August, 2009

1. EAIR ConferenceBuilding Brand and Demand:Connecting University Assets to Student Expectations and Perceptions August, 2009

2. Goals of the Project • Determine market expectations from higher education • Gauge prospective student perceptions of Sample University • Define the University’s most promising student audiences • Identify effective brand concepts and message themes • Distinguish audience-specific messages

3. How well doesSample University meet the expectations of prospective students?

4. Positive Impressions • Good teachers/Student-teacher relations (15%) • Location/Good location (13%) • Good program/school (24%) • Attractive campus (21%) • Community/Desirable atmosphere (16%) NegativeImpressions • No response (18%) • Cold (18%) • Party school (16%) • Too large (15%) • Drug use (12%) • Too expensive (11%)

5. Sample UNIVERSITY Importance of Characteristics Versus the University’s Quality 1.  Geographic location 2.   Availability of financial aid 3.   Preparation for graduate/professional study 4.   Employment opportunities after graduation 5.   Value of education (combination of quality & cost) 6.    Research and graduate study opportunities 7.   Availability of internships 8.   Small class size 9.   Quality of desired major 10.  Access to a major city 11.  Academic reputation 12.  Strong sense of campus community 13.   Wide variety of majors and areas of study 14.   Campus safety & security 15.   Emphasis on teaching undergraduates 16.   Racial/ethnic diversity of student body 17.   Attractive campus 18.   High quality faculty who are recognized scholars in their fields 19.   Student advising and mentorship programs 20.   Good balance of academic and athletic opportunities 21.   Personal attention to students; close contact with faculty 22.   Quality of on-campus housing 23.   Campus cultural and intellectual life 24.   Honors program 25.   Strong liberal arts education 5.0 4.5 17 4.0 1 14 13 25 12 4 15 5 9 Quality of the University 20 3 22 6 3.5 24 19 7 23 18 8 11 21 2 10 16 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Importance of Characteristics

6. Definition of Value • Correlation analysis showed that educational value is associated with: • employment opportunities after graduation, • research and graduate study opportunities for undergraduates, • preparation for graduate/professional study, • internship opportunities, • quality of the desired major, as well as • cost. • The University received middling ratings. • No clear perception of distinctive value.

7. Importance/Quality Gaps • Importance/quality gaps exist for: • Quality of desired major* • Value of education* • Employment opportunities after graduation* • Academic reputation* • Quality of on-campus housing* • Personal attention; close contact with faculty* • Financial aid** • Preparation for graduate study** • High-quality faculty *Top Priorities ** More important to minority students

8. FACTOR 4 Location & Quality of Campus FACTOR 3 Diverse Academic Experience FACTOR 1 Preparation for the Future FACTOR 2 Personal Attention Variance Accounted for: 2.7% Variance Accounted for: 19.1% Variance Accounted for: 4.3% Variance Accounted for: 5.4% SAMPLE UNIVERSITY Factor Analysis Important Characteristics Factor Loading Factor Loading Factor Loading Factor Loading 4. Employment opportunities after graduation .70 6. Research and graduate study opportunities for undergraduates .67 3. Preparation for graduate/ professional study .66 7. Availability of internships .53 5. Value of education (combination of quality & cost) .52 9. Quality of desired major .42 2. Availability of financial aid .38 24. Honors program .36 8. Small class size .83 21. Personal attention to students; close contact with faculty .65 • 23. Campus cultural and • intellectual life .58 • Strong liberal arts • education .58 • 16. Racial/ethnic • diversity of student • body .50 • 24. Honors program .39 • 13. Wide variety of • majors and areas • of study .38 17. Attractive campus .61 22. Quality of on-campus housing .44 10. Access to a major city .33 1. Geographic location .33 Correlation between Factor 1 and Factor 2: .367 Correlation between Factor 1 and Factor 3: .347 Correlation between Factor 1 and Factor 4: .189 Correlation between Factor 2 and Factor 3: .241 Correlation between Factor 2 and Factor 4: .231 Correlation between Factor 3 and Factor 4: .362

9. SAMPLE UNIVERSITY Logistic Regression Analysis Predictive Models of Application Status Best Fitting Three-Variable Model Quality of Sample University Outcome Measure Variance Accounted for (R2) = 0.224 Applied to University Geographic location Access to a major city Quality of desired major b = .570 b = .499 b = .415

10. Which messages aboutSample University are appealing, credible, and true?

11. Most and Least Credible Messages • Identified the most credible messages for the University: • “Located in an idyllic setting with some of the country’s most beautiful scenery.” (4.35) • “Is an outdoor enthusiast’s paradise.” (4.31) • Identified the least credible messages: • “Has leading scholars teaching introductory courses” (3.27) • “Attracts students from many different places…cultures and backgrounds” (3.27) • “Has top-notch professors who are recognized scholars in their fields” (3.29)

12. Competitive Advantages • Defined Sample University’s strongest competitive advantages: • Idyllic setting** • Outdoor enthusiast’s paradise** • Keen interest in the environment** • Located in a charming college town **Not high priorities

13. Is the University attracting the right students?

14. Profile of the Sample

15. Minority versus White Students • African-American differences are: • More come from families with incomes under $40,000 • Tend to have lower SAT scores • More desire a doctorate or professional degree • Asian-American differences are: • More are high achievers • Have higher SAT Math scores • Hispanic differences are: • More come from families with incomes under $40,000 • More are aiming for doctorates • Tend to have lower SAT Verbal scores

