What Schools Tolerate That Would Never Be Allowed in a Business

And why it’s costing you enrolments!

There are things happening every day inside school admissions teams that would raise serious red flags in almost any other business. Things that would make your hair curl!*

Not because schools don’t care.
Not because admissions teams aren’t capable.
But because we’ve quietly normalised practices that undermine conversion, confidence, and performance, all while still expecting strong enrolment numbers.

In the latest episode of Selling Education, I unpack exactly what those practices are, why they persist, and why avoiding them is no longer an option if schools want sustainable enrolment growth.

We expect sales outcomes while pretending it isn’t sales

Let’s start with the contradiction at the heart of admissions.

Admissions teams are expected to:

• Move families from enquiry to enrolment
  
  
• Protect fee value and reduce discounting
  
  
• Maintain momentum over long decision cycles
  
  
• Hit targets and fill beds or classrooms
  
  

In any business, that would be clearly recognised as sales responsibility.

In schools, we expect those outcomes while avoiding the word sales, as if naming it somehow cheapens the work. The result is confusion, discomfort, and a lack of proper structure, training, or support.

You cannot expect professional outcomes while refusing to legitimise the discipline behind them.

We measure admin activity instead of decision-making

Many schools have CRMs, pipelines, and reports. On paper, it looks organised.

In reality, most admissions pipelines are built around internal administration, not how families actually make decisions.

They track tasks completed, not confidence built.
They log forms, not momentum.
They prioritise internal comfort over external clarity.

In a business, pipelines are designed around conversion moments, with clear stages, metrics, and nurture in between. In schools, we often inherit legacy workflows that look busy but don’t move families forward.

This is one of the biggest hidden leaks in student recruitment.

We shame follow-up while demanding results

Admissions teams are often told:
“Don’t chase.”
“Give families space.”
“Be careful not to pressure.”

At the same time, they’re expected to:

• Prevent drop-off
  
  
• Justify marketing spend
  
  
• Avoid last-minute panic discounting
  
  

You can’t have it both ways.

In business, follow-up is planned, trained, expected, and measured because it supports good decision-making. In schools, it’s treated as something slightly inappropriate, despite being essential.

The result is hesitancy, inconsistency, and missed opportunities for families who actually need guidance.

Selling education properly should not feel like something to apologise for.

We expect resilience without recognition

Admissions professionals deal daily with indecision, silence, rejection, ghosting, and pressure.

That emotional load exists whether we call it sales or not.

In most sectors, this is acknowledged, supported, coached, and rewarded in some way. In education, we remove the label but keep the weight.

Even if commission and bonuses feel uncomfortable, progress still needs recognition. Movement through the pipeline, improved conversion, stronger follow-up behaviours all of these can be acknowledged without compromising values.

Expecting people to consistently push through discomfort with no recognition is not ethical. It’s unrealistic.

We treat every enquiry the same and then blame conversion

No business expects its sales team to give equal time to every lead regardless of fit, readiness, or likelihood to convert.

Yet many schools do exactly that.

When enquiry volume is low, this might feel manageable. When volume increases, high-potential families don’t get the attention they deserve, time is wasted, and teams stay busy without seeing results improve.

Early, human qualifying is not exclusion.
It’s guidance.
And it protects both the family and the school.

We assume capability without making it a priority

Admissions teams absolutely can do this work well. I see it every week.

The issue is rarely ability. It’s priority.

When training is optional, irregular, or dismissed as “just CPD,” outcomes suffer. In business, revenue-generating skills are protected, invested in, and taken seriously.

In schools, admissions is still too often expected to deliver commercial outcomes without the same leadership attention or investment.

That would never fly elsewhere.

Why this matters now

Schools are becoming more commercial by necessity. That doesn’t mean becoming pushy or salesy.

It means becoming professional.

Professional at guiding families.
Professional at building confidence.
Professional at protecting fit, value, and outcomes.

If we want better enrolment results, we have to be willing to name the work and treat it with the seriousness it deserves.

I go into this in far more depth in the full podcast episode, including what schools can do differently without compromising values.

🎧 Listen to the full episode of Selling Education to hear the complete breakdown and practical next steps. (Click here)

If this episode raises questions for you, or reflects what you’re seeing in your own admissions team, that’s not a problem. That’s the starting point.

And it’s a conversation we need to keep having.

—----

Hi, I’m Nicola Lutz, founder of No Fluff. I’ve spent nearly 30 years working in and with the education sector, helping schools and agents turn enquiries into enrolments without compromising values.

I help teams improve their student recruitment results and take the discomfort out of so-called sales conversations by giving them structure, language, and confidence that actually works.

If student numbers are a concern right now, book a call with one of my team and we can look at whether working with me makes sense for you.

Book a call