Skip to content
November 30, 2010 / Su Hallenbeck

$45,712

In the Form 8-K filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, The Apollo Group announced that it eliminated approximately 700 admissions positions at the University of Phoenix for the quarter ending November 30, 2010.  In doing so, the company reported that it will save about $8 million per quarter, or $32 million per year.  A quick check of my trusty calculator shows that that means a savings of about $45,712 per position.

This actually seems rather low to me.  Assuming about a 33% rollup of benefits, that would mean that the average position was paying about $34,400.  When you consider the heavy sales emphasis that was alleged to be part of these positions, that really isn’t a huge amount of money.  Of course, nowhere is there a mention of what would likely be saved in bonus payments to these individuals, assuming they had been eligible for such payments.

On the other hand, an earlier filing, dated November 23, 2010 outlined a change in the compensation structure for several senior-level executives.  According to that document, 15% of the performance goals for these officers

will be tied to the level of student academic success and will be measured in terms of the percentage of students who first enroll in a University of Phoenix (“UOPX”) course at any time during the first two quarters of the 2011 fiscal year and subsequently earn at least one unit of academic credit.

Other factors, each with a weight of 15%, that will be used in determining performance include the results of a student satisfaction survey, measures of faculty engagement, and the improvement shown by individual campuses in addressing student concerns and complaints or issues raised by external agencies.  The final performance measure, weighted at 40%, will be the company’s operating income for the first three quarters of 2011.

The ‘target bonus opportunity’ for the named officers ranged from 75% to 100% of their salary.  Not a bad target to have.  But I have to wonder, given the performance measures and their relative weights, whether the individuals named in the filing will be more focused on student satisfaction, faculty engagement, academic success (although, can one earned credit really be called a ‘success’?) and responsiveness to student concerns, or on operating income earned?
Advertisement

4 Comments

Leave a Comment
  1. bizrelationships / Nov 30 2010 6:03 pm

    UOP has 2 sets of admissions advisors. The first are truly “qualifiers” although CALLED Admissions advisors. They make all outbound calls and first contacts; ask 3-4 questions and then pass along to the “closers” or “the admissions advisors that get paid on targets” (or used to). The first set of advisors are hired at $30K and I believe can only go up to $35K; so maybe this is where they cut the 700 from???

    • Su Hallenbeck / Nov 30 2010 6:11 pm

      Interesting. Didn’t realize they were using a 2-tiered system. Thanks for the insight!

      Wonder how drastically the compensation of the ‘closers’ will change, and whether this will lead to an exodus from those ranks as well?

      • Karen / Nov 30 2010 11:34 pm

        I am a student at UofP and was wondering why both my Academic Counselor and my Financial Counselor were both recently changed. This must be why! They also raised tuition recently :(

      • bizrelationships / Dec 1 2010 12:50 pm

        Based on the regs, the compensation should (if it has not already, which I believe it has) change a lot

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.