1. Retaining
University
Talent
in
St.
Louis
Olin
Business
School,
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
2015
Fall:
Prac@cum
Team Leads:
Jamie Stroble (MBA ’16)
Esther Koh (BSBA ’16)
Members:
Lizzie Griesedieck (MBA ‘16)
Ryan Tao (MSCA ’16)
Nick Cooley (BS ’16)
Nancy Chen (BSCS, MSCA ‘16)

2. 2
Agenda
I.
Introduc@on
3
II.
Survey
Overview
5
III.
Research
Findings
6
IV.
Recommenda@on
9
V.
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera@on
of
St.
Louis
Employers
10
VI.
Strategies
For
Boos@ng
Awareness
&
Considera@on
16
VII.
Case
Studies
21
VIII.
Partnerships
&
Next
Steps
23
IX.
Appendix
26

3. Objec;ve:
ATract
and
retain
talent
in
St.
Louis
3
Introduc;on
Objec;ve:
ATract
and
retain
top
university
talent
in
St.
Louis
Objec;ve:
Help
local
employers
beTer
engage
top
university
talent
in
St.
Louis

4. 4
Introduc;on
Why
focus
on
top
local
students?
1
“The
New
Geography
of
Jobs,”
Enrico
MoreM
2
US
Census
Bureau
Why
focus
on
jobs?
§ “Jobs”
was
the
#1
reason
(49%
of
respondents)
cited
by
students
we
surveyed
for
wan@ng
to
leave
St.
Louis.
“Culture”
was
the
second
biggest
considera@on
at
13%.
1
2
3
As
people
age
they
become
less
likely
to
move:
§ In
2012,
ages
18
–
34
represented
24%
of
the
overall
popula@on,
but
44%
of
the
movers.
A
35
year-­‐old
is
almost
half
as
likely
to
move
as
a
25
year-­‐old.
2
Local
connec;on:
Retaining
is
easier
than
aTrac@ng.
Top
students
tend
to
enter
the
tech
&
innova@on
sectors.
These
sectors
have
a
dispropor@onate
influence
on
the
local
economy:
§ ”Most
sectors
have
a
mul0plier
effect,
but
the
innova0on
sector
has
the
largest
mul0plier
of
all:
about
3x
larger
than
that
of
manufacturing.”1

5. 5
Survey 1:
Initial Survey
Survey 2:
St. Louis Perception
Survey 3:
Compare Cities
79 respondents
206 respondents
198 respondents
Iden@fy
the
important
aTributes
of
a
city
How
do
students
perceive
St.
Louis?
How
does
St.
Louis
compare
to
compe@ng
ci@es?
Survey
Overview
76%
17%
6%
2%
WashU
SLU
UMSL
Other
Respondents
by
university
Respondents
by
degree
program
23%
21%
20%
18%
6%
12%
BA
BS
MBA
BSBA
MS
Other

6. Research
Findings
6
St.
Louis
students
in
our
survey…
Prefer
to
work
at
medium-­‐to-­‐large
companies.
Prefer
small
companies:
11%
Prefer
medium
companies:
30%
Prefer
large
companies:
36%
2
Overwhelmingly
choose
ci@es
post-­‐gradua@on
based
on
career
considera;ons.
Reasons
cited
for
wan;ng
to
leave:
#1:
Jobs
à
49%
#2:
Culture
à
13%
1
Are
less
likely
to
stay
in
St.
Louis
if
they’re
interested
in
working
at
a
large
company.
Willingness
to
stay
in
St.
Louis:
If
interested
in
small
company
à
45%
If
interested
in
large
company
à
26%
3
Expect
to
job
hop,
and
worry
whether
St.
Louis
can
support
their
long-­‐term
career
ambi@ons.
91%
of
millenials
an@cipate
staying
at
their
job
for
less
than
3
years.1
4
Have
limited
awareness
of
and
willingness
to
work
for
the
largest
local
companies.
Students
aware
of
Centene:
42%
Students
aware
of
Graybar:
17%
Students
aware
of
RGA:
16%
5
1
Bureau
of
Labor
Sta;s;cs

