1 / 41

Awareness and Evaluation of K-State Research and Extension

Awareness and Evaluation of K-State Research and Extension. Summer 2007 Telephone Survey Results Department of Communications Presented by Pat Melgares. Five Year Marketing Plan (2006-2010) Target marketing. Why are we doing this?. Randomized digit dialing Survey Research Center (KU)

gnicholas
Download Presentation

Awareness and Evaluation of K-State Research and Extension

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Awareness and Evaluation ofK-State Research and Extension Summer 2007 Telephone Survey Results Department of Communications Presented by Pat Melgares

  2. Five Year Marketing Plan (2006-2010) Target marketing Why are we doing this?

  3. Randomized digit dialing Survey Research Center (KU) All Kansas adults (age 18-older) Evening phone calls (June/July) Goal: 500 response Methods

  4. 512 responses (26.4 percent) 95% confidence level +/- 4% margin of error Results

  5. Respondents expressed a stronger awareness of “Extension” compared to KAES, CES or KSRE Results

  6. Number and percentage of respondents who said they had heard of the organization, by related names: N = 512

  7. 71% associated this system with Kansas State University Results

  8. This system is associated with a university in the state of Kansas. Which university do you think that is? N = 512

  9. Information is perceived to be credible Results

  10. Would you consider information from K-State Research and Extension to be very credible, somewhat credible, or not credible? N = 512

  11. Service is perceived to be important in the state of Kansas Results

  12. In your opinion, is it very important, somewhat important, or not important to maintain this type of service in the state of Kansas? N = 512

  13. Do you approve, strongly approve, neither approve nor disapprove, disapprove, or strongly disapprove of spending public funds to support this program? N = 512

  14. All areas of service are considered high interest among respondents Results

  15. Number and percentage of respondents who said they are very or somewhat interested in selected topic areas: N = 512

  16. Internet/computer usage is high; awareness of KSRE Web site is low Results

  17. How often do you use the Internet for any purpose? N = 512

  18. Awareness of K-State Research and Extension Web site, or local county Web site N = 512

  19. Information channels rated as effective or very effective ways to provide Kansas citizens with information on topics that they are interested in. N = 512

  20. Information ChannelsYoung adults (ages 24-44)Internet, TV, public places, brochures/reports, newsletters Results

  21. Information channels: Young Adults (ages 24-44) N = 122

  22. Information ChannelsCurrent UsersNewspapers, TV, brochures/reports, presentations/seminars, telephone, public places, newsletters Results

  23. Information channels: Current Users N = 152

  24. Information ChannelsNon-UsersNewspapers, TV, public places, newsletters Results

  25. Information channels: Non-Users N = 360

  26. Information ChannelsMetro ResidentsInternet, radio, telephone, public places Results

  27. Information channels: Metro Residents N = 122

  28. Information ChannelsSuburban ResidentsInternet, newspapers, radio, TV, public places Results

  29. Information channels: Suburban Residents N = 171

  30. Information ChannelsRural ResidentsNewspapers, TV, brochures/reports, public places, newsletters Results

  31. Information channels: Rural Residents N = 162

  32. Information ChannelsLeast effectiveVideotapes, courses/classes*(moderately effective for Current Users) Results

  33. Web technologiesMinimal familiarity, mostly blogs, discussion boards, and chat roomsHigher overall among men than women. Results

  34. Mean scores for respondents’ familiarity with common or emerging Web technologies. SCALE: 1 – Completely unfamiliar; 3 – Somewhat familiar;5 – Very familiar with the technology and have used it.

  35. Focus groups (metro areas) Web address survey Additional research

  36. County Web Addresses SCALE: 1 – Strongly dislike it; 2 – Dislike it; 3 – Neither Like or Dislike it; 4 – Like it; 5 – Strongly like it.

  37. County Web Addresses SCALE: 1 – Strongly dislike it; 2 – Dislike it; 3 – Neither Like or Dislike it; 4 – Like it; 5 – Strongly like it.

  38. KSRE Web Addresses SCALE: 1 – Strongly dislike it; 2 – Dislike it; 3 – Neither Like or Dislike it; 4 – Like it; 5 – Strongly like it.

  39. KSRE Web Addresses SCALE: 1 – Strongly dislike it; 2 – Dislike it; 3 – Neither Like or Dislike it; 4 – Like it; 5 – Strongly like it.

  40. What’s Next? Market Research

  41. Questions

More Related