FACEBOOK INTEGRATION AND ITS MEASUREMENT OF SUCCESS FOR FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES BY PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES IN THAILAND

FACEBOOK INTEGRATION AND ITS MEASUREMENT OF SUCCESS FOR FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES BY PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES IN THAILAND By DIANA RIESENBERGER A Master Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Business Administration Faculty of Business Administration Asia-Pacific International University 2016

2 Thesis Title: Facebook Integration and Its measurement of Success for Fundraising Activities by International Private Universities in Thailand Author: Diana Riesenberger Thesis Principle Supervisor: Pak Lee, Ph.D Thesis Supervisor: Henry Foster, Ph.D Program: Master of Business Administration Academic Year: 2016

3 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis entitled, “Facebook Integration and Its measurement of Success for Fundraising Activities by International Private Universities in Thailand” prepared and submitted by Diana Riesenberger (ID: 201280025) in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree, Masters of Business Administration, at Asia-Pacific International University, has been examined and is recommended for oral examination. ___________________________ Advisor ___________________________ Signature _____________________________ Date ___________________________ MBA Committee Chair ___________________________ Signature _____________________________ Date

4 ABSTRACT In the past decade, social media has grown tremendously. Universities have also harnessed its capacity for communication. For universities, Facebook has become more integrated into recruitment and fundraising campaigns. Private international universities occupy a unique niche within Thailand. While Thailand is very active online, it was unknown if Facebook was being successfully integrated for fundraising. This study used two approaches that consisted of quantitative and qualitative research design. Detailed Facebook data were collected from 12 institutions. Semi-structured interviews of marketing and advancement staff were also conducted with selected universities. One research purpose was to determine if there was any relationship between types of university Facebook posts and users’ responses. The second research purpose was to determine if there was any relationship between Facebook posts and funds raised as a measurement of success. Data was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation, Chi-square, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Fisher’s exact. Four statistically significant relationships were discovered between university Facebook post categories and users’ responsiveness. Although no association was found between frequency of Facebook posting and the success measurement, such as user likes, user shares, user comments, funds raised, event participation, volunteering/involvement or others. Some university respondents shared success stories. It was concluded that private international universities in Thailand were still in the developing stage of Facebook fundraising integration. Further research was recommended in this area to understand why some institutions were more successful than others. KEYWORDS: SOCIAL MEDIA, FACEBOOK, FUNDRAISING, HIGHER EDUCATION, PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY THAILAND

5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Diana Riesenberger, Master of Business Administration, Faculty of Business Administration, Graduate Studies, Asia-Pacific International University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Diana Riesenberger, Faculty of Business Administration, Graduate Studies, Asia-Pacific International University, 195 Moo 3 Muak Lek, Saraburi 18180 Thailand. Research Advisors: Dr. Pak Lee, Dr. Henry Foster, and Dr. Paluku Kazimoto. Defense Committee Chair: Asst. Prof. Dr. Leela Tiangsoongnern, Dhurakij Pundit University Thai Research Assistants: Pitayut Sindhuvanich, Faculty of Education & Psychology; and Rungaroon Wongsak, Faculty of Business Administration. Special Thanks: Dora Otieno, my supportive parents, and most of all God.

6 Table of Contents ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................4 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................9 1.1 Background of the Study .....................................................................................................9 1.2 Statement of the Problem...................................................................................................11 1.3 Objectives of the Study......................................................................................................12 1.4 Research Questions............................................................................................................12 1.5 Research Objectives...........................................................................................................12 1.6 Scope & Context of the Study ...........................................................................................13 1.7 Significance of this Study ..................................................................................................14 1.8 Definition of Terms............................................................................................................16 1.9 Organization of Study........................................................................................................18 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................19 2.1 Facebook: Social Media Background (Objectives 1 & 2) .................................................19 2.2 Facebook & Other Social Media’s Incorporation for Fundraising (Objectives 3 & 4) .....26 2.3 Related Key Findings: CASE Surveys & Applications.....................................................28 2.4 Analysis: Connecting Theory and Application: Columbia University Giving Day ..........36 2.5 Facebook & Social Media Usage in Southeast Asia..........................................................39 2.6 Gaps in Literature & Hypotheses Formation: Users’ Responsiveness & Other Success Measurements to Facebook Posting by Institutions........................................................46 2.7 Hypotheses Related to User Responses to University Facebook Posts.............................46 2.8 Null Hypotheses.................................................................................................................47 2.9 Summary of Literature Review..........................................................................................48 2.10 Conceptual Framework 48 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................50 3.1 Research Design.................................................................................................................50 3.2 Population ..........................................................................................................................51 3.3 Sample Size........................................................................................................................51 3.4 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................54 3.5 Validity and Reliability Research ......................................................................................56 3.6 Data Analysis Plan.............................................................................................................57 3.7 Ethics..................................................................................................................................62 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS........................................................................................................63 4.1 Quantitative Part: Fundraising Category from Facebook Posts and User Responses .......70 4.2 Quantitative Part: Relationships Between (User Responses) of Social Media Posts Categories and Social Media Posts for Fundraising of Private International Universities in Thailand ......................................................................................................................71 4.3 Qualitative Part: Facebook Funds Raised as a Measurement of Success..........................77 4.4 Qualitative Part: Facebook Integration into Fundraising: Overview: Facebook Post Category & Measurement of Success.............................................................................87 4.5 Summary of Analyses for Quantitative Part and Qualitative Interviews...........................92

7 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................96 5.1 Summary Related to H1: Users’ Responsiveness to Fundraising Facebook Posts............97 5.2 Discussion Related to H2: User Responses to Facebook Categories & Users’ Responsiveness to Fundraising Posts.......................................................................................99 5.3 Summary: Qualitative Interviews....................................................................................100 5.4 Discussion Related to H3 and Conclusions.....................................................................100 5.5 Discussion Related to H4 and Conclusions.....................................................................102 5.6 Summarization of the Quantitative and Qualitative Parts In Relation to Each Other .....103 5.7 Significance from the Findings of this Study ..................................................................106 5.8 Conclusions......................................................................................................................107 5.9 Recommendations............................................................................................................109 References..............................................................................................................................113 Appendix................................................................................................................................123 Appendix A: Questionnaire ...........................................................................................123 Appendix B: Questionnaire Responses..........................................................................127

8 List of Tables Table 1. Private International Universities in Thailand...........................................................52 Table 2. Office Identification of Respondents.........................................................................54 Table 3. University Enrollment from Respondents…………………………………………..54 Table 4. Facebook Post Categories………………………………………………………….66 Table 5. Users’ Responses to Facebook Post Categories .......................................................69 Table 6. Status of Facebook Social Media Posts for Fundraising Category by Private International Universities in Thailand with User Response ....................................................70 Table 7. Relationships between Social Media Posts Categories and Social Media Posts for Fundraising of Private International Universities in Thailand 72 Table 8. Social Media Type ....................................................................................................73 Table 9. Social Media Posting Frequency ..............................................................................74 Chart for Table 9. Social Media Posting Frequency...............................................................75 Table 10. Facebook Posting Categories Ranked Most to Least Used ....................................75 Table 11. Measurement of Effectiveness for Fundraising Integrating Social Media .............78 Table 12. Frequency of Fundraising Integrating Social Media and Effectiveness.................80 Table 13. Main Groups Funds are Raised from......................................................................81 Table 14. Percentage of Funds Raised Integrating Social Media ...........................................82 Chart for Table 14. By Institution: Percentages of Funds Raised Integrating Social Media..83 Table 15. Ranges of Funds Raised Integrating Social Media .................................................83 Chart for Table 15. By Institution: Ranges of Funds Raised Integrating Social Media 84 Table 16. Ranking: Measurement of Success for Posting of Post Categories on Facebook ..87 Table 17. Facebook Post Category & Measurement of Success: (1) News Sharing & (8) Funds Raised............................................................................................................................88 Table 18. Facebook Post Category & Measurement of Success: (5) Thanks or Recognition & (8) Funds Raised ..................................................................................................................89 Table 19. Facebook Post Category & Measurement of Success: (6) Quotes, memes or comics, & (5) Website traffic...................................................................................................90 Table 20. Facebook Post Category & Measurement of Success: (7) Service or values, & (3) User comments.........................................................................................................................90 Table 21. Table of Adjusted Frequencies of Facebook Posting, Percentage & Range of Funds Raised............................................................................................................................91 Table 22. Fisher’s Exact Test..................................................................................................92

