Consistency without rigidity
Education groups want consistent processes, brand and reporting across campuses. Each campus still has its own programmes, calendars, fee structures and local regulations. The platform must support both.
Group vs campus configuration
| Configured at group level | Configured at campus level |
|---|---|
| Data model and reporting definitions | Programmes and intakes offered |
| Brand templates and communication standards | Local contacts and signatures |
| Security policies and roles | Staff assignments |
| Core workflows | Local approval steps |
| Group dashboards | Campus fee structures and calendars |
Planned capabilities
Campus-scoped access
Staff see their campus; group leaders see all.
Consolidated reporting
Compare campuses on consistent indicators.
Shared services
Central admissions or finance teams can serve multiple campuses.
Transfers
Move students between campuses with history intact.
Frequently asked questions
Can each campus keep its own fee structures?
Yes, that is the plan. Fees, calendars and programmes can be configured per campus while reporting definitions stay consistent across the group.
Can a central admissions team work for several campuses?
Yes, that is the plan. Shared teams can be given access to several campuses, while campus teams see only their own records.
How do we compare campuses fairly?
Group dashboards use the same indicator definitions for every campus, so comparisons reflect performance rather than differences in how data is recorded.