I find in my work in university advancement that internationalization is not top of mind for many CEOs these days. And it’s not surprising that, in a difficult economy and a climate of state budget cuts, most higher education leaders, including board members, are reviewing their core businesses and deciding that internationalization is not one. But a sea change is coming.
Financial trends and technology are changing government policies toward higher education in countries all around the globe. Governments are rethinking economic-development priorities and the role higher education should play in helping meet those priorities. China, for example, is creating new higher education institutions with the goal of enhanced international influence, while other countries, like India and those in the Gulf States, are establishing many more colleges and universities to meet the basic educational needs of their populations. Poorer parts of the world are also awakening to the need to pay more attention to the economic-development potential of higher education.
While some countries are actually cutting back overall financial support for higher education, such major changes in emphasis and focus are fundamentally altering the landscape. In one way or another, these trends are creating a new competitive environment for higher education on a global scale, one likely to impact virtually every size and type of academic institution—whether they have big international ambitions, small ones, or none at all—in at least three key areas.
Student Recruitment
Student migration patterns are changing. Colleges that want to recruit more students from abroad will probably face more competition from institutions in other countries. More foreign students from all parts of the world may still want to attend prestigious American institutions—in fact, the number of international students in America increased almost 6 percent in 2011–2012. But many governments are working hard not only to draw those students back home after completing their degrees here, but also to keep the best of them at home in the first place. As a result of such trends, the flow of talented students from China and other countries to the United States may very well diminish in the years ahead.
But the biggest overall worldwide change in student migration concerns the flow going in the opposite direction: the recruitment of American undergraduate students by foreign institutions. More colleges and universities from other countries—in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere—are planning to recruit in the United States, and it is likely that our best students will respond the quickest. Top high-school students in this country, especially those in private schools, tend to be fairly well traveled by the time they graduate. They have vacationed in all parts of the world, and growing numbers have lived abroad as exchange students or with friends and family. Meanwhile, the world economy is shifting, drifting steadily to countries in Asia. Top American students will be able to see the appeal of an education that is Asia-savvy—and all in English. Institutions in Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and even Great Britain already offer that now. And growing numbers of colleges and universities in Europe and the Middle East will probably offer it, as well.
Fundraising
Colleges and universities in all parts of the world are also expanding their fundraising activities into other countries and will be coming to the United States to raise money. They will first focus their efforts on their alumni, but many foreign institutions will also be looking for foundations, corporations, and individuals in our local communities to support their research and projects. They will be offering significant and attractive naming opportunities in prestigious and visible locations abroad. Now donors and organizations will have the chance to be impressively visible in different and growing parts of the world and be able to participate in new and exciting economic opportunities for their businesses and organizations.
Great Britain is one clear example of the heightening global competition for private resources. With drastic cutbacks in government support, the entire higher education marketplace in England, Scotland, and Wales is changing. Student attendance and recruitment patterns are shifting, and fundraising is being upgraded at virtually every institution. The government has been using matching incentives, for example, to encourage institutions to go out and find more gift support wherever it might be available. Higher education leaders are suddenly thinking much more like their counterparts in America when it comes to raising private funds. The United States is ripe territory.
Canadian institutions are also coming south in greater numbers not only to recruit students, but also to find money. Many from Asia and also Australia are working here, too.
I had an interesting experience at the University of Queensland in Australia last summer, when I was invited to speak at an annual leadership retreat organized by the vice chancellor and CEO. He had invited the top administrative and academic leaders of the university, including deans and heads of research institutes and program areas, to participate, and almost 200 people were in attendance. This vice chancellor had a single theme: developing a culture of philanthropy. He asked the retreat participants to accept the reality that the institution’s goals could no longer be met by relying on government support. He outlined an ambitious vision of international leadership in teaching and research, one that could only be met if everyone assembled could put behind them the old idea of state-financed education and accept that they would have to help substantially increase giving among students, alumni, and other constituencies.
