99 considered in this research study. Also, the scope of this research did not include giving behaviors for higher education in the Thai culture. Universities may have found that alternative channels besides social media integration for fundraising campaigns. Also, it should the Fundraising category also encompassed donor recognition and scholarships. Therefore some of the high user responsiveness could have been reflective of students’ excitement for a scholarship, rather than excitement to donate funds. In the qualitative interviews of this research, further light was shed on this area of Facebook integration in university fundraising. However, based of the low volume of Facebook posts for fundraising proposes, it was concluded that Facebook and social media integration for fundraising is not a priority in private higher education in Thailand. 5.2 Discussion Related to H2: User Responses to Facebook Categories & Users’ Responsiveness to Fundraising Post s A notable finding from the quantitative part of this study revealed four positive statistically significant correlations between users' responses on Facebook posts and users’ responses on fundraising posts. Because the analysis focused on user response relationships, it removed the universities’ volume of activity as the driving factor, and therefore gave more weight and neutrality to the results. These findings shown in Table 7, supported the current social media fundraising literature that stated that social media integration for fundraising campaigns yields greater fundraising success (Slover-Linett & Stoner, 2015). The statistically significant relationship were found between the following pairs: the News category’s user shares and Fundraising user likes; the News category’s user shares and Fundraising user shares; the News category’s user comments and Fundraising user shares; and the Alumni category’s user comments and Fundraising user comments. The News category relationship with Fundraising user likes (p =0.013) and Fundraising user shares
100 (p=0.001) had significant relationships at the 0.01 level, exceeding the methodology’s level of significance for p values < 0.05. The interpretation of the findings indicated correlation, implying influence or effect, but not necessarily cause, but consideration was given in light of the literature review. The findings in relation to the Alumni category user commenting appeared to confirm the importance of alumni relations in higher education, as well as social media as a communication channel for alumni (Lipman Hearne, Inc., 1999; Condon, 2013). These relationships were concluded to imply awareness or influence between the user activity for Fundraising, News Sharing, and Alumni. In the area of alumni communications, international studies have shown social media as an effective alumni communication tool for both younger and older alumni, and this also appears to be the case for private international institutions in Thailand (Condon, 2013). The qualitative interview part of the study touched upon alumni involvement in fundraising, thus making these findings relevant as knowledge for higher education fundraisers for private education in Thailand. In summarization the quantitative part, H1 and H2 were answered and accepted based on the above-mentioned findings. The relationships between user response for the categories of News, Fundraising and Alumni have helped fill an unknown knowledge gap. Additionally, the data collected showed an array of university and user activity that had not been previously documented in scholarly literature. 5.3 Summary: Qualitative Interviews 5.4 Discussion Related to H3 and Conclusions The interviews for this research helped shed light on some of the findings from the quantitative part of this study. The second part of the study consisted of questionnaires
101 administered by interview that were collected from private interviews as described in the methodology. Respondents were also free to share additional details to their responses, as documented in chapter 4. The rationale for this additional data collection was to give perspective to the findings from quantitative part of this study, and to collect sensitive data related to institutional fundraising. The findings gave perspective from university administrators and gave triangulation to the findings of this research overall. While the respondents provided the data requested in their questionnaire, they also included additional information that helped explain their institution’s Facebook integration for fundraising, as well as their thoughts regarding social media’s effectiveness for fundraising. The findings from this study revealed that social media has been actively used, with Facebook being used universities, according to 100% of respondents by the selected private international universities in Thailand (See Table 8). Additional findings confirm the literature that stated that Facebook is the predominant social media used in Thailand (DAAT, 2015), with some having high posting frequency by the institutions. From Table 10, where respondents ranked their frequency of posting the various Facebook post categories, and the documented stories from respondents confirmed the literature in relation to social recognition (Balick, 2013). In the analysis section of the interview data, a few respondents described how they thanked and recognized donors on social media, and how that strengthened their fundraising campaigns. While their categories and purposes for posting to Facebook varied, the results showed that some institutions are posting in relation to their fundraising campaigns or for donor recognition. Additionally, a majority (Table 8, 86%) of those surveyed also stated their institution used other lesser-known social media to meet communication needs.
102 The responses from Table 15, in which respondents gave ranges for funders raised which integrated social media, also provided relevant data for this knowledge gap. While over a third responded with 500,000 THB or less (35.29%) and the majority giving no response, there was response for each of the higher tiers for funds raised which integrated social media. This information was valuable in determining if Thai institutions in this context were finding success in their social media integration for fundraising, with one respondent indicating 5,000,000 THB or more raised (See Table 15). Additionally, the respondents’ stories of integrating Facebook and other social media to increase their fundraising success also were meaningful to the objectives of this study. It was also of consideration that the respondents themselves did not give priority to actual funds raised as a measurement of effectiveness for their Facebook posts. However, in answer to H3, respondents indicated they had other measurements of effectiveness besides funds raised, such as event participation or volunteering, however, it should be noted that the categories the relationships were found in categories related to previously discussed social media theories, in addition to the quantitative part of this study. Therefore, these findings, in addition to respondents various experiences in success measurement revealed that funds was one of many measurements of success for institutions posting on Facebook. 5.5 Discussion Related to H4 and Conclusions There were no statistically significant relationships between frequency of Facebook posting and the Fundraising Facebook post category and funds raised, thus answering H4, which proposed that there may be relationships between intuitions posting frequently on Facebook and funds raised. Additionally, there were no associations found through ANOVA and comparison of means, Chi-square test for relationship and Fisher’s exact test for independence.
