Higher education is a relationship-driven endeavor. But somewhere along the way, the work of building relationships became a series of transactions to be managed.
From the time a student expresses interest in an institution, they start to form a relationship with it—one that can last a lifetime. Those of us who choose this work understand that every interaction—from a recruitment email to a donor call—is an opportunity to deepen trust and belonging.
The financial and competitive pressures on colleges right now are intense. The technologies, from CRMs to AI, offer tremendous potential. But how they are deployed—by humans, for humans—must be grounded in purpose. Do they only serve the bottom line, or do they deepen the student experience and, ultimately, the lifelong relationship between the student and their college?
Easy to say, because the bottom line impact is clear. But the “return on relationships” is far harder to pin down. But students—and ultimately alumni—will see it: in their interactions with the people who are on the front lines of their relationship with the college.
Every conversation builds on the last, demonstrating not just that we know the student but that we keep getting to know them.This sends the signal that the college is in it for the long haul, from selecting a major to navigating a career.
Technology platforms have spoken in these terms for years, but we continue to see colleges reintroducing themselves to students as they move from one office to the next. This is not a technology gap. It’s a people gap. The data and systems need to put staff in the best position to connect genuinely with students and alumni, with a focus on what matters to them at each stage of their relationship with the college.
As a college president said to one of us recently, “all relationships matter.” The relationship-building process, whether led by an admission or advancement officer, is the same—and it is deeply human. Put people in the best position to connect with people, and make sure every tool and technology serves that goal. Everything else isn’t just noise; it’s a waste of time.
Tell a consistent story
Get the story straight. The college’s value proposition and how it connects to the experience and expectations of each prospective student, alum, and donor need to be crystal clear.
Why that story matters will vary by audience: a prospective student weighing their options, an alum deciding whether to get involved, a donor considering a gift. But the underlying value proposition is consistent. All engagement ultimately contributes to the institution’s mission. The job is to show each person how they fit in, and then show them that their actions mattered.
Do this with a voice that reflects the institution’s brand while speaking to what each person actually cares about. One of us worked at a faith-based institution where conversations with both prospective students and donors were grounded in the college’s spiritual identity. But what that meant diverged from there. For a student, it shaped the campus experience. For a donor, it anchored the case for investment. Same story. Different chapter.
Shared roles, stronger relationships
Outside of higher ed, no one knows the difference between an admission and an advancement officer, nor should they have to. They just want good, consistent information from people who seem to know them. If the story is one story, equip frontline staff to tell it.
Joint admission and advancement officers, whether based on campus or in regional offices, create real efficiency. But more importantly, they put talented people in positions to build relationships with prospective students and families as well as prospective donors. The role is different. The relationship is the same.
Define your return on relationships
Colleges have an abundance of data and significant investment in the tools to collect and process it. The payoff isn’t just better management; it’s stronger relationships.
Too often, the admissions system is disconnected from student information, and both are separate from the alumni database. This is more than a missed opportunity. It is a structural contradiction—colleges that say they are committed to lifelong relationships operating systems that treat each phase as a fresh start.
Integration efforts are expensive, and so the conversation defaults to ROI. It should default to ROR (return on relationships). Through that lens, investment in connected data and platforms isn’t a technology decision. It’s a mission decision. And in an era of automation, institutions that build genuine, sustained human connections won’t just be doing the right thing. They’ll have a competitive advantage.
Executing on “it’s all one thing”
The entry point is admission. The long game is advancement. But the relationship is continuous, and the institutions that treat it that way will outperform those that don’t.
That means hiring and developing people who can speak to the full arc of the student relationship, not just their slice of it. It means integrating systems so that knowledge doesn’t get lost every time a student moves from one office to the next. It means measuring what matters—not just cost savings but the depth and durability of the connections being built.
None of this requires a transformation initiative. It requires intention. Enrollment, student affairs, and advancement are not separate functions serving separate goals. They are chapters in a single, ongoing relationship between a person and an institution. When colleges operate that way, it shows.
It really is all one thing.
If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
