• Like
  • Save
Dr. Monica G. Williams, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Dr. Monica G. Williams, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair

on

  • 2,838 views

Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, PhD Dissertation Chair for Dr. Monica G. Williams, PhD Program in Educational Leadership, PVAMU, Member of the Texas A&M University System.

Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, PhD Dissertation Chair for Dr. Monica G. Williams, PhD Program in Educational Leadership, PVAMU, Member of the Texas A&M University System.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,838
Views on SlideShare
2,820
Embed Views
18

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
34
Comments
0

1 Embed 18

http://www.slideshare.net 18

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Dr. Monica G. Williams, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair Dr. Monica G. Williams, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair Presentation Transcript

    • Engagement Levels of Historically Black College and University Leaders in Entrepreneurialism through Fundraising ______________________________________ A Doctoral Dissertation Defense by Monica Georgette Williams July 10, 2009 William Allan Kritsonis, Ph.D. Dissertation Chair
    • DISSERTATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS
      • William Allan Kritsonis, Ph.D. , Dissertation Chair
      • David E. Herrington, Ph.D. , Committee Member
      • Lisa D. Hobson Horton, Ph.D. , Committee Member
      • Ronald Howard, III, Ph.D. , Committee Member
      • Michael L. McFrazier, Ed.D. , Committee Member
    • Dissertation Defense Format
      • I. Statement of the Problem
      • II. Purpose of the Study
      • III. Research Questions
      • IV. Theoretical Framework
      • V. Method
      • VI. Major Findings
      • VII. Conclusions
      • VIII. Implications
      • IX. Recommendations for Further Study
      • X. References
    • Statement of the Problem
      • Tindall (2007) asserts that fundraising efforts of both private and public HBCUs linger significantly behind the established fundraising programs at PWIs.
      • There are 105 HBCUs across the nation, yet few of these institution’s leaders have devoted time and effort to understanding the complexities and challenges associated with fundraising at these institutions.
      • Public HBCU institutional leaders face a growing dilemma – how to strengthen university resources in a climate that has historically relied almost wholly on public funding.
    • Purpose of the Study
      • The purpose of the study was to determine the entrepreneurial orientation of public HBCU leaders and to determine if those orientations were related to the revenue-generating activities of their institutions and the institutions’ financial stability.
    • Research Questions
      • What connection exists between the Historically Black College and University leaders’ entrepreneurial orientation and the financial stability of their institution?
      • To what extent do Historically Black College and University leaders value and carry out entrepreneurial activities?
      • What factors are associated with best practices in fundraising at Historically Black Colleges and Universities?
    • Research Questions
      • How do the institutions’ development practices influence entrepreneurial activities for the purpose of advancing the institution?
      • 5. What is the perception of the entrepreneurial orientation of the administrator’s role by the administrator?
    • Theoretical Framework
      • According to Clark (1998), entrepreneurial activities comprise third-stream income sources that include:
        • innovative and profit-based, self-supporting operations that go beyond traditional sources, such as business development activities and innovative retail sales operations;
        • activities that develop and enhance traditional income streams such as endowment and tuition; and
        • activities that involve both traditional and nontraditional aspects, such as distance learning, which uses nontraditional methods of teaching to gain tuition, a traditional source of income ( which was not considered in this study ) .
    • Method
      • Qualitative Study Design using the following variables:
        • the amount of employment training and preparation
        • length of employment at the institution
        • innovative approaches used on the job
        • creativity in fundraising strategies
        • team building exercises implemented
        • opportunistic tactics used to get the job done
        • risk-taking approach to realize fundraising goals
        • competitive nature
        • vision-driven initiatives
        • ability to be proactive
        • persuasiveness
        • professional experience
        • philosophy of fund development
        • the impact of private philanthropy on the institution
    • Method continued
      • Data was collected through on-line questionnaire developed by the researcher
      • Questions were developed based on Clark’s (1998) discussion of entrepreneurial involvement by colleges and universities
      • Open-ended questions were used to capture responses of individuals in their natural settings
    • Method continued
      • Data collected in Survey Monkey was analyzed through coding.
      • Researcher carefully read through each response and identified a list of main themes in the data.
      • After each response was coded and verified, a frequency analysis of the numeric codings was conducted.
      • Findings were documented using percentages, the nature of the themes, relationships and differences between the data, and interrelationships within the themes.
      • Summary measures of respondents’ perceptions of their own entrepreneurial characteristics were produced by computing the average of responses to items regarding individual entrepreneurial traits.
    • Method continued
      • Inquiry was directed to 30 of the 47 Thurgood Marshall College Fund (TMCF) member schools.
      • TMCF law schools and 17 member schools were not included in this study.
