Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES IN HIGHER EDUCATION MARKETING: AN
APPLICATION TO U.S. INTERNATIONAL MBA (IMBA) PROGRAMS
Haze Caraganis
A Thesis Submitted to the
University of North Carolina Wilmington in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Business Administration
Cameron School of Business
University of North Carolina Wilmington
2011
Approved by
Advisory Committee
Amparo Cervera Marta Frasquet
Vince Howe Amparo Cervera
Chair
Accepted by
______________________________
Dean, Graduate School
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... viii
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1. Justification of the Selected Topic .................................................................................. 1
1.2. Primary Objective ........................................................................................................... 3
2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 5
2.1. Qualitative Analysis ........................................................................................................ 5
2.2. Quantitative Analysis ...................................................................................................... 6
2.3. Data Collection ............................................................................................................... 7
2.4. Units of Analysis............................................................................................................. 8
2.5. Coding Procedure............................................................................................................ 8
2.6. Framework ...................................................................................................................... 9
3. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 10
3.1. Contemporary Social Networking Sites (SNS’s) .......................................................... 10
3.1.1. Top 2 social networking sites (SNS’s) in the U.S. (2011) ..................................... 11
3.1.2. Top SNS features ................................................................................................... 13
3.1.3. Electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) ..................................................................... 16
3.2. Evolution of Social Media Marketing and Social Commerce ...................................... 17
3.2.1. Social media marketing.......................................................................................... 18
3.3. The Psychology Behind Social Commerce................................................................... 22
3.3.1. Heuristic thinking................................................................................................... 23
3.4. Utilizing Social Networking Sites in Higher Education Marketing Strategies............. 25
3.4.1. Higher education marketing ................................................................................... 25
3.5. The Value Proposition .................................................................................................. 30
3.6. Research Propositions ................................................................................................... 30
4. APPLICATION OF THE TOP 2 SNS’S TO THE TOP 20 IMBA PROGRAMS IN THE
UNITED STATES ................................................................................................................... 32
4.1. General Description ...................................................................................................... 32
4.1.1. History and key facts ............................................................................................. 33
4.1.2. Work and research assignment .............................................................................. 34
4.2. State of the Art – Brand Identity of the Top 20 IMBA Programs in the U.S. .............. 48
4.2.1. The core identity .................................................................................................... 48
4.2.2. The brand essence .................................................................................................. 50
4.2.3. The extended identity ............................................................................................. 50
4.2.4. The value proposition ............................................................................................ 54
iii
4.3. Proposals for Improvement ........................................................................................... 54
4.3.1. Better understanding of customers......................................................................... 54
4.3.2. Wider service offerings .......................................................................................... 55
4.3.3. More focused content ............................................................................................. 56
4.3.4. Consider utilizing alternative SNS sites ................................................................ 56
5. PROPOSAL ..................................................................................................................... 58
5.1. Objectives of the Proposal ............................................................................................ 58
5.2. Methodology to Apply the Proposal ............................................................................. 59
5.2.1. Qualitative analysis ................................................................................................ 60
5.2.2. Quantitative analysis .............................................................................................. 62
5.3. Research Findings ......................................................................................................... 63
5.3.1. Research findings - Facebook ............................................................................... 64
5.3.2. Research findings - Twitter ................................................................................... 68
5.4. Timing and Budgeting ................................................................................................. 73
5.4.1. Timing and budgeting for academic Facebook/Twitter page (August 15th
, 2011 –
September 11th
, 2011) ...................................................................................................... 74
5.5. Control and Evaluation Process .................................................................................... 76
6. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 78
6.1. Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 78
6.2. Managerial Implications and Further Research ............................................................ 81
6.2.1. Managerial implications........................................................................................ 81
6.2.2. Further research ..................................................................................................... 81
7. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 83
8. APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 88
iv
ABSTRACT
The following Master’s Thesis explores the use of the top two most popular Social
Networking Sites (SNS’s) in the United States (U.S.), Facebook and Twitter, in University
Marketing Strategies by the top 20 International Masters of Business Administration (IMBA)
programs in the U.S. The Master Thesis is divided into five main sections.
In Section One, we highlight in the Introduction the interest to study this topic, as well
as its importance for discovering future managerial implications of utilizing SNS’s in the
University Marketing field in the United States, as well as abroad.
Section Two focuses on the primary Literature Review compiled for this paper. This
review includes the most contemporary conceptual and theoretical frameworks concerning
the utilization of Social Networking Sites in University Marketing, and will also present
argument supporting the use of Content Analysis as a viable and appropriate data collection
method for this survey.
Next, Section Three presents the study’s Application to the Company, more
specifically how the current subjects, the Top 20 International MBA programs in the U.S.,
utilize Social Networking Sites in their University Marketing Strategies. This section includes
a SWOT Analysis of the University Marketing field, as well as describes the field’s current
state-of-the-art. Finally, proposals for improvements in the applications of SNS’s in
University Marketing are presented.
Section Four is comprised of this study’s formal Proposal, and will include the
primary objectives of the specific proposal to U.S. universities, as well as the methodology
used to apply the proposal to these institutions. In addition, the final budget, as well as
complete timeline of the proposal will be presented. The last part of this section includes the
Control and Evaluation process that should be utilized in order to obtain desired results and
maintain quality control.
v
The last section, Section Five, provides this study’s final conclusions, according to the
original Master Thesis objectives, and answers all questions posed in the beginning of the
paper. Also, the current and future managerial implications in regards to the use of Social
Networking Sites in University Marketing by Academic Institutions in the U.S. will be
discussed.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
At this point, I would like to give credit to some of people who have assisted me
throughout the writing of this Master’s Thesis, and thank them for having helped me to
achieve my many goals.
Firstly, I would like to thank my Master Thesis supervisor, Professor Luisa Andreu
Simo, PhD. of the University of Valencia (Spain). Without her expertise, advise, and
willingness to assist me in crafting this paper, it would have never reached the level of
intellectualism and professionalism that it necessitated and deserved. Thank you Luisa!
Next, I must give great thanks to Professor Shintaro Okazaki, PhD. of the
Autonomous University of Madrid (Spain), who attended my IMBA classes several times as
a visiting professor. It was he who first sparked my interest in the contemporary applications
of Social Networking Services in regards to modern marketing, as well as pointing me in the
direction of some wonderful resources to begin formulating my study. Thank you Dr.
Okazaki, your inspiration and assistance was invaluable to my efforts.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends who have offered their
unrelenting support throughout this long and arduous journey. Thank you to my parents, Kim
and Lewis Caraganis, for always encouraging me to reach higher both in my academic
studies and overall life, and teaching me the value of hard work and perseverance. Thank you
to my brothers, Kai and Rivers Caraganis, who gave me the emotional support and mental
fortitude to maintain my tenacity and composure in the face of adversity, while at the same
time reminding me that patience is essential to all success. Last but not least, I would like to
thank my friends and colleagues who have stood by me during the countless hours of
research and writing, reminding me that nothing of value ever comes easy, and keeping me
sane over the last year and a half.
Thank you all!
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3.1. Top 9 SNS Features .......................................................................................................14
4.1. Ranking of the top 20 International MBA Schools in the U.S ......................................33
4.2. Internal Strengths and Weaknesses ................................................................................38
4.3. External Opportunities and Threats ...............................................................................42
5.1. Eight Types of Content Communicated .........................................................................60
5.2. Qualitative Analysis Results – Facebook ......................................................................64
5.3. Quantitative Analysis Results – Facebook ....................................................................67
5.4. Frequency of Types of Content Communicated – Facebook.........................................67
5.5. Qualitative Analysis Results – Twitter ..........................................................................69
5.6. Quantitative Analysis Results – Twitter ........................................................................72
5.7. Frequency of Types of Content Communicated – Twitter ............................................72
5.8. Control and Evaluation Processes ..................................................................................77
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
3.1. Top 2 Social Networking Sites in the U.S (2011) .........................................................12
4.1. Locations of Top 20 IMBA Programs in the U.S. .........................................................34
4.2. Primary and Secondary Stakeholders ............................................................................36
4.3. Primary Competitors ......................................................................................................37
4.4. American IMBA Programs Competitive Positioning ....................................................47
4.5. The Official Insignia of the Top 20 IMBA Programs in the U.S. .................................51
4.6. Brand Points of Contact .................................................................................................52
5.1. Facebook – Number of Users Per Institution .................................................................65
5.2. Facebook – Average Wallposts Per Week .....................................................................66
5.3. Twitter – Number of Users Per Institution ....................................................................70
5.4. Twitter – Average Wallposts Per Week .........................................................................71
5.5 Timing and Budgeting Constraints of Academic SNS Page ..........................................74
1. INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1 introduces the Master Thesis. Included is a brief discussion of the
justification for this research, the subjects that are to be investigated, and the methodology
used to conduct the subsequent analysis. Finally, the framework for the rest of the paper is
identified.
As the World Economy experiences increased Globalization and Mankind presses
further into the Digital Age, the ways people communicate with each other both privately and
publically have begun to evolve as well, primarily due to the advancement of technology;
specifically, the Internet. The Internet has dramatically transformed how organizations of all
types communicate with their primary target groups, and market their products and services
in distinct and valuable ways around the Globe. In addition, new applications and uses of the
World Wide Web (Web) are constantly being developed, most notably the Social Networking
Sites (SNS’s) like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and many more, that allow users to create
online user profiles and join virtual communities. SNS’s have set a new precedent in the
online world, and have had great influence on how many people use and interact with the
Internet, both privately and commercially. (Okazaki, 2004).
1.1. Justification of the Selected Topic
Today, the Internet is no longer just a means of transmitting information, but a way of
life for many that incorporates ideas of community and freedom of information, coupled with
personal privacy and discretion as well. Estimates put the approximate number of worldwide
Internet users at just over two billion, with approximately 30% of the worldwide population
now having access to Internet, a 480% increase in the last decade alone (World Internet
usage, 2011). In addition, Experian reports that 66% of the 239,893,600 Internet users in the
2
United States are now utilizing various SNS’s, a 46% increase from 2000. (2010 Social
Networking Report, 2010)
Not surprisingly, this trend has not been lost on businesses or consumers, and
consumer-buying behavior has also begun to go through changes. Tied with this astounding
growth has been the increasing inclination of consumers turning away from traditional means
of shopping such as catalogues and in-store visits, and instead participating more and more in
online electronic commerce (e-commerce). In order to remain viable, many organizations
have taken their businesses online as well, creating company websites capable of
communicating their unique value propositions around the globe, as well as receiving value
from their customers in the form of feedback and purchases (Okazaki, 2004).
The online website has become an essential aspect of companies’ marketing
communications tools, and SNS’s have integrated themselves as crucial additions to these
sites. Today, it is rare for a company not to be represented on at least one of the major SNS’s
(Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc.), if not five to ten others as well, and a business is
considered completely out of touch with modern consumers if they are not already using
SNS’s in their daily marketing operations. (Okazaki, 2004)
However, little formal justification exists on how to best implement these services
into ones marketing communication tools, and there has been much quiet debate over the best
policies for how to employ SNS’s in University Marketing applications. In addition, the
belief over whether SNS’s are an effective tool for reaching ones target groups is still heavily
debated, and some circles in the business community have even gone as far as to criticize the
entire field of Social Media Marketing (SMM), referring to it as mere ―snake oil…a motley
crew of reconverted estate agents/realtors and ad men‖ (Marsden, 2010). Nevertheless, the
growing popularity of SNS’s and SMM is undeniable, and therefore deserves further review.
3
In this paper, I will investigate the top 20 International MBA (IMBA) programs in the
U.S. and discover how these organizations use the top two Social Networking Sites in the
U.S., Facebook and Twitter, as tools in their overall University Marketing Strategies. Though
my research will relate primarily to the Academic sphere, the reality is that universities are
diverse and dynamic institutions that perform many functions, not the least of which are
financial. For this reason, I believe my investigation and ensuing analysis will shed much
light on the topic, as well as provide important present and future managerial implications in
the University Marketing field in the U.S., as well as institutions located abroad.
1.2. Primary Objective
The primary objective of this Master’s Thesis is to explore the utilization of the U.S.’s
top two most popular SNS’s, Facebook and Twitter, in University Marketing Strategies by
American higher learning institutions in order to better understand how these organizations
effectively and efficiently connect and communicate with their different target groups using
online, web-based communication.
More specifically, I will be analyzing the typical, as well as the unique, content that
the top 20 International Masters of Business Administration (IMBA) programs in the U.S.
project to their audiences through personalized, user-profile pages on selected SNS sites
(Facebook and Twitter), and determine whether standardization or customization is most
popular amongst the subjects reviewed. This information will be useful for not only
determining the current state-of-the-art concerning University Marketing using Social
Networking Sites, but also will help to illuminate future managerial implications concerning
the way Academic Organizations communicate with their constituents via SNS’s.
While similar research projects regarding standardization versus customization of
online content and various cross-culture analyses have been proposed and executed in the
past by experienced and notable researchers, this paper will focus on a very unique and
4
distinctive target group; the Top 20 International Master’s of Business Administration
(IMBA) Programs in the United States.
An exclusive and highly regarded segment of business organizations, these
universities represent not only big business in the conventional sense, but are also helping to
shape the economic leaders of tomorrow, and have a large influence on future commerce.
Institutions for higher learning such as these are regarded as centers for thought and progress,
and indeed much research initially started at universities finds its way into the private sector,
a conglomerate always hungry for new ideas and future progress.
The two SNS’s that have been selected for this particular study were listed by
eBizMBA inc. as the top to SNS’s in the United States by estimated monthly visits. They
provide a free, online knowledgebase composed of various industry reports and rankings
related to the Masters of Business Administration field, and therefore seemed an excellent
point of reference.
For these reasons, I will research, analyze, and present my findings on how the top 20
IMBA programs in the U.S. utilize SNS’s in their University Marketing strategies. Finally,
the managerial implications will be discussed and a final conclusion concerning the use of
SNS’s in U.S. University Marketing will be made.
2. METHODOLOGY
For this research project, website content analysis will be the primary method of
statistical analysis used, because it has been proven to be an excellent tool in not only gaining
valuable insights into the qualitative natures of the use of online social networks, but also the
quantitative environments as well. (Babbie, 2010)
Content analysis can be defined as ―the study of recorded human communications, such
as books, websites, paintings, and laws‖ (Babbie, 2010). By no means a new concept,
examples exist dating back to the ancient Greeks where conversations and interactions
between peoples were later reviewed and analyzed to determine an infinite amount of
associations and correlations, which revealed meaningful insights into contemporary human
nature, and society as a whole. (Krippendorf, K., 1980)
However, with the aid of computerized statistical analysis programs like Microsoft’s
Excel spreadsheet software, modern content analysis has been able to jump light years ahead
of its predecessors, and been reinvented as an effective tool for evaluating continuous and
complex communications in the Digital Age.
A qualitative and quantitative analysis was performed for each of the test subjects’
official academic Facebook and Twitter pages.
2.1. Qualitative Analysis
Step one of the qualitative analysis will be to determine the various attributes, both
functional and novel, offered by Facebook and Twitter that have made them the most popular
SNS’s in the United States, and the focus of this study.
6
Next, the chosen IMBA programs will be scrutinized, first observing whether or not
the schools use these services at all, and if so, what functions are available through their
page?
Finally, all of this data will be graphed and analyzed in attempts to see previously
ambiguous correlations, and hopefully gather valuable and useful revelations into the best
methods of utilizing SNS’s in university marketing strategies.
2.2. Quantitative Analysis
For each IMBA programs selected, a corresponding quantitative analysis of the
organization’s use of SNS’s will be presented using graphs and tables to illustrate the data
collected, and expose any trends or patterns that exist. This comparison will not only show
the current state of University Marketing using SNS’s, taking note of the most common
means of transmitting and receiving information between the universities and their target
groups on these sites, but will also identify some of the more unique approaches utilized, and
allow for intelligent predictions to be made about the future of advertising at an academic
level.
