SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive Factor … SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive...

1

SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and

Competitive Factor Analysis

2013-14 Report

SPPE ● Strategic Planning and Performance Excellence (210) 485-0750 www.alamo.edu/planning

DRAFT

2

SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive Factor Analysis 2013-14 Report

Table of Contents

Page

I. Executive Summary 3

II. SWOT Analysis 6

SWOT Analysis Results (Top 5) 6

SWOT Analysis Top Results by Stakeholder Category 7

SWOT Analysis Top Results by Campus 8

III. Priorities 9

Top Priorities for the Alamo Colleges by Stakeholder Category 12

Top Priorities for the Alamo Colleges by Campus 13

IV. Competitive Factor Analysis 14

Overall Competitive Factor Analysis Results 14

Competitive Factor Analysis Top Results by Stakeholder Category 16

Competitive Factor Analysis Top Results by Campus 16

V. Appendices 17

Appendix A. Sample of SWOT Analysis Survey 18

Appendix B. Frequency Distribution of Responses to SWOT Survey by Stakeholder Category 25

Appendix C. Frequency Distribution of Responses to SWOT Survey by Campus 28

Appendix D. Comments Provided by Responding Stakeholders 31

3

I. Executive Summary This SWOT Analysis report presents the results of the Fall 2013 online survey on the Alamo Colleges’ strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. The report includes a list of priorities for the Alamo Colleges identified by survey respondents as well as a list of competitive factors related to area institutions of higher education. This information is provided prior to the Spring 2014 Alamo Colleges strategic planning retreat as a tool for the review, update, and reaffirmation of the strategic plan. The Survey The online survey (sample in Appendix A) addressed the following areas: Strengths: What are the top 3 things that the Alamo Colleges do well? Weaknesses: What are the top 3 things that the Alamo Colleges should improve? Opportunities: What opportunities could the Alamo Colleges take advantage of in the next three years? Threats: What is changing in the environment which could adversely affect the Alamo Colleges? Priorities 1: What should the Alamo Colleges address immediately? Priorities 2: What should the Alamo Colleges preserve at all costs? Priorities 3: What future direction or decision should the Alamo Colleges avoid at all costs? Competitive Factors 1: What do the Alamo Colleges do better than other institutions of higher education in the area? Competitive Factors 2: What do other institutions of higher education in the area do better than the Alamo Colleges? The Respondents In November 2013, 284 strategic planning contributors (identified by the five colleges and the district) were invited to take the online SWOT analysis survey, including questions about priorities and competitive factors. The rate of response to this survey was 49 percent or 140 of 284 Alamo Colleges stakeholders completing the online survey. The distribution of respondents according to seven stakeholder categories and six campuses was the following:

Stakeholder SAC SPC PAC NVC NLC District Not an

employee of Alamo

Unknown Total

Adjunct Faculty 2 1 4 4 4 15

Full-Time Faculty 7 1 1 3 5 17 Vice Chancellor or College President 4 4

College Staff or Administrator 10 5 8 6 5 1 1 1 37

District Staff or Administrator 1 47 48

Student 3 2 1 2 1 3 12

Community Member 6 6

Unknown 1 1

Total 22 9 14 16 15 52 10 2 140 * Presidents’ responses were included in the District count to ensure their anonymity. Methodology Collected responses to multiple choice questions were tabulated by stakeholder category and campus. Responses to open-ended questions were synthesized, categorized, and tabulated by stakeholder category and campus. The frequency distributions of all responses appear in Appendices B and C. The identified Alamo Colleges strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats, priorities, and competitive factors are presented below.

4

Highlights of Results by Stakeholder Category 1. Top SWOT Results:

Stakeholder S W O T

Adjunct Faculty

Instruction quality; Affordability/value; Programs offerings; Workforce and economic development (training, education, programs, support); Student centeredness.

Employee support (benefits, development); Budgeting/resource allocation; Collaboration between district and colleges; Retention strategies; Student support services.

Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.).

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP); Funding reductions; High school misalignment with colleges.

Full-Time Faculty Affordability/value; Instruction quality; Accessibility/recruitment; Programs offerings.

Collaboration between district and colleges; Communication (internal, external); Collaboration among colleges; Data-informed decision making.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.); Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue; Establish/strengthen partnerships.

High school misalignment with colleges; Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP); Funding reductions; Competition from other higher education institutions; Accreditation requirements.

Vice Chancellor or College President

Affordability/value; Accessibility/recruitment; Programs offerings; Student centeredness; Student support services; Technology; Employee support (benefits, development); Leadership; Partnerships; Financial management; Planning.

Collaboration between district and colleges; Communication (internal, external).

Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.); Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue.

Funding reductions; High school misalignment with colleges; Competition from other higher education institutions.

College Staff or Administrator

Affordability/value; Accessibility/recruitment; Programs offerings; Student centeredness; Student support services; Instruction quality; Facilities.

Collaboration between district and colleges; Communication (internal, external); Data-informed decision making; Process improvement; Budgeting/resource allocation.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue; Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.); Establish/strengthen partnerships.

Funding reductions; Competition from other higher education institutions; Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP); Accountability requirements; Accreditation requirements; High school misalignment with colleges.

District Staff or Administrator

Affordability/value; Workforce and economic development (training, education, programs, support); Programs offerings; Student centeredness; Technology; Leadership; Data-informed decision making; Budgeting/resource allocation.

Collaboration between district and colleges; Communication (internal, external); Collaboration among colleges; Graduation/completion; Data-informed decision making; Process improvement.

Establish/strengthen partnerships; Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue; Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.); Articulation agreements with four-year institutions.

Funding reductions; Competition from other higher education institutions; High school misalignment with colleges; Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP); Economic downturn..

Student Affordability/value; Institutional image/culture/pride; Instruction quality.

Programs offerings; Graduation/completion; Collaboration between district and colleges; Retention strategies.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.).

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP); Inflation/cost of living; High school dropout rates.

Community Member

Affordability/value; Institutional image/culture/pride; Workforce and economic development (training, education, programs, support); Leadership.

Graduation/completion; Collaboration between district and colleges; Retention strategies; Marketing/promotion program.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Workforce needs (workforce demands for emerging industries/programs, skilled workers); Establish/strengthen partnerships; Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.).

Funding reductions; High school misalignment with colleges; Economic downturn; High school dropout rates; Community's disengagement/complacency; Legal/regulatory changes.