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study Around the world, colleges and universities are integrating social media into fundraising and enrollment campaigns. Many case studies have shown great success (SloverLinett & Stoner, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015; Sherman, 2011; Huron Education & Stoner, 2013 and Arnett 2015) even raising millions of dollars, other universities have struggled to successfully integrate social media (Haught, Willis & Furrow, 2016). Social media has been defined as “forms of electronic communication shared through social networking applications and the Internet” (Merriam-Webster, n.d.), and various research studies have sought to understand the ways in which users create online communities, through messaging, sharing information, images and ideas. Around the world, colleges and universities are integrating social media into fundraising for campaigning to increase their enrollment and collect funds from their alumni and partners. While many case studies show great success (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, Sherman, 2011; Huron Education & Stoner, 2013 and Arnett 2015) even raising millions of dollars, other universities have struggled in successfully integrating social media (Haught, Willis & Furrow, 2016). Reynolds (2011) observed that most non-profit organizations incorporate social media with the purpose of brand awareness, news sharing, and promotion from both observation and data collection. The non-profits and higher education sectors have of the compelling fundraising case studies (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015), institutions are seeking ways to effectively integrate social media for giving purposes. Over 2 billion people have social media accounts as of August 2014, and the figure continues to grow (Kemp, 2015). With such a vast number of users, social media has the potential of facilitating

10 communication and connections and networking with many prospective donors and communities. According to Schivinski and Dąbrowski (2013) social media has been providing higher education fundraisers insights into audiences’ interests via demographical data, analytics of interests, reviews and other online communications or e-word-of-mouth. Extensive studies have revealed data and cases for the effective use of social media integration into fundraising campaigns for higher education in North America (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010-2015; Sherman, 2011; Campbell, J., 2014; Arnett 2015). Examples of social media integration for fundraising have been documented in many cases, such as Columbia University’s “Giving Day” which raised $6.8m in 2012 and the Southern University System Foundation’s “Million Dollar March,” which raised $1.2m in 2014 (Arnett, 2015). These studies illustrate how integrating social media into fundraising campaigns can be extremely effective to raise funds, as well as expanding an institutions’ alumni and donor audiences. Reynolds (2011), Slover-Linett and Stoner (2015) both found that institutions’ were posting on Facebook for the purposes of news sharing, brand, events, promotion, thanks, share quotes, service or values, alumni, fundraising or donor recognition, or sharing videos or other social media. Slover-Linett and Stoner (2015) also found that fundraising campaigns may be more effective when integrating social media, which can raise campaign awareness and where users may either click to give or are directed to a giving webpage or other online giving site. Southeast Asian Universities could benefit from utilizing social media in these ways. Social media has been considered to be a “free to low-cost” communication method and it could be applied to smaller institutions, especially in a developing region such as Southeast Asia (Reynolds, 2011). Despite the number of users on Facebook, and the compelling funds raised in the United States and around the world (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015), institutions of higher learning in Southeast Asia seem to not have effectively

11 integrated social media for fundraising or donation purposes. This study was aimed at investigating how social media, and in particularly Facebook post categories related to fundraising posts from private Universities in Thailand. 1.2 Statement of the Problem Facebook was identified as a main social media being integrated in the above mentioned fundraising campaigns. Therefore, Facebook may have potential to be an important tool for advancement in higher learning institutions in Southeast Asia. Yet, it appears that Southeast Asian universities have not been tapping its full potential to connect with and reach their users and partners. The lack of literature regarding this topic may imply that social media was found to be ineffective in fundraising integration. However, Southeast Asian universities could benefit by posting on Facebook regarding their news, brand recognition, promoting events and programs, giving thanks, sharing quotes, recognizing service or values, connecting with alumni, sharing videos or other media, and most of all, fundraising or donor recognition. These types of Facebook communications could support institutional fundraising activities and direct users to a giving webpage or other online giving site (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). Studies revealed that Thailand had a higher inclination to give compared to other countries in the region (Kanchanachitra, 2014; Emerging Markets More Likely to Donate, 2015), therefore a knowledge gap was found regarding the lack of literature and apparent lack of social media fundraising integration. Universities in Thailand could benefit from incorporating Facebook into their fundraising efforts, such as engaging potential donor audiences, publish donor recognition and share fundraising success stories. The few literature and studies found regarding social media and fundraising in Thailand revealed that the status of Facebook and fundraising effectiveness for higher education was unknown.

12 1.3 Objectives of the Study The purpose of this study was to investigate the current status of Facebook pages of private international universities in Thailand. It observed Facebook posts on pages of the universities and observed measurements of success, including user responsiveness. Interviews of university staff were conducted to further understand user responsiveness and measurements of success. This study sought to determine if users were responding to universities’ Facebook fundraising-related posts. Determining this association may help institutions maximize their Facebook strategies to increase users’ responsiveness and increase their success. 1.4 Research Questions 1. What are users’ responsiveness towards Facebook (FB) posts and FB integration into fundraising activities/campaigns by private international universities in Thailand? 2. Are there any statistically significant relationships between users’ response to Facebook post categories, specifically fundraising related posts, and users’ response to the other Facebook posts by the universities (eg. User likes of FB Fundraising category, and user shares of FB News category posts)? 3. What are the components of a measurement of success in Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns of private international universities in Thailand? 4. Are there any statistically significant relationships between frequency of Facebook posting and measurements of success by private international universities in Thailand? 1.5 Research Objectives The research was guided by the following specific objectives: 1. To identify users’ responsiveness toward Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns by private international universities in Thailand.

13 2. To determine if there are statistically significant relationships between Facebook post categories, specifically fundraising related posts, and users’ response to the other Facebook posts by the universities (eg. User likes of FB Fundraising category, and user shares of FB News category posts). 3. To identify a measurement of success in Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns of private international universities in Thailand. 4. To determine if there are statistically significant relationships between frequency of Facebook posting and the measurement of success by private international universities in Thailand. 1.6 Scope & Context of the Study In order to focus the scope of this study, the following contexts were put into place: university type, social media type, social media post type, time and language limitations. This study focused on private international universities in Thailand. The universities included were those that had active, official Facebook pages and those that opted into the research study to be interviewed. Furthermore, Facebook was the only social media source studied in relation to this context. Facebook was selected because it was the most used social media in Thailand at the time of this study (DAAT, 2015). Only official university Facebook pages were included in this study. What also narrowed the limitations were the post type categories studied for this research. The posts also gave scope in regards to times in which they were posted. The time frame limit for this study was the year 2015, with 1 week randomly selected per quarter of the year (Pick at Random, n.d.). Only posts within this time frame were studied.

14 Finally, language was another issue, as some universities may post in Thai. Therefore only posts in English, or those which could be clearly understood (ie. photo or video) were included as within the limits of this study. This research focused only on private international universities in Thailand. There are 17 private international universities in this context as of 2016 (OHEC, 2016). For social media type, data was collected only from Facebook. Facebook was selected because it was the top social media platform in Thailand (DAAT, 2015). The data studied was from 2015, as it was the most recent and complete year at the time of this study. For text only posts, only English was be categorized. Posts that were unidentifiable or only in Thai or other languages were not included. 1.7 Significance of this Study As little is known about how private international universities in Thailand are using and integrating social media into their fundraising initiatives and communication, this study is intended to benefit universities so they may have a better understanding regarding institutional social media use and user response. This study was designed to provide a clearer picture regarding the status of Facebook usage by private international universities in Thailand. With the findings of this research, private international universities in Thailand will gain insights regarding how to connect better with their audiences via Facebook. Public universities in Thailand, or other institutions in similar contexts (ie. other Southeast Asian institutions, or other private international institutions), may find the results significant as they study how best to utilize Facebook for their various objectives, to promote their activities and services, monitor their partners as well as community interests. Because this study gives both user response and institutional intent, the findings give better perspective to Facebook’s effectiveness in reaching audiences for different purposes. Overall this study’s significance is

