiments. The results may surprise you.

Why can’t they see the point?

Social psychologist Lee Ross’ research led him to conclude that people often express what he calls “naive realism.” Each person assumes that they perceive events as they really are. Eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson explains that since we are sure we recognize reality, our tendency is to assume that others who are reasonable should be able to see things our way. If they don’t, we assume that they aren’t reasonable. But are we ourselves always able to see the facts clearly?

NBC news reported on a study done on “seeing the facts” in the political arena. During the 2004 presidential race between George W. Bush and John Kerry, Drew Westen, Director of Clinical Psychology at Emory University conducted a study using functional MRI (fMRI) equipment. This machine allows researchers to monitor blood flow to different parts of the brain, revealing how people’s minds react in various situations. One study found, for example, that the brain area normally involved in reading did not activate when those coping with dyslexia attempted to read. Another neural region tried to do the job for which it was not equipped (like star quarterbacks Tom Brady or Drew Brees playing nose tackle).

In Dr. Westen’s study, staunch Republicans and Democrats heard contradictory statements released by Bush or Kerry on important issues while monitored by the fMRI equipment. When hearing their own candidate’s points, supporters’ brain regions involved in reasoning and emotion lit up. They paid close attention and liked what they heard.

But when listening to the opposing candidate, the reaction was quite different. "We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," the researcher reported. People paid little attention to a viewpoint that contradicted their own. According to NBC, “The test subjects on both sides of the political aisle reached totally biased conclusions by ignoring information that could not rationally be discounted, Westen and his colleagues say…The study points to a total lack of reason in political decision-making.”

That’s a scary finding. And if people whose minds are made up can discount or ignore inconvenient facts in a crucial matter like national leadership, what hope do we have of winning colleagues to our point of view on institutional initiatives or admissions matters? Fortunately, research has not only revealed human biases, but some helpful approaches for overcoming them as well. Stay tuned.

The Allied Group is an award-winning marketing communications company that provides search, conversion,yield and stealth programs for college admissions. Allied is a leader in employing one-to-one communication programs for admissions and advancement based on important research in marketing and social psychology.

Have you or your staff ever had an experience like this one? You have a conversation with a high school student who’s appears to be a perfect fit for your institution. He/she is responding with enthusiasm to your message. You’re certain that this student will be a member of your incoming freshman class. And then…you never hear from them again.

What happened? Did you say or do something wrong? Often, the answer is no. Everything you said and did clicked with the student. But in the time between your conversation and the time to inquire, apply or enroll, something or someone else got in the way.

Technology to the Rescue

Fortunately, as often happens, new technology can help you prevent situations like this one from happening over and over again. That technology is mobile marketing. Mobile marketing allows you to capture a response from students while they feel like responding. Is there an event you’d like them to attend? Tell them about it, and then give them an easy way to register right there on the spot with their mobile phones. Do you want them to visit a website to respond to your college’s offer or inquire in some other way? Mobile technology can allow them to do it while they’re in the mood.

Mobile Rated Effective

The Noel-Levitz report “2011 Marketing and Student Recruitment Practices at Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions” shows that 64% of admissions officials responding rated mobile apps as “somewhat effective” or “very effective” in recruiting freshmen, yet only 16.9% actively use them. Could this be due to the fact that mobile apps must be created by talented but overworked college IT departments? 

An Easier Way

Using QR codes (two-dimensional bar codes) can provide an easier way to reap a major benefit of mobile marketing – immediate response – while avoiding the hassle of creating your own mobile apps and getting students to download them. Every smartphone user can download a free QR code reader, and new initiatives by Coca-Cola, Best Buy, Macy's and other major retailers will encourage your prospects to install them on their phones.

Displaying QR codes on admissions marketing materials or posters can allow students to immediately visit mobile websites created and sponsored by qualified partners. There they can respond to an offer, get a customized electronic brochure for the program of their choice or register for an on-campus or online event. This can prove an excellent way to “strike while the iron is hot,” increasing qualified inquiry, application and yield rates.

