The UATX Brand

AI's evaluate how the University of Austin is perceived

I asked a few AI’s about UATX’s market positioning.

Claude

Claude provided a slide deck. On one if its slides, Claude says that UATX’s self-presentation of its educational model is:

• Great works emphasis

• Enduring sources

• Liberal arts focus

• Old school approach

• In-person learning

• Non-ideological

But Claude pointed out that its external reputation differs. UATX is seen as a right-wing counter-institution to the Ivy League.

Here, I will tip my hand. I think that Harvard’s dysfunction runs deeper than Queers for Palestine. The smug credentialism that the higher education establishment inflicts on society is what I question. I agree with Mike Gibson: Set the paper belt on fire. I want to see young people engaged in risk-taking and problem-solving, rather than seek social desirability and accumulate diplomas.

Nasty McKinsey

A reader is working on an AI that does strategic assessment. I call it “Nasty McKinsey,” because it probes for weaknesses and does not pull any punches. The beta version said about UATX,

The institution may be caught between two incompatible identities: a rigorous classical liberal arts college versus a political countermovement.

…The curriculum itself (Great Books + project-based) is not unique — St. John’s College, Hillsdale, and others offer similar structures.¹ The differentiation is **ideological positioning** combined with **zero tuition** and **tech/startup network access**.

Nasty McKinsey includes in its assessments a cynical “what cannot be said” section. For UATX, it wrote,

**What Can’t Be Said:**

- “We don’t know if we can achieve accreditation on the timeline promised to students”

- “The ideological positioning that attracts donors may be narrowing our academic credibility”

- “We’re more dependent on Yass, Crow, Ackman, and a handful of billionaires than we’d like to admit”

- “If the culture-war salience of ‘woke campus’ fades, our differentiation weakens”

- “We may have confused being anti-establishment with having a sustainable institutional model”

Nasty McKinsey concludes:

UATX must decide whether it is:

- **A) A rigorous classical liberal arts college with genuine intellectual diversity** (competes with St. John’s, Hillsdale, elite honors programs)

- **B) A conservative/libertarian institution with explicit ideological mission** (competes with Hillsdale, Ave Maria, Patrick Henry)

- **C) A political movement masquerading as a university** (competes with think tanks, not universities)

**Current State:** UATX is attempting (A) while behaving like (B) and being funded as (C). This is unsustainable.

I have given Nasty McKinsey other tasks, such as analyzing an essay of mine, and it always comes through with punches that land.

Manus

Meta’s acquisition of Manus made me aware of the latter. I asked Manus to do a strategic assessment of UATX and to answer the question of whether a strategic pivot is called for.

As an aside, Manus uses a “freemium” approach that I found very annoying. It offers a free trial that automatically converts to paid after one week. Then it makes canceling the subscription difficult to find and execute. I think that if you really believe in your product, you can make the paid subscription opt-in rather than (challenging to) opt-out.

That said, in responding to my prompt, Manus did a credible job. On the specific question, it wrote,

A strategic pivot is essential. By repositioning as **”The Practical Liberal Arts University,”** UATX can resolve its authenticity crisis and occupy a unique and valuable space in the higher education landscape. This pivot leverages its greatest strengths--its innovative financial model, its classical curriculum, and its strategic location to offer a clear and compelling solution to the twin crises of cost and relevance facing American higher education

Manus sketched a three-phase approach to executing this pivot. I will put my reactions in italics in brackets.

Phase 1: Immediate Actions (Next 6 Months) - Foundational Realignment

This phase focuses on immediate internal reforms to close the brand-reality gap and build a foundation of trust and transparency.

1.  **Establish an Academic Freedom Council:** Create an independent council, composed of both internal faculty and respected external figures, to review and adjudicate all claims of ideological bias or infringement on academic freedom. This body’s findings should be made public to demonstrate a genuine commitment to intellectual courage. [No.  This is a make-work project for various professors.]
2.  **Conduct a Comprehensive Brand Audit:** Engage a third-party firm to conduct a confidential audit of brand perception among all stakeholders: students, faculty, staff, donors, and the broader public. This will provide an honest baseline against which to measure the success of the pivot.[No.  This is a make-work project for consultants.]
3.  **Launch an Outcome Transparency Initiative:** Begin aggressively tracking the progress of the inaugural cohort. Develop a public-facing dashboard showcasing internships, research projects, entrepreneurial ventures, and other early indicators of success. This preemptively builds the case for the “outcomes-focused” pillar.[I applaud the proposal, even though I hate calling it an "Outcome Transparency Initiative."]
4.  **Formalize and Announce Key Industry Partnerships:** Convert informal relationships with Austin’s tech companies into formal, structured partnerships. Announce at least two major partnerships that provide clear internship or project pathways for students, giving immediate substance to the “contemporary application” pillar.[Yes!  And I suspect that the administration would be open to this and is already doing it to some extent.]

### Phase 2: Medium-Term Actions (6-18 Months) - Building the Brand

This phase focuses on external communication and programmatic evolution to build market awareness and credibility for the new brand position.

1.  **Evolve the Curriculum:** While retaining the Great Books core, introduce a set of interdisciplinary “Challenge Concentrations” (e.g., “AI & Ethics,” “Free Speech & The Digital Public Square,” “Biotechnology & Human Nature”). These concentrations would explicitly link classical texts to contemporary problems and require a practical, project-based capstone.  [Clever.  Worth considering.]
2.  **Launch a Thought Leadership Campaign:** Position UATX faculty and leadership as the leading voices on the future of the liberal arts. This should involve publishing articles, hosting a flagship conference on “The Practical Liberal Arts,” and developing a strong media presence focused on educational innovation rather than political grievance. [This looks like a stretch, but again worth considering.]
3.  **Publish a Detailed Accreditation Roadmap:** Increase transparency around the accreditation process. Publish a detailed timeline, outline the specific MSCHE standards being addressed, and provide regular public updates on progress. This will help mitigate the uncertainty that is a primary weakness.[I would be less concerned about accreditation.  I would put energy into implementing other recommendations.  If you're delivering a job without a credential, that beats delivering a credential without a job.]
4.  **Diversify Recruitment Efforts:** Implement a targeted recruitment strategy to attract a more ideologically and demographically diverse student body. This would involve outreach to a wider range of high schools and communities, demonstrating that “merit” is found across all backgrounds. [Maybe a virtual consortium with other colleges, with students freely moving back and forth?]

[I am omitting the recommendations for the third phase, which struck me as irrelevant for now]

I like to summarize market positioning as “Like ___, but ___.” I think of Manus as proposing to position UATX as “like Babson, but combining a classical curriculum with getting students involved in the tech industry.” Babson is a small college in the Boston area that specializes in business and entrepreneurship. It is reputed to do an outstanding job of launching students on successful careers. The advent of generative AI might increase the value of classical education in the tech world.

The ever-skeptical Nasty McKinsey wrote,

The Free-Tuition Model Is a Strategic Trap, Not a Strategic Advantage

The concern is that, as with any non-profit, UATX must be donor-facing. This may dilute the incentive to focus on the desires of students, parents, and potential students. The “strategic trap” is that you might never investigate how the customer base would respond to a “like Babson” pivot.

Of course, I have yet to set foot on the place. I might find out immediately that the AI’s are wrong in their assessment.

1. I would add that right next door in Austin, The UT School of Civic Leadership looks like formidable competition.