5" -' v V' ‘ v ' ”'7', '5'\ t' -x 5 '5' v 5 'Jr’ ’5‘ 5 '5 .v 55 fl"- ? ""5U,55};~ 5"." , 5 .‘5 ', :- 5. 5‘. '_"~ ‘ 5 , ' . . 5. 5)" 5-5 . .55.'.' 5 ' J 5 P ’ - ;. ,5f,. ‘ ' .0 "- 5 ‘ , 5 fl. . -'I. III .0 5 l ‘ r. 5 A}! i ‘5 .‘ (NI 5 .‘U 5'. 5'.» . :LIIA. 5’ ‘ "1 ‘ ‘5' 5 ‘7'}..J'JJ5 ._ .'° 5 55 5' .0 .5. . ' . "'5'. . "JINRR‘? ' S I . If. "'4‘ I H“ I "5. ”3‘4; ' ”5" 5' 'l J I55 55 ‘ . £I II". I 5‘55 5. l 5.5 -..\ 5'“. .. ' 5' n5 l‘qu. 'l‘ "5 5s! '1 5:}. ' ' 7' 'II " ' " l ° I ‘:‘ .' '5 :‘VV' . ‘. I - 5 “ ' A 5 I |I ‘v‘ 5”” 5"". ,‘ v. '5 I :7“ (I ‘ I 5.. ." ‘.".I I. “.1 _ .5 ‘5 '5 _0 N. .5; . 0 ‘ O 5”" l o | I .filefl . 55 I ' I .‘:II .5 5 ' l" 'I"! ' , ‘ '.-5 5 5 5".“ | 5: '5‘ U " I v ." " 4.5“: '-"> " "51). 5 5 5 -,~» , I I 7 5..'.~.5:'.‘: 5,".3-5 .5: . '5 '5 51”.. '5 " .' .."‘ u. Iv. 1'5”,” .. ”ll-vii: .' I'I' "1.5.5.I ”IVE-5(9)” 555,716, .‘5I "'5' jf'“=‘.‘ "L .’ 5 ' ‘ .5 " ' . ' ' ' ‘ ° ' 55 . ' .“.' "'. .115: ;'r .-‘ I 55:: ., .- ‘ I“. “5 ‘ '5‘I5. ' “”3 II “flit " '55 J3? "’Iu ‘ "'5 " .. {IR}; ‘5“ "W: ‘75 .‘ ‘~ 5.' firp5 "u‘.u '" :5 .',.~'5‘,L 4,<¢5:255ayn;*5 5 fl“ 5'. 5 5 5555 it)”: . 5.5II | \ k If?) 5 ,IIiI 5 II 5I , \“‘.'5'5:- 5 I J‘- "_ I '- ". 5,‘ . ‘5 HI; 5‘5 '.5 '5 I '5'IIII 5II I‘ .‘I' II’ 5. 5 5 ' I- .'.- .' ' “55'l \5 " I 5' II 5 - , '. 5' 5 'I h. " - 15 .. '4 5 ’ 5' ' ".1" . 5 . 5 -).5| '.," we, 5 , - ' I 5 l1:55“ '5 ' _ ’5': -' (1" ..~ ' " “”51' . ""535" ' *w'I WM" 7'2- 55 “f‘ (1‘ ."5'53 5 '5" 5 " {.3’I55.'l-,""T"*l§: 5 "‘ I'M! , ' J“ " Y -55M55”¢y4¢g§5gwafiJmmmwmfumk 5,; 5 ""55' 5 ”5 “'5’." ‘l /' I 5 . -' 51." 'IIJ 5‘.- I 5 .. 5.5" II.II5;IIII.II ‘15 55 . ’“fiwlr 5.5,! 5554.5?“5 . 55" _, . 55 . ‘ ' ' ‘. 5‘. - , , 5 {5.1“}: um afi 5H W“¢mfi5iqy’ ,c5m¥flmfiWu .%fl .\ {J‘ _5| .1“ *1 «. ‘ 5 ,5] I 3,5)“ U“ I.,I I _ . III .55 "‘ .(rml‘ " "5 v'5' " ".55,5'*I,-"‘ ‘ ' 5" ‘ ’ !, 5I'.|5 ‘5'5' ‘1‘)!” .5 I ”5‘! 5 ‘, 5- 345,5 - 5, . '4 [’5 I55.- . ‘II5..5I_ l' 'i‘wlj 9|qu ‘3‘“ ‘.l'll"|.l' 105. 5"" ,' “I'M" '5'“. I'm ”€1.1h‘l 5, II_:I"5 ","Jn‘ fi+ :8“ . .I.:'.I 5)er ),I15,I5 'I'_I__.55I -’ II55 . . "5 5I 5'5 'I\TI Ififi II'WQ s'. 5.5-3 .5 .‘.J ‘i"' ‘ I M. ' W" nth.“ ‘- '1 ‘~(' "mm: A 5. I'M? 3:“ | ' 1.53,; v ‘ L 5,: ' "J 'IV fi'I/fi" II t'. » 3’5" £3": ‘ ""1‘1’5'lT-‘x \1‘5 "35‘ \ . n . 5 '."\ '5‘5‘J'5": u. .5‘ “15‘ ' 5" ‘ ' "I .5 ”3% ~II 5:- I. .II v .- n .557 5.‘ ~ 55. ' .Ig J Ig¢,,fix A L‘fi.’ If): - .L f); 5 _ ‘ -"‘.‘ '5 5553‘ .51?! J" "I'm “ ( ‘ . A I tn 5‘ ‘i . ' S ,I'u . ‘II‘u‘W‘I 5;.“ ‘5 .4 ' H'I, " '1 ”@533 $.55“ I I. IIIQ‘Q‘IJ ’5 .Ii’fIfitw‘ 5 I 55.5 5JI(I I'v'u'lh’vn ”'{ A I t I M; v 5 5 ‘\.;:1\I|I|..1,5‘- .' ,T‘, . (“:5 .f. -- ', I"I 5" -... ' - 5. H ”7"1‘ I; I '. ’v 1'! 5 .z"(\.~" %' ' "‘0’* 55 :5: "III ‘I"'{' I." ,5 ‘5 J:‘5 35‘ 5' d .‘r ‘ : I.v . 5w ', ' z‘uh'kgI A” “(f-L ' 5 M5 5'-' . ' ' - , "3"“. IIIIIIfII IIIIOI . . ,I . 3}“ I '5‘5 5 ,4 , 5!” #0 ml 5: 5. .5". . II.I,5-55 -' -- ms.“ ‘S Ma. ”5: . 5 | O 5 r... IM' 5" 55 'I‘ - “I' IcflJ , Od‘wL‘l f' 5‘ 5. ' fl? u 5“, E' 55%*' ' I'.|l,5. ' l5 ‘55 ' 5 .' . +1; IIII Ii: IsirNIIuI‘I 5"" t5 |45IJ '5' II ‘ I1}\" 0 :5; :. 5" yql‘l I lull“ . 5 Nb; ‘ 1b .5, Hint-“w I. '|. ”'v I ’1 w? 5 5'.” I‘.’ -55. '. ‘ {Ju'I'II THESIS Lzlu ‘ A ”I a wuur‘lt Michigan 52:23 ! 0-91 -1_E-F“-Als lfll‘i‘vluu‘ This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A Description and Analysis in Terms of Kotler's Marketing Orientation of Selected University Marketing Agencies Which Sell Faculty-Developed Non-Print Materials presented by Betty L. Decker has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctor of degree In Educational Systems Philosophy Development Major professor “(Iii-an ALA-d A .1 II- In - l L - 0.12771 MSU LIBRARIES RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to “Baum-:5 remove this checkout from L” your record. FINES will i be charged if book is returned after the date c‘amnqd Heine 0-- ~‘. f a M— A DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF KOTLER'S MARKETING ORIENTATION OF SELECTED UNIVERSITY MARKETING AGENCIES WHICH SELL FACULTY-DEVELOPED NON-PRINT MATERIALS BY Betty L. Decker A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Educational Systems Development 1985 ABSTRACT A DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF KOTLER'S MARKETING ORIENTATION OF SELECTED UNIVERSITY MARKETING AGENCIES WHICH SELL FACULTY-DEVELOPED NON-PRINT MATERIALS BY Betty L. Decker This study was undertaken to identify and describe the characteristics of university Marketing Agencies in terms of the marketing orientation model. The model was used to explain relative marketing effectiveness through the use of the Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale (MERS). The description of the characteristics of existing Marketing Agencies and the rating of their relative effectiveness as explained by the model would be useful for existing Agencies as an evaluative tool. It could also be used by univer- sities which are interested in establishing a Marketing Agency. In addition, the perceived hindering and facilitat- ing characteristics of the university setting were ident- ified. Questionnaires were sent to all seventeen Marketing Agencies identified in the search for members of the popula- tion. A follow-up telephone interview was used to answer any questions which the respondents might have, and to ensure the return of all questionnaires. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for the data collected. Medians and ranges were reported for financial data. MERS scores were calculated using the scoring system. Betty L. Decker Analysis of the results showed general support for the marketing orientation model. Those Agencies which scored most highly on MERS also reported greater financial success; fourteen Agencies (82%) had listed revenue generation as their primary goal. The two hindering characteristics listed by the Agencies were their exclusion from the new product development process and restrictions on advertising by the university. Facilitating characteristics included lower cost services, the prestige of the university's name, the ability to market "slim market" materials, and the availability of the faculty for assistance. A series of conclusions and general recommendations were formulated for Marketing Agencies to use to become more effective marketers. Since these recommendations were quite extensive, a first year action plan was also formulated based on three general marketing plans, i.e. intra-Agency, intra—University, and off-campus. To my mother, Beatrice Joyce Hill ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank the members of her committee, Dr. Castelle Gentry (Chairperson), Dr. Cassandra Book, Dr. Bruce Miles, and Dr. Max Raines for their valuable suggestions, guidance, and support throughout the entire doctoral experience. In addition, special thanks goes to Mr. Somnath Chatterjee of the Instructional Media Center at Michigan State University for his continued support through the many years which this project has taken. And last, but not least, appreciation is accorded to Ms. Mary Ploor, a fellow graduate student, who kept us both ahead of deadlines and required paperwork. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLESOOCOOOCOOO00......OO00.00.000.000...OOOOOOVii LIST OF FIGURESOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCix LIST OF APPENDICESOIOOO00.0.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOX Chapter I. II. THE PROBLEM...‘OOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0..0.0.0.01 Statement of the_Problem.........................l Purpose of the Study.............................2 Kotler's Model...................................3 Organizational Orientations....................3 Marketing Orientation Characteristics..........8 Need for the Study..............................ll Value of the Study to Educational Technology....13 Theoretical Base................................13 Research Questions..............................21 Limitations of this Research....................23 Assumptions.....................................23 Key Definitions.................................24 Summary.........................................27 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE....................29 Related Areas in Higher Education Research......30 Development of Marketing........................31 Peculiarities of Marketing in Higher Education..34 Organizational Orientations.....................37 Characteristics of the Marketing Orientation....42 Client-Centered Philosophy....................43 Adequate Marketing Information................54 Integrated Organization.......................59 Strategic Orientation.........................66 Operational Efficiency........................73 Summary.........................................77 iv III. VI. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURESOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOBG Population......................................81 Data Collection Instrument......................84 Data Collection Procedures......................9l Data Analysis...................................92 Summary.........................................94 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS..............96 Questionnaires Received.........................96 Current Characteristics of Marketing Agencies...97 Primary Goals.................................98 Operational Efficiency........................99 Integrated Organization......................104 Adequate Marketing Information...............167 Strategic Orientation........................lfl9 Customer Philosophy..........................ll$ Perceived Marketing Effectiveness (MERS).......112 Adequate Marketing Information...............112 Strategic Orientation........................ll4 Integrated Organization......................116 Operational Efficiency.......................118 Customer Philosophy..........................121 Overview of Marketing Effectiveness..........124 Environmental Factors..........................128 Perceived Hindering Characteristics..........128 Perceived Facilitating Characteristics.......139 Summary........................................132 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS......137 Study Summary..................................137 Conclusions and Recommendations................l40 Recommendations Regarding Hindering Characteristics..............................lSl Recommendations for Optimizing Facilitating Characteristics..............................153 Recommendations for First Year Action Plan.....lS4 Internal Marketing Program for the Marketing Agency.....................................154 Internal Marketing Program for the University.................................154 Chapter V cont'd. External Marketing Program for Off-Campus customers...0......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCO00.0155 Recommendations for Additional Research........155 sumary.OOO0.0000000000000000000000.0.0.0.0....157 BIBLIOGRAPHYOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0..0......159 APPENDICES...‘OOOOOOOOOOCOOOO0.00.00.00.00...0.169 App. App. App 0 App . App. Ob “NH Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale..169 Marketing Positions...................l7a University Marketing Agencies Addresses...........................171 Verification Questions to Qualify Population..........................l72 Cover Letter for the Questionnaire....l73 Survey Instrument Used................l74 Relevant Definitions..................178 vi Table 1. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. LIST OF TABLES Page Distribution of Questionnaire Items for the Research Questions............................94 Prioritized Goals of Marketing Agencies.........98 Percentage of Base Budget Provided by University Appropriations....................100 Expenses Paid from Income by Marketing AgeDCieSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIO0.0.0.100 Capital Invested in Inventory by Marketing AgeOCieSOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIGS Revenue of Marketing Agencies..................102 Expenses of Marketing Agencies.................102 Royalty Distribution by Marketing Agencies.....la4 Distribution of Authorship.....................105 Marketing Activities Performed by Marketing AgenCieSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.0000...0.0.0.000168 Promotional Activities Used by Marketing AgenCieSOOOOOOOCOO0.0.0.000...0.0.0.000000000199 Other Services Provided by Marketing Agencies..lll Distribution of Scores on MERS.................112 Research on Customers, Buying Influences, Channels' and cothitOISOOOOOOOOOO0.0.00.000113 Knowledge of Sales Potential and Profitability of Different Market Segments, Products, and Channel-800.00.00.00.00.......0000000000000000114 vii 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 39. 31. Degree of Effort to Measure Cost Effectiveness Of ExpenditureSOOOOO0..0.0.0.0...0.0.0.000000114 Extent of Formal Planning by Marketing AgenCieSOIOOO0.000000000000000000000I00.0.000115 Quality of Marketing Strategy Used by Marketing AgeUCieSOOO0.0...O0.00......0.00.00.00.0000000115 Extent of Contingency Thinking.................llS Degree that the Marketing Agency Works Well With others...