Instructors helping instructors
The night before the Global Kumon Party, we had a treat listening to Phyllis, from California and Catherine, an instructor from Germany. Orchestrated or not, the two related how they visited each other’s centre to gain insight of their respective centre operations and to compare notes.
They discussed how their networking experience benefitted them both – dramatically!
A month before the conference at a monthly instructors meeting, Leila and Lise, whose centers are within 15 miles of each other, also shared their experience working with and learning from each other. Their relationship has blossomed and both have experienced great satisfaction in their work.
But why is this so rare? Why is there such an antipathy, through well camouflaged, amongst Kumon instructors?
One word might cause this – encroachment. Because territorial restriction is not part of the Kumon Franchise agreement, and because franchise and marketing development might cause a new centre opening that could threaten student enrollment, instructors remain wary of each other, (and of the franchise/marketing department).
A Complex Dilemma
This is an interesting and complex dilemma. Obviously, increasing student enrollment and market penetration is the sole objective of center expansion. If existing centers in an area fail to generate growth in their operations in spite of a large prospective market, then the threat of encroachment from new franchisees or other instructors opening a 2nd or 3rd center becomes real.
A classic example – Negative impact of Protectionism
(Real names are not used in the following illustrations.) Justin is a hardworking instructor with more than 500 students. Within 5 miles of his centre, Linda, has persevered for years but seems content with 140 students. Tom used to have a large enrollment but age is catching up with him and he could no longer sustain the pace he used to work. Although within 15 miles of each other, they never established a “working relationship”. They just did their own thing. At monthly meetings, they were polite with each other but that is it.
Rising operating costs prompted Justin to increase his tuition rate. Tom, sensing that he might gain from Justin’s move, decided to “discount” his rate. Linda still did her own thing.
Unfortunately, Tom and Linda, who both decided not to follow Justin’s move, experienced the opposite of their expectation.
This is one example of the negative impact of “protectionism”.
What is better?
Current policies allow instructors to set their own tuition rate but there is no policy for “uniformity within a territory”. This gives rise to the question of “quality control”, in effect causing prospective customers to speculate. “Why is Tom offering the same service for $10 less per month?”
A WIN/WIN Alternative
Networking would obviously have great benefits. Instructors can gain from each other’s insight and perspective. Even a monthly “breakfast” meeting to discuss strategies could have a substantial impact on student enrollment and successful operations.
This is a much better solution to encroachment: helping instructors to expand their student enrollment through cooperation and networking. It is a WIN/WIN situation.
· Instructors will begin to trust each other rather be apathetic and disdainful.
· It will raise quality control as instructors will be sharing each other’s “success formula” and follow operating procedures proven to work
· Kumon’s public presence and goodwill will rise
· Market share will rise
· Power to change the world – one child at a time becomes a reality
But first, corporate Kumon must resolve the social inequity between itself and its instructors.
ü Branding was a good move.
ü Revisiting corporate expansion policies would be better.
ü Restructuring compensation sharing and reshaping global policies is best.
POWER TO CHANGE THE WORLD 