Overconfidence and Calling the Baby ‘Ugly’
This week, Inside Higher Ed released its 2025 survey of college and university presidents. Making headlines was the finding that only 37% of the 298 presidents who were surveyed agreed with the statement “the pros of faculty tenure outweigh the cons.”
Beyond this standout stat, what caught my attention was how consistently presidents characterized the state of higher education in dire terms but felt that their own institutions were doing well. Consider, for instance, the following results of the survey:
85% of presidents say they have a good climate for open inquiry on their campuses, but only 39% would say the same about colleges and universities generally
89% rate the state of race relations on their campus as good or excellent, but only 41% would say the same about higher education as a whole
69% believe their institutions are effectively addressing student mental health, but only 37% say colleges and universities collectively have been effective in this area
Only 25% are very or extremely concerned about the implications for their own institutions of the growing education divide, but 58% are equally concerned about the implications for higher ed as a whole
Finally, 87% of college presidents are confident that their institution will be financially stable over the next five years.
Take these results together and it’s clear that college presidents have a high degree of confidence in their own institutions. This is a good thing…in healthy doses. A president should be confident in how well the institution is doing and in its prospects for success in the future.
Problems arise, however, when confidence bleeds into overconfidence. Overconfidence can lead to an unrealistic understanding of the challenges facing an institution. This gap between perception and reality has real consequences. When an institution struggles to meet enrollment goals, overconfidence can lead leaders to assume the problem lies with marketing or admissions, rather than recognizing deeper reputational challenges.
This is just one of the reasons market research is so valuable. It doesn’t just confirm what institutions want to believe; it provides a clear-eyed assessment of what prospective students and the public actually think.
Sometimes, that validates strengths. Other times, it reveals blind spots that leadership hadn’t considered. And occasionally, it’s a shock to the system - something my longtime friend and collaborator, Chuck Reed, referred to as “calling the baby ‘ugly.’”
In many cases, research findings are valuable because they are difficult pills to swallow. They lead to the difficult but necessary process of confronting uncomfortable truths so that institutions can rethink how to position themselves.
When it comes to institutional reputation and enrollment, confidence is a good thing - but overconfidence can be dangerous. As this year’s survey of college presidents makes clear, there’s a persistent gap between how leaders view their own institutions and how they perceive the industry as a whole. If history is any guide, that kind of blind spot can lead to missed opportunities, misguided strategies, or even existential threats.
Market research provides a reality check, a way to see the institution as prospective students and the broader public perceive it, not just as you hope they do.
Institutions that embrace insights, however difficult they may be, are in the best position to make meaningful change. It is only by first understanding the truth of where you are that you can create an effective plan to get to where you want to be.