Each of the IMBA programs’ individual Facebook and Twitter pages will be reviewed
on a weekly basis for one continuous month between August 15th
, 2011 to September 15th
,
2011, accounting for the general amount of usage of these SNS’s by tallying the number of
Wall Posts per week by each school, and classifying those posts into eight predetermined
categories with the goal of being able to see trends or patterns in usage.
Also, the amount of users on each of the schools’ Facebook and Twitter pages will be
recorded weekly in order to gain additional insight into how many people are actually
utilizing these social networks.
The month-long time period between the dates of August 15th
, 2011 to September
15th
, 2011 was chosen because this marked the general start of fall classes for American
7
IMBA programs around the country, and the initial month of school seemed a suitable and
interesting one guaranteed to offer an abundance of quality data and well-represent these
schools’ actual usages.
2.3. Data Collection
The research subjects for this paper are the Top 20 International Master’s of Business
Administration (IMBA) programs located in the U.S. according to the U.S. News and World
Report 2011 ranking of the Top 20 International Masters of Business Administration (IMBA)
programs in the United States. U.S. News and World Report, an internationally recognized
news corporation with nearly 100 years of experience of reporting on top commercial affairs,
has been ranking graduate programs in the U.S. since 1994, and therefore was a perfect
reference for this study. (―Best international business,‖ 2011)
They were chosen for two reasons:
1. As the two SNS’s represented in the study were first invented and
implemented in the United States, American Universities would have most
likely had the most amount of time to explore and use these services. This
increases the quality of the results because they have had more time to
develop.
2. In order to narrow the scope of the project to a manageable size and ensure
quality results, it was essential to choose a single country to observe as well
as a set number of Social Networking Sites to scrutinize.
For the month between August 15th
, 2011 and September 15th
, 2011, each of the top 20 U.S.
IMBA programs from the U.S. News and World Report list will be analyzed every week for
four consecutive weeks to determine the amounts of usage applied in their communications
via the SNS’s Facebook and Twitter, and seek to determine whether some of these
institutions are breaking the conventional bounds of these sites, and offering unique value
8
propositions. This data will be entered into spreadsheets using the statistical analysis
application Microsoft Excel where it can then be employed to generate valuable graphs and
tables.
2.4. Units of Analysis
The units of analysis are the top two Social Networking Service sites in the United
States currently being utilized by the top 20 IMBA programs in the U.S.; Facebook and
Twitter (Top 15 most,‖ 2011). These SNS’s were chosen in an effort to maximize the
effectiveness of the data, and minimize research time as well as misleading results.
2.5. Coding Procedure
The 9 criteria components used to evaluate the Social Networking Sites included in
the study are as follows. A more detailed explanation is available in table 2.1 in the following
Literature Review. They were derived from a much larger list of criteria found on the Tech
Media Network’s website, Top10Reviews.com. (―Social networking website,‖ 2011)
1. User Profile
2. News Feed
3. Message Board
4. Chatting
5. Email
6. Pictures
7. Video
8. Skype
9. Tools, Widgets, and Applications
9
2.6. Framework
For the remainder of the paper, the structure will be as follows. The corresponding
Literature Review is first. Drawing from a multitude of scientific research papers and
industry reports, the literature review is a compilation of the major theoretical frameworks,
contemporary conceptual models of the utilization, and most popular perspectives of today
for the utilization of Social Networking Sites in University Marketing by Academic
institutions in the U.S. Next, several research questions will be posed and the method of
Content Analysis will be explored and explained, as well as commented upon as to why it is
such a valuable tool in generating qualitative and quantitative analyses, and a suitable
instrument for the study. The study results will next be presented along with their
corresponding analyses, and finally the managerial implications will be discussed.
3. METHODOLOGY
This chapter aims at reviewing contemporary literature associated with Social
Networking Sites (SNS). It will begin by identifying the top 2 SNS sites in the United States,
and include a brief description of each, as well as an explanation of the primary features that
make these sites so popular. Next, Social Media Marketing (SMM) will be discussed, as well
as its evolution into modern day Social Commerce. In addition, the human psychological
conditions that have made these SNS sites successful will be explored, drawing on the ideas
of the six dimensions of heuristic thinking, as well as the concept of electronic word-of-
mouth (e-WOM) communication. Lastly, all of these concepts will be applied to higher
education marketing strategies, the value proposition will be identified, and the research
propositions will be made.
3.1. Contemporary Social Networking Sites (SNS’s)
In the past decade, few innovations have radically changed the way modern society
interacts and expresses itself like the online, web-based Social Networking Sites (SNS).
Social Networking Sites are defined as ―web-based services that allow individuals to (1)
create a public or semi-public profile within a bound system, (2) articulate a list of other users
with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and
those made by others within the system‖ (Boyd, & Ellison, 2008). Using the Internet, Social
Networking Sites have created virtual communities where users can communicate with each
other through various applications including blogging, real-time chatting, and posting digital
content like photos and video. Utilized for personal and group communication, as well as
private and commercial business, Social Networking Sites have the potential to revolutionize
global culture and the economy, and their growth has caught the attention of the business
sector. Aside from the conventional SNS applications used for basic communication, a host
11
of options related to buying and selling goods through these sites has been developed in order
to stimulate product awareness and boost sales (Boyd, & Ellison, 2008).
While ―brick-and-mortar‖ selling from physical storefronts still dominates the
mainstream shopping culture, electronic commerce (e-commerce) has made tremendous
advancements in only a few short years, and is quickly becoming a preferred method of trade,
especially within the youth populations (―The Global Online,‖ 2009). A major advantage for
e-commerce has been the utilization of electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) advertising, or
the sharing of information electronically between peer groups in an effort to raise awareness
through group discussion as well as for amusement and personal satisfaction. While still a
relatively new phenomenon, e-WOM is a powerful driver of Social Networking Sites and e-
commerce alike, and is an integral aspect of understanding for marketers planning on
utilizing Social Media Marketing (SMM) (―The Global Online,‖ 2009).
3.1.1. Top 2 social networking sites (SNS’s) in the U.S. (2011)
Today, the top two most popular Social Networking Sites in the United States are
Facebook (Fb) and Twitter (―Top 15 most,‖ 2011). While similar in that these sites encourage
and facilitate various forms of communication between their users, they differ in the assorted
applications and particular features offered. Below in Figures 2.1 and 2.2 are a general
description of the top two social networking sites in the U.S. and the corresponding
applications that helped lead to their huge success, respectively.
12
Figure 3.1. – Top Two Social Networking Sites in the United States of America (2011)
(Source: Own elaboration)
Facebook, the largest and most widely used of all the SNS, is less than a decade old
yet boasts more than 750 million users worldwide. The site was founded in 2004 by a young
entrepreneur, Mark Zuckerberg, in his college dorm room at the age of 20. Originally
intended as a simple networking tool primarily for use as a directory amongst Harvard
students, the site became an instant success prompting it to quickly spread at first amongst
other college students around the U.S., to eventually what we now know today is a Global
network that includes individuals as well as public and private organizations. (Boyd, &
Ellison, 2008) Traditionally, Facebook has been used primarily as a private communication
tool between individuals, as well as a source of personal entertainment. However, recently
there has been a push by retailers to commercialize Facebook’s services, and advertising has
increased dramatically on the site. So far, the primary marketing tools used on Fb have been
13
the creation of company profile pages, digital banners advertising products or services, and
direct purchasing options. Nonetheless, modifications in Social Networking Sites are taking
place almost every day, and Facebook has shown so far that they are working diligently to
position itself at the front of these innovations. (Boyd, & Ellison, 2008)
Twitter was founded in 2006 by creators Jack Dorsey and Noah Glass in San
Francisco, California. The SNS allows users to communicate with one another by posting
messages or ―tweets‖ of up to 140 characters long on personal micro blogs, or individual user
pages that combined make up the whole of the international Twitter community. Currently,
there are an estimated 200 million Twitter accounts, though the company has been reticent to
give any exact figures. While early on Twitter seemed more of a novelty than an actual
functional service that could deliver real value, in retrospect it seems as if the service’s full
potentials had merely failed to be explored, given the amount of attention the SNS has
received in the last two years in various news stories ranging from organized social
revolutions in Asia and the Middle East, coordinated disaster preparedness and relief efforts
in the U.S., and basic entertainment around the Globe. Still, Twitter is an SNS that is used by
many, yet understood by few. While there is great inherent value within the site, it is yet to be
understood the full ramifications of this SNS, especially its capabilities in Academia.
(Java, Song, Finin, &Tseng, 2007)
3.1.2. Top SNS features
There are several top features of Social Networking Sites that have made their use so
compelling to the public, and led to their meteoric rise. Figure 2.2 below illustrates the nine
primary features of SNS sites that define their basic interface platform: (Boyd, & Ellison,
2008)
14
Table 3.1. – Top 9 SNS Features
SNS Feature Description
1. User Profile Creating a user profile is an important part of accessing the full
potentials of Social Networking Sites, and normally consists of
listing your full name, email address, sex, date of birth, and
choosing a username and password. Afterwards, users are
generally free to post content as long as it is within the bounds of
the sites allowable subject matter. This includes pictures of
themselves, as well as listing information about oneself including
a personal bio, current contact information, and sometimes even
relationship statuses. While privacy controls allow the user to
predominantly choose what information is displayed to the public
as well as ―friends‖ or other connected profiles, administrators of
these sites maintain detailed records of all information posted.
For this reason, privacy has been a major critique of Social
Networking Sites.
2. Picture sharing An important feature on both of these sites, the picture sharing
applications allows users to post personal photos to the site.
User’s can also comment on said pictures/videos and show their
support of the file to their friends.
3. Video sharing Video sharing, including personal files, music videos and
webinars, is a feature that is growing in popularity, yet not as
widely used as the picture-sharing feature. Users can post
personalized videos or create links to pictures/videos on sites
outside of the particular SNS’s network.
4. News Feed The News Feed is the ―public square‖ of the SNS, and does not
exist on all sites. In some cases, users see a continuously updated
list of content posted by their friends, and have the ability to
further comment and share these posts.
5. Wall post Wall posts are what make up the news feed, and consist of
content posted by individual users in the form of pictures, videos
or comments. They are the primary form of public
communication on most SNS websites.
15
Table 3.1 cont.
6. Chatting Chatting is not available on all SNS sites, yet is an integral piece
of Facebook that has led to the sites great success. When a user
signs onto the network, a list appears showing all other friends
currently online and available for chat.
7. Email While the appearance of email was relatively late on the SNS
scene, it has been an important catalyst in increasing the amount
of usage of some sites, especially Facebook. With the inclusion
of email applications on SNS sites, users no longer have to utilize
an outside server for their email. This is another feature that has
made Facebook the leader in the SNS industry.
8. Skype Videoconferencing using Skype is the newest addition to Social
Networking Service features, and has been met with great
excitement. Although currently only offered on a select few SNS
sites (e.g. Fb, Google+) in limited capacity (e.g. Fb’s Skype only
allows one-on-one video chatting, and not a conference call with
multiple users like some competitors), live video chatting is
expected to be a large aspect of the future of SNS.
9. Tools, Widgets, and
Applications
Tools, widgets, and applications refer to the various programs
that have been developed to work as supplemental tools on the
Facebook, Twitter, and other SNS interfaces. While initially
created internally by program developers working within Social
Networking companies as simple ad-ons to their basic service
offerings meant to enhance users’ online experiences, their
creation soon mushroomed far beyond anything originally
intended to cover a broad range of topics including games,
music, pictures, and even e-commerce tools being developed by
individual, private programmers around the World. By utilizing
open user-interface platforms, Facebook, Twitter, and other
SNS’s have greatly increased their operating capabilities, as well
as solidified ideas of transparency, utility, and convenience
across the entire Social Networking industry.
(Source: Own elaboration)
16
Mobile applications for smart phones and tablets have revolutionized the way people
are using SNS’s because they allow users to access their favorite social networks from their
mobile smart phones, utilizing all of the normal services available through normal use, while
essentially eliminating the need for a computer. The use of mobile SNS applications has
become extremely popular in recent years as smart phone technology has developed, and has
become an important factor in developers’ design of new and future products. However, due
to the fact that both Facebook and Twitter support mobile applications, and the inability to
gauge how many of the users observed were actually using these applications, this feature
was not included on the Top 9 SNS Features table.
3.1.3. Electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM)
The term electronic Word-of-Mouth (e-WOM) refers to the online communication
between customers regarding their opinions of various products, services, or companies
(Pollach, 2006). While basic Word-of-Mouth Communication (WOM) is not a new concept,
it traditionally revolved around informal, face-to-face and personal interactions. According to
Brown, Broderick, & Lee, (2007), there are three primary reasons consumers utilize WOM
communication (Brown, Broderick, & Lee, 2007):
1. In order to reduce perceived risk of purchasing a product as well as improve their
knowledge of a particular product or service, consumers will seek the opinions and
reviews of other shoppers, even if they are complete strangers.
2. For future use in purchasing and to improve current product/service knowledge,
consumers will perform their own research, browsing various consumer review websites,
as well as the official commercial web pages.
17
3. Some consumers simply enjoy posting their personal opinions or information
concerning various product or service offerings.
However, the advent of the Internet and subsequent online applications, most notably and
recently, SNS’s, revolutionized WOM communication and consequently, e-WOM, or
electronic word-of-mouth was established. E-WOM is a fundamental part of the huge success
SNS’s have experienced in the last decade, and its implications have led to much of the
innovations occurring today in the SNS industry. Because SNS’s like Facebook,and Twitter
provide a myriad of features for sharing ideas and communicating opinions, they have
become the essential platform for e-WOM. Originating as simple discussion boards or blogs
that were usually one-sided, allowing only the administrator to post comments, SNS sites
have developed into complex networking tools, constantly evolving and adapting to best suit
the global marketplace. (Pollach, 2006)
3.2. Evolution of Social Media Marketing and Social Commerce
In the recent decade, the spectacular growth of SNS’s has been the premier topic of
interest in the online community, and has thus led to the creation of a wide gamut of new
features and services for users, both privately and commercially. While many SNS’s were
originally created primarily to facilitate interactions between close friends and family in a
recreational capacity, private enterprise soon discovered the vast potential of electronic word-
of-mouth (e-WOM) communication, and set to capitalize on an ever expanding network of
consumers, one which grew exponentially with minimal input from marketers. (Pollach,
2006)
While initially, Social Media Marketing (SMM) was implemented as the primary means
of communication with online users, obvious flaws existed specifically on the ability to
measure its effectiveness and value. To combat these uncertainties, Social Commerce was
18
developed in an attempt to alleviate many of the previous dilemmas associated with SMM.
Using several different techniques, Social Commerce has revolutionized the way businesses
utilize SMM tools in their marketing strategies, and has finally provided clear frameworks for
gathering valuable feedback in terms of Return on Investment (ROI) for various advertising
campaigns. (Marsden, 2010)
In this section of the Literature Review, Social Media Marketing, Social Commerce
and the human psychology associated with these topics will be explored and discussed using
the most up to date sources available.
3.2.1. Social media marketing
Social Media Marketing is the ―use of online media, including web-based Social
Networking Sites (SNS), that allows businesses to support social interactions and user
contributions, to enhance the online purchase experience,‖ in a hope to create value for both
the organization and the customer (Marsden 2010). With tools ranging from making Groups
and posting digitized billboards on various SNS sites, to creating entirely new web-based
communities, companies have traditionally aimed at creating increasing public awareness of
their product/service offerings, as well as building valuable brand equity. (Constantinides, &
Stagno, 2011)
Initially, advertisers’ promotional efforts manifested in a relatively limited variety for
today’s standards, primarily taking the form of public forums and communities where people,
i.e. consumers, could discuss products and services. These types of services became very
popular, and consumers’ abilities to perform detailed information searches on various
products increased exponentially, theoretically turning the entire web into a worldwide
consumer report. While businesses and customers alike relished in the opportunities for
discussion, communication, and awareness, obvious flaws existed concerning how the
19
effectiveness and value of these forums were to be quantified (Stewart, & Pavlou, 2002).