7. Research
Findings
7
St.
Louis
students
in
our
survey…
Prefer
to
work
at
medium-­‐to-­‐large
companies.
Prefer
small
companies:
11%
Prefer
medium
companies:
30%
Prefer
large
companies:
36%
2
Overwhelmingly
choose
ci@es
post-­‐gradua@on
based
on
career
considera;ons.
Reasons
cited
for
wan;ng
to
leave:
#1:
Jobs
à
49%
#2:
Culture
à
13%
1
Are
less
likely
to
stay
in
St.
Louis
if
they’re
interested
in
working
at
a
large
company.
Willingness
to
stay
in
St.
Louis:
If
interested
in
small
company
à
45%
If
interested
in
large
company
à
26%
3
Expect
to
job
hop,
and
worry
whether
St.
Louis
can
support
their
long-­‐term
career
ambi@ons.
91%
of
millenials
an@cipate
staying
at
their
job
for
less
than
3
years.1
4
Have
limited
awareness
of
and
willingness
to
work
for
the
largest
local
companies.
Students
aware
of
Centene:
42%
Students
aware
of
Graybar:
17%
Students
aware
of
RGA:
16%
5
1
Bureau
of
Labor
Sta;s;cs
Building
brands
of
individual
companies
will
help
build
brand
of
city
Large
companies
have
biggest
role
to
play
in
keeping
students
in
St.
Louis
Start-­‐ups
do
the
best
job
of
boos;ng
students’
willingness
to
stay
Civic
groups
like
RBC,
Civic
Progress
and
Regional
Chamber
should
promote
ecosystem
of
companies
Large
companies
in
par;cular
need
to
change
the
way
they
engage
students

8. Lessons
From
Start-­‐ups
8
§ Con@nued
investment
in
local
entrepreneurs
will
allow
St.
Louis
to
grow
its
next
genera@on
of
large
companies
&
has
proven
successful
§ Startups
have
the
right
messaging,
high
touch
recrui@ng
tac@cs,
on-­‐
campus
engagement
and
work
environment
that
students
want
§ What
about
the
89%
of
students
not
inclined
toward
small
companies?
§ What
role
do
St.
Louis’s
largest
companies
need
to
play?

9. Recommenda;on
Large
companies
must
lead
the
ini@a@ves
to
retain
students
in
St.
Louis.
If
large
companies
marketed
and
recruited
on-­‐
campus
with
high
touch
tac@cs
they
would
increase
student
considera@on
and
beTer
retain
top
talent.
9

10. 10
As
part
of
the
St.
Louis
Percep@on
survey,
university
students
were
given
the
following
list
of
local
employers
and
asked:
“Select
each
company
that
you
have
heard
of.”
A
condi@onal
follow-­‐up
ques@on
was
then
asked,
presen@ng
students
with
a
list
of
the
companies
they
had
selected:
”Of
the
companies
with
which
you
are
familiar,
please
select
the
ones
you
would
consider
seeking
employment
from
in
the
future.”
• Ameren
• Edward
Jones
• Nestle
Purina
Petcare
Co.
• Anheuser-­‐Busch/InBev
• Emerson
• Peabody
Energy
• Apex
Oil
Company
• Energizer
Holdings
• Reinsurance
Group
of
America
• Ascension
• Enterprise
Holdings
• S;fel
• BJC
Healthcare
• Equifax
• Sigma-­‐Aldrich
• Boeing
Company
• Express
Scripts
• Scofrade
• Bryan
Cave
LLP
• Fabick
CAT
• SSM
• Build-­‐A-­‐Bear
Workshops
• Fleishman
Hillard
• Thompson
Coburn
LLP
• Caleres
Shoes
(Brown
Shoe)
• Graybar
Electric
Co.
• T-­‐REx*
• Centene
• Mallinckrodt
• Wells
Fargo
Advisors
• ConAgra
Foods
• Moneta
Group
• World
Wide
Technology
• Cortex
Innova;on
Community*
• Monsanto
*
Cortex
&
T-­‐REx
aren’t
tradi;onal
employers,
but
were
used
as
a
proxy
for
startup
companies
in
St.
Louis
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera;on
of
St.
Louis
Employers

11. Boeing
BJC
Anheuser-­‐Busch
Cortex
S@fel
SSM
T-­‐REX
Sigma-­‐Aldrich
Monsanto
Nestle
Purina
Thompson
Coburn
World
Wide
Technology
Wells
Fargo
Express
Scripts
Emerson
Fleishman
Hillard
Edward
Jones
ScoTrade
ConAgra
Centene
Ascension
Energizer
Apex
Oil
Build-­‐A-­‐Bear
Graybar
Ameren
Bryan
Cave
Enterprise
Holdings
Caleres
(Brown
Shoe)
Peabody
Mallinckrodt
Fabick
CAT
Equifax
Moneta
Group
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Awareness
Willingness
to
Work
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera;on
of
STL
Employers
11

12. Boeing
Anheuser-­‐Busch
Cortex
S@fel
T-­‐REX
World
Wide
Technology
Express
Scripts
Emerson
Graybar
Enterprise
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
“Gold
Standard”
Students
think
these
are
clear
paths
to
career
success
“Diamonds
in
the
Rough”
Need
polishing
for
students
to
consider
employment
“Gems”
Students
who
find
them
love
them
“Unmined
Poten;al”
No
student
awareness
or
engagement
Awareness
Willingness
to
Work
12
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera;on
of
STL
Employers

