Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Title
Page Image Ratio: Square
(PowerPoint will
automatically crop)
Advancement
Framework Planning
Ohio State University Alumni
Association Board Review
May 17, 2012
Header
& Text
Agenda
• Project overview and status
• Review foundational concepts
• Review selected qualitative & quantitative insights
• Summary of segmentation
• Next steps
2
Section
Divider
PROJECT OVERVIEW
3
Header
& Text
What is Advancement?
Advancement is a University-wide initiative to increase the eminence of The
Ohio State University through efforts to build awareness, engagement and
giving among critical stakeholder groups, including students, faculty, staff,
alumni, Ohioans, corporate partners and national leaders.
4
DEFINITION
GUIDING
PRINCIPLES
Ohio State strives for its constituents to be a meaningful part of the life and
success of the institution.
Advancement enables us to deepen our connections with all of our audiences
to engage, inform, and inspire, and to jointly leverage our resources to
accelerate Ohio State‟s eminence.
Advancement streamlines and organizes us to provide powerful and engaging
experiences, information, and support for our constituencies, and unites us to
act as one university as we pursue our visionary and transformative goals.
Header
& Text
Advancement will require integration of Communications, Development and Alumni Relations functions
Achieving these goals will require an integrated approach to enhancing Ohio
State‟s reputation, strengthening relationships and managing fundraising
activities across three key functions:
• Communications and Marketing
• Fundraising
• Alumni Relations
5
APPROACH
ALIGNMENT
The Advancement programs will be created on a foundation of aligned
strategy that expresses Ohio State‟s values and goals, an organizational
structure that promotes integrated decision-making and communications, and
processes and systems that support efficient data usage and analysis.
Header
Only
Advancement must express Ohio State‟s shared values and goals to stakeholders INTEGRATED AWARENESS, ENGAGEMENT AND GIVING FUNCTIONS ARE CRITICAL DRIVERS OF SUCCESS
6
GIVING Values
Goals
ENGAGEMENT
AWARENESS
Strategy
Systems and
Processes
Structure
and People
Header
& Text
Project Approach
Organization
Design
Brand
Positioning
1
2 Discover and
Develop
Engage (out of scope)
3 4
Discover and
Develop
Strategize
1
2
3
4
In Brand Positioning, we will use research insights to articulate a differentiated core positioning of the
Ohio State brand which can be leveraged by the University as a whole and by its units and colleges
During Organization Design, we will evaluate the existing organization and use best practices to
design an operating model that integrates communications, development and alumni relations
The brand and organization workstreams will converge at Strategize, where we will design an
integrated engagement and marketing plan to support Advancement efforts
While Engage is not in scope for this effort, capabilities necessary for successful execution will be
identified for future use
7
Header
& Text
Project Timeline
8
2011 2012
February
6 13 20 27
December
5 12 19 26
January
2 9 16 23 30
March
5 12 19 26
April
2 9 16 23 30
May
7 14 21 28
July
2 9 16 23 30
Finals Winter
Break Finals
Spring
Break
June
4 11 18 25
Finals Summer
Break
Project
Launch
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH &
ANALYSIS Xmas
QUANTITATIVE
MESSAGE TESTING
QUALITATIVE
MESSAGE TESTING
ORG DATA GATHERING &
ANALYTICS
BRAND DEVELOPMENT &
STRATEGY
STRATEGIC PLANNING
FINAL
DELIVERABLE
Xmas
INTERNAL ASSESSMENT
& LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS &
SEGMENTATION Xmas
Workstream in progress
Workstream completed
We are here
Header
& Text
Framework Planning Team
9
The Framework Planning Team is steering committee that provides overall strategic
direction, decision-making and guidance over the development of the Advancement
deliverables
Dr. Joseph Alutto EVP and Provost, Academic Affairs
Melinda Church VP, University Communications
Dr. G. Gilbert Cloyd, Chair Board of Trustees
Philip Duncan Global Design Officer, P&G
Christopher A. Ito Treasurer, Board of Directors, The Ohio State University
Alumni Association
Jeff Kaplan SVP, University Development
President, The Ohio State University Foundation
Linda Kass Board of Trustees
Kathleen McCutcheon VP and Chief Human Resources Officer
Sharen Turney CEO, Victoria‟s Secret
Kate Wolford AVP, University Advancement
Section
Divider
FOUNDATIONAL CONCEPTS WHY ARE BRANDS IMPORTANT?
