I. Introduction
II. Summary
III. Task Force on Strategic Environment
A. U.S. News and World Report
B. Mixed Perceptions, New Opportunities
C. Recommendations
IV. Task Force on Technology
A. Assumptions
B. Recommendations
V. Task Force on Visibility and Communications
VI. Conclusion
A. Summary of Recommendations
B. Future Topics
VII. Appendices
A. OCPC Members, 1996-97
B. U.S. News and World Report Rankings
I. Introduction This document represents the third annual report from the On-Campus PlanningCommittee (OCPC) aimed at improving Hamilton's market competitiveness. A yearago we said, "Hamilton's strategic planning process ... seeks to provide anincreasingly superior liberal arts education for an increasingly superior groupof students." While our objective remains the same, our methods havechanged.
The On-Campus Planning Committee's June 1995 report discussed in broad termssome of the challenges confronting postsecondary institutions in general andHamilton in particular. It noted the demographic and fiscal challengesconfronting the College and suggested that Hamilton must plan around issues of"institutional identity, academic climate, and student culture."
One year later, in June 1996, the OCPC concluded its deliberations with eightrecommendations on subjects ranging from identity to institutional size tofinancial aid and facilities. Many of these recommendations affirmed currentdirections -- regarding size, increases in financial aid, curricular planningand stabilization of the employee base -- and one of the recommendations,conducting an audit of educational facilities, was implemented this year withthe assistance of Dober and Associates.
This year's committee began its work with a two-day visit from George Keller,a leading authority on strategic planning in colleges and universities.Keller's visit was provocative and controversial. He argued that soundstrategic planning is not the same as comprehensive planning. The latter asksall divisions in an institution to plan and then implement -- to set goals andobjectives according to a timetable and then execute the plan. Keller'salternative, what he called a "back of the envelope" approach, suggests thatplanning should focus on a few specific, institution-wide initiatives thatwould make a college or university more competitive and productive.
Although there was considerable debate about Keller's perceptions ofHamilton, the committee did adopt a more focused variation of his approach. Wedecided that the On-Campus Planning Committee could function most effectively if itserved as a broadly representative "think tank" for issues of potentialstrategic importance to the president and Board of Trustees. Such issues mightarise in a variety of ways, and at the initiative of different constituencies,but ultimately they would be determined to be of significant strategicimportance by the president and the Board. The OCPC would then help frame andinvestigate these issues and make recommendations to the president and theTrustee Planning Committee.
Using this model, the committee divided its work into three task forces. Each was charged with examining more specific issues and making recommendationsthatcould be implemented in the short term within the general framework ofPresident Tobin's goal of making Hamilton better known for rigor and academicexcellence. The Task Force on Strategic Environment examined some specificaspects of Hamilton's competitive position vis-a-vis other selective liberalarts colleges, the Technology group investigated the role technology might playin improving teaching and learning at Hamilton, and the Visibility andCommunications task force considered ways to make Hamilton better known.
The first two groups offer recommendations below, some of which are alreadybeing implemented. The work of the third group is being done primarily througha "communications audit" currently under way by Marts and Lundy consultantAnn Duffield, who also directs the Pew Higher Education Roundtable, part of theInstitute for Research on Higher Education at the University of Pennsylvania.The third report will be completed after Duffield presents her report to thiscommittee for discussion.
III. Task Force on StrategicEnvironment
This group (Peter Blanchfield, Carol Drogus, Rit Fuller, David Paris, NancyThompson, and, in the second semester, Jan Coates) was charged with examiningthe strategic environment specifically relevant to Hamilton. Its aim was toprovide a more focused analysis of Hamilton's position among selective liberalarts colleges with an eye toward increasing our competitiveness with them. Tooversimplify, we sought to discover what people see when they look at Hamilton,how prospective students (and others