Innovators recognized the need for increased ROI measurement and accountability of time
spent and content posted. For these reasons, Social Commerce became the next step in the
Social Media Marketing continuum, and currently shows much promise in filling many of its
predecessors’ gaps. (Marsden, 2010)
―Social Commerce is the fusion of social media with electronic commerce.‖
Electronic commerce (e-commerce) being defined as the ―buying and selling of products and
services online‖ and Social Media being defined as ―online media supporting social
interactions and user contributions‖ (Marsden, 2010). The six main tools associated with
Social Commerce are Social Shopping, Recommendations and Referrals, Ratings and
Reviews, Forums and Communities, and Ads and Applications. Similar to Social Media
Marketing in many regards, it differs in several key aspects, the effects of which are dramatic
from both the business perspective, as well as the customer perspective. (Marsden, 2010)
From the business perspective, Social Media Marketing Monetization, E-Commerce
Sales Optimization, and Business Model Innovation are the three largest differentiators in
comparison to traditional Social Media Marketing techniques. (Marsden, 2010)
Social Media Marketing Monetization (SMMM) is the ―online promotion of goods
and services using social media.‖ Different from traditional Social Media Marketing, SMMM
allows users to purchase goods directly from an online source, rather than simply providing a
forum for discussion and information. Through Social Media Marketing Monetization, the
former difficulties affiliated with the lack of measurable results of online advertising
campaigns are alleviated because dollar amounts can be assigned to inventory sold,
dissolving discussions as to whether SMM was even a viable communication tool. Rather,
Marketers finally have the opportunity to accurately appraise the worth of their Social Media
Marketing campaigns by assigning dollar values to inventory sold and comparing the gains or
20
losses. More specifically, comparing the amount of online purchases to how much was spent
on the campaign provides a perfect Return on Investment (ROI) analysis. ROI is one of the
most important measurements a business can have in determining the success or failure of a
project, and for this reason, Social Media Marketing Monetization is considered one of the
strongest features of Social Commerce. (Stewart, & Pavlou, 2002)
The next capability of Social Commerce that has had great effects on Social Media
Marketing is E-Commerce Sales Optimization. E-Commerce Sales Optimization allows
businesses to maximize the Reach and Reputation of web-based promotional campaigns for
online retailers, by increasing customer traffic, conversion rates, and order values. Instead of
simply offering direct-purchase opportunities on traditional websites, companies have
succeeded in integrating themselves into various social media platforms and effectively
increased contact with their customers. (Marsden, 2010)
While Reach and Reputation are the primary analyses used to quantify a company’s
E-Commerce Sales Optimization, these methods are at times ambiguous because they provide
accurate cost assessments for the company yet produce skewed and unfavorable results
considering returns. In this case, Reach measures a company’s ―exposure‖ to a particular
consumer group using social media. In contrast, Reputation describes the ―influence‖ of a
company’s social media campaign in regards to the rest of Social Media community, and
their subsequent approval or disapproval. Though Reach and Reputation are measurable
indices, they are often criticized for their tendency to provide useful data from a cost-based
perspective, and little to no functional information concerning earnings. It is for these reasons
the Return on Investment (ROI) is in most cases the preferred method of measurement for
marketers. Nevertheless, all three (ROI, Reach, and Reputation) are used to quantify the
successes or failures Social Commerce campaigns. (Stewart, & Pavlou, 2002)
21
Business Model Innovation refers to a company utilizing an existing technology or
field of SNS expertise and modifying its normal method of use to create a new product or
service of value to the company and the consumer. A popular example of this is companies
compiling information from various sites around the net and then reselling the data in a
usable and meaningful way, usually in the form of statistical analyses. While the original
elements used to create these products or services are not necessarily innovative, the new and
final product offers a unique significance to consumers. While Business Model Innovation is
not the primary choice of businesses utilizing SNS’s because of its perceived and actual
complexity, if understood and implemented properly, it can be an effective tool in creating
new revenue streams from existing applications. (Marsden, 2010)
Unlike the business perspective, the customer perspective of Social Commerce is less
focused on cost-benefit metrics and more concerned with improving the consumer’s overall
online encounter. When users, or customers rather, interact online, there are several key
attributes that are most important to their having a positive and fulfilling experience, more
specifically, Trust, Utility, and Fun. (Marsden, 2010)
Trust is the most important attribute of Social Commerce from a user’s perspective
because of the obvious fact that there is no face-to-face interaction, and therefore perceived
―source credibility‖ may be lower than traditional ―brick and mortar‖ interactions. To combat
these perceptions, websites utilizing Social Commerce tools should enable 2-way
communication between its users and administrators through customer reviews and ratings.
Increasing the perceived integrity of a site and its proposed marketing messages is essential to
making content more trustworthy to the user, and more convincing overall. (Marsden, 2010)
Utility is a second factor of Social Commerce that is of great importance to usability
from a customer’s perspective. Basic utility has traditionally included ratings and reviews of
products/services, as well as the potential to buy said products/services directly online.
22
However, recent advancements in this sector have led to significant innovations including co-
browsing, social bookmarking, and even synchronous shopping. Again, the goal of Social
Commerce from a customer’s perspective is to enhance usability. Therefore, the more tools
utilized to empower the customer, the greater the online experience for the user. (Marsden,
2010)
Fun is the third attribute of Social Commerce from the Customer Perspective, and
refers to the ―emotional value‖ users obtain from interacting and purchasing online. While
original online shopping primarily consisted of private browsing on non-affiliated sites,
recent innovations like the ones aforementioned have increased the communal aspect of
online shopping, and this has been well received by the public. (Marsden, 2010)
While Trust, Utility, and Fun are key attributes of Social Commerce from the
Customer’s Perspective, there are stronger forces at work that inherently draw contemporary
shoppers to online shopping. The next section will consist of the psychology behind
consumer’s inclination to use Social Commerce, and the managerial implications that result.
3.3. The Psychology Behind Social Commerce
Understanding the psychology behind Social Commerce is essential if marketers wish
to maximize their messaging campaign results, and achieve the greatest amount of synergy
with their users. Identifying customers’ wants and needs is an essential part of effective brand
building and positioning, and a firm must be able to recognize and capitalize on these user
motivations in order to effectively utilize Social Media tools. At its core, Social Commerce
applications are enablers for greater communication and learning between groups of people.
Humans are inherently social creatures, and discovery and innovation are fundamental
characteristics of our beings. While we are all very unique, undeniable similarities exist in
our shared consciousness, specifically in our decision-making processes. This is known as
23
―heuristic thinking‖ and is identified as a key part of Man’s ―Social Intelligence.‖ (Marsden,
2010)
3.3.1. Heuristic thinking
Heuristic thinking consists of 6 basic dimensions: Popularity, Authority, Scarcity,
Affinity, Consistency, and Reciprocity. Every consumer, whether consciously or
subconsciously, rotates between these categories before, during, and after a purchase, and
they are commonly referred to in unison as the Consumer Decision Making Process. Social
Commerce applications can utilize this information to maximize user experience, as well as
value created for all parties (Palmer, & Koenig-Lewis, 2009). Below is an explanation of the
six dimensions of Heuristic Thinking, and their implications on Social Commerce. (Marsden,
2010)
By observing the buying habits and preferences of other groups, individuals feel more
educated on their prospective shopping choices, and become more comfortable in making
decisions for themselves. Popularity of a product/service can have short-term, as well as
long-term connotations, therefore marketers must first establish what type of positioning they
are trying to establish for a particular campaign. (Marsden, 2010)
Authority is established by the consumer’s perception that the information being
provided is from an individual with greater than average knowledge on the subject, usually an
expert or specialist. Relying on predetermined facts and opinions can save a customer time
and energy, as well as increase their own personal knowledge of the product or service.
(Marsden, 2010)
24
Scarcity refers to the lack of availability of products/services, and the resulting
emotional reactions by consumers. Typically, the less available something is, the more value
inherently exists. Scarcity can be a strong brand builder yet it must be used with caution as to
maintain a suitable (i.e. profitable) supply and demand relationship. (Marsden, 2010)
In terms of Social Commerce, Affinity is one of the most important aspects of the six
dimensions of heuristic thinking. Similar to the Popularity dimension, observing other’s
opinions and reactions, especially those of friends and family, gives the user a greater sense
of understanding as well as enjoyment. Affinity is an innate piece Social Commerce, and an
important element in the psychology behind its success. (Marsden, 2010)
Consistency is another important aspect of Social Commerce because depending on
its use, far different results can occur. Typically, users prefer consistency because it
minimizes the amount of internal mental doubt that occurs during the decision making
process. However, some firms purposefully use inconsistency as a way to separate
themselves from their competitors, and seem unique. While both strategies have their pros
and cons, relative consistency in product and service offerings are the industry standard.
(Marsden, 2010)
The sixth and final dimension of heuristic thinking, Reciprocity is important to Social
Commerce and consumers because of the emotions affiliated with goodwill, such as returning
a favor. Modern consumers are a social bunch, and feel that passing along useful and helpful
information is a key aspect of maintaining and increasing the value of the Internet. A classic
example of Reciprocity is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
For marketers, identifying and utilizing the six dimensions of heuristic thinking is a
crucial step for understanding the wants and needs of the consumer, and implementing a
successful messaging campaign. Brand building and positioning are important implications
25
that result from the use of Social Commerce campaigns, and understanding the consumer
thought process is essential for achieving valuable results. (Marsden, 2010)
3.4. Utilizing Social Networking Sites in Higher Education Marketing Strategies
3.4.1. Higher education marketing
Historically, higher education marketing has been a neglected subject in the general
marketing field, and has encountered great resistance towards innovation from within its own
walls in the academic world, due to the belief by some that it would ―undermine academic
standards of quality and excellence‖ (Constantides, & Stagno, 2011). Academic institutions
traditionally believed that their needs were different from those of private businesses, and
therefore, distinctive approaches were required, ones that were deemed to be more ethical and
focused on relationships rather than consumption. Unfortunately, the reality has become that
many universities’ marketing efforts have failed to evolve with the times, and are primarily
relying upon old-fashioned and rudimentary techniques to advertise their services in an
increasingly globalized society.
Another limiting factor in the evolution of contemporary university marketing
strategies is that ―the literature on higher education marketing is incoherent, even inchoate,
and lacks theoretical models that reflect upon the particular context of higher education and
the nature of their services,‖ making contemporary research and analysis on this subject even
more difficult (Constantides, & Stagno, 2011).
However, at the same time, increasing market pressure due to political and
technological innovations is greatly increasing competition between higher learning
institutions, and mandates that these organizations let go of their antiquated notions of
dismissing the functions of marketing, and instead effectively promote themselves to the
public so as to remain relevant in their industry, as well as the global economy as a whole. A
26
new set of methods and techniques is needed for the field of higher education marketing to
evolve, and many believe Social Media is the next frontier. (Constantides, & Stagno, 2011)
Social Media, specifically SNS’s, shows much potential to be an effective and
powerful marketing communication tool for university marketing strategies for several
reasons. Firstly, SNS’s draw on many of the same values that universities use to position
themselves to their target groups, including networking, information exchange, and the ability
to advertise products and services. In addition, the Pew Research Center (Constantides, &
Stagno, 2011), reports ―83% of Americans between 18 and 33 years old are already users of
social networking sites,‖ representing a near perfect segmentation for higher educations’
target consumer groups. However, while SNS’s have shown tremendous growth and
demonstrated serious innovation in their respective fields, higher education marketing has
been relatively stagnant in recent years. The aim is to utilize the popular features and past
successes of SNS’s by implementing them into cohesive marketing communication tools, and
creating value for users. There are two primary perspectives to the utilization of SNS’s in
higher education marketing strategies that vary greatly in their purposes, as well as
applications, yet provide insight into the potential value proposition; the Administrative
Perspective and the Student Perspective. (Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, & Witty,
2010)
From an Administrative perspective, segmenting target groups, brand positioning, and
communicating school information are the primary goals when utilizing SNS’s as marketing
communication tools. (Constantides, & Stagno, 2011)
Segmentation is important for academic administrators because it helps to determine
the type and amount of content that must be posted on SNS’s in order to keep current users
interested and involved, as well as attract new users that may potentially bring value to the
site or organization in the future. Academic institutions have three primary target groups they
27
hope to communicate with through SNS’s: current students, future students, and alumni.
Because each group has different wants and needs, proper segmentation is important to
achieving the maximum reach and effectiveness of messages, and also keeping the site
relevant so current users will return and hopefully attract new ones in the process. To achieve
this, administrators post a variety of information including current events, notable figures in
the academic community, and general information on the school itself. In addition, the
content is regularly updated and rotated in order to maintain pertinent and interesting to users.
(Constantides, & Stagno, 2011)
Brand positioning is the second use of Social Networking Sites from the
Administrative Perspective and refers to how schools present themselves to their users and
the public through the type of content posted, as well as the frequency. Brand positioning is
one of the most important features of SNS’s utilized by academic institutions because the
relatively small amount of content posted represents a much larger organization with history,
current affairs, and a large community of stakeholders and other interested parties. However,
a common constraint and complaint of Social Networking Sites has been their defined
boundaries of expression and communication, consisting primarily of pictures, videos, and
short text communiqués. While historically, this has been seen as a limiting and somewhat
discouraging factor of SNS’s use as a marketing communication tool in the eyes of
academics, it is no longer being accepted as a large enough reason to not utilize the
technology, and therefore has become an important area for discussion. Currently, there is not
one particular official accepted methodology for brand positioning by academic
administrators using SNS’s, and is one of the top areas of interest for this study.
(Constantides, & Stagno, 2011)
28
The majority of communication from the Administrative perspective is one way, in
that much of the content posted is directed towards informing users of school business and
related topics. Current and upcoming events, notable figures, as well as information regarding
the school is the predominate type of information presented, and is largely connected to the
universities desired brand positioning strategy. However, this is not entirely the case, and
opportunity exists for users to not only receive information, but also to respond. After content
is posted, users often have the ability to leave feedback, usually consisting of comments
displayed on the public News Feed. While this does depend on how the administrator has
delegated their privacy settings, the general consensus is that while users are not usually able
to post information themselves on school’s pages, allowing for feedback is an important
value factor in users’ enjoyment when viewing and interacting on the site. Also, reviewing
feedback can be an important tool when measuring users’ perceptions and attitudes of posted
comment, and can help to increase the source credibility of administrators. (Constantides, &
Stagno, 2011)
The student perspective of SNS’s in the application of University Marketing is
interesting and unique because it relies more on perception rather than promotion. Receiving
information rather than posting content is the primary activity from the student perspective,
yet returning feedback is a valued attribute as well. In addition, networking with other users
is an important attribute for users from this perspective. (de Villiers, 2010)
Receiving school-related information is a key feature of SNS’s from the Student
Perspective because it provides a direct portal from the academic institution to the user.
Unlike a blog or user-rated review site, content posted on University SNS profiles are
typically viewed as an extension of the organization’s official homepage, with similar levels
of source credibility, yet in a more accessible and popular form in accordance with modern
social norms concerning Internet use among youth. Schedules of current and upcoming
29
events, as well as assorted media including pictures and videos comprise the largest portions
of total content, though some conventional information exists as well including links to the
organizations’ homepages and basic information about the institution. While many question
how this differs from traditional University homepages, the reality is that Academic SNS
profiles are not substitutes, yet rather supplements to online marketing communication
efforts. Administrators of official academic homepages are often reluctant to make frequent
changes in posted content or interface because of a high perception of risk considering the
organization’s reputation and positioning. However, Social Networking Sites differ in that
users not only enjoy regular content updates, but they even come to expect it. This is an
important aspect of receiving information from the Student Perspective, and must be
recognized by administrators for effective communication between parties. (de Villiers, 2010)
Giving feedback is a second function of the Student Perspective, and consists
primarily of posting reactionary statements to specific content displayed by the administrator,
known as ―comments.‖ Comments, both positive and negative, are clear indicators of users’
perceptions of content. Commenting positively can help to spark the interests of others,
furthering the conversation topics through increased blogging and posting of links to relative
material. Likewise, negative comments on particular subjects normally discourage further
exploration of the topic, effectively decreasing the information’s perceived value to the user.