103 The third and fourth research objectives that was, “to identify a measurement of success in Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns of private international universities in Thailand,” and, “To determine a relationship between frequency of Facebook posting and the measurement of success by private international universities in Thailand,” was therefore met based on these findings. However, H3 was accepted because of the results that showed different measurements of success besides funds. On the other hand, H4 was rejected because there was no statistically significant relationship between frequency of Facebook posting and measurement of success. Though it was revealed that universities had other levels of measurement besides funds to rate their Facebook posting success, there was no association found between how frequently institutions posted on Facebook and their success measurements. 5.6 Summarization of the Quantitative and Qualitative Parts In Relation to Each Other The quantitative part of this study collected publicly available data of private international universities in Thailand’s Facebook posts and user response. The qualitative part of this study collected data from knowledgeable staff of selected private international universities in Thailand. This summarization consists of comparing the notable descriptive findings and the statistically significant correlative findings. Comparing the notable descriptive findings of both parts, Facebook post categories of “Promotion” and “Brand” ranked high for both the public Facebook data and the university staff responses to the survey. The “Promotion” category of Facebook posts appeared at the highest frequency with 114 posts (31.32%) and “Brand, Campus and Classroom,” had 78 posts (21.43%) from the sampled weeks. However, the “Promotion” category was ranked third, and the “Brand” category was ranked second, in terms of user response. University staff respondents ranked “Promotion” and “Brand” as a highly used Facebook post
104 categories, but they were not ranked the overall most used category for posting to Facebook. The interpretation for these repeated Facebook post categories might mean that both users and university administrators see the appeal and value of posts related to that category. Another meaning may be that users are responsive to the efforts of communication related to administrators’ efforts to “Promote” their institutions. The results from Part 1 showed in user responses in relation to Facebook categories, the categories of “News Sharing,” “Alumni,” and “Fundraising,” had positive statistically significant relationships. In Part 2 of this research, while there were no associations found in the analysis, respondents shared several stories of alumni giving. Institutions that shared fundraising stories more as news or PR, described how there was benefit to both the institution and the donor in recognizing and thanking them. The perspectives both bring triangulation to this research, because the data collected were from different sources – the user responses and the university staff respondents. Additional Findings from the Qualitative Part Some of the questions that arose from quantitative Facebook data a university’s intent for Facebook and fundraising were answered in the interviews. In qualitative part of this study, questions arose regarding the development of brand presence on Facebook, Facebook’s effectiveness for integration into fundraising campaigns, alumni relations and fundraising, other social media use and other issues such as human resources and alternative Fundraising methods. The findings related to brand presence from the interviews revealed that many of the universities interviewed were continually promoting their brand through Facebook and other social media. Some respondents also stated that they were continually developing their
105 social media strategies, and even looking into new social media channels as well as developing their own social media applications. Lack of Facebook and social media presence was said by some respondents to be due to a lack of human resources, and also lack of coordination between the communications and advancement units. This information gave insights to lower post quantity from the quantitative part of this study, by the majority of the universities within this study. Alumni audience activity was also significant for this study, as may show positive feelings or awareness from alumni (Arnett, 2015). Engaging user interest, especially alumni audiences, seems to have many methods both including and independent of social media, and respondents stated that alumni were a relevant audience for their social media activities. Further research could be explored in the area of alumni for private international institutions in Thailand. Respondents did not rank the fundraising category for Facebook as a high priority, however four respondents stated that they raised 500,001THB or more through integration of social media (See Table 16). Though some respondents said they would like to develop their social media channels and better reach their communication and fundraising goals, they also shared that fundraising through social media or online giving was not the most effective method for large fundraising projects. Several of those interviewed said that their institutions had alternative and more effective means for fundraising. More than a few answered that relationship building and face-to-face meetings proved to be the most effective methods for fundraising. However, comparing the statistical data with the individual accounts given by the university respondents, several of the universities that were integrating Facebook into their fundraising activities shared their stories of success. Respondents that shared success stories also indicated higher ranges and percentages of funds raised in the questionnaire.
106 It was therefore concluded, that the findings of this study appear to support the current literature. However, because of the lack of statistical relationship between frequency of Facebook use and success measurement, it may be implied that social media integration for fundraising is developing in the higher education sector for private international institutions in Thailand. The results may also have been influenced by the small sample size, or differences between institutions (ie. University size, human resources or different Facebook communication objectives). While many institutions were meeting their goals for their own measurement of success, it was additionally concluded that a few institutions are successfully integrating Facebook for fundraising purposes with success. 5.7 Significance from the Findings of this Study This study’s findings benefit universities in similar contexts, fundraising, marketing teams, international fundraisers, students and scholars, so they may have a better understanding regarding institutional Facebook use and fundraising effectiveness. This study particularly gave a clearer picture regarding Facebook usage by private international universities in Thailand. From the findings of this study other universities in similar contexts, may gain insight regarding how to better connect with their audiences via Facebook. They may also be encouraged to continue developing their social media strategies and teams in order to strengthen fundraising effectiveness. University fundraising teams, marketing teams, and international fundraisers benefit from the findings of this study, with the knowledge that specific Facebook post categories have relationship with others, especially related to Fundraising, News Sharing, and Alumni categories. Fundraising teams may therefore be able to better connect with their audiences, especially alumni, through social media. Fundraising teams and international
107 fundraisers may be able to incorporate social media in order to thank donors and encourages others to donate through social media recognition and other mentioned indicators. Current and prospective students should in tern benefit from the findings of this study. They should be able to better connect with relevant institutions, which should also therefore have ample funding to support their learning experience. Scholars may use the findings and expand this area of research. They may also apply it to similar contexts and discover similar outcomes. The overall goal of this study was fulfilled in that it produced findings that may help institutions in the same or similar contexts better understand the state of Facebook use at private institutions, understand user response, and post categories in relation to expected fundraising results or other measurements of success. 5.8 Conclusions The findings from this 2-stage study showed that the majority private international universities in Thailand are actively using Facebook. Objective 1 was fulfilled through the quantitative part of the study, which included the documentation of online Facebook data from the majority of the private international universities in Thailand. H1 stated that users were responsive towards Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns by private international universities in Thailand. The findings revealed that users were responsive to these posts, therefore fulfilling this objective. Universities were observed at having various levels posting frequency, using Facebook as a communication to reach their audiences and various objectives. Although the data showed that there was a lack of responsiveness by users towards Fundraising posts, it was mainly based on the low quantity of posts related to Fundraising.