S = Strengths; W = Weaknesses; O = Opportunities; T = Threats

5

2. Top Priorities and Competitive Factors: P1 = Priorities 1: What should the Alamo Colleges address immediately? P2 = Priorities 2: What should the Alamo Colleges preserve at all costs? P3 = Priorities 3: What future direction or decision should the Alamo Colleges avoid at all costs? C1 = Competitor Factors 1: What do the Alamo Colleges do better than other institutions of higher education in the area? C2 = Competitor Factors 2: What do other institutions of higher education in the area do better than the Alamo Colleges? Stakeholder P1 P2 P3 C1 C2

Adjunct Faculty

Enrollment; Hiring issues; Faculty issues; student support services

Student Support Services; Counseling; Student Centered Focus

Over-standardizing /Weakening Curriculum; Student Svcs Budget Cuts

Student centeredness; Affordability.

High quality of instruction; Marketing; Student centeredness.

Full-Time Faculty Lack of Leadership; Academic Autonomy; District managing colleges

High quality education; College individuality; Academic Freedom; Evidence decision-making

Cookie cutter college approach; Common textbooks

Student centeredness; Affordability.

Marketing; Internal processes (recruitment/enrollment/ registration, completion/ graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, short pathways); Completion/graduation; High quality of instruction; Innovation; Leadership.


Communication; Focus on few major issues; Strengthening Student Services

Individual College cultures; Ease of Accessibility; Student Centered focus

Not fully serving all student populations; Student Support Services Budget Cuts; Decentralization of district operations

Value; Accessibility.

Marketing; Completion/graduation; Customer service.


Technology Issues; Enrollment; Resource allocations for new Initiatives

Individual College Culture; Affordability; Quality Education; Alamo Way (Respect)

Excessive Initiatives/Limited resources; Staffing budget cuts; Eliminating College Individuality

Student centeredness; Affordability; Value; High quality of instruction.

Marketing; Internal processes (recruitment/enrollment/ registration, completion/ graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, short pathways); Student support services.


Lack of Leadership; Prioritization; Ease of Enrollment process

Integrity/Trust; Commitment to Community; Affordability; Accessibility

Unjustified decisions (i.e. Expansion; increasing debt svc); Political agendas; Not serving all students

Affordability; Value; Accessibility.

Marketing; Internal processes (recruitment/enrollment/ registration, completion/ graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, short pathways); High quality of instruction; Completion/graduation.

Student Funding for Student Services; Communication Student Engagement

Affordability; Faculty/Student Ratios

Budget cuts to the Arts; Non student-centered leadership

Affordability; Student centeredness; Developing leaders.

Student support services; Program variety; Marketing; Partnerships/community outreach.

Community Member

Student Advisory Services; Collaboration with High Schools to reduce dropout rates;

Affordability; Integrity; Alamo Way (Vision)

Losing focus of student needs; Technology which Impact students; Abandoning community centers

Affordability. Completion/graduation

6

II. SWOT Analysis The overall top five Alamo Colleges strengths and weaknesses as well as the overall top five opportunities and threats to the Alamo Colleges appear, along with their relative frequencies, in the following chart. SWOT Analysis Overall Results (Top 5)

Top 5 Strengths

Affordability/value, 20.9% Instruction quality, 8.0% Programs offerings, 6.8% Workforce and economic developm., 6.1% Accessibility/recruitment, 5.8%

Top 5 Weaknesses

Collaboration between district and colleges, 14.6% Communication (internal; external), 11.0% Collaboration among colleges, 7.2% Data-informed decision making, 7.2% Graduation/completion, 6.5%

Top 5 Opportunities

Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies), 16.6%

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions, 15.1%

Technology (demand for new technologies; distance education; etc.), 14.3%

Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue, 13.5%

Establish/strengthen partnerships, 13.3%

Top 5 Threats Funding reductions, 17.3% Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP), 12.5% Competition from other higher education institutions, 11.3% High school misalignment with colleges, 10.6% Accreditation requirements, 5.7%

* Percentages indicate proportion of responses within each cell.

7

The top SWOT Analysis results are presented by stakeholder category and campus in the following two tables. See Appendices B and C for a complete frequency distribution of all SWOT Analysis results. SWOT Analysis Top Results by Stakeholder Category

Top

Strength Top

Weakness Top

Opportunity Top

Threat

Adjunct Faculty Instruction quality. Employee support (benefits, development).

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.).

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP).

Full-Time Faculty Affordability/value.

Collaboration between district and colleges.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions.

High school misalignment with colleges.


Affordability/value. Collaboration between district and colleges.

Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies).

Funding reductions.

College Staff or Administrator Affordability/value.



Funding reductions.

District Staff or Administrator Affordability/value.


Establish/strengthen partnerships.

Funding reductions.

Student Affordability/value. Program offerings.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies).


Community Member Affordability/value.

Graduation/ completion; Collaboration between district and colleges; Retention strategies; Marketing/ promotion program.

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions; Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies); Establish/strengthen partnerships.

Funding reductions.

8

SWOT Analysis Top Results by Campus

Top

Strength Top

Weakness Top

Opportunity Top

Threat

SAC Affordability/value. Collaboration between district and colleges.

Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.).

Funding reductions

SPC Affordability/value. Communication (internal; external).



PAC Affordability/value. Collaboration between district and colleges.

Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies).

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation,

illiteracy, LEP).

NVC Affordability/value. Collaboration between district and colleges.


Student/citizen issues (poor preparation,

illiteracy, LEP).

NLC Affordability/value. Collaboration between district and colleges.

Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue; Establish/strengthen partnerships.

Accreditation requirements.

District Affordability/value. Collaboration between district and colleges.

Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies); Establish/strengthen partnerships.

Funding reductions.

Other Affordability/value. Graduation/completion.

Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies); Articulation agreements with four-year institutions.

Funding reductions; Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP); Economic downturn; High school dropout rates; Inflation/cost of living.

