States need buy-in from multiple constituencies to advance a productivity agenda. But recent research by Public Agenda illustrates the difficulty that states will face in building strong and diverse coalitions. In The Iron Triangle, many college presidents contend that quality, cost, and access exist in an unbreakable reciprocal relationship. To improve the quality of higher education, one must either put more money in the system or be prepared to see higher education become less accessible to students. Conversely, presidents argue that cutting costs in higher education must eventually lead to cuts either in quality or access. In Squeeze Play 2009, the public rejects this view. They say that colleges could spend less without compromising quality.
Attitudinal research of college faculty and business officers further complicates the picture. In Campus Commons faculty members say they worry about student preparation and believe that efforts to boost the number of degrees, without serious safeguards, could undermine academic excellence. Meanwhile, financial officers at the institutional level say that they are interested in increasing higher education productivity and willing to ask hard questions about higher education’s assumptions, especially about class size and teaching loads. Many contend that more robust use of technology could lead to significant savings.
Given this, what can states do to create a shared agenda for boosting productivity? Following are some of the efforts underway in two Making Opportunity Affordable partner states.
Montana
As part of its effort to build a stronger and more cost-effective system of two-year education, the Montana University System has met with various groups across the state: business and community leaders, policymakers, K-12 leaders, high school guidance counselors, tribal leaders, and college faculty and staff members. Participants have voiced a variety of opinions, including:
Staff members from the system office are preparing to launch another round of listening sessions, focusing on communities served by a community college, college of technology, or tribal college. These sessions will test the perceptions above, and the results will be used to develop messages to promote the system’s efforts to increase participation in and graduation from two-year programs.
Ohio
The Board of Regents created the Advisory Committee on Efficiency in the University System of Ohio to examine public colleges’ and universities’ business practices, identify potential improvements and promote adoption of best practices throughout the system. The committee comprises University System of Ohio’s trustees, presidents, faculty and staff members, students, and business leaders.
“We expect the Advisory Committee on Efficiency to work with our colleges and universities to look across the system and identify areas where institutions can share resources, cut costs and implement savings strategies,” notes Eric D. Fingerhut, Chancellor of the Ohio Board of Regents. “These efforts will better position the university system to educate Ohio’s workforce with resources we have.”
At its inaugural meeting in February, the committee addressed a wide range of topics, including:
Campus leaders briefed the committee on institutional activities that have been effective in increasing efficiency. For example, The University of Akron and Lorain County Community College have cut unnecessary costs and improved service by sharing and streamlining non-competing business processes in areas such as financial services and human resources. Kent State University has reduced costs by consolidating network operations, data centers, and servers and by outsourcing software applications, such as e-mail.