108 Objective 2 was fulfilled through the analysis of the quantitative Facebook data, which was analyzed to determine if there was relationship 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). The four statistically significant relationships that were found led, meant the acceptance of H2, which stated that there were, statistically significant relationships between Facebook post categories, specifically fundraising related posts, and users’ response to the other Facebook posts by the universities. University respondents in the qualitative part of this research ranked the Facebook categories based on their institutional goals for Facebook communications. Additional data was obtained regarding alternative social media channels used by universities and some respondents also shared their hopes for future development in social media. From the quantitative part of this study, objective 2 was fulfilled regarding Facebook’s integration in fundraising, was fulfilled in user responsiveness between various Facebook post categories and Facebook Fundraising posts by the universities. These findings resulted in the acceptance of H2. The analysis showed that there were significant positive correlations between users’ responses on Facebook “Fundraising” posts and “News” and “Alumni” posts. This implies that as users respond to posts of those categories, their responses to posts of the other categories also increase. Further research would need to be conducted to determine the relevant aspects of these correlations. From the qualitative interviews of this study, objective 3 was fulfilled through the identification measurements of success in Facebook integration into fundraising activities/campaigns of private international universities in Thailand. The responses from knowledgeable university staff, as indicated through the questionnaire and verbal responses, that their institutions had other measurements of Facebook communications success besides
109 funds raised, which included event participation, volunteering or involvement, or other indicators (ie. PR value, alumni or donor relations, etc.). These finding also led to the acceptance of H3. Objective 4 was also fulfilled as respondents from the universities gave percentages of funds raised, ranges of funds raised and estimation of success of fundraising that integrated Facebook. However, the analysis revealed no statistically significant relationships or associations between frequency of Facebook posting and measurements of success, such as funds raised (ranges or percentages) or event participation, volunteering or other involvement. Therefore H4 was rejected, however, some respondents shared their success stories of Facebook and social media integration for fundraising and donor recognition purposes. It was noted that some of the findings may have been a result of the small sample size, or to differences in institutional size, resources or Facebook goals. Further research should be conducted to better understand the uses and goals for university social media use in this context. 5.9 Recommendations From findings of this study, the following recommendations were provided: 1. To the management of private international universities in Thailand A majority of the university staff seemed unclear regarding how their unit determined if their Facebook post activities were successful in the area of fundraising. Therefore the following recommendations were made: There is a need of evaluation to find out if their staff are effectively implementing their social media and Facebook in order to reach institutional fundraising goals, and also their customers. For example, institutions should develop strategies for Facebook posting that use content that will be engaging to
110 their target audiences, socially relevant causes. Furthermore, the audience response tracking tools for Facebook pages should indicate effective user responsiveness, in addition to surveys of participants at events, volunteers or other measurement of success. Strengthen their online communication strategies and focus on fundraising objectives, as a way to promote and collect funds for university development. Institutions should study their Facebook audiences to understand what influences their motives to give or support university causes (ie. events, competitions, etc.). To evaluate the use of social media as a potential technique to increase students’ enrollment, public relations, and community involvement. Institutional strengths should be studied, with the appropriate communications strategies/campaigns designed to best meet their audience and communications goals. 2. To fundraising and marketing teams of private international universities in Thailand Some university staff shared how Facebook or social media integration were not effective for large donations, yet this appears contrary to the majority of the literature therefore it was recommended for these teams to: To research and develop appropriate techniques of social media communications in order to connect with alumni and other potential donor audiences for the university. For example some institutions shared that they have alumni chapters, or alumni group chats for different cities/regions, and alumni groups by Department or School (ie. School of Nursing, etc.). Some institutions found success in integrating aspects of the theory of mutual recognition to increase fundraising and donor relationships.
111 To determine which audiences and campaigns would be the best fit for social media fundraising and work on research and development strategies to strengthen their social media programs. For example, Facebook in the context of Thailand was observed to have a younger user audience (Kemp, 2015), and therefore they may be more interested in concerts, sporting events or other area of interest. To find out why customers (students and all other audiences) were not strongly responsive to their integration of Facebook for fundraising purposes. As mentioned in the previous point, target audiences may show responsiveness to different media or content based on demographics. 3. For further studies of private international universities in Thailand Scholars and researchers are recommended to further investigate on the following understanding of social media usage from international universities in Thailand: Post Category: The content of the posts themselves in relation to user response should be further studied. This would benefit marketing and fundraising teams as to better understand audience interest, particularly content/posts coming from universities. User Response: Social media behavior in the context of Thailand should be further studied to determine the users’ main purposes, motivators and activities regarding social media. Further study in this area would benefit social studies related to new media and user behavior. Fundraising: Further research should be conducted regarding fundraising for higher education in Thailand using social media. Although a few respondents claimed that Facebook integration for fundraising would not be effective as other methods, the institutions in this research study did not state that they had
112 fundraising campaigns which integrated new media. Further research in this area could test fundraising models, such as Columbia, Amherst, etc. and thus have research to prove/disprove the statements. Social media: Scholars and researchers may further investigate this area of research to perhaps discover more relevant social media correlations. As mentioned previously, sample size, institutional type or resources (funds, human, etc.) may have been limitations of this study which could be further explored.