15 to determine if Facebook can be integrated by private international universities in Thailand into their fundraising campaigns and have similar fundraising successes, as in North America. University fundraising teams, marketing teams, and international fundraisers should benefit from the findings of this study to have better interactions with their target audiences and thus meet fundraising and recruitment goals. Fundraising teams may learn how to connect better with their donor audiences. Universities will also be able to understand what types of posts increase audience awareness, and thus build their prospective student and donor audiences. Students can also benefit from this research. They benefit from being better connected with institutions that both meet their learning needs and have the funding necessary to support their learning experience. Students’ quality of education may also be enhanced through increased funding supported by fundraising efforts through social media. The significance of this study for scholars, would be in relation to future studies related to Facebook and social media usage in higher education in Thailand and similar contexts. Scholars may also benefit from the collected archival social media data for additional analysis or comparison and further recommendations. Overall, this research’s audience was private international universities in Thailand and their anticipated need for additional funding. As private universities are limited in the amount of government, foundation, organization and other funding (Thai Revenue Department, 2016), these institutions may look for other methods of raising funds such as online media and social networking. Management and coordinators who work directly with online communications such as Facebook or other social media were selected to be part of the individuals to gather data from regarding the state of social media and fundraising in these institutions. Getting a baseline of understanding as to how private institutions in Thailand are utilizing social media and their audiences’ responses is worth studying in the light of the

16 literature. The aim of this study was to produce findings that will help institutions in the same context better understand the state of social media use in private international universities in Thailand, as well as explore user response and trends. This data should be especially meaningful to institutions in this unique context seeking to improve their social media communications. 1.8 Definition of Terms Some terms related to this study are as follows: Facebook Social Media : This study focused on Facebook as a type of social media. Social media/Facebook refers to web-based media used for social interaction, and in the case of this research, between institutions and their audiences and partners (Social Media, Merriam Webster, n.d.). These web-based media may include blogs, Flickr for photos and images, YouTube for videos, and Facebook, which provides a suite of social media tools. Social networking refers to the interactions facilitated by those media, which include sharing, commenting, ranking, posting, and so forth (Lenhart, 2010). Alumni refers to a graduate or former student from a certain school, college, or university (Alumni, Merriam Webster, 2016). Comment refers to a specific statement in forms of user response that may be in the form of text, photo, video, link or other, in response to a post provided from Facebook or other categories of social media. This content is viewable under the original post and is tracked in numeric form (Facebook, 2016).

17 Facebook Post Categories from the universities that were included in this study were in specific categories. These categories were selected and modified from a previous research (Reynolds, 2011) and were as follows: 1) News sharing, 2) Brand, campus or classroom, 3) Event, 4) Promotion or call to action, 5) Thanks or recognition, 6) Quotes, memes or comics, 7) Service or values, 8) Alumni, 9) Fundraising or donor recognition, and, 10) Video or other social media platform share (Ex: YouTube video shared onto the Facebook page). Also included with the posts, were their likes, shares and comments by other users. Fundraising refers to “activity done to collect money for a political party, charity, school, etc.” and “the organized activity of raising funds (as for an institution or political cause)” (Fundraising, Merriam-Webster, nd.) Like refers to a user response indicating their feelings in word of “like” to show that they enjoy a post. Likes are visible to users and totaled below the social media post title. Facebook later incorporated “sticker” commenting (Bell, 2014), and later added the “heart, wow, haha, sad, angry” icons (Thielman, 2016) to give users more options for acknowledging and responding. Official/Unofficial Verified Facebook Page refers to a Facebook page that has been verified at different levels using documentation and/or other communications between Facebook and the institution or entity (Facebook, 2016). Page refers to a social media page, such as a Facebook page, that represents businesses, schools, or public figures (Facebook, 2016) Post refers to a social media post, or Facebook post involving content categories such as news sharing, brand, events, promotion, thanks, quotes, values, alumni, fundraising, video or connecting to other social media. These posts can be “a

18 comment, picture or other media link that is posted on the user’s Facebook page or “wall” (Scripted, 2012; Reynolds, 2011) Profile refers to a social media page, on Facebook page, or other social media that represents an individual (Facebook, 2016). Share refers to a feature that allows users to share content from another user or page to their Facebook timeline. This feature is linked to the original post and shares are also numerically totaled under the original post (Facebook, 2016) User-Generated Content (UGC): refers to content published publicly showing creative effort and has been created outside of professional practices or official social media channels (Cole, 2014). Verified/Unverified Facebook Page refers to a Facebook page that have or have not been verified using documentation and/or other communications between Facebook and the institution or entity (Facebook, 2016). 1.9 Organization of Study This research consists of five chapters. Chapter one gives an introduction of the topic, problem identification, purpose of study and significance of the study. Chapter two covers the literature review. Chapter three details the methodology, which consists of the research design, population and sampling, data collection and data analysis. Chapter four gives the results of the analysis. Finally Chapter five gives the summary, discussion, conclusions and recommendations.

19 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW While many studies have been conducted to determine the effectiveness of integrating social media into fundraising campaigns, the literature review revealed that little research had been conducted regarding how international universities in Southeast Asia plan, use or apply social media in their fundraising initiatives. This literature review has overviewed the main research findings for social media and its incorporation into fundraising initiatives for higher education. It summarizes social media principles and theories, findings via case studies, and in conclusion analyzed the principles, applications and their interconnections. Relevant and current topics for this research, such as fundraising trends, social media marketing, and other new communication principles were also included. Higher education research regarding social media incorporation, and also research studies for social media fundraising for non-profit organizations were included due to its relevancy (Barnes & Mattson, 2009). 2.1 Facebook: Social Media Background Social media is not a recent media, but is as old as the Internet itself, starting with “Listservers” and online bulletin boards developed in 1975 (Rainie & Horrigan, 2002). Digital Trends (2016) indicated that since early 2000 there were online social media platforms, such as Friendster in 2002, and Facebook in 2004, that have become a predominant method of online social networking as opposed to forums (Digital Trends, 2016). It was observed that colleges and universities began utilizing social media mainly for brand awareness, news sharing, and recruitment (Ruben, 2008). With approximately 1.55 billion users on Facebook (Statista, 2015) and over 1 billion users on YouTube (Reuters,

20 2013), it is understandable that businesses, especially fundraisers for non-profit organizations and higher education institutions, want to capture the attention of those vast audiences. Facebook & Social Media Demographics In order for institutions to reach their target audiences through Facebook, there would need to be some types of motivating reasons for individuals to interact with the institution, or its content, such as articles, photos, events, etc. Researchers speculate why people use social media. Dr. Stephanie Tobin (2014) “found that active participation on social media sites gave users a greater sense of connectedness” and that their social media participation gave them feelings of belonging or validation (Tobin, 2014, pg. 1). Connectedness and recognition are reoccurring themes that surface in this related literature review. Facebook and Community Literature regarding Facebook was in agreement with the basic understanding that those who use social media are trying to connect socially, thus creating community. McMillan and Chavis’ (1986) describe the four different dimensions of their “Sense of Community Framework” as, feelings of membership, feelings of influence, integration and fulfillment of needs, and shared emotional connection. This framework is relevant to the digital realm also. In calculating social media analytics, the “Like” button on Facebook or the “heart” icon on Instagram, act as generators for statistics of audience reach or acknowledged views (Balick, 2013). Balick (2013) also uses Facebook’s “Like” button as an analogy to one of his theories regarding social media recognition. Facebook and Social Recognition Balick (2013) focused on users clicking the button to “recognize, affirm, validate, acknowledge, understand, appreciate,” (p. 31) etc. as being the main motivator that people

21 use social media (Balick, 2013). He builds off of Benjamin’s (1988) “mutual recognition” theory, which was founded in “relational psychoanalysis,” that “sees the motivation to relate as absolutely central to human experience and the meanings that individuals make of their lives” (Balick, 2013, p. 28). Calling for further qualitative studies, Balick recognized that the statistics regarding social media do not provide the full psychological picture of what this younger generation is really experiencing, having grown up in media-saturated environments. He juxtaposes two concepts as follows: The computer scientist Kranzberg (1986) famously stated that “Technology is neither good nor bad, nor is it neutral.” Turkle (2011) pithily informs us that “Technology proposes itself as the architect of our intimacies” (p. 1). The combination of these two statements makes an important synergy. It puts into perspective the nature of an online world that has an architecture and for this reason is not neutral.” (p. 32) Facebook’s Social Capital Most researchers theorize that the variety of connectedness increases and enriches our sense of community, while others dispute it saying that face-to-face interactions are more meaningful or valid. Putnam’s (1993) social capital theory, states that the spread (variety) of social networking lowers social capital because he considers a social network’s density (number of users and interconnections) to increase mutual exchanges and social trust. He continues to theorize that, “Physically based virtual communities would increase the chances of overlapping with [face-to-face] communities” (Putman, 1993, p. 297; Sherman, 2011, p. 15). Whether digital or face-to-face, social capital represents the value and benefits created between the individuals that are interconnected (Putnam, 1993). Putnam (1993) outlines benefits such as trust, reciprocity, information, and cooperation associated with social networks. While people may all have their different motivators for using social media, it is clear that there is social and psychological value an individual receives from participating varies based on their interest, or motivations for using social media.