16. African-American Priorities • African-Americans place higher importance than Whites on: • Availability of financial aid • Preparation for graduate school • Availability of internships • Access to a major city • Campus safety and security • Emphasis on teaching undergraduates • Racial/ethnic diversity • Student advising and mentorship programs • Campus cultural and intellectual life • Cutting edge technology

17. Asian-American Priorities • Asian-Americans are more focused than Whites on: • Preparation for graduate school • Research and graduate study opportunities for undergraduates • Academic reputation • Campus safety and security • Racial/ethnic diversity • Campus cultural and intellectual life • Honors program • Cutting edge technology

18. Hispanic Student Priorities • No significant differences were noted for Hispanic versus White students with regard to: • Educational priorities • Appeal of marketing messages • Psychographic descriptions

19. High-Ability Students • Highlights of their distinctive qualities were: • Tend to describe themselves as more disciplined students • More openly consider themselves as ambitious • More interested in an honors program • More interested in financial aid • More open to the value of the liberal arts • Top students see the University’s image in the same light as other students.

20. Psychographic Cluster Analysis • Sample University’s prospective students fall into the following categories: • Active Community Service Orientation • Goal-Directed/Low Social Motivation • Goal-Directed/High Social Motivation • Individualism • Detached

21. Applicants by Psychographic Cluster

22. Social Activist • Preferred, attainable pool • 18% convert from inquirer to applicant • Personality profile • Highest levels of interest in community service and self-direction • High level of goal direction • Highest percentage of women (77%) • Highest achieving (55% in top 10% of class) • Highest educational goals (23% intend to seek doctorate and 28% a professional degree)

23. Goal Directed, Extroverts • Preferred, attainable pool • 17% convert from inquirer to applicant • Personality profile • Highest levels of social motivation • High level of goal-directedness • Moderate interest in community service and self-direction • Driven, but more for personal than community benefit • Greater emphasis on good balance of academic and athletic opportunities • Work hard/play hard experience is appealing

24. Individualists • Somewhat preferred, attainable pool • 16% convert from inquirer to applicant • Personality profile • Moderate levels of interest in community service and self-direction • Lowest levels of goal direction, including educational aspirations (33% undecided) • Tend to be less responsive to what is important about the college experience • Compared to Detached students, a higher priority is given to racial/ethnic diversity, connectedness with faculty, and community service

25. Detached Students • Less preferred, attainable pool • 14% convert from inquirer to applicant • Personality profile • Lowest levels of self-direction and interest in community service • Lower levels of goal direction • High percentage undecided about educational goals • Tend to be weaker students • Highest percentage of men • Lower levels ofpriority given to all features of the college experience

26. Goal Directed, Introverts • Less preferred, less attainable pool • Only 8% convert from inquirer to applicant • Personality profile • High levels of goal direction and low social motivation • Moderate levels of interest in community service and self-direction • Highest percentage of Asian/Pacific-Islanders (8%) • Not as concerned with finding a sense of campus community

27. From Research to Action:Brand Componentsand Message Themes

28. Brand Components • Research-based hallmark themes: • Academic community • Preparation for the future • Advantages of location • Development of each individual • Social commitment • Busy, complete lives • Focused on preferred psychographic profiles.

29. Message Themes • Academic Community • Mentoring, high expectations from faculty in a friendly environment • Wide variety of majors • Faculty who are scholars in their field teaching in the classroom • Learning by doing • Accessible faculty who interact informally with students • Curricular connections with real world experiences

30. Message Themes • Preparation for the Future • University’s commitment to launching students into successful careers, service to society, and meaningful lives • Emphasis on student growth during college years • Track record for graduate school acceptances and career achievements • High profile graduates

31. Message Themes • Advantages of Location • Beauty of the setting • Assets of nearby city • Co-curricular opportunities • Safety of the campus and the area • Attractiveness of the campus • Diversity of outdoor resources

32. Message Themes • Development of Each Individual • Resources to build an academic program around each student’s ambitions • Academic flexibility • “Tapestry” of student life - activities form around personal interests • Fostering of individualism • Inclusive community • Emphasis on student growth • Experienced professionals to guide growth process

33. Message Themes • Social Commitment • Keen interest in the environment • Student involvement in community service • Peace Corp tradition • Student involvement in university, city, state, national, and international issues • High-visibility alumni profiles

34. Message Themes • Busy, Complete Lives • Connections between active social life and social responsibility • Busy making a difference • Diversity of opportunities • Multi-faceted lives • Outdoor recreation and sports • Athletic and extracurricular activities

35. Outcomes

36. Brand and Image Enhancements • Snow, cold  outdoor activities, busy lives • Green, rural  Environmentally conscious

37. Brand and Image Enhancements • Party school  Socially responsible • Low profile academics  Academically serious

38. Admissions Profile • Applications increased by 42% within three years of the research. • Minority student applications increased by 30%. • Standardized test scores increased by 12%. • Geographic profile improved significantly. • Recaptured former markets • Penetrated new markets • Ability to shape the class increased.

39. “The future is not a gift.It is an achievement.”