113 References Alumni [Def 1]. (nd). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved March 2015, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alumni Amherst University (2014, April). UMass Amherst Launches Second Annual UMassGives 36- Hour Online Fundraising Drive. Retrieved from https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/article/umass-amherst-launches-second-annual Apinunmahakul, A. (2015, July). Determinants of Voluntary Contributions in Thailand. Journal of Development Economic Review. Vol 9, No. 2. Retrieved from: http://www.tcithaijo.org/index.php/NER/ Apinunmahakul, A. (2014). Religious and Non-religious Giving in Thailand: An Economic Perspective. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. Vol 5, No 3. Retrieved from: http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEDS/article/view/11005 ASEAN.org. (2015). Statements & Communiqués. Retrieved from http://asean.org/category/asean-statement-communiques/ Arnett, Autumn A. (2015). Giving Grows: Social Media Is Increasingly Playing a Crucial Role in the Fundraising Campaigns of Colleges and Universities. Balick, Aaron. (2013). The Real Motivation Behind Social Networking. Tilt Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/2494977/The_Real_Motivation_Behind_Social_Networking._T herapeutic_Innovations_in_Light_of_Technology_Volume_3_Issue_2_ Barnes, Nora Ganim; Mattson, Eric. (2009). Still Setting the Pace in Social Media: The First Longitudinal Study of Usage by the Largest US Charities. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/PingElizabeth/still-setting-the-pacein-social-media-the-first-longitudinal-study-of-usage-by-the-largest-us-charities Bell, Karissa. (2014, October, 14). Facebook Stickers Are Now Available in Comments. Mashable. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2014/10/13/facebook-commentsstickers/#Az7wAg9Mxuqw Benjamin, Jessica. (1988). The Bonds of Love: psychoanalysis, feminism, and the problem of domination. New York: Pantheon. Bonchek, Mark & France, Cara. (2014, May). Marketing Can No Longer Rely on the Funnel. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/05/marketing-can-nolonger-rely-on-the-funnel
114 Bovaird, J. & Kupzyk, K. (2010). "Sequential Design." In Encyclopedia of Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers. Brewer, Dominic J & Picus, Lawrence. (2014, November). Encyclopedia of Education Economics and Finance. SAGE Publications. Retrieved from http://www.nyu.edu/projects/corcoran/papers/Teacher%20Experience.pdf Bright, J; Hale S; Margetts, H; Yasseri, Taha. (2014, December). The Use of Social Media for Research and Analysis: A Feasibility Study. A report of research carried out by the Oxford Internet Institute on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions. pg. 9. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/387591/use -of-social-media-for-research-and-analysis.pdf Campbell, I. (2007). Chi-squared and Fisher-Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations. Statist. Med. Campbell, Julia. (2014, May). 6 Ways Nonprofits Are Getting Online Fundraising All Wrong. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140521180907-14536119-6-waysnonprofits-are-getting-online-fundraising-all-wrong Cole, Clark. (2014, June). Social Media Best Practices for Nonprofit Organizations. Retrieved from http://www.ccghr.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/CCGHR-Social-MediaModules_Complete.pdf Condon, Tamara J. (2013). Social Media Usage Among Andrews University Alumni and Their Preferences for Alumni Communication. Andrews University. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/21785750/SOCIAL_MEDIA_USAGE_AMONG_ANDREWS _UNIVERSITY_ALUMNI_AND_THEIR_PREFERENCES_FOR_ALUMNI_COMMU NICATION Connor, U. (2002). Epilogue: Case studies in cross-cultural fundraising. The CASE International Journal of Educational Advancement, 3(2), 173-176. Retrieved from: https://liberalarts.iupui.edu/icic/uploads/docs/Epilogue_Case_Studies.doc Court, David; Elzinga, Dave; Mulder, Susan & Vetvik, Ole Jørgen. (2009, June). The consumer decision journey. McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/marketing_sales/the_consumer_decision_journey Creswell, JW. (2005). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Crewel, JW. (2014). Research Design, Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publication.