22 In terms of reciprocal value for broad audiences, the numbers can be impressive, YouTubers, or individuals that publish YouTube videos, may for example have over 5 million subscribers (Reuters, 2013). That means, that 5 million people want to be notified when certain individuals post a new video on YouTube. Whether it is product testing and reviews, travel experiences, or personal posts, those subscribers want to be notified. Thus, both channel subscribers and YouTubers receive mutual benefits of social capital, regardless of the variety of their connectedness. Social capital in relation to social media, appears to be more than simply a one-dimensional scale in terms of value. Meaning, there is not a straight gradation of more or less social capital, but other qualities that could be measured, such as depth of interaction, dynamic interaction, etc. For-profit companies’ marketers have been very active in new ways to use social media to sell, but would these methods be the same for fundraising? True, there are a large number of people worldwide using social media, but what methods have been successful in capturing these vast audiences? What about in terms of fundraising? Social Media Authenticity: Facebook’s “Influencer Marketing” and User Responsiveness Relander (2014) states, "Every brand that succeeds on social media achieves authenticity and a consistent voice. Their audiences recognize the brand’s voice as authentic and influential, shaping the opinions of people and driving action," (p. 1). Brand recognition and brand value are often a focus of development for marketing, however, because of social media, trends have shifted in terms of what customers perceive as believable (Delzio, 2015). Customers are more prone to believe an everyday person reviewing a product rather than a company-produced advertisement because of the everyday person’s authenticity (Delzio, Social Media Examiner, 2015). According to interviews with marketing leaders such as

23 Google, Intuit, Sephora, SAP, Twitter, and Visa, they state that, “the primary problem with the funnel is that the buying process is no longer linear. Prospects don’t just enter at the top of the funnel; instead, they come in at any stage.” (Bonchek & France, 2014, p. 1). Ecommerce, customer reviews, Facebook user commenting, such as blogging or YouTube have changed how businesses present their brand, and how they connect with and influence their audiences (Court, Elzinga, Mulder, & Vetvik, 2009). Social media has taken marketing to another level with “influencer marketing.” Influencer marketing occurs when regular people, who have credible blogs or YouTube channels, and substantial followers review brands and products (Delzio, 2015). One example is self-taught makeup artist Michelle Phan, a popular Vietnamese-American YouTube personality with over 8 million followers. Phan’s influence has lead to YouTube and company endorsements earning her $3 million in 2015. Phan was also recognized on the “Entrepreneurs Under 30” lists for both Forbes and Inc. magazines in 2015. What makes Phan so popular? Authenticity. Welcome to a new generation of marketing. Social media has changed how people evaluate brands. Online ecommerce product reviews ratings, and video reviews on YouTube or other social media all give consumers feedback and perspectives of other customers. Amazon.com for example is a website where products may be ranked from 1-5 stars. Another popular example of social media ranking for travel is TripAdvisor, in which users rank venues or experiences from 1-5 for quality or level of satisfaction. While people may utilize this aspect of social media in determining purchases, or as a way to stay connected with friends or colleagues, social media has also shown significant trends in raising awareness of social issues or concerns (Bright, Margetts, Hale, &Yasseri, 2014, p. 9).

24 Facebook and Other Social Media’s User Responsiveness to Current Social Issues Social media has helped spread relevant or concerning global issues or causes, and sometimes quite rapidly (Bright, Margetts, Hale, & Yasseri, 2014). Brands have shifted from simply placing advertisements running along the sidebars of social media sites, to now integrating related social issues and connecting those issues with their brand values. Brands have chosen to pair their products or missions with related social causes or issues. An excellent example of connecting brands to relevant issues, was the Dove “Real Beauty” worldwide ad campaign series, which featured Facebook posts and videos, ads and even workshops and events that focused on encouraging women to see themselves positively and feel uniquely beautiful (Unilever, 2004). The campaign’s videos especially went viral with people sharing and commenting on this socially relevant issue. Another campaign fittingly juxtaposed with Snapchat, was the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) campaign for endangered animals which was hash-tagged the #LastSelfie. “WWF used the idea that selfies disappear off Snapchat after 10 seconds to illustrate the disappearance of endangered species around the world. The result was worldwide branding and sharing that led to increased donations for the month in only a matter of days,” (Olenski, 2015). This brand-to-currentissues connection has increased social media engagement. In addition to relevancy of the topic, times during the day when posts, photos, tweets, etc. are viewed also affects audience engagement. Facebook & Other Social Media Timing and Trending Related to User Responsiveness Life happens and is experienced in the context of time. The same context of time applies to social media for 1) timeliness or related current issues and 2) most effective times for posting. Social media “trending” or sometimes referred to as “viral” is defined as a “very popular as a subject discussed” on social media (Trending, MacMilland, n.d.). Companies and organizations sometimes study the social media behaviors of the target audiences and

25 look for the best times to engage them on social media (Mayes, 2011). Therefore, for greater views and social engagement, time and relevancy are two major factors (Dyer, 2014). Facebook & Other Social Media “Trending” Generally, the goal of companies promoting via social media is to have the greatest audience reach and impact. This impact can be measured by views, commenting, sharing and traffic redirected back to their website or donation page. Brands simultaneously do audience research as well as keep up-to-date on current events to try to get posts “trending” or sustain longer than one-day audience engagement. Social media “trending” occurs when a specific post gets a high volume of views or activity and the activity is sustained over a longer than average period of time (Facebook, 2015). The initial posting time, as well as commenting or sharing times also can affect audience reach. Social media use has been documented at different levels throughout the day (Dyer, 2015). Typical work and school schedules tend to dictate what times during the day are for leisure or socialization. Social media statistical activity gives insights as to when the majority of users are active at different times of the day (Dyer, 2015). Days of the week, as well as specific times of the day vary in terms of effectiveness and by media type. While specific audiences may differ, statistics show times that users are more active on specific social media (Ellering, 2016). For instance, best times for posting on Facebook are Thursdays and Fridays, with highest views during the early afternoon. However, for Twitter, the best days to tweet for B2Cs are weekends with 17% increased engagement, while B2Bs stats show 14% more engagement during the week (Ellering, 2016). The logic behind the Twitter activity stats may be that businesses are more likely to interact with other businesses during working hours. Most strategic social media planning though should be based off of your followers or subscribers.

26 Moving further into social media theory, literature was examined regarding how educators and nonprofits integrated social media into their fundraising initiatives. 2.2 Facebook & Other Social Media’s Incorporation for Fundraising Some organizations characterized social media akin to the categories used as marketing tools in advertising (Waters, Burnett, Lamm & Lucas, 2009). However, similarly as magazine advertisements get more or less viewers and have been priced differently, social media activity also has had varying visibility. Institutions that are passive in their social media efforts, ie. simply creating an official Facebook page and letting it sit, are missing the whole point of social media. Even if their page reaches 1000 “likes” it does not mean there is a social dynamic or interest from an individual towards the institution. Fine and Kanter (2010), painted an amusing picture of this passive scenario: Envisioning oneself and one’s organization as the center of the universe with other people and organizations circling around it – providing it with funds, attention, and volunteers as needed – is at odds with a world energized by social media and connectedness […] [now, organizations] strengthen and expand these networks by building relationships within them to engage and activate them for their organizations’ efforts. (Fine & Kanter, 2010, p. 25) Fundraising via social media has had a variety of reports in terms of giving. Some institutions raising millions in a 24-hour time period, such as Columbia’s “Giving Day” (Arnett, 2015), and others being unable to trace funds in relations to their various social media channels (Reynolds, 2011). Because tuition alone does not cover the operating expenses of most universities (Brewer & Picus, 2014), universities both public and private turn to fundraising. Social media presents a low to no-cost channel for university fundraising. But is social media really no cost? Community and recognition imply relationship, and relationships take time. In order to engage audiences better through social media for nonprofit organizations, Kent and Taylor (1998) were cited as introducing “the subject of online

