Due to the size of our school and quantity of applicants our biggest issue has been turning away turning away applicants who are not qualified for our program so we would never even consider incentivizing enrollment. I can however agree with most of the post on this forum in saying that the reward is helping a student from application to graduation and hearing about their careers after successfully completing the program.
Recognition of a job well done, either from our students or peers is great. I feel successful and happy to have been a part of helping a student change his or her life. It is so great to see the change in our students from the first meetings to graduation. It is fulfilling to be a part of that.
Being recognized intrinsically for a job well done is very satisfying. Receiving a plague, being at or near the top of others performing in a similar role at the school is pretty cool. In addition, continued success will lead to better reviews and hopefully promotional consideration if not at your present school, then a future one.
Admissions are encouraged to be competitive and help as many students possible. The unapproved way would only encourage admissions to take on the "Do Whatever it Takes" mentality, which could misguide future students. The approved way encourages reps to do the right thing for the student and keep things above boards. I feel that when you take the unapproved method out of the equations, you and your school will correctly inform the perspective students.
Student compensation are best if they are of an intrinsic nature. They may include: Committing to a personal goal and achieving it. Participating in the educational experience, perhaps being a SBO or school ambassador.
Of course the unapproved methods are most effective. People respond to money, it's human nature, it's also the reason most people go to work the money exchanged for their time and efforts. That being said it's illegal to compensate in this fashion, so the point is irrelevant.
However, by taking the carrot away and only leaving the stick... Meaning employees can be judged and dismissed for not reaching goals the entire rule could be circumvented (this is not an endorsement to do such).
Chris, I agree as a Campus Director. Our staff displays a team atmosphere and if one departments wins, we all win!
Compensation has no place in the education industry. My belief is that a person should be willing to go and enroll into an agreement on their own will without any outside influence and incentives. Compensation in my opinion is a bad idea and is unethical when it comes to clarity and transparency.
If there is an expectation, or even anticipation, of added compensation (e.g. gifts, bonuses, etc.) in exchange for exceptional results, Admissions personnel might be tempted to bend or break the rules to achieve those results. The regulations prohibiting that type of compensation remove that temptation and, hopefully, lead reps to just do what is right. This protects the students and the school.
Having read the responses to the questions, there are a lot of institutions displaying the integrity outcomes that the legislation had intended. It's refreshing to see the subscribers to this program fully embrace the rules and hopefully further marginalize those institutions still tempted to offer sales inducements.
Personally, I like the stress on the intrinsic rewards rather than monetary recognition. However, it would be naïve to think the practice of offering monetary inducements has been completely eradicated, but the pressure on institutions to do the "right thing" will eventually clean up most of the non conforming institutions.
Giving a student a great education that helps him qualify to achieve his career aspirations is the most important recognition that any student would want. A material or monetary inducement would be short lived and forgotten.
At the conclusion of a semester, the College hosts an employee appreciation dinner to celebrate the success together. We don't just celebrate meeting an enrollment goal, we celebrate the graduating cohort and all the support departments that provided the guidance for those students and their success.
It brings the College together and reaffirms our goal of changing lives.
have a student succeed is reward enough. When every department works together to help a student achieve their academic goals we all win
I'm not sure what your asking. If you are asking which is better: compensation based on enrollments or everything except enrollments, then I choose the latter. It helps take pressure off of the admissions rep making them less likely to "cross the line" and do something unethical just to make a number.
Support and guidance throughout the process. As said by several others, their compensation comes at the end of their program when they earn their degree. Having a degree is invaluable.
Employee recognition combined with quality assurance scores
Recognition for hard work is appropriate but not at the expense or requirement of someone else action such as getting students to enroll. Pressure on students to enroll so that they meet a goal is also inappropriate. Goals are good but the achievement must be due to the value premise.
Reps are a no sales-commission role, but are often acted as such.
It is good we are not on a commission based structure-that way we can all stay legal and the temptation to lie is taken out of the equation.
Knowing you are helping accurately, and honestly, a student achieve a course of action in life that will better themselves is rewarding enough. Watching the student make great efforts and strides to create a result that you helped initialize.
