In moments of uncertainty, the stories institutions tell can be just as powerful as the data they present. This reality became especially evident during the COVID 19 pandemic, when public colleges and universities faced significant financial strain while continuing to serve students in rapidly changing conditions. In their 2024 study, Billings, Rubin, Gándara, and Hammond explore how higher education leaders strategically framed their budget requests to state legislators during this period. Their research offers not only a window into institutional advocacy but also a roadmap for leaders seeking to align data, storytelling, and policy priorities in meaningful ways.
Using a narrative policy framework and a multiple case study design, the authors examined an extensive body of evidence, including 131 hours of legislative budget meeting transcripts and 62 supporting documents from institutions in California and Texas. This methodological approach allowed them to go beyond surface level observations and instead analyze how institutional leaders constructed their messages, what themes they emphasized, and how those themes resonated with policymakers.
The findings reveal a consistent pattern in how higher education officials communicated their funding needs. Rather than focusing solely on financial deficits or institutional hardships, leaders framed their arguments around three central themes. First, they emphasized the economic role of higher education, highlighting how colleges and universities contribute to workforce development, innovation, and regional economic stability. By doing so, they positioned higher education not as a cost center but as an essential investment in the state’s future.
Second, institutional leaders underscored stability in accountability measures. Metrics such as enrollment, student persistence, and graduation rates were presented as evidence of institutional effectiveness, even amid the disruptions caused by the pandemic. This emphasis reassured policymakers that public funds were being used responsibly and that institutions remained committed to measurable outcomes.
Third, leaders highlighted effective institutional management. By demonstrating fiscal responsibility, adaptability, and strategic decision making, they reinforced their credibility and built trust with legislators. This narrative of competence was particularly important during a time when state budgets were under intense pressure and competing priorities were abundant.
Ultimately, the authors conclude that these narrative strategies were not accidental. Instead, they were carefully aligned with the values and expectations of policymakers. By framing their requests in ways that emphasized economic impact, accountability, and efficiency, higher education leaders were able to make a compelling case for continued or increased funding.
For professionals engaged in Strategic Enrollment Management, this study carries significant implications. At its core, Strategic Enrollment Management is about more than managing admissions numbers or optimizing recruitment strategies. It is about aligning institutional goals with student success outcomes and ensuring long term sustainability. The metrics commonly used in SEM, such as enrollment trends, retention rates, and graduation outcomes, are not only internal tools for planning and assessment. They are also powerful instruments for external advocacy.
The research by Billings and colleagues highlights the importance of translating these metrics into narratives that resonate beyond campus boundaries. Data alone rarely persuades. It is the interpretation and framing of that data that gives it meaning and impact. For example, an increase in retention rates is not just a statistic. When framed effectively, it becomes a story about student support, institutional commitment, and the efficient use of public resources. Similarly, stable or growing enrollment can be positioned as evidence of institutional relevance and community trust.
This perspective challenges SEM leaders to expand their roles. In addition to analyzing data and implementing strategies, they must also become skilled communicators who understand how to connect institutional performance with broader societal goals. This includes recognizing the priorities of policymakers, such as economic development, workforce readiness, and fiscal accountability, and aligning institutional narratives accordingly.
Another key takeaway from the study is the importance of context. The success of any narrative depends on its ability to resonate with its audience. In the case of state legislators, this means understanding the political, economic, and cultural environment in which decisions are made. What matters to policymakers in one state or region may differ significantly from another. Therefore, effective SEM practice requires not only technical expertise but also contextual awareness and adaptability.
The COVID 19 pandemic underscored the need for this kind of strategic communication. Institutions were forced to justify their value in an environment of heightened scrutiny and limited resources. Those that succeeded were often the ones that could clearly articulate their contributions to society and demonstrate their effectiveness through both data and narrative.
As higher education continues to navigate financial challenges and shifting policy landscapes, the lessons from this study remain highly relevant. Leaders must recognize that advocacy is not a separate function from institutional strategy. Instead, it is an extension of it. The same data that informs enrollment planning and student success initiatives can and should be leveraged to tell compelling stories that influence policy decisions.
In conclusion, the work of Billings, Rubin, Gándara, and Hammond illustrates the power of narrative in shaping higher education policy outcomes. By aligning data driven evidence with values that resonate with policymakers, institutional leaders can more effectively advocate for the resources they need. For those involved in Strategic Enrollment Management, this means embracing a dual role as both analysts and storytellers. In doing so, they can help ensure that their institutions not only survive in times of crisis but also thrive in the years ahead.
Reference
Billings, M. S., Rubin, P. G., Gándara, D., & Hammond, L. (2024). Higher education policy narratives during COVID 19: How are budget requests justified to state legislatures? Research in Higher Education, 65(4), 625 to 654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-024-09798-3
