While the U.S. News and World Report rankings have become the defacto metric for many schools, A-HEC institutional and program research takes a decidedly different tact. The purpose of the A-HEC collaborative research is to be helpful to program and institutional leaders in determining how effective a program or inititative is: from both the institutional and student perspective. In order to provide this guidance, the A-HEC collaborative research process focuses on ten dimensions:

1. Alignment with Institutional Mission: At the core of every institution are key values and objectives. Does the program help further theses objectives?

2. Distinctiveness: What is innovative about the program? How is it better than other similar programs?

3. Market or Social Need: Is there a market or social need that the program is responding to? What impact can this program have on addressing the need?

4. Clarity of Value Proposition to the Student: Is there an explicit definition of what the benefits to the student are of taking this program?

5. Clarity of Positioning: Is there a good understanding of the choices a potential student has and what the decision criteria are? What is the "value advantage" of the program compared to the other alternatives a student may undertake?

6. Delivery and Service: Does the student experience mesh with the purported value proposition? What processes where put in place to ensure this?

7. Promotion: What strategy is used to reach potential students? Is the strategy consistent with the program positioning and the institution mission? What is the return on marketing and recruitment dollars?

8. Quality Measures: How is program quality defined and measured?

9. Student Impact: How is student success defined and measured?

10. Financial Impact on Institution: Is the financial impact of the program on the institution understood and quantified? How important is this impact in the larger context of the institution?

Part of the A-HEC mission is to continue to refine the dimensions of effectiveness with experience. While imperfect, the system provides program and institutional leaders process to think through a balanced set of metrics for determining program effectiveness.