Admissions & Enrollment Management · Education
Should you build or buy Online Program Management & Enrollment Marketing (OPM)?
Online Program Management & Enrollment Marketing (OPM) software and services help higher education institutions recruit, enroll, and retain students for online degree programs — covering digital marketing, lead generation, CRM-integrated enrollment workflows, and in some cases full managed-service operations including call centers and student support staffing. The category spans a wide range of engagement models, from revenue-share partnerships that absorb most operational functions to fee-for-service software platforms that leave recruitment operations in institutional hands.
The build-vs-buy decision for OPM turns on whether an institution is evaluating software tools or outsourcing enrollment operations entirely — because the category conflates both, and the right answer differs depending on which problem is actually on the table; with revenue-share scrutiny intensifying and AI marketing tools maturing, the calculus is shifting faster than most institutions realize.
Build it, buy it, or bridge?
When building makes sense
Building the enrollment marketing layer — running paid digital acquisition, managing CRM workflows, and personalizing outreach — has become genuinely achievable. AI targeting tools, programmatic advertising platforms, and CRM-integrated email sequences are not proprietary advantages anymore. An institution with a marketing team, a data analyst, and access to current tooling can execute competitive digital lead generation without a managed OPM partner. The stronger argument for building is strategic control. Under a revenue-share OPM arrangement, the vendor shapes which programs grow, how students are recruited, and what the brand looks like at the point of contact. Institutions with existing program brand recognition in their target markets, or those with online programs that fill from organic reputation rather than paid search, have limited reason to give up 40-60% of tuition to a vendor who is doing work they could internalize. The feasibility argument also strengthens for institutions insourcing over time: buying an enrollment marketing platform like Element451 while building internal team capacity is a practical middle path between full outsourcing and pure self-build.
When buying makes sense
Buying — whether through a revenue-share OPM or a fee-for-service enrollment marketing platform — makes sense when an institution lacks the infrastructure or brand presence to recruit online students independently. Launching a new online program from zero is hard without an established pipeline, and full-service OPM vendors bring call center operations, performance lead generation networks, and student support staffing that cannot be replicated quickly with internal hires and software subscriptions alone. For institutions with limited marketing capacity, a revenue-share arrangement converts upfront risk into variable cost tied to performance. The vendor bears the acquisition spend; the institution pays from outcomes. That model works when the alternative is either not launching the program or launching it without the operational infrastructure to fill it. Fee-for-service platforms like Wiley University Services or Noodle offer a middle option that retains operational responsibility while providing software infrastructure and specialized expertise — worth evaluating for schools that want tools without the revenue-share exposure.
The desk read
The OPM category conflates software and managed service in a way that makes the build-vs-buy question more consequential than usual. Vendors like 2U and Risepoint don't just provide enrollment marketing tools; they operate call centers, manage student support staff, and run performance lead-generation networks. Under a revenue-share model, they take 40 to 60 percent of tuition in exchange. That's not a software subscription; it's a business relationship that shapes which programs survive.
The build case for the software layer has gotten stronger. AI targeting tools, digital marketing platforms, and CRM-integrated enrollment workflows are achievable without a full OPM partner. Element451 occupies the middle ground, offering enrollment marketing software without the managed-service revenue-share structure. The question isn't really build vs. buy the software; it's whether the institution wants to internalize enrollment operations or outsource them. Institutions with marketing capability and existing brand recognition in their target segments have the most to gain from insourcing.
Frequently asked
What is Online Program Management & Enrollment Marketing (OPM) software?
OPM software and services help higher education institutions recruit, enroll, and retain students for online degree programs — covering digital marketing, lead generation, CRM-integrated enrollment workflows, and in some cases full managed-service operations including call centers and student support staffing. The category spans revenue-share partnerships that absorb most operational functions and fee-for-service platforms that leave recruitment in institutional hands.
When does building OPM enrollment marketing capability make sense?
Building makes sense when an institution has existing marketing staff, program brand recognition, and online student demand that doesn't depend on paid lead generation. Institutions with those conditions can capture the same enrollment outcomes without giving up 40-60% of tuition under a revenue-share model.
When does buying OPM software or services make sense?
Buying is the right call for institutions launching new online programs without existing recruitment infrastructure — particularly when they lack call center operations, student support staffing, and a paid acquisition pipeline. Revenue-share models reduce launch risk when the alternative is an underfunded self-managed effort.
What are the main OPM vendors?
Representative vendors include Risepoint (Academic Partnerships), Wiley University Services, Element451 (enrollment marketing), Noodle. B4 Pro scores the full set.
How is the shift from revenue-share to fee-for-service changing the OPM market?
Department of Education scrutiny of revenue-share arrangements has pushed many institutions toward fee-for-service contracts, which tend to cost significantly less and return more strategic control to the institution. Combined with maturing AI marketing tools, this shift is making the partial-build or platform-only model more viable — and is putting pressure on full-service OPM vendors to justify their economics.