13. Wells
Fargo
Edward
Jones
Scofrade
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Finance
Gap
Awareness
Willingness
to
Work
13
Despite
St.
Louis’s
strong
brokerage
presence,
students
interested
in
finance
are
among
the
least
willing
to
stay
in
St.
Louis
aner
gradua@on:
Student
industry
interest
%
planning
on
staying
in
St.
Louis
1.
Technology
35.1%
2.
Professional
services
34.3%
3.
Healthcare,
Pharma,
Biotech
31.0%
9.
Finance
23.5%

14. Boeing
Anheuser-­‐Busch
Cortex
S@fel
T-­‐REx
World
Wide
Technology
Wells
Fargo
Express
Scripts
Emerson
Edward
Jones
ScoTrade
Graybar
Enterprise
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Increasing
willingness
to
work
at
these
core
companies
should
be
highest
priority
“Gold
Standard”
“Diamonds
in
the
Rough”
Awareness
Willingness
to
Work
14
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera;on
of
STL
Employers

15. Boeing
Anheuser-­‐Busch
Cortex
S@fel
T-­‐REx
World
Wide
Technology
Wells
Fargo
Express
Scripts
Emerson
Edward
Jones
ScoTrade
Centene
Graybar
Enterprise
Caleres
(Brown
Shoe)
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
“Gold
Standard”
“Diamonds
in
the
Rough”
Awareness
Willingness
to
Work
Low
awareness
of
largest
companies
in
St.
Louis
perpetuates
second
class
city
mentality
15
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera;on
of
STL
Employers

16. Boeing
Anheuser-­‐Busch
Cortex
S@fel
T-­‐REx
World
Wide
Technology
Express
Scripts
Emerson
Graybar
Enterprise
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Awareness
“Low
Touch”
Strategies
Boost
Awareness
• Adver@se
on-­‐campus
(student
newspapers,
flyers)
• Facebook
ads,
social
media
presence
• Signage
on
campus
• Promo@ons
offered
on
campus
• Tradi@onal
recrui@ng
(career
fairs,
etc.)
• Messaging
“High
Touch”
Strategies
Boost
Considera;on
• Company
leaders
speak
or
aTend
events
on
campus
• Companies
hire
interns
/
part-­‐@me
work
during
the
year
• Crea@ve
partnerships
on
campus
(CEL,
Skandalaris)
• Student
club
involvement
or
sponsorship
• Locate
satellite
offices
in
innova@on
centers
Willingness
to
Work
16

17. • Pos@ng
is
very
long
(excerpted
here);
emphasizes
pleasant
culture
and
ease
of
candidate
placement
(“needs-­‐based”)
• Tone
is
friendly,
op@mis@c:
• “Values”
• “Most
Respected
Companies”
• “Rela@onship-­‐Driven”
• “Dedicated”
• “Understanding”
• Offers
candidate
the
opportunity
to
gain
experience
17
Messaging
Case
Studies

18. • Pos@ng
is
short
and
direct,
with
uncompromising
requirements
sec@on
• Tone
is
compe@@ve,
challenging,
innova@ve:
• “Cusng
edge”
• “Culture
of
constant
measurement”
• “Aggressive”
• “Sophis@cated”
• “Analyze
and
develop
business
strategies”
• Requires
candidate
to
have
prior
experience
18

19. • Pos@ng
is
short
and
direct,
with
uncompromising
requirements
sec@on
• Tone
is
compe@@ve,
challenging,
innova@ve:
• “Cusng
edge”
• “Culture
of
constant
measurement”
• “Aggressive”
• “Sophis@cated”
• “Analyze
and
develop
business
strategies”
• Requires
candidate
to
have
prior
experience
Words
that
Signal
a
Millennial-­‐Friendly
Culture:
Entrepreneurial
Ÿ
Crea;ve
Ÿ
Innova;ve
Ÿ
Leadership
Ÿ
Social
Responsibility
Ÿ
Diversity
Ÿ
Fast-­‐Paced
Ÿ
Work-­‐Life
Balance
Ÿ
Analy;cal
Ÿ
Rigorous
Ÿ
Ambi;ous
Ÿ
Global
or
Interna;onal
Ÿ
Learning
Ÿ
Flexible
Ÿ
Independent
Ÿ
Collabora;ve
Ÿ
Fast-­‐Track
Ÿ
Mentorship
Ÿ
Teamwork
19

20. 20
Case
Studies
“#1
thing
millennials
look
for
in
an
employer:
People
&
Culture
Fit”
-­‐HBR
Video
(commercial):
“At
S@fel
We
Encourage
an
Entrepreneurial
Spirit”