27 relationship development to public relations, and many have advocated for organizations to implement strategic virtual communication strategies to cultivate relationships with key stakeholders” (Waters, Burnett, Lamm & Lucas, 2009, p. 103). The research showed that the greatest indicator for successfully integrating social media was (1) skilled human resources and (2) developing effective plans for their fundraising goals (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015; Laird, 2010). Richard D.Waters, et al. (2009) wrote that, “nonprofit organizations use social media to streamline their management functions, interact with volunteers and donors, and educate others about their programs and services.” It was further stated, “Through interactions with stakeholders on Facebook and other social media applications, organizations seek to develop relationships with important publics” (Waters, et al., 2009, p. 103). Therefore, these interactive social media relationships between organization and user can lead to great social awareness and fundraising opportunity. Some well-known examples include the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, commonly known in the US as Lou Gehrig's Disease) which went viral on Facebook in the summer of 2014 and raised awareness plus over $220 million globally (Gebelhoff, 2015). While this was a fundraising challenge for users to participate in, other businesses have also had significant campaigns to increase their brand and give a benefit to users. Such was the case with American brand Kohl’s in their social media “$10 million give away” which led to a user interactive competition giving $500,000 to the most “liked” high schools and academies, (Hajewski, 2010). User engagement and interaction is therefore key to social media fundraising. In terms of fundraising in higher education, the Counsel for the Advance and Support of Education (CASE) has done the most extensive surveys, collecting statistical data along with some analysis and individual case studies, to give a more tangible glimpse of how institutions are utilizing social media for giving.

28 2.3 Related Key Findings: CASE Surveys & Applications The following key findings were presented to develop this research study’s hypotheses. These findings pointed to the social media type selected (Facebook) for this study. They also pointed the variables that were relevant, which were, the university social media/Facebook posting activities (Independent), and the measurements of success and user responsiveness (Dependent). CASE Surveys: Facebook & Other Social Media Integration For Fundraising The first study of social media in higher education by CASE conducted was in 2010 (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010), and they have organized similar surveys through 2015. The first report following the initial survey, “Succeeding with Social Media: Lessons from the First Survey of Social Media in Advancement,” showed overall survey findings along with several case studies of individual institutions and their unique social media strategies and applications (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010). The most recent CASE survey in 2015 focused on areas of effectiveness, staffing and “shifts in channel use, what success looks like, frequency, key tools” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015, p. 5). The rationale for these reviews are as follows: the 2010 findings to serve as a baseline, 2011 to note changes and trends, and the 2015 was reviewed to determine the most current trends. All surveys had similar sampling sizes, were randomly selected from populations of 18,000 to 28,000, had approximately 1,000 respondents, with the majority 88% (2011) and 83% (2015) in the US or Canada. Only 3% were representing the Asia Pacific region. It should also be noted that while the majority of institutions surveyed were colleges and universities, some were identified as “Elementary / primary / secondary / high school” or “Special focus institutions” (ie. “stand-alone business school, medical school, etc”). In review of the following summaries, these details should be noted.

29 While the CASE surveys all incorporate the use of incorporating social media to reach enrollment and advancement targets, there are slight variations in each yearly survey (Huron Education, Slover-Linett & Stoner 2012-2015). While the initial 2010 survey gets a baseline as to how institutions are using social media, subsequent surveys further examined various aspects of meeting goals, strategies, staffing and measurements of success. CASE Survey Trends In the initial 2010 report, Rae Goldsmith, Vice President of advancement resources at CASE said, “Social media is something that professionals in all disciplines [in higher education] — fundraising, alumni relations, communications, marketing, advancement services — are struggling with. It’s a universal advancement issue… There just isn’t much data about what people are doing in advancement to better understand social media and to employ it to achieve their goals. We need a way to better benchmark where people are to help us understand their needs and determine what resources could be meaningful to them.” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010, p. 3). While the initial survey showed how institutions were experimenting with and attempting to incorporate social media in their communication plans, comparing the yearly surveys gives a clearer picture of how social media use has developed in sophistication of use and integration as well as user-related trends. The past five surveys show that institutions mainly used social media to engage alumni, prospective and admitted students, share news and events as well as strengthen brand awareness. The 2011 survey gives a good summarization of what the past five years have been attempting to discover: “to learn how institutions are using, managing and measuring social media” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2011, p. 3, emphasis added).

30 CASE Findings Regarding Methods: Facebook Identified as a Leading Social Media Facebook and YouTube still remain the two largest social media platforms (Digital Insights, 2013), and therefore were usually the first social media platforms that are developed by universities. Universities often developed their websites, such as news pages and blogs to work in conjunction with their social media, thus improving audience reach (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). Some universities, such as Georgetown, utilized alumni ambassadors to help expand audience reach with through the authentic voices of their alumni. Audiences of Users’ Responsiveness Regarding University Targets & Purpose While brand awareness has been a major driving force behind university’s social media presence, keeping in touch with alumni has been another major audience of focus. “Alumni are the primary focus of institutions’ social media efforts,” with institutional image and brand usually following. (Slover-Linett & Stoner 2010, p. 33). The main audiences throughout all the CASE surveys have been 1) alumni and 2) brand. This finding is logical, as many universities have found that one of their largest donor audiences is in their alumni (Lipman Hearne, Inc., 1999). While some alumni volunteer their time to support their alma matter, one of the greatest challenges institutions and nonprofits are finding is management and staffing. The first CASE report in 2010 summarized, “While it’s important for institutions to experiment with social media, a real communications strategy must look beyond the tools themselves. Simply using Facebook or Twitter or LinkedIn is not an end in itself. These platforms, like email, postcards, or phone calls, are tools that should be chosen specifically to achieve a defined goal” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010, p. 13).

31 University Social Media Posting: Management Staffing, Guidelines and Planning The on-going challenges from all surveys were staffing, management and coordination. “Institutions are not making significant investments to support social media, either in staffing or budgetary support.” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010, p. 34). Some institutions have integrated social media into multiple offices, providing guidelines and training, however, others shared that the management and lead often comes from the marketing or communications offices (Huron Education & Stoner, 2013). However the 2015 survey showed growth in overall campaign coordination (Slover-Linett & Stoner 2015). Also, guidelines for social media have continued to take a back seat in terms of development (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). “About 60 percent have some kind of policy or guidelines regarding content or control, but the most common type covers branding and graphics.” And “71 percent would like to see more [coordination and planning] in the coming year” (p. 35). As Andy Shaindlin (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010, p. 13), consultant from Alumni Futures, shared in regards to the disappointing lack of staffing and coordination issues involved in integrating social media: “So you’re not going to get any more people to do social media, but what you do have to do is unplug some people from doing some of what they’re doing and switch their responsibilities,” says Shaindlin. “Social media has been layered on to everything else. This isn’t a budget issue. It’s a management challenge.” The 2011 report showed that the offices of Communications or marketing [mostly] manage institution-wide SM (social media) activities, yet usually lack guidelines or policies, evaluation or feedback, specific goals, institutional buy-in, centralized control, expertise, and most of all, lack staffing (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2011). But overall, institutions are increasing in their ability to reach campaign goals through integrating one or more social media channels.

