|
Jonathan F Blinco |
|
|
|
Research Project
CHAPTER
1 - INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF PROBLEM A. INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH Academic institutions
around the world, both public and private, all rely on multiple sources of funding in order to grow and maintain their livelihood.
One of the most significant sources of revenue is generated through the solicitation of funds from the alumni population of
the institution. In some cases, if funding from alumni ceased or was otherwise excluded from the budget, some institutions
would cease to exist. Studies have shown that there are specific characteristics that are more prevalent in those that become
alumni donors than those that choose not to give. Although there is no scientific formula that can predict with extreme accuracy
future charitable activity, researchers have shown that the characteristics identified in their studies can be used to more
accurately identify potential donors. This not only allows institutions to better design solicitation campaigns targeted at
likely alumni donors, but also allows some institutions to modify their admissions policies to increase the number of likely
donors admitted to their institution. Ultimately, understanding the characteristics of the giving behavior of Alumni has powerful
implications that can be used to the advantage of most academic institutions. The purpose of
this proposed study is to identify characteristics of alumni giving within the Alumni Association- most notably involving
the relationships between participation in university activities, overall undergraduate experience, and current satisfaction
with university performance. By performing primary research by means of an online survey of ASU Alumni Association, it is
hoped that the research will show similar trends extant within the ASU community and/or identify any inconsistencies. At The research hypothesis is that the results of the research conducted will show that at ASU, higher involvement
in university activities as an undergraduate and overall satisfaction with the undergraduate experience lead to a higher likelihood
of giving within the Alumni Association. Universities across
the nation have invested in behavioral studies in an effort to better ensure their financial stability in the future. As the
New American University, it is time that ASU embrace the research done on this topic, identify its place, and create a strategy
to better identify and target those more likely to give for fund solicitation. D.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The significance of
this study is tremendous; not only at From an interdisciplinary
perspective, the implications of this project permeate multiple disciplines that are all involved in administering the university.
From a marketing perspective, this data can be used to identify the target demographics and create more effective soliciting
campaigns. From a finance perspective, monies saved by reducing the wasteful nature of blind marketing can be redirected to
fund other initiatives that may be lacking in funding. Cultural anthropology comes into play with the study of the motives
of generosity and gift giving while the psychologist can determine the psychological nature of experiences relative to behavior
later in life. This of course could be tied back into marketing techniques. The list goes on an on. There are any number of
disciplines that can be augmented into a study like this and work in an interdisciplinary fashion to systematically make the
university an institution that breeds alumni likely to give back in the future offering the university a greater element of
financial stability in the years ahead. E. ASSUMPTIONS OF THE STUDY It was assumed that participation in university events after graduation may also be a factor of alumni
giving, but this is not addressed in this study. Next, it was assumed that the alumni propensity to give will also be affected
by the individual alumnus perspective on current university policies and procedures. The researchers also assumed that a higher
level of participation would also lead to a higher level of satisfaction. Finally, it was also assumed that the Alumni Association
participants would be available and be somewhat representative of ASU alumni as a whole. F.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY There are many possible
limitations to this study. The first limitation is time. In order to meet the required time limit of this study, the survey
had to be limited to few general questions rather than many specific, more precise questions. Another limitation is our survey
instrument. Due to financial constraints, the survey instrument the study will be able to afford only allows 1000 responses,
significantly reducing the sample originally planned for the study. Since it would be impossible to predict the percentage
of alumni that will respond, the number surveyed must be limited to prevent going over 1000 responses causing the study financial
difficulties. The size of our sample space is another limitation of this study. Given the size of the alumni population as
a whole, the size of the allowed sample for this study may not accurately represent the population as a whole. The persons who are taking the survey may be another limitation of this study. Given that the survey instrument
is administered anonymously online, we are unable to control who actually provides the instrument or the accuracy and truthfulness
of their answers. Lastly, the Alumni Association itself has the potential to be something that limits our study. Given the
limitations of the ability of the Alumni Association to distribute surveys, the distribution and sample may not be of a truly
random nature. The most important limitation
of this study is that the data collected was not from the Alumni Association, but was fabricated based upon the data in the
literature review as well as some randomly answer questions to account for some of our other limitations listed above. However,
this limitation does not distract from the objectives of the assignment, but only on the accurate representation of actual
ASU alumni. G. DEFINITIONS Alumni: For the purpose of this study, those individuals that have graduated from Participation in university activities: Literally any extra-curricular activity sponsored by or related
in any way to the university to include athletics, Greek life, volunteering, tutoring, residential life, etc. Overall Satisfaction: This will be calculated based upon the participant’s response to a question
with ranges of satisfaction to choose from. Essentially, this is the level of satisfaction that they have looking back on
their undergraduate experience at ASU. University Performance: This covers any modern activity of the university to include the athletic program
success, administrative policies and beliefs, implications of research, or any other variable that might elicit a change,
good or bad, in the alumni’s perspective and opinion of the school. CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW It takes a substantial
amount of money to sustain and grow a major university in the There are many important
factors linked to the ability, and tendency, for current students and alumni to give back to their institution. The first
element examines how involved students and alumni are within the institution, and how effective the school was at keeping
them involved and satisfied. The first alumni association was established in 1821 and was the first of its kind. Susan Clouse
Dolbert, Ph. D the former President and Executive Director of Also regarding
student involvement, it is important to look at the article titled, The Role of Student
Involvement and Perceptions of Integration in a Casual Model of Student Persistence, by J.B. Berger and J.F. Milem (1999) which five key theories on student involvement are examined. The study briefly explains each theory and then creates their own study that they will perform. “This study uses a revised integrated model of undergraduate persistence to examine first-year retention
at a private, highly selective research university. Findings from the study provide
strong support for use of the model in future studies” (Berger & Milem 641).