Is your institution looking to improve in any of these areas? Using mobile marketing and QR codes might just be the way to accomplish it.

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company that offers mobile marketing along with Search, Stealth, Conversion and Yield programs for colleges and universities. 

As Student Search letters hit the mail, it’s important to recognize what many institutions are up against. Students may have never heard of the college that would prove to be their best choice. If they choose a better-known institution that’s not a good fit, both they and their ideal school will lose. How can worthy but less-than-famous colleges get students’ attention?

Direct mail is still the best way to reach out to students initially. In a College Board survey, 81% of students said that personal letters from colleges increased their interest. Another 75% indicated that brochures mailed to them had a similar effect. Emails came in at 61%.  All should continue to be employed by many institutions.

But crowded mailboxes are the bane of lesser-known schools. One study presented at NEACAC this year found that 40% of prospects’ names were available for only one year. Institutions must therefore make the best use of their opportunity to engage these prospects. Time-pressed Millennials often take mental shortcuts and choose brand name institutions. Many rely on the advice of parents and friends. Although 74% respected their guidance counselor’s recommendations, these alone may not be enough to help unknown but creditable institutions.

Getting noticed in a crowded Search market

After PSAT, SAT and ACT results become available, many students are deluged with Search letters and emails. As these crowd their mail boxes, two types will stand out: 

• Those from familiar institutions   
• Those whose message is relevant

The first point is obvious. It’s also proved by research. When students feel overwhelmed with choices, familiar names will stand out. But if your college is not a household name, personal relevance may be your best chance at getting your letter or email opened. Studies cited by eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson reveal that when a message is personally relevant, people will pay attention to it even if the presenter doesn’t have the benefit of fame and prestige.

How can you know what’s personally relevant?

Relevant text and/or photos on a mailer or envelope will make it stand out and increase its chances to be opened and read. But what’s relevant? If Search names are from a recent test, student-provided data on intended major, sports and extracurricular interests are likely to be fairly accurate. This information could be an excellent source of relevant data to be used in a one to one communication campaign starting with Search letters and emails. If test results are not recent, data on intended majors will spoil rather than improve with age.  How can institutions make sure student interest information is up-to-date? 

Some college websites employ a Stealth Program, offering visitors a customized electronic, and sometimes printed, brochure. Students wanting to receive one must give contact information and indicate their intended major and extracurricular interests. This tool can be used effectively in a number of settings.

Links included on college Facebook pages and targeted display ads can turn an electronic brochure offer into a great outreach tool. It gives students exactly the information they request, gets institutions the fresh data they need, and has proved to get substantially higher conversion rates than traditional Search. And, of course, prospects requesting e-brochures have thereby inquired and may not need to be searched again.

Could a relevant message help your institution stand out in a crowded field?

The Allied Group is a marketing communications company offering award-winning Search, Stealth, Conversion and Yield Programs for traditional and nontraditional college admissions.

Admissions officials are often reminded of advantages that higher education can bring to students. These unquestionably include substantially higher lifetime earnings, ability to think critically and a broadened outlook. But research shows that the college experience can have an impact that neither students nor parents anticipate. It’s important for administrators, faculty and admissions officials to understand this effect, since they want to truly help those they educate.

Learning more than academics

A point observed by many is backed by science. Social psychologist and textbook author Dr. David Myers writes, “The teens and early twenties are important formative years (Krosnick & Alwin, 1989).  Attitudes are changeable during that time and the attitudes formed then tend to stabilize through middle adulthood.” Research beside that quoted here by Dr. Myers bears this out. For although some adults clearly change their opinions and beliefs, convictions formed during the college years have proved remarkably resilient.

Researcher James Davis (2004) combed through the National Opinion Research Center archives and found, for instance, that Americans who reached age 16 during the 1960s became more politically liberal than average and maintained that view for many years. 