9

III. Priorities The following three charts indicate what the Alamo Colleges should address, preserve, and avoid.

1. What should the Alamo Colleges address immediately?

N %

-Leadership Issues (address political changes; public 360 Evaluations of PVC; distrust of District; District administrat. on control over the Colleges; lack of appropriate leadership; not supporting CEO; promote teamwork; reactive)

14 9.2

-Communication (transparency (4); create capacity for effective internal communications; inform appropriate employees of PVC decisions/process change in a timely manner (3); with students (2); with Faculty; from HR; monitor & measure for effectiveness)

13 8.6

-Personnel Shortages (hire more staff/faculty (2); Allied Health faculty; college operations(2); college student services (3); college programs(2); student services (3))

10 6.6

-Enrollment (simplification/ease (4); possible barriers & effectiveness i.e. Alamo Enroll/MyMAP; growth; simplify registration process; competition)

8 5.3

-Technology Issues (Banner issues/limitations; leaving behind populations with technological advances; training students in new technology; accommodate staffing shortages; Fix IT; monitor student usage technology trends)

8 5.3

-Collaboration (between district and college (3); among departments like registration; with high schools preparing students for college level coursework; with high schools to reduce dropout rates)

7 4.6

-Completion/graduation rates (5) (simplify degree award process to improve rate; address lack of) 7 4.6 -Employment Issues (satisfaction; morale; promotional opportunities; workplace safety) 7 4.6 -Budgeting (expense control/unnecessary spending; evaluation of non-productive programs; flawed model implications; presidents autonomy over resource allocations; preventative maintenance cuts)

6 3.9

-Student Support Services (advising; counseling students to help students set realistic expectations (2); improvements to attract/retain students; basic life/study skills)

6 3.9

-Distance Learning (alignment with proprietary models; improve instructional quality; centralize course offerings) 5 3.3 -Hiring Issues (HR understanding hiring needs; inability to hire staff/faculty; process debilitating; inability to meet demand for new faculty/staffing; not providing better matrix for hiring and extending accountability)

5 3.3

-New Imitative Issues (resource allocations (2); too many; Complete roll out of current initiative before embarking on improvements/changes; over extending employees)

5 3.3

-Student experience/needs (engagement; awarding financial aid) 5 3.3 -Compensation (based on merit; competitive pay; mid-year increase; adjunct faculty pay & benefits) 4 2.6 -Faculty Issues (competency; lack of academic autonomy; adjunct inclusion in campus activities) 4 2.6 -Funding Opportunities (to offset reductions; fundraising to support college program/initiatives) 3 2.0 -Prioritization (identify major issues to focus on; focus on WIGS; process improvement initiatives) 3 2.0 -Streamline/standardize (district approval process with timelines to meet customer needs; student services protocols; user-friendly program evaluation metrics)

3 2.0

-Accessibility 2 1.3 -Employee development (focus on "hard skills; to increase retention and growth) 2 1.3 -Funding/state reductions 2 1.3 -Innovation (promoting; exploring nontraditional semesters) 2 1.3 -Offer faculty option to teach/hold office hours exclusively online (Full-time) 2 1.3 -Retention 2 1.3 -Other (Unique responses: Accreditation (NLC); Annexation efforts; Articulation agreements; Citizen issues; District administrators should understand how students learn; District departments understanding college needs - i.e. PR, HR and Finance; Misalignment between P-16 and higher education; Monitoring remedial students so they don't fall between the tracks; Perception enrollment is for students who cannot make it in higher level institutions; Poor preparation; Relocation of staff at Houston St; State Reporting issues; Textbook Costs; Threats; Transferring transcripts incoming and outgoing; TSI; Workforce development).

17 11.2

Total 152 100.0%

10

2. What should the Alamo Colleges preserve at all costs?

N %

Affordability (low tuition (18); Dual credit & early college HS) 19 13.1

Individual College Cultures (embrace key differentiators/uniqueness (2) ) 16 11.0 Quality education (instruction (6); face-to-face instruction (2); training programs; exceptional program) 13 9.0 Accessibility 10 6.9 Student-centered focus/Student Success 9 6.2 Integrity (public image as a District; of community college model; rigorous programs) 8 5.5 Alamo Way (vision; respect for all (2); enforce new values; faculty commitment to vision) 7 4.8 Faculty (academic Autonomy for professors; qualified faculty and adjunct pool; Diverse FT workforce; funding; Integrity; teaching diverse populations)

7 4.8

Faculty/Student Ratios 6 4.1 Leadership (student-centered; decentralized; training/development for current & future leaders) 5 3.4 Commitment to community (roots/history) 4 2.8 Community outreach efforts 4 2.8 College Collaboration (Integration of systems/business processes across colleges) 3 2.1 Partnerships with business/community (ISD's) 3 2.1 Student support services (quality of services; counseling) 3 2.1 Academic Freedom 2 1.4 Data informed decision-making 2 1.4 Innovation (commitment to changing educational delivery systems) 2 1.4 Retention 2 1.4 Student development & Leadership opportunities 2 1.4 Technology investments 2 1.4 Value of education 2 1.4 Other (Unique responses: Academic Standards; Career preparation; Commitment to at-risk students; Distance Learning expansion; Grant Administration Flexibility; Institute implementations; MyMap; Number of employees; Open door policy; Opportunities; Resources devoted to accreditation compliance; Student pipelines; The students being the legacy of the colleges success; Transparency).

15 9.7

Total 145 100.0%

11

3. What future direction or decision should the Alamo Colleges avoid at all costs?

N %

Budget cuts (faculty positions; student support services (2); department budgets; downsizing of staff; funding the arts; Lay-offs)

8 7.8

Not fully serving all student populations (losing the one on one care; losing focus of current students; developmental education; abandoning community centers; closing doors to certain populations; remedial; Overlooking diversity)

8 7.8

Expansion (additional accredited colleges; Delays of new DSO offices; over-investment in buildings; without justification)

6 5.9

Lack of focus (exclusively focusing on workforce; decisions not reflecting constituents needs; student needs; training over education; taking care of facilities; staying too district centered)

6 5.9

Lack of innovation (compromising; cookie cutter approach/college; quieting outside the box/paradigm thinking; status quo; conservatism)

6 5.9

Consolidating (department & services; systemizing" departments; Consolidating with other institutions; college authority)

5 4.9

Excessive initiatives/limited resources (overlapping efforts;; taking time away from students) 5 4.9 Becoming a university/tech college (degree efforts) 4 3.9 Leadership imposing management concepts (Indoctrinating employees with passé management concepts; Imposing Principle Centered Leadership, not everyone is a leader; tinking in business terms)