115 DAAT, Digital Advertising Association of Thailand (2015, January). [Infographic] Online Marketing Thailand: The State of Social Media. Syndacast.com. Retrieved from http://syndacast.com/infographic-online-marketing-thailand-the-state-of-social-media/ also retrieved from full report, http://syndacast.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/01/Thailand-Social-Media-Landscape.pdf Delzio, Susan. (2015, April, 22). Social Media Examiner. Retrieved on October, 2015 from http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/marketers-embrace-influencer-marketing-newresearch/ Digital Insights. (2013, September). Social Media facts, figures and statistics 2013. Retrieved from http://blog.digitalinsights.in/social-media-facts-and-statistics-2013/0560387.html Digital Trends. (2016, May). The History of Social Networking. Retrieved from http://www.digitaltrends.com/features/the-history-of-social-networking/ Dhammananda, K. S. (2002). What Buddhists believe: Expanded 4th edition. Kuala Lumpur: Buddhist Missionary Society Malaysia. Dyer, Pam. (2014, March). When to Post on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, LinkedIn and Pinterest [Infographic]. Social Media Today. Retrieved from http://www.socialmediatoday.com/content/when-post-facebook-twitter-google-linkedinand-pinterest-infographic Education Division of the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA), edWeb.net, and MCH Strategic Data. (2011). Social Media Marketing in Education. Ellering, Nathan. (2016, April). What 10 Studies Say About The Best Times To Post On Social Media. Retrieved from http://coschedule.com/blog/best-times-to-post-on-social-media/ “Emerging Markets More Likely to Donate to Charity, While Developed Countries Give Bigger Amounts” (2015, July). Retrieved from: http://newsroom.mastercard.com/asiapacific/press-releases/emerging-markets-more-likely-to-donate-to-charity-whiledeveloped-countries-give-bigger-amounts/ Facebook. (2015). Help Center, Comment. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/help/281592001947683/ Facebook. (2015). Help Center, Page Basics. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/help/281592001947683/ Facebook. (2015). Help Center, Verified Page or profile. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/help/196050490547892 Facebook. (2015). Community Standards. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards
116 Fairfield, Johnathan. (2015, January, 1). A complete guide to Internet and social media usage in Thailand. Thai Tech. Retrieved from http://tech.thaivisa.com/complete-insight-internetsocial-media-usage-thailand/3147/ Fine, AH. & Kanter, B. (2010). The networked nonprofit: Connecting with social media to drive change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Fundraising [Def 1 and full def.]. (nd). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fundraising Gay, L. R., & Airasian (2003). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Gebelhoff, Robert. (2015, August, 19). Scientists are crediting the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge for breakthroughs in research. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/08/19/scientists-arecrediting-the-ice-bucket-challenge-for-breakthroughs-in-research/ Hajewski, Doris. (2010, November, 1). Kohl's contest raises questions. Journal Sentinel. Retrieved from http://www.jsonline.com/business/106491618.html Halfpenny, Peter; Procter, Rob. (2015, May 18). Innovations in Digital Research Methods. SAGE Publishing. Retrieved from https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/asi/innovations-indigital-research-methods/book236862 Haught, Matthew J.; Willis, Erin; Furrow, Ashley; Morris III, David L.; Freberg, Karen. (2016, September). Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics. p.17-38 17. College Sport Research Institute. Retrieved from http://csrijiia.org/documents/publications/research_articles/2016/JIIA_2016_9_2_398.pdf Hutchinson, Andrew. (2015, August, 8). Facebook Releases New Data on South East Asian Market [Report]. Social Media Today. Retrieved from: http://www.socialmediatoday.com/social-business/adhutchinson/2015-08-08/facebookreleases-new-data-south-east-asian-market-report Huron Education & Stoner, Michael. (2013). #SocialMedia, Advancement, and Fundraising in Education. Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). Immjumlong, A. (2013). The Use of Facebook as a Media Channel for Studying the Communication Arts. The Journal Communications for Business, Pundit (University 7). Issue 7 No. 1, January-June, 2013. Retrieved on June 20, 2016,: http://www.dpu.ac.th/commarts/journal/upload/issue/t4X8ZoN6xw.pdf Jackson, Sherri L. (2012, March, 17). Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach. Cengage Learning. Belmont, California, USA. Pg. 88
117 Kanchanachitra, M. (2014, January). The Giving Behavior of Households in Thailand. Journal of Population and Social Studies, Mahidol University. Volume 22 Number 1. Retrieved from: http://www.jpss.mahidol.ac.th/PDF/JPSS-Vol22(1)- Manasigan%20Household%20Giving-Final.pdf Keawsuk, W. (2014). Communication on Social Network: Case Study “Homeless Dog Foundation 2014”. In partial fulfillment of Master of Arts and Sciences, University 5. Retrieved on June 20, 2016, from http://dspace.bu.ac.th/bitstream/123456789/1194/1/wanisa_keaw.pdf Kemp, Simon. (2015, Novemer, 23) Digital landscape of Southeast Asia in Q4 2015. Tech in Asia. Retrieved from https://www.techinasia.com/talk/digital-southeast-asia-q4-2015 Kent, M. L. & Taylor, M. (1998) Building Dialogic Relationships through the World Wide Web. Public Relations Review. vol. 24, no. 3 Khunrachasana, K. (2014). The Activities of Teaching Four Noble Truths Method Through Social Media Towards the Achievement Development of Electronic Media Subject to the Teaching of Undergraduates. Phetchabun Rajabhat University. Retrieved from http://research.pcru.ac.th/rdb/pro_data/files/5702004.pdf Lenhart A., P. K. (2010, February, 3). Social Media and Young Adults. Retrieved 2013, September from Pew Internet: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Mediaand-Young-Adults.aspx Laird, Monica. (2010, June). Social Media Fundraising: Facebook Friend or Foe? A Case Study of Oregon Nonprofit Organizations. University of Oregon. Retrieved from https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/10676/Laird_Monica_mp a2010sp.pdf?sequence=1 Leedy, P.D., & Ormrod, J.E. (2005). Practical research, planning and design (8th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Leoseng, W. (2014). The Use of Facebook as a Media Channel for Studying the Communication Arts. Retrieved June 20, 2016, from: http://swis.acp.ac.th/html_edu/acp/temp_research/273.pdf x Lipman Hearne, Inc. (1999, January). Alumni and Non-Alumni Donor Survey Results. San Francisco State University. Retrieved from http://www.sfsu.edu/~news/surveys/alumnisurvey.htm Marginson, S., Kaur, S., Sawir, E. (2011, August). Higher Education in the Asia-Pacific: Strategic Responses to Globalization. Springer Science & Business Media. Retrieved from:
118 https://books.google.co.th/books?id=cG79c5EDa1sC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage& q&f=false Mayes, Laura (2011, May, 3). Effectively Incorporating Social Media: A Case Study on CocaCola. Retrieved from https://www.american.edu/soc/communication/upload/LauraMayes.pdf McMillan, D.W., & Chavis, D.M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6-23 Nsubuga, J. (2016, January 11). Injured British girl ‘out of immediate danger’ after Facebook blood donor appeal. MetroUK News. Retrieved from: http://metro.co.uk/2016/01/11/injured-british-girl-out-of-immediate-danger-afterfacebook-blood-donor-appeal-5616395/#ixzz4Eqro5vWd OHEC, Office of Higher Education Commission in Thailand. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.mua.go.th/ Olenski, Steve. (2015, August, 21). The 3 Best Social Media Campaigns Of 2015 (So Far). Forbes Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveolenski/2015/08/21/the-3-best-social-mediacampaigns-of-2015-so-far/#1028a5ee606f Pearson in conjunction with Babson Survey Research Group and New Marketing Labs. (2010). Social Media in Higher Education. Pict At Random. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://pickatrandom.com/ Polpasi, G. (2011, December). Online Social Network in Thai Higher Education: A Study of Facebook Integrated Classroom Activities. Retrieved from the Library of Dusit Thani College, Bangkok, Thailand: http://lib.dtc.ac.th/research/Gunn.pdf Political & Risk Consultancy LTD. (2011). Emerging Asia SWOT Report. Retrieved from http://www.asiarisk.com/library2.pdf Putnam, R.D. (1993). Making democracy work: civil traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Raine, Lee; Horrigan, John B. (2002, March). Getting Serious Online: As Americans Gain Experience, They Pursue More Serious Activities. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2002/03/03/getting-serious-online-as-americans-gainexperience-they-pursue-more-serious-activities/ Relander, Brett. (2014, June). Entrepreneur Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/234870
119 Reuters. (2013, May). YouTube Stats: Site Has 1 Billion Active Users Each Month. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/21/youtubestats_n_2922543.html Ruben, R. (2008). Social Media Marketing in Education. Reynolds, C. (2011). Friends Who Give: Relationship-Building and Other Uses of Social Networking Tools by Nonprofit Organizations. The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications. (Vol. 2, No. 2, Fall). Sangdit, T. 2010. Community Motivation and Mobilization of Education Resources in Schools Under the Office of Ratchaburi Education Service Area 1. Department of Educational Administration, Graduate School, Silpakorn University. Retrieved from: http://www.thapra.lib.su.ac.th/objects/thesis/fulltext/snamcn/Teerasak_Sangdit/fulltext.p df Sangjunruang, K. 2011. Social Learning Promotion and Development by Online Social Network; Case Study: Facebook.com by Thammasat University Students. Retrieved from: http://digi.library.tu.ac.th/thesis/it/0791/title-biography.pdf Schivinski, B., & Dąbrowski, D. (2013). The Impact of Brand Communication on Brand Equity Dimensions and Brand Purchase Intention Through Facebook. Gdansk University of Technology, Faculty of Management and Economics. Scripted. (2012). What is a Facebook Post. Retrieved from https://www.scripted.com/writers/what-is-a-facebook-post/ Sharma, Yojana. (2015, October). Asia emerging as ‘third pole’ in higher education. University World News, Issue 00432. Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20151017102236390 Sherman, Arielle R. (2011, June). The Art of Social Giving: The Role of Online Fundraising & Community Engagement in Local Arts Organizations. University of Oregon. Retrieved from https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11198 Sighakorn, S. (2014, December). Development of Learning and Teaching by Social Network. Year 4, Vol. 2, July-December 2014. Electronic Journal of Open and Distance Innovative Learning. Sincero, S. (2012, Sept, 21). The Survey Guide: 4.2 Personal Interview Survey. Explorable.com. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.th/books?id=2bpx0QGBxHIC&pg=PT35&lpg=PT35&dq=%22P ersonal+Interview+Survey%22&source=bl&ots=w3eM4CxZDC&sig=pmtGh5YCnpW3
120 Hu6FKXZZRT0Xeoc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTzc3I9YHOAhUJNo8KHSgXD MUQ6AEIcDAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false Sirkin, M. (2005). "Two-sample t tests". Statistics for the Social Sciences (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Slover-Linett, Cheryl; Stoner, Michael. (2010). Succeeding with Social Media: Lessons from the First Survey of Social Media in Advancement. Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). Slover-Linett, Cheryl; Stoner, Michael. (2011). Findings from 2011 CASE/mStoner/Slover Linett Survey of Social Media & Advancement. Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). Slover-Linett, Cheryl; Stoner, Michael. (2012, August). #SocialMedia and Advancement: Insights from Three Years of Data. Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). Slover-Linett, Cheryl; Stoner, Michael. (2015). Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). Social media [Def 1]. (nd). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved September, 2015, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialmedia Somboon, Prakit Na. 2010. Using social network for learning and teaching of Computer for Tourism Industry, St. John’s University, Thailand. Retrieved from (copy/paste): http://www.stjohn.ac.th/sju/research/pdf/%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%88%E 0%B8%B1%E0%B8%A2%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%B1%E 0%B9%89%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%A2%E0 %B8%99- %E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%88%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%A A%E0%B8%96%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%992553/16.%E0 %B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%8A%E0%B9%89%20S ocial%20Network%20%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%B7%E0%B9%88%E0% B8%AD%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%AD%E0 %B8%99%E0%B8%AF- %E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%88 %20%E0%B8%93%20%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B9%E0 %B8%A3%E0%B8%93%E0%B9%8C.pdf Sullivan, M. (2010). Statistics: Informed decisions using data (3rd ed.). NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. ThaiGiving (nd.) http://thaigiving.org/en/product
121 Thai Ministry of Education via World Education News & Reviews. (2014, March). Education in Thailand. Retrieved from http://wenr.wes.org/2014/03/education-in-thailand Thai Revenue Department. (2016, October). Limitations and Tax on Donations. Retrieved October, 2016 from: http://www.rd.go.th/publish/23371.0.html and FAQs: http://www.rd.go.th/publish/28933.0.html Thepkhamram, P. (2014, October, 17). Thai Health News. Retrieved from: http://www.thaihealth.or.th/partnership/Content/26175- %E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A3 %E0%B8%B0%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%8 7%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%8 4%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%8C%20%60%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%A3%E 0%B8%B4%E0%B8%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%84%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A5%E0 %B8%B7%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%94%60.html Thielman, Sam. (2016, February). Facebook recrafts 'like' button with Reactions, complete with an angry face. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/24/facebook-reactions-like-buttonangry-love-haha-wow-sad-faces-heart Thonglim, J. (2015). ประสิทธิภาพการใช้Facebook เพื่อเป็นเครื่องมือในการติดต่อสื่อสาร ระหวา่งอาจารยผ์สู้อนและนิสิต (The use of Facebook as a Useful Tool for Facilitating Communications Between Teachers and Students). Naresuan University Journal, Vol.8, no. 3. Retrieved on June 20, 2016, from http://www.journal.nu.ac.th/index.php?journal=JCDR&page=article&op=view&path%5 B%5D=1093&path%5B%5D=794 Tobin, Stephanie, J.; Vanman, Eric J. Verreynne, Marnize; Saeri, Alexander K. (2014, March). Threats to belonging on Facebook: lurking and ostracism. Retrieved from www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15534510.2014.893924 Trending [Def 1]. (nd) MacMilland Dictionary retrieved from http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/trending Trisittiwat, N. (2014, May). การประยุกต์ใช้Social Network และ Social Media ส าหรับการศึกษา. เทคโนโลยี การศึกษา. เทคโนโลยีการศึกษา Educational Technology Journal. Retrieved from http://edutech14.blogspot.com/2014/05/social-network-social-media.html Triola, M. (2012). Elementary Statistics Technology Update: International Edition. (11th ed.), Pearson Higher Education.