21. 21
Case
Studies
High
Touch
Strategies
§ DeloiTe
Consul@ng
Na@onal
Case
Compe@@on
§ “Cheap
Lunch”
Par@cipant
§ NextGen
Leaders
Program
&
Conference
§ Alterna@ve
Spring
Break
§ One-­‐on-­‐One
Recrui@ng
Process
§ Case
compe@@on:
Boeing
Patent
Challenge
§ “Cheap
Lunch”
Par@cipant
§ Sponsor
/
Par@cipant
Regional
Business
Council’s
“Young
Professionals
Network”
§ Satellite
office
“Ventures”
in
Cortex
Innova@on
District
Ø Most
desired
company
included
in
St.
Louis
Percep;on
survey
Ø In
2014
alone,
Epic
hired
over
50
WashU
students.
§ Constructed
1,000
acre
campus
with
12+
office
buildings;
“themed
spaces”
§ Required
interview
in
Madison,
WI
where
“Cost
of
living”
calculator
is
presented.
§ CEO:
“We
are
compe@ng
for
talent
with
Apple,
Microson,
and
Facebook.
We
need
to
give
these
people
a
reason
to
come
to
Wisconsin.”
§ Alumni
involvement
“#1
thing
millennials
look
for
in
an
employer:
People
&
Culture
Fit”
-­‐HBR

22. 22
Case
Studies
High
Touch
Strategies
§ DeloiTe
Consul@ng
Na@onal
Case
Compe@@on
§ “Cheap
Lunch”
Par@cipant
§ NextGen
Leaders
Program
&
Conference
§ Alterna@ve
Spring
Break
§ One-­‐on-­‐One
Recrui@ng
Process
§ Case
compe@@on:
Boeing
Patent
Challenge
§ “Cheap
Lunch”
Par@cipant
§ Sponsor
/
Par@cipant
Regional
Business
Council’s
“Young
Professionals
Network”
§ Satellite
office
“Ventures”
in
Cortex
Innova@on
District
§ Most
desired
company
at
WashU
according
to
our
surveys
Ø In
2014
alone,
Epic
hired
over
50
WashU
students.
§ Constructed
1,000
acre
campus
with
12+
office
buildings;
“themed
spaces”
§ Required
interview
in
Madison,
WI
where
“Cost
of
living”
calculator
is
presented.
§ CEO:
“We
are
compe@ng
for
talent
with
Apple,
Microson,
and
Facebook.
We
need
to
give
these
people
a
reason
to
come
to
Wisconsin.”
§ Alumni
involvement
“#1
thing
millennials
look
for
in
an
employer:
People
&
Culture
Fit”
-­‐HBR
10%
30%
50%
70%
90%
Use
their
Product
News
Social
Media
On
Campus
Job
Board
Friends
How
Millennials
Hear
About
Companies1
1“How
Companies
Can
Afract
the
Best
College
Talent,”
Harvard
Business
Review

23. 23
Future
Areas
of
Research:
§ Company
percep@on
of
and
need
for
top
university
talent;
determining
employment
capacity
§ Student
percep@on
mapping
for
local
small-­‐
to
mid-­‐
cap
companies
§ Exis@ng
models
for
corporate
/
start-­‐up
partnerships
§ Industry-­‐specific
talent
reten@on
programs
§ Career
advancement
tracks
in
St.
Louis
as
perceived
by
students
Partnerships
&
Next
Steps

24. 24
Please
help
ensure
that
St.
Louis
con@nues
to
aTract
&
retain
top
talent
by
sharing
this
presenta@on
with
the
CEOs
and
heads
of
Human
Resources
at
the
following
35
companies
covered
in
our
research:
• Ameren
• Edward
Jones
• Nestle
Purina
Petcare
Co.
• Anheuser-­‐Busch/InBev
• Emerson
• Peabody
Energy
• Apex
Oil
Company
• Energizer
Holdings
• Reinsurance
Group
of
America
• Ascension
• Enterprise
Holdings
• S;fel
• BJC
Healthcare
• Equifax
• Sigma-­‐Aldrich
• Boeing
Company
• Express
Scripts
• Scofrade
• Bryan
Cave
LLP
• Fabick
CAT
• SSM
• Build-­‐A-­‐Bear
Workshops
• Fleishman
Hillard
• Thompson
Coburn
LLP
• Caleres
Shoes
(Brown
Shoe)
• Graybar
Electric
Co.
• T-­‐REx
• Centene
• Mallinckrodt
• Wells
Fargo
Advisors
• ConAgra
Foods
• Moneta
Group
• World
Wide
Technology
• Cortex
Innova;on
Community
• Monsanto
Partnerships
&
Next
Steps