3 2.9

Loosing value of course content/curriculum (homogenizing the curriculum; Over-standardization of course content; Weakening curriculum)

3 2.9

Single accreditation. 3 2.9 Technology issues (create barriers for students; that does not address "what's best for students"; impacts students affordability)

3 2.9

Tuition increase 3 2.9 Centralization (over-centralizing; top-down decision making) 2 2.0 Common textbooks for each course 2 2.0 Complacency 2 2.0 Eliminating college individuality 2 2.0

Non-student centered Leadership (keeping leadership in office who do not care about students; focus on political agendas)

2 2.0

Over reliance on adjunct faculty 2 2.0

Other (Unique responses: annexation; capping registration; college separation; decentralization of district operations; Faculty advising; faculty focusing on themselves; faculty tenure; increasing obstacles for students; increasing student costs; increasing student to faculty ratio; lack of data-driven marketing; lack of transparency; leadership Imposing mission statements on the Colleges; losing quality employees; losing site of the value of liberal arts/humanities; losing sight of values; misconception- cheaper is better; too much emphasis on online course offerings; retention that impacts recruitment; attempt to make wholesale changes at all cost; expanding oversight positions at the district level when course demand indicates a need for more faculty positions; financial transactions that increase debt service; committees formed, but recommendations not being implemented; specifying employee ratios for departments instead of providing a matrix for achieving results; basing on social factors not related to education; keeping instructors with bad evaluations/review because they contribute financially; using student survey results with sampling less than 95%).

27 26.5

Total 145 100.0%

12

The top priorities for the Alamo Colleges are divided by stakeholder category and campus in the following two tables.

Top Priorities for the Alamo Colleges by Stakeholder Category 1. What the

Alamo Colleges

should address immediately

2. What the Alamo Colleges

should preserve at all

costs

3. What the Alamo Colleges should avoid at

all costs

Adjunct Faculty

Enrollment; Hiring issues; Faculty issues; student support services

Student Support Services; Counseling; Student Centered Focus

Over-standardizing /Weakening Curriculum; Student Services Budget Cuts

Full-Time Faculty

Lack of Leadership; Academic Autonomy; District managing colleges

High quality education; College individuality; Academic Freedom; Evidence decision-making

Cookie cutter college approach; Common textbooks


Communication; Focus on few major issues; Strengthening Student Services

Individual College cultures; Ease of Accessibility; Student Centered focus

Not fully serving all student populations; Student Support Services Budget Cuts; Decentralization of district operations


Technology Issues; Enrollment; Resource allocations for new Initiatives

Individual College Culture; Affordability; Quality Education; Alamo Way (Respect)

Excessive Initiatives/Limited resources; Staffing budget cuts; Eliminating College Individuality


Lack of Leadership; Prioritization; Ease of Enrollment process

Integrity/Trust; Commitment to Community; Affordability; Accessibility

Unjustified decisions (i.e. Expansion; increasing debt svc); Political agendas; Not serving all students

Student Funding for Student Services; Communication Student Engagement Affordability; Faculty/Student Ratios Budget cuts to the Arts; Non student-centered

leadership

Community Member

Student Advisory Services; Collaboration with High Schools to reduce dropout rates;

Affordability; Integrity; Alamo Way (Vision)

Losing focus of student needs; Technology which Impact students; Abandoning community centers

13

Top Priorities for the Alamo Colleges by Campus 1. What the

Alamo Colleges should

address immediately

2. What the Alamo Colleges should preserve

at all costs

3. What the Alamo Colleges should

avoid at all costs

SAC Leadership; Personnel shortages; Communication; Enrollment; Technology

Individual college culture; Quality education; Student centered focus; Faculty/Student Ratios

Student centered focus; Barriers in technology; Single accreditation; Budget cuts (personnel); Centralization (top/down decision-making); Excessive initiatives with limited resources

SPC Personnel shortages; Budgetary model; Communication

Individual college culture; Community outreach; Student Support Services; Alamo Way (respect)

Student Support Svcs Budget Cuts; Downsizing staff; Increasing Student Costs; Single Accreditation

PAC Technology Issues; Student Support Services

Affordability; Individual college culture; Quality education

Creating student obstacles; Loosing value of course curriculum; Retention that impacts Recruitment; Complacency

NVC Hiring; Leadership; Registration; Communication; Promotional opportunities

Individual college culture; Affordability; Quality education

Adding district oversight positions over course demand positions; Specifying employee ratios for departments; Opening another college

NLC Distrust district leadership; Communication (inform about decisions); New Initiative resource allocations

Quality instruction; Individual college culture/accreditation; Alamo Way (mission)

Excessive initiatives with limited resources; common textbooks; Position shortages

District Communication (transparency &decision-making); Compensation; Employee morale; Prioritization

Access/Affordability; Integrity; Student Centered Focus; Commitment to Community

Over expansion (no justification); Decentralizing district operations; Losing quality employees; Not fully serving all student populations

Other Personnel shortages; Retention

Becoming a University/Technical College; Technology that impacts students affordability; Abandoning community centers

14

IV. Competitive Factor Analysis The analysis of competitive factors among local institutions of higher education revealed that the Alamo Colleges are stronger than other schools in offering affordability, student centeredness; better educational value, accessibility, and high quality of instruction, whereas competing schools in our area have more effective marketing, internal processes (recruitment/enrollment/registration, completion/graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, short pathways), student support services; and completion/graduation rates.

Overall Competitive Factor Analysis Results

What Alamo Colleges Do Better Than Competitors

N %

Affordability 31 23.1% Student centeredness 21 15.7% Value 19 14.2% Accessibility 12 9.0% High quality of instruction 9 6.7% Small class size 6 4.5% Workforce development (technical programs, courses, certifications) 6 4.5% Partnerships/community outreach 5 3.7% Developing leaders 3 2.2% Nothing 3 2.2% Data-informed decision making 2 1.5% Diversity 2 1.5% Planning 2 1.5% Program variety 2 1.5% Technology 2 1.5% Other (Unique responses: Accountability; Continuing education; Continuous process improvement; Developmental education; Employee retention; Facilities; Fiscal management; Student support services).

