A lot of talk has surfaced in the last few months over the topic of In-sourcing vs. Outsourcing. I guess this could be an expected outcome of Apol buying Aptimus. Clearly there are advantages of both, here are some of them:
Outsourcing:
- Leveraging a firm who is experienced, and leveraging their power with the vendors for pricing & placement.
- Leveraging the firms experience and knowledge of the broader vendor universe with regards to conversion rates, volume, sourcing & price.
- Leveraging the firms knowledgebase of conversion rates from other schools with similar vendors to determine how competitive you are with your leads. Leveraging multiple schools analytics vs. your own.
- Limit internal headcount based on outsourced components.
- Better chance of identifying lead fraud.
- Utilizing the firm as a means of stability, reduces risk due to internal turnover issues.
In-sourcing:
- Capitalizing on owning the market intelligence of sourcing, conversions & pricing
- No paying a mark-up on lead spend/agency fees
- Stronger direct relationships with lead sources
- Complete control of marketing…good & bad
- Owning of own marketing analytics
There are more for both, and if you have some feel free to share and we will add them. I think it also comes down to size of school/system as well as growth objectives. Often smaller schools tend to be to small to outsource while many of the largest reach a point where it becomes too costly. The good news is that technology has been advancing and there are more options today than in years past.
Feel free to contact us for more detailed information or for us to help you determine which choice is better for you based on your near & long term goals.
In the current economic climate, outsourcing can be a very cost efficient and service beneficial way to go. Many schools are making decisions about layoffs for example. Layoffs almost always cut into a school’s ability to perform. So, if the choice is lowering costs by eliminating a position, it may be much more beneficial to outsource a function and capture the savings to cover a needed function position. Outsourcing can provide some real service and cost benefits. By allowing you fund to strengthen really needed services like enrollment and retention.
For example, if you run your own bookstore, you could go with a solid provider like Ambassador Books and take the costs savings from the costs saved by outsourcing to hire in areas you had to cut. Or if you run your own food service, jump to get an excellent firm like Aramark. Let them absorb your costs and possible losses so you can move money where you need it more. Don’t put off that much needed web update, outsource it to COREacademics which is a leader at lower costs.
The money from the positions can be recovered and put where it will do the most benefit to increase revenue and EBITA. So don’t look at outsourcing as a deficiency but as a strategy to improve enrollment and population capacity.
In regards to in-sourcing vs out-sourcing marketing efforts, I think we can learn from the history of what’s happened in other industries that promote themselves vigorously. For decades, in every other consumer-driven industry, marketers have utilized a mix of internal management and external expertise and execution. Outsourcers get the bulk of the business until marketers gain the ability to execute themselves more efficiently. As an example, remember a few years ago when advertisng and interactive agencies d produced all teh work in creating websites, e-mail campaigns and SEO campaigns. Now much of this work is done in-house.