Revenue diversification is a term that becomes more relevant as higher education institutions are confronted with increased regulation, competition, declining enrollments, and strained finances. A challenge that many institutions face is that expenditures are higher than revenues and increase faster than them. The term Revenue diversification seems obvious to higher education administration professionals, although they do not all define it the same way. For that reason, it needs a precise definition so that the industry genuinely can embrace the concept and thereby seek to generate more revenues to drive existing and innovative agendas. Indeed, a common understanding will allow universities to develop strategies to reduce the reliance on traditional tuition and fees. The study examines three not-for-profit institutions with a student population less than 5,000 that already are diversifying their revenue streams. The definition of leadership at each institution is compared with the strategies that have been implemented or proposed in order to understand whether there is alignment. The three cases—Stevenson University, Franklin & Marshall College, and Oglethorpe University—respectively have the following story lines: 1) growth is the only possibility; 2) the current situation is one of stasis, and the way forward is unclear; 3) efforts must be undertaken to improve financial viability. In addition to the qualitative research, the study also encompasses an analysis of IPEDS that reflects how each institution is changing its revenues in comparison to a similarly situated group of institutions. The findings reveal that Revenue diversification is on everybody’s mind, but the definition of the term is inconclusive. Leadership teams are trying to determine what revenue-diversification strategies will work for the institutions and its stakeholders to be able to offset expense increases. Identifying new revenue sources will entail pursuing non-historical revenue sources, which includes academic programs, services, property, institutional advancement, and more. The higher education environment is concerning to many of its member institutions, and by diversifying revenues, long-term viability can be secured.
|Advisor:||Zemsky, Robert M.|
|Commitee:||Armacost, Mary-Linda M., Boston, Wallace E.|
|School:||University of Pennsylvania|
|Department:||Higher Education Management|
|School Location:||United States -- Pennsylvania|
|Source:||DAI-A 79/01(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Education finance, Higher Education Administration, Higher education|
|Keywords:||Change, Diversification, Education, Higher, Revenue, Strategy|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be