8 6.0%

Total 134 100.0%

15

What Competitors Do Better Than Alamo Colleges

N %

Marketing 24 22.6% Internal processes (recruitment/enrollment/registration, completion/graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, short pathways) 14 13.2% Student support services 8 7.5% Completion/graduation 7 6.6% High quality of instruction 7 6.6% Student centeredness 6 5.7% Program variety 4 3.8% Partnerships/community outreach 4 3.8% Fundraising - Alumni support 4 3.8% Innovation 2 1.9% Leadership 2 1.9% Customer service 2 1.9% Fewer, simpler initiatives 2 1.9% Financial aid 2 1.9% Responsiveness 2 1.9% Student retention 2 1.9% Other (Unique responses: Academic freedom; Better compensation/benefits for adjunct faculty; Collaboration; Communication; Consistent policies/approaches; Data-informed decision making; Degree planning; Employee retention; Employee support; Facilities; High standards for work ethic; Hiring faculty when needed; Student diversity; Technology).

14 13.2%

Total 106 100.0%

16

Competitive factor analysis results are presented by stakeholder category and by campus in the following two tables.

Competitive Factor Analysis Top Results by Stakeholder Category

What Alamo Colleges Do Better Than

Competitors

What Competitors Do Better Than Alamo

Colleges Adjunct Faculty Student centeredness. Marketing; High quality of instruction;

Student centeredness. Full-Time Faculty Affordability; Student centeredness. Marketing.


Accessibility, Value. Marketing.


Student centeredness. Marketing; Internal processes (recruitment/ enrollment/registration, completion/graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, pathways).


Affordability. Marketing.

Student Affordability; Student centeredness; Developing leaders. Student support services; Program variety.

Community Member Affordability. Completion/graduation.

Competitive Factor Analysis Top Results by Campus

What Alamo Colleges Do Better Than

Competitors

What Competitors Do Better Than Alamo

Colleges SAC Provide better educational value. Marketing.

SPC Student centeredness. Marketing.

PAC Affordability; Student centeredness. Marketing.

NVC Student centeredness. Marketing.

NLC Student centeredness. Internal processes (recruitment/enrollment/ registration, completion/graduation, record-keeping, transcript processing, short pathways).

DSO Affordability. Marketing.

Other Affordability.

Completion/graduation; Fewer, simpler initiatives; Marketing; Student centeredness; Student retention; Student support services; Other (Degree planning, Technology).

17

V. APPENDICES

Appendix A. Sample of SWOT Analysis Survey (Page 18) Appendix B. Frequency Distribution of Responses to SWOT Survey by

Stakeholder Category (Page 25) Appendix C. Frequency Distribution of Responses to SWOT Survey by Campus

(Page 28) Appendix D. Comments Provided by Responding Stakeholders (Page 31)

18

Appendix A. Sample of SWOT Analysis Survey

The Alamo Way: Always Inspire, Always Improve

2013-14 SWOT Analysis Survey

What is a SWOT analysis? A SWOT analysis is a simple, powerful, and necessary tool in strategic development. It involves the evaluation of Alamo Colleges strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

The strengths and weaknesses represent internal factors. The strengths refer to competitive advantages or core competencies that give the Alamo Colleges a better position in meeting the needs of students and the community. Weaknesses refer to any limitations the Alamo Colleges might face in developing or implementing a strategy.

Opportunities and threats are external to the Alamo Colleges, but they can greatly affect the organization’s operation. Opportunities refer to favorable conditions in the environment that could produce positive outcomes for the Alamo Colleges, whereas threats refer to negative conditions or barriers that may prevent the Alamo Colleges from reaching stated goals and objectives.

Knowing each SWOT element, and matching internal strengths to external opportunities, converting weaknesses into strengths, and converting external threats into opportunities, will help us develop strategies to more effectively meet the needs of our students and the community.

In preparation for the 2014 Strategic Planning Retreat, please complete this SWOT analysis survey from the perspective of your role as a leader of the Alamo Colleges system (colleges and district combined). Your input will help shape the future of the Alamo Colleges. Your responses will be collected along with those from other leaders to produce a summary report, thereby ensuring your anonymity. If you have any questions, contact Dr. Carlos Ayala, Coordinator of Strategic Planning, at (210) 485-0750.

1. Indicate your affiliation.

SAC

SPC

PAC

NVC

NLC

District (District Support Operations)

Not an employee of Alamo Colleges

19

2. Indicate your occupation category

Full-Time Faculty

Adjunct Faculty




Student

Community Member (not an Alamo Colleges employee or student)

3. Alamo Colleges Strengths

What are the top 3 things that the Alamo Colleges do well? (Specifically, consider the greatest internal institutional strengths which should be maintained; all aspects that affect the organization’s performance and its prospects for the future; services, operations, relationships, facilities, resources, technology, people, etc.; competitive advantages or core competencies)

Accessibility/recruitment

Affordability/value

Budgeting/resource allocation

Collaboration among colleges

Collaboration between district and colleges

Communication (internal, external)

Data-informed decision making

Distance education

Employee support (benefits, development)

Employees' capabilities

Facilities

Financial management

Funding

Fundraising

Graduation/completion

Institutional image/culture/pride

20

Instruction quality

Leadership

Marketing/promotion program

Partnerships

Planning

Process improvement

Programs offerings

Retention strategies

Student centeredness

Student support services

Technology

Workforce and economic development (training, education, programs, support)

Other (please provide other strengths not listed above):

4. Alamo Colleges Weaknesses

What are the top 3 things that the Alamo Colleges should improve? (Specifically, consider the greatest internal institutional strengths which should be maintained; all aspects that affect the organization’s performance and its prospects for the future; services, operations, relationships, facilities, resources, technology, people, etc.; competitive advantages or core competencies)

Accessibility/recruitment

Affordability/value

Budgeting/resource allocation

Collaboration among colleges

Collaboration between district and colleges

Communication (internal, external)

Data-informed decision making

Distance education

Employee support (benefits, development)

Employees' capabilities

Facilities

Financial management

21

Funding

Fundraising

Graduation/completion

Institutional image/culture/pride

Instruction quality

Leadership

Marketing/promotion program

Partnerships

Planning

Process improvement

Programs offerings

Retention strategies

Student centeredness

Student support services

Technology


Other (please provide other weaknesses not listed above):

5. Opportunities for the Alamo Colleges

What opportunities could the Alamo Colleges take advantage of in the next three years? (Specifically, consider the most important EXTERNAL opportunities; all favorable conditions in the current and future operating environments, e.g., social, cultural, demographic, economic, political, legal, local, state, national, global, etc.; the full range of stakeholders)

Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions

Demographic changes

Dual credit program revenue increase

Establish/strengthen partnerships

Global initiatives

Political changes

Slow economy prompting higher enrollments

22

Socio-cultural changes

Sustainability trends

Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.)