10
Header Only,
No Logo
Brand Positioning: What is brand equity? BRAND ELEMENTS PLAY DIFFERENT ROLES IN CREATING A BRAND EXPERIENCE
11
BRAND EQUITY
LOGOS
• Classic American style with European refinement
• Sportsmanship, rugged
• Timeless; prestige
• Quality craftsmanship and details
Brand equity defines the enduring values or character of a brand that is differentiated,
relevant and clearly connects with consumers on rational and emotional levels,
influencing their choices of one brand over another, while logos and messaging will
change more frequently
MESSAGING
ENDURING
VALUES
LASTING
IMAGES
SHORT-TERM
CONVERSATIONS
ILLUSTRATIVE
Header
& Text
Brand Positioning: Defining The Ohio State University OHIO STATE IS A COMPLICATED ENTITY WITH NUMEROUS BRANDS THAT SHOULD ALIGN AND MUTUALLY
REINFORCE EACH OTHER, EVEN AS THEY CELEBRATE THEIR RELATIVE DISTINCTIVENESS
12
Each individual institution must be allowed to distinguish itself within its
own competitive set and set of stakeholders…
Header
& Text
Brand Positioning: Defining The Ohio State University OHIO STATE IS A COMPLICATED ENTITY WITH NUMEROUS BRANDS THAT SHOULD ALIGN AND MUTUALLY
REINFORCE EACH OTHER, EVEN AS THEY CELEBRATE THEIR RELATIVE DISTINCTIVENESS
13
Each individual institution must also be allowed to distinguish itself within
its own competitive set and set of stakeholders…
… But, the central essence and enterprise brand equities of Ohio State should be
shared and reinforced across all entities to the mutual and/or collective benefit
of all
Header
& Text
BEHAVIOR
“HOW YOU ACT” The actions and decisions of OSU
must reflect the brand‟s core:
– Strategic vision/mission
– Rewards and incentives
– Recruitment
– Management policies
– Partnerships
14
Brand
Identity Attributes
Values
Promise
Positioning ENVIRONMENT
“WHERE YOU ARE” Ensure that consumer touchpoints
convey the elements of the brand:
– Campuses, offices
– Website usability/interface
– Organizational design
– Administrative offices
– Admissions process
PRODUCTS
“WHAT YOU DO” Confirm that products and services
support the brand:
–Program Development
–Curriculum
–Events
–Research initiatives
–Social initiatives
COMMUNICATION
„WHAT YOU SAY” Deliver clear and consistent brand
messages aligned with core brand
essence:
–Advertising
–Publications
–Media relations
–President and senior officer
keynotes
–Public relations
–Website and social media
Once we understand the central brand equity, it should permeate Ohio State‟s brand experience BRAND EXPERIENCE ARCHITECTURE
“Who You Are” is reflected by the core Brand Identity
Header
& Text
Brand Advisory Group
15
The Brand Advisory Group is comprised of people from multiple roles with the University
– faculty, students, administrators, staff, athletes – who will support the Brand
Development work by providing the “voice of the University” and their respective groups
in developing Ohio State‟s enterprise brand equity,
Bill MacDonald Dean and Director, The Ohio State University at Newark
Executive Dean of Regional Campuses
Associate professor, Sociology
Dr. Andy Thomas, MD, MBA Medical Director, Wexner Medical Center
Assistant Professor, Clinical Internal Medicine, Wexner Medical Center
Kimberly Lowe Director, Alumni Clubs, The Ohio State Alumni Association
Kristen Convery Web Editor, University Marketing Communications
Liz Sullivan President, Student-Athlete Board
Former Captain, Women‟s Soccer Team
BS Psychology, Winter 2012
Tim Gerber Professor, School of Music
Secretary, University Senate
Tracey Stuck Assistant Vice President, Student Life
Matt Fenstermaker Candidate for BA in Art Education, 2012
President, Student-Alumni Council
Shashi Matta Assistant Professor of Marketing, Fisher College of Business
Header
& Text
What have we learned? INSIGHTS FROM DISCOVERY PHASE
16
BRAND
• The mission and brand essence of Ohio State are intuitively well understood, but not
crisply articulated
• “Size” is top-of-mind for most stakeholders when asked to describe Ohio State, and it has
both positive (e.g., diversity, opportunity, unexpected connections) and negative (e.g.,
isolating, impersonal).