This may skew the results and make the exact result hard to duplicate. In
the final discussion other characteristics are brought up as well. Such as being
female, family income, high school GPA, and being African American. Also some
positive perceptions are discussed and some of the negative effects on liberal political views. From looking at these direct and indirect affects there is still more research to be done. Though all of these theories are interrelated they all have missing pieces to a definite answer. Behavior and perception both contribute to involvement. However,
there are many more characteristics that have influences on this. Participation
is also discussed in an article by Paul G. Schervish and John J. Havens (1997) in an
article titled Social Participation and Charitable Giving: a multivariate analysis
researches data on charitable giving. For their model there are two sets of virtues, “ participation virtues that
motivate giving such as benevolence, justice, reciprocity, enlightened cherishing and self-respect and (2) enabling virtues
that direct the quality of care” (Schervish & Havens, 1997) The Altruism theory is discussed in the section
as well. Schervish and Havens (1997) discuss that most of the time these acts of what are thought to be selflessness are actually
mutually beneficial for both parties involved. Another variable is experiences from one’s youth. The way that
a person is brought up and in what kind of home can affect their opinion on charitable giving. Additionally, the more money
that a household makes the more that they may be willing to donate or give to charity. (Schervish & Havens,
1997) There are a wide variety of reasons that people donate their time and
money and the exact reasons may be hard to extract. The second concept of alumni giving involves satisfaction. Kevin P. Gwinner and Richard F. Beltramini did an
empirical study examining alumni connection and student satisfaction with his or her experience with the university. They
looked at many different study sources and stated “Findings indicate that measuring student satisfaction by only one
of these dimensions may negatively impact the usefulness of the satisfaction measure” (Gwinner & Beltramini, 1995).
The study looked at a correlation between the intentions of a student becoming connected to alumni. Gwinner and Beltramini
said “It could be argued that student satisfaction is a function of meeting the expectations” (Gwinner & Beltramini,
1995). They also stated that “A students educational experience is result of university activities and departmental
activities associated with their major” (Gwinner & Beltramini, 1995). Looking at this study provides a look at alumni
participation through the lens of the student. Alumni satisfaction
is also discussed in an article by James Monks (2003); he acknowledges that there has been some investigation into the determinants
of alumni giving behavior, but that a closer look at donors and their habits will produce more fruitful results in identifying
behavior and conditions consistent with alumni giving. The “focus of [his] analysis is not simply to identify correlates
from a survey of alumni with giving, but rather to find variables that are observable to the development offices on campus
and can be effectively used to target campaign fund resources.” (Monks, 2003)
Monks believes this is important because it can be used to better identify potential donors that can be solicited for
funds instead of using resources on those that are less likely to become donors. (2003) Monks (2003) concludes
that the most significant factor influencing giving was overall satisfaction with the undergraduate experience. Some of the
determinants identified by Monks that were part of the undergraduate experience were involvement in extra-curricular activities,
interpersonal relationships with faculty and staff, degree of study, academic status, and social demographics to include race,
gender, and citizenship. Those that identified themselves as very satisfied typically gave 2.6 times as much as those neutrally
satisfied, and those that were generally satisfied tended to give 1.8 times as much. (Monks, 2003) A third theory of contributions
involves the success of athletic programs at a given school. Athletic programs have been part of school tradition for many
years and have been thought to have direct effects of contributions by alumni. According to Robert A. Baade and Jeffery O.