Workforce needs (capitalize on workforce demands for emerging industry programs, trained/skilled workers by existing and incoming industries/companies)

Other (please provide other external opportunities not listed above):

Optional: Please provide details for the opportunities you checked above.

6. Threats to Alamo Colleges

What is changing in the environment which could adversely affect the Alamo Colleges? (Specifically, consider all EXTERNAL threats to the organization; all Alamo Colleges current and likely future operating environments, e.g., social, cultural, demographic, economic, political, legal, local, state, national, global, etc.; all conditions or barriers that may prevent the Alamo Colleges from fulfilling the mission or achieving the vision)

Accountability requirements

Accreditation requirements

Alternative energy issues

Community's disengagement/complacency

Community's negative image about community colleges

Competition from other higher education institutions

Demographic changes

Economic downturn

Funding reductions

Globalization

High school dropout rates

High school misalignment with colleges

Inflation/cost of living

Lawsuits and bad press

Legal/regulatory changes

Nursing/Allied Health instructor availability

Political changes

23

Population growth

Poverty

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP)

Technology changes

Other (please provide other external threats not listed above):

Optional: Please provide details for the threats you checked above.

7. Alamo Colleges Priorities

What should the Alamo Colleges address immediately?

What should the Alamo Colleges preserve at all costs?

What future direction or decision should the Alamo Colleges avoid at all costs?

8. Alamo Colleges Competition

What do the Alamo Colleges do better than other institutions of higher education in the area?

What do other institutions of higher education in the area do better than the Alamo Colleges?

24

9. Other Comments

Finish

25

Appendix B. Frequency Distribution of Responses to SWOT Survey by Stakeholder Category

STRENGTHS Adjunct Faculty

Full-Time Faculty




StudentCommunity

MemberUnknown TOTAL %

Affordability/value 7 12 3 23 31 7 3 0 86 20.9%

Institutional image/culture/pride 2 3 0 4 5 3 2 0 19 4.6%

Instruction quality 9 8 0 8 3 3 1 1 33 8.0%


3 0 0 5 13 2 2 0 25 6.1%

Leadership 1 0 1 2 7 2 2 0 15 3.6%

Facilities 1 1 0 8 5 2 0 0 17 4.1%

Programs offerings 3 5 1 10 7 1 1 0 28 6.8%

Student centeredness 3 2 1 8 7 1 0 1 23 5.6%

Technology 1 2 1 2 7 1 1 0 15 3.6%

Budgeting/resource allocation 0 0 0 0 7 1 1 0 9 2.2%

Partnerships 0 0 1 4 6 1 1 0 13 3.2%

Marketing/promotion program 0 4 0 0 5 1 0 0 10 2.4%

Student support services 2 2 1 8 2 1 0 1 17 4.1%

Data-informed decision making 0 1 0 0 7 0 1 0 9 2.2%

Financial management 0 0 1 3 6 0 1 0 11 2.7%

Accessibility/recruitment 2 6 1 10 5 0 0 0 24 5.8%

Employee support (benefits, development) 0 1 1 4 5 0 0 0 11 2.7%

Planning 0 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 7 1.7%

Employees' capabilities 1 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 7 1.7%

Distance education 2 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 8 1.9%

Process improvement 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 6 1.5%

Graduation/completion 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 4 1.0%

Collaboration between district and colleges 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 0.7%

Communication (internal, external) 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 0.7%

Fundraising 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 0.7%

Collaboration among colleges 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Funding 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0.5%

Retention strategies 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.5%42 52 13 107 149 29 17 3 412 100.0%

26

WEAKNESSES Adjunct Faculty

Full-Time Faculty




StudentCommunity


Program offerings 2 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 8 1.9%



Retention strategies 3 3 0 4 6 3 2 0 21 5.0%



Technology 2 1 0 4 2 2 0 0 11 2.6%






Leadership 0 5 0 4 5 1 0 1 16 3.8%

Planning 0 1 0 4 4 1 0 1 11 2.6%


Funding 0 2 1 4 4 0 0 0 11 2.6%


Fundraising 0 0 1 3 1 0 1 0 6 1.4%






1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 1.2%

Facilities 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 4 1.0%

Partnerships 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 4 1.0%



Other-Adjunct faculty compensation 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.2%

Other-Staff compensation 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.2%34 50 12 107 155 37 19 4 418 100.0%

27

OPPORTUNITIES Adjunct Faculty

Full-Time Faculty




StudentCommunity


Articulation agreements with four-year institutions 7 11 0 18 13 6 3 1 59 15.1%


6 7 4 17 22 6 3 0 65 16.6%

Establish/strengthen partnerships 3 7 1 10 24 3 3 0 51 13.0%Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.)

7 7 2 14 18 5 2 1 56 14.3%

Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue 2 7 2 17 22 1 1 1 53 13.5%Dual credit program revenue increase 2 3 0 6 9 2 1 0 23 5.9%Sustainability trends 3 4 0 5 9 1 1 0 23 5.9%Demographic changes 0 2 1 6 8 2 1 0 20 5.1%Political changes 4 0 1 2 5 1 0 0 13 3.3%Global initiatives 1 0 1 1 6 1 0 0 10 2.6%Slow economy prompting higher enrollments 3 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 10 2.6%Socio-cultural changes 3 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 9 2.3%

41 49 12 100 142 30 15 3 392 100.0%

THREATS Adjunct Faculty

Full-Time Faculty




StudentCommunity


Funding reductions 6 7 4 23 27 2 3 1 73 17.3%

High school misalignment with colleges 5 9 2 8 17 2 2 0 45 10.6%

Economic downturn 2 0 1 2 10 1 2 0 18 4.3%

High school dropout rates 1 0 1 3 3 4 2 0 14 3.3%

Community's disengagement/complacency 3 3 1 4 9 0 2 0 22 5.2%

Legal/regulatory changes 0 0 0 1 4 0 2 0 7 1.7%

Competition from other higher education institutions 1 6 2 17 18 2 1 1 48 11.3%

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP) 8 7 0 13 15 9 1 0 53 12.5%

