Sustaining a strong brand (i.e., navigating long-term goals) feels more complex than ever.
Marketing has splintered as new skills, technologies and media demand attention, giving rise to strategists of all types. Stretch that splintering over a historically siloed and bureaucratic organization, and you end up navigating a fragmented web of directives that compete across varied business goals.
For strategy to reclaim its place at the center of the institution (i.e., defining its north star), it must lead the way in shaping every aspect of success. Institutions must rally around an organizing principle that drives integration, embedding within it emergent properties that naturally inform direction. In a business context, A.G. Lafley argued that integration happens when institutions answer two key questions: “Where will you play, and how will you win there?”
From advancement to advising, institutions must define how they will win, creating a clear throughline where every decision, action, and adaptation builds toward something greater. As organizations decentralize, re-centralize or reorganize, this definition often breaks down or becomes siloed as daily demands take the wheel.
Lafley again: “Strategy is choice. More specifically, strategy is an integrated set of choices that uniquely positions the firm in its industry so as to create sustainable advantage and superior value relative to the competition.”
Every step (e.g., refining messaging, aligning teams, adapting to shifts) contributes to brand growth. When guided by purpose, this evolution designs a future where the brand thrives as a complete and cohesive entity. And that’s just internal pressure.
Externally, higher ed leaders must navigate even more complexity. From policy shifts to rising career pragmatism, strategy must create alignment while reflecting why a customer chooses the category in the first place. Alignment alone isn’t enough; it must hold a sharp, clear point of view.
To build that kind of advantage, institutions must break down the silos that weaken strategy and shift from fragmented solutions to shared understanding. Start with three critical steps.
Define Your Ambition: What Success Looks Like Across the Institution
No matter the ambition, clarity is key. Do you aim to challenge higher ed conventions? To become the most innovative? Marketing leadership must confidently define success and outline the metrics that support it. Whether tracking shifts in perception, enrollment, or funding, begin by aligning on this definition and collaborating across departments.
Key questions to ask:
- What does success look like for our institution, and who defines it?
- What unique role should our institution play in the broader landscape of higher education?
- Are we solving the right problem, or just the most visible one?
- What is the single most important behavior or perception we need to change?
- Extra credit: Where will we play, and how will we win there?
Set the Stage: Align Teams, Culture, and Execution
Defining ambition is just the start. Institutions must also build the conditions (e.g., structure, process, culture, and programs) to bring it to life.
So often, the issue isn’t strategy; it’s execution.
Key questions to ask:
- Does our current structure enable collaboration or reinforce silos?
- Where does brand strategy live, and is it empowered to lead?
- Are the people doing the work connected to the people shaping the strategy?
- What internal myths hold us back?
- Have we built a culture of follow-through, not just planning?
- What moments across the student journey most reflect our ambition, and are they consistent?
Build a functional community that connects strategic expertise with execution across departments. Embrace holism because nothing happens in isolation. Brilliant strategies fall flat if brands can’t meet expectations. Reports continue to show that brand experiences often underdeliver. Institutions don’t just need better plans; they need better follow-through.
Measure Together: A Shared Framework for Brand and Business Impact
Brand strategy only works when measurement aligns across teams. According to SimpsonScarborough’s latest CMO study, 61% of institutions lack a reporting system or centralization. A shared framework ensures every decision reinforces institutional ambition and supports long-term brand health.
This approach creates a natural bridge between specialists and leadership, forming a shared understanding of how marketing efforts should align and how to improve them continuously.
Key questions to ask:
- What data does each team already track—and is it shared?
- Do our metrics reflect institutional ambition or just marketing performance?
- How do we define and measure brand health?
- Can we draw a clear line from marketing activity to institutional outcomes?
- Are we using measurement to validate decisions, or to inform them?
- Who needs to see this data to make better decisions?
Brand should act as an organizing idea that drives alignment. Think of brand strategy as an operating system—a continuous evolution where every move, message, and decision shapes the whole. Institutions that embrace this mindset will treat strategy as a shared discipline, threading through departments, connecting specialists to leadership, and turning fragmentation into momentum.