32 One Measurement of Success: Audience Reach of Donors & Alumni All surveys reported growth in social media for fundraising, either by donor audience reach or in funds raised. Comparing surveys, they all address social media type, need for strategy and how the institutions measured their effectiveness, through simplistic likes/views metrics. While the 2011 survey showed that 66% of institutions were using social media to “connect” with donors (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2011), the 2015 showed 35% “engagement” with alumni and donors (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). “Connect” in terms of passive, one-way communication, news broadcasting, or “views,” while the “engagement” referred to audiences commenting, sharing, or clicking to links or making donations. The percentage decreased, but the metric of measurement became more meaningful and dynamic, rather than the vague estimation in 2011. As institutions adjusted their social media planning and strategies, their measurements for success became more concrete. However, their metric of “success” has increased in sophistication over the years with engagement (commenting, sharing or donating). This is a more meaningful measurement, which had in earlier surveys been measuring their success metric as number of “touches” (friends, click-throughs, participation)” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2011, p. 17). “We're just starting to measure engagement at the most basic level using three things ... event attendance, made a contribution or serves on a volunteer board.” (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). While the surveys don’t go into depth regarding the specific relationship between alumni audience reach and fundraising, giving was one of the measures. In 2014, 47% of those surveyed said they were using social media to fundraise, while in 2015, it rose to 57%. The institutions surveyed said they were raising relatively small amounts, with 83% in 2015 indicating that social-media-based fundraising represents 5% or less of their institution’s total. The funds were still significant, as the trend in growth of funds raised by integrating social media continues to rise. The 2013 CASE reported the highest jump in

33 social media giving, with 67% of institutions surveyed saying they raise up to at least $10,000 through integrating social media into their fundraising campaigns (Huron Education & Stoner, 2013). The 2015 report shows a similar percentages for the up to $10,000 range. However, in the $100,000+ range, while the 2013 reported 6% of institutions surveyed, 2015 reported 13%. (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). Days of giving, crowdfunding and alumni or peer fundraising advocates are amongst other growing social media trends for higher education (Arnett, 2015). The CASE’s surveys show growth in social media channels usage, growth in management and coordination, and also significant measurements for audience reach and funds raised. However, in review of the following institutions’ examples, models are not specifically identified. Other Key Findings: User Responsiveness & Measurements of Success from Institutions University specific case studies reporting significant results have particularly motivated university fundraisers to try to incorporate social media into their campaigns, however, some interesting findings surface in reviewing those reports. In terms of comparison and application, the institutions differ vastly in terms of human resources, funding and alumni relationship. For most higher education fundraisers, Columbia University is an example that shows that fundraising campaigns integrating social media can raise millions of dollars in a 24 hour period. Columbia University’s Giving Day campaign raised more than $7.8 million in 24-hours, but how does that figure reflect in planning, coordination, staff and volunteer time? (Huron Education & Stoner, 2013). Further in analysis of the literature, the theory and applications of social media methods are compared, including aspects that seem to make for success or failure of social media fundraising. Institutional success stories all share similar findings. Passion regarding the causes, unique voice of author and user recognition were some of the themes that were repeated.

34 Arnett (2015) found that personal stories were compelling in terms of social media activity, and Reynolds (2011) also found that the non-profit cause itself combined with the relevant audience interested “play[ed] a large role in the amount of time and energy spent on the social networking platforms by the users” (Reynolds, 2011, p. 25). Amherst and Georgetown universities shared a common finding in debriefings for their giving campaigns, which was uniqueness in the “voice” of those posting gave authenticity and success in terms of audience reach. These however were planned campaigns that gave direction for goals, structure for timing and teams and also pre-designed graphics and “copy/paste messages for their nominated campaign ambassadors,” such as influential individuals on campus or active alumni (Amherst University, 2014). Similarly, Georgetown found that the authentic voice for their “online ambassadors, or “peer-to-peer online fundraising advocates” made their fundraising campaigns successful” (Arnett, 2015). A nonprofit, “Autism Speaks” had more organic user-generated posts, such as personal stories, and also appreciating or praising the organization for becoming a forum in which to share and support. Both non-profit and higher education institutions were connecting themselves with real life stories. “Inside higher [education] it’s all about connecting the community, the alumni, to stories happening on the ground,” according to Matt Racz, co-founder and COO of crowdfunder USEED (Arnett, 2015). USEED is a similar crowdfunding site like GoFundMe. Finally, some findings differed greatly in Reynolds’ research because of human resources and planning, which brings into question if organization size is an indicator of fundraising success. Generally, larger institutions have more staff and volunteers in terms of human resources. The more resources available for advancement teams, the more successful their social media initiatives seem to be (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010). Those with the most human resources were posting more frequently, and had two-way communications. Two-way communications for social media confirm the findings of the first research that explored the

35 internet dialog, an article written by Kent and Taylor (1998). However, inversely, size of institution also presented challenges in terms of coordinating communications for social media. In the context of smaller organizations, social media has been shown to be cost effective and manageable without assigning part time staff or major roles for managing (Reynolds, 2011). While these examples show great success, questions arise regarding coordination in terms of strategy and planning, and also strength of alumni and donor relations as well as record keeping. The majority of these examples do not include examples of failures or missed targets. The CASE surveys do point to areas of improvement, such as privacy, ethical issues (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2011, p. 28). There is little literature that deals with the areas of missed targets in social media fundraising campaigns in higher education, though some examples are documented for non-profit organizations. A non-profit, the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts (YBCA), attempted a social media fundraising campaign that was unsuccessful, but it still helped raise brand awareness (Sherman, 2011). In 2009, Ingenhoff and Koelling analyzed the websites of over 100 Swiss non-profits and concluded they had “yet to find a proper way of carrying out these goals of dialog,” (Ingenhoff & Koelling, 2009), thus pointing to the possible significance of cultural communication differences. Other similar “common-sense” articles were found regarding social media fundraising, but they were predominantly on blogs or websites of companies or contractors targeting nonprofits. In summary of the literature for the CASE surveys and North American higher education, much success has been found in integrating social media into fundraising campaigns. While most of these individual cases give a variety of examples of integration of social media, it should be noted that there was not any one specific model, but rather principles guiding the integration of social media for fundraising. Audience research,

36 strategic communications planning and team coordination all played relevant roles in the campaign reach and fundraising effectiveness. Comparing the findings, social media fundraising is a growing trend in which institutions are learning methods from each other, as well as finding their own unique methodologies that best fit their institutions, campaigns and various donor audiences. But again, only 3% of the CASE surveys represented the AsiaPacific region, which in itself is diverse in terms of culture and social media habits. Examining social media theories and the CASE studies together, one gets a fuller picture of the influence social media can have when integrated into fundraising campaigns. Planning is often organized based off of audience research, equipping staff, and following social media motivators while focusing on a main goal. 2.4 Analysis: Connecting Theory and Application: Columbia University Giving Day This next section explores the social media integration theories with a specific fundraising campaign. Columbia University’s “Giving Day” has been a model that other universities have applied and adjusted with success. Columbia University’s Giving Day on October 24, 2012, is a case study that has been widely written about and used as a model for other universities. It’s referenced frequently because of Columbia’s clear documentation of planning — and their financial and public relations success. Their goal was to “create a unified fundraising effort to engage the community and donors to benefit annual funds” (Huron Education & Stoner, 2013, p. 13). In analysis, one can see how Columbia planned well, utilized influential alumni, combined multiple communication channels, encouraged competition and also held live-streamed events. The planning, coordination, and multiple channels of communication made the Giving Day campaign a $6.8 million dollar success.

37 As a fundraising campaign integrating social media that is both well documented and successful, we will analyze its’ success combined with our previously reviewed social media theories. Key Finding: Building Community & Relationship for User Responsiveness, Alumni Identified as a Responsive Audience, to Assist in Facebook Trending The offices of Development and Marketing and Communication planned as well as researched. In the planning stages, Columbia’s Development Director talked with other 24hr fundraising campaigns to learn tips and potential challenges. Columbia also had help from external vendors Kimbia and Story Worldwide. Team coordination on campus, as well as the communications online (website, emails, social media) all helped to reinforce Columbia’s community impact. Connecting the principle of community, Columbia planned to build up social buzz (which led to social media trending) using influential alumni as social media ambassadors (influencer marketing / social capital) over a month leading up to Giving Day. Because the office of alumni relations each of the colleges kept in touch with their alumni (relationship) — they knew which of their alumni would be the strongest social influencers. Having those relationships also helped build a strong sense of community. Annual funding for Columbia became a dynamic social issue as alumni representatives from different programs shared in their own personal perspectives and voices regarding giving. However, those tweets and posts were not spontaneous, but intentional and coordinated, following a “detailed content schedule for the month leading up to the campaign and continuing after” (Huron Education& Stoner, 2013, p. 16).