ADVANCEMENT ORGANIZATION
• Ohio State is complex and evolving, so we‟re building the plane while we‟re flying it
• The raw materials of the organization structure are largely in place, but there is clearly a
need to improve governance models to clarify decision-making and create
communication mechanisms that support integrated strategic planning
• Experts say there is no “right” Advancement model
– Some best practices exist, including clarity of roles, accountability, disciplined
tracking and sharing of data, and non-duplication of efforts
– Specific Advancement models, however, should reflect the school‟s current strategic
vision, environment, leadership and culture
Section
Divider
QUALITATIVE & QUANTITATIVE INSIGHTS MOTIVATIONAL DRIVERS OF
GIVING TO + ENGAGEMENT WITH OHIO STATE
17
Header Only,
No Logo
+
18
Perceived Return On Investment (ROI) is
a cost of entry for modern charitable
giving
Engagement Motivations
ATTITUDES TOWARD ENGAGEMENT AND GIVING
Respondents were wary of organizations
that:
• Are unclear about where the money
goes (“too big” or not forthcoming)
– Financial transparency creates a
bond of trust with donors
• Are too new (no proven track record)
• Don‟t have a personal connection, e.g.
they have too broad a mission
• Seem to be doing fine without any help
– My time/contribution may not be
fully appreciated
In addition to good ROI, people desire
good “Return On Engagement” (ROE)
from their charitable investments
Respondents want to experience
emotional engagement and heightened
leverage.
• The ability to feel and visualize the
narrative of the cause is key to donor
retention.
– Show me where the money goes
(e.g. $10 = 3 books)
– Include me in the story (e.g. thank
you, email, photos, )
• A platform to have greater impact
through collective action
Validation of Personal Power
Fulfilled Responsibility
Feeling of Empowerment
Part of Something Bigger
TRADITIONAL PAYOFF EVOLVED PAYOFF
Header Only,
No Logo
Giving to + Engagement with Ohio State
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ATTITUDES EXIST
19
“ “ “ “
Ohio State helped me get to
where I am today so why not
help other people there?
The person that I have become
is in direct relationship to my
education, the things that I have
learned. I can only keep what I
have by giving it back.
“ “ “ “ I want to be able to say what my
donation goes towards. I want it
to go toward what impacted me.
They have enough money. They
keep raising their fees. They get
all this money from the sports
programs.”
It‟s being part of a legacy at Ohio
State. “ “ I CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE
“ “
I just don't feel I have a clear
connection with what my
donation does there. The only
reason the person on the phone
can give you is that your paltry
amount will at least help rankings
in US News and World reports.
MISSION = MY VALUES
IMPACTS MY COMMUNITY
IN NEED GIVING BACK
Header
& Text
20
Giving to + Engagement with Ohio State
OHIO STATE‟S MOTIVATING FACTORS CAN BE STRENGTHENED IN ALL
DIRECTIONS
Does Ohio State
articulate its
mission(s)
effectively and in
an engaging way?