Inflation/cost of living 1 0 0 0 6 6 1 0 14 3.3%

Community's negative image about community colleges 2 4 0 3 6 2 1 0 18 4.3%

Political changes 3 0 1 2 4 1 1 0 12 2.8%

Demographic changes 1 1 0 1 4 0 1 0 8 1.9%

Accreditation requirements 2 5 0 9 6 2 0 0 24 5.7%

Accountability requirements 2 3 0 10 8 0 0 0 23 5.4%

Technology changes 1 2 0 4 6 1 0 0 14 3.3%

Poverty 2 1 0 2 3 2 0 0 10 2.4%

Limited Nursing/Allied Health instructor availability 0 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 6 1.4%

Changes in education (delivery methodologies, teaching paradigm)

0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Demand for innovation in education 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Globalization 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Lawsuits and bad press 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0.5%

Population growth 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Other - Alternative energy issues 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.2%

Other - Limited land space for growth 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.2%

Other - Loan Default Rate 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.2%

Other - Demand for correct, consistent, timely, and professional service

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.2%

41 50 12 108 154 36 19 3 423 100.0%

28

Appendix C. Frequency Distribution of Responses to SWOT Survey by Campus

STRENGTHS SAC SPC PAC NVC NLC DSOStudents and Community

Unknown TOTAL %





0 3 1 3 1 13 3 1 25 6.1%

Accessibility/recruitment 5 0 2 5 5 6 0 1 24 5.8%



Facilities 4 3 0 4 2 4 0 0 17 4.1%


Leadership 1 1 1 1 1 8 2 0 15 3.6%

Technology 1 2 1 1 1 8 1 0 15 3.6%

Partnerships 0 1 1 1 1 7 2 0 13 3.2%








Planning 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 7 1.7%





Fundraising 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 0.7%


Funding 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0.5%

Retention strategies 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0.5%64 23 40 50 47 158 24 6 412 100.0%

29

WEAKNESSES SAC SPC PAC NVC NLC DSOStudents and Community

Unknown TOTAL %







Retention strategies 4 1 3 1 3 5 3 1 21 5.0%




Leadership 3 2 1 3 2 4 0 1 16 3.8%

Funding 2 0 1 3 1 4 0 0 11 2.6%


Planning (too many initiatives) 3 1 2 1 0 3 0 1 11 2.6%

Technology 3 0 3 2 0 2 1 0 11 2.6%



Fundraising 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 6 1.4%






0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 5 1.2%

Facilities 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 1.0%

Partnerships 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 4 1.0%



Other-Adjunct faculty compensation 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.2%

Other-Staff compensation 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.2%66 25 38 59 42 151 30 7 418 100.0%

30

OPPORTUNITIES SAC SPC PAC NVC NLC DSOStudents and Community

Unknown TOTAL %


9 2 9 8 7 25 5 0 65 16.6%

Articulation agreements with four-year institutions 12 8 5 10 6 12 5 1 59 15.1%

Technology (demand for new technologies, distance education, etc.)

14 0 8 7 3 20 3 1 56 14.3%

Annexation leading to increased enrollment and revenue 10 2 4 1 8 24 2 2 53 13.5%

Establish/strengthen partnerships 5 3 5 1 8 25 4 0 51 13.0%

Dual credit program revenue increase 3 0 4 4 2 8 1 1 23 5.9%

Sustainability trends 5 1 2 2 2 9 1 1 23 5.9%



Global initiatives 0 0 0 1 1 7 1 0 10 2.6%

Slow economy prompting higher enrollments 2 0 1 1 4 1 1 0 10 2.6%

Socio-cultural changes 3 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 9 2.3%68 20 39 42 44 149 24 6 392 100.0%

THREATS SAC SPC PAC NVC NLC DSOStudents and Community

Unknown TOTAL %

Funding reductions 16 4 6 6 6 30 3 2 73 17.3%

Student/citizen issues (poor preparation, illiteracy, LEP) 6 7 9 7 6 14 3 1 53 12.5%

Competition from other higher education institutions 11 1 7 5 3 18 2 1 48 11.3%

High school misalignment with colleges 5 3 7 6 4 18 2 0 45 10.6%

Accreditation requirements 2 1 0 6 9 5 0 1 24 5.7%

Accountability requirements 6 2 2 3 3 7 0 0 23 5.4%

Community's disengagement/complacency 2 0 2 5 1 10 2 0 22 5.2%

Economic downturn 0 2 0 2 1 10 3 0 18 4.3%

Community's negative image about community colleges 3 0 1 3 4 5 2 0 18 4.3%

High school dropout rates 2 0 4 2 1 2 3 0 14 3.3%

Inflation/cost of living 0 1 2 2 1 5 3 0 14 3.3%

Technology changes 4 0 1 1 1 6 1 0 14 3.3%


Poverty 1 0 3 2 0 4 0 0 10 2.4%


Legal/regulatory changes 0 0 0 1 1 3 2 0 7 1.7%

Limited Nursing/Allied Health instructor availability 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 6 1.4%

Changes in education (delivery methodologies, teaching paradigm)

2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Demand for innovation in education 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0.5%

Globalization 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0.5%

Lawsuits and bad press 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Population growth 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0.5%

Other - Alternative energy issues 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0.2%

Other - Limited land space for growth 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.2%

Other - Loan Default Rate 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0.2%

Other - Demand for correct, consistent, timely, and professional service

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.2%

67 22 48 58 42 152 28 6 423 100.0%

31

Appendix D. Comments Provided by Responding Stakeholders Stakeholder Category Campus Comments

Adjunct Faculty

SAC Thank you for your consideration of my comments. I am proud to be a part of Alamo Colleges!

Adjunct Faculty

PAC Give adjuncts the raise everyone else got.

Adjunct Faculty

NVC The leadership at the Alamo Colleges is some of the best I have seen in 16 years of teaching (middle school to graduate school).