The vice chancellor had also recently announced that the university would be opening an office in Washington, D.C., that would be staffed half by advancement professionals and half by internationaleducation professionals. Working together, the two groups plan to recruit students, develop academic and corporate partnerships, conduct individual fundraising, and seek foundation support.
Talent Migration
All these trends will establish an environment of global academic talent migration. College and university leaders whom I met on a recent trip to India admitted that much of their interest in establishing partnerships with American institutions is driven by a desire to upgrade faculty performance—the overall level of scholarship and teaching—in their country.
Indeed, higher education institutions throughout the world will increasingly be searching for faculty talent everywhere, especially in all types and sizes of American institutions. And the best talent will be offered very attractive deals. Top talent is always scarce, and world trends will increase its value, along with its cost to institutions.
Boards and the Inevitability of a Global Higher Education Marketplace
Thus, no matter the size, location, or type, all higher education institutions will be affected by the new global forces in one way or another. The American Council on Education (ACE) established a Blue Ribbon Panel on Global Engagement, chaired by John Sexton, president of New York University (see his related article here), to examine these trends, inviting 20 institutional presidents and CEOs around the world to meet periodically in Washington over the course of a year. ACE published a report based on its deliberations, “Strength through Global Leadership and Engagement: U.S. Higher Education in the 21st Century” last November.
I had the privilege of sitting in on these meetings, and I concluded that operating abroad was not going to be easy for any college or university—and it certainly could not be counted on as a source of easy new income. Even so, it was also abundantly clear to me that every higher education institution in America will have to compete, one way or another, in the global market. Internationalization will to some degree change us all, whether we like it or not.
What does that mean for boards? An institution’s “brand” and reputation are basic components of its core business, and it’s more important than ever for an institution to craft a relevant and exciting brand identity. Being “global” in some tangible way is very likely to be an assumed feature of that brand by many important constituents, especially prospective students.
As the ACE report noted, many institutions have approached globalization of higher education in a somewhat ad hoc, haphazard way, as faculty members have pursued opportunities independently. The result has been a collection of efforts that don’t support the institution’s overall mission, strategic priorities, or brand identity.
Thus, when it comes to going global, boards and administrators should first ask: What kind of international presence makes sense for our institution based on its mission? What are our fundamental goals when it comes to internationalization and how do they fit within our institution’s broader strategic directions? How do we ensure they support our brand identity? Can any international initiatives we are considering negatively affect our core business?
Boards can help the president and other senior campus leaders determine what type of global engagements and investments make the most sense, based on their institution’s mission and strategic goals. New York University’s mission and international objectives are clear: It has opened campuses around the globe with a primary goal of having faculty members and students spend time at various campuses within that international network of campuses. But for those that don’t have NYU’s size or resources, smaller partnerships of one kind or another, or expanded study-abroad options, may offer more promise.
Other key questions that boards and presidents should ask include:
- How will globalization change the overall higher education marketplace in America and alter our current student markets?
- How might global changes affect the giving of any of our individual, foundation, or corporate supporters?
- How will globalization influence the market for quality faculty, and how can we continue to attract top faculty members?
- What implications does internationalization have for our curriculum and the real-world experiences that we provide our students?
- How will our mission, values, and vision inform how we respond to globalization and address the expectations of alumni, students, donors, community leaders, and legislators?
- Are there fundraising, student recruiting, or reputation-building opportunities for us in other countries?
All these questions present new challenges for boards and presidents. As the ACE report notes, “Moving forward in this new global space will require a set of mapping skills to navigate unfamiliar terrain, skills which are just now developing at most institutions.”
But the report also emphasizes that, “While the evolution of this more complex and interconnected global environment poses unprecedented challenges, it also offers new opportunities.” And it adds, “Indeed, if ever there were circumstances in which colleges, universities, and the organizations that help them advance must adopt new perspectives and develop new programs, that time is now.”
Share on LinkedIn
