Key points:
- The dialogue between institutions and tech providers must be open and ongoing
- Bolstering network continuity to support technology adoptions
- The hidden cost of legacy systems in higher ed
- For more on edtech integration, visit eCN’s Campus Leadership hub
In recent years, the higher education landscape has witnessed a significant wave of mergers and acquisitions in the academic technology sector. And just weeks ago, I spent three days trying to pull any carrots of wisdom from a user conference hosted by one of the conglomerates birthed by these mergers–a company with which my institution has a multi-product contract. At times, it feels as though these events become an echo-chamber rather than a collaboration that provides meaningful insight to a path forward. And while the company touted the “power of working together,” I felt increasingly isolated.
These companies have an ostensibly holistic vision for education technology and aim to provide comprehensive solutions from enrollment to alumni engagement. However, this overarching ambition often comes at a steep price–the individual tools within these portfolios suffer from neglect, resulting in subpar performance and deserted development.
The core issue is resource allocation. Tools with the highest average contract values receive the most attention and investment, while others are neglected. This focus on revenue-generating tools undermines the potential impact of these technologies. Instead of fostering a balanced ecosystem of robust educational tools, we face a scenario similar to past issues with Enterprise Resource Planning systems, where a few standout pieces overshadow a collection of mediocre ones.
The current laser-focus on integrated data without a view of the bigger picture adds to this complexity. While integrated data offers immense potential for insights and improvements, the focus often shifts away from the usability and functionality of the individual tools used daily by faculty, staff and students.
Data integration is only valuable if the tools feeding this data are effective, user-friendly, and enhance the educational experience; data lakes run dry if faculty and staff don’t find systems valuable enough to actually use.
The vision of seamless data integration, tracking a student’s journey from their first steps on campus to their actions as a lifelong donor, is appealing. Yet, the trend among large academic tech companies to create vast system empires, only to let some tools languish while diverting resources to polish others, is counterproductive. It makes more sense for these companies to choose their verticals within higher education, excel within those niches, and inspire innovation rather than attempting to cover all bases inadequately.
The higher education sector is unique in its requirements and challenges. It demands technology solutions tailored to its specific needs rather than generic tools potentially repurposed from other industries. Big edtech companies must remember that they claim to serve educational institutions, not just to maximize profits. Their success should be measured not only by financial performance but also by the tangible benefits they bring to campuses and students.
If that’s not their view, campuses must identify alternatives–even if this means going back to campus-created templates and tools. And those of us who source and sign the contracts need to make a clear call to action for big academic technology companies and their investors–refocus your efforts. Because the benefits of a sole provider are lost when its components become stale.
My advice is to invest thoughtfully and strategically in tools that truly matter, those that directly enhance the educational experience. Be discerning in your mergers and acquisitions, ensuring that each addition to your portfolio aligns with your company’s mission and doesn’t simply satisfy an oft-missed RFP requirement. Avoid spreading yourselves too thin in the pursuit of market dominance or capital return. Instead, strive to be the best in your chosen areas, providing exceptional value and support to the institutions you serve.
End users–not just chief information officers and procurement officials–must feel empowered to push back when technologies do not meet their needs or head in unproductive directions. The dialogue between educational institutions and tech providers must be open and ongoing, ensuring that the tools developed and deployed are genuinely beneficial for students, faculty, and staff. At my institution, we are empowered to push companies regarding roadmaps and timelines with an understanding that we have invested in the internal people, processes, and tools to not be afraid to consider in-house options when needed.
We must hold these tech conglomerates accountable and remind them of a shared primary mission–to support our campuses and ensure student success. If they overextend themselves and fall victim to faulty assumptions or valuations, it is not just their bottom line that suffers, but the future of higher education itself.
If we truly aim to elevate the educational experience, we must hold edtech conglomerates accountable for delivering on their promises. Let’s demand they live up to their missions and visions rather than just claiming to. It’s time to call for a focused approach to innovation–one that prioritizes the real needs of educators and students over the relentless pursuit of market dominance.
Let’s challenge these companies to invest wisely, ensuring their tools are not just functional but exceptional. After all, the future of higher education depends on the strength of the technologies we choose to support it. If these giants cannot rise to the challenge, we must be prepared to walk away and seek out alternatives that do.
Will Miller
Associate Vice President for Continuous Improvement and Institutional Performance
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
904-495-3574
Dr. Will Miller is a recognized leader in institutional effectiveness, student success, and continuous improvement. As Associate Vice President for Continuous Improvement and Institutional Performance and SACSCOC Liaison at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, he oversees assessment, accreditation, state authorization, and institutional effectiveness for three campuses, 100+ off-campus sites, and 30,000 students.