Because of timelines, I also had to meet with marketing staff from both institutions to get a sense of their timelines and the tools (budget) available to them, because clearly visibility and "splash" are going to be important in this venture. That means though that we need to choose programs that can create a splash, and if we want to launch by fall, we need to choose programs with target audiences that we can reach over the summer. Programs that would appeal primarily to graduated high school students, for example, would be very tough to market over the summer, because school's out! There are however some EAL learners in daytime programs that can be reached, so we may need to choose programs that would appeal to that target group.
As a result, this project is already an example of how program planning simply cannot be linear, or even circular. While the first stage of research needed to be completed upfront, I've started marketing timelines and budgeting, but the identification of stakeholders has only partially happened. My sense of program planning as being an emergent process is more and more evident to me. Rather more like a catalytic reaction, one arising element can lead to any number of possible "next steps", which then contribute to what's known and what's needed, setting off a number of other catalytic reactions that require additional work. This exponential increase of elements that need investigating, completing and monitoring explains to me the sense of overwhelm that often happens at this early stage of program planning. So much is unknown, so much needs to be done, and yet nothing can move ahead without some preliminary decisions ... even if there isn't enough information yet.
For example, it's clear who the key (and powerful) drivers within the two institutions are, and thankfully their intentions are visionary and exciting. I can expect that innovation is desired and, in fact, expected. However, the stakeholders out in the community are less clear to me, and things are already moving so quickly that I'm not sure when I'll be able to consult with them. I think there will be unusual learner groups, industry partners and community agencies that I need to meet with. I may need to slow things down at some point to catch up on this piece.
In short, I only "know" what some of the internal stakeholders know, believe and want, and I need to start making decisions to get marketing rolling, but I don't have a budget approved, and I won't know until marketing comes up with a draft promotional strategy whether or not I can actually choose the courses I've chosen to help them get the marketing strategy started!
The familiarization with internal stakeholders has been going well though, and so I have some confidence that I'm on track, even if I have to tweak a few things. Interestingly enough, it's the people that are making some program ideas more viable than others. Technically, a number of connections can be made between programming in the two institutions. However, some people are more territorial about their programs, while others are itching to innovate, collaborate and build better programming.
Two program areas have emerged as highly dynamic and existing, for a variety of reasons. The remainder will be put on the back burner in terms of fuller development of certificate, diploma and/or degree programs. This puts the courses/programs to be offered into three tiers: stand-alone courses that help address wait list issues at one or the other institution; supporter courses that help students in some programs gain something extra, and full-on co-developed programs with a variety of correlated community-based initiatives. The latter of these are, of course, the ones that interest me the most. :)
Next we'll leave big picture planning behind, get the details of a marketing strategy underway, and begin to focus in on the two "splash" programs.
No comments:
Post a Comment