After reviewing a few market research reports shared by a former colleague, I have to say I was mildly alarmed at what I read. One presented data and findings in such a complex and convoluted way that it took me more time to figure out each chart than I know most presidents and provosts have. Another one completely lacked any understanding of the higher education context and then made "canned" conclusions that are unlikely to be helpful -- or acted upon.

It has never been a more important to incorporate a market perspective into programming decisions. Legislators are requiring it, students are demanding it, and increasing numbers of administrators are using it to make tough calls. But there are as many ways to use data as there are cases to be made, so we must be careful.

My own thinking on the application of market data to decision making has evolved over a long period and, to risk oversimplifying myself, I think the market researcher today has to develop their services with a focus on the meeting point of: accuracy, cost, and timeliness with a huge dose of real-life experience.

Primary research: Some think that the only way to ensure the best data is to use the “gold standard” of primary market research—surveys, focus groups, and such. This scores high on “accuracy” but not so much on the “cost effective” and “timely” scales. In fact, dependent on your methodology, it can even score lower than you think on the “accuracy” scale.

Secondary research: Others think that using the secondary data that we all have access to (IPEDS, Bureau of Labor Statistics, etc.) is the way to go. These data DO offer a baseline understanding of the market factors that are most important to institutions:

1. In what subjects and at what institutions are degrees being generated in greatest numbers (for short-term gains); and

2. In what occupations and careers is employer demand strongest and emerging (for longer term growth strategy).

Such analysis scores high on the “cost effective” and “timely” scales, but (dependent on how they are being used) can score far lower on the “accuracy” scale.

The do’s and don’ts of using market data

In both of these cases, it is a case of “Dos” and “Don’ts” coupled to some really good “How To” suggestions that will make the case for successful strategy development. Here are some of my own dos and don'ts:

Do: Primary market research is often the step that completes the picture you need to ensure that your programs are properly positioned in the market. But there may be better ways to determine the programs that are in highest demand, and there may be more affordable ways to understand your audience than to do randomized surveys in your region.

Don’t: Some institutions are committed to using primary research, but cannot afford the costs associated with a quantitative study. So, they decide to use qualitative primary research - focus groups - as the foundational underpinning of programming decisions. The thinking is that it is putting the voice of the student at the top, however, this means you are making decisions affecting tens of thousands of dollars of program development on the feedback of a couple dozen people (however well informed they may be).

Don’t: I’ve been impressed in the last few years by the growth of formalized new program proposal processes that include a market research requirement. Too often, however, that “box” can be “checked” by presenting overly simplistic IPEDS, BLS, and other data in support of that program. Why is this a problem? Because without context (perhaps with the same data for other programs) you can’t be sure that the numbers are positive or less positive.

Do: Secondary data can be a powerful way to underpin strategic programming decisions—whether that be what programs to focus marketing dollars on today or what new programs should be implemented in the future. These data provide a useable snapshot of current student demand and longer term employer demands. But you have to use them in a manner in which their real power than be seen.

There are dozens of other dos and don't. If you'd like to have a conversation, ping me. I'd love to get into the weeds with you!

This article is based on a blog I contributed to the RNL Blog in January 2023.