      • Acting administrators or those who had not been in their positions more than 12 months were not included in this study they were serving on a temporary basis and/or that they had not served in the current leadership capacity that would allow them to objectively complete the questionnaire.
    • Method continued
      • Institutional Review Board approved study for a minimum of five schools within the TMCF member schools
      • Representatives from 17 schools (56.6%) agreed to participate in the study
      • Administrators from 14 schools (46.6%) actually completed the questionnarie
    • Method continued Interview Questions
      • Background Questions
      • In which state is your institution located?
      • What is your institutional enrollment?
      • What is your title?
      • How many years of experience do you have in this position?
      • What is your highest level of education?
      • What additional training have you had to prepare you for this position? (RQ 3)
    • Method continued Interview Questions
      • 7. How long have you been employed at this institution?
      • 8. Please select the following words you feel best describe you: (RQ 1)
      • innovative risk taker proactive creative change agent persuasive
      • team builder competitive
      • opportunist visionary
    • Method continued Interview Questions
      • Philanthropic Cultivation
      • 9. What is your professional experience within the fields of fund development and university advancement? (RQ 4)
      • 10. What is your philosophy of fund development? (RQ 5)
      • 11. What members of your organization, including yourself, do you believe responsible for fund development? (Please specify titles and exclude individual names) (RQ5)
      • 12. How does private philanthropy impact institutional initiatives? (RQ4)
      • 13. What strategies do you employ to seek resources from private philanthropists? (RQ4)
      • 14. What strategies would you like to employ to seek resources from private philanthropists but are unable to do so because of forces outside your locus of control (i.e. financial constraints, policy restraints, etc.)? (RQ3)
      • What general differences do you perceive between your role as a university leader/executive and the role of traditional business executives? (RQ2)
    • Method continued Interview Questions
      • Giving
      • 16. In the last three years, how much money has been raised from private philanthropic sources? (RQ1)
      • 17. When was the last time your institution engaged in a capital campaign? (RQ1)
    • The Fundraising Cycle © by Seiler (2009 )
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One
      • What connection exists between the Historically Black College and University leaders’ entrepreneurial orientation and the financial stability of their institution?
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One
      • Building teams and being proactive were most popular entrepreneurial characteristics
      • Common entrepreneurial characteristics among the top three surveyed fundraising institutions were innovative (75%), creative (75%), team builder (100%), change agent (100%), competitive (75%), visionary (75%), proactive (100%), and persuasive (100%)
      • Only one of the four respondents in this category reported being a risk taker
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One persuasive proactive visionary competitive change agent risk taker opportunist team builder creative innovative $15,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000+ Amount Raised Respondents 9 & 11 Respondent 13 Respondent 15
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One
      • Highest level of education could be interrelated to the HBCU leader’s entrepreneurial orientation (Riggs, 2005)
        • Two of three presidents have doctoral degrees and one has a law degree
          • President with the law degree (Respondent 13) reported that his institution raised $25 million in the last three years compared to Respondent 11 who raised $15 million and Respondent 8 who did not report the amount of money raised
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One
      • There appeared to be no connection between development executives’ level of education and the amount of money raised (Smith-Hunter, 2003).
        • A development director (Respondent 9) with an undergraduate degree raised the largest amount of money among his participating peers.
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Characteristics – Research Question One
      • 30.7% of respondents reported that they had not participated in a strategic fundraising effort or that they had not launched a capital campaign in ten or more years.
      • Michael Lomax, the “fundraising machine for private HBCUs” believes that HBCUs should fundraise regardless of their apprehensions (Stuart, 2009, p.6).
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Activities – Research Question Two
      • To what extent do Historically Black College and University leaders value and carry out entrepreneurial activities?
      • Emerging themes among HBCU leaders
        • it was more difficult to get support at universities than businesses because businesses have more stringent performance expectations (Dingfelder, 2007)
        • that more flexibility is required of university leaders (Dunkelberg & Cooper, 1988)
        • there was minimal or no difference between university leaders and business executives
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Activities – Research Question Three
      • What factors are associated with best practices in fundraising at Historically Black Colleges and Universities?
      • Only four respondents (Respondents 3, 8, 10 and 16) took advantage of the Indiana University Center on Philanthropy’s training provided by the TMCF (Barrett, 2006)
        • Indiana University offers the most comprehensive philanthropic academic program to professionalize fundraising as an occupation. Through a partnership with the Lilly Endowment and The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, TMCF provides training to development professionals from the 47 TMCF member schools.
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Activities – Research Question Four
      • How do the institutions’ development practices influence entrepreneurial activities for the purpose of advancing the institution?