How can the
(mis)perception
that Ohio State
does not need
additional
support be
evolved?
How can Ohio State
connect more
publicly with the
local community, or
raise awareness of
existing initiatives?
How can Ohio State
better balance wooing
big-ticket donors while
making lower-level
donors and participants
feel that they have a
meaningful role to play?
MISSION
CONNECTS
WITH MY
VALUES
IN NEED
IMPACTS MY
COMMUNITY
I CAN MAKE A
DIFFERENCE
Header
Only
88%
86%
67%
49%
48%
36%
31%
31%
29%
28%
91%
90%
63%
45%
66%
43%
40%
41%
35%
36%
Care about the cause
Care about the organization
Organization helped me or someone I
care about
Support friends who are involved
Support research on specific
topic/disease
Have supported in the past
Can give to specific building or
department
Can honor an individual
Tax deduction
It counts on my support
Alumni Donors
Non-Alumni Friends
Top Reasons For Supporting Organizations
Quantitative results supported the qualitative findings around what triggers
stakeholders‟ general support
21
Rating each as a very important reason to support an organization (8-10 on a ten-point scale)
* Eight additional items received lower ratings
Q3. On a scale of one to 10, with one meaning not at all, and 10 being extremely important, how important to you is each of the
following reasons to support an organization? By support, we mean talking to friends or family, promoting the organization
including using social media, volunteering, donating money, or taking other actions.
Mission connects
with my values
Impacts my
community
I can make a
difference
In need
Header
Only
Great potential exists to further engage people with Ohio State, with clear
differences between what they‟d like to “give,” and what they‟d like to “get”
22
Interest In Various Interactions For and With Ohio State:
Alumni Donors—Left; Alumni and Non-alumni--Right
59%
52%
52%
49%
48%
47%
40%
37%
36%
31%
28%
26%
54%
52%
52%
58%
51%
48%
39%
47%
38%
32%
33%
25%
47%
34%
44%
21%
35%
19%
36%
18%
21%
21%
14%
20%
Attend speakers series on my
profession/interests
Attend speakers series on my
college major/field
Online continuing education
programs
Meet OSU alumni in my profession
Attend Webinar on my profession,
interests
Attend social events with alumni
In-person continuing education
programs
Use career services to find job
postiings
Meet specific alum who is a leader
in his or her field
Volunteer-oriented travel organized
through OSU
Use career services to post a job
Family centered travel organized
through OSU
Alumni
Donors
Alumni
Non
Donors
Non
Alumni
Friends
% Total Very/Somewhat interested in having this
interaction with Ohio State
53%
32%
15%
17%
7%
17%
18%
5%
8%
5%
35%
39%
51%
47%
56%
44%
37%
46%
39%
37%
Attend/watch OSU athletic
event
Give to my
college/department
Attend a performance or
exhibit on campus
Meet Ohio State alumni
Mentor current OSU students
interested in my profession
Attend Alumni Club or Society
events
Donate to scholarships for
Ohio State students
Serve on advisory board or
other organization
Host/attend networking
events with alumni
Help fund research on
specific topics
Already do
this for Ohio
State
Very/Somewh
at interested
in doing this
for Ohio State
Participation and Interest in Doing Various Activities
For Ohio State: Alumni Donors
Header Only,
No Logo
Among alumni who have given to Ohio State, those who are engaged in 3 or more activities for Ohio State give more often, and give larger gifts than those who are not engaged.