Sundberg (1996), football bowl appearances and basketball tournament bids increased the amount of giving in both private and
public university samples. In a current study titled Fourth Down and Gold to Go?,
which studies the link between winning and giving through a methodological approach with the collection of data, it is seen
that for both public and private universities that experience an increase of winning by just 1 percent also saw that it increased
the amount of giving by 0.07 percent (Baade and Sundberg, 1996) This shows that alumni put substantial weight on the sports
and extracurricular activities of their alma mater when deciding how much and how often they give back to these institutions.
Additional to athletic
post-season appearances, the television element is also discussed. When current students and alumni possess the ability to
watch their team on television, it increases the awareness of success for their given team. In a study titled Alumni Contributions to Academics, which focused on the roles that sports and NCAA sanctions play on contributions,
by Paul W. Grimes and George A. Chressanthis (1994), “television has a positive impact on academic contributions.”
Further, the television element of collegiate sports, seen in the total equation, showed just under a two-hundred thousand
real dollar increase in academic contributions. (Grimes & Chressanthis, 1994) The level and amount of exposure shows alumni
members that their money will be put to good and promotes them to offer more to their school. A fourth variable that
is shown to have effects on alumni contributions is how much money they were given, or paid out during college. Dugan, Mullin
and Siegfried (2000) analyzed the relationship between financial aid and decisions to donate in Undergraduate Financial Aid and Subsequent Alumni Giving Behavior. (Dugan, et al., 2000) Data was collected from
2,822 full-time students who entered Dugan, Mullin, and Siegfried
(2000) presented the hypothesis that graduates’ willingness to donate to their alma maters primarily depends on personal
satisfaction with their under graduate experience with an important component being financial aid history. The results of
the experiment concluded that alumni giving depend on the type of financial aid received instead of the amount given. It was
revealed that those who received scholarships were most likely to give back than those who received loans. (Dugan, et al.,
2000) Dugan, Mullin, and Siegfried (2000) found that receipt of need-based loans lower probability of giving back by 13% while
receipt of a need-based scholarship increases probability by 12%. The conclusion confirms the hypothesis. The type of financial
aid received is much more important than the quantity given. (Dugan, et al., 2000) The last variable discusses
Alumni giving as being influenced by institutional quality as well as institutional development effort (Baade & Sundberg,
1996). The study addresses the “rich-student, quality school” bias and findings conclude it does not account for
the alumni giving phenomenon (Baade & Sundberg, 1996). Baade & Sundberg (1996) conducted collected their data based
on three types of schools: private and public doctoral granting universities, and liberal arts colleges. Baade and Sundberg
(1996) considered samples extracted from over 125 public and private doctoral-granting research universities and over 250
liberal arts colleges for fiscal years 1989 and 1990. Baade and Sundberg (1996)
concluded that student and institution quality matter in determining alumni giving, institutions that invest more heavily
in instruction of their students receive a greater return from their alumni, and the experience students have influence their
attitudes as alumni. Their findings confirm that quality variables have the most significant impact on alumni giving. The
importance of offering scholarships as a tool used to enhance the quality of student experience and increase the chance alumni
will donate in the future. (Baade & Sundberg, 1996 This is an important
element for universities to study based on the fact that alumni contributions make up a large portion of funding. This study
should start to shed some light on what alumni believe to be important factors that effect their contributions. This will
then allow the universities to take the necessary steps to ensure that their students get the proper education, while setting
themselves up for future contributions after graduation. CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY A.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY, SETTING, AND POPULATION The purpose this
study was to identify characteristics of alumni giving within the Alumni Association. The study was designed to look for a
relationship between participation in university activities along with their overall satisfaction with the university. The
researchers performed their survey through surveymonkey.com. Using this service enabled the alumni to answer the survey in
the comfort of there own home and at their leisure. The researchers wanted to focus their survey on Alumni Association members
for two reasons. First, it allows them the ability to process a quantitative survey in a short period of time to a large population
of B. DATA COLLECTION The researchers proposed
to gather the data they needed through a survey analysis. The survey they proposed to the ASU Alumni Association compiled
data measuring their collegiate experience in terms of involvement and overall satisfaction; and examined the relationship
with monetary contributions of ASU alumni. The researchers created an online survey and submitted it via surveymonkey.com.
