May 11, 2026, By Chet Haskell – Every institution of higher education has some form of strategic plan. Indeed, such plans are usually required by accrediting organizations. These plans are supposed to define organizational goals and provide a clear path towards their achievement. For many institutions, strategic plans are largely aspirational, seeking to give guidance to stakeholders in order to channel their energies and to provide a degree of comfort for stakeholders for the road ahead.

The Plight of the Small Private Colleges

However, there is a class of private, non-profit colleges and universities where strategic plans have an existential dimension. There are close to a thousand small (3000 or fewer. students) colleges and universities that are at financial risk of failure. The elemental question these institutions face is: what must we do to stay alive institutionally? Strategic plans thus take on a special role for these institutions, both in their substance and in terms of their framing of the culture through which substance is manifested. Strategic plans here are central to the future of these schools.

The sources of pressures on these institutions are well known. More than eighty have closed in the past decade and another 30 have merged with other institutions.  The conditions for survival of the rest are not propitious.

Funding is at the root of this situation. The current tuition-based economic model for these schools is inadequate to meet their revenue needs. Yes, there a few wealthy institutions  with huge endowments:  there are 94 private institutions with endowments in excess of $1 billion. But these represent only 6% of such schools. The vast majority have small (or no) endowments and limited opportunities for other revenue sources beyond the tuition that comes with enrollments. There are more than 800 institutions with endowments averaging $30 million, which is almost insignificant in terms of how much supporting revenue can be garnered and directed toward the operational costs of the college. And, strikingly, there are at least 328 institutions with no endowment at all.

Furthermore, there are several other sources of pressure on such institutions. Their basic model is typically a residential undergraduate experience for 18-22 year old students, a demographic that is shrinking. Most of these institutions discount their tuition by 50% or more, meaning their situations are even more dire. Generating net tuition revenue means doubling enrollments. While critics sometimes counsel expanding programs to accommodate older, working students, many institutions are poorly set up to do so. Institutions  also lack significant distance education capacity. They have limited opportunities, experience and capital for expansion of programs. Their tenured faculty often lack experience with older students. And they are competing with a large number of similar institutions trying to do the same thing. And there is recent evidence such enrollments are declining. Finally, there is recent evidence such enrollments may also be declining.

The Purpose of a Strategic Plan

Fundamentally, most strategic plans are future-oriented and seek to show how to balance adequate resources with reasonable expenses. Since these schools are tuition dependent, most plans start with the goal of increasing enrollments and presenting ways to achieve this.  However, this is not merely a matter of growing numbers of students or increasing tuition dollars. Institutions of higher education are seamless webs where activities in one area are connected directly to several other areas. There are crucial additional elements that are not as clear-cut as enrollments or total revenue. Money  is necessary, but not sufficient.

The Role of Institutional Mission

The institution’s mission is key. Clear explication of mission presents a college’s basic purpose: why it exists and what it offers to both the individual student and to society at large. Externally, the mission is a crucial message to its internal community, potential students and families, possible donors and external communities about its purpose. Internally, the mission is a foundational expression of why students, faculty, staff and alumni should care about and support the college.

A strong and clear mission statement can help to focus attention and to attract individuals who might wish to study, teach or work there. It can be a powerful differentiator in a crowded marketplace. It can engender pride, loyalty and commitment, sometimes being credited as a reason one wishes to be part of a college, regardless of challenges, high tuition or low salaries. A strong mission statement can help tie an institution together.

A distinct and unambiguous mission statement is central to any strategic plans for the institution. Strategic plans or strategic initiatives must build on mission to express a realistic and direct blueprint to manifest that mission and promote institutional sustainability.

Unfortunately, many mission statements and strategic plans fail in this regard. Maria Toyoda, president of the WASC Senior College and University Commission, a leading  accreditation body, recently addressed the mission component underlying strategic plans, arguing that many college mission statements try to say everything and end up being meaningless. Meaningless missions lead to meaningless strategic plans. Every institution should be examining and perhaps reimagining its mission, preferably with a team of faculty, students, alumni, administrators and board members. This is a good way to get strategic planning rolling and in front of all, if there is time to do so.

