Looking 3-5 Years Out
What Edu Marketers Should Be Focused On
Last week I wrapped up my final set of Office Hours for the year.
I do these periodically just to make space to catch up with industry colleagues, talk shop, and compare notes without a formal agenda. No decks, no pitches - just honest conversations about what’s working, what’s breaking, and what people are quietly worried about.
Toward the end of one of those conversations, a higher ed marketer asked a question we didn’t have time to fully unpack:
“If everything is going well today - assume you’re hitting your targets - what should a marketer actually be worried about over the next three to five years?”
I followed up with him this morning via email to finish the thought.
Here’s what I shared:
Morning,
It was great catching up last week during office hours. I wanted to follow up on the last question you asked that we ran out of time for - essentially: if things are going well today, what should marketers be focused on looking three to five years out?
It’s a great big-picture question, and the honest answer is ‘it depends,’ but there are a handful of areas I think are relevant for almost everyone.
Here are the five that come to mind:
First, shifts in search behavior and the growing importance of organic search.
I’ve never met a college that invests enough in SEO, and that gap is only going to matter more. SEO has to evolve beyond traditional optimization to include answer engine optimization and generative engine optimization. Roughly 60% of Google searches now result in zero clicks, overall search demand for higher ed is declining, and a meaningful share of the market is already using LLMs to get information.
Our industry was built on non-branded paid search, and that channel won’t sustain its historical contribution forever. New AI-driven ad units will emerge, but historically new ad units initially underperform legacy ones. That transition period won’t be efficient from a paid perspective, which is why I see SEO as one of the most important long-term investments. Even at Kanahoma, we’re redesigning our digital marketing and AOR offering to intentionally bridge paid and SEO because of how critical this shift feels.
Second, AI implementation.
I haven’t seen a college yet that’s investing enough here either. Part of this is basic workflow and automation - training teams to use existing tools to meaningfully increase efficiency and output. Most institutions are still dabbling rather than transforming how work actually gets done.
The bigger opportunity, though, is AI digital workers. Earlier this year we launched an AI admissions product that functions as a contact center, calling and qualifying leads, and it’s an extremely interesting space. I genuinely believe that over the next three to five years a significant portion of enrollment roles will be replaced or augmented by AI. Institutions that plan for that shift early will be far better positioned.
Third, the death of the RFI.
The idea that prospective students should fill out a form just to get basic information is a holdover from a different era. People increasingly want to get everything they need first, and then decide whether to apply or talk to admissions.
I don’t think chatbots or AI site search alone is enough here. If I were thinking seriously about the next few years, I’d be investing time in reimagining what replaces the RFI altogether, because our funnels are going to look very different than they do today.
Fourth, brand investment at scale.
Most institutions either underinvest in brand or treat brand primarily as a creative exercise. Real brand work spans research, strategy, creative concepting, and campaign development. The piece that’s most often missing is deep quantitative and qualitative research - research that truly challenges existing value propositions and tests how they resonate with specific audiences.
As the market gets more complex, messaging has to become more precise. It’s not enough to know what makes a university unique in the abstract. You need to understand what resonates with parents versus students, by program area, by geography, and by motivation.
Finally, budgeting.
Too many higher ed marketers simply accept the budget they’re given. Budgeting is the single biggest lever you have to drive real growth. Thinking in multi-year terms, partnering closely with CFOs, and building growth models that show marketing as a revenue driver rather than a cost center is what unlocks incremental investment.
Straight-lining last year’s spend into next year is how most institutions operate, but that approach almost always limits what’s possible.
I’m sure I’m missing plenty, but these were the five areas that surfaced when I finally had a moment to step back and think about the question you asked.
As noted, the list above is far from comprehensive, but there felt like enough there to be worth sharing more broadly.
For many of us, the holidays create a rare chance to step back, detach a bit from the day-to-day, and - if we can’t quite turn our brains off - think a little more long-term and big picture. With that in mind, I thought this perspective might be worth socializing.
Now, if you’ve made it this far, I do have one question for you:
When you look three to five years out, what do you think higher ed marketers should be paying closer attention to?
- Seth
About The Author
Seth is the founder and CEO of Kanahoma, a San Diego-based performance marketing agency on a mission to build a better agency for organizations building a better world.
You can learn more about who we are and what we do at www.Kanahoma.com.