25. For
ques;ons
related
to
the
project
please
contact:
25
Jamie
Stroble:
jstroble@wustl.edu
Esther
Koh:
estherkoh@wustl.edu
Partnerships
&
Next
Steps

26. Appendix
26

27. Appendix
A.1
Background
Why
the
focus
on
millennials
and
students?
27
Source:
The
Atlan@c’s
CityLab

28. -­‐50
0
50
100
150
200
0-­‐4
5-­‐9
10-­‐14
15-­‐19
20-­‐24
25-­‐29
30-­‐34
35-­‐39
Net
Migra@on
Rate
(Per
100
Individuals)
Age
Net
Migra@on
Rate
During
2000s
Comparison
San
Francisco
Kansas
City
St.
Louis
New
York
City
Key
Points:
• People
are
most
mobile
from
ages
20-­‐29.
• St.
Louis
compares
favorably
to
similar
sized
ci@es,
i.e.,
Kansas
City,
but
does
not
fare
well
against
larger
ci@es
• Sharp
fall
in
migra@on
from
25-­‐29à
30-­‐34.
If
people
can
be
aTracted
early
they
will
be
more
likely
to
stay
in
St.
Louis
Appendix
A.2
Background
28

29. 29
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
St.
Louis
New
York
Chicago
Madison
2012
2013
2014
Top
Recrui;ng
Des;na;ons
for
WashU
Undergraduates
Appendix
A.3
Background

30. St.
Louis-­‐based
Fortune
500
Companies
(2015)
Company
Revenue
2015
Rank
2014
Rank
Express
Scripts
Holdings
$100.89
billion
22
20
Emerson
Electric
$24.54
billion
120
121
Centene
$16.56
billion
186
251
Monsanto
$15.86
billion
197
197
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
$10.9
billion
273
274
Peabody
Energy
$6.79
billion
398
365
Edward
Jones
(Jones
Financial)
$6.33
billion
426
444
Ameren
Corp.
$6.05
billion
438
379
Graybar
Electric
$5.98
billion
445
449
Source:
St.
Louis
Business
Journal1
&
Fortune
30
Appendix
A.4
Background

31. St.
Louis’s
Top
Privately-­‐Held
Companies
(2014)
Company
Revenue
(2013)
1
Enterprise
Holdings
$16.4
billion
(+6.5%)
2
World
Wide
Technology
$6.4
billion
(+26.9%)
3
Edward
Jones
$5.66
billion
(+15.5%)
4
Graybar
$5.66
billion
(+4.5%)
5
Apex
Oil
$5
billion
(es@mate)
6
Center
Oil
Co.
$4.1
billion
(-­‐2.6%)
7
McCarthy
Holdings
Inc.
$3.23
billion
(7.7%)
8
Piasa
Enterprises
Inc.
$2.9
billion
(-­‐19.4%)
9
Prairie
Farms
Dairy
Inc.
$2.78
billion
(+4.5%)
10
Schnuck
Markets
Inc.
$2.6
billion
(+4%)
Source:
St.
Louis
Business
Journal1
31
Appendix
A.5
Background

32. 32
Company
1
Google
40.28%
2
Apple
23.14%
3
Facebook
14.96%
4
Microson
12.24%
5
Amazon
11.36%
6
eBay
8.50%
7
LinkedIn
6.09%
8
Yahoo!
5.90%
9
Goldman
Sachs
5.66%
10
IBM
5.19%
11
Intel
4.94%
12
Cisco
4.44%
13
McKinsey
&
Co.
4.20%
14
TwiTer
4.18%
15
JP
Morgan
3.49%
16
DeloiTe
3.27%
17
Qualcomm
3.23%
Company
18
Salesforce
2.99%
19
Morgan
Stanley
2.81%
20
Disney
2.46%
21
Nike
2.16%
22
Accenture
2.16%
23
Palan@r
Technologies
2.14%
24
Bain
&
Co.
2.13%
25
Boeing
2.10%
26
Groupon
2.07%
27
Tesla
Motors
1.92%
28
NBC
Universal
1.92%
29
Samsung
Electronics
1.84%
30
HP
1.80%
31
BCG
1.66%
32
Dell
1.59%
33
General
Electric
1.55%
34
Ne{lix
1.43%
Company
35
ESPN
1.32%
36
PWC
1.32%
37
Dropbox
1.21%
38
Verizon
1.21%
39
Proctor
&
Gamble
1.18%
40
Genentech
1.17%
41
Credit
Suisse
1.14%
42
Schlumberger
1.12%
43
Lockheed
Mar@n
1.11%
44
Texas
Instruments
1.08%
45
Sony
1.05%
46
Ernst
&
Young
1.04%
47
Bank
of
America
1.03%
48
Citrix
1.00%
49
Space
X
0.97%
50
BofA
Merril
Lynch
0.92%
Source:
“How
Companies
Can
Afract
the
Best
College
Talent,”
Harvard
Business
Review
Top
50
Companies
Young
People
Want
to
Work
For
Appendix
A.6
Background