Talia Argondezzi, writing in McSweeney’s Internet Tendency, goes further. In a recent piece entitledIntroducing Our Lord and Savior, the College’s New Strategic Initiative, she

satirizes the very concept of strategic plans and initiatives by praising such efforts in quasi-religious terms as promising all things to all people. Good satires are based in fact and Argondezzi is grounded in hers as the director of the writing and speaking program at Ursinus College. (Ursinus has an endowment of approximately $164 million, which places it above the 800 or so institutions most relevant for this essay, but still an institution facing the same risks.)

Strategic Plans are Often Unrealistic

The reality is that many mission statements and strategic plans are in fact often little more than aspirational window dressing. Institutions need a clear sense of where they are, where they are heading and how they intend to get there. Not only do they need to do this for external bodies such as accreditors and for a hope of attracting necessary enrollments and resources, but they also need to so it for all of the internal and external stakeholders.

Time is also relevant. Many strategic plans are constructed as five-year initiatives. This is too short a time frame for the future. Plans should either be shorter in term or, even annually reviewed and updated. Time is no one’s friend.

Unlike for-profit enterprises, the primary goal of private colleges is not simply to make money. A clear mission statement underscores this. And at the same time, it is important to remember that a college, like most organizations, is a collection of individuals working together for a common purpose. In other words, the human elements are central.

Indeed, the matter of culture permeates every college. Personnel decisions – especially presidential searches and other top appointments – often turn not on qualifications or experience, but on subjective judgments on how the individual will fit in. In other words, how will the new leader fit into the existing culture? Search committees always ask this question.

Culture has a significant role in appointments. For example, boards and search committees are asked by executive search firms to define the type of individual being sought for a position and do so in largely subjective terms. Search firms then often fall into a trap of only proposing candidates they interpret as fitting a narrow profile defined by the institution.

Thus, the institutional culture has a defining effect on what a new president or other senior leader should be. Hollis Robbins has described how college leaders generally are part of a nomenklatura, where being seen as appropriate for a leading role typically requires having demonstrated capacity in lower-level roles. The notion of who might be a good leader is often straitened by such expectations, excluding candidates who do not match a preconceived profile and who “might not fit.” This sort of isomorphic behavior has a direct impact not only on who is appointed to various posts, but also on the entire strategic planning process. Getting the right people with a shared culture can enhance the process. Getting this wrong will upset the process and likely lead to suboptimal, undesirable outcomes

What makes a good strategic plan?

Effective institutions employ mission statements and the development of strategic plans as elements of building a common institutional culture, a shared purpose. Mission statements are regularly reviewed with the institution and sometimes modified. Strategic plans often are developed through lengthy and inclusive processes. The concerns of the various constituents or stakeholders are recognized and addressed in some fashion. Accreditors encourage such processes. Good leaders understand and encourage such engagement. Getting people involved is a common means of engendering support for a plan, especially when a plan involves changes.

Of course, this approach may mean a set of compromises where everyone gets something. (Setting the ground for wild satires like Argondazzi’s.) Well-managed plans are more focused and take less of a something for everyone approach. Inputs are taken from all points, but decisions are made about priorities. Realities are made clear, and choices are defined. 

The most important elements of an effective plan are the presentation of how the institution will fulfill its mission. Specific, practical goals and timelines are put forth. Crucially, an effective strategic plan is not only clear and pragmatic, but it is central to the institution’s credibility and the credibility of its leaders. Confidence and trust in leaders are invaluable commodities, and both are built on credibility.

Institutional Culture in Alternative Structures

Not only does institutional culture impact the formation and implementation of a strategic plan. Culture plays a central role in a college’s strategy that looks beyond a plan for success as an independent institution. For another reality today is that many institutions must consider possible partnerships, mergers, or other arrangements if their path to healthy independence is not viable. Just as the news is full of college closures, it is also replete with examples of institutions coming together.