Returning feedback is important because it enhances the user experience by creating the
feeling of connectedness to the administrative entity, and therefore an implied importance in
the online community. (de Villiers, 2010)
Networking is a quintessential aspect in all Social Networking Sites, and serves as the
backbone for all SNS activity. From the Student Perspective, networking can be used for
professional purposes like contacting professors or colleagues, as well as for entertainment,
connecting with other students socially. Meeting other users on an academic organization’s
30
SNS site presents an immediate and obvious similarity in interest, the university, increasing
the trust factor in the initial interaction, and therefore enhancing the overall user experience.
While a site’s success does not depend on how many users it has, larger networks can
increase source credibility, which may have further implication with other aspects of the site.
(de Villiers, 2010)
3.5. The Value Proposition
The value proposition of utilizing SNS’s in higher education marketing strategies is
derived from a mixture of the functional, emotional, and self-expressive benefits that result
from Social Media Marketing, electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM), and the six dimensions
of heuristic thinking. These three elements work in positioning the institution towards the
public, segmenting target groups, and building brand equity through networking. Their
understanding is essential to academic institutions’ successful implementation of SNS’s as
online marketing communications tools, and can be used to effectively create and
communicate a unique identity in the eyes of online consumers.
3.6. Research Propositions
The following research propositions concern the utilization of SNS’s in higher
education marketing strategies in the United States (U.S.), and are a direct result of the work
compiled in this literature review.
RP1: Social Media Marketing (SMM) is an important and essential component for
academic institutions’ University Marketing strategies in the U.S.
RP2: SNS’s are valuable instruments in Social Commerce, and should be adopted as a
customary and respected marketing communication tool by higher learning institutions.
31
RP3: Using the unique value proposition of SNS, academic institutions can
communicate unique messages to a large consumer base, effectively positioning themselves
to particular groups, and successfully build brand equity.
4. APPLICATION OF THE TOP 2 SNS’S TO THE TOP 20 IMBA PROGRAMS IN
THE UNITED STATES
The third chapter begins with a general description of the top 20 IMBA programs in
the United States. A SWOT analysis will be conducted, followed by a look at the current
state-of-the-art of their University Marketing Strategies, and finally proposals for
improvement will be made.
4.1. General Description
The twenty International Masters of Business Administration (i-MBA) programs used
in this study are all headquartered in the United States and originate from a 2011 ranking
compiled by U.S. News and World Report, entitled ―Best International Business Schools.‖
The ranking was generated according to seven different attributes (Tuition, Enrollment (full-
time), Average GMAT score, Average Undergraduate GPA, Acceptance Rate, Average
starting salary and bonus, and Full-time graduates employed at graduation). U.S. News and
World Report magazine has been ranking American graduate programs since 1994, and has
since become a respected and trusted leader in educational rankings. (―Best international
business,‖ 2011)
Below, in Table 3.1, is their 2011 ranking for the top 20 international business schools
in the United States as well as the cities and states in the U.S.A. where these schools are
located:
33
Table 4.1. - Ranking of the Top 20 International MBA Schools in the U.S. (2011)
Top 20 International MBA Schools in the United States of America
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management - Glendale, Arizona
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) – Columbia, South Carolina
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) – Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
4. Duke University (Fuqua) – Durham, North Carolina
5. University of Michigan—Ann Arbor (Ross) – Ann Arbor, Michigan
6. Harvard University – Boston, Massachusetts
7. New York University (Stern) – New York City, New York
8. Columbia University – New York City, New York
9. University of Southern California (Marshall) – Los Angeles, California
10. University of California—Berkeley (Haas) – Berkeley, California
11. University of Chicago (Booth) – Chicago, Illinois
12. Michigan State University (Broad) – East Lansing, Michigan
13. Stanford University – Palo Alto, California
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) – Los Angeles, California
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) – Washington D.C.
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) – Austin, Texas
17. St. Louis University (Cook) – St. Louis, Missouri
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) – Evanston, Illinois
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) – Bloomington, Indiana
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) – Hanover, New Hampshire
Source: Based on ―Best International Business Schools-U.S. ranking (News and World
Report, 2011)
4.1.1. History and key facts
All of the IMBA programs studied in this master thesis were founded in the United
States of America and are relatively equally distributed geographically across the continental
U.S. Dedicated to offering higher education services to individuals in the various fields of
international business, having an undergraduate degree in business is not mandatory for
applying to these IMBA programs, however having some type of undergraduate degree is a
34
prerequisite for admission, as well as taking either the GRE or GMAT standardized test.
Figure 3.1 below shows the geographic locations of the Top 20 American IMBA programs.
Figure 4.1. – Locations of Top 20 IMBA Programs in the United States of America
Source: Own elaboration
4.1.2. Work and research assignment
The majority of work performed at these institutions regards preparing full and part-
time students for careers in international business through specialized coursework, study
abroad experiences, and internships in multinational enterprises (MNE’s). In their
coursework, students are introduced to a variety of contemporary business subjects including
Human Resources (HR) Management, Marketing, and Finance, with a focus on these topics’
applications to the modern Business World. Studying abroad is also considered an essential
35
component of all IMBA programs for students, and usually consists of one or two semesters
spent at a partner institution’s school (outside of the U.S.), researching a particular field of
specialization in International Business. During their studies, many students choose to work
for various multinational enterprises (MNE’s) to further their education, as well as network in
attempts to secure a full-time job position after graduation. Finally, the majority of these
programs require their students to complete and defend a Master’s Thesis, showing some type
of original work or research. Master’s Theses are generally completed at the end of a
student’s tenure, and require the student to defend their work in front of an administrative
body. Specialized coursework, study abroad opportunities, internships in MNE’s, and writing
a Master’s Thesis are the primary components of a modern IMBA programs work, creating a
unique and valuable educational service. In addition, many of the faculty members who teach
are also concurrently involved in other research applications, and carry out private work to
further explore their respective fields of investigation. Their results are normally conveyed to
the public via International conferences, and are considered essential events for faculty
members to attend somewhat regularly.
4.1.3. Stakeholders
IMBA programs have a network of primary stakeholders with interests in the short-
term functional operations of the schools, as well as their long-term directional goals. While
all parties have unique responsibilities, concerns, and goals, their work in combination
establishes an effective and productive learning environment, helps to achieve value co-
creation, and leads to natural evolutions within the program. (Chapleo, & Simms, 2010)
Figure 4.2 illustrates these stakeholders.
36
Figure 4.2. – Primary and Secondary Stakeholders
Source: Based on ―Stakeholder Analysis in Higher Education: A Case Study of the
University of Portsmouth (Chapleo, & Simms, 2010)
4.1.4. Competitors
The modern American IMBA program is an organization faced with great
competition, not only from other higher education programs located in the United States, but
also from academic institutions located abroad in foreign nations. In addition, some
prospective students decide that the time and money invested in obtaining an IMBA degree is
too much, and that they would be better served immediately working after their
undergraduate studies are completed. Other times, students may realize the value of an
IMBA, but the person isn’t interested in studying abroad for an extended period of time,
opting instead to work towards a traditional MBA degree. For these reasons, the International
MBA program is considered to have many competitors within the education sector as well as
the commercial sector, and a unique choice for upcoming professionals. Figure 4.3 illustrates
IMBA programs’ major competitors. (Chapleo, & Simms, 2010)
37
Figure 4.3. – Primary Competitors
Source: Based on ―Stakeholder Analysis in Higher Education: A Case Study of the University of Portsmouth (Chapleo, & Simms, 2010)
4.1.5. Strategic situation analysis
The current situation of International MBA programs in the United States is one
composed of great opportunity and growth, as well as strong competition and alternatives.
The following strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis is directed
towards the entirety of the IMBA programs discussed in this paper and not a single school.
The first table shows the internal strengths and weaknesses of the said programs. Next, the
external opportunities and threats posed to the subjects, and how that shapes their competitive
positioning. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
38
Table 4.2. – Internal strengths and weaknesses
Strengths Weaknesses
a. High intellectual presence e. Traditional university marketing
methodologies
b. Established parent organizations f. Internal support
c. International professional network g. Brand identity
d. Access to funding
Source: Based on Idaho State University’s SWOT Analysis Resource Page (SWOT analysis
resource, 2006)
a. Strength – High intellectual presence
As most would expect in these types of settings, there is an extremely high and
sustained intellectual presence in academic institutions of this caliber, at the Master’s level.
The professors charged with developing curriculums and teaching subject matter have
demonstrated through their own studies and dissertations that they are highly competent in
their respected fields and capable of delivering that knowledge to their pupils through
teaching. Indeed, they are trusted members of the academic community and often times
leading figures of expertise in the educational and public sectors, as well as the private
business sector. In addition, it is not uncommon for graduate professors, especially those
involved in programs with international components, to have worked previously in private
industry, and sometimes simultaneously while teaching. This clustering of great minds is
extremely beneficial for addressing complex issues and creates an environment where
problems can be analyzed using a variety of methods, not only the most basic cost-benefit
comparisons that controls many of the decisions made in the traditional business world. Due
to the intricacies of university marketing including the need to fulfill various social
obligations such as transparency and accessibility as well as meet the bottom-line in order to
maintain financial viability, maintaining a high intellectual presence created by the
employment of well-trained, professional educators is essential to addressing the, short-term,
39
day-to-day trials of IMBA programs, as well as the long-term, strategic decisions that need to
be made in order to ensure continuous excellence and enduring prestige. (SWOT analysis
resource, 2006)
b. Strength – Established parent organizations
While the degree is somewhat varying, the majority of the IMBA programs discussed
in this paper are individual departments that compose much larger academic institutions, and
many of these universities have been in existence for hundreds of years. The test of time is
ultimate, and the fact that many of these organizations have not only survived but thrived for
decades and even centuries is a testament to the strength and lasting fortitude that has shaped
their faces and values. Consequently, specific departments like IMBA programs are greatly
empowered because they have rapid and extensive access to the same services and networks
that their corresponding parent organizations enjoy. This part to whole relationship affects
almost every aspect of IMBA programs including their core values, brand image, and even
services offered, and therefore is a crucial strength to them. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
c. Strength – International professional network
Having access to an international network of professionals is a crucial aspect of
running any international organization, and for the twenty IMBA programs researched for
this study, these networks form the backbones of departments’ actual operating capabilities,
as well as their reputations amongst their peers both at home and abroad. The more outside
schools a particular IMBA program has relations with, the larger its overall professional
network becomes, and the more services become increasingly available for current and future
students like study abroad options and internships, thus increasing value for all parties
involved. Also, being recognized as a serious program helps to attract the best and brightest
40
students, attracting positive media attention to the program and university, job offerings from
employers, and even federal funding. Maintaining and broadening an international
professional network is one of an IMBA program’s largest tasks, yet can be a source for some
of their best strengths. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
d. Strength – Access to funding
Having access to the necessary amount of funding is an integral part of operating a
successful organization, and for IMBA programs it is no different. IMBA programs are
fortunate that their particular field of study is increasingly relevant in the modern Digital
Age, which has led to reinvigorated interest in the subject and reinvented how international
business is perceived and utilized. These days, it would be unusual for a business school to
not offer an international option in their curriculum, and therefore the IMBA program is
increasingly being considered in business schools’ budgets, and accordingly receiving more
access to funding. Increased funding means greater resources for teachers and students, a
huge factor for the morale of current students and professors, as well as incentive for future
students considering applying to an IMBA program. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
e. Weakness – Traditional university marketing methodologies
An internal weakness of IMBA programs is the restraint imposed on them by the
confidence in and implementation of traditional marketing methodologies in university
marketing strategies. As discussed earlier in this paper, university marketers have historically
been opposed to behaviors appearing to be too closely resembling those of private business
ones out of a belief that it was inappropriate for an academic institution to operate on a pure
profit-driven basis. Consequently, this has been a highly limiting factor and considered a
weakness. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
41
f. Weakness – Internal support
When operating a department as diverse and manifold as International MBA
programs, finding internal organizational support can be a complex and arduous task. Be it
staffing, the procuring of funds, or even basic endorsement from stakeholders can be difficult
if all members aren’t aware of the particular characteristics and idiosyncrasies that
accompany unique projects. The primary source of this skepticism stems from the unique
way that IMBA programs are measured in comparison to other academic programs at the
master’s level, particularly the importance of utilizing a quality metric that reflects all of the
social factors involved in an international venture, and not solely the economic costs and
ramifications. Without strong leadership and agreement between all stakeholders, finding and
maintaining internal support in an IMBA program can be a major weakness. (SWOT analysis
resource, 2006)
g. Weakness – Brand identity
Establishing a strong brand identity is difficult in any industry, yet even more so in
the academic world because of the large and ever increasing amount of substitutes available
to current and prospective students. Because each program is unique, it is important to
highlight points about one’s organization that mirror those special qualities, and them relate
them to the student in an effective and meaningful way. Building brand identity is one of the
toughest tasks for business organizations because the ramifications on the market and
individual customers are profound. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
42
Table 4.3. – External Opportunities and Threats
Opportunities Threats
a. Low market saturation e. Many competitors
b. Future growth f. Global economic recession
c. International prestige g. Constantly evolving subject matter
d. Creation of strong alumni base h. Reach of marketing communication tools
Source: Based on Idaho State University’s SWOT Analysis Resource Page (SWOT analysis
resource, 2006)
a. Opportunity – Low market saturation
Historically, the world of higher education was one of prestige and privilege, catering
primarily to the sons and daughters of the wealthy elite, creating a relatively small network of
universities in comparison to the number of potential customers in the market. For these
reasons, the higher education market was considered to be relatively unsaturated compared to
its potential. However, recent decades have ushered in a time of much higher academic
equality where almost anyone with the right grades can attend institutions of higher learning
with the assistance of university scholarships, federal education grants, and private student
loans from banks. This availability of funds has created a situation previously unseen in
higher education, and opened the doors of universities to people from all walks of life. This
relatively low market saturation is a huge opportunity for American IMBA programs, and can
be capitalized on by informing potential students of services available to them that may not
have been previously. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
b. Opportunity – Future growth
Stemming from the low market saturation just discussed, the high potential for future
market growth is a primary opportunity for higher learning institutions in the United States,
particularly IMBA programs. While previously, potential students may not have believed that
43
they could afford higher education, let alone programs with international travel components
like IMBA programs, various funding options like the ones previously discussed (e.g.
university scholarships, federal education grants, and private student loans from banks, etc.)
have changed public opinions of higher education, and made the possibility of attaining a
master’s level degree much more attainable. As a result, higher learning organizations have
responded by not only revamping existing departments by increasing the number of classes
offered and the amount of resources available to students and faculty, but also by establishing
completely new and specialized institutes with cutting-edge campuses. In hopes of meeting
increasing demand, academic institutions have increased their supply of amount and type of
service options, and this possibility of large amounts of future growth is a huge opportunity
for American IMBA programs. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
c. Opportunity – International prestige
Attaining international prestige is another external opportunity that can bring great
value to American IMBA programs by expanding their professional network, increasing
invitations to international academic conferences, and hopefully attracting prospective
students from around the globe. Forging relationships with other universities around the
globe is an important aspect of IMBA programs, and the better of a reputation a program can
build, the more opportunities across the board will be available to them. While there is not an
established method of building international prestige per se, there are certain behaviors that
can increase the likelihood of attaining it including inviting international guest speakers and
professors, submitting research papers to academic forums, and demonstrating a strong
willingness and desire to build a program dedicated to the advancement of the field of
international business. Nevertheless, building international prestige can be a huge boon for
44
American IMBA programs because it gives them increased legitimacy from the international
perspective as well as their domestic peers. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
d. Opportunity – Creation of strong alumni base
Creating a strong alumni base is a fourth external opportunity for American IMBA
programs that can be extremely beneficial to the organization in many ways, yet can take
several years to become visible and relevant. Be it fundraising, guest speaking, or finding
jobs and internships for current students, alumni are important stakeholders to IMBA
programs because they hopefully represent many of the same values the academic program
tries to exhibit, and have advanced past the academic world and into the business world.