‘OOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.00.00.000000117 Level of Integration and Control of Major Marketing Functions..........................118 Organization of the New Product Development Process...O0.0.0....OOOOOIOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0....118 Degree to which Marketing Thinking is Communicated Throughout the Organization.....126 Degree to which Marketing Thinking is Implemented Throughout the Organization......120 Degree of Effectiveness in Using Marketing ResourceSOOCOOOO0.......0...0.0.00.0000000000129 Capacity to React Quickly to On-The-Spot Developments in the Marketplace..............121 Capacity to React Effectively to On-The-Spot Developments in the Marketplace..............121 Degree to whch Different Offerings and Market Plans are Developed for Different Market segmentSOOOOOCCOO...COCOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.123 Degree to which the Agency Takes a Whole System's View when Planning..................123 Importance of Designing the Agency to Serve the Needs and Wants of Chosen Markets........123 Comparison of MERS Scores, Reported Revenue, and Primary Goal for Marketing Agencies......126 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Conceptualization of Kotler's Marketing orientationoo...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOICO0..0...007 2. An Expanded Representation of the Customer/Salesman Dyad........................15 3. Some Exogenous Variables in the Customer/Salesman Dyad........................l6 4. The Marketing Information System................55 5. A Marketing Planning and Control System.........67 ix Appendix 1 2 APPENDICES Page Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale...........169 Marketing Positions............................l7G University Marketing Agencies Addresses........l7l Verification Questions to Qualify Population...l72 Cover Letter for the Questionnaire.............l73 Survey Instrument Used.........................l74 Relevant Definitions...........................l78 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM The purpose of this study was to gather sufficient information to accurately describe marketing organizations within universities which sell the non-print materials developed by the institutions' faculty and staff. Marketing Agencies were then analyzed in terms of a general marketing model. The model was used as a basis for explaining the relative level of effectiveness of the Marketing Agencies in reaching their goals. This study also identified particular variables which acted as constraints on the Agency's performance because of the university environment in which it operated. Finally, the study offered a set of recommen- dations against which existing Marketing Agencies can com- pare. themselves and which universities establishing new Marketing Agencies can use to make the decisions about policies and procedures under which the Marketing Agency must operate. Statement of the Problem The marketing of university admissions, academic programs, and services has been researched but little has appeared about the characteristics of university marketing agencies, hereafter called Marketing Agencies, which sell the non-print materials developed by the faculty and staff. 2 The Marketing Agencies examined in this research were units which act as the central marketing outlet for non-print materials such as computer software, video, slide/tape, audio/print, and other forms of media developed as instruc- tional materials primarily by the university's faculty and staff. There are two problems. First, little is known about Marketing Agencies. Information is lacking about organiza- tion, policy, funding, types of materials offered, marketing strategies used, and their relative level of success. Secondly, there seems to be no criteria or model against which the performance of a university Marketing Agency has been evaluated. Without such criteria, efforts to improve the effectiveness of an Agency must be by trial and error and without specific direction. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to gather sufficient information to accurately describe and analyze university Marketing Agencies. This analysis provided the basis for a set_ of recommendations which could be used by existing Marketing Agencies to improve their effectiveness or by universities to establish new Marketing Agencies. This study also identified hindering and facilitating character- istics of the university environment on the operations of the Marketing Agency. 3 The recommendations generated for analyzing and improv- ing Marketing Agencies were based on comparison with the marketing orientation as developed by Kotler (1975 s 1982). This descriptive model has been used by Kotler to rate the overall marketing effectiveness of organizations engaged in marketing activities. Marketing is defined as: ”the analysis, planning, implementation and control of carefully formulated programs designed to bring about the voluntary exchange of values with target markets for the purpose of achieving organizational objectives. It relies heavily on designing the organization's offering in terms of the target market's needs and desires, and on using effective pricing, communication and distribu- tion to inform, motivate and serve markets (Kotler, l982:6)." According to Kotler, the marketing orientation is only one of five orientations which organizations may demonstrate. The particular emphasis of each of the five orientations and their basic assumptions are described in Kotler's Princi- ples of Marketing (1980:20-6). The other four orientations are: production, product, sales, and societal. Each is described in the following paragraphs. Kotler's Model Organizational Orientations The marketing orientation is the orientation which Kotler contends will make an organization most successful in achieving its marketing goals. An organization which favors the marketing orientation believes that the key to achieving its goals consists of determining the needs and wants of target markets and adapting the organization to deliver the 4 desired satisfaction better than the competition. The underlying premises of the marketing orientation are as follows: First, consumers can be grouped into different market segments by their needs and wants. Second, consumers in any market segment will favor the offer that best meets their needs and wants. Third, the Marketing Agency's task is to research and choose target markets and deliver effec- tive offerings and marketing programs as the way to attract- ing and holding customers. As part of his own research, Kotler (1977) developed a questionnaire which he used to rate an organization's marketing effectiveness in terms of the marketing orientation. Later, he published an opera- tional plan which organizations could use to become more marketing oriented (Kotler, 1979). The production orientation assumes that the customer will favor products which are available and affordable. Therefore, the main tasks of marketing agencies are to pursue improved production and distribution efficiency. There are four implicit assumptions for the production orientation. First, consumers are primarily interested in product availability and low price. Second, consumers know the prices of competing products. Third, non-price differ- ences are not important to consumers. Fourth, the marketing agency's task is to lower prices by improving production and distribution efficiency as the method for attracting and holding customers. 5 Organizations which favor a product orientation assume that the consumer will prefer those products which offer the most quality for the price. Therefore, the marketing agency should devote its energy to improving product quality. There are five implicit assumptions in the product orienta— tion. First, consumers buy products rather than solutions to needs. Second, consumers are interested in product quality. Third, consumers know the quality and feature differences of competing products. Fourth, consumer choice is based on the most quality for the price. And fifth, the marketing agency's task is to keep improving product quality as the way to attract and hold customers. The organization which guides its exchange activities by a sales or selling orientation believes that consumers will either not buy or not buy enough of the seller's products unless a significant effort is made to stimulate customer interest in the seller's product. There are three implicit assumptions in the selling orientation. First, consumers have a normal resistance toward buying most products which are not necessary. Second, consumers can be persuaded to buy. more through various sales strategies. Third, the marketing agency's task is to organize a strong sales department as the way to attract and hold customers. In the sales orientation, any flaws in the product are hidden from the potential customer because the emphasis is with sales and not with customer satisfaction. Such agencies 6 concentrate on hard-sell sales tactics and slick promotion while de-emphasizing other aspects of marketing. The last of the five orientations is the societal mar- keting orientation. The organization which practices this orientation believes that the marketing organization has two main tasks. The first is to determine the needs, wants, and interests of target markets, and to adapt the organization to meet those needs better than the competition. The second task of the organization is to accomplish the above 2311 in ways which preserve and/or enhance the consumer's and society's long-range well being. For example, if the auto companies were practicing a societal marketing orientation, they would have developed products which satisfy customer needs and wants which did not pollute the atmosphere, can not be driven by an intoxicated person, and would not rust or otherwise harm the environment or the quality of life. There are three implicit premises in the societal marketing orientation. First, consumers' wants do not always coincide with their own or society's long-run interests. Second, consumers will increasingly favor those marketing agencies which show a concern for the consumer's and society's long- range well being in products which meet the consumer's wants. Third, the marketing agency's task is .to meet consumers' wants in a way that satisfies the consumer but also has long-range individual and societal benefits as the way to attract and hold customers. There is growing support 7 for this perspective in the field of marketing (Lavidge, 1970; Dawson, 1971; Kotler, 1972). Of the five orientations of production, product, sales, societal, and marketing, Kotler contends that the marketing orientation will enable an organization to be most success- ful in achieving its marketing goals. To be marketing oriented, an organization must exhibit five characteristics to a high degree. These characteristics are customer- centered philosophy, adequate marketing information, inte- grated marketing organization, strategic orientation, and operational efficiency. Figure 1, presents a schematic of this researcher's conceptualization of Kotler's marketing orientation. Customer philosophy Operational Integrated Organization Adequate marketing information orientation Figure l. Conceptualization of Kotler's marketing orienta- tion. 8 In the marketing orientation, Kotler describes the char- acteristic of client-centered philosophy as being the- base which encompasses the other four characteristics. The client-centered philosophy is the key to more effective marketing and is the single characteristic which separates the marketing orientation from the other less effective orientations of production, product, sales, and societal. Marketing Orientation Characteristics The marketing orientation has five characteristics. According to Kotler, organizations which possess all of these characteristics to a high degree are predicted to be more successful in reaching their marketing goals than those organizations which concentrate on only one or two of the characteristics. All organizations may possess some or all of the characteristics to some degree. The characteristics of the marketing orientation are as follows: To rate highly on the characteristic of customer- centered philosophy, the organization must acknowledge that the marketplace's and consumer's needs and wants are the most important factors in shaping organizational plans and operations. To be customer-centered, the organization must study the marketplace continuously, select the best parts of the market to serve, and shape the organization to offer superior value to the chosen customers in terms of their needs and wants. This includes not only customers, but also 9 suppliers, supporters, distributors, and others who can have an impact on the success of the organization. The characteristic of adequate marketing information consists of the kind and quality of information which the organization needs to conduct effective marketing. Effec- tive marketing requires that decision makers have enough information for planning and allocating resources to differ- ent markets, products, and marketing tools. Marketing tools consist of the 4 P's of product, price, place, and promo- tion/communication (McCarthy, 1968:31-3). Such information would include recent studies of consumers' preferences, perceptions, buying habits, and information which monitors both direct and indirect competition. It would also include good information regarding the sales