33. 33
What
Millennials
Look
for
in
Employers
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Alumni
&
Friends
Target
Audience
Market
Leadership
New
Graduate
Program
Innova@on
Company
Mission
Challenging
Environment
Compensa@on
Work/Life
Balance
Career
Poten@al
People
and
Culture
Fit
10%
30%
50%
70%
90%
Use
their
Product
News
Social
Media
On
Campus
Job
Board
Friends
How
Millennials
Hear
About
Companies
Source:
“How
Companies
Can
Afract
the
Best
College
Talent,”
Harvard
Business
Review
Appendix
A.7
Background

34. Survey Methodology: STL Perception
The survey aims to comprehend and quantify students’ views on
select aspects of St. Louis. The survey population includes
undergraduate and graduate students at Washington University,
UMSL and SLU. The survey was distributed both on and off line
(in-person on electronic devices) at various sites throughout
Washington University campus as well as UMSL and SLU.
Respondents
University
Affilia@on
WUSTL
U
of
Missorui-­‐St.Louis
St.
Louis
University
Other
Mean(Age)
=
22.09
Mean(Working
Experience)
=
2.36
Industries
of
Interest
Energy,
Materias,
or
Industrials
Healthcare
Automo@ve
or
Aerospace
Finance
Technology
Media
Retail
Consumer
Staples
Professional
Services
Nonprofit
34
Appendix
B.1
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

35. Survey Questions: STL Perception
Q1: Please select each company that you have heard of
Q2: Of the companies with which you are familiar, please select the ones you would consider seeking employment
from in the future.
Q3: Why to stay or leave St. Louis
Q4: Where do you like to spend your free time? (This includes eating out, shopping, socializing, exercising, etc.)
Q5: Where do you like to spend your free time? (This includes eating out, shopping, socializing, exercising, etc.)
Q6: Which of these do you use often (once a week) to find out about things to do in St. Louis?
Q7: In your opinion, how easy would it be for you to make a positive impact on the St. Louis community?
Q8: What type of organizations are you currently involved with that contribute to the St. Louis community?
Q9: What type of organizations are you currently involved with that contribute to the St. Louis community?
Q10: What type of organizations are you currently involved with that contribute to the St. Louis community?
Q11: What school or university do you attend?
Q12: What is your major or program focus?
Q13: What year are you in school? (If you're an alum, put "alum.")
Q14: How old are you?
Q15: What is your hometown zip code? (May differ from your current zip code.)
Q16: Have you ever spent time in St. Louis for non-academic reasons? (Examples: internship, part-time work,
full-time work, volunteering, research)
Q17: Primary industry of interest
Q18: What size company would you prefer to work for?
35
Appendix
B.2
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

36. Ameren
Anheuser-­‐Busch
&
Boeing
Apex
Oil
Ascension
BJC
Bryan
Cave
Build-­‐A-­‐Bear
Caleres
(Brown
Shoe)
Centene
ConAgra
Cortex
Edward
Jones
Emerson
Energizer
Enterprise
Equifax
Express
Scripts
Fabick
CAT
Fleishman
Hillard
Graybar
Mallinckrodt
Moneta
Monsanto
Nestle
Purina
Peabody
Reinsurance
Group
of
America
S@fel
Sigma-­‐Aldrich
ScoTrade
SSM
Thompson
Coburn
T-­‐REX
Wells
Fargo
World
Wide
Technology
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Awareness
Willingness
to
work
36
Students’
Awareness
&
Considera;on
of
STL
Employers
(Just
MBAs
&
BSBAs;
n
=
79)

