Through years of partnering with colleges and universities on Slate for Student Success implementations, one lesson has become clear—successful implementations aren’t driven by technology alone, they’re driven by strategy. From identifying the right project team and rethinking outdated processes, to building campus buy-in, establishing governance, and defining long-term ownership, the decisions made before implementation lay the foundation for long-term success.
At this year’s Technolutions Slate Summit in Nashville, Carnegie Higher Ed’s Student Success team hosted an interactive panel alongside three longstanding institutional partners who have implemented Slate for Student Success in very different environments.
Together, we set out to pull back the curtain on the implementation process, sharing candid stories, hard-earned lessons, and practical advice to help other institutions avoid common pitfalls and build a strong foundation from day one. Throughout the discussion, we explored the strategic decisions institutions should make before beginning their build and answered audience questions with insights drawn from real implementation experiences.
Meet Our Panelists
Allison Beebie
Assistant Director of Slate for Student Success
Carnegie Higher Ed.
With seven years of Slate experience and as a former academic advisor, TRIO Student Success coach, and adjunct faculty member, Allison drew on her lived experience while moderating this session.
Carrie Stockton
Vice President of Student Success
Carnegie Higher Ed.
Carrie’s 20+ year career in university leadership within enrollment management and academic affairs focused on improving student success–these experiences served as a foundation for moderating this session.
Audra Taylor
Director of Student Success Technology and Analytics
Georgia Southern University
Audra offered the perspective of a large public institution navigating a multi-campus environment and the complexities of implementing during a college consolidation.
Sam Klaskow
Senior Director of the Student Success Center
Kettering University
Sam shared the experience of a small, student-centered STEM university whose alternating academic/co-op model demands a highly intentional strategy for student success.
Rusty Martel
Manager of Student Systems
Mount Royal University
Rusty provided insight on creating a successful student success instance at a mid-sized Canadian university, while also navigating the challenges of sharing a Slate instance with their admissions team.
If you missed our session at Slate Summit 2026, don’t worry—we’ve gathered the key insights from the discussion here!
Whether you’re preparing for your first implementation, revisiting an existing project, or looking to strengthen your current Student Success instance, these perspectives from experienced practitioners can help you avoid common pitfalls and make more informed decisions throughout your implementation journey.
Strategic Questions for a Successful Student Success Implementation
What’s one decision you made before your build that had the biggest long-term impact—positive or negative?
One theme emerged almost immediately: the most successful implementations began with organizational decisions—not technical ones.
Tying a Student Success implementation to a broader institutional strategy was consistently identified as one of the most impactful decisions an institution could make. When Slate was positioned as a key component of a strategic enrollment or student success initiative, it became much more than a software implementation.
Executive leaders were invested, cross-campus collaboration became easier, and the project maintained momentum even when challenges arose.
The panel also emphasized the importance of assembling the right implementation team early. Institutions found the greatest success when they included individuals who understood both the academic and operational sides of the institution and could make decisions with the entire student journey in mind.
Beyond having the right people involved, the size of the core project team mattered as well. A focused team of three to six decision-makers proved to be the most effective, with additional subject matter experts brought into the conversation at key points throughout the implementation as their expertise was needed.
Multiple panelists also highlighted the value of evaluating and redesigning business processes before beginning the build, rather than recreating existing workflows in a new system.
We’re all familiar with the challenge of proposing changes to campus-wide, or even department-wide, processes that have “always been done this way”. A Student Success implementation provides a valuable opportunity to intentionally reevaluate those processes and build workflows that better support students, rather than investing time replicating systems that no longer meet the institution’s needs.
Finally, the panel discussed several technical decisions that carry long-term implications. Choosing Slate as the platform was only the beginning; institutions also considered whether Student Success should live in a shared Slate instance or a standalone environment (a topic we’ll explore in more detail later in this article).