38 Facebook Identified in Fundraising Campaign Strategies Alumni, volunteers and staff were supplied with editorial packets including written messaging for posts, tweets and graphics — along with a webinar for training — were all conducted in after the initial planning was in place. Also designed and ready at the beginning of the campaign was a Giving Day website, which would also mirror their Facebook page. The communications “strategy also included the creation and distribution of postcards and other print materials to compliment the digital content” (Huron Education & Stoner, 2013, p. 16). Besides their website, Facebook and Twitter, Columbia also used online communications such as email and livestreams. The Livestreams helped engage audiences before and during the 24 hour event. Faculty and deans, alumni and other leadership spoke in on-campus events, which were streamed online (livestream). Online and on campus, the community could listen to presenters share their reasons for getting involved in Giving Day. Also, the competition to raise the most funds “between colleges was intense… [with] online leader boards [which] showed who was winning” (Huron Education & Stoner 2013, p. 17). Thoroughly planned, “at midnight… donors received an email with a special thank-you video from the trustees” (p.17). That thank-you gave personal recognition, in addition to the social media recognition received via likes or comments. Columbia University raised $6.8 million, both online and via phone. Their success was found in creating a dynamic social issue through combining social theory and coordinating their communication activities. Steering their community influencers to create social relevancy, those who participated were rewarded with social recognition and collective achievement. In analysis, Columbia’s 2012 Giving Day clearly shows how an institution applied social media theories. While this North American example in the literature review clearly shows the application of theory and social media integration leading to success, Southeast Asia lacks literature involving fundraising via social media.

39 2.5 Facebook & Social Media Usage in Southeast Asia With the vast majority of the literature representing North America, this section of the literature review covers Southeast Asia, Thailand in particular. It outlines how social media was being used in Thailand. Lastly, implications are for fundraising for international universities in Thailand were reviewed. Facebook Use in Thailand Hutchinson (2015) and other analysts indicated that social media use has been on the rise in Southeast Asia. Findings show that “61% of people surveyed across the 5 Southeast Asian countries said they would rather talk to close friends on Facebook than on the phone or through email, according to studies (Hutchinson, 2015). This sentiment was most pronounced in Thailand, where 82% of surveyed people reported emailing less, 79% said they spend less time on the phone and 91% said they send fewer texts because they communicate via Facebook and Messenger.” (Hutchinson, 2015). In the latest report of the “Digital landscape of Southeast Asia in Q4 2015,” analysts concluded that the combination of affordability of “internet-enabled mobile devices” and mobile data were factors for Thailand’s high rate of social media usage (Kemp, 2015). Furthermore, the report indicated that there were 232.9 million active social media users in Southeast Asia, with a 23.9 millionuser growth since March 2015 (Kemp, 2015). In January 2015 (Kemp, 2015), 240 countries and their Internet, mobile and social media usage statistics were profiled. Thailand was ranked #2 out of 30 countries analyzed with the highest time spent on the Internet per day (5.5 hours desktop/laptop; 4.1 hours mobile) (Kemp, 2015). Kemp’s updated report in November 2015 also showed that Thailand’s social media use was representative of over half of the entire country at 58% of the population, but may be larger as this comparative statistic represents active users on the

40 most active social media platforms (Kemp, 2015). Poushter of Pew Research wrote, “In every country we polled, younger people ages 18 to 34 [were] substantially more likely to say they use the internet than those who are older. Especially large differences occur[ed] in Asia, and particularly in Thailand, where 83% of 18- to 34-year-olds [were] online” (Pew Research, 2015). While social media has been on the rise in Southeast Asia, the findings indicated clearly that Thailand was online and has been very active on social media. Facebook & Other Social Media Use in Thailand Statistics from Digital Advertising Association Thailand (DAAT, 2015) indicated that Thailand was much more active on Facebook than the global average, with 30 million active users per month, and notably, the data showed that, “Out of the 30 million users…28 million users are active on mobile devices.” While Facebook was still found to be the dominant social media platform, Thailand also heavily uses LINE, an application with similar chat, profile and timeline features like Facebook (LINE website, n.d.a.). “Where the trend does tend to differ is with regards to usage of instant messaging/chat applications, with Facebook Messenger and LINE being most popular in the Land of Smiles, whereas globally, QQ, WhatsApp, WeChat and Skype are also popular” (Fairfield, 2015). In tune with the global trend, YouTube also ranked #2 for Thailand, with 2.14 million average users per day. Twitter, was #3, but showed a slightly awkward statistic of 4.5 million users, but 61% inactive (DAAT, 2015). Instagram was #4 — and notably, that on Instagram, Bangkok was ranked #2 most photographed city in the world (DAAT, 2015). These differences in findings called into question if the motivators differed due to culture, trends, or other factors. Because language was a limitation in this study, a brief overview of Thai research literature was done in regards to this area of study.

41 Key Findings in the Thai Literature Review: Social Media in Education, Charitable Giving and Social Media Fundraising In this section, Thai literature was collected and summarized in English in order to give insights to some of the literature gaps in the English language. Literature was not found in the area directly related to social media fundraising for education in Thailand, but there was documentation of universities using social media for other purposes such as student recruitment and as a learning tool. Documented cases were also found of Thai’s using social media for disaster relief and other fundraising purposes outside of the education sector. Thai literature was found that described Thai attitudes and culture towards charitable giving. Additionally, the Revenue Department of Thailand has specific restrictions on giving to various types of organizations, including education (Thai Revenue Department, 2016). The following gives an overview of each of these areas to give Thai perspective on social media, Thai attitudes towards charitable giving and instances of online giving in Thailand. Facebook Identified as an Effective Social Media for Learning in Thailand Facebook and other social media have been shown to be an effective learning tool in Thai research. Thai researchers have found that incorporating social media was beneficial to students (Trisittiwat, 2014). Social media integrated in Thai learning has also showed improved communication, and it has given creative methods for classroom interaction via social media (Somboon, 2010). One study showed that students’ satisfaction of a topic studied increased, as well as their scores improving by 18% (Khunrachasana, 2014). Facebook and other social media in Thailand were shown to be effective communication tools for students and teachers, for both secondary and higher education. In regards to social media and its effectiveness in education and classroom communication,

42 several research studies were conducted in Thailand. Sighakorn (2014) reported that students who had social media integrated into their learning had statistically significant cognitive achievement scores, interpersonal relationship scores, responsibility scores, numeric analytical skills, communication and IT usage scores. These findings show that integration of social media for these various purposes greatly enriches a student’s learning experience and improves skills. Facebook specifically, has been studied in Thai research and shown to be effective to enhance learning and classroom communication (Polpasi, 2011; Leoseng, 2014). When Facebook was used as a primary communication tool for Thai learning, it was shown that students indicated a high level of satisfaction regarding communication between each other and their instructors (Thonglim, 2015). In a research study of a Thai communication arts class, Facebook as a communication tool, enhanced classroom communication; findings resulted in enhanced communication for study groups consisting of three main types of activities, which were posting, sharing and commenting (Immjumlong, 2013). Additionally, in a sociological study, Facebook was also shown to have an increased sense of participants’ social acceptance in the Thai classroom (Sangjunruang, 2011). These Thai literature shows that there has been general effectiveness and openness of Thais to integrating social media into education. Another area of literature explored, was Thai attitudes towards charitable giving. Measurement of Effectiveness & Charitable Giving in Thailand A research study of the Asia Pacific region showed Thailand ranked #1 out of the countries interviewed in terms of charitable giving; the research showed that 70.5% of Thais are involved in charitable giving (“Emerging Markets More Likely to Donate” 2015). The same study indicated that the #1 type of charitable cause was for the category of children’s health and children’s education. Other studies showed that the Thai attitude towards

43 charitable giving may be tied to the Buddhist religion and its beliefs in karma and reincarnation (Dhammananda, 2002). Therefore, giving to charities is an act of making spiritual merit, and is a valued characteristic of Thai culture (Kanchanachitra, 2014). Research conducted in the area of charitable giving in Thailand showed that attendance of religious services increased participants’ generosity to both religious and nonreligious causes, indicating Buddhism’s positive influence on Thailand’s socioeconomic development (Apinunmahakul, 2014). Another study showed that only volunteering time was a determinant in charitable giving by a majority of Thais, and that education level and social capital were also motivators; the study concluded stating that with these two indicators that more online social networking should be promoted to raise awareness of community needs (Apinunmahakul, 2015). Another research study in the area of Thai education, found a high relationship between the motivations for collective and individual giving, and the actual mobilization of recourses. (Sangdit, 2010). Overall, the review of Thai literature thus far gave a clear picture that Thais are generous people and that social media is being integrated into Thai learning, however literature was not found in regards to social media fundraising for education in Thailand. Something that may explain this, is that the Thai government heavily supports education, with students being able to apply for government loans which may be repaid after graduation (Marginson, Kaur, Sawir, 2011). In the next section, it was found that literature was lacking in the area of social media giving in Thailand. Facebook, Other Social Media and Online Giving in Thailand As already examined, Thailand is active in social media use, integrating social media in the classroom, and are culturally and religiously inclined to charitable giving, but