potential and profit- ability of different market segments, products, channels, order sizes, and an accounting system which gives profit by line item so that the results of marketing expenditures can be evaluated. The characteristic of integrated marketing organization requires that the organization be staffed so that it will be able to carry out marketing analysis, planning, implementa- tion, and control. The organizational structure must reflect the client-centered philosophy through the various marketing positions which are designed to serve the needs of important market segments, territories, and product lines. Marketing management must be able to effectively work with other departments within the organization in a way which 10 earns both respect and cooperation. Finally, the organiza- tion must have a well-defined system for developing, evalu- ating, testing, and launching new products because these form the basis for the organization's future. To rate highly on strategic orientation, the organiza- tion must generate innovative strategies and plans for long- run growth and profitability if these are the agency's goals. The strategies are based on the organization's philosophy, organization, and information resources. This requires a formal system for annual and long-range planning. The plan leads to a core strategy that is clear, innovative, and data-based. It must look ahead for contingent actions which might be required by new developments in the market- place. However, regardless of the amount and quality of market planning, marketing effectiveness cannot be achieved unless plans are efficiently carried out at the various levels of the organization. Operational efficiency is achieved when marketing plans are implemented in a cost-effective manner and results are monitored for quick corrective action. For the organization to be operationally efficient, all employees must act as though the client's interests are most important. Adequate resources must also be available to do the various marketing activities; and organizational systems must be able to react quickly and intelligently to on-the-spot developments in the marketplace. ll Organizations which demonstrate high levels of compet- ence on the five characteristics of client-centeredness, adequate marketing information, integrated marketing organi- zation, strategic orientation, and operational efficiency can be described as following Kotler's marketing orienta- tion. Kotler (1982) contends that organizations with a marketing orientation will be more successful in reaching their marketing goals than organizations which follow any of the other four orientations of production, product, sales, or societal. Obviously all Marketing Agencies will perform some of the activities which comprise each of the char- acteristics of the marketing orientation. However, Kotler contends that to be truly effective, agencies must pursue all of the characteristics to a high degree. From the research generated by Kotler's Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale (MERS) (1977), a scoring system has been devel- oped for measuring an organization's marketing effective- ness. The data collected and the score from the MERS are used as basis for working with members of an organization to improve the organization's marketing orientation and effec- tiveness. Need for the Study The results from this study can fill a number of current needs. First, it will provide a comprehensive description of university Marketing Agencies; there is no such descrip- tion currently available. Second, it will provide a listing 12 of major university Marketing Agencies which can be used to locate finished materials on particular topics. Third, it will provide a set of recommendations which can be used by universities interested in establishing new Marketing Agen- cies. There is some interest within universities in the revenues which such Agencies can generate. Fourth, the recommendations are based on a marketing model and could be used by existing Marketing Agencies to compare their present marketing procedures/policies and make decisions concerning improving their marketing efforts. Fifth, this study will identify characteristics within the university setting which may act to hinder or facilitate the Marketing Agency's ability to act as an effective marketer. Having been iden- tified, universities can make decisions to minimize hinder- ing characteristics and optimize facilitating characteris- tics in view of the expected performance of the Marketing Agency as a marketer. Sixth, accessible information about established Marketing Agencies could save institutions of higher education money in terms of new materials develop- ment. Costs could be lowered if materials are purchased and adapted rather than developed from inception. Seventh, the application of the marketing research segment of the market- ing model would allow institutions to establish planned programs for materials development by matching their own needs with segments of the educational market for which materials have not yet been developed, but for which a need can be established. 13 Value of the Study to Educational Technology Information from this study can be useful to instruc- tional development professionals. It would provide a listing of university Agencies which sell developed instruc- tional materials. This could save time and money expended in duplicating developmental efforts already completed at other universities. The developer's efforts could then be concentrated in development of materials which do not already exist and on the adaptation of existing materials. It is possible, that in this way, more instructional needs may be met; thus improving the instructional developer's effectiveness. It is also possible that this study could assist instructional developers in the dissemination of their instructional products through the establishment of Market- ing Agencies. Revenues generated by Marketing Agencies could be used in support of developmental activities. Royalties distributed to the faculty from sales of instruc- tional materials could act as an incentive for the faculty to spend the time required to produce non-print instruc- tional materials. Theoretical Base The relative success of Marketing Agencies depends on their ability to facilitate exchanges of value. To "sell" their products to clients who need them, to produce new materials to satisfy emerging market needs, and to earn more 14 than they spend, are all critical to continued survival. An understanding of the theoretical basis for marketing, the exchange of value, is important as a first step in under- standing Marketing Agencies. The "exchange Paradigm" has emerged in the marketing literature as the most useful framework for understanding marketing behavior (Bagozzi, 1975:32). Bagozzi (1974:78) defines the exchange system as: I ”a set of social actors, their relationships to each other, and the endogenous and exogenous variables affecting the behavior of the social actors in that relationship." Social actors may include salespersons, retailers, con- sumers, advertisers, stockholders, and others. Relation- ships are defined as connections or patterning between social actors,' such as roles. The endogenous and exogenous variables represent causal factors superimposed on both the social actors and the relationships between/among the actors, including social, psychological and physical pheno- mena (Bagozzi, 1974:78). Under this type of expansion over more traditional simplistic formulations of exchange, the exchange system can be interpreted as a process of cause- and-effect relations which depend on the actions of the actors as well as external factors. Bagozzi (1974:79) bases his exchange system, in part, on the work of Tedeschi, Schlenker, and Bonoma (1973) in social influence processes. Figure 2 uses the salesperson/customer relationship as an illustration of this expanded exchange system. Some of the 15 endogenous variables to be considered are attraction, resources, prestige, esteem, role position/status, message credibility, reward/punishment, relative product, and money relations. lndosenous Variables Histocy oi reward mediation and/or degree of attitu- dinal similarity (Attraction) Source intentions (Prestige) awummumummnq] Source J (Esteem) l [ A mm In— Magnitude oi reward or punishment product and money ........ ........... I m... I Figure 2. An expanded representation of the customer/ salesman dyad. Source: R. Bagozzi,"Marketing as an 0r- ganizational Behavioral System," Journal of Marketing (October, 1974), (38), p. 79. In addition to the endogenous variables proposed, certain exogenous variables will also need to be considered. These can include the company's goals, policies, social norms, ethics, legal restrictions, competitive offerings, and the various needs and limitations which effect customers 16 as social actors. These exogenous variables are illustrated in Figure 3. Family needs, budget limits- 33.7.“:3 tions, other policies iorcas impinging on the social actors Social norms, ethics, and legal restrictions Figure 3. Some exogenous variables in the customer/salesman dyad. Source: R. Bagozzi, "Marketing as an Organized Behavioral System," Journal of Marketirg (Oct., 1974),p. 81. In general, there are three types of exchange relation- ships which have emerged in social exchange theory: restricted, generalized, and complex. The distinction between generalized and restricted exchange was first made by Levi-Strauss (1969). Extended, critical analysis of these two types of exchange appears in Chapter III of Social Exchange Theory: The Two Traditions by Peter Ekeh (1974). Restricted exchange refers to two-party, reciprocal relations where the actors give and receive exchanges as consumers, retailers, salespersons, organizations, or collectives (Ekeh, 1974:58). Restricted exchanges exhibit two characteristics: 1) there is a great attempt to main- tain equality, especially in the case of repeatable social exchange acts; 2) there is a notion of quidppro quo where l7 mutual reciprocities are cut short. There is an attempt to balance activities and exchange items as part of the mutual reciprocal relations (Ekeh, 1974:51-2). Additional research has been conducted in the area of equity and inequity in exchange situations (Adams, 1963; Adams and Freedman, 1976; Huppertz, et al., 1978) under the general theoretical category of cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957). Generalized exchange denotes univocal reciprocal rela- tionships among at least three actors in the exchange situa- tion. Univocal reciprocity occurs if "the reciprocations involves at least three actors and the actors do not benefit each other directly, but only indirectly (Ekeh, 1974:48 & 59)." In generalized exchange, the social actors form a system where each actor gives to another and receives from someone else. Such exchanges do not conform to the usual notions of quid pro quo but do constitute a marketing ex- change (Bagozzi, 1975:33). Complex exchange refers to a system of mutual relation- ships among at least three parties. Each actor is involved in at least one direct exchange, while the entire system is organized by an interconnecting web of relationships. Complex chain and complex circular exchanges involve predominantly conscious systems of social and economic rela- tionships. Alderson termed such an overt coordination of activities and expectations an "organized behavioral system" which he reserved for the household, the firm and the channel of distribution (1965:Chapter l). A group of 18 researchers which include Frazer (1919), Homans (1974) and Blau (1964) have worked in the area of generalized and complex exchanges in relatively unconscious systems of social and economic relationships. These writers have based their theories of exchange on the assumption of individual- istic self-interest as the foundation for the web of kinship, economic, and social relationships. They have diverged from the exchange tradition developed by Levi- Strauss which is based on socialistic, collectivistic rather than individualistic assumptions about generalized exchange (Levi-Strauss, 1969; Ekeh, 1974:Chapters 3 a 4). In order to satisfy human needs and organizational resource needs, people, and organizations are compelled to engage in social and economic exchanges with other people and organizations. By complying with or influencing the behavior of others, needs are met. This is done by control- ling and communicating the media of exchange, which in turn, comprises the links between individuals and organizations. The media of exchange are the vehicles by which individuals and organizations satisfy their needs and may include such things as money, persuasion, punishment, power/authority, inducement, and activation of normative and ethical commit- ments (Parsons, 1963:37-62; Parsons, 1963:232-62; Emerson, 1962:31-40). Products and services are also vehicles of exchange, and marketing is concerned not only with influence processes, but also with meeting existing needs and antici- pating future ones. Marketing is more than the transfer of 19 a product or service for money. The explanation of its occurrence lies in social and psychological experiences, meanings, and feelings of the parties in the exchange. In general, marketing exchanges may exhibit one of three classes of meanings: utilitarian, symbolic, or mixed (Bagozzi, 1975:35-6). The utilitarian exchange, often called the economic exchange, is an interaction wherein goods are exchanged for money or goods, for the anticipated use or tangible charac- teristics associated with the goods. Utilitarian exchange theory is built on the base of the idea of ”economic man" (Schneider, 1974). The theory of economic man assumes that man is rational, will attempt to maximize satisfaction, will have complete information on all available alternatives, and the exchange will be relatively free from external influ- ences. Symbolic exchange is involved with the mutual exchange or transfer of psychological, social, or other intangibles between two or more actors. '...symbol is a general term for all the instances where experience is mediated rather than direct; where an object, action, word, picture, or complex behavior is understood to mean not only itself but also some other ideas or feelings...People buy things not only for what they are, but also for what they mean (Levy, 1959:117- 9)." Sellers of goods are concerned not only with selling practical merchandise, but with selling symbols as consumers move away from priority concerns with survival. 