This validates a groundbreaking study conducted with students from Bennington College. During the 1930s and early 1940s, Bennington students were primarily women from wealthier, more conservative families. The young professors who taught them leaned toward leftist political views. Their influence was strong and its effects long-lasting. Bennington women became much more liberal than others from the same social background. Some fifty years later, in the 1984 presidential election, Bennington alumnae in their 70s voted Democratic by a 3 to 1 margin while the same percentage of college educated women in that age group voted Republican. Dr. Myers noted, “Their views embraced at an impressionable time had survived a lifetime of wider experience.”

This highlights the power the college experience has to impact young people, perhaps for the rest of their lives. As often noted, this learning is not done in the classroom alone. Roommates, fraternity/sorority members and others can exert considerable influence as well, as illustrated by research conducted at Columbia University. It asked subjects, alone in a darkened room, to estimate how much a pinpoint of light moved.  This was an optical illusion – natural movement of their eyes made the stationary light appear to shift. 

Understandably, estimates varied widely - until researcher Muzafer Sherif put subjects in groups and asked them to look again. Participants were surprised that their companions’ assessments were so different than theirs.  But soon each group reached a middle-of-the-road compromise. When invited back a year later, each group member estimated the light’s movement by themselves, but still stuck to the group’s viewpoint. As eminent social psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson put it, “These results suggest that people were relying on each other to define reality and came to privately accept the group estimate.”

Thus, students who come to campus for a degree in nursing, business or engineering may receive an education they didn’t expect. We ourselves may find that some of our views still reflect opinions expressed by professors and college friends. Said Dr. Myers, “Young people might therefore be advised to choose their social influences - the groups they join, the media they imbibe, the roles they adopt – carefully.” This research also highlights the serious responsibility institutions have toward undergraduate students. The entire college experience will mold their thinking. Do they realize that? Will all the features of that mold truly benefit them? 

The Allied Group is a higher education marketing firm offering Search, Conversion and Yield Programs to the admissions community.

Educators and marketers alike have genuine respect for the value of research. Putting good marketing research to use helped one New England university more than double undergraduate enrollment over a four-year period. Learning studies have assisted educators to find ways to more effectively teach traditional and nontraditional students alike. 

Social psychology research can prove just as valuable in undergraduate and nontraditional admissions marketing as well as advancement programs. Fundraising campaigns that use it have doubled participation. An undergraduate yield website designed by The Allied Group, a marketing services company, effectively employs such research. That website helped three universities get yield rates for accepted students who visited it ranging from 43.2% to 44.8%.

Eminent psychologist Dr. Elliot Aronson defines social psychology as “the scientific study of the way in which people’s thoughts, feelings and behaviors are influenced by the real or imagined presence of other people.” Established research in this discipline can tell educators and marketers how students, prospects and alumni are likely to react in certain situations. This is extremely important. Controlled, peer-reviewed experiments often produce results that are quite different than we might expect.  Understanding the findings of scientific studies can help institutions avoid serious problems.

For example, to focus students’ attention on a growing campus problem, administrators may emphasize how many have contributed to it. Messages like, “Many students leave trash in the cafeteria” or “Far too many people text while they’re driving” may communicate the fact that these issues are significant. But research finds that statements like these actually add to the problem. To illustrate, the National Park Service has been greatly concerned over the theft of irreplaceable petrified wood from the Petrified Forest National Park. Park visitors take some 14 tons of it per year. Rangers put up large signs decrying the fact that visitors steal so much wood that someday much of this national treasure may disappear. 

Renowned social psychologist Robert Cialdini, PhD and colleagues put the effectiveness of these signs to the test. They replaced some with placards that simply asked visitors in text and symbols not to take petrified wood. In other areas they took down all signs. Then they put marked pieces of petrified wood along pathways in each area to monitor theft rates. The results, according to Dr. Cialdini, “should petrify the National Park’s management.” Note how many pieces of marked wood were stolen during a brief period:

     • “Far too many visitors steal wood” sign:       7.92 pieces
     •  No sign (control group):                                2.92 pieces
     • “Please don’t remove petrified wood” sign:   1.67 pieces

The park’s commonsense approach to reduce theft by alerting visitors to the enormity of the problem actually made it worse – more than 2 ½ times worse than doing nothing at all! Numerous studies reveal that in certain circumstances people are automatically moved to do what others are doing. This illustrates the fact that including the right social psychology research in well-designed marketing communications strategies can make or break their success.    