An e-mail with a link to the actual survey was sent to 1,000 members of the ASU Alumni Association. Responses were analyzed
and are discussed in Chapter 4. C. DATA
COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS Data compilation and
analysis will be obtained and submitted through an online survey. The researchers’ choice to utilize surveymonkey.com,
as an online survey resource, is a legitimate method of collecting data and is beneficial to our study for three reasons.
First, the survey tool automatically analyzes and presents data in statistical terms. Second, trends are indicated and identified
by percentages. Finally, the statistical analysis of data gathered provides feedback to our hypothesis by either affirming
or refuting it. D. SUMMARY It is evident that there
is a need for understanding the reasons why members of the Alumni Association make contributions beyond the required fees. The reasons vary from the benefits that the individual gets for being involved with
the Alumni Association, their experience as an undergraduate, and how they would like to contribute to ensure the program’s
success for future graduates. By identifying the characteristics of Alumni giving,
the university can create a better environment that is more likely to facilitate future contributions. By creating an environment that is more conducive to produce Alumni that give back, the university will
have more funds to work with for certain projects and programs. Through the analysis
of the surveys the researchers were able to verify that the amount of participation and overall satisfaction of the persons’
tenure at the university had a positive affect on the financial contributions to the Alumni Association. CHAPTER 4 – RESULTS In order to examine
the influence of participation and overall satisfaction with the undergraduate experience on alumni giving, the researchers
had to come up with a survey design that contained an appropriate range of activities that would cover many of the available
options that would have been made available to the alumni during their undergraduate experience at the university. With over
17 years of undergraduate experience between them, the researchers believe that the questions posed in the survey largely
account for the gamut of opportunities available at the university. These include opportunities with Greek Life, Residential
Life, Student Organizations, Athletics, university sponsored events, and more. By analyzing and examining the data, the researchers
were able to support the hypothesis that higher levels of participation and higher level of satisfaction do in fact lead to
higher levels of giving. The researchers found
that overall satisfaction was higher when the graduates where involved in university activities. Participants in the study
that were completely satisfied with their experience felt that they were most heavily involved, accounting for 85.4% of level
5 responses. The data clearly indicates that overall alumni satisfaction with the undergraduate experience, as much as participation,
influences the amount of monetary contributions that the graduate ultimately gives back to the university. The extent of which
will be discussed in the following section. The research showed
that the graduates that identified themselves as being completely satisfied tended to live on campus for two years (58.6%),
attend ASU for four years (79%), participate in Greek life (75%), socialize in the Memorial Union (83.2%), was a part of one
or more student organizations (85.4%), were not athletes (55.2%), attended ASU sporting events regularly (93.8%), and utilized
the universities resources available to them (95.8%). (See Figure A) However,
those who were completely satisfied did not participate in residential life (79%). Again, this could be because of a smaller
demand for participants and highly selective nature of the organization. Looking at the data
collected shows that higher amounts of participation will result in a higher number of graduates that are completely satisfied
with their college experience, and is in line with the research hypothesis. The
data analyzed by researchers supports the hypothesis that at least one element of alumni giving is a higher level of participation
in university related activities. Additionally, the data illustrates that a higher level of participation is a factor influencing
overall satisfaction with 90.1% of participants describing themselves as most active also describing themselves as completely
satisfied. Overall satisfaction of the undergraduate experience is also a factor of alumni giving, to be discussed in the
next section. A thorough examination of the data indicates that those who participated the most in university affairs tended
to capitalize more on available ASU resources (95.6%), participate in public ASU sponsored events (92.2%), regularly attended
ASU sporting events (96.7%), were a part of one or more student organizations
(92.3%), socialize in the Memorial Union (83.3%), were involved in Greek Life (78%) , with most living on campus for the first
two years of their collegiate career (50%). (See Figure B) Although those reporting the highest level of participation tended
to participate in most other activities available on the survey, there were two that were quite the opposite. 80% of the highest
level of participants did not participate in Residential Life affairs while 52% did not participate in student athletics.
This is most likely due to the more selective nature of these types of activities. Examining the data from
each reduced level of participation reveals a linear declination that provides strong support that; indeed, the level of participation
in university activities statistically correlates with the level of alumni giving among members of the Alumni Association.