Key Takeaways
- Anchor your Student Success implementation to an institutional strategic priority—not just a technology initiative
- Build a small, empowered core project team (3–6 people) and engage additional campus subject matter experts throughout the project
- Use implementation as an opportunity to redesign business processes, rather than simply recreating existing systems in Slate
- Secure executive sponsorship early to maintain momentum and encourage campus-wide collaboration
- Consider long-term data governance and instance architecture from the outset, including whether a shared or standalone Slate instance best supports your institution
What did your institution underestimate when planning for its Student Success implementation?
If there was one universal lesson from our panel, it was this: every institution underestimated the time required for a successful implementation.
That wasn’t just true of the overall project timeline—it also applied to the weekly time commitment needed to build in Slate and the time required for leadership and individual departments to make thoughtful institutional decisions.
The panelists also emphasized the reality that a Student Success Slate instance is never truly “finished.” Like student success itself, it continues to evolve alongside your institution’s needs. While each institution developed a realistic project plan, the work extended well beyond system configuration. Gathering requirements, testing new functionality, refining processes, training users, and coordinating across departments all required significant time and attention.
Several panelists noted that the work happening between weekly implementation team meetings was often just as substantial as the meetings themselves. The panel also discussed how their understanding of user needs evolved throughout the implementation. As advisors, faculty, and staff began seeing what was possible in Slate, new ideas, use cases, and requirements naturally surfaced.
Rather than viewing this as a setback, institutions encouraged embracing this evolution while remaining disciplined about prioritization and phased implementation. Building everything at once isn’t the goal; creating a strong foundation that can grow over time is.
Carnegie Perspective
One of the reasons our implementations begin with strategy and discovery is because we know that technology is only one piece of a successful implementation. The institutions that see the greatest long-term success invest just as much time in defining processes, building consensus, and making thoughtful decisions as they do configuring Slate itself.
Key Takeaways
- Plan for your implementation to be an ongoing journey, not a one-time project
- Budget time into your project plan for conversations, decision-making, testing, and training—not just building in Slate
- Expect new ideas and opportunities to emerge as users begin working in Slate
- Focus on building a strong foundation first, then expand through a phased implementation.
- Remember that the strongest implementations are built on strategy, governance, and thoughtful process design—not technology alone
Why did your institution initially decide to implement Slate for Student Success? How did you determine what to include in your initial implementation?
While every institution arrived at Slate for Student Success through a different journey, they all shared a common goal: creating a more connected, student-centered experience. Whether replacing a legacy advising platform, expanding an existing Slate ecosystem, or supporting a broader institutional strategy, the decision was driven by a desire to bring people, processes, and data together in one place.
The panelists also agreed that a successful implementation doesn’t require building everything at once. In fact, they urged against it.
Instead of trying to solve every challenge in a single project, institutions benefited from identifying the highest-priority functionality needed for launch and treating implementation as the beginning of an ongoing evolution. Immediate operational needs, campus timelines, and institutional priorities all helped determine what made up the initial scope.
Perhaps most importantly, implementation priorities were not determined by one office alone. Discovery conversations with stakeholders across campus helped surface pain points, identify opportunities for collaboration, and build consensus around what would deliver the greatest value early on. Starting with a focused, achievable scope allowed institutions to build momentum while creating a roadmap for future enhancements.
Key Takeaways
- Align your implementation with institutional goals, not just technology replacement
- Prioritize functionality that delivers immediate value and supports a successful launch
- Engage stakeholders early to identify the most impactful use cases
- View implementation as a phased journey rather than a one-time project
Which roles are absolutely essential on a Slate for Student Success implementation team?
Building a Student Success CRM is an institutional initiative, which means the implementation team should represent both the technical and functional sides of the institution.
Across every institution represented on the panel, project management, Information Technology, and functional experts from key Student Success offices emerged as foundational members of the implementation team.
Technical staff help ensure integrations, data security, and infrastructure are thoughtfully designed, while student-facing subject matter experts provide the context needed to build workflows that truly support students and advance institutional retention goals.
Panelists also emphasized the importance of involving institutional leaders who understand how departments intersect and collaborate, rather than viewing processes through the lens of a single office.