Now that May 1st has come and gone, admissions officers across America are pausing to catch their breath. After what may have been an exhausting yield campaign, admissions officers might well wonder if there’s an easier, more effective way to improve their yield programs and enrollment rates. Recent research demonstrates that there is, and its ROI can be substantial.

A few years ago The Allied Group, a marketing communications company, won a national award for its Yield Program. It helped the University of Hartford set an institution record for deposits. The following year another New England university tailored Allied’s program to its needs and got an 11% deposit increase. In 2010 their Director of Admissions decided to add Allied’s Yield Website to further boost the university’s yield rate. This wise admissions marketer set up a controlled test to measure the exact impact Allied’s enrollment initiative and its print and web components had on enrollments. It was important to do this, because Allied’s Yield Program may be unique in college admissions.

This recruiting procedure includes sending a customized publication to admitted students. That publication highlights information of greatest interest to the individual and invites him or her to visit a yield website to register for a contest. The yield website is far from elaborate – while it can be customized to the interests of each student, it merely asks two ordinary survey questions.  But social psychology research shows that asking these questions at this point in the cycle can have a powerful impact on students, further increasing their interest in enrolling.

As the final results demonstrated, social psychology research accurately predicted the results. The contest sponsored by the admissions office drove a full 20% of admitted students to the website. That was crucial to the program’s success, as shown by the final numbers:

• Allied Yield Website deposit rate:                     38.6%
• Allied Yield Website enrollment rate:                32.5%
• Allied Yield Program overall enrollment rate      28.9%
• Control Group enrollment rate                          27.5%

Thus, this well-conceived yield program actually helped the university’s admissions office enroll 44 more students in 2010 than they would without it. The Director of Admissions’ method for driving students to the website was a key – of the 44 additional students the university enrolled with the Allied program, 35 came from the Yield Website. The ROI was excellent, exceeding $25 in first-year tuition for every $1 spent.

If you have any questions about this highly cost-effective marketing communications program, please feel free to email me or call me at (401) 946-6100 x3230.

Part One considered one technique taught in college that has clearly earned its place among marketing communications strategies. The foot-in-the-door (FITD) technique has helped savvy undergraduate Student Search providers generate large inquiry pools for colleges and universities across America. FITD is just one aspect of what psychologists call the Consistency Principle. It’s people's tendency to change their attitudes to make them consistent with their actions. The Consistency Principle was once viewed as a theory. It has been verified by some 1,000 controlled scientific studies and is now considered a fact.

Why do humans change their feelings to make them consistent with their actions? Some psychologists feel it’s due to society's negative view of wishy-washy people. Eminent psychologist Elliot Aronson, PhD describes it as a way to maintain a stable, positive self-image. But whatever the reason, study after study shows that, under the right conditions, most people will not only take actions based on how they feel, they’ll feel emotions that are consistent with their actions.

Recruiting with Consistency

Consistency has a long and storied role in admissions marketing. It’s among the most effective academic lead generation methods. A major undergraduate Student Search company employs it to get high inquiry rates for hundreds of colleges. If it’s done right, prospective students who respond to Search initiatives using this approach are significantly more likely to apply.

The Allied Group recently deployed an undergraduate Yield Website to help admissions departments improve their yield of accepted students. That website used the Consistency Principle to increase students’ desire to enroll. In a controlled marketing test at one New England university, a considerable number of students visited the interactive site. They enrolled at a rate of 32.53%, a full five percentage points higher than the control group’s 27.5%.

Nontraditional Recruiting Application

Higher education programs for adults can make good use of the Consistency Principle to help them generate qualified adult inquiries. After all, the original studies that led to its acceptance used adult participants. Graduate, continuing education and professional development Search programs can adapt the techniques that work so well in undergraduate Search to the particular interests of adult learners. 