122 Trochim, W. (2006). Descriptive Statistics. In Research Methods Knowledge Base (Analysis: Descriptive Statistics). Retrieved from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/statdesc.php University of Virginia. (2012). Institutional Review Board for Social & Behavioral Sciences. Archival Data. Retrieved from http://www.virginia.edu/vpr/irb/sbs/submissions_review_ex_exemption_arch.html Unilever. (2004). Dove Campaign for Real Beauty. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20070816112659/http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.ca/sup ports.asp?url=supports.asp§ion=campaign&id=1560 Waters, Richard D.; Burnett, Emily; Lammb, Anna; Lucas Jessica. (2009). Engaging stakeholders through social networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook. Public Relations Review 35. p. 103; p. 102-106. Retrieved from https://cyfar.org/sites/default/files/Waters,%202009.pdf Williamson, K. (2002, July 1). Research Methods for Students, Academics and Professionals: Information Management and Systems. Center for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, Australia. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.th/books?id=4veiAgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs _ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Yates, D., Moore, Moore, D., McCabe, G. (1999). The Practice of Statistics (1st Ed.). New York: W.H. Freeman.
123 Appendix Appendix A: Questionnaire A. Demographic Information (Ask at end) Code B Social Media 1. Which types of social media do you (your unit) use? Please select all that apply. 1 Facebook 2 YouTube 3 Instagram 4 LINE 5 Twitter 6 Other, please list Very frequently (4) Frequently (3) Sometimes (2) Rarely/Never (1) 2. If you use Facebook, how frequently do you post on Facebook? 3. If you use Youtube, how frequently do you post on Youtube? 4. If you use Instagram, how frequently do you post on Instagram? 5. If you use LINE, how frequently do you post on LINE? 6. If you use Twitter, how frequently do you tweet on Twitter? 7. If you use other social media, how frequently do you use your other social media?
124 8. If using Facebook, which of the following are the main purposes for posting on Facebook: (1 as most used, 10 being the least used) 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, 10) Video or other social media platform share 9. For Facebook, how do you measure effectiveness of post categories? (1 strongest, 8 weakest) 1) User likes 2) User shares 3) User comments 4) Student applications / new students 5) Website traffic 6) Event attendance 7) New or more alumni contacts 8) Funds raised C Fundraising via Social Media 10. How do you measure effectiveness for your social media fundraising? (1 being the strongest measure to 4, being the weakest measure) 1) Funds raised 2) Event participation 3) Volunteering or involvement 4) Other, please specify
125 11. How frequently does your institution use social media to connect with donors? What are the other ways you connect with donors? _____________________________________________ Very frequently (4) Frequently (3) Sometimes (2) Rarely/Never (1) 12. How frequently do you post to social media for fundraising purposes? *12, 13 Can describe… 13. How frequently does your university use social media to raise money? 14. Which of the following are the main groups your university raises funds from? (1 as largest group to 7 as the smallest group) 1) Foundations 2) Organizations 3) Alumni 4) Community 5) Businesses 6) University Faculty & Staff 7) Other, please specify 15. About what percentage of the total funds your institution raised in 2014-2015 was from social media channels? 0 to 5% 6% to 10% 11% to 20% 21% to 49% 50% or more Very successful (4) Successful (3) Somewhat successful (2) Not very successful (1) 16. How would you rate the overall success of your university’s social media use for fundraising?
