Every institution of higher education engages in some form of data sharing, if in no other way than as a result of external requirements to submit data to the US. Department of Education's Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and other governmental agencies, and in response to surveys from college guidebooks and from various higher education associations. Despite complaints from institutions about the burden associated with responding to these external requests, many institutions have elected to engage in additional data sharing on a voluntary basis in order to have access to data that can be used to improve planning and to inform decision making within the institution. Information about peer institutions can be so valuable that Middaugh, Trusheim, and Bauer (1994) identify inter-institutional peer analyses, together with general data collection and reporting, enrollment management, assessment, and budget support, as the five key responsibilities of an institutional researcher.
Assessments of effectiveness, efficiency, and quality are often couched in terms of how well a school compares with peer institutions. Furthermore, boards of trustees and governmental agencies are increasingly asking for comparative data for evaluation and accountability purposes, and comparative data are often used to justify requests for enhanced funding allocations. In addition, the quality movement in higher education has heightened awareness about the benefits of benchmarking (identifymg exemplary organizations with the goal of adapting their best practices to one's own institution).
The most systematic efforts involving data exchange are those associated with formal consortia composed of institutions that share data dealing with