One program in particular demonstrates the viability of the Consistency Principle in recruiting nontraditional students. A few years ago, all-adult Franklin University’s website offered web visitors a customized electronic brochure in exchange for their contact information. Students who requested it had to take action to fill out the questionnaire and choose their preferred field of study.  Did it increase interest? Marketing officials at Franklin reported that this program improved their adult inquiries by 35% and helped them convert an astounding 48% of participating web visitors into applicants. A similar Stealth Program provided by The Allied Group has converted traditional undergraduate “stealth students” into qualified inquiries at a number of institutions in the Northeast, with conversion rates as high as 63.9%.

Could this proven scientific principle increase your inquiries and applications?

To tell or not to tell.  That is the question for any student applying to college with a less-than-stellar disciplinary record.  Students, parents and guidance counselors worry about the effect disclosing negative information might have on the admissions process.  If the student is a good kid who made one mistake, is it really necessary to strongly admonish him to reveal everything?

According to eminent social psychologist, researcher and author Elliot Aronson, PhD, failing to be honest can affect the student in ways that go far beyond admittance to college.   Dr. Aronson’s award-winning research has proved many aspects of the theory of cognitive dissonance.  That theory effectively explains much of the psychology behind marital discord, racial prejudice and public corruption.  In Mistakes Were Made (but not by me), Dr. Aronson and coauthor Carol Tavris, PhD explain:

Cognitive dissonance is a state of tension that occurs whenever a person holds two cognitions (ideas, attitudes, beliefs, opinions) that are psychologically inconsistent, such as “Smoking is a dumb thing to do because it could kill me” and “I smoke two packs a day.”  Dissonance produces mental discomfort, ranging from minor pangs to deep anguish; people don’t rest easy until they find a way to reduce it.

Completing a college application is an undertaking fraught with cognitive dissonance if you’re a student with a past.  What will you do?  You know it’s wrong to lie, and worse if you certify you’ve told the truth. But if you tell the truth, you risk rejection by an institution you’d like to attend.  Either course is uncomfortable. In the widely used textbook, Social Psychology, Dr. Aronson and his coauthors frame the dilemma in terms of cheating on a college exam:

Supposed that after a difficult struggle you decide to cheat.  How do you reduce the dissonance?...It is likely that you would try to justify the action... You would adopt a more lenient attitude involving cheating, convincing yourself that it’s a victimless crime, that everybody does it and so it’s really not so bad.

In contrast, a student who decides not to cheat will reduce dissonance by convincing himself that cheating is unquestionably wrong; otherwise he would not risk an important grade to avoid it. His truthful actions actually make him a more truthful person.

Students who lie to get into college have started down a slippery slope, setting themselves up to lie and cheat in other situations as well.  This can become a way of life.  In matters of ethics, it truly is “In for a penny, in for a pound.”  Many corrupt public figures started out honest, but then “lost their moral compass.”  Anyone in a position to influence students should help them avoid that pitfall.

The Allied Group is an award-winning marketing communications company and full-service fulfillment provider.  Our Yield Programs have been proven to increase enrollment.

In Part One we discussed how cultivating a spirit of liking or respect for a challenging faculty member or colleague can pay dividends in increasing their willingness to cooperate.  We saw how a strategy that once served Ben Franklin well can warm relations with coworkers today.  Research reveals some further communication strategies that can help you turn difficult associates into allies.

At times, colleagues who are at odds try to catch each other doing something wrong, hoping to find usable leverage.  Often, a more effective strategy is to try to catch a contentious coworker doing something right and immediately commend him or her for it.  This will not only reinforce desirable behavior but will allow you to label them as a helpful ally.  Why would you want to attach such a label to a person who may have withheld their cooperation in the past?  Eminent psychologist Elliot Aronson, PhD and his coauthor answer:

One of social psychology’s best documented phenomena is the self-fulfilling
prophecy – the tendency for a definition of a situation to evoke behavior that makes the definition come true.  Dozens of experiments have shown that students who are randomly labeled “smarter” tend to act smarter…and women who are labeled “beautiful” behave as if they are beautiful.

