The Case for Better, Not More

Why You Can’t Build Up if the Base is Crumbling

Photo by Bernd 📷 Dittrich on Unsplash

When colleges face enrollment declines or flatline growth, the first instinct is often to build. Launch a new program. Add a certificate. Create a shiny new offering to draw in students.

The thinking is: “What else can we offer? What else can we build?”

But here's the truth no one wants to say out loud: if your foundation is weak, adding more floors won't save you. It might just accelerate the collapse.

I’ve watched institutions pour time, energy, and money into building “more” instead of making “better.” And while I’ve seen this strategy work wonders when approached intentionally, I’ve also seen it go painfully (and I mean painfully) wrong.

When Building More Goes Wrong

Take the case of a college that launched a suite of doctoral programs. On paper, it was a smart play. Capture your alumni, draw in new professionals, and increase revenue through a high-ticket offering. They invested heavily: new faculty, a full-time director, and a robust marketing campaign.

But here’s what happened:
Alumni didn’t return. Their first experience with the college had been so poor that the idea of going back wasn’t even a consideration. The reputation had already soured.

And as for new students? The program looked promising until they started asking around. They talked to supervisors in their districts, colleagues, and mentors. People told them to save their time and chose something different.

By the time their enrollment advisor called back, the decision had already been made: this isn’t a good fit.

I’ve seen this same mistake repeated with certificate programs, too—5 to 7-course offerings built quickly in hopes of fast revenue. But if the core programs have a poor reputation, the new offerings get squashed under the weight of it.

When Better Comes First

But I’ve also seen the opposite.

An institution facing low retention and poor job placement outcomes chose to do something different. Instead of building more, they focused on becoming better.

They called their graduates and asked, “What could we have done differently?”
They surveyed current students and even picked up the phone to talk to those who had dropped out.

They heard everything from frustrating faculty dynamics, to outdated assignment, to confusing LMS setups that made it difficult to stay on track.

Then they acted. They made changes to faculty, updated curriculum, and cleaned up the LMS. And then—they called those students back.

Let’s Talk Numbers

Let’s say your institution enrolls 1,000 students each year. If you’re retaining 60%, that means 600 make it to graduation—and 400 walk away.

Now, imagine you reach out to 200 of those 400 students who left. You identify 10 common reasons they dropped—- things you can realistically fix. Then you ask: “If we fixed this, would you consider coming back?”

Let’s say 100 of them say yes and actually re-enroll.

That alone bumps your graduation rate from 60% to 70%. But let’s break it down further:

• If each returning student brings in $3,000 to $5,000 in annual tuition revenue, that’s $300,000 to $500,000 in recovered revenue.

• Now, let’s say one in four returning students refers a friend or colleague who enrolls—that’s 25 new students.

• If those referrals enroll in a longer-form program worth $20,000 in total tuition, that’s an additional $500,000 in new revenue.

Total revenue: $800,000 to $1 million.
Marketing spend: $0.

Now, yes—there is a cost to making improvements. Maybe you need to revise some courses, reassign faculty, clean up your LMS, or enhance advising services. But those costs are nowhere near what you’d spend on large-scale marketing campaigns to acquire new students from scratch. In fact, most schools underestimate just how expensive it is to chase new enrollment when their reputation is weak.

And here’s where it gets really exciting.

Let’s say those 100 returning students are now satisfied, successful students. They’ve had a better experience. They’re connected to the institution again. Now, when you decide to launch a doctoral program, you’re not guessing who will enroll.

You’ve already built your pipeline. You’ve earned back the trust.
And you can confidently invest in building more, knowing your alumni are ready from day one.

You Can’t Build on a Crumbling Foundation

We say we want growth, but real growth isn’t about stacking on new offerings like building blocks. It’s about reinforcing the structure underneath.

You can’t build a second story on a one-story house with a cracked foundation.

In higher education, we often try anyway. And then we act surprised when everything crumbles. When enrollment doesn’t stick, when faculty burn out, when departments fall apart.

So if you’re a program director or a dean assessing your college’s next move, resist the urge to build up.

Instead, look down. Look back. Look at the cracks you’ve ignored for too long and fix what’s broken. Bring back the students who left. Strengthen what you already have.

Because when your foundation is strong, you won’t have to build growth.
It will come.

---

If this resonated with you, you’re in the right place.

I write about the real work of improving higher education—- curriculum, strategy, student experience, and all the messy decisions in between. Subscribe to get thoughtful, practical insights that help you build better, not just more.