This data also shows a declination of overall satisfaction with a reduced level of participation. Most of the study was
done in the respect of what elements caused graduates to contribute a larger amount of money after graduation. The data that
has been compiled shows that alumni members that gave $500, or more, 97.1% were completely satisfied with their undergraduate
experience and 91.3% felt as if they had participated at the highest level (5). Additionally, out of the members that gave
between $100 and $500, 58.8% were completely satisfied with their time spent at ASU and 55.9% had a participation level of
5 (highest). Overall, the data is
not only supports the research hypothesis, but it also supports the information found in the past research done at other institutions
around the country. A greater amount of participation in university events like the ones present in the survey yield a greater
bond with peers, a sense of belonging to an organization and, according to the data, a sense of responsibility to give back
to the institution that provided the opportunities to create what the participants reported as a completely or simply satisfied
experience. The following section examines the data pertaining to overall satisfaction and participation of the undergraduate
experience and how it statistically relates to the level of alumni giving among members of the Alumni Association. CHAPTER 5 – DISCUSSION A.
Introduction A post analysis discussion
of the study merits the examination of several factors and implications that the study revealed. The first are the Interdisciplinary
implications- how was the study viewed from an interdisciplinary standpoint and
how can it be used from an interdisciplinary standpoint. The second is why do higher
levels of participation and overall satisfaction lead to higher levels of giving? Finally, and perhaps most importantly, what
are the implications of this data for the administration at B. Interdisciplinary
Implications Understanding reasons
for Alumni involvement and giving is important for many reasons. From an interdisciplinary perspective, the implications of
this project involve numerous disciplines and can be used throughout the administration of any academic institution to include
To recap, there are
many disciplines that can be involved in a study of this nature and by working an interdisciplinary fashion, they can methodically
turn the university into an institution that breeds alumni that are likely to give back in the future. This ultimately provides
the university with a strategic foothold the help preserve the university’s financial wellbeing, which is essential
for its continued success for years to come. C. Reasoning Why do higher levels of participation and overall satisfaction lead to higher levels of giving? It seems logical to
assume that the more someone participates in something and the greater their experience was while doing it would lead to the
desire to give back to that institution to aid in its continued success in the hopes that others too would be able to have
the same experiences as they did. But how does this develop? In their article that was addressed in the literature review,
Baade and Sundberg pointed out that, ”the broad range of experiences within the campus culture establishes the strength
of the bond forged between an institution and its graduates.” (Baade and Sundberg, p. 76) This bond can only be created
by the experiences of participating in events and opportunities that are sponsored by the institution. This bond, in most
cases, is associated with a positive experience that many carry with them throughout their lifetimes. The data supports this
with 90.1% of those identified as participating the most also reporting that they were completely satisfied with their overall
undergraduate experience. D. Implications
at the University Level As stated earlier, the
information gathered in this project can be used throughout the university to more efficiently manage its financial campaigns,
better distribute funds throughout the university, and help solidify its financial future. This is particularly important
because not only does E. Conclusions After a close look at
the data and reviewing the supporting text, it is clear to see that the hypothesis proposed by the researchers has been supported
and that the implications of the study permeate many disciplines within the academic environment. Higher levels of participation
and overall satisfaction with the undergraduate experience are in fact associated with higher levels of giving while the opposite
remains true as well. It is important that the university conduct further research and remain current on trends associated
with alumni giving in order to fully capitalize on potential donors that exist within the current student and alumni populations.
Ignoring these powerful resources will only serve as silent detriment to what could produce an ever increasing source of revenue
to the university. REFERENCES Baade, R.A., Sundberg, J. (1996) Fourth down and gold to go? Assessing the link
between athletics and
alumni giving. Social science quarterly. 77(4). 789-803. Baade and Sundberg, (1996). What Determines Alumni Generosity? Economics of
Education Review, 15 (1), 75-81. Baade and Sundberg, (1996). Who gives to their alma mater?. Economics of Education
Review
,16 (2), 66-79. Dolbert, Susan Clouse, Ph.D. Future Trends in Alumni Relations.
2002, 4 Oct. http://www.idp.edu.au Retrieved 06/7/2007. Dugan, Mullin, Siegfried, (2000). Undergraduate Financial Aid and Subsequent Giving
Behavior (Doctoral dissertation, Grimes, P.W., Chressanthis, G.A. (1994) Alumni Contributions to Academics: The Role of Intercollegiate Sports and NCAA Sanctions. American Journal of Economics and Sociology. 53(1). 27-40. Gwinner Kevin P. and Beltramini Richard F. (1995). Alumni Satisfaction and
Behavioral Intentions: University versus Department Measures . Social Science
Collections, (Spring), 34-40. Monks, J. (2003). Patterns of giving to one's alma mater among young graduates from
selective institutions. Economics of Education Review, 22, 121-130. Schervish, Paul, and Havens, John. (1997). Social participation and charitable giving: A multivariate analysis. Voluntas:
International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 8(3). 235-260.
|
|
Enter supporting content here |