23
Null, or zero gifts NOT included in this analysis
Engagement activities are defined by Spring Segmentation Survey – excluding direct gift activities
$17,262
$2,100 Mean Lifetime Giving
$421
$222 Median Lifetime Giving
9
6 Median Number of Gifts
Among Alumni Who Have Given (49% of total)
■ Engaged (N = 282)
■ Not Engaged (N = 574)
Header
& Text
24.8
18.6
14.2 12
10.1
3.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Mean Number of Lifetime Gifts
$465
$4,930
$6,718
$10,753
$17,471
$8,682
$0.00
$2,000.00
$4,000.00
$6,000.00
$8,000.00
$10,000.00
$12,000.00
$14,000.00
$16,000.00
$18,000.00
Not Engaged Engaged in 1+ Engaged in 2+ Engaged in 3+ Engaged in 4+ Engaged in 5+
Lifetime Giving and Number of Gifts
Mean Lifetime Giving
Both the mean number of gifts and mean lifetime giving go up with
increased levels of engagement
24 Null, or zero gifts ARE included in this analysis
Engagement activities are defined by Spring 2012 Segmentation Survey Data
Lifetime giving
average among all
alums = $3502
Section
Divider
SEGMENTATION SUMMARY ALUMNI + NON-ALUMNI FRIENDS
25
Header
& Text
Differences in Approach to Segmentation Between Initial Segments
and New Segments
26
Different Goals
Segmentation
Process
Outcome
• Was designed to maximize alumni
giving by focusing resources
• Is intended to maximize both alumni
giving & engagement
• Additional segmentation of “non-
alumni friends”
Original Segmentation New Segmentation
• Created using survey data and
donor database data
• Factor analysis grouped similar
attitudes and behaviors
• The factor analysis was used to
drive a k-means cluster analysis to
create the actual groups
• Initial engagement + giving groups
based on the Hart Alumni Survey data
were validated, yet further refined
using the Spring Alumni Segmentation
survey
• Similar process with additional
variables and different goals resulted
in different factors and clusters.
• Eight alumni segments ranked
primarily by giving potential
• Five were recommended for
proactive targeting
• Five alumni segments, three of which
are recommended for focused
targeting
• Five Non-Alumni Friends targets, three
of which are recommended for
proactive targeting
Header
& Text
The enhanced alumni segmentation confirms intuition, but with important
nuance—for example, that engagement doesn‟t necessarily match up with
giving
Alumni Segmentation Overview: Size and Rankings
27
Segment A
40%
Segment B
33%
Segment C
10%
Segment D
9%
Segment E
8% Segment A Size 1
Engaged 1
% Give 3
Avg. Gift 3
Med. Gift 3
Segment B Size 2
Engaged 2
% Give 2
Avg. Gift 2
Med. Gift 2
Segment C Size 3
Engaged 5
% Give 5
Avg. Gift 4
Med. Gift 5
Segment D Size 4
Engaged 3
% Give 1
Avg. Gift 1
Med. Gift 1
Segment E Size 5
Engaged 4
% Give 4
Avg. Gift 5
Med. Gift 4
Header
& Text
Ohio State Alumni Segments - Descriptors PROFILES OF THE CLUSTERS SHOW „WHO‟ THEY ARE, AND HOW COMMUNICATIONS AND PROGRAMMING
CAN BE DEVELOPED APPROPRIATELY FOR THEIR LIFE-STAGE
28
Segment Name Size within
Study
Members of
Alumni
Association
% Engaged
(Already do 3+
activities)
Average Gift, Mean,
Median Total Lifetime
Giving (Source: Donor database
records)
Demographic
Highlights
Segment A 40% 59% 44%
Average gift: $216
Mean: $2,850
Median: $200
Mean age: 38
Male: 53%
Female: 47%
Segment B 33% 50% 32%
Average gift: $230
Mean: $4,512
Median: $440
Mean age: 48
Male: 58%
Female: 42%
Segment C 10% 30% 4%
Average gift: $178
Mean: $2,291
Median: $100
Mean age: 39
Male: 57%
Female: 43%
Segment D 9% 67% 12%
Average gift: $2,092
Mean: $40,118
Median: $524
Mean age: 48
Male: 57%
Female: 43%
Segment E 8% 37% 8%
Average gift: $74
Mean: $1,029
Median: $160
Mean age: 42
Male: 53%
Female: 47%
Total/
Average --- 52% 34%
Average gift: $440
Mean: $7,099
Median: $265
Mean age: 42
Male: 55%
Female: 45%
Header
& Text
Ohio State Alumni Segments - Psychographics PROFILES OF THE CLUSTERS SHOW „WHO‟ THEY ARE, AND HOW COMMUNICATIONS AND PROGRAMMING
