1 / 17

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST? THE REBRANDING OF WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST? THE REBRANDING OF WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION. James M. Owston American Association University Administrators 2008 Assembly. Rebrandings 1996-2005 By percentage. College-to-University 1996-2005 By percentage. Populations of the study.

verdi
Download Presentation

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST? THE REBRANDING OF WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION

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. SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST? THE REBRANDING OF WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION James M. Owston American Association University Administrators 2008 Assembly

  2. Rebrandings 1996-2005 By percentage

  3. College-to-University 1996-2005By percentage

  4. Populations of the study 11 West Virginia Institutions 51 Institutions in and surrounding Appalachia 103 Institutions nationwide (1996-2001) 6 Institutions using a similar brand name - Allegheny

  5. Method • Mixed method approach • Quantitative • Qualitative • Historical • Naturalistic observation • Interviews • Postmodern theoretical perspective • Atypical dissertation model

  6. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 1: What factors precipitated the “college-to-university” change? • Reflect current status • Define future mission • Institutional prestige

  7. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 2: What was the administration’s justification for the university designation? • The offering of graduate degrees • The university model of structure • The international implications of “College”

  8. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 3: What was the institution’s strategy for the rebranding process? • Strategic planning • Instituting a university structure • The choice of name • Minor-simple 53% • Minor-complex 34% • Major 13% • Time commitment – average 22 months

  9. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 4: What procedures did administration use to implement the change? • Kaikati & Kaikati (2003) – 6 strategies • Institutional colors and mascots • Funding

  10. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 5: What influence did regulatory bodies have upon the change? • Accrediting bodies had little influence • Legislature – • Influenced public institutions • Compared to other states – limited in scope

  11. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 6: What were reactions of stakeholders to the change? • Numerous stakeholder groups • Alumni most vocal stakeholder group • Combined stakeholder efforts

  12. Basis of the Success of Change 160 140 139 Points 120 100 Clarified Identity Enhanced Reputation 90 Points Enrollment & Recruiting 80 Points New Programs International Issues 72 Points All others 60 40 35 Points 32 Points 20 17 Points 0 Areas Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 7: How did senior administrators perceive the success of the change?

  13. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 7: How did senior administrators perceive the success of the change? • Koku (1997) found no significance in enrollment trends with strategic name changes • 103 “College-to-University” changed institutions – significance, but a negative correlation.

  14. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 8: Did the change produce any indicators of increased prestige? • Carnegie Classification • Increase in graduate programs • Undergraduate selectivity • Tuition – “Chivas Regal” effect

  15. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 9: What suggestions did administrators provide upon revisiting the change? • Have a good reason to change 147 points • Have a defendable name that relates to the institutional mission 141 points • Address stakeholder issues 81 points

  16. Research Questions & ResultsQuestion 10: What methods can institutions use to retain ownership of a brand? • Longevity of brand use • Excellent academic reputation • Succinct mission • Identify fallacious arguments from contenders • Protect your brand at all costs

  17. SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST? THE REBRANDING OF WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION James M. Owston www.newriver.net

More Related