In one experiment outlined by persuasion expert Robert Cialdini, PhD and his coauthors, researchers interviewed a large number of registered voters and told half of them that their responses showed they were “above average citizens likely to vote and participate in political events.”  The others were told that they were average in this area.  Those labeled as good citizens proved 15% more likely to vote in the election held one week later.  In another study, New Haven residents who were told they were generous later contributed significantly more than others to a worthy cause.

A word of caution:  Using the labeling technique insincerely could easily backfire. Praising someone for a desirable trait he or she hasn’t displayed could be readily seen as an overt attempt to manipulate.

But even the most unhelpful associate will usually assist someone.  Be alert for occasions when they do and commend them for their accommodating actions.  Let them know that this shows the kind of helpful person they are.  This was a favorite negotiating tactic of former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat.  As Dr. Cialdini put it:

Before international negotiations began, Sadat would assure his bargaining opponents that they and the citizens of their country were widely known for their cooperativeness and fairness...  According to master-negotiator Henry Kissinger (1982), Sadat was successful because he got others to act in his interests by giving them a reputation to uphold.

In summary, to turn a challenging colleague into an ally, here are some strategies to use:
 

1. Warm up your own feelings by thinking about your associate’s good qualities. 
2. Use Ben Franklin’s tactic to gain a friend: ask them for a favor and, when they grant it, let them know how much they helped you.
3. Catch them doing a helpful act and commend them for it, giving them a good reputation to live up to.

You will find that many people will respond favorably.  And you may just gain the comrade-in-arms you need.


Yield Programs using one-to-one communication have proved extremely effective in enrolling accepted students.  If you'd like to read a case study, click here.
 

In Part One we discussed how several institutions including the University of Hartford and Southern New Hampshire University achieved substantial increases in their yield rates with One to One communication by sending accepted students a customized yield publication. These publications showed students the aspects of the institution that were most important to them.

New Results from a 2010 Study

Research conducted by Southern New Hampshire University this spring showed that sending a customized yield publication with the right creative design is one of the marketing communication strategies that continue to work even in this difficult economic climate. SNHU, which had previously sent a personalized yield piece to each accepted student now divided their accepted students into two groups: an experimental group that would continue to receive this customized direct mail and a control group that would get everything the university normally sent except that piece. Here are the results:

• Total Accepted Students – 3,443
• Experimental Group receiving the customized yield piece – 3105
  • Deposits from Test Group – 898
  • Yield Rate – 28.9%
• Control Group (no customized piece) – 338
  • Deposits from Control Group – 93
  • Yield Rate – 27.5%

That yield rate difference of 1.4% means that the customized yield piece added 44 to 48 students, depending on how you look at the numbers. That many students would generate more than $1,000,000 in first year tuition alone and more than $2,000,000 over two years at many institutions. Clearly, One to One communication, if done using sound psychological and design principles, works in admissions yield even in tough economic times.

An inexpensive way to increase yield using the web

One university found another way to increase their yield rate using the Internet. This strategy involved neither an expensive yield website nor Facebook. Instead this university made use of a tactic that had previously helped Proctor & Gamble achieve their most successful new product launch in corporation history. 

The admissions office conducted a marketing test in which accepted students were encouraged to enter a contest by visiting a website. At the well designed but uncomplicated site, students were asked two simple but psychologically-loaded questions. The university’s results were similar to Proctor & Gamble’s. In that recession-plagued year, the institution suffered through an overall yield rate below 20%. But students who visited the website yielded at a rate of 44.75%.

Unlike the SNHU test, this experiment was not scientifically controlled, so that it’s possible that only the most committed accepted students visited the site. But previous controlled experiments clearly demonstrated that the principle behind this campaign was psychologically sound; after Proctor & Gamble’s marketing campaign employed the same strategy for Crest toothpaste, its sales rose 4.5% while rival Colgate’s sales remained flat.

Enrolling accepted students in difficult economic times will always be a challenge. But yield marketing strategies that effectively blend psychology, technology and top-notch creative design will continue to prove their worth. If you’d like to learn more about the yield programs considered here, or to discuss your own yield program, please email me at lrondeau@thealliedgrp.com