37. 37
Delmar
Loop
The
Grove
Laclede's
Landing
Downtown
CWE
Clayton
Forest
Park
Cherokee
Street
Maplewood
LafayeTe
Square
Soulard
Grand
Center
Brentwood
Daily
or
weekly
41%
6%
4%
11%
37%
33%
37%
4%
5%
5%
10%
20%
27%
Monthly
or
rarely
57%
80%
67%
89%
61%
62%
62%
62%
62%
59%
78%
62%
66%
Never
heard
of
it
2%
14%
29%
0%
2%
5%
1%
34%
33%
36%
11%
19%
8%
Delmar
Loop
The
Grove
Laclede's
Landing
Downtown
CWE
Clayton
Forest
Park
Dogtown
The
Hill
Cherokee
Street
Maplewood
LafayeTe
Square
Soulard
South
Grand
Grand
Center
Brentwood
Daily
26
2
1
4
16
11
18
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
23
3
Weekly
54
9
6
17
57
52
55
5
6
6
10
7
18
15
15
48
Monthly
72
50
25
87
82
60
85
17
32
19
24
19
45
37
38
65
Rarely
39
104
103
84
38
61
34
84
132
100
95
94
106
95
80
62
Never
heard
of
it
4
27
54
0
3
10
1
85
22
66
63
69
22
43
36
16
Totals:
195
192
189
192
196
194
193
191
192
192
192
190
192
191
192
194
Students were asked, “Where do you like to spend your free time? (This includes eating out, shopping,
socializing, exercising, etc.)” They were given 16 neighborhoods or locations in St. Louis (shown below in
the top rows) and asked to either selected “daily,” “weekly,” “monthly,” “rarely,” or “never heard of it.”
The first table includes raw data in # of votes; the next table is consolidated into high engagement, low
engagement, and not aware. A few instances are highlighted of the most successful neighborhoods and
neighborhoods lagging behind in either engagement or awareness:
Appendix
B.3
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

38. 38
Delmar
Loop
The
Grove
Laclede's
Landing
Downtown
St.Louis
Central
West
End
Clayton
Forest
Park
Dogtown
The
Hill
Cherokee
Street
Maplewood
LafayeTe
Square
Soulard
South
Grand
Grand
Center
Brentwood
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
Awareness
Level
of
Engagement
(1
–
4)*
*Level
of
engagement
isn’t
linear,
but
is
reflected
as
linear
on
this
chart.
“1”
corresponds
to
‘rarely,’
“2”
corresponds
to
‘monthly,’
“3”
corresponds
to
‘weekly,’
and
“4”
corresponds
to
‘daily.’
So
“1”
could
equal
one
visit
per
month,
and
“4”
could
equal
30
visits
a
month.
Appendix
B.4
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

39. 39
Appendix
B.5
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on
How
does
the
size
of
the
company
a
person
is
interested
in
working
for
affect
their
willingness
to
stay
in
St.
Louis?
Small
(1
-­‐
50
employees)
11%
Medium
(51
-­‐
250
employees)
30%
Large
(250+
employees)
36%
No
preference
23%
What
size
company
do
students
prefer
to
work
for?
No,
I
don’t
plan
on
staying
Yes,
I
plan
on
staying
Large
/
Corpora;on
(250+
employees)
73.1%
26.9%
Medium
(50
-­‐
249
employees)
67.6%
31.5%
Small
/
Start-­‐up
(1
-­‐
49
employees)
55.0%
45.0%
No
preference
76.5%
18.5%

40. How
does
a
student’s
exposure
to
non-­‐
academic
opportuni;es
affect
their
willingness
to
stay
in
St.
Louis?
How
does
age
affect
someone’s
willingness
to
stay
in
St.
Louis?
40
Appendix
B.6
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on
No,
I
don’t
plan
on
staying
Yes,
I
plan
on
staying
No
Experience
82.3%
17.7%
Some
Experience
69.2%
29.5%
No,
I
don’t
plan
on
staying
Yes,
I
plan
on
staying
Below
23
77.5%
22.5%
23+
58.6%
39.6%

41. How
does
the
hometown
zip
code
affects
people’s
willingness
to
stay?
Zip
Code
Absolute
%
"Yes"
"Yes"
%
"No"
"No"
%
East
30
10%
5
17%
25
83%
Southeast
12
4%
3
25%
9
75%
Midwest
171
59%
61
36%
110
64%
South
16
6%
2
13%
14
88%
West
36
13%
5
14%
31
86%
Southwest
4
1%
2
50%
2
50%
Northwest
19
7%
3
16%
16
84%
288
100%
81
28%
207
72%
Zip
Code
Absolute
%
"Yes"
"Yes"
%
"No"
"No"
%
MO
63
22%
35
56%
28
44%
IL
55
19%
15
27%
40
73%
Midwest
171
59%
61
36%
110
64%
Non-­‐Midwest
117
41%
20
17%
97
83%
41
Appendix
B.7
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

42. What
are
the
reasons
behind
people
choosing
to
stay
vs.
leave?
Write-­‐In
Survey
Responses:
Reasons
Students
Cited
to
Stay
and
Leave
Reasons
Cited
Code
"Yes"
%
"No"
%
Job
1
10
63%
23
49%
Culture
2
2
13%
6
13%
Family
3
2
13%
5
11%
Loca@on
preference
4
1
6%
5
11%
Con@nuing
educa@on
5
0
0%
3
6%
Other
6
1
6%
5
11%
16
100%
47
100%
42
Appendix
B.8
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