28 Mixed exchanges involve both utilitarian and symbolic exchange aspects which are usually difficult to separate. Marketing must be concerned with the creation and resolution of marketing exchanges which involve a mix of utilitarian and symbolic exchange aspects. The picture of people as complex entities striving for both economic and symbolic rewards has led to the emergence of the study of “marketing man" which is based on the following assumptions: 1) "Man" is sometimes rational and sometimes irrational. 2) He/she is motivated by tangible as well as intangible rewards, by internal as well as external forces which may be present or anticipated in the future. 3) He/she engages in both utili- tarian and symbolic exchanges involving social and psycho- logical aspects. 4) He/she goes ahead with decisions based on incomplete information and very rudimentary calculations of costs and benefits. 5) "Marketing man” will often settle for less than optimum gains from exchanges although he/she may try to maximize. 6) Exchanges are subject to many individual and social constraints which may include legal, ethical, normative, and coercive considerations, among others (Bagozzi, 1975:37). In a broad sense, marketing as defined in this research can be described and understood within the framework of general system theory (Von Bertalanffy, 1962). For example, expanded exchange systems are open systems with many influ- ences from both within and without affecting the actions of people and organizations. The continuous effort to satisfy 21 consumers' needs better, both in the present and in the future, keeps new energy working within the system. So it is continually adapting and changing to offset positive entropic inclinations i.e., the tendency for organized systems to deteriorate. Certainly, the success of exchange as describing the area of marketing depends on continuous feedback for the actors in the exchange so that the system continues to evolve to more complex states. Research Questions The following three questions were formulated to guide this research: 1. What are the characteristics of university non- print Marketing Agencies as they now exist? 2. What level of perceived marketing effectiveness currently exists in university non-print Marketing Agencies? 3. What characteristics of the university environment, if any, do Marketing Agencies perceive as hindering or facilitating their ability to operate as effective marketers? Question 1 seeks to establish what actually exists at the present time. There are Marketing Agencies in univer- sities which are selling non-print instructional materials, but they are few and little is known about them. The infor- mation for this question will establish the important 22 characteristics of these Agencies such as their policies, procedures, income, funding, history, and goals. Question 2 seeks to establish the level of marketing effectiveness of Marketing Agencies according to their own perceptions. This is accomplished through the use of the Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale (MERS) an instrument developed, and used by Kotler (1977). The actual language and form of the questions were altered somewhat to facili- tate its use as applied to university Marketing Agencies. The original MERS appears in Appendix 1. MERS is based on the five characteristics of Kotler's marketing orientation. Question 3 seeks to identify the characteristics of the university setting which Marketing Agencies perceive as hindering or facilitating their effort to do an effective marketing job. University Marketing Agencies may be insur- mountably affected by restrictions placed on them by the institutions of which they are a part. The differences cited by Weinberg and Lovelock (1978) between non-profit and profit organizations may keep university Marketing Agencies from being effective marketers. Or, it may be the case that these agencies as “self-sufficient, single-constituency operation(s), (are) a close analogue to the profit-oriented company. Therefore, traditional business concepts and tech- niques can be applied to (their) marketing needs (Shapiro, 1973:130)." This 23 Limitations of this Research research has been limited in a number of ways with respect to the population of interest. 1. 5. Only central service units which served the whole university rather than a single college or department were selected. The Marketing Agencies were recognized by their institutions as the vendor for non-print materials. The Marketing Agencies actually sold non-profit materials developed primarily by the faculty and staff. Only Marketing Agencies in institutions of higher education with at least four year academic programs were used. Only institutions located within the United States were included. Only Marketing Agencies which vended copyrighted rather than patented materials were included in the study. Since the instrument used was a survey instrument, the data collected is subjective in nature. No compilation of subject titles offered for sale by the Marketing Agencies was attempted. Assumptions This study is based on some general assumptions concern- ing Marketing Agencies. The first is that these Agencies 24 are not able or meant to earn a profit in the sense that commercial marketers are required to do. Revenues generated by university Marketing Agencies are used to support the larger goals and objectives of the institution in some way. Thus, revenues are paid out as royalties to the authors, as payment toward the costs of production, in support of the Marketing Agency's costs in performing its function and/or in the dissemination of university developed innovative materials. The second assumption is that it is neither realistic nor desirable to try to separate the functions of the Marketing Agency from the larger institution. The goal is to improve the effectiveness of its operations and thus improve its service to the university. .The third assumption of this study is that the applica- tion of research and techniques from the field of marketing is a valid method for achieving greater marketing effective- ness. However, marketing effectiveness is a relative measure which will have to be worked toward over time and in a systematic way. It will take careful planning and deter- mined effort to bring about changes within the institution which are necessary if the Marketing Agency is to become marketing oriented. Key Definitions Adequate marketing information - a component of the marketing orientation. It involves sufficient, timely, and 25 accurate information to allow management to make decisions concerning the allocation of resources to ensure greatest marketing effectiveness. Client-centered gphilosophy - the key component to the marketing orientation. Requires that all of the Agency's efforts and resources be directed to satisfying identified client needs and wants. Integrated organization - a component of the marketing orientation. It involves the ability of the staff to work cooperatively and in coordination with others to carry out the marketing functions of analysis, planning, implementa- tion, and control. This includes the new product develop- ment process. Market - a distinct group of people and/or organizations that have resources which they want to exchange for something of distinct benefit to themselves (Kotler, 1982:56). Marketing - "...is the analysis, planning, implementa- tion, and control of carefully formulated programs to bring about the voluntary exchange of values with target markets for the purpose of achieving organizational objectives. It relies heavily on designing the organization's offering in terms of the target market's needs and desires, and on using effective 'pricing, communication, and distribution to inform, motivate, and serve markets (Kotler, l982:6)." Marketing Agency - a formal organization within a university's structure with the primary purpose of marketing 26 the non-print copyrighted materials developed primarily by the faculty and staff of the institution as part of or as a result of their employment. Marketingy mix - the particular blend of controllable marketing variables that the firm uses to achieve its objectives in the target market (Kotler, 1982:188). Marketing oriented - the main task of the organization is to determine the needs and wants of target markets and to satisfy them through the design, communication, pricing, and delivery of appropriate and competitatively viable products and services (Kotler, 1982:22). Operational efficiency - a component of the marketing orientation. It involves the optimal use of resources, the cost effective implementation of plans, and the ability to react quickly, and effectively to on-the-spot developments in the marketplace. Product - anything that can be offered to a market to satisfy a need. It can include physical objects, services, persons, places, ideas, and organizations. Other names for a product would be an offer, value package, or benefit bundle (Kotler, 1982:291). Product oriented - the major task of the organization is to put out products which it thinks would be good for the customer (Kotler, 1982:21) Production oriented - the major task of the organization is to pursue efficiency in production and distribution (Kotler, 1982:21). 27 Public - a distinct group of people and/or organizations that has an actual or potential interest and/or impact on the organization (Kotler, 1982:47). Sales or selling oriented - the main task of the organization is to stimulate the interest of potential customers in the organization's existing products and services (Kotler, 1982:22). Strategic orientation - a component of the marketing orientation which involves the setting of goals, objectives, and formulating both annual and long-range plans for reaching those goals. Includes planning for contingencies which may occur so that.the Agency can optimize or minimize the effects. Additional definitions can be found in Appendix 5 of this study. Summary The purpose of this study was to gather information about Marketing Agencies in universities. This was done because there is currently very little known about these Agencies, nor has there been any attempt to establish their effectiveness as marketers in their own environment. It has not been established whether or not Marketing Agencies are adversely or positively affected by their location in uni- versities. In addition, information about Marketing Agencies may be used by universities as a guide for making decisions concerning establishing new Agencies and by 28 existing Agencies as a comparison for possible organiza- tional changes which may increase marketing effectiveness. Information was sought to answer three questions concerning present characteristics, perceived marketing effectiveness, and the perceived effects on marketing effec- tiveness caused by the university site. To measure perceived marketing effectiveness of the Marketing Agency, the Marketingthfectiveness Rating Scale was used (Kotler, 1977). This instrument was based on a general descriptive model in the field of marketing for non-profit organizations (Kotler, 1975 a 1982). The model had five characteristics including client-centered philosophy, adequate marketing information, integrated marketing organization, strategic planning, and operational efficiency. The marketing orien- tation model was grounded in the ”exchange paradigm” and on the premise of "marketing man” rather than "economic man" (Bagozzi, 1973 a 1974). The literature review which supports the marketing orientation follows in Chapter II. Chapter III describes the population, the data collection instrument, data collection procedures, and the data analy- sis. Chapter IV presents the data collected and the results of the data analysis. Chapter V is a discussion of the conclusions and the recommendations. CHAPTER II REVIEW 0]? RELATED LITERATURE Although there is little in the literature concerning university Marketing Agencies, there are a number of related areas involving marketing in higher education and in the profit sector. Literature concerning marketing in higher education