Connecting to the business world is important for universities, especially business schools
because their curriculum derives directly from real life business practices. For these reasons,
creating a strong alumni base is a critical opportunity for IMBA programs, and should be
addressed accordingly. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
e. Threat – Many competitors
A primary external threat to IMBA programs in the U.S. is the increasing amount of
competitors burgeoning in the higher education sector in the last few decades alone. While
master’s level educations may have been limited in the past, new entrants to the industry have
created new options in a previously finite vocation, and increased the pressure on all parties
involved to offer new and unique services. In addition, American IMBA programs are faced
with threat of prospective students skipping the North American education market all
together and traveling to Europe to complete their studies. And, as always, the option to work
and save money rather than to spend money and continue schooling is always an option for
prospective master’s students, and therefore increases the amount of competition and
45
substitutes available across the board. Clearly, the threat of many competitors in the world of
higher education is a central one, particularly in the field of IMBA programs. (SWOT
analysis resource, 2006)
f. Threat – Global economic recession
The threat of global economic recession is one almost all businesses are facing in this
day and age, however, American IMBA programs must account for it two-fold, being that
they deal not only in the domestic American economy, attempting to offer quality products
and services to consumers that are viable, useful, and practical, but they also have interests
and partnerships in the international World economy, strongly affected by fluctuating
currencies and shifting political situations. To properly address these threats, it is important
for IMBA programs to first recognize and understand the complex connections that exist in
international programs, and then find proper administrators that can manage the internal and
external workings and intricacies. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
g. Constantly evolving subject matter
A third external threat that applies to American IMBA programs is the constantly
evolving subject matter that forms the basis of the curriculum. As mankind has entered
further into the Digital Age and globalization has created connections and relationships
between people all around the world never before thought possible, so to has the field of
International Business evolved from a relatively straight forward concentration into a focus
and branch of learning composed of an ever increasing number of larger and larger elements
and smaller and smaller minutiae, that presently is on a course never before experienced in
our history. Information technology has been the primary instigator of this progression, and
judging from recent history, has no plans on stopping or slowing down. This constantly
46
evolving subject matter is what both makes International Business so interesting, and poses
such a large threat to American IMBA programs. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
h. Reach of marketing communication tools
A final and real external threat to American IMBA programs is the reach, or lack their
of rather, of their chosen marketing communication tools. While historically universities
relied heavily on word-of-mouth and their reputations to indirectly advertise themselves to
potential students, much has changed in the recent decades and globalization in combination
with the high number of competitors and substitutes has made it an almost necessity for
higher learning institutions to properly market themselves using effective communication
tools. Unfortunately, a recent and major issue has been the acceptance of this fact and the
inability to utilize modern techniques in addition to some of the older ones. If higher learning
institutions wish to properly avoid this threat, it is important for them to recognize the change
in dynamics in technology and education that has occurred in recent years, and implement
modern university marketing techniques that properly address these transformations. (SWOT
analysis resource, 2006)
The following table synthesizes the previous SWOT analysis into a SWOT matrix. A
SWOT matrix is useful for comparing the various sections of a traditional SWOT analysis,
and forming more concrete presumptions. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
47
Figure 4.4. – American IMBA programs competitive positioning
Source: Based on Idaho State University’s SWOT Analysis Resource Page (SWOT analysis
resource, 2006)
The top 20 American IMBA programs discussed in this study are academic
organizations with vast opportunity to break their domestic bounds and gain prestige at the
international level by drawing on the strengths its already established parent organizations
can provide to them. The threat of constantly evolving subject matter can be addressed and
approached with focus and attention from school faculty and administrators, and hopefully
alleviated. While internal support has traditionally been an internal weakness for American
IMBA programs, the creation of a strong alumni base could help to counter this issue by
expanding the number of interested stakeholders. Alumni have first-hand experience with
inner workings of the curriculums, and therefore could offer useful insight and support to the
programs. Finally, while traditional marketing methodologies are have normally been seen as
a hindrance and weakness of American IMBA programs, the recent and rapid development of
48
competitors and substitutes could actually offer new insights and practices into an outdated
field, thus transforming it into a strength. (SWOT analysis resource, 2006)
4.2. State of the Art – Brand Identity of the Top 20 IMBA Programs in the U.S.
The current state-of-the-art of the top 20 IMBA programs in the United States is
considered to be one of relative maturity, yet exhibiting opportunities for growth and
innovation. While the practice and study of International Business is not new, many of the
contemporary techniques and tools being utilized in the modern age have only recently been
developed with the ushering in of the Digital Age, and have yet to be fully examined or
explored. For these reasons, IMBA programs throughout the World have had to reassess their
positioning in the academic and business communities, as well as the methods they use to
interact and communicate with their constituents and interested stakeholders. The modern
IMBA program in the U.S. has reached an exciting and fascinating crossroads in its centuries
old journey, and thus must be reexamined from a more current perspective.
4.2.1. The core identity
The primary goal of the American IMBA program is to expose students to a
curriculum based on real and current international business practices in hopes of preparing
them for a future career in that or a relating field. This is achieved through a multifaceted
approach of practical in-class instruction and international networking through study abroad
opportunities.
These academic institutions’ key values are discovery, innovation, collaboration, and
excellence through academic exploration and investigation.
49
The IMBA programs reviewed in this paper are internationally recognized institutions
for both the quality of young professionals trained within their walls, as well as the high
levels of academic research papers forged by their members. A long recognized competency
of these programs described earlier in the SWOT analysis is the unusually high concentration
of professionals and intellectuals in a single geographic location. By mixing business and
academia, the modern IMBA program has access to vast potentials of knowledge and
experience not normally seen in traditional schooling or work places. In addition, these
IMBA programs have unprecedented international support networks in comparison to
traditional academic organizations, and can make decisions based not only on the best
practices known in their part of the world, but also draw from and utilize their global
expertise and influences to solve complex problems. This is considered to be one of the
IMBA program’s largest advantages.
These organization’s names normally derive from two unique origins, the physical
geographic location where the campus is situated, followed by the last name of the founder of
the business school or sometimes a wealthy benefactor to the program (e.g. University of
Pennsylvania (Wharton), Joseph Wharton. A university’s name is an important aspect of their
brand identity because its not only the first symbol of the organization that is conveyed to an
individual in discussion, but it also represents history; time honored traditions and
longstanding reputations that are known throughout the United States and the rest of the
world and act as important differentiators between competitors. For these reasons, its is
important for schools to choose an appealing and descriptive name that properly identifies the
program.
50
4.2.2. The brand essence
While not all of these organizations have their mission statements posted directly on
their websites, all of them have detailed provide detailed descriptions of their schools and
programs on dedicated web pages linked to their homepages, usually entitled ―About
School.‖ These pages provide news about current events involving the schools, as well as
messages from the dean, and other links including facts and figures that provide basic
information concerning the school and its public image. However, all are unique and cannot
be unanimously described in absolutes.
4.2.3. The extended identity
As mentioned earlier, the personalities behind many of these business schools have
usually been successful professionals and wealthy industrialists, as well as social benefactors
and patrons of academia. While not all are mentioned in the schools’ names (e.g. Thunderbird
School of Global Management, founded by Lieutenant General Barton Kyle Yount), many
are (e.g. Duke University (Fuqua), University of Michigan—Ann Arbor (Ross), etc.), and
their legacies are upheld through the continuation of education at these institutions.
51
Figure 4.5. - The official insignia of the top 20 International MBA Programs in the U.S.
Source: Own elaboration
Each of the designs shown above in figure 4.5 are the official insignia of the top 20
International MBA schools in the U.S., and are the programs primary visual identities that are
conveyed to the public. While all different, they do possess similar characteristics including
their programs’ names written in varying sizes and fonts and usually in the school’s colors,
and normally a seal or picture, though this is not the case for all. An organization’s visual
identity is extremely important because it provides an illustrated description of the program
that attempts to convey the schools values and ideals while simultaneously creating a mental
picture for individuals that holds significant value for future recognition and memory recall.
Therefore, every aspect of an institution’s logo is carefully constructed and highly
scrutinized.
52
There are numerous points of contact for these organization’s brands with the public. Figure
4.6 illustrates these interactions.
Figure 4.6. – Brand points of contact
Source: Own elaboration
1. Physical campus – A university’s physical school campus is an essential point of contact
for all academic institutions, and is an important representation of the organization’s values,
goals, and ambitions. The classrooms, administration, library, and all of the other buildings
are direct manifestations of the curriculums taught within their walls, and architecture as well
as campus planning has serious ramifications on the learning environments created.
2. Mixed media – Mixed media describes the various tools and methods universities use to
communicate their unique value propositions to the public. It includes online material like
web and social media pages, as well letterheads, business cards, stationary, and even visual
identities like the school’s logo. All of these are important points of contact with the public
53
because they create memories and impressions that remain even after the physical
experiences, and therefore must be managed appropriately.
3. Publications
University publications primarily consist of scientific research of various topics, which is
subsequently analyzed and turned into valuable reports and presentations for the academic
and business communities. These publications are important because they represent the level
of professional research that is occurring within the walls of the university and influence the
publics’ perceptions of the institution. Many times, these works are submitted to national and
international conferences to be further scrutinized by the academic and business communities
as a whole. Good research attracts attention, further working to enhance universities’
reputations, garnering respect and making them more desirable for current and future
scholars.
4. Merchandise
Merchandise, like mixed media, is another tangible representation of the schools values and
image, and creates impressions that last far beyond physical interactions with faculty, staff,
and students on campus. T-shirts, sports jerseys, plush toys, and posters/art are some typical
examples of school merchandise, yet is not limited to these categories and can even include
items such as class rings. Controlling supply and demand, as well as preventing forgeries and
knock-offs to be produced are concerns affiliated with this point of contact. While
merchandising is not considered a primary task for IMBA programs, it is important to
understand its implications.
54
5. Classes
Classes hosted either physically on campus or digitally through web-based services, are an
integral point of contact for IMBA programs because they are the final realization of the total
efforts of all involved stakeholders. The aptitude of all involved parties culminates in the
classroom, creating real value through thought, discussion, and argument. The classroom
experience is the true litmus test of an IMBA program, and has strong and direct effects on
the future growth of all interested stakeholders.
4.2.4. The value proposition
The stakeholder model is the best representation of these organizations’ value
propositions because it clearly illustrates the numerous interested parties and describes the
relationships that exist between parties.
4.3. Proposals for Improvement
After thorough research and subsequent analysis, several opportunities for
improvement in the application of social networking sites to IMBA marketing strategies have
been encountered, and those examples are cited below.
4.3.1. Better understanding of customers
Understanding what drives consumer buying habits is essential to effectively utilizing
social networking sites in IMBA university marketing strategies because essentially, the
school is a manufacturer of products and services while the students is a customer interested
in exchanging time and money for these goods. Without a thorough understanding of why the
students is spending time browsing the site let alone interacting with it, the majority of efforts
put forth by the administrator are lost, and valuable time and money has been spent with little
55
return. The concepts mentioned in the literature review section of this paper are good bases
for understanding consumer drivers, and their importance should not be overlooked or
dismissed.
4.3.2. Wider service offerings
A second major area for improvement identified in this study was the limited amount
of actual service offerings available through these schools’ Facebook and Twitter pages
including the ability to complete full enrollment applications to these programs directly from
their social networking pages, as well as view content in a language other than English. Aside
from the ability to read and post content, view pictures, and in some cases videos affiliated
with the school, there was a surprisingly limited amount of useful operations available in
terms of conducting valuable business through these schools’ SNS pages to appeal to more
than the general web browser, and as of now most individuals would probably choose to use
the schools’ official homepages for most functions rather than their SNS pages. In addition
none of the schools studied utilized a single one of the numerous applications and widgets for
doing business on Facebook and Twitter, all of which could be utilized to create uniqueness
and reach a competitive advantage. The lack of service provisions as well as limited language
offerings represents two major oversights in the overall usefulness of social networking sites
in marketing strategies of IMBA programs, and should be addressed in the academic
community. While some of these features are typically available on the schools’ official
homepages, and these homepages are usually available through a digital link via the social
network page or through direct access on the world wide web, Social Networking Sites
should no longer be considered as a secondary alternative to traditional homepages, rather
they should be utilized in combination and harmony with official homepages, synergizing the
56
advantages of all pages, while simultaneously minimizing the limitations presented by using
only one service.
4.3.3. More focused content
A third opportunity for improving the use of SNS’s in university marketing strategies
is the amount and type of content posted on schools’ pages. In this study, it became evident
that there was hardly any standardization of content amongst the twenty schools in their
usage of the two SNS’s, Facebook and Twitter, and many of the schools’ pages were either
inactive for long periods of time or contained Wall posts with irrelevant or uninteresting
subject matter. Because Facebook and Twitter’s basic interfaces and operational capabilities
are relatively standardized (aside from aforementioned widgets and applications), it is
important for administrators to set themselves apart from the competition by customizing
their pages as best possible. An effective way of approaching this issue is by posting useful
and interesting content with moderately high frequency. In addition, these content postings
should not be random, rather obviously associated with university or program affairs, or some
other predetermined plan. This unique method of both standardizing while simultaneously
customizing can help to create unique SNS pages for schools with appealing and valuable
content.
4.3.4. Consider utilizing alternative SNS sites
Utilizing alternative SNS’s in IMBA University marketing strategies is the fourth
proposal for improvement, and advocates that schools look further than Facebook and Twitter
when utilizing social networking sites. While Facebook and Twitter are currently the top two
SNS’s utilized in the United States, there are numerous online communities that that offer
valuable and appealing services. Also, creating school pages on social networking sites more
57
popular outside of the U.S. like Tuenti, an SNS developed in Spain in 2006, would help to
increase the number of international users, as well as break some of the language barriers
affiliated with English-only sites. By appealing to users around the world in many different
markets, IMBA programs can address several problems including reach and language
impediments.
By addressing these proposals for improvement, IMBA programs and other academic
organizations can work to avoid some of the basic pitfalls of utilizing Social Networking
Sites in university marketing strategies, and maximize the returns on investment in terms of
time and money in order to gain the most value out of the sites’ uses. While these are no
doubt the only opportunities for enhancing the use of social networking by higher learning
institutions, they represent four important areas of focus, and deserve their due attention.
5. PROPOSAL
Chapter five extends the various theories previously discussed in this paper, including
those on Social Media Marketing, Social Commerce, and Electronic Word-of-mouth
(EWOM), in an effort to present suggestions for improvement in utilizing Social Networking
Sites (SNS’s) in contemporary University Marketing Strategies by American IMBA
programs. These proposals are direct products of the research presented in this paper’s
Literature Review, as well as the qualitative and quantitative content analysis performed on
the chosen twenty IMBA programs’ Facebook and Twitter pages. First, the research
objectives as well as the methodology used to investigate them are explained and justified.
Next, the research findings are presented, and an improvement plan outlining a practical and
functional direction for academic institutions to work towards is presented, including a Gant
Chart illustrating the time and budget constraints to be expected. Finally, evaluation methods
and quality control procedures will be discussed, and their importance as tools vital to the
long-term success of SNS’s in University Marketing Strategies made explicit.
5.1. Objectives of the Proposal
The objectives of this proposal are multidimensional; Foremost, to affirm the current
state-of-the-art concerning the utilization of Social Networking Sites (SNS’s) by the top 20
American IMBA programs in their University Marketing Strategies and affirm whether the
latest uses of these sites by said academic organizations are in-line with the contemporary
literature and theoretical framework models of today. If not, an improvement plan including a
Gant Chart will follow, showing time and budget constraints for each measure of operation.