Beyond the build itself, the discussion highlighted the critical role of change management. Faculty champions, executive sponsors, trainers, and other campus leaders all play an important part in helping new Slate users understand the value of the platform and feel confident adopting it.
The panel also noted that developing internal Slate expertise—even if that expertise is built during implementation—can significantly strengthen long-term sustainability and reduce reliance on external partners over time.
Key Takeaways
- Build a cross-functional implementation team that includes both technical and student-facing expertise
- Include leaders who understand how departments collaborate across the student experience
- Invest in change management through champions, trainers, and executive support
- Develop internal Slate expertise to support long-term sustainability and continuous improvement
- Remember that successful implementations are driven by people as much as by technology
What strategies have been most effective in building early campus buy-in?
The panelists agreed that campus buy-in isn’t something you build after implementation — it begins during the planning stages.
Institutions found success by inviting faculty, staff, and campus partners into the process early through discovery sessions, focus groups, demonstrations, and other opportunities for meaningful feedback.
Just as importantly, they acted on that feedback whenever possible. When members of the campus community saw their ideas reflected in the final product, they became advocates for the platform and helped build excitement within their own departments.
Communication emerged as another recurring theme. Long implementations can easily lose momentum if updates become infrequent or the work happening behind the scenes becomes invisible.
Panelists encouraged institutions to regularly share progress, celebrate milestones, demonstrate new functionality, and keep the campus informed about how the implementation is evolving. Even small wins can build excitement when they’re communicated consistently.
Perhaps the simplest—and most memorable—advice came from Audra:
“Just never shut up about it.”
While tongue-in-cheek, the message resonated with the entire panel. The more you communicate about your implementation, the more opportunities you create for people to understand its value, stay engaged in the process, and become champions for the platform.
Key Takeaways
- Engage faculty and staff early through discovery, demonstrations, and meaningful feedback opportunities
- Build trust by incorporating user feedback whenever possible
- Communicate consistently throughout implementation to maintain momentum and excitement
- Celebrate progress and share early successes across campus
- Remember that campus buy-in is built over time—not at launch
Who “owns” Slate for Student Success on your campus, and why?
If there was one takeaway from this discussion, it was that there is no single “right” ownership model for Slate for Student Success—and that’s perfectly okay.
Among our panelists, one institution had a dedicated Slate administrator responsible for the ongoing maintenance and development of the platform. Another distributed responsibilities across Student Success, Information Technology, Campus Systems, Enrollment, and Marketing, with each office owning a different aspect of the system. A third relied on a network of functional experts embedded within each office, allowing those closest to the work to manage and evolve the areas they use every day.
While the governance structures varied, every institution emphasized the importance of clearly defining roles and responsibilities. Whether your institution has one Slate administrator or a collaborative ownership model, success depends on establishing who makes decisions, who maintains the platform, and how future enhancements will be evaluated.
Carnegie Perspective
Before we begin an implementation, one of our first priorities is helping institutional partners identify who will serve as the project’s decision-makers and who will be responsible for the long-term administration of the Slate instance.
Establishing clear ownership early helps institutions move more efficiently throughout implementation while creating a sustainable model for ongoing maintenance and future growth.
Segmented super users across campus play an essential role in the platform’s success, but there will always be system administration, governance, and maintenance tasks that don’t naturally belong to a single office.
Having one person with clear accountability helps ensure those responsibilities don’t fall through the cracks as the instance continues to evolve.
Key Takeaways
- There is no universal ownership model for Slate for Student Success
- Choose a structure that aligns with your institution’s people, processes, and resources
- Clearly define decision-making authority and long-term maintenance responsibilities before implementation begins
- Document ownership before the implementation—not after
What should institutions consider when deciding between implementing Student Success in an existing Admissions instance versus a standalone Slate instance?
As mentioned previously, there is no universally correct answer to this question. Instead, the right decision depends on each institution’s size, data governance model, available funding, staffing capacity, and long-term strategy.