is now at the stage of arguing for the application of marketing principles and strategies (Lucas, 1979; Litten, 1989). Little has appeared concerned with the analysis of educational institutions which have been successful from a marketing perspective. There is nothing in the research concerning marketing in the non-profit sector which approaches the extensive study performed by Peters and Waterman (1982) to identify the variables which make some large corporations more successful than others. The find- ings of the Peters and Waterman study, as well as others, have been applied in this chapter in support of the market- ing orientation developed by Kotler (1982). This chapter is organized to present a description of related literature, a summary of the evolution of marketing, a discussion of the peculiarities of higher education with respect to marketing, and five orientations toward marketing which organizations can demonstrate. The largest portion of the chapter treats the characteristics of Kotler's marketing orientation, i.e. client—centered philosophy, adequate 29 38 marketing information, integrated marketing organization, strategic orientation, and operational efficiency. Related Areas in Higher Education Research Extensive work for this review found only four articles which treated the topic of the university as a publisher of non-print instructional materials (Bowen, 1974; Gaunt, 1976; Decker, 1982; Pike, 1985). There were also a few articles concerning ownership and copyrights for intellectual and/or instructional materials developed by university faculty (Cosello, 1977; Silverstein, 1978). The scarcity of research concerning university Marketing Agencies does not mean that institutions of higher education are not interest- ed in the area of marketing as evidenced by the variety of university activities to which marketing has been applied. During the last ten years, marketing topics have appeared on the agendas at most educational meetings (Vaccaro, 1979:18). A number of articles have appeared which applied the con- cepts of marketing to institutions of higher education as an institutional planning and communications approach (Krachen- berg, 1972; Hugstad, 1975; Trivett, 1978; Litten, 1988; Grabowski, 1981). The application of marketing strategies to increase student enrollment is well researched (Ihlan- feldt, 1988:x). Some of the reasons higher education should be interested in marketing concepts were summarized by Lucas (l979:vii). These concerns have led to the formulation of explicit strategies for the development and implementation 31 of new educational programs through the application of mar- keting principles (Mowen, et al., 1977; Lee and Gilmour, 1977). The application of marketing principles and stra- tegies to areas other than the sale of tangible goods is a recent development in the field of marketing, and one which has caused some controversy (Ohio State University, 1965; Kotler and Levy, 1969; Luck, 1969; Kotler and Levy, 1969; Kotler and Zaltman, 1971; Kotler, 1972; Luck, 1974; Bartels, 1974). Development of Marketing In the marketing literature, Kotler has been in the forefront of the movement to broaden marketing's domain from a narrow concern with the sale of tangible goods, to a prospective of marketing as a general social process which can be applied broadly. Under this broader perspective, products would include persons, ideas, organizations, and less tangible goods and services as well as tangible goods (Kotler and Levy, 1969:11). Consumers would include sup- pliers, clients, trustees/directors, active, and general publics as well as purchasers of tangible goods and ser- vices. Everyone who could have an interest in a particular exchange needs to be included in the marketing effort (Kotler and Levy, 1969:12). The advent of consumerism (Levy, 1959) reflects the concern of groups for long-range effects and values, and the marketer's growing responsibil- ity to consumers (Kotler, 1972:48). Lavidge (1978:27) 32 contends that it is the marketer's responsibility to ask the question "Should it be sold?" ”Is it worth its cost to society?" and not just "Can it be sold?" In an economy of abundance, marketing must be viewed as an instrument for social control with the focus on changing consumer norms (Lazar, l969:3). Not only should marketing be viewed as a social process, but as a science relative to the problems and issues concerning people's lives in both the short and the long-range (Dawson, 1971:66). The principles of market- ing analysis, planning, and control can and should be applied to the process of social change (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971:3). Scholars in the area of higher education agree with both the expansion of the application of marketing principles and the responsibility of marketers for both the short and long- range welfare of the consumer. Part of the university's basic mission is to act as ”a catalyst for positive intel- lectual, social, and technological change (Mission State- mggt, Michigan State University, 1982)." Universities have recognized responsibility for societal marketing (Litten, 1988:52) since marketing, properly used, can substantially increase the acceptance and utilization of something new (Mowen, et al., l977:1). Marketing can "help organizations ensure survival and continued health through serving their markets effectively (Kotler, 1982:7)." Marketing principles and techniques are being applied by institutions of higher education, but often in a haphazard manner (Litten, 33 1988:41). Much of the negative reaction and disappointing results from marketing efforts can be ascribed to a lack of understanding of exactly what marketing is and what it can do for an institution with the value structure and goals of universities (Vaccaro, 1979:19). According to Vaccaro (1979:22), educators too often equate marketing with adver- tising. Often institutions of higher education use promo- tion as the starting point; this may be because universities are product-oriented, rather than user-oriented (Vaccaro, 1979:22). Also, universities generally lack professionals with training in marketing to coordinate the marketing effort (Lucas, 1979:vii). Some institutions are hiring advertising firms which use strategies that the university's publics feel are incongruent with the university's image and values (Vaccaro, 1979:19). Promotional campaigns by persons who are not familiar with universities and not able to judge the quality of the product which they are "overselling" can lead to hostility and dissatisfaction from the faculty who are expected to deliver the promised educational product without having had any input into the strategies used to market it (Davidson, 1988:48). Many writers believe that marketing can and should be directly applied to higher education as it would be to General Motors (Hugstad, 1975:584). However, more scholars agree that there are basic differences between profit sector organizations and institutions of higher education which require that 34 marketing concepts be adapted when used (Shapiro, 1973; Kotler and Murray, 1975). Peculiarities of Marketing in Higher Education As social enterprises, the similarities between business and higher education are probably more numerous than the differences. Shirley (1978) has compared the nature of strategic choices that face higher education, hospitals, and businesses. He concludes that these choices are remarkably similar for the three types of organizations. However, the differences are critical in transferring marketing activi- ties from one setting to the other. Also, marketing in business is highly differentiated by the type of business activity. This makes the transfer of marketing from appro- priate spheres a task requiring considerable sensibility (Litten, 1988:45; Kotler, 1982:8). An analysis has been developed of the differences between profit and non-profit marketing for different types of marketing as they apply to institutions of higher education (Lovelock and Weinberg, 1974; Lovelock and Rothschild, 1979). The major differences identified by these researchers follow. First, non-profit agencies have at least two major publics to work with from a marketing point of view. They are clients and funders. The former poses the problem of resource allocation; and the latter, the problem of resource attraction. In addition to these two, mggy other publics surround the institution and call for marketing programs. 35 An institution of higher education needs to direct marketing programs toward prospective students, current students, parents of students, alumni, faculty, local businesses, granting agencies, local, state, and federal agencies. Although businesses also deal with a multitude of publics, their tendency is to think about marketing only in connec- tion with one of these publics, their customers. Second, non-profit agencies tend to pursue several im- portant objectives at once rather than only one, such as profits. As a result, it is more difficult to formulate strategies that will satisfy all of the objectives. It is particularly important for management to state the relative importance of the objectives so that choices can be made among alternative strategies. Business organizations also have multiple objectives, but these tend to be dominated by the drive for profit. Third, non-profit organizations are usually subject to close public scrutiny because they provide needed public services, are subsidized, and are tax-exempt. In many cases, they are mandated into existence. They experience pressure from various publics and are expected to operate in the public interest. Administrators of non-profit organiza- tions often feel that they must move carefully with marketing activities or their publics might challenge them. The three most frequent types of criticism are: 1) market- ing wastes the public's money; 2) marketing activities are 36 intrusive; and 3) marketing is manipulative (Kotler, 1982:18-9). Fourth, most profit agencies are engaged in the produc— tion of services rather than goods. Services have the char- acteristics of being intangible, inseparable, variable, and perishable. For example, a university offers an intangible service called education. Its delivery is inseparable from professors who deliver it. Its quality is variable with respect to who delivers it; and it is perishable in the sense that empty seats mean a loss of revenue. Service marketers, including higher education, must keep these char— acteristics in mind when developing marketing strategies and plans. Contributors to the literatureIin higher education agree that there are important differences between marketing in the profit sector and marketing in higher education. In general, educators have selected one or another specific difference to contrast in detail. For example, Hugstad (1975) points out that there are important, inherent insti- tutional differences between corporate and educational structures. The most significant are the differences in goals and operating climate. He goes on to examine the modifications which these institutional differences impose upon the use of various marketing techniques. A second example is the point-by-point contrast presented by Pernal (1977) who argues that the buyer-seller model does not fit higher education. It cannot be justifiably applied beyond 37 the purpose of alerting colleges to reassess their roles in society as a whole. The most frequently treated group of marketing concepts used to illustrate the differences between profit and non-profit marketing is the 4 P's of the marketing mix, i.e., product, price, place, and promotion. An article by Vaccaro (1979:28-2) is a good illustration of efforts to interpret these concepts in terms of their appli- cation to higher education. Organizational Orientations Marketing is an applied science concerned with managing exchanges effectively and efficiently (Kotler and Murray, 1975:478). It is designed to produce three principal bene- fits for the organization and its publics. First, marketing is designed to achieve the improved satisfaction of the target market(s). In stressing the importance of measuring and satisfying consumer needs, marketing tends to produce an improved level of client service and satisfaction. This is particularly important since many non-profit organizations do not have any competition and the demand for service exceeds the supply. Second, marketing is designed to improve the attraction of marketingyresources through a dis- ciplined approach. Such resources may include members, funds, employees, volunteers, and public support. Third, marketing is designed to bring about improved efficiency in marketingpactivities within the organization. Marketing places great emphasis on the Irational management and 38 coordination of product development, pricing, communication, and distribution. When decisions concerning these activities are made with insufficient information, the results are usually more cost for the given impact. Since funding for non-profit organizations is generally inadequate and/or undependable, it is important that maximum efficiency and effectiveness be obtained from marketing activities (Kotler, 1982:19). It is erroneous to assume that any organization which adds a marketing function necessarily becomes an effective marketer. According to Kotler (1982), there are five different orientations which marketing organizations may have: production, sales, product, societal, and marketing orientations. The most effective of these is the marketing orientation. The production orientation holds that the major task of the organization is to pursue efficiency in production and distribution. Many organizations focus attention on running a smooth production process. Human needs must be altered if necessary to meet the requirements of the production process. Mass production companies are compelled to produce as many pieces as they can to achieve the lowest per unit cost in order to augment profits. A similar orientation can be observed in institutional instructional television with its emphasis on number of student hours produced. Bus drivers who pass waiting passengers to meet schedules and employment offices which process people like objects are all 39 production oriented. A production orientation usually leads to an emphasis on selling or moving the product. This is a ”we've produced it, now you get rid of it” attitude. In the sales orientation, the main task of the organiza— tion is to stimulate customer interest in the organization's existing products and services. Selling focuses on the needs of the seller/provider and not on the needs of the buyer/consumer. Such organizations believe that they can substantially increase the size of their market by increased selling effort, rather than change their products to make them more attractive to the target market. The budget for advertising, personal selling, sales promotion, and other “demand" stimulating activities is increased. Thus, a university may react to a decline in enrollment by increas- ing the budget of the admissions office to hire more recruiters. More direct mail may be sent out, and the appearance of university brochures improved. Such sales- oriented activities will probably increase customers in the short-run, but should not be confused with a marketing orientation designed to generate higher sales in the long- run. The selling orientation equates the marketing task with persuading the target audiences that they ought to accept their offering as superior to any alternatives. Some indicators of selling, or a product, state of mind are described by Andreasen (1982:187). 1) The offering is gggg as inherently desirable; it simple does not occur to the seller that potential customers may not share their 48 enthusiasm about their offerings. 2) The seller believes that the consumer must be ignorant if the consumer shows any lack of interest in the offering. Obviously the consumer does not fully appreciate the nature of the offer. If consumers do understand, the problem must be that managers just have not found the right incentive to motivate the consumer to buy the offer. 3) There is an over-emphasis on promotion. Too much stock is placed in advertising and public relations. Sellers are convinced that they should concentrate on the message and its packaging. 4) Consumer research plays a very secondary role because the seller "knows" that the problem lies with the consumer and that better promotion is the key to marketing success. The role of marketing research is to confirm what the seller already believes. For example, the auto industry spent millions on consumer research to establish consumer preferences between the kinds of things that they had already decided to offer, and not what the consumer really wanted (Levitt, 1968:51). 5) The market is often viewed as monolithic, and the seller tends to believe that there is one best marketing strategy or, at most, two which need to be used. Such certainty has the effect of precluding experimentation either with alter- native strategies or with variations for market subsegments. The fact that many marketing personnel in non-profit insti- tutions come from a non-business background and may be afraid to take risks encourages overemphasis on promotion. 6) Many non-profit institutions ignore or are ignorant of 41 either generic or indirect competition. Strategies are rarely formulated to meet competition. Thus, the literature from a university may not point out the advantages of a college degree over a degree from a community college or trade school. 7) The marketing staff is usually selected for itsgproduct knowledge rather than its marketing back- ground. In a modern marketing organization, staff members are selected for their knowledge of customer markets, marketing research and management techniques. Characteris- tics' of non-profit administrators tend to reinforce the selection of personnel with product knowledge over marketing knowledge. The production orientation holds that the major task of the organization is to put out products which it thinks would be good for the public. Many organizations think the world of their product and resist all attempts to modify it even though modification might increase its appeal to others. The product orientation involves a focus on the basic offering; and a belief that the best marketing strategy for increasing sales is to improve the offering's quality. Some highly successful profit companies ascribe to quality as the most important aim for their company. How- ever, these companies also possess the characteristics which make them market oriented, rather than product oriented (Cross, 1963; Faltermayer, 1977; "Caterpillar", 1981; "No. / 1's”, 1981). 42 In the marketing orientation, the main task of the organization is to determine the needs and wants of target markets, and to satisfy them through the design, communica- tion, pricing, and delivery of appropriate and competitively viable products and services. A marketing oriented organi- zation views production, sales, and products as means of producing satisfaction in target markets. They are willing to work hard at being client-centered and constantly improve products to meet customers' needs. In addition, employees are selected and trained to feel that they are working for the customer and not for the organization. The employees in a marketing oriented organization work together as a team to meet the needs of the specific target markets to be served. ”The aim of marketing is to make selling superfluous;” the product sells itself because it fits so well (Drucker, 1974:64). A marketing orientation contributes greatly to an organization's effectiveness. The organization's effective- ness is reflected in the degree to which it exhibits the five characteristics of the marketing orientation. Characteristics of the Marketing Orientation Kotler contends that companies or organizations which possess all five characteristics to a high level can be predicted to be more effective in reaching their marketing goals because they will be more responsive, adaptive, and entrepreneurial than their competitors. Most organizations will possess some or all of the characteristics to some 43 degree, but to be truly effective, all five must be present in an organization to a high degree. In addition, these characteristics cannot be described as independent of each other for they are highly interrelated.~ The five character- istics of the marketing orientation follow. Client-Centered Philosophy The Vorganization must acknowledge the primacy of the marketplace and of customer needs and wants in shaping organizational plans and operations. This characteristic demands that the organization study the marketplace contin- uously and select the parts of the market which can be served. The organization changes as necessary to offer ‘ superior value to the chosen customers in terms of their own needs and wants. Attention to offering value is not restricted to clients or customers of the organization. It extends to suppliers, distributors, supporters, and any others who can have an impact on the organization- reaching its marketing goals. The problem of how to make an organization responsive to client needs and wants is not an easy one. The "customer is king" philosophy is often heard, but the behaviors which demonstrate such a philosophy are much rarer (Young, l988:2). At the center of every organization are the people who make up the organization; and it is their behavior which will demonstrate whether or not the organization is truly responsive to client needs. Analyses of successful 44 organizations usually feature the dedication of the members of the organization as either the major reason or one of the major reasons for their success. Such organizations find out what their customers want. These wants become the goal of the organization. The people in the organization believe in the organization's goals and do everything they can to achieve those goals. This is an oversimplification; how- ever, it is central to the success of the organization and the client-centered philosophy. The major research in this area of marketing is 13 search of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Com- panies (Peters and Waterman, 1982). Peters and Waterman concluded that regardless of whether the company was in the business of: "bending tin, frying hamburgers or providing rooms for rent, virtually all of the excellent companies had, it seemed, defined themselves as de facto service businesses. Customers reign supreme. They are not treated to untested technology or unnecessary gold- plating. They are the recipients of products that last; service delivered promptly (1982:xx).” Other writers have also pinpointed client-centered service as the principle reason for business success. Tinnen (1981) describes the ”disciples" at Heineken Brewing Company who will not sell a mediocre bottle of beer. Likewise, Maytag and Caterpillar are successful companies which subscribe to the twin goals of quality and reliability. Their employees are rewarded and promoted for behavior which assures the company's goal attainment and are often responsible for improvements in the product and operational efficiency 45 (Cross, 1963; Faltermayer, 1977; "Caterpillar", 1981). International Business Machines (IBM), Boeing, and Digital Equipment Company (D.E.C.) will help identify client needs and then design systems to meet those needs, and they guarantee that the system will work. In Boeing's case, the company even financed some of its customers during reces- sionary periods. In each of these organizations, the management and employees are cited for their dedicated per— formance to customers which has kept these companies growing and prospering (Uttal, 1979; Zonona, 1988; "No. 1's”, 1981). Although comparable research in the non-profit sector is lacking, examples of organizations which have improved their viability because they have changed themselves to become client-centered do exist. Kotler (1982) cites several examples including New York University, Adelphi University, and Northwestern University. Under new leadership, New York University (NYU) embarked on a marketing oriented program. A key element of this program was the appointment of deans and chairpersons who were willing to take a more entrepre- neurial view of their markets; their task was ”to find needs and fill them." One result from this change in perspective was a new program designed to give unemployed Ph.D.'s training in business and interviewing techniques. Most of the participants received job offers after completion. NYU has reversed its decline and moved to the top of its market in New York City (Kotler, 1982:112). 46 Other examples of institutions of higher education which have initiated new programs based on customer needs include the phenomena of satellite branches as a response to the need for more convenient locations and evening classes to serve working adults. Telecourses are in part a response to shut-in populations and greater convenience to the customer. Electronic classrooms are under development to provide multiple classrooms the advantage of the ”master teacher" through the use of holography with phone hook-ups in each room (Kotler, 1978:239). Some institutions are offering unique settings. For example, Adelphi University offers classes for commuters who ride the Long Island Railroad. Other institutions offer unusual time slots such as at shift end between 1:88 - 3:88 a.m. for steel workers, and between 6:88 — 8:88 a.m. for office workers. Northwestern Univer- sity offers a M.A. in Management for qualified middle management, who can attend all day on alternative Fridays and Saturdays for two years. Mundelein College in Chicago operates a weekend college consisting of courses on Friday evening, all day Saturday, and Sunday. Some colleges are providing lunch hour classes for employees in offices and factories. The University of Illinois is pioneering an educational delivery system called Plato which uses computer terminals and programmed instruction for student learning wherever there is a telephone. All of these innovations are attempts by institutions of higher education to meet client needs and to become client-centered (Kotler, 1982:319). 