43. Do
par;cular
industries
of
interest
have
a
higher
willingness
to
stay
in
St.
Louis?
%
Planning
to
Stay
in
St.
Louis
Aver
Gradua;on
Technology
35.1%
Professional
Services
(Doctor,
Lawyer,
Accountant,
etc.)
34.3%
Healthcare,
Pharmaceu@cals,
Biotechnology
31.0%
Media
29.4%
Consumer
Staples
(food,
beverage,
household
products)
28.0%
Retail
26.7%
Other
25.0%
Finance
23.5%
Energy,
Materials,
or
Industrials
18.8%
Non-­‐Profit
14.3%
Uncertain
15.0%
43
Appendix
B.9
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on

44. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Where
students
get
their
informa;on
about
St.
Louis
events
Appendix
B.10
Surveys
–
St.
Louis
Percep;on
44

45. Survey Methodology: Comparable Cities
This survey was conducted using a simple random sample of
students in St. Louis (including students at Washington
University in St. Louis, St. Louis University, University of
Missouri-St. Louis). We decided to include New York, Chicago,
Minneapolis, San Francisco and Boston as points of
comparison because these are the cities graduates typically
relocate to after graduation according to Career Center of
Washington University in St. Louis as well as Western Career
Center of Olin Business School.
Respondents
University
Affilia@on
WUSTL
U
of
Missorui-­‐St.Louis
St.
Louis
University
Other
Academic
Program
BA
BS
MBA
BSBA
MD
JD
MS
MA
Other
PHD
MSW
Mean(Age)
=
22.58
Mean(Year
in
School)
=
1.95
Mean(Working
Experience)
=
2.22
45
Appendix
C.1
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es

46. Survey Questions: Comparable Cities
Q1:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
job
opportunity
Q2:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Salary
Q3:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
the
Sports
Scene
(sports
event
availability,
variety,
team
spirit,
etc.)
Q4:
Where
do
you
like
to
spend
your
free
@me?
(Includes
ea@ng
out,
shopping,
socializing,
exercising,
etc.)
Q5:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Safety
Q6:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Ease
of
Transporta;on
Without
a
Car
Q7:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Ease
of
Transporta;on
With
a
Car
Q8:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
the
Restaurants
and
Bar
Scene
Q9:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Greenspace
(quality
and
quan@ty)
Q10:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Ease
of
Transporta;on
With
a
Car
Q11:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Arts/Culture/Entertainment
Q12:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
the
Diversity
of
its
inhabitants
Q13:
Please
rate
the
following
ci@es
in
terms
of
Youthfulness
Q14:
What
school
or
university
do
you
aTend?
Q15:
What
is
your
academic
program?
(Choose
all
that
apply)
Q16:
Why
or
why
not?
Q17:
What
is
your
major
or
program
focus?
Q18:
What
year
are
you
in
school?
(If
applicable,
for
the
academic
program
you
answered
with
above.)
Q19:
What
is
your
age?
46
Appendix
C.2
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es

47. Survey Questions: Comparable Cities
Q20: How
many
years
of
prior
work
experience
(excluding
internships)
do
you
have?
Q21:
What
is
your
hometown
zip
code?
(May
differ
from
your
current
zip
code.)
Q22:
Have
you
ever
spent
@me
in
St.
Louis
for
non-­‐academic
reasons?
(Examples:
internship,
part-­‐@me
work,
full-­‐@me
work,
volunteering,
research,
from
St.
Louis,
etc)
Q23:
If
yes,
what
did
you
do?
Which
company
or
organiza@on?(if
applicable)?
Q24:
Primary
industry
of
interest:
What
size
company
would
you
prefer
to
work
for?
Q25:
What
size
company
would
you
prefer
to
work
for?
Q26:
Please
provide
your
email
address
if
you'd
like
the
chance
to
win
a
$50
Starbucks
gin
card.
47
Appendix
C.2
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es

48. Appendix
C.3
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es
48

49. Appendix
C.3
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es
49

50. Appendix
C.3
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es
50

51. 51
Cost
of
living
Ease
of
transport
with
car
Green
space
Diversity
Arts
&
entertainment
Job
opportunity
Ease
of
transport
w/o
car
Restaurant/Bat
scene
Safety
Salary
Youthfulness
Sports
scene
St.
Louis
San
Francisco
Boston
Chicago
New
York
City
Kansas
City
Minneapolis
Appendix
C.4
Surveys
–
Comparable
Ci;es

52. • Pos@ng
is
short
and
direct,
with
rigorous
requirements
• Tone
is
compe@@ve,
challenging,
innova@ve:
• “Entrepreneurial”
• “Growth
companies”
• “Analy@cal
rigor”
• “Manage”
and
“Supervise”
• Requires
candidate
to
have
prior
experience
&
right
“fit”
52