Full-Time Faculty

SAC Online courses are the fastest growing mode of teaching within our District as well as in other colleges regionally and nationally. To remain competitive, all measures to support strong online adult learning are necessary. With more and more individuals attending college for the first time or enrolling due to a slow economy to bust their professional opportunities, many want to take courses primarily online. The demand is exceeding the online offering of courses. I want to suggest the option that full-time faculty are permitted to teach online exclusively. Currently, most full-time faculty that teach online must teach on-campus also. Thus, the option is needed and it's time has come. The opportunity to devote and dedicate ones efforts to this mode of teaching can permit faculty to hone their skills and have the time to dedicate themselves to provide an array of online strategies needed to support online adult learning. Most importantly, it permits faculty to devote their time to online students’ needs which require different and time-consuming tools. Thus, I suggest that this single focus to teach online only can greatly support and strengthen increased students enrollment and graduation.

Full-Time Faculty

SAC We have the students, faculty, and staff to excel in our community and state.

Full-Time Faculty

SAC Need to build on the focus on transfers and completions

Full-Time Faculty

NLC Review of the higher tuition that students are charged although they live on border of district. Surely there is a way to reduce that.

Full-Time Faculty

NLC Alamo Colleges does need to seek continuous improvements but avoid making changes that are not supported by more than a few attempts by other institutions.

Full-Time Faculty

NLC District needs to stop trying to micromanage the colleges and let them do their job. Change is good, but too much change is detrimental. Make slower changes over time and give employees a chance to adjust before you make other major changes.

Full-Time Faculty

NLC New processes and initiatives should be more fully vetted prior to roll out especially when technology is involved. Too often, the glitches in a system are not addressed until after roll out and the system / process is frustrating or fails.


NVC I consider it an honor to work for the Alamo Colleges. I cannot imagine working at a better place.


NVC The ACOL is a huge concern given its attempt at growth on its own without being firmly placed inside the current college infrastructure and programming. It is spinning its wheels and only giving the appearance of movement.


NVC The website needs to be for prospective students and alumni and donors. The website should not be for employees. Also current students should have a intranet site that's really good but that's not the same as the main college website.

32


PAC We really need to rethink our enrollment process. We need to make it easier and simple (i.e. For-profit institutions).


NVC Accreditation requirements, specifically for assessment require more manpower and knowledge than currently exists at the colleges.


NLC Continue to make everyone accountable for their duties/work expectations so that we can work toward the success of our colleges.


Unknown Make more AA programs accountable like your nursing program is for improving AA completion. More rigor, less allowance for excusing poor student academic performance


DSO Improve consistent standards if how colleges deliver services and strive to work closer together between colleges to leverage resources instead of compete.


DSO We live in a larger global community ripe for opportunity. The local area is in constant change due aging society and new citizens arriving every day. The aging society requires a workforce replacement that is properly trained using new methods and more college access.


DSO We need to stay ahead of the game in technology demands. Our community needs need to be addressed with "fast job training" which would allow students to immediately join the workforce at higher paying jobs. Also, our transfer transition to universities needs to be smoother and seamless, ensuring that all AC students transfer.


DSO Alamo Colleges is a great place to work and it is also a great place for our students to learn!!


DSO Communication continues to be a silo model between leadership and employees. Transparency still troubles the Alamo Colleges. Decentralization drags down progress and will keep us from reaching new heights of success.


DSO District marketing does not collaborate effectively to equitably market district programs. They create barriers, favor certain programs, play politics.


DSO I have been here 13+ years now and have enjoyed every minute. This is a great place to work for a great cause. Investing in people's lives as they try to improve themselves and their future is meaningful.


DSO I think one big item that Alamo has going for it is the collegiality of all employees. It is a very positive work environment.


DSO Under current leadership the Alamo Colleges will continue to decline...thus becoming an obstacle to new monies resulting from bond elections.


DSO We need to recognize employees' contribution. We are losing too many good employees to our competitors.


DSO It appears that institutions of higher education, to include the Alamo Colleges, are being led by technological advances in the private sector. Higher Ed should be leading the way and not the private or workforce sector which is primarily motivated by profit and not quality education.

33


DSO The rich/poor gap is threatening to put the accessibility of higher education via a community college out of reach. The political changes/polarization is toxic to higher education that requires freedom of thought and flexibility. The prior two will cause poverty that a community college will be unable to effectively help change.


DSO We make it so difficult for students to register for classes. MYMAP/AlamoEnroll is not very user-friendly. Students jump through too many hoops before actually getting into a class.


DSO We should be making a culture out of doing more with less.

Student SAC As student government president of San Antonio College, I am proud of this institution and the good we do in the lives of our students.

Student SPC The Alamo Colleges does great photo opportunities. They need to connect with their surrounding communities to encourage people to not be intimidated by the idea of higher education.

Student NVC Northwest Vista College is setting the standard for customer service to a diverse student body and community, and it is reflected in the daily life and activities observed around campus.

Student NVC Many students come into the college unable to read. For some, this may be the cause of many high school drop-outs, and thus a decline in enrollment at the Alamo Colleges. The growing demand for Allied Health careers also decreases the amount of Allied Health faculty available to teach required courses.

Student Unknown The Alamo Colleges are a great value to our community and needs some improvement. However, the course value should remain as long as fiscally possible.

Unknown Unknown The District not being inclusive in making decisions that affect the colleges' ability to better serve the student; District's focus on national awards and recognition while not being interested in learning what faculty, staff, administrators and students think is going well and what needs remediation; District's insistence on forcing Collins, Covey, Baldrige on personnel without really embracing the philosophy or spirit of these schools of thought--training sessions, workshops, presentations only provide information, real change in thinking will come when the leadership truly embrace and model the new philosophy, such as seek to understand before advocating for your position. The District has not tried to understand what really happens at the Colleges. I have never seen a VC at my college listening to faculty and staff share what their ideas are for improvement.

Unknown Unknown Truly attempt to provide an "Amazon.com" experience for our customer (student, parent, donor, business leader, citizen). Talk in my community at football games, social events is "don't even try to get enrolled at Alamo Colleges," it’s easier to enroll anywhere else.

Unknown Unknown There is something wrong with employees being overworked due to limited resources while district spends money on leadership packages which are generic and nice, but not proven. Quality leadership stems from having a good plan which is supported by the majority as the leadership inspires the followers. At this point, there is little inspiration from District leadership. Our community and our students deserve better than what they are subjected to at this point.

Unknown Unknown Alamo Colleges lacks the personnel, the technology and the sense of customer service to meet the requirements of a society that is more sophisticated and demands correct, consistent, timely, and professional service.

SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive Factor … SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive...

Documents

Transcript of SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive Factor … SWOT Analysis, Priorities, and Competitive...