47 Trivett (l978:1) wrote "that the institutions which survive respond to basic market needs." The client-centered philosophy of the marketing orientation is necessary for an organization to know or care about basic market needs. In the profit sector, Peters and Waterman (1982) found that successful companies got their basic values from one or two strong leaders at an early stage in the company's develop- ment. Research presented by Phillips and Kennedy (1988) con- cluded that: "Success in instilling values seems to have had little to do with charismatic personality. Rather, it derived from obvious, sincere, sustained personal commitment to the values the leader sought to implant, coupled with extraordinary persistence in reinforcing those values. None of the men we studied relied on personal magnetism. All made themselves into effective leaders (pg. 8)." The leader instills values through deeds rather than words, and no opportunity is too small to encourage behaviors consistent with the values of the leadership and the organization. The tools of observation, measurement, feed- back, and guidance need to be used appropriately to help the leader(s) keep track of how the members are doing. As Peters and Waterman observed: ”If you don't constantly monitor how people are operating, not only will they wander off the track, but they will also begin to believe that you weren't serious in the first place (1982:289)." Leaders in the excellent companies behave as they believe and are particularly careful to see that their top manage- ment team does the same. In instilling critical business 48 values, management has no alternative but to act in agree- ment (Selznick, 1957:118). Peters and Waterman, as well as others, cite examples from among the excellent companies. For example, the president of United Airlines initiated Management By Wandering Around (MBWA). He and his executive staff flew 288,888 miles a year, talked with customers, baggage handlers, ticket personnel, and others (Peters and Waterman, 1982:122 & 298). At Disney Enterprises intensive management involvement is highlighted by the annual "cross- utilization” week when all executives put on costumes and work in the amusement parks (Pope, 1979:167). The president of Boeing set the example for customer service when he provided a 747 to Alitalia Airlines within two months to replace a crashed plane, despite a two year backlog in orders (Zonona, 1988:1 & 28). Boeing has taken a long time, consciously, trying to build a team which is customer oriented. They believe that if the company is going to succeed, the important ingredient is the customer (Mansfield, 1966:361). The current president of IBM echoes the founder when he talks about IBM being ”customer and market-driven, not technology driven.” He wants sales- persons to act as though they were on the customer's payroll and put 211 IBM resources at the customer's service. It is service after the sale that counts, and filling customer needs with the sale helps service by eliminating service visits because the system does not perform the functions 49 needed by the client when he/she bought the system (Shook, 1988:55-73). In each of the instances cited, leaders were successful in inculcating the members of the organization with a thoroughly client-centered value system. Each organization had a special way of being close to the customer through its members, and the consensus was that profitability naturally followed (Nemeroff, 1988:165-7). In other research, Peters and Waterman (1982:281) found that companies whose only articulated goals were financial did not do nearly so well financially as companies which had a broader set of values. Both theory and research support the Peters and Waterman findings. As early as the 1938's, Chester Barnard (1938) recognized the unique role of the leader as a_ manager of organizational values. Later, he reiterated his belief that a leader's role was to harness the social forces in the organization by shaping and managing values. He described good managers as value shapers concerned with the informal, social properties of the organization. This contrasts with the mere manipulation of formal rewards and systems which deal with the narrower concepts of short-term efficiency (Barnard, 1968:Chapter 5). Selznick (1958) wrote that leadership goes beyond efficiency as in: 1) when it sets basic mission, and 2) when it creates a social organization capable of fulfilling that mission. He concludes that as an institutional_ leader, he/she is primarily an expert in the 58 promotion and protection of values (Selznick, 1957:17, 28, 48, 135-6, 149-58, 152-3). James McGregor Burns' descrip- tion of "transforming leadership” seems to fit the leaders of the excellent companies. They have been able to instill a transcending purpose into followers through consistency of behavior over long periods of time in support of one or two values. The values of the leader become the values of the followers and inseparable from the followers' needs and goals (Burns, 1978:13, 18-28, 48). Such a process can generate great excitement and motivation (Quinn, 1977:26). The leader of the organization becomes its ”social archi- tect” (Bennis, 1976:165). The pivotal role of the leader as the instiller of values through behavior rather than through proclamation seems to be consistent with the part of attitude theory in psychology which posits that ”You more likely act yourself into feeling than feel yourself into acting” (Bruner, 1973:24). Later, "foot-in-the-door” research demonstrates the importance of incrementally acting ones way into major commitment (Freedman and Fraser, 1966:195-282). When leaders have been successful in instilling a client-centered value system into an organization, a "service statesmanship" example is set by senior management. Nemeroff identified three principle themes from her close- to-the-customer-through-service research (1988:165-7). The first is intensive active involvement on the part of senior management. The second is a remarkable people orientation, 51 and the third is a high intensity of measurement and feed- back. Executives who were interviewed expressed the belief that they must maintain a long-term view of service as a revenue builder. Research by Utterbach (1978) and Von Hipple (1978) in better-performing companies showed that there were intense company/customer linkages. These link- ages were often with creative and demanding users who forced the organization to be innovative in order to meet the client's needs. Such innovating pressure helps the company to remain viable within changing environments (Utterback, 1978:37). A careful look at where innovations have come from in the scientific instrument business showed that of eleven ”firsteof-type” major inventions, 211 came from users; of sixty-six ”major improvements,” eighty-five percent came from users. Of eighty-three "minor improve- ments," approximately two-thirds came from users (Von Hipple, 1978:32). In the garment industry, Levi-Strauss obtained the right to market steel-riveted jeans from an early buyer who had altered them; Bloomingdales invented faded jeans by bleaching the denim jeans purchased from Levi (Cray, 1978:21). At IBM, almost all of the early inven- tions, including the computer, were developed in collabora- tion with the lead customer, the Census Bureau. A salesman at 3M invented the desk-top dispenser for a narrow use industrial adhesive called scotch tape. Digital, Hewlett- Packard, and Wang rely on customers to find uses for micro- computers (Uttal, 1979:188; "No. 1's", 1979:85; "Wang", 52 1979:188). In an extensive study of thirty-nine inventions in the chemical industry and thirty-three inventions in scientific instruments, economist Christopher Freeman found that the number one factor for both was that "successful firms understand user needs better.” The number two factor was that ”successful innovations have fewer problems." In summary, Freeman and his colleagues (1972) noted: ”Successful companies pay more attention to the market than do failures. Successful innovators innovate in response to market needs, involve potential users in the development of the innovation, and understand user needs better (99. 196).“ Establishing a client-centered marketing orientation is at least as difficult to do in a non-profit organization as it is in the private sector. Non-profit organizations tend to be slower to change or innovate for a number of reasons which Kotler (1982:113) has enumerated. First, non-profit organizations have typically not faced or recognized competition. Therefore, they lack a spur to do better. Second, non-profits generally lack the budget to experiment with new products or methods. Furthermore, their boards and/or legislators refuse to support innovations. Third, non-profits are typically non-entrepreneurial. Their training is in an academic specialty area, or administration with an emphasis on running existing organizations rather than creating new ones. Fourth, non-profit organizations often view their services as necessary and as not requiring justification or marketing. To overcome these types of resistance, persons interested in making an organization 53 marketing oriented must work patiently. Instilling a client-centered philosophy in an organization requires major commitments and changes. Again, the key to making an organ- ization marketing oriented is the dedicated leader, but he/she cannot do it alone and may not have a realistic perspective of how the organization as a whole perceives the marketing effort. I In gathering data for his dissertation, Mathias (1982) surveyed one hundred-nine presidents and faculty/staff in small liberal arts colleges in the United States. He found that the presidents rated the institution's acceptance of marketing much more highly than did the staff. Also, the staff was not convinced of the effectiveness of marketing activities, or that marketing could be successfully adopted for use in colleges. He found that a "consumer orientation" was only moderately strong, and an "integrated effort" to market existed in only a few colleges. In summary, some -colleges had used marketing techniques with favorable effect, but they had not adopted the entire marketing con- cept (Mathias, l982:1). There are a number of strategies which may be used to encourage a marketing oriented, client-centered philosophy within an organization. Disney Enterprises uses new employee training to promote "positive customer attitudes" (Pope, July & Sept., 1979). Kotler (1982:145) recommends workshops for employees on various marketing topics. Also the institution of a business planning system requires 54 strong marketing data and analysis. These are all methods for improving the organization's marketing orientation. Adequate Marketing Information Effective marketing requires that decision makers have adequate information for planning and allocating resources. Such information includes market analysis which requires the study of three areas. These are customers' perceptions, preferences, and buying habits; direct/indirect competition; and the sales potential/profitability of different market segments, channels, and order sizes. In addition, informa- tion is required for an accounting system which gives profit information by line item so that the results of various marketing expenditures can be evaluated. To be effective marketers, high levels of measurement, and feedback must be maintained (Nemeroff, 1988:165). The most frequently used system for measurement and feedback is a Marketing Information System (MIS): ”...a continuing and interacting structure of people, equipment, and procedures designed to gather, sort, analyze, evaluate and distribute pertinent, timely, accurate information for use by marketing decision makers to improve their marketing planning, execution and control (Smith, Brian and Stafford, l968:7).” Developments and trends in the marketing environment are picked up by one of the major subsystems of the M13 and channeled to the appropriate manager to be used in decision making. A typical MIS model is shown in Figure 4. 55 uuwmnuo '1 ‘ guvmouueu'r Eusxsnwo masses Target markets Mm Wag attenuate [reaming intormation Pulihs Corneal W tomes WWMW Figure 4. The Marketing Information System Source: P. Kotler, Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations, 1982, p.153. Information from the marketing environment is collected in various ways. For example, in the excellent companies studied by Peters and Waterman (1982:198), analysis is not done by staff who read about competitors. Analysis is done by salespersons, service representatives, or venture team leaders who are out in the field watching the competition. Likewise, the on-the-spot member of the company listens to the customer, particularly the “lead users" who may be several years ahead of the market segment. Information 56 concerning these customers' perceptions, needs, and wants can enable an organization to stay ahead of the competition through innovations to meet user needs. The excellent companies do more and better customer/competitor analysis than do less effective marketers (Peters and Waterman, 1982:198). The information gathered from customer contact is used as the basis for market segmentation, targeting, market measurement, forecasting, and consumer analysis. Market segmentation determines the main groups making up a market. Targeting is the choice of the best of these groups for the organization to serve. Market measurement and forecasting is a process to determine the current and future size of the available market for the organization's product(s)i and services(s). Consumer analysis is aimed at determining the characteristics of consumers so that products can better be adapted to consumer needs (Kotler, 1982:196). Hooper, et al., (1982) reports that the successful companies in his study base their excellent market analysis on information from their staff who are required to spend large amounts of their time in the field with the customer. In this way, they are able to collect first-hand data on customer needs and competitors' moves. In that same report by Hooper et al., on Hewlett-Packard, he describes how the weekly feed- back system brings back the numbers concerning quality, shipments, expenses, revenues, and market share. To make sure it stays in touch with the customer, IBM measures 57 internal and external customer satisfacation monthly. These measures account for a large share of incentive compensa— tion. Employee attitude surveys are taken every ninety days; and a check is kept on employee perceptions of the way service is being maintained ("No. 1's", 1981:86). At McDonald's, stores are regularly measured on "Quality," "Service,” ”Cleanliness,” and ”Value.