The University That Improved Everything And Still Fell in Rankings

What evolutionary biology can teach us about the ruthless competition for rankings position

Jason Cohen, PhD, Director of Research + Insights at Frankel

In 1871, Lewis Carroll wrote an absurd race scene in which the Red Queen tells Alice: “It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.” A century later, an evolutionary biologist named Leigh Van Valen realized this paradox was an evolutionary allegory for how species compete for survival.

Extended to describe organizational ecologies, it also becomes a nearly perfect description of university rankings.

“It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!”

— The Red Queen, Through the Looking-Glass (1871)

The Paradox of Improving While Declining

Indiana University Bloomington did almost everything right between 2015 and 2025:

Read that again. Applications up 76%. Raised $4 billion, exceeding the goal by a third. Graduation rates improved from 52% to 68%. The “You Belong at IU” campaign resonated with first-generation students. Big Ten athletics integration strengthened visibility.

And yet Indiana’s U.S. News ranking dropped from #68 to #73.

This isn’t a story about failure. It’s a story about what happens when you improve at a reasonable pace in a landscape where everyone else is accelerating. Peer perception isn’t everything, and even if it’s one important factor, you have to consider rankings holistically. 

The Red Queen Effect in Higher Education

In 1973, evolutionary biologist Leigh Van Valen proposed what he called the “Red Queen hypothesis” to explain a puzzling pattern in the fossil record: species don’t become more extinction-resistant over time. No matter how long a species has existed, its probability of going extinct remains constant.

Why? Because every species is competing against other species that are also evolving. An antelope that runs faster survives until the cheetah evolves to run faster, or learns a new hunting technique it can teach its coalition to outmaneuver the antelope. An environment is never static: it’s an arms race.

The Red Queen Principle

In a competitive landscape where all participants are improving, you must improve faster than your competitors just to maintain your position. Absolute improvement is necessary but not sufficient.

University rankings work exactly this way. The U.S. News methodology is fundamentally relative, and lagging. Your score depends not just on your performance, but on how your performance compares to everyone else’s, and how it has done so over the past 5-10 years.

When Indiana improved its graduation rate from 52% to 68%, that sounds impressive. But look at what peer institutions did in the same period:

USF’s 38-point improvement dwarfs Indiana’s 16-point gain. And while FSU improved by fewer overall percentage points, its absolute graduation rate is meaningfully higher than IU’s, suggesting that its gains were more challenging to capture than the returns Indiana was able to secure. In the Red Queen’s race, Indiana ran, but not fast enough.

The complete analysis goes deeper. Our white paper examines competitive velocity patterns across all 10 institutions, including the thresholds that separate climbers from decliners. Download the White Paper →

The 75% Application Growth Threshold

Our analysis revealed a critical threshold that separates institutions that reach Top 50 status from those that don’t:

Every institution in our study that exceeded +75% application growth achieved Top 50 rankings status. Every single one.

This threshold appears to represent a tipping point in the virtuous cycle: above +75% application growth, institutions gain sufficient selectivity to meaningfully improve student outcomes, which feeds back into improved rankings and even greater application growth.

Below this threshold, the cycle operates, but without sufficient momentum to overcome competitive pressure from peer institutions that are accelerating faster.

Indiana’s +76% application growth put them right on the cusp of the threshold. But being at the threshold isn’t enough when competitors like USF (+79%) and FSU (+182%) are blowing past it.

First-Mover Advantages: Creating Uncopyable Wins

Several institutions created competitive advantages by being first to achieve particular milestones:

Michigan

First public university to exceed $5 billion in a comprehensive campaign. The “Victors for Michigan” campaign raised $5.28 billion. The milestone itself generated national coverage that became part of the marketing message.

NC State

First to set the single-day giving record at $58.1 million on March 24, 2021. Chronicle of Philanthropy coverage. National visibility among peer voters. A “first” that competitors literally cannot replicate.

USF

First public university in Florida invited to join the AAU in nearly 40 years (2023). A substantive achievement that created a natural news hook and lasting differentiation from in-state competitors.

Strategic Implication: Identify achievable “first” milestones to generate earned media and differentiate your institution. Being the first to achieve something creates a competitive advantage that peers can’t simply copy.

Running Faster to Move Forward

The Red Queen framework reveals an uncomfortable truth about university rankings: in a relative race where all competitors are improving, standing still means falling behind.

Indiana University improved by almost every absolute measure. They raised billions. They improved graduation rates. They grew applications. And they still fell in the rankings because their peers improved faster.

The question for institutional strategists isn’t “Are we improving?” It’s “Are we improving faster in our critical areas than the institutions we’re competing against?”

If you want to stay in the same place, you have to run just as fast as everyone else.

If you want to move forward, you have to run at least twice as fast as that.

Get the Complete Analysis

Our white paper “The Red Queen Imperative” includes the full competitive velocity analysis, the strategic acceleration framework, peer monitoring methodologies, and the decision matrix for different institutional positions.

Download the White Paper | Or contact us to discuss your institution’s competitive position.

Five Questions to Ask Your Leadership Team

Based on the Red Queen framework, here are the questions that should drive your next strategy conversation:

1. What is our improvement velocity relative to peer institutions? Not “are we improving” but “are we improving faster than the schools we compete with?”

2. What thresholds are we approaching, and how quickly can we cross them? The 75% application growth threshold, AAU eligibility, Top 50 status—these matter more than incremental gains.

3. What “first” achievements can we realistically pursue? Record-setting fundraising days, milestone campaign totals, prestigious memberships—what’s achievable that creates uncopyable differentiation?

4. Are we investing in duration or intensity? Sustained moderate investment (10+ years) outperforms sporadic large spending. What’s our commitment horizon?

5. Are we measuring ourselves against the right competitors? Your peer set may be improving faster than you realize. Who are you actually racing against?

The Red Queen doesn’t care about your strategic plan. She only cares whether you’re running fast enough.

Frankel is a higher education marketing agency specializing in rankings improvement strategy, brand development, and institutional advancement.