Attention Deficit

Universities deserve to be called out for misleading marketing, but getting noticed is increasingly difficult.

As the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) wades in to investigate and crackdown on misleading advertisements in higher education, many institutions will be doing a slightly worried audit of their own claims. It’s about time too.

We live in a world overshadowed by the spectre of fake news, a time when trust is being eroded on a daily basis. The 2017 Edelman Trust Barometer (a must read for anyone who wants to makes sense of the current climate) claims “Trust is in crisis around the world.” Globally, trust in the institutions of business, media, government and non-governmental organisations has hit an all-time low.

For the first time, “a person like yourself” is as credible a source for information about a company as a technical or academic expert (all three at 60 per cent). Is it any wonder that many higher-education institutions’ broad-brush claims (predominantly used without source or substantiation) have fallen foul of the watchdogs?

Savvy consumers

The signs have been there for a while now. The importance of consumer rights standards for higher education increased following clarification of the law by the Competition and Markets Authority in 2015. Increasingly, students and their families are warier, choosier and act increasingly (like it or not) as consumers; and they don’t expect to be misled. They investigate—often analytically—the claims made by universities and the opportunities offered with rigour and precision.

Higher education is a massive investment for many. As we become more and more reliant on the opinions of others, and systematically use reviews and online resources to benchmark what we buy, it’s no surprise that recent research from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, in the report Learners as Consumers—Future trends and expectations, notes that student reviews of universities appear at number three in a top ten of the most important factors in the decision to apply.

The University of Reading was the first to come under the spotlight, with its claim (now taken down) to be in the top 1 per cent of the world’s universities. The ASA decided that this could not be objectively substantiated and since then, several other universities including Teesside University, Falmouth University, the University of East Anglia, the University of Strathclyde, the University of Leicester and the University of West London have been censured.

Straightforward adverts

The ASA found many “misleading and unsubstantiated” claims on university websites and social media and warned universities to hold relevant data to support future claims. The Daily Mail had a field day with the story and seemed to take particular—and unfair—delight in flagging up former polytechnics on the list.

The ASA/Committees of Advertising Practice issued new guidance for higher education institutions on 15 November. It includes advice on how to make comparative claims (such as claiming to be number one or in the top five), and top tips, such as having evidence for claims, not misrepresenting the evidence, making the basis of the claim clear and ensuring claims can be easily understood.

So how did it get to this? Ultimately, because of competition and the need to stand out and appeal to an increasingly sophisticated, savvy and switched-on audience. This audience expects authenticity and lives in a digital world that means social media and online advertising are the new battlegrounds. You have the blink of an eye to capture attention, gain cut-through and make your point. Shortcuts and soundbites are appealing and how better to choose one than use a pithy, hard claim about how good you are as an institution?

It’s not as easy as it sounds when you consider there are around 130 universities and university colleges in the UK, and the top ten slots in each of the key league tables and rankings feature many of the same names. Where do you go if you’re not on the list? What’s your unique strength, the thing that makes you special, your call to action to get the attention of potential students?

What’s the difference?

An industry that doesn’t foster much in the way of differentiation exacerbates this. Hands up the vice-chancellors who are happy to say they absolutely excel at teaching but their research is less glittering? Or that their research is world-leading but they don’t actually care about students? And that’s the problem. Middle of the road doesn’t sell and yet universities have an innate desire to be all things to all men (and women).

Far too many institutions are also over-reliant on what my team calls “lazy girl marketing”—rolling forward text, images, and “facts” that probably never were facts, the sources of which are lost in the midst of time. Worse, colleagues in some institutions are presented with a fait accompli from the senior team, keen to hang their colours to a mast which is not particularly robust, or to develop their own calculations that “prove” a fact, however tenuously, and then insist the marketing team uses it.

None of this is an excuse and we must do better. My own university, Loughborough, does very little advertising. We rely on grassroots advocacy, PR, social media, meticulous campaigns, and personalisation. We are fortunate in having strength in student experience, research and rankings.

Money isn't everything

Increasingly, however, markets are a minefield, with many institutions spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on advertising both on and offline and seeking to emulate the methods used by big brands with significantly more spending power. Spending is not necessarily related to league table success; many lower down the rankings spend a significant amount of cash on this activity but some higher up the league tables also spend significant sums on advertising and related marketing.

Marketing spending in higher education has become close to an arms race. The pace gets faster every year and what used to work no longer hits the mark. Agility, speed, nimbleness and honesty are the new gold standards for marketing impact but spending is too often used as a proxy for skill.

On 23 November, vice-chancellors’ group Universities UK hosted an event on innovations in university marketing and communications. Predictably there was a huge focus on youth and digital marketing, new methods of reaching students, multi-platform touchpoints, integration, use of the web, social media and branding. The opening keynote was from the ASA on the new advice and guidance.

It remains to be seen what the long-term impact of all this on the way we market our universities will be. But there is no doubt that change is afoot.

Written as an opinion piece for Research Professional.