A shared instance can be a great choice for smaller institutions with faculty and staff members who wear many hats. You’ll reap the benefits of cost savings, having all of your admissions and retention data in one place, and potentially fewer Slate experts needed to keep your Slate ecosystem afloat.
Challenges with a shared instance begin to emerge as an institution grows in complexity. High volumes of student records, extensive process automation, and strict data governance requirements can all increase the administrative effort required to successfully manage a shared environment.
Also, while Slate is an incredibly powerful platform, there are practical limits to what any single instance can support efficiently. For many institutions, a standalone Student Success instance provides greater flexibility and more room for long-term growth. It allows Student Success teams to evolve their processes independently while simplifying administration and reducing competing priorities across functional areas.
The primary tradeoff, beyond the additional cost, with standalone instances is staffing. The panelists and moderators agreed that each instance should really have its own Slate Captain, and not all institutions are able to allocate the resources to support that model.
Ultimately, there isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. The best decision is the one that aligns with your institution’s needs, technical capacity, budget, and long-term vision for supporting students through Slate.
Key Takeaways
- There is no one-size-fits-all approach to instance architecture
- Consider your institution’s size, staffing capacity, budget, and long-term goals when deciding between a shared or standalone instance
- Shared instances can be an excellent fit for smaller institutions, but administrative complexity increases as your Slate ecosystem grows
- Standalone Student Success instances provide greater flexibility and scalability, but best thrive with dedicated staffing to support long-term success
- Choose the model that your institution can realistically sustain, not just at implementation, but for years to come
Looking back, what other advice would you offer institutions preparing for their own implementation?
The panelists offered one overarching piece of advice: implementing Slate for Student Success is a marathon, not a sprint.
Open communication should remain a priority from start to finish. Long projects can lose visibility if campus leaders are not kept informed, making it harder to maintain excitement and institutional support. Regular updates, demonstrations, and opportunities for engagement help keep the project top of mind while reinforcing the value of the work being done.
The panel also emphasized the importance of establishing ownership and decision-making practices early. Clearly defining how build decisions will be made, what constitutes a completed feature, and how future enhancement requests will be evaluated creates consistency and prevents implementation from becoming an endless cycle of revisions.
Just as importantly, be prepared to have difficult conversations. Every implementation involves competing priorities, limited resources, and requests that may not align with the institution’s long-term goals. Establishing objective decision-making criteria early helps teams navigate those conversations with confidence and transparency.
Finally, give yourself (and your team) grace. Every implementation encounters unexpected challenges, shifting priorities, and new requirements along the way. Build flexibility into your timeline, engage the campus community early and often, and remember that successful implementations are iterative.
The goal isn’t perfection on day one—it’s building a sustainable foundation that can continue to evolve alongside your institution.
Carnegie Perspective
If there’s one lesson we’ve learned from partnering with institutions on Student Success implementations, it’s that success isn’t determined by how quickly you launch or how many features you build, it’s determined by the strength of the foundation you create.
Institutions that invest in strategy, collaboration, intentional change management, and thoughtful decision-making build Slate environments that can grow alongside their
Key Takeaways
- Treat implementation as a long-term institutional initiative, not a one-time project
- Communicate consistently to maintain momentum, visibility, and campus support
- Be prepared to make difficult decisions and have honest conversations as priorities compete
- Establish clear ownership and decision-making processes from the outset
- Build flexibility into your timeline and expect priorities to evolve
- Focus on creating a sustainable foundation that can grow alongside your institution
Building a Sustainable Foundation for Student Success
We hope the experiences shared by our panelists provide practical guidance as you begin, or continue, your own Slate Student Success journey.
While every institution’s path is unique, the most successful implementations share a common thread: they begin with thoughtful planning, clear governance, and a commitment to continuous improvement.
Those are the foundations that transform a Slate implementation into a lasting institutional investment.
If you have questions about planning or implementing Slate for Student Success, Carnegie’s Student Success team is here to help. We’d love to continue the conversation.