44 what about online giving? Thailand appears to be motivated to give online through a couple instances. The largest online giving hubs for non-profit organizations in Thailand is the ThaiGiving website (ThaiGiving, n.d.). It’s a highly secure site, which allows users to search for organizations to give to, and also gives news and updates related to charity opportunities or fundraising activities. However, the amount of activity or funds raised through the website is unknown. Social media giving in Thailand through organization campaign and personal appeal were both represented. In a matter of 24-hours, a British girl who was in serious condition from a car accident in Thailand received a needed blood transfusion from donors due to a Facebook appeal (Nsubuga, 2016). This incident is an example of a non-organizational charitable appeal. The Red Cross of Thailand is an organization that raises awareness through social media. In the Red Cross’ project “1to3blood Jeb-Nee-Puer-Ter,” users may post on Facebook, Instagram or Twitter with the hashtag #1to3blood, to raise awareness about blood donation and also earn merit just by posting on with that hashtag (Thepkhamram, 2014). Blood donors typically give once a year, and the Red Cross stated that they have experienced blood shortages. The meaning of the #1to3blood is that one unit of blood can be used to save 3 people’s lives as blood can be separated into plasma, platelets, and red blood cells. “JebNee-Peur-Ter” means that donating blood may hurt, but it’s worth it to help others. However, while there were a few instances of social media fundraising in Thailand, only one scholarly article was found. It was a research study regarding motivators for giving to the Homeless Dog Foundation, in which donors were made aware of this cause through Facebook (Keawsuk, 2014). While it seems that there is some activity of online and social media giving in Thailand, it may either be a non-researched topic, or that there is little

45 motivation to research this area. While Thailand has been shown to be a giving culture, and very active on social media, there seems to be a disconnect between the two. In a Western-perspective research of international fundraising, it was found that cross-cultural fundraising has been shown to differ in concept, process and goals (Connor, 2002). This may be an indicator of the lack of literature. So, while Thailand may be active online, culturally and religiously inclined to give, and motivated to give towards health and education, there are gaps as to why social media is not being utilized as a means to give to higher education through social media. Private International Universities in Thailand For this research regarding fundraising via social media, private international universities within Thailand were selected. Thailand, compared to its neighbors in Southeast Asia, has the highest growth prospect and a more developed infrastructure (Political & Economic Risk Consultancy, 2011). There are almost an equal number of public to private universities, 79 public and 71 private universities or colleges, not including community colleges (Thai Ministry of Education via World Education Services, 2014). Of the 71 private universities and colleges, 17 are private universities with international programs (OHEC, 2016). These universities differ in their type and also program offering types. Data indicates Thailand’s need and favorable market for higher education, and this trend was also confirmed in a recent meeting in Singapore of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, (OECD)(Sharma, 2015). Private universities were selected for this study because of their limitations in access to Thai government funding (Clark, 2014), as well as their uniqueness in terms of program specialty or religious affiliation. Another compelling factor is Thailand’s statistics for internet usage.

46 Facebook & Thailand’s Internet Usage Also, interestingly, Thailand ranked #2 in a global comparison of 30 countries in time spent on the Internet: 5.5 hours on desktop and 4.1 hours on mobile (Kemp, 2015). This high usage rate combined with Thailand’s ranking of being the top fifth for average hours of social media use, 3.8 hours, indicates Thailand has active participation in social media. Facebook was identified as the most active social media channel in Thailand (Kemp, 2015). 2.6 Gaps in Literature & Hypotheses Formation: Users’ Responsiveness & Other Success Measurements to Facebook Posting by Institutions With the majority of college-aged and young working class social media users in Thailand, one can only speculate they are utilizing social media for their studies, socialization, ecommerce or other work communications. A direct application of the North American social media fundraising principles may or may not be as effective in Thailand. Due to the lack of literature and research, this area points back to the research questions and helped form the research hypotheses as follows: 2.7 Hypotheses Related to User Responses to University Facebook Posts (Objectives 1 & 2) The literature identified Facebook as the dominant social media for Thailand (DAAT, 2015), and users’ responsiveness was identified through likes, shares and commenting (Court, Elzinga, Mulder, & Vetvik, 2009). Therefore, the first and second hypotheses were formed: H1: Users are responsive towards Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns (Independent) by private international universities in Thailand. H2: There are statistically significant relationships between Facebook post categories, specifically fundraising related posts, and users’ response to the other Facebook by

47 the universities (eg. User likes of FB Fundraising category, and user shares of FB News category posts). Hypotheses: University Facebook Posting & Measurement of Success (Objectives 3 & 4) Users responsiveness was also shown through examples related to relevant social causes related to higher education (Bright, Margetts, Hale, & Yasseri, 2014). Funds raised was identified as a measurement of success, sometimes in millions of dollars raised (Gebelhoff, 2015; Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010 – 2015). Other measurements of success were identified such as, event participation, volunteering or other involvement (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2010 – 2015; Huron Education & Stoner, 2013). Therefore, the third and fourth hypotheses were formed: H3: Measurements of success in Facebook integration into fundraising activities of private international universities in Thailand are likely to be funds raised, event participation, volunteering and other measures. H4: There are statistically significant relationships between frequency of Facebook posting and the measurement of success by private international universities in Thailand. 2.8 Null Hypotheses There are no statistically significant relationship between users’ response to fundraising-related Facebook post categories, and users’ response to other posts by private international universities in Thailand. Additionally, there are no statistically significant relationships or associations between frequency of Facebook posting and measurements of success by private international universities in Thailand.

48 Private international universities in Thailand are not using Facebook and other social media, and Facebook is not being integrated for fundraising purposes. 2.9 Summary of Literature Review This literature review covered the topic of social media, including concepts such as demographics, social theories and social media use by business. Millions of people use social media for different psychological reasons (Balick, 2013; Putnam, 1993). Social media has proven to be effective for brand awareness (Relander, 2014) and successful for new forms of online marketing (Delzio, 2015). Fundraising via social media literature was also covered, with documentation by higher education studies and surveys, as well as its successes and failures by other organizations such as nonprofits. Columbia and Georgetown were analyzed as models of success for social media integration into fundraising campaigns (Arnett, 2015). The CASE reports by Slover-Linett and Stoner (2010, 2015) also revealed the success institutions had while incorporating social media into fundraising campaigns. However, of the findings from the CASE reports, the Asia-Pacific region was only represented by 3%. Literature was also reviewed which addressed the state of social media in Southeast Asia and Thailand. Thailand was shown to be very active online and on social media (Kemp, 2015; DAAT, 2015). Also, Thailand was identified both by Thai and international reports to be a giving culture (Apinunmahakul, 2014; “Emerging Markets More Likely to Donate” 2015). There was almost no Thai literature regarding social media use for fundraising. Thus there was identified a gap in relation to how private international universities may be using social media for fundraising purposes. 2.10 Conceptual Framework Based on the four hypotheses of the study, the following relationships were proposed as follows:

49 Suggested conceptual framework diagram H1 & H2 Facebook post categories incl. Users’ responses (e.g. likes, comments, shares) H3 Users’ responses Measurement of Success (e.g. funds raised, event participation, volunteering, others) H4 Frequency of Facebook posting Measurement of Success (e.g. funds raised, event participation, volunteering, others)

50 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY From the literature review, we see how social media has been integrated and well documented for fundraising campaigns in both processes and outcomes. While the vast majority of the literature covered predominantly North American institutions, this study sought to determine the status of Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns by private international universities in Thailand and users’ responsiveness through likes, shares and comments in Facebook, as well as funds raised, event participation, volunteering or other measurement of success. 3.1 Research Design This study used quantitative and qualitative research design. According to Creswell (2014), together with both quantitative and qualitative data, a clearer understanding of the research area may be formed, versus an understanding using only one type of data related to the research problem. Also, using both quantitative and qualitative research has been considered a good research design if one wants to build upon the strengths of both methods (Creswell, 2014). Mixed methodology was selected because one method alone was insufficient to address the research problem, and both together provide clearer answers to the research questions. Quantitative: Quantitative data of this study used descriptive and correlative research designs. According to Gay and Airasian (2003), descriptive research is used to describe and understand the current situation of a particular issue or phenomena within a particular population. Since part of the purpose of this study was to determine the current state of social media usage, descriptive research was an appropriate research design. It will