To ensure long-term, quality results, evaluation methods and quality control procedures are
identified at the end of this section as precautionary tools meant to enhance the effectiveness
of the improvement plan.
59
5.2. Methodology to Apply the Proposal
Website Content Analysis was the primary method of statistical analysis used to evaluate
the communiqués on the twenty test subjects’ Facebook and Twitter pages. Because it has
been used on previous studies involving online, web-based communications on social
networks, and has been deemed a suitable method when dealing with this type of research, it
seemed an appropriate and viable method for obtaining quality results.
The test subjects chosen for the study were the top twenty International MBA (IMBA)
programs from the United States, according to the US News and World Report 2011 ranking.
They were chosen for two reasons; the first being that the two Social Networking Sites to be
evaluated in the study had been founded and experienced the most growth, within the United
States, it seemed that to choosing American universities to study would yield the best and
clearest results, maximizing the entire value gained from the project. Secondly, in order to
define a manageable project scope, it was essential to choose a single country to observe as
well as a set number of Social Networking Sites to scrutinize.
Each of the top twenty American IMBA programs’ individual Facebook and Twitter
pages were reviewed on a weekly basis for one continuous month between August 15th
, 2011
to September 15th
, 2011, assessing the general amount of usage of these SNS’s through both
qualitative and quantitative measures. The month-long time period between the dates of
August 15th
, 2011 to September 15th
, 2011 were chosen because this marked the general start
of fall classes for American IMBA programs around the country, and the initial month of
school seemed a suitable and interesting one guaranteed to offer an abundance of quality data
and well-represent these schools’ actual usages.
60
5.2.1. Qualitative analysis
After determining the nine primary components of SNS’s (Table 2.1.), each of the test
subjects’ Facebook and Twitter pages were reviewed, taking into account whether or not their
respective profile pages used any or all of these features. This data was then put into
Microsoft Excel’s Spreadsheet software program in order to clearly display the results, and
enable a comparison of all twenty schools, through meaningful tables and charts.
In addition, the content posted on each school’s Facebook and Twitter pages by
administrators was classified into eight specific categories, defined by the type of message
being conveyed, and recorded onto an Excel spreadsheet. This sorting allowed posted content
to be better visualized, as well as a subsequent quantitative analysis to be performed. The
eight categories determined and their definitions are exhibited below in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1. – Eight Types of Content Communicated
Type of Content
Communicated
Description
1. Social Activities Social Activities describe extracurricular affairs including events
planned by students or members of the public that may interest the
online academic community. They can occur during school hours or
after, but usually have some relation to the school or its affiliates.
2. Administrative
Issues
Administrative Issues refer to topics such as changes in faculty,
staff, or procedures related to the school or SNS page that may
affect users. This could include information about technical
difficulties experienced, upcoming student surveys, or changes to
the general administration of the SNS page as a whole.
61
Table 5.1 cont.
3. Academic Issues Academic Issues pertain to subject matters directly related students
and the current school year. Be it reminders about registration,
paying for classes, changes in class schedules, or details about
exams, content classified in this category is generally directed
towards current students rather than future ones, alumni, or
faculty/staff.
4. Organized
Activities
The Organized Activities category groups wall posts and tweets that
contain information announcing occasions planned by
administrators, faculty and staff members, or students that is
directly affiliated with the University. These activities usually take
place on campus during school hours, but they may be hosted off-
campus during after-class hours as well. This category differs from
the ―Social Activities‖ category because it is more official, and
relates more directly to school business.
5. Economic News Economic News catalogs posted content revolving around current
events and business papers, both within the Academic community
and outside of as well in private and commercial enterprises, that
relate to commerce and trade. Sometimes, these are reports written
by university professors and other times, they are links to outside
news stories, however they are always business-related.
6. Program News The Program News category describes current affairs and events
directly relating to the current International MBA class of each
particular business school. If information was considered to be a
part of this category as well as another one of the eight, the posting
was logged into this grouping rather than the other.
62
Table 5.1 cont.
7. School News School News, as opposed to Program News, refers to content posted
relating to the entire business school of each particular university.
This could be information like the honoring of a faculty member or
student regarding academic honors, the construction of a new
building, or the hosting of a guest professor from another
institution. Nevertheless, School News is broader than Program
News, and more general in nature.
8. Alumni Information Alumni Information pertains to subject matter associated with
announcements or stories related to school alumni and their affairs.
This can range from on-campus events where alumni will be guests
to general news involving alumni, including sponsored events or job
opportunities for students.
(Source: Own elaboration)
5.2.2. Quantitative analysis
For each of the twenty test subjects, matching quantitative analyses were also
performed. By tallying the number of wall-posts per week in each of the eight categories for
each of the twenty test subjects’ Facebook and Twitter pages, and classifying those posts into
the eight predetermined categories (Table 4.1.), trends in usage and communication patterns
that were previously unrecognizable became apparent. Also, by calculating the average
number of wall posts per week, a better understanding of which schools were most active on
their respective accounts was gleaned.
In addition, the amount of users on each of the schools’ Facebook and Twitter pages
was recorded weekly in order to gain additional insights into how many people were actually
being reached by these communications, and utilizing these social networks in ways that
brought value to both users and administrators alike. While only the final numbers from week
63
4 are presented, the week-to-week changes can be found in the corresponding data charts in
the Appendix.
5.3. Research Findings
The research findings of this study are important because they help to define the current
state-of-the-art concerning the utilization of the top two SNS’s in the U.S. (FB and Twitter)
in university marketing strategies by the top twenty IMBA programs in America. While the
population sample for the study and the choice to use only the top two SNS’s could be
considered somewhat narrow, the goal was observe a distinct and highly specialized segment
of the academic world, and form empirical conclusions that were predominantly absent in the
education community and corresponding literature previously. By focusing the scope of the
project, the subsequent findings allowed for a greater detailed picture to be painted about how
post-graduate business schools in the U.S. are utilizing SNS’s in their university marketing
strategies, than if the test subjects would have been different types of schools from different
countries employing different SNS’s.
Below, a summation of the results of both the qualitative and quantitative analyses of all
twenty test subjects’ official academic Facebook and Twitter pages are presented, along with
brief descriptions explaining some of the causes as well as implications of these findings. The
data collected and the corresponding graphical models constructed from that data is found
directly following the conclusion of this Master’s Thesis, in the Appendices section.
64
5.3.1. Research findings - Facebook
The qualitative analysis of the twenty test subjects’ official academic Facebook pages
began with determining whether or not the organizations even utilized Facebook for
academic reasons, and if so, which of the nine tools and services (Figure 2.1.). This data is
reflected below in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2. – Qualitative Analysis Results - Facebook
Source: Based on Facebook - Qualitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
In fact, nineteen out of the twenty test subjects had a current Facebook user profile
directly affiliated with their business school, with New York University’s Stern School of
Business, number seven on the top twenty list, being the only school not to. Above, Table
5.2. exhibits which of the nine tool and services referenced above are used by each of the
twenty universities, as well as the language options offered on their pages. Many of the
subjects’ Facebook pages were fairly standardized, employing most of the nine tools and
services cited, and only offering their communications in English. Also, While The
University of South Carolina’s Moore School of Business did have an official academic
Facebook page, however they did not post content regularly and failed to employ any of the
tools or services that have been mentioned throughout this paper.
TOP 20 U.S. IMBA PROGRAMS
USER
PROFILE
NEWS-
FEED
MESSAGE
BOARD CHATTING EMAIL PICTURES VIDEO SKYPE TOOLS ENGLISH SPANISH OTHER
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES NO YES NO NO
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) YES NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES NO NO
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
4. Duke University (Fuqua) YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross) YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
6. Harvard University YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
7. New York University (Stern) NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
8. Columbia University YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
9. University of Southern California - Marshall YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
11. University of Chicago (Booth) YES NO YES NO NO NO NO NO NO YES NO NO
12. Michigan State University (Broad) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
13. Stanford University YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
17. St. Louis University (Cook) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS RESULTS - FACEBOOK
65
For the quantitative analysis of the twenty subjects’ official academic Facebook pages,
the number of users per institution at the completion of the study was recorded, along with
the average number of wall posts per week. In addition, each wall post recorded was
classified into one of the eight types of content categories discussed earlier (Table 5.1.).
These calculations helped to form strong conclusions about the amount of use each of these
pages were generating, observing the administrative, as well as user side of these pages, and
revealed the most common types of content communicated by the twenty business schools.
The results of the number of users per institution, the average number of wall posts per week,
and the classifications by type of content communicated are illustrated below in Figures 5.1.
and 5.2., and Table 5.3., respectively.
Figure 5.1. – Facebook – Number of Users Per Institution
Source: Based on Facebook - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
8,113
251
16,120
4,513
4,927
17,164
0
7,380
4,100
9,625
1,470
778
5,437
4,578
2,445
3,049
7,097
1,831
279
1,953
Facebook - Number of Users Per Institution
66
The Harvard School of Business, number six on the top twenty list, had the largest online
community, with 17,164 users. The University of South Carolina’s Moore School of
Business, test subject number two, had the least amount of users, with 251 online ―friends.‖
Figure 5.2. – Facebook - Average Wallposts Per Week
Source: Based on Facebook - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
The University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, number three on the list,
averaged the highest number of wall posts per week, with 21. Number twelve on the Top
Twenty list, Michigan State University’s Broad School of Business logged the least amount
of average weekly wall posts with zero.
0
5
10
15
20
25
4
1
21
16
45
0
6
2
6
9
0
2 3
1
4 4 4
3
6
Facebook - Average Wallposts Per Week
67
Table 5.3. – Quantitative Analysis Results - Facebook
Source: Based on Facebook - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
Table 5.4. – Frequency of Types of Content Communicated - Facebook
Type of Content
Communicated
Avg. # Wall
post/week
Number of Schools
posting
Final Ranking
Social Activities 13.25 11 5
Administrative Issues 1 2 8
Academic Issues 4 5 6
Organized Activities 14.5 12 4
Economic News 25.5 17 1
Program News 23.5 16 2
School News 16.75 19 3
Alumni Information 2.5 5 7
Source: Based on Facebook - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
As Tables 5.3. and 5.4. above illustrate, Economic News was the most widely posted type of
content with an average of 25.5 wall postings per week across 17 schools. The second most
TOP 20 U.S. IMBA PROGRAMS Week#
Social
Activities
Admin.
Issues
Academic
Issues
Organized
Activities
Economic
News
Program
News
School
News
Alumni
Info
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management 1-4 1.25 - - 1.00 0.50 0.75 0.50 -
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) 1-4 - - - - - - 0.50 -
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 1-4 3.00 0.75 1.00 4.00 3.75 3.50 3.25 1.25
4. Duke University (Fuqua) 1-4 3.25 0.25 1.25 3.50 4.00 3.50 1.75 0.25
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross) 1-4 - - - - 1.25 1.50 1.50 -
6. Harvard University 1-4 - - 0.75 0.25 1.50 1.75 0.25 -
7. New York University (Stern) 1-4 - - - - - - - -
8. Columbia University 1-4 1.00 - 0.50 1.00 1.75 1.25 0.25 0.25
9. University of Southern California - Marshall 1-4 - - - 0.50 0.75 0.75 0.25 -
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas) 1-4 0.75 - 0.50 1.25 2.00 1.25 0.50 -
11. University of Chicago (Booth) 1-4 1.00 - - 1.50 2.25 2.50 1.75 -
12. Michigan State University (Broad) 1-4 - - - - - - 0.25 -
13. Stanford University 1-4 - - - - 0.50 1.00 0.50 -
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) 1-4 - - - - 1.25 1.00 0.50 0.25
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) 1-4 - - - - 0.25 - 0.50 -
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) 1-4 0.25 - - 0.50 1.25 1.25 0.50 -
17. St. Louis University (Cook) 1-4 0.75 - - 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.25 0.50
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) 1-4 0.50 - - 0.25 0.75 1.00 1.75 -
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) 1-4 1.00 - - 0.25 0.75 0.75 0.25 -
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) 1-4 0.50 - - - 2.25 0.75 1.75 -
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS RESULTS - FACEBOOK
68
communicated type of content amongst the twenty test subjects was Program News, with
23.5 average wall posts per week by 16 of the IMBA programs. School News came in third in
terms of frequency posted, with an average of 16.75 postings per week by 19 of the schools.
Organized Activities and Social Activities came in at fourth and fifth place as the next
greatest categories in terms of amount of average content posted per week, respectively,
followed by Academic Issues and Alumni Information in the sixth and seventh positions.
Administrative Issues were the type of content least communicated by the twenty IMBA
programs, with only 1 average weekly wall postings per week by two schools.
Also, The University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business and Duke
University’s Fuqua School of Business were the only two schools out of the twenty test
subjects to consistently communicate all of the eight types of content on a weekly basis. This
demonstrates a strong understanding of how to use SNS’s for academic reasons, and is worth
noting.
5.3.2. Research findings - Twitter
The qualitative analysis of the twenty test subjects’ official academic Twitter pages also
began with determining whether or not the organizations utilized the service for academic
reasons, and if so, which of the nine tools and services (Figure 2.1). This data is reflected
below in Table 5.5.
69
Table 5.5. – Qualitative Analysis Results - Twitter
Source: Based on Twitter - Qualitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
While nearly all of the IMBA programs observed utilized Twitter’s services, with
eighteen out of the twenty test subjects employing official academic Twitter pages, the
number was slightly smaller than the amount of official academic Facebook pages examined
previously, which was nineteen. The two schools out of the twenty test subjects not to use
Twitter’s services were The University of South Carolina’s Moore School of Business and
Columbia University’s School of Business. Aside from those two schools, the majority of the
Twitter pages observed were relatively standardized, utilizing a user profiles, newsfeeds,
message boards, and Pictures. In addition, similar to the nineteen Facebook pages examined,
all communications were in English, with no other language capabilities. Also, not a single
official academic Twitter page implemented a single additional tool, application, or widget
for enhanced usability.
For the quantitative analysis of the twenty subjects’ official academic Twitter pages,
identical measures as the ones utilized to analyze the schools’ Facebook pages were
implemented, and the number of users per institution at the completion of the study was
recorded, along with the average number of wall posts per week. Again, each wall post
TOP 20 U.S. IMBA PROGRAMS
USER
PROFILE
NEWS-
FEED
MESSAGE
BOARD CHATTING EMAIL PICTURES VIDEO SKYPE TOOLS ENGLISH SPANISH OTHER
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) NO YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
4. Duke University (Fuqua) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
6. Harvard University YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
7. New York University (Stern) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
8. Columbia University NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
9. University of Southern California - Marshall YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
11. University of Chicago (Booth) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
12. Michigan State University (Broad) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
13. Stanford University YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
17. St. Louis University (Cook) YES YES YES NO NO NO NO NO NO YES NO NO
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) YES YES YES NO NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) YES YES YES NO NO NO NO NO NO YES NO NO
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS RESULTS - TWITTER
70
recorded was classified into one of the eight types of content categories discussed earlier
(Table 4.1). These calculations were essential in developing clear conclusions about the
frequency and type of use these pages were generating. The results of the number of users per
institution, the average number of wall posts per week, and the classifications by type of
content communicated are illustrated below in Figures 5.3. and 5.4., and Table 5.6.,
respectively.
Figure 5.3. – Twitter – Number of Users Per Institution
Source: Based on Twitter - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
The University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, number three on the top
twenty list, had the most amount of users on its Twitter page, with 15,923 followers. The
University of South Carolina’s Moore School of Business and Columbia University’s School
of Business had the least amount of followers, both logging in zero.
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
4,112
0
15,923
2,367303
14,147
6600
812
8,234
2,553
891
6,989
1,239767
5,558
1,419
8,146
2,446
3,610
Twitter - Number of Users Per Institution
71
Figure 5.4. – Twitter - Average Wallposts Per Week
Source: Based on Twitter - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
St. Louis University’s Cook School of Business, test subject seventeen, registered the
most amounts of wall posts per week with an average of thirty-eight, followed closely by the
number one school, The Thunderbird School of Global Management, with thirty six postings.