      • There was an interrelationship between the factors associated with best practices in fundraising and how the institutions’ development practices influence entrepreneurial activities.
        • Development professionals tended to have like responses when reporting additional training they had to prepare them for their positions and their professional experience within the fields of fund development and university advancement
    • Major Findings Entrepreneurial Activities – Research Question Five
      • What is the perception of the entrepreneurial orientation of the administrator’s role by the administrator?
      • Surveyed HBCU administrators do recognize themselves as being entrepreneurially oriented.
      • The reported perceptions of entrepreneurial orientation among participants suggests that there is an attitude among these leaders that embraces a business-minded spirit.
      • Every surveyed participant shared a philosophy of fund development that could be attributed to entrepreneurial orientation.
    • Major Findings Supporting Literature
      • Entrepreneurs have orientations that influence growth and independence (Dunkelberg and Cooper, 1988)
      • The decline in public support for colleges and universities mandates that these institutions seek private funds as a matter of survival (Johnsen, 2005).
      • HBCUs need to engage in appropriate planning to achieve fundraising results Barrett (2006).
      • Due to the decline in state resources, public institutions are placing stronger emphasis on fundraising (Riggs, 2005).
      • “ A business-like orientation focused on efficiency, accountability, and productivity is reshaping the management of higher education” (Dingfelder, 2007, p. 2).
      • Other researchers have described entrepreneurs as individuals who recognize and seize opportunities when they occur (Smith-Hunter, 2003).
    • Conclusions
      • Given the shortfall in government support to public higher education, it is nearly impossible to meet institutional demands without private philanthropic support .
      • Administrators who completed the questionnaire shared insightful information that will assist fellow HBCU leaders in their quests to secure private gifts to supplement their public funding.
      • There was a shortage in staff in advancement offices.
        • One respondent put it best saying “it takes money to raise money”, and raising money requires a reasonable number of staff.
      • Strategic planning emerged as a priority among respondents.
      • Best fundraising practices recognized by organizations who focus on fundraising are important professional development vehicles.
    • Implications
      • Fund development is quite possibly the most important activity that an HBCU administrator will undertake. Without private dollars to support these institutions, HBCUs will not be able to survive at a time when our country is facing economic depression and consistent declines in public funding.
    • Recommendations for Further Study
      • 1. A study could be conducted to include the public HBCU presidents and chief development officers who were not included in this study.
      • 2. A study could be conducted to compare the entrepreneurial engagement levels between public and private HBCU leaders.
      • 3. A study could be conducted to compare fundraising at Tier One and Tier Two institutions.
      • 4. A study could be conducted to identify the best fundraising practices among all HBCUs.
    • Recommendations for Further Study continued
      • 5. A study could be conducted to determine the engagement levels of other HBCU leaders not including the presidents and chief development officers.
      • 6. A study could be conducted to identify methods for involving students in fundraising at HBCUs.
      • 7. A study could be conducted to identify methods for involving alumni in fundraising at HBCUs.
      • 8. A study could be conducted to compare fundraising between the Thurgood Marshall College Fund schools and the United Negro College Fund Schools.
      • Barrett, T. G. (2006). How strategic presidential leadership and institutional culture influenced fundraising effectiveness at Spelman College. Planning for Higher Education , 35 (1), 5-18.
      • Birnbaum, R. (1992). How academic leadership works: Understanding success and failure in the college presidency . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
      • Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation . Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
      • Dingfelder, D. C. (2007). Exploring the dimensions of entrepreneurial community colleges . Retrieved May 9, 2008, from ProQuest Information and Learning Company http://www.lib.umi.com/dissertations/search
      • Dunkelberg, W., Cooper, A. et.al. (1987). New firm growth and performance. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research , 307-321.
      • Johnsen, L. L. (2005). Understanding deliberative conflicts that confront academic fundraisers: A grounded theory study . Retrieved May 5, 2006, from ProQuest Information and Learning Company http:// www.lib.umi.com /dissertations/search
      References
      • Masterson, K. (2008). Howard U. assembles fund-raising juggernaut. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. 54.
      • Riggs, D. G. (2005). Entrepreneurial activities in independent college and university presidents: A view from the top . Retrieved May 5, 2006, from ProQuest Information and Learning Company http:// www.lib.umi.com /dissertations/search
      • Sieler, T. L. (2009). Roadmap to fundraising success. Retrieved February 1, 2009, from The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/TheFundRaisingSchool/PrecourseReadings/roadmap_to_fundraising_success.aspx
      • Smith-Hunter, A. (2003, April). A psychological model of entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Business and Economics , 1-11.
      • Stuart, R. (2009) UNCF wrestles with new economy, old issues. Diverse Issues in Higher Education , 23 , 6.
      • Tindall, N. T. J. (2007). Fund-raising models at public historically Black colleges and universities. Public Relations Review , 33 (2), 201-5.
      References