Last Friday, Inside Higher Ed reported on a “Provocative Ad Campaign on Pause.” This is an absolutely fascinating case study in the marketing of higher education, and the writer did a great job of capturing many of the thoughts I shared when we spoke last Thursday. But I have a few more observations about the Suffolk University ad campaign that I’d like to share.
Suffolk University is not a SimpsonScarborough client, but I would assume that the very sophisticated marketers at Suffolk went through a lengthy process to determine their brand and campaign strategy. I would not be surprised if they spent a great deal of time and money researching their key audiences to identify Suffolk’s authentic differentiators. I would guess they did not simply hire DeVito/Verdi, their ad agency, and let them run amok with any wild and crazy idea they thought would “get attention.”
After reviewing the campaign, I don’t think getting attention is what it’s about—it’s about shaping the Suffolk brand and communicating the true identity of the institution. If branding is all about differentiating, Suffolk University’s campaign gets an “A.” Sure, they have taken a bold stance akin to the Pepsi Challenge that may be uncomfortable to some, but what’s an institution located in the most competitive higher ed market in the world to do?
The campaign “puts down” other institutions in an attempt to shine a light on Suffolk’s differentiators. I can understand that makes some uncomfortable, but let’s keep in mind which institutions we are “putting down.” I think the Ivys can take it. They’ve been taking a lot worse for a long, long time.
You’ve got to admit that the Suffolk University campaign strikes a chord. It has a distinct tone and personality that I understand is very true to the University and its culture. Suffolk’s marketers and their agency partners seem to have accomplished what so many other universities have failed to do: carve out a brand strategy that is appealing to external audiences, authentic to internal audiences, and different than competitors. It’s a branding trifecta, if you ask me.
All of this is not to say that I would ignore criticism from my new president and others if I were in charge of marketing. But surely, any campaign can be tweaked without losing the core strategy altogether. I would hate to see the campaign watered down to the point that it loses all of its flavor and punch.
