In the world of program management and institutional improvement, the question of how to measure success is paramount. When assessing the effectiveness of its efforts, an institution should distinguish between establishing benchmarks and tracking programmatic goals. Benchmarks, which are typically established by and for an industry, provide collective data against which institutions can compare themselves. These benchmarks, often aggregated from various sources, offer insights into what is typically successful within the industry. However, the real focus should be on setting, measuring, and achieving your own programmatic goals that seek continuous improvement and impactful outcomes.
Benchmarks
Benchmarks serve as a reference point, offering a glimpse into what is generally considered successful in the field. They can be best used to assess how closely your institution aligns with the institutions that contribute data to the benchmark depending on how similar those entities are to your institution in terms of structure and operations. This comparison helps you understand whether your efforts are on par with the industry standard.
Benchmarks often focus on easily measurable outputs, such as the number of participants, because they are readily available from most institutions. Key data should be collected and shared with benchmarking systems that involve similar institutions or a broader group of peers. These benchmarks offer general guidance and serve as a reference point on potential areas for improvement.
Institutional Goals
The key is to track the effectiveness of your efforts in achieving the institutional goals. That means knowing your current strengths and weaknesses, establishing goals, collecting data, and analyzing the results. It’s vital to monitor and assess how much improvement your institution experiences and how effective your program is in creating a significant impact regardless of how you compare to others.
When evaluating a specific program’s effectiveness, the goals can be more tailored to engagement, impact, and behavioral outcomes resulting from the efforts. To do this effectively, most institutions need to choose one or two areas to investigate in-depth, as collecting such data can be time-consuming.
Here is an example of how benchmarking compares to goal setting:
– EdUniv, a large university, has a benchmarking cohort and the benchmark for participation in homecoming is about 1% (alumni come to campus.)
– At EdUniv, homecoming draws about 0.3% of alumni. The benchmark suggests that there is opportunity! EdUniv should try to understand why it has a lower participation rate and learn from other institutions about how to increase attendance.
– Based on its alumni population and its history, EdUniv might set a goal for a 10% improvement each year by implementing a new communication effort and adding some activities.
– By monitoring attendance, EdUniv can determine the success of its efforts.
– EdUniv achieves its goal of .5% participation after 5 years, very successful though still below the benchmark.
A System
An effective measurement system encompasses both benchmarking and in-depth program assessment. While benchmarks provide useful references for where your institution stands within the industry, your primary focus should be on setting your own goals for continuous improvement and impactful outcomes. The good news is that data collection can often overlap, reducing the need for duplicating efforts. You can be part of a benchmarking group and improve your internal measurement system without doubling your workload.
This synergy between industry benchmarks and institutional goals creates a holistic and meaningful measurement system that not only allows you to compare your performance with industry standards but also empowers you to drive your program toward the desired level of success and impact.
Read more articles on alumni relations including the Alumni Relations Transformations Series at AlmaShines or the Impactrics Resources area.