126 17. About how much money did your institution raise through social media in 2014-2015? 500,000 THB or less 500,001 – 999,999 THB 1,000,000 – 4,999,999 THB 5,000,000 THB or more A Demographic Information 18. Which best describes your institution? Undergraduate / Baccalaureate (four year) college Graduate (Master, Doctorate) Associate's (two year) college Trade school or special focus institution (e.g. stand-alone law school, medical school) Other (please specify) 19. How many students does your institution have? (Please include ALL students; may specify exact number / write in) Less than 1,000 1,000 - 4,999 5,000 - 9,999 10,000 -14,999 15,000 - 19,999 20,000 or more *May specify exact number 20. Which best describes your office’s role at this university? Advancement / Development Alumni Relations Communications Marketing Other, please specify
127 21. How many years have you worked for this university? 1 year or less 1-3 3-5 5-10 10+ Appendix B: Questionnaire Responses 1. Which types of social media do you (your unit) use? Please select all that apply. Facebook 17 (100%) YouTube 15 (88.24%) Instagram 11 (64.71%) LINE 15 (88.24%) Twitter 9 (52.94%) Other, please list 14 (82.35%) Blogs, Email, Fiver, Flicker, Google+ pages, Issuu, LinkedIn, Phone, Pinterest, QS Rankings, Scoop it, Slideshare, Website, WeChat 2. If you use Facebook, how frequently do you post on Facebook? Very frequently (4) 12 (70.59%) Frequently (3) 3 (17.65%) Sometimes (2) 2 (11.76%) Rarely/Never (1) 0 3. If you use Youtube, how frequently do you post on Youtube? Very frequently (4) 1 Frequently (3) 3 Sometimes (2) 8 Rarely/Never (1) 4 No response 1 4. If you use Instagram, how frequently do you post on Instagram? Very frequently (4) 3 Frequently (3) 1 Sometimes (2) 7 Rarely/Never (1) 3 No response 3
128 5. If you use LINE, how frequently do you post on LINE? Very frequently (4) 7 Frequently (3) 3 Sometimes (2) 1 Rarely/Never (1) 6 No response 0 6. If you use Twitter, how frequently do you tweet on Twitter? Very frequently (4) 3 Frequently (3) 1 Sometimes (2) 4 Rarely/Never (1) 6 No response 3 7. If you use other social media, how frequently do you use your other social media? Very frequently (4) 4 Frequently (3) 3 Sometimes (2) 2 Rarely/Never (1) 4 No response 4 8. If using Facebook, which of the following are the main purposes for posting on Facebook: (1 as most used, 10 being the least used) Purpose for Posting on Facebook 1 Most Used 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Least Used News Sharing 8 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Brand, campus or classroom 2 4 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 Event 3 2 3 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 Promotion or call to action 4 2 2 1 3 0 1 2 0 0 Thanks or recognition 0 0 2 2 1 0 2 2 1 4 Quotes, memes or comics 1 1 1 2 0 0 3 2 2 1 Service or values 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 2 3 1 Alumni 0 0 1 2 3 3 1 3 2 0 Fundraising or donor recognition 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 5 6 Video/other SM share 0 0 1 2 2 4 2 2 0 0 9. For Facebook, how do you measure effectiveness of post categories? (1 strongest, 8 weakest) Measurement for Effectiveness 1 Strongest 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Weakest User Likes 9 4 1 0 1 0 0 1 User Shares 4 3 4 2 1 1 0 0 User Comments 0 3 5 2 5 1 0 0 Student applications / new students 2 0 5 3 2 2 1 0 Website traffic 0 3 1 3 2 2 2 0 Event attendance 1 1 0 4 3 4 3 0 New or more alumni contacts 0 1 1 2 3 4 3 0 Funds raised 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 11
129 10. How do you measure effectiveness for your social media fundraising? (1 being the strongest measure to 4, being the weakest measure) Response Frequency Percentage No response / Not used 5 29.41% Funds Raised 3 17.65% Event Participation 4 23.53% Volunteering or involvement 4 23.53% Other 1 5.88% Total 17 100% 11. How frequently does your institution use social media to connect with donors? What are the other ways you connect with donors? (Open response) 12. How frequently do you post to social media for fundraising purposes? Very frequently (4) 0 Frequently (3) 4 Sometimes (2) 5 Rarely/Never (1) 7 No response 1 13. How frequently does your university use social media to raise money? Very frequently (4) 0 Frequently (3) 1 Sometimes (2) 3 Rarely/Never (1) 13 14. Which of the following are the main groups your university raises funds from? (1 as largest group to 7 as the smallest group) Response 1 Most 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Least Foundations 2 2 3 3 0 1 2 0 Organizations 2 2 3 0 2 0 0 0 Alumni 6 2 2 2 1 0 1 0 Community 0 1 1 2 1 2 1 0 Businesses 0 4 1 3 1 0 0 0 University Faculty & Staff 1 3 2 0 1 3 0 0 Other, please specify 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 Individuals 3 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 Total by Rank 15 17 19 16 11 12 12 3 15. About what percentage of the total funds your institution raised in 2014-2015 was from social media channels? 0 to 5% 6 6% to 10% 3 11% to 20% 1 21% to 49% 0
130 50% or more 0 No response 7 16. How would you rate the overall success of your university’s social media use for fundraising? Very successful (4) 0 Successful (3) 2 Somewhat successful (2) 9 Not very successful (1) 5 17. About how much money did your institution raise through social media in 2014-2015? 500,000 THB or less 6 500,001 – 999,999 THB 1 1,000,000 – 4,999,999 THB 1 5,000,000 THB or more 1 No response 8 18. Which best describes your institution? Undergraduate / Baccalaureate (four year) college 14 Graduate (Master, Doctorate) 11 Associate's (two year) college 2 Trade school or special focus institution (e.g. stand-alone law school, medical school) 5 Other (please specify) 5 19. How many students does your institution have? (Please include ALL students; may specify exact number / write in) Less than 1,000 2 1,000 - 4,999 11 5,000 - 9,999 0 10,000 -14,999 1 15,000 - 19,999 0 20,000 or more 2 20. Which best describes your office’s role at this university? Advancement / Development 5 Alumni Relations 6 Communications 12 Marketing 15 Other, please specify 4 All of the above, student support 21. How many years have you worked for this university? 1 year or less 2 1-3 4 3-5 2 5-10 4 10+ 4