As with single institution strategic plans, money is usually the key element in any discussion of partners. Institutions with sustainable independent budgets usually don’t think much about partnerships. The default position of most private higher education institutions does not involve collaboration.

Forward thinking colleges sometimes address the question: What do we do if our plans fall short? Such an approach will often lead to at least the exploration of possible partnerships or mergers. A school may have programs that could grow, but lack the resources and time it takes to accomplish this. Is there a way a potential partner might be a source for such investments? Real estate sometimes plays a central role as an asset that is not accessible for budget purposes. Is there a way to monetize this asset in collaboration? Can the school be stronger and more sustainable within a partnership structure?

Therefore, a proper plan must not only put forth paths to independent sustainability and success, but it should also at least explore alternatives. This is tricky. While everyone knows colleges are under stress and that many are merging or closing, no one wants their own institution to close. And alternatives like mergers or partnerships are often viewed with trepidation, even if seen as necessary. It may be difficult or even impossible to broach the likely outcomes should plans not bear fruit, especially in plans that are made public. There is always the danger of creating a self-fulfilling partnership. Institutional leaders must be keenly aware of possibilities and sensitive to communication implications.

The Keys to a Successful Partnership

Much has been written about partnerships and mergers as being essential to provide institutional scale and to promote continuing existence. The specifics of any such arrangement are unique to the institutions involved. However, there are three principal elements of any successful deal. First and foremost, the finances must work. The proposed financial arrangements must be realistic and workable for the schools involved. Otherwise, there can be no deal. Both sides need to do their own analysis and reach roughly the same conclusions.

However, a second key is cultural alignment or fit. The cultures of two separate institutions must be melded if the combined entity is to be a success. Cultural fit is essential for two human organizations attempting to become partners. If the cultures cannot come together, it will be nearly impossible to fulfill the third basic requirement: implementation of an agreement.

A merger or partnership is much more than the signing of a formal agreement. That is just the beginning. There are accreditor and regulatory hurdles to be faced. The specifics of program changes, new initiatives, shared services agreements and much more must be addressed. Accomplishing this means people in both institutions must find ways to work together for common purpose. This may be difficult. A collaboration may mean some jobs will be abolished or changed. Or, there are many examples of agreements that have faltered because it became clear that working together might be too stressful or difficult.

The reality is that agreements of this type are complex and take time. Further, it is not the presidents or senior leaders that have to make this work, but faculty and staff at all levels and often alumni must be able to come together. Individuals in a new structure have to develop credibility and trust among each other. People must come together.

Dollars and culture are essential

Colleges facing today’s daunting challenges must be coldly realistic in assessing their situations and exploring options for addressing those challenges, especially financial challenges. It has been said that “no mission, no margin,” meaning that if an institution is unclear about its purpose, it is difficult to attract sufficient resources to implement it. And if the resources cannot be found, the institution must fail and its mission will be unrealized.

Thus, the saying “no margin, no mission” is also true. Private institutions that cannot generate enough money to balance a budget and have at least a little surplus cannot survive for long in their current forms. Boards and leaders must face such realities squarely. And their strategic plan is the crucial place to do so. Failure in this risks adding their institutions to the lengthening list of closures.

Should some form of partnership be an outcome, the same dual requirements of finances and  cultures will form the core of a new plan for the new structure.  In this case, the partnership is the beginning of new chapters, not an end in itself.

Finances and human, cultural matters are inextricably linked in both single institutions and those entering a partnership arrangement. Money and people must go together make for success.

References:

Maria Toyoda, Many college mission statements say everything – and nothing at all.  Chronicle of Higher Education, April 22, 2026

Talia Argondezzi, Introducing Our Lord and Savior, the College’s New Strategic Initiative, McSweeney’s Internet Tendency, February 6, 2026

Hollis Robbins, The Higher Ed Nomenklatura, Inside Higher Ed, May 12, 2025

---