Test subject numbers two, eight, and nine, The University of South Carolina’s Moore School
of Business, Columbia University’s School of Business, and the University of Southern
California at Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, respectively, registered the lowest average
wall posts per week, all with zero posts, followed by Michigan State’s Broad School of
Business, test subject twelve, and Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business,
test subject fifteen, each with one average posting per week.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40 36
0
16 15
17
7 5
0 0
18 16
1
2
16
1
21
38
1413
3
Twitter - Average Wallposts Per Week
72
Table 5.6. – Quantitative Analysis Results - Twitter
Source: Based on Twitter - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
Table 5.7. - Frequency of Types of Content Communicated - Twitter
Type of Content
Communicated
Avg. # Wall
post/week
Number of Schools
posting
Final Ranking of
Types of Content
Social Activities 29.75 14 4
Administrative Issues 4.25 6 8
Academic Issues 4.25 5 7
Organized Activities 48.75 13 2
Economic News 69.75 15 1
Program News 47.75 17 3
School News 23.75 18 5
Alumni Information 6.75 10 6
Source: Based on Twitter - Quantitative Analysis - Data Chart (Appendix)
TOP 20 U.S. IMBA PROGRAMS Week#
Social
Activities
Admin.
Issues
Academic
Issues
Organized
Activities
Economic
News
Program
News
School
News
Alumni
Info
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management 1-4 4.50 0.50 0.25 7.25 9.75 8.00 4.25 1.50
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) 1-4 - - - - - - - -
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 1-4 3.00 1.00 1.25 3.50 4.50 2.00 1.50 0.50
4. Duke University (Fuqua) 1-4 1.75 1.00 1.25 2.00 4.75 3.25 0.50 -
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross) 1-4 2.25 0.25 1.25 3.50 4.00 3.50 2.00 0.25
6. Harvard University 1-4 0.75 0.25 0.25 1.50 2.00 1.75 0.25 -
7. New York University (Stern) 1-4 0.25 - - - 3.25 1.25 0.25 -
8. Columbia University 1-4 - - - - - - - -
9. University of Southern California - Marshall 1-4 - - - - - - 0.25 -
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas) 1-4 2.50 - - 4.00 5.00 4.00 0.75 0.25
11. University of Chicago (Booth) 1-4 0.75 1.25 - 6.25 2.50 4.75 0.75 0.25
12. Michigan State University (Broad) 1-4 - - - - - 0.25 0.50 -
13. Stanford University 1-4 0.25 - - - - 0.75 0.50 0.25
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) 1-4 2.50 - - 1.75 8.00 1.75 1.25 -
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) 1-4 - - - - 0.25 0.25 0.25 -
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) 1-4 4.50 - - 4.75 6.25 0.50 4.00 0.50
17. St. Louis University (Cook) 1-4 4.25 - - 8.25 8.25 7.50 3.75 2.25
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) 1-4 1.50 - - 2.50 5.50 4.25 0.50 -
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) 1-4 1.00 - - 2.00 4.25 3.50 1.75 0.75
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) 1-4 - - - 0.25 1.50 0.50 0.75 0.25
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS RESULTS - TWITTER
73
As tables 5.6 and 5.7 illustrate above, Economic News was again the most widely posted
type of content with an average of 69.75 wall postings per week across 15 schools, more than
double that observed throughout the twenty Facebook pages. The second most communicated
type of content amongst the twenty test subjects was Organized Activities, with 48.75
average wall posts per week by 13 of the IMBA programs. Program News came in third in
terms of frequency posted, with an average of 47.75 postings per week by 17 of the schools.
Social Activities and School News came in at fourth and fifth place as the next greatest
categories in terms of amount of average content posted per week, respectively, followed by
Alumni Information and Academic Issues in the sixth and seventh positions. Again,
Administrative Issues were the type of content least communicated by the twenty IMBA
programs, with only 4.25 average weekly wall postings per week by six schools.
There were five schools out of the twenty test subjects to consistently communicate all of
the eight types of content on a weekly basis. They were test subjects one, three, four, five,
and six. This once again demonstrates a strong understanding of how to use SNS’s for
academic reasons, and is worth mentioning.
5.4. Timing and Budgeting
For the most part, the cost-benefit relationships relating to the timing and budgeting
options for these proposals are quite attractive, and advantageous to both the users and
administrators of academic SNS pages. Pragmatic and easily manageable, the models below
illustrate the required amount of time and money necessary for properly managing an
academic Facebook and Twitter page for one month. This information can be further used to
calculate the time and cost constraints for a university for one semester, a full school year, or
year-around upkeep.
74
5.4.1. Timing and budgeting for academic Facebook/Twitter page (August 15th
, 2011
– September 11th
, 2011)
Below is a Gant Chart representing the timing and budgeting constraints for one month of
maintenance of an academic Facebook or Twitter page. The chart is divided into 5 categories;
ID number, week number, task name, predecessors, and duration of activity per week. The ID
Number classifies the various tasks by number, as well as designates a color for that
particular task on the chart. The Week # indicates in which week the particular task will
occur in. The Task Name gives a description of the task. Next, Predecessors identifies other
tasks that must occur before that task can take place. Finally, Duration/week signifies the
number of hours per week that is necessary to complete the task.
Figure 5.5. - Timing and budgeting constraints for one month of maintenance of an academic
Facebook or Twitter page
ID Week # Task Name Predecessors Duration/week
1 – Lt. Blue 1,2,3,4 Brainstorm
communication
strategy
N/A 2 hours
2 – Blue 1,2,3,4 Post content 1 1.5 hours
3 – Dark blue 1,2,3,4 Review
responses to
content
1 1.5 hours
4 – Green 2,4 Survey users 1,2,3 2 hours
5 – Red 1,3 Read SNS
Literature/News
1 2 hours
6 - Purple 4 Focus group 1,2,3,4 3 hours
75
(Source: Own elaboration)
To find the total cost of maintaining an academic Facebook or Twitter page, one must first
calculate the durations/activity for one month, add those numbers together, then multiply this
number by the average hourly wage of an IT professional, usually around $20/hr. This
calculation can be seen below. Note, the total monthly cost would be cheaper if maintained
by an intern or serviced less regularly.
Total monthly cost for maintaining an academic Facebook or Twitter page:
=∑(duration/activity) x (Avg. hourly salary of IT professional)
= {[8 hours (Brainstorm)] + [6 hours (Post content)] + [6 hours (Review content)] + [4 hours
(Survey users)] + [4 hours (Read SNS Lit.)] + [3 hours (Focus group)]} x (Avg. hourly salary
of IT professional)
= 31 hours x $20/hour
=$620/month
76
The total monthly cost for maintaining an academic Facebook or Twitter page is $620.
Compared with the amount of potential value to be gained from the utilization of either one
of these sites, the number is extremely low. Again, the total costs could be lowered further by
hiring an intern to maintain the site or curtailing the number of hours spent servicing the site
per week. Nevertheless, the total is a recurring monthly fee, rather than a one-time expense,
and must be expanded even further for additional SNS’s.
5.5. Control and Evaluation Process
For the control and evaluation processes, a number of possibilities and opportunities
exists for administrators to help keep official academic SNS pages relevant and useful
including; user surveys, student and faculty focus groups, researching contemporary literature
on associated topics, and regular monitoring similar to some of the procedures performed in
this research study including basic content analysis. The Gantt chart above includes all of
these methods, and reveals the relative simplicity of controlling and evaluating academic
SNS pages. These measures are described below in Figure 5.8.
77
Table 5.8. – Control and Evaluation Processes
Control and Evaluation Processes Description
1. User surveys User surveys can be done electronically through
email, or linked directly on schools SNS pages.
They can include predetermined questions, as well
as provide opportunities for open-ended
responses. A reasonable amount of time should be
allotted for users to form opinions on usage before
user surveys are distributed in order to ensure
accurate and meaningful replies.
2. Student/Faculty Focus Groups Student/Faculty Focus Groups are similar to User
Surveys in that they ask for users opinions on
content and delivery. Unlike User Surveys, they
are normally done face-to-face rather than through
electronic means, and are even more open-ended
allowing individuals to explain and elaborate on
their praises and critiques.
3. Researching contemporary literature Researching contemporary literature is important
because it is essential to know the current state-of-
the-art of SNS’s and this is done by observing
how individuals throughout other industries utilize
these services.
4. Regular monitoring Regular monitoring is an easy, yet essential
control and evaluation process of SNS’s. It is
normally done by simply observing ones own site
as well as a number of competitors, and
comparing various attributes.
78
6. CONCLUSION
Chapter five concludes this Master Thesis by summarizing the end results of the
study, as well as reckoning with the original research propositions suggested at the end of the
Literature Review. In addition, the final managerial implications of this study are presented
and some of the limitations of SNS’s, as well as further research opportunities into the
subject.
6.1. Conclusions
From the twenty IMBA programs observed between the month of August 15th
, 2011 –
September 15th
, 2011, it is valid to assert that Social Networking Sites have already
penetrated the academic community, and are being recognized as valid marketing
communication tools in University Marketing strategies. This is best evidenced by the fact
that nineteen out of the twenty test subjects monitored utilized the SNS Facebook’s services
in some manner or capacity, and eighteen out of the twenty test subjects employed the SNS
Twitter. However, this is not surprising considering some of the theoretical models discussed
in chapter two’s Literature Review such as electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) and Social
Commerce
Electronic Word-of-Mouth (e-WOM) and Social Commerce are powerful forces that
are increasingly putting pressure on vendors and consumers alike to constantly reinvent the
way we communicate with each other, and participate in various forms of trade. They were
conceived out of similar, more antiquated ideas (Word-of-Mouth and Social Media
Marketing) and have evolved into two of the premier theories associated with online
advertising. Nevertheless, in recent years implementing the two theories has proven to be
more of an art than a science, and the scientific research necessary to fully exploit these
concepts has yet to be completed leaving large gaps in understanding across many industries.
79
This paper propounds that the academic community, specifically that of higher
education institutions like the top twenty IMBA programs in the U.S. observed in the study,
make up one of those industries that has yet to realize the full potential of their online
capabilities, and have great opportunities for growth through the use of SNS’s in their
University Marketing strategies.
Below, the original research propositions area again presented, and final conclusions
as to their validity or illegitimacy.
RP1: Social Media Marketing (SMM) is an important and essential component for
academic institutions’ University Marketing strategies in the U.S.
This proposition is correct, but needs to be reexamined. While it is true that SMM is
an important and essential component for academic institutions’ University Marketing
strategies in the U.S., this concept has developed into the more detailed theory of Social
Commerce, intended to address many of the perceived shortcomings of its predecessor.
Social Commerce allows for a much wider availability of services on both the user and
administrative side as well as permits a much higher level of accountability and control.
Indeed, while SMM is certainly the forerunner to much of the online activity being done with
advertising and sales, Social Commerce is the new paradigm for the Web, and should be
granted the most focus and attention.
RP2: SNS’s are valuable instruments in Social Commerce, and should be adopted as a
customary and respected marketing communication tool by higher learning institutions.
This statement is absolutely true, and essentially sums up everything observed in this
study. While the use of SNS’s in University Marketing Strategies is still in its infancy and
80
fails to fully exploit several of the key advantages gained through modern Social Commerce
techniques, chiefly the ability to buy goods and services online and in return exchange
currency electronically, much has been achieved in only a few short years, and the high
number of test subjects’ having academic Facebook and Twitter pages is evidence of this.
However, in order to maximize their potentials as valuable marketing communication tools,
universities need to fully understand SNS’s capabilities and implications, and unleash their
value to the market.
RP3: Using the unique value proposition of SNS’s, academic institutions can
communicate specialized messages to a large consumer base, effectively positioning
themselves to particular groups, and successfully build brand equity.
The third and final research proposition, while questionable before this study, must be
presented as completely valid, as indicated by the results of this project. The functional,
emotional, and self-expressive benefits that result from Social Commerce and electronic
Word-of-Mouth (e-WOM) communication is invaluable to many industries, and the academic
community is no question included. By positioning the institution towards the public,
segmenting target groups, and building brand equity through networking, universities have
much to gain through the implementation of SNS’s as online marketing communications, and
can also strengthen their University Marketing Strategies through innovation, uniqueness, and
diversification.
81
6.2. Managerial Implications and Further Research
6.2.1. Managerial implications
The managerial implications of these findings are sweeping, and are a true testament to
the realized, as well as unrealized, potentials of utilizing SNS’s in University Marketing
Strategies.
First, it must be advised that if a particular institution is not already implementing SNS’s
in some capacity in their business, they are already behind the competition, and should
immediately consider starting this practice.
Second, it is important that administrators reflect upon what their overall objectives are
for using SNS’s in their University Marketing Strategies, and which types of communicated
messages they feel will best attain these goals. If an SNS site does not have a clear and
focused message, it can bring about confusion in users, and eventual dismissal of its use.
Thirdly, it should be stated that the subject matters associated with contemporary SNS
use, especially in the academic fields, are fledgling and still in their early stages of
development. While much speculation and some evidence suggests that there is great
potential in utilizing SNS’s as an online marketing tool, every organization is different and
therefore utilizing these services should be prefaced with thorough research of the subject and
its relationship to different topics. Below is the suggested course of action for further research
into the subject of SNS’s and their application to various industries.
6.2.2. Further research
Further research is an absolute necessity for gaining the greatest levels of understanding
of SNS’s and their implications across various industries. Academic and scientific research
82
papers like this one are great resources for delving into the fundamentals of SNS’s, and offer
focused insights into their various features and applications. However, many do not have the
time or patience to sort through information like this, and most likely will end up running a
basic query through an online search engine of their choice. This being the case, a myriad of
articles relating to all types of nuances between services and their various functions will be
presented, all containing value, yet unorganized in their presentation and objectives. This
being the case, if one attempts to research further into the use of SNS’s in a particular field or
industry, it should be remembered that having a clear idea of one’s own personal objectives
will help in the search for clarity. Also, observing how competitors are using various services
can be a great tool in not only determining what one hopes to achieve, but also what they
know to be of disinterest, so as not to waste valuable time or resources.
7. REFERENCES
2010 social networking report. (2010). Experian, Retrieved from http://www.experian.com
(2011). Best international business schools. US News and World Report, Retrieved from
http://premium.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-business-schools/international-
business-rankings
About us. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.hitwise.com/us/about-us/
Babbie, E. (2010). The practice of social research. (12 ed., pp. 393-505). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Boyd, D.M., & Ellison, N.B. (2008). Social network sites: definition, history, and
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 210-230
Brown, J., Broderick, A.J., & Lee, N. (2007). Word of mouth communication within online
communities: conceptualizing the online social network. Journal of Interactive Marketing,
21(3), 2-17.
Chapleo, S., & Simms, S. (2010). Stakeholder analysis in higher education: a case study of
the university of Portsmouth. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 14(1),
12-20
Constantinides, E., & Stagno, M.C.Z. (2011). Potential of the social media as instruments of
higher education marketing: a segmentation study. Journal of Marketing for Higher
Education, 21(7), 7-24.
84
De Villiers, M.R. (2010). Academic us of a group on facebook: initial findings and
perceptions. Proceedings of the informing science and IT education conference (pp. 173-
189). Pretoria: Informing Science Institute.
Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of facebook ―friends:‖ social
capital and college student’s use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication, 12, 1143-1168.
Ft group|about us|. (2011). Retrieved from http://aboutus.ft.com/corporate-information/ft-
group/
Global mba rankings 2011. (2011, June 21). Retrieved from
http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/global-mba-rankings-2011
Heslop, L.A., & Nadeau, J. (2010). Branding mba programs; the use of target market desired
outcomes for effective brand positioning. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 20(1),
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08841241003788110
How teens use media: the Nielsen report on the myths and realities of teen media trends.
(2009). Nielsen, Retrieved from http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/
Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., & Tseng, B. (2007) Why we twitter: understanding
microblogging usage and communities. ACM Digital Library, doi:
10.1145/1348549.1348556
Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content Analysis; An Introduction to its Methodology. 88.