CAN BE DEVELOPED APPROPRIATELY FOR THEIR LIFE-STAGE
29
Segment Name Segment descriptions Top giving Motivations Top 3 Interests
Segment A
Described themselves as the typical
Ohio State students and Buckeye
Super-fans in college. They are most
likely to show support by donating
money and attending events
•I care about Ohio State (78%)
•If I could have access to athletics
events (68%)
•Watching sports (74%)
•Travel (63%)
•Fitness, including individual
sports (62%)
Segment B
Call themselves studious, and are
interested in learning and fun – also
interested in sports. Segments are
more likely than other clusters to
have graduate degrees
•I care about Ohio State (60%)
•If I could have access to athletic
events (49%)
•Reading (66%)
•Travel (60%)
•Watching sports (60%)
Segment C
Less engaged, and give less, but are
not a lost cause. Describe
themselves as complex and invisible
in college. They do engage with Ohio
State; however, at lower levels
•If I could have access to Ohio
State‟s library (54%)
•If I could have access to athletic
events (47%)
•Reading (64%)
•Travel (50%)
•Watching sports (49%)
Segment D
Highly Greek during college. They
would consider themselves to have
been the “typical Ohio State
student” and socially well connected
in college
•If I could have access to athletics
events (72%)
•I care about Ohio State (71%)
•Watching sports (69%)
•Fitness, including individual
sports (65%)
•Travel (65%)
Segment E
Artistic, studious, and less interested
in sports. They are most interested
in donating their time to the Arts and
would describe themselves as
complex and hard working college
students
•I care about Ohio State (56%)
•If a friend reached out with the
request (55%)
•Reading (72%)
•Fine arts (63%)
•Travel (61%)
Header
& Text
Quantitative Segmentation
STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
30
Segmentation
Engagement
Giving
Alumni: Ohio State alumni can be grouped into five attitudinal/behavioral
segments
Non-alumni friends: 5 segments are best organized by giving habits and
behavioral history with Ohio State rather than their attitudes
A potential lifecycle model that emphasizes engagement in early adulthood with
increased development emphasis as alumni age
Despite overall low degree of engagement outside football and donations, there is a motivating desire for more involvement in many other activities at Ohio State (e.g. funding research and donor societies)
What supporters want in return from Ohio State:
- Continuous learning through speaker series and on-line education
- Networking with others in their profession or with like interests
- Career support through use of career services for job postings
Among young alumni, there is a low level of current engagement, but high interest
in various types of non-monetary participation
Motivations for Giving:
- Passion: Both donors and non-donors say they need to care about the cause
they are supporting and prefer to designate their gifts, rather than give to the
University as a whole
- Impact: Supporting an organization that helped them, or someone they
cared about, resonated strongly across all audiences
- Personalization: Non-donors would require personalized attention to compel
them to engage and give (e.g., if a friend asked, if their specific college
asked)
Header
& Text
Project Next Steps
31
COMPLETE BRAND DEVELOPMENT PHASE
• Confirm a recommended brand positioning, equity statement and messaging, leveraging the
qualitative and quantitative insights
• Leverage feedback from various sources, including Framework Planning Committee, Board of
Trustees, and Brand Advisory Committee to testing hypotheses and refine the outcomes.
COMPLETE ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN
• Propose and test organizational models which will address the gaps in strategy, structure and
process
• Syndicate the organizational proposals with key stakeholders.
