Harvard. The name alone conjures prestige, tradition, and excellence. It is one of the most recognizable brands in the world. Like Apple or Rolex, Harvard has become a global symbol of scarcity-driven value. But in a political climate increasingly hostile to elite institutions, the pillars of that brand equity, the exclusivity, are being weaponized against it.
This isn’t just about Harvard. It’s about the growing vulnerability of elite higher education brands that, over time, have failed to reconcile their brand promises with their institutional behaviors.
Brand Purpose in the Crosshairs
For decades, institutions like Harvard cultivated a brand based on academic excellence and exclusivity. But over time, questions began to arise: How accessible is excellence when admissions processes are opaque and sticker prices hover near $90,000 a year? Can brands rooted in “educating leaders” still claim public purpose when the majority of Americans feel excluded—culturally, economically, and ideologically?
Michael Crow at Arizona State University (ASU) has long challenged the elite educational version of excellence, arguing that a true assessment of value lies “not by the number of students that they turn away but by their ability to grant access and ensure student success.” As a publicly funded, state institution, Dr. Crow has stated that his mission is about inclusion versus exclusion. Scott Galloway has similarly critiqued elite universities for over-promising outcomes while under-serving the broader public. As he’s put it, “Higher education is a $2 trillion industry sticking its chin out to be disrupted”.
The latest salvo in this branding breakdown is being led by the Trump Administration. With sweeping federal cuts, legal challenges, and proposed policy overhauls, the administration has reframed elite higher education not as a public good—but as a problem to be solved. And, according to the Pew Institute, public sentiment may be more receptive than institutions realize: only 22% of Americans believe the cost of college is worth it if it means taking on debt.
From Brand Erosion to Brain Drain
The consequences are immediate and global. Nearly a third of Harvard’s federal research funding has been cut. Lawsuits are mounting. International student enrollments are being weaponized, restricted, and revoked. The effect of the uncertainty has the U.S. already seeing a 13% decline in international postgraduate enrollment and a surge in U.S. students applying to universities abroad.
What does that say about America’s role in global education? What does it mean for U.S. innovation and research leadership?
Alignment, Differentiation, and Authenticity
To navigate this storm, elite institutions, and all of higher education, must reexamine their brand purpose and align it authentically with their mission. That means:
- Clarifying your institutional value proposition, not just to prospective students, but to the nation.
- Differentiating in ways that resonate beyond legacy and exclusivity.
- Being unapologetically transparent about both your challenges and your efforts to solve them: on affordability, inclusion, political neutrality, and student outcomes.
This is a branding and communication challenge. And more importantly, it’s a mission challenge. It’s time for higher education to lead not just with prestige—but with purpose.