Marsden, P. (2010). Social Commerce: monetizing social media. Syzygy, Retreived from
http://www.syzygy.net/
85
Marsden, P. (2011). E-commerce: selling on facebook. Syzygy, Retrieved from
http://www.syzygy.net/
Okazaki, S. (2004). Does culture matter?: identifying cross-national dimensions in Japanese
multinationals’ product-based websites. Electronic Markets: The International Journal of
Networked Business, 1(14), Retrieved from http://www.electronicmarkets.org/articles doi:
10.1080/1019678042000175306
Okazaki, S. (2004). Do multinationals standardize or localize? The cross-cultural
dimensionality of product-based websites. Internet Research: Electronic Networking
Applications and Policy, 14(1), 81-94.
Okazaki, S. (2005). Searching the web for global brands: how American brands standardize
their website in europe. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1). Retrieved from
www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm doi:10.1108/03090560510572034
Palmer, A., & Koenig-Lewis, N. (2009). An experiential, social network-based approach to
direct marketing. Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 3(3), 162-176.
Pempek, T., Yermolayeva, Y. & Calvert, S. (2009). College students’ social networking
experiences on facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Pyschology, 30(3), 227-238.
Doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010
Pollach, l. (2006). Electronic word of mouth: a genre analysis of product reviews on
consumer opinion web sites. Proceedings of the 39th
Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences,
http://www.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hicss/2006/2507/03/250730051c.pdf
86
Roblyer, M.D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J.V. (2010). Findings on
facebook in high education: a comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions
of social networking sites. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 134-140.
Social networking website review. (2011). Retrieved from http://social-networking-websites-
review.toptenreviews.com/
Stewart, D.W., & Pavlou, P.A. (2002) From consumer response to active consumer:
measuring the effectivess of interactive media. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
30(4), 376-396
Swot analysis resource page. (2006). Informally published manuscript, Office of Academic
Affairs, Idaho State University, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Retrieved from
http://www.isu.edu/acadaff/swot/index.html
The global online media landscape: identifying opportunities in a challenging landscape.
(2009). Nielsen, Retrieved from http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/
Timm, D.M., & Duven, C.J. (2008). Privacy and social networking sites. Wiley Periodicals,
124. Retrieved from www.interscience.wiley.com doi: 10.1002/ss.297
Top 5 U.S. social networking sites – june 2011. (2011, June 18). Retrieved from http://r-
rwebdesign.com/blog/?p=1298
Top 10 websites. (2011, June 25). Retrieved from
http://www.hitwise.com/us/datacenter/main/dashboard-10133.html
Top 15 most popular social networking sites. (2011). Retrieved from
http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/social-networking-websites
87
Weisenfeld, D. (2009). Building great brands in the digital age: guidelines for developing
winning strategies. Nielsen, Retrieved from http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/
World internet usage statistics. (2011, March 31). Retrieved from
http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
8. APPENDICES
8.1. FACEBOOK – Qualitative Analysis Results – Data Charts
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 1 1 1 2 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 2 1
Organized Activities 0 2 1 1 Organized Activities 0 1 0 0
Economic News 1 1 0 0 Economic News 2 2 1 1
Program News 1 1 1 0 Program News 2 2 2 1
School News 1 1 0 0 School News 1 0 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 0 0
Economic News 0 0 0 0 Economic News 0 0 0 0
Program News 0 0 0 0 Program News 0 0 0 0
School News 0 0 0 2 School News 0 0 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 4 3 2 Social Activities 2 1 0 1
Administrative Issues 0 0 3 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 4 0 Academic Issues 0 0 1 1
Organized Activities 4 5 3 4 Organized Activities 2 0 1 1
Economic News 4 5 2 4 Economic News 2 2 1 2
Program News 4 5 2 3 Program News 1 2 1 1
School News 2 6 2 3 School News 0 0 1 0
Alumni Info 0 2 1 2 Alumni Info 0 0 1 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 5 2 3 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 1 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 3 2 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 4 5 2 3 Organized Activities 0 0 0 2
Economic News 4 7 3 2 Economic News 0 1 0 2
Program News 4 6 2 2 Program News 2 1 0 0
School News 2 4 1 0 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 1 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 0 2
Economic News 2 2 1 0 Economic News 0 1 0 2
Program News 2 0 1 3 Program News 2 1 0 0
School News 2 2 0 2 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management
2. University of South Carolina (Moore)
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton)
4. Duke University (Fuqua)
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross)
6. Harvard University
7. New York University (Stern)
8. Columbia University
9. University of Southern California - Marshall
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas)
U.S. IMBA Program Week # Users Wallposts
User
Profile Newsfeed
Message
Board Chatting Email Pictures Video Skype Tools English Spanish Other
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management 1 8012 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0
2 8050 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0
3 8113 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0
4 8113 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 8072 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) 1 207 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 228 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 250 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 251 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 234 0.5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 1 15998 17 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 16050 27 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 16096 20 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 16120 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 16066 20.5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4. Duke University (Fuqua) 1 4479 17 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 4497 19 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 4500 13 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 4513 14 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 4497.25 15.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross) 1 4899 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 4915 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 4920 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 4927 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 4915.25 4.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
6. Harvard University 1 17099 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 170126 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 17160 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 17164 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 55387.3 4.5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
7. New York University (Stern) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8. Columbia University 1 7300 7 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 7355 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 7380 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 7380 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 7353.75 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
9. University of Southern California - Marshall 1 4062 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 4079 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 4095 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 4100 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 4084 2.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas) 1 9061 7 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 9615 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 9619 8 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 9625 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 9480 6.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
LanguagesFeatures
89
U.S. IMBA Program Week # Users Wallposts
User
Profile Newsfeed
Message
Board Chatting Email Pictures Video Skype Tools English Spanish Other
11. University of Chicago (Booth) 1 1452 7 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 1468 7 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 1470 8 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 1470 15 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 1465 9.25 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
12. Michigan State University (Broad) 1 767 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 771 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 776 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 778 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 773 0.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
13. Stanford University 1 5420 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 5425 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 5437 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 5437 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 5429.75 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) 1 4542 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 4560 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 4570 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 4578 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 4562.5 3.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) 1 2428 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 2437 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 2445 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 2445 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 2438.75 0.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) 1 3035 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 3043 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 3049 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 3049 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 3044 3.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
17. St. Louis University (Cook) 1 7054 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 7068 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 7097 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 7097 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 7079 3.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) 1 1810 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 1819 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 1825 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 1831 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 1821.25 4.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) 1 264 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 269 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 275 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 279 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 271.75 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) 1 1928 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
2 1935 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 1943 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
4 1953 7 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 1939.75 5.5 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
LanguagesFeatures
90
8.2. Facebook – Quantitative Analysis Results – Data Charts
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 1 1 1 2 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 2 1
Organized Activities 0 2 1 1 Organized Activities 0 1 0 0
Economic News 1 1 0 0 Economic News 2 2 1 1
Program News 1 1 1 0 Program News 2 2 2 1
School News 1 1 0 0 School News 1 0 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 0 0
Economic News 0 0 0 0 Economic News 0 0 0 0
Program News 0 0 0 0 Program News 0 0 0 0
School News 0 0 0 2 School News 0 0 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 4 3 2 Social Activities 2 1 0 1
Administrative Issues 0 0 3 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 4 0 Academic Issues 0 0 1 1
Organized Activities 4 5 3 4 Organized Activities 2 0 1 1
Economic News 4 5 2 4 Economic News 2 2 1 2
Program News 4 5 2 3 Program News 1 2 1 1
School News 2 6 2 3 School News 0 0 1 0
Alumni Info 0 2 1 2 Alumni Info 0 0 1 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 5 2 3 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 1 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 3 2 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 4 5 2 3 Organized Activities 0 0 0 2
Economic News 4 7 3 2 Economic News 0 1 0 2
Program News 4 6 2 2 Program News 2 1 0 0
School News 2 4 1 0 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 1 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 0 2
Economic News 2 2 1 0 Economic News 0 1 0 2
Program News 2 0 1 3 Program News 2 1 0 0
School News 2 2 0 2 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management
2. University of South Carolina (Moore)
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton)
4. Duke University (Fuqua)
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross)
6. Harvard University
7. New York University (Stern)
8. Columbia University
9. University of Southern California - Marshall
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas)
91
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 1 1 0 2 Social Activities 1 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 1 2 3 Organized Activities 0 0 2 0
Economic News 2 1 2 4 Economic News 1 1 0 3
Program News 2 3 2 3 Program News 1 1 0 3
School News 2 1 2 2 School News 1 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 1 1 1 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 1 1
Economic News 0 0 0 0 Economic News 2 1 0 0
Program News 0 0 0 0 Program News 2 1 1 0
School News 0 1 0 0 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 2
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 1 1 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 1 0
Economic News 1 1 0 0 Economic News 2 1 0 0
Program News 1 1 0 2 Program News 2 1 1 0
School News 0 1 0 1 School News 0 1 3 3
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 1 0 0 3
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 1 0 0
Economic News 1 1 1 2 Economic News 1 1 0 1
Program News 1 0 1 2 Program News 1 1 1 0
School News 1 1 0 0 School News 0 0 1 0
Alumni Info 0 1 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 2 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 0 0
Economic News 1 0 0 0 Economic News 2 1 2 4
Program News 0 0 0 0 Program News 1 2 0 0
School News 0 1 1 0 School News 0 2 2 3
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg)
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley)
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck)
13. Stanford University
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson)
15. Georgetown University (McDonough)
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs)
17. St. Louis University (Cook)12. Michigan State University (Broad)
11. University of Chicago (Booth)
92
8.3. Twitter – Qualitative Analysis Results – Data Charts
TWITTER Features Languages
U.S. IMBA Program Week# # Users Tweets
User
Profile Newsfeed
Message
Board Chatting Email Pictures Video Skype Tools English Spanish Other
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management 1 4096 37 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 4115 33 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 4118 32 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 4118 42 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 4111.75 36 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2. University of South Carolina (Moore) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 1 15889 17 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 15907 16 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 15920 15 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 15975 17 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 15922.75 16.25 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4. Duke University (Fuqua) 1 2335 15 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 2363 17 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 2370 16 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 2399 13 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 2366.75 15.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross) 1 299 16 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 303 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 305 16 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 305 17 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 303 16.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
6. Harvard University 1 14138 7 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 14144 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 14150 6 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 14156 9 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 14147 6.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
7. New York University (Stern) 1 651 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 658 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 666 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 666 10 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 660.25 5.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
8. Columbia University 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9. University of Southern California - Marshall 1 808 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 811 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 813 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 814 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 811.5 0.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas) 1 8217 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 8236 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 8240 20 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 8243 14 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 8234 17.5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
93
TWITTER Features Languages
11. University of Chicago (Booth) 1 2535 15 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 2548 16 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 2560 14 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 2568 20 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 2552.75 16.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
12. Michigan State University (Broad) 1 886 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 889 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 890 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 897 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 890.5 0.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
13. Stanford University 1 6985 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 6990 3 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 6991 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 6991 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 6989.25 1.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson) 1 1236 15 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 1240 16 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 1240 13 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 1240 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 1239 15.5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
15. Georgetown University (McDonough) 1 758 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 766 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 770 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 772 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 766.5 0.75 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs) 1 5546 16 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 5558 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 5560 12 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 5566 36 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 5557.5 20.5 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
17. St. Louis University (Cook) 1 1409 38 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 1417 29 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 1420 35 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 1429 48 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 1418.75 37.5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg) 1 6637 14 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 6644 17 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 9650 15 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 9652 11 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 8145.75 14.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley) 1 2430 11 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 2438 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 2455 14 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 2460 10 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 2445.75 13.25 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck) 1 3607 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 3609 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 3610 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 3612 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE: 3609.5 3.25 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
94
8.4. Twitter - Quantitative Analysis Results – Data Charts
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 3 5 7 Social Activities 0 0 1 2
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 2 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 1
Academic Issues 0 0 0 1 Academic Issues 0 0 0 1
Organized Activities 10 8 5 6 Organized Activities 2 0 2 2
Economic News 9 8 10 12 Economic News 3 1 2 2
Program News 9 10 5 8 Program News 2 3 1 1
School News 6 4 2 5 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 5 1 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 1 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 0 0 0 0
Economic News 0 0 0 0 Economic News 2 1 3 7
Program News 0 0 0 0 Program News 2 1 0 2
School News 0 0 0 0 School News 0 1 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 2 3 4 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 2 2 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 2 3 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 5 3 4 2 Organized Activities 0 0 0 0
Economic News 6 6 3 3 Economic News 0 0 0 0
Program News 2 3 2 1 Program News 0 0 0 0
School News 1 2 2 1 School News 0 0 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 1 1 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 2 2 1 2 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 2 2 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 3 2 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 2 3 2 1 Organized Activities 0 0 0 0
Economic News 6 7 4 2 Economic News 0 0 0 0
Program News 4 4 2 3 Program News 0 0 0 0
School News 0 1 0 1 School News 1 0 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 3 2 1 Social Activities 3 2 3 2
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 1 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 2 3 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 3 4 3 4 Organized Activities 4 5 3 4
Economic News 4 4 4 4 Economic News 5 6 5 4
Program News 3 3 4 4 Program News 5 2 5 4
School News 3 4 1 0 School News 1 2 0 0
Alumni Info 0 0 1 0 Alumni Info 0 1 0 0
1. Thunderbird School of Global Management
2. University of South Carolina (Moore)
3. University of Pennsylvania (Wharton)
4. Duke University (Fuqua)
5. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (Ross)
6. Harvard University
7. New York University (Stern)
8. Columbia University
9. University of Southern California - Marshall
10. University of California – Berkeley (Haas)
95
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 1 2 0 0 Social Activities 4 4 5 5
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 5 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 5 4 7 9 Organized Activities 5 4 3 7
Economic News 4 6 0 0 Economic News 6 8 3 8
Program News 4 3 7 5 Program News 1 0 0 1
School News 1 2 0 0 School News 0 2 0 14
Alumni Info 0 0 0 1 Alumni Info 0 0 1 1
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 6 2 4 5
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 8 7 9 9
Economic News 0 0 0 0 Economic News 9 8 8 8
Program News 0 1 0 0 Program News 8 9 7 6
School News 1 0 0 1 School News 4 2 4 5
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 3 1 3 2
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 1 0 0 Social Activities 2 1 2 1
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 2 3 2 3
Economic News 0 0 0 0 Economic News 5 6 6 5
Program News 1 1 0 1 Program News 5 6 4 2
School News 1 1 0 0 School News 0 1 1 0
Alumni Info 0 0 1 0 Alumni Info 0 0 0 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 3 1 2 4 Social Activities 1 3 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 4 3 0 0 Organized Activities 3 3 1 1
Economic News 4 6 10 12 Economic News 4 4 4 5
Program News 3 3 1 0 Program News 2 4 4 4
School News 2 3 0 0 School News 1 3 3 0
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 1 2 0
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
Social Activities 0 0 0 0 Social Activities 0 0 0 0
Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0 Administrative Issues 0 0 0 0
Academic Issues 0 0 0 0 Academic Issues 0 0 0 0
Organized Activities 0 0 0 0 Organized Activities 1 0 0 0
Economic News 0 1 0 0 Economic News 1 1 2 2
Program News 1 0 0 0 Program News 1 1 0 0
School News 0 0 0 1 School News 0 1 0 2
Alumni Info 0 0 0 0 Alumni Info 0 0 1 0
12. Michigan State University (Broad)
11. University of Chicago (Booth)
19. Indiana University—Bloomington (Kelley)
20. Dartmouth College (Tuck)
13. Stanford University
14. University of California—Los Angeles (Anderson)
15. Georgetown University (McDonough)
16. University of Texas—Austin (McCombs)
17. St. Louis University (Cook)
18. Northwestern University (Kellogg)
