PIANO
PEDAGOGY
FORUM
v. 2, no. 1/January 1, 1999

FORUM ON KEYBOARD TECHNOLOGY

Tom Stampfli
PO Box 500
Milligan College
Milligan College, TN 37682
423.461.8978
TSTAMPFLI@Milligan.edu

Developing Alliances With Industry:
An Alternative Solution to Supplementing Academic Budgets

We've all heard it said, "Love makes the world go round." In the 21st century, educators may need to create a paraphrase of this old adage "Money keeps higher education sound." Downsizing of governmental subsidies for higher education at all levels, coupled with rising costs, have presented administrators with the ever-increasing challenge of simply maintaining existing programs, much less initiating new ones. The cost of maintaining and replacing existing assets too often requires capital expenditures exceeding most departmental resources. The relatively new role that technology plays in various music degree tracks puts further strain on departmental budgets. The useful life span of computers, digital keyboards, and other peripheral technology-based equipment is far less than traditional musical instruments. Yet the technology must be regularly upgraded or replaced to remain state-of-the-art, if it is to retain its value as a teaching tool and recruitment asset. Finally music departments, always at the bottom of the academic food chain, must inherently battle for their share of institutional funding, a struggle exacerbated by the continuing decline of student enrollment within the field.

The point of this litany of woe is obvious: traditional funding sources are currently insufficient to meet the needs of many college and university music programs. Finding economic alternatives to balance the ledger will continue to be the order of the day for some time to come. One promising source of alternative funding may be possible through alliances with the music industry.

There are a number of reasons why such a partnership can be advantageous to both parties. First and foremost, music departments and the music industry share the same demographic constituency. Both are equally alarmed at the shrinking number of children studying music and the subsequent reduction in college-bound students who are entering music as a profession. Music industry analysts finally realize that a further reduction in the number of qualified music teachers will result in an even more limited market potential for their products. Secondly, in this diminishing market, competition is fierce and companies attempt to establish product loyalty as early as possible. That means capturing the attention of future music educators and performers during their academic years. Working with academic institutions by supplying their products at little or no cost is one means of securing that loyalty. Finally, successful marketing in the '90s requires a positive PR image that can be best secured through a perceived interest in the education and welfare of our nation's children. Supporting educational institutions is one of the best ways for the music industry to achieve a positive public image.

While this type of alliance is potentially fruitful, it is by no means a panacea and requires a good deal of effort to achieve results. As with understanding the conditions for successful grant writing, educators must acknowledge and work within the operational parameters of any company with which they desire assistance. As a customer, educational institutions can often dictate many of the terms of a transaction. When seeking economic aid from a company, however, the situation is reversed and educators must sell themselves to be successful. This type of relationship is doomed unless it is approached and established with a quid pro quo mindset. The following guidelines may help to develop such a relationship:

1. Always remember that the goal of any private sector institution is to make a profit. To lose sight of this fact when negotiating with the music industry is to guarantee failure. They are not in the business of philanthropy! While this concept may seem foreign or self-serving to educators more familiar with the nonprofit, service-related activities of the public sector, it is nevertheless a fact that business executives answer to their shareholders who legitimately demand monetary profit. As a result, most business-related contributions to an educational institution must result in some form of reciprocal value to the company. To simply ask for economic help on the basis of its educational merit will usually result in a polite brush-off. Businessmen respect savvy educators who understand these facts and market their proposals accordingly.

2. With the assumption of a quid pro quo relationship, a school must thoroughly scrutinize its strengths and liabilities from the industry's perspective before presenting any proposal. The strengths of any institution are name recognition, student enrollment, and its influence with its at-large constituency, who represent potential clientele for the manufacturer. The extent of an institution's willingness to lend these strengths to a company via endorsement and promotion is also a contributing factor in developing a partnership. Large schools usually have the advantage of name recognition and regional, if not national prestige. Association with well-recognized institutions can enhance the company's public image and marketing capability through effective advertising. Student enrollment is also a factor in the consideration of such alliances, since vendors see larger programs as a guarantee of greater student exposure to their products.

   However, small schools should not despair as larger institutions are often more limited by governmental and bureaucratic restraints concerning the endorsement of products or for-profit companies. Smaller schools usually have more leeway in this area, particularly private institutions. Further, smaller schools may also be better able to tailor their relationship to the needs of a specific manufacturer, thereby offsetting the limitations of a smaller student enrollment. Small colleges and universities often represent a specialized regional or parochail constituency not necessarily available to a manufacturer through general marketing. In either case, an academic institution must know its strengths and minimize its limitations while negotiating with company representatives.

3. It is easier to procure contributions of in-house product than hard currency. It costs a company far less to give an institution an in-house product with a retail value of $5,000 than the equivalent sum of money. Institutional placement programs are the most common means by which companies work with educational institutions. These programs range from placing instruments within a school at no expense to supplying product for a nominal cost through a lease program. Lease programs usually supply product on an annual basis, offering equipment for a marginal lease fee (usually 1-5% of retail value) and the maintenance/shipping costs. In the best arrangements, there are no lease fees, but these are harder to secure. In most cases however, educational institutions must also provide assistance in selling these instruments at the end of the lease period through endorsement and promotion to their constituency. Their success in aiding the sale of these instruments may be tied to the continuation of the lease program. In rare circumstances, companies will sell their product at manufacturer cost to an academic institution. But for most schools, the lease program is the optimum means of securing equipment, as it is constantly updated at an affordable cost.

   Contributions of currency are usually limited to specific events cosponsored by the educational institution and a manufacturer. Cash contributions are rare and usually limited to high-profile service events with media appeal, such as major competitions or national convention events. Individual colleges and universities may be able to secure such sponsorship for events, but only if the company is certain of sufficient media profile to warrant the expenditure.

4. When seeking such an alliance, it's important to have realistic expectations of the industry partners available to your school. Companies whose products are in high demand may be less inclined to establish a relationship with any educational institution, or at best, only with those institutions of highest profile and prestige. Yet there are expanding companies with fine products that are interested in increasing their market share. These are the manufacturers that are likely to do business with an uncommitted school- if it can offer them an opportunity for positive exposure and growth potential.

5. Before entering into negotiations with any manufacturer, an educational institution should be certain that long-term compatibility is likely between both parties. Part of a school's responsibility in this type of relationship is the concrete demonstration of product loyalty. The school will be identified with this company for an indefinite period and possibly long after the relationship ends. The faculty and administration must be willing to support the company image and its product line. This can involve recommending these products to affiliated institutions and constituents during company sales of used or new equipment. It also involves a willingness to recommend these products to the institution's students.

6. Finally, be wary of playing one company against another for a better situation, once a relationship has been established. These tactics can backfire, giving an institution a poor reputation within the music industry. The industry is small and everybody knows everybody else! Alliance possibilities could disappear quickly if an academic institution is labeled as unreliable. Very few schools have the prestige and power to work with more than one company of a specific product line at time.

Developing and securing a working alliance with industry is time-consuming and may require several attempts with different companies before a satisfactory relationship can be forged. Remember that most companies prefer to work though a local dealer who carries their products. A good working relationship with the local retailer is essential to securing and maintaining your partnership with the parent company. Making contact with national representatives of targeted music industries at conventions can also provide opportunities for opening negotiations. Perseverance and a well-marketed proposal have a good chance of eventually bearing fruit. It's well worth the effort.

© 1999 University of South Carolina School of Music