“ Compensation to employees and management is largely based on that score. Failure to meet the standards set can mean the loss of a job for the manager or loss of the franchise (McDonald's, l988:4). Proctor and Gamble is famous for the quality of its analysis. No written material at this company can be more than one page in length. Their experience is that if there are only a few numbers to concentrate on, everyone knows where they stand. The numbers are very well researched with good backup analysis (Smith, 1988:77). Fingerhut, the successful mail order catalog, overspends on data collection and uses its customer data to open a per- sonal store for each customer. Because of its remarkable system for tracking customers and customer profitability, virtually every individual customer is a market segment (Meyer, 1988:182). The quality and timeliness of informa- tion collected and used by effective marketers allows them to target the groups which the company can best serve. During the process of identifying markets, the organiza- tion must realize that it cannot reach and appeal to all customers. Effective marketers are good at nichemanship. 58 They divide their consumers base into numerous segments to provide tailored products and services. LIke 3M, successful companies do not believe in taking a few big risks. They take many small risks in the form of new products for specialized markets. By doing this, they take themselves out of the commodity market and can charge more for their product (Lehr, 1988:31). Peters and Waterman (1982:183) identify five fundamental attributes of companies which were close to the customer through nichemanship. These are astute manipulation of technology, pricing skill, better segmenting, a problem-solving orientation, and a willingness to spend to discriminate. This marketing strategy, differ- entiated marketing, typifies effective marketers. Differentiated marketing is used by organizations which decide to serve several market segments by developing an effective offer and marketing mix for each. The quantities of information about the consumer are applied to the development of the market offers and the marketing mix. The marketing mix includes decisions about product characteris- tics, pricing, place/distribution, and promotion (McCarthy, 1968). In making these decisions, the marketer different- iates the mix based on information from consumer analysis and various models which have been developed to explain buyer behavior. Whether appealing to the individual or organizational buyer, the marketer focuses on the five stages of the consumer buying process. These are need arousal (Maslow, 1954:88-186), information gathering (Kelman S9 and Hovlan, 1953:327), decision evaluation (Boyd, Ray, and Strong, 1972:27), decision execution (Fishbein, 1967:477; Taylor, 1974), and post-decision assessment (Donnelly and Ivancevich, 1978:488; Anderson, 1973:43). The excellent companies influence the consumer buying process through their intensive contact with the customer before, during, and after the sale (Harris, 1981:17; "Caterpillar," 1981:7; Wiegner, 1981:68). These companies/have excellent systems for accumulating, analyzing, and distributing information. However, with the proliferation of marketing information systems (MIS) and forecasting models, the excellent com- panies go to great lengths to foster an atmosphere and environment conducive to informal communication between people at all levels of the organization. These systems are encouraged to circumvent the official organizational struc- ture so that communication flow through the most effective channels (Packard, 1974:42). Integrated Organization The organization must be staffed to carry out marketing analysis, planning, implementation, and control. The Marketing Agency must be structured organizationally in a way which reflects its client-centered philosophy. The major marketing functions must be integrated and controlled at a high administrative level, and the various marketing positions must be designed to serve the needs of important market segments, territories, and product lines. Marketing 68 management must be effective in working with other depart- ments within the organization so that marketing tasks can be efficiently carried through to best serve the customer. Finally, to be truly effective, the organization must have a well-defined system for developing, evaluating, testing, and launching new products because these form the base of the organization's future. Effective marketing requires a staff which is trained in the area of marketing. Marketing cannot be squeezed into existing positions and still be expected to be effective, nor can non-professional staff be held accountable for marketing responsibilities (Lucas, 1979:89). Likewise, seeking ”free" advise, hiring a marketing consulting firm, using the business faculty for expertise, and/or sending key staff to seminars and workshops to learn marketing are all makeshift methods with inherent disadvantages (Kotler, 1982:134). If the marketing agency is to be effective, it must have staff who are trained in the field of marketing, especially the main officer of the organization. The next functional specialists would be a marketing researcher and/or an advertising manager. A brief description of the variety of jobs which may be found in a larger scale market- ing department appears in Appendix 2. To be able to function effectively, the main officer of the marketing organization needs to have the support of upper administration and a staff to carry through the marketing functions. Organizations which do not have a 61 marketing function and want to establish one, can use a gradual implementation strategy like the one found in Kotler (1979). One of the better ways of getting other members of the organization familiar with marketing and contributing to the marketing orientation is through a series of workshops. These can include marketing topics such as market opportun- ity identification, market segmentation, market targeting, market positioning, market planning/control, pricing, selling, and market promotion/communication. Staff from other functions such as new product development, distribu- tion, advertising, and accounting should be included. The workshop approach has been used with exemplary success in organizations like Disney Enterprises (Pope, 1979; 1979). An approach used successfully by most of the companies in the Peters and Waterman study was to put volunteers from all of the various functions in the organization together on temporary teams working with a new product. The team would go through development, testing, marketing, and distribu- tion. The team came to "own” the product. If the new offer was a success, the team would advance in both pay and promo- tions with the product as though it were their own company (Drucker, 1979:255). Further, each of these small groups was formed around the innovator or "product champion", who refused to give up on the product. Research on Japanese companies has shown that six out of six successful new products had a champion, while three out of four failures had no champion. Likewise in the United States, fourteen 62 out of fifteen successes had champions while six out of nine failures did not have champions (Peters and Waterman, 1982:284). By working in small groups, even large organizations can have the advantages of small ones. Members with different backgrounds and expertise work together on a problem, and they talk to each other a lot without a great deal of paper- work (Hewlett and Packard, 1988:18). People are mixed in the same environmental space. Citibank solved the tradi- tional split between lending officers and operations by moving them all to the same floor with their desks inter- mingled. Corning Glass installed escalators, and 3M sponsored all kinds of clubs to increase face-to-face contact and problem solving (Meadows, 1988:95). The communications systems fostered by the excellent companies have several characteristics which aid the organi- zation in maintaining flexibility and integration of functions. Communication systems are informal which helps the right people be in touch with each other regularly. There is a high intensity of communication. Companies like Exxon, Intel, and Citibank use a process which they call ”decision making by peers" which encourages an open, blunt, and straightforward management style. Communication is given physical supports with numerous small conference rooms, blackboards, and long tables instead of small ones to encourage people to come together for problem solving. Research by Allen (1967) on the effect of physical 63 configurations shows that people who are more than thirty feet apart have a probability of communicating once a week of only eight or nine percent. At fifteen feet, the prob- ability of once a week contact rises to twenty-five percent. The excellent companies use forcingydevices to get their people to communicate more. These are programs that regularly shake up the system and encourage innovation. The intense, informal communication system acts as a control system even as it encourages rather than restrains innovation. 3M is a good example: "Of course we are under control. No team can spend more than a few thousand dollars without a whole bunch of people looking over their shoulders, not kicking them around, but being genuinely interested in how it's going (Peters and Waterman, 1982:223).” The chain of command is avoided to keep communication flowing, encourage maximum flexibility, and fluidity. Control becomes a function of peer comparison because infor- mation is available to everybody and not just to a few top executives. By making financial data available, people know quickly whether or not the job is getting done, and who is doing it well or poorly. Such information sharing cannot be done in an evaluative manner. Management does not "brow- beat" people with numbers, and "superiors" are not telling "subordinates" what to do. Such information sharing becomes a strong motivator for individual performance (Burck, 1981:68). The intricate network of informal, open communi— cation in the excellent companies keeps the right people 64 talking to each other regularly and acts as a spur to innovation. To continue to be successful, organizations must develop new products and services which meet customer needs. The informal communication network in the excellent companies serves as a principle integrating force during the whole development process from idea to delivery. Although these companies work with large quantities of information, their development process is a series of tests in small increments so that any project can be discontinued early if it becomes apparent that something just will not work. Peters and Waterman (1982:119) have labeled this process ”a bias for action.” The excellent companies operate on a ”do it, fix it, try it' basis. They experiment more; they have more successes. At Hewlett-Packard it is tradition that design engineers leave their prototype models on top of their desks so that others can come by and play with them. At 3M ideas are put into materials at once; as they are at most of the other companies in the Peters and Waterman study. The use of inexpensive, experimental prototypes which can be seen, manipulated and tested early in the development process means that these companies save enormous amounts of resources which are not invested in feasibility studies while the competition beats them to the market. Proctor and Gamble is particularly well known for its "testing fetish." Products and advertising are pretested with consumers in the 65 marketplace. According to Ogilvy (1988:86), there is no more important word than test. This is especially true since research shows that twenty-four out of twenty-five new products fail in test markets. Developers who do not test products can incur large losses if products fail on a national scale. The excellent companies rely on hands-on experience, and small experiments rather than analytical detachment and methodological ”elegance" when making decisions concerning the allocation of resources (Hayes and Abernathy, 1988:78-1). In this way, a steady stream of new products to the marketplace is maintained. As noted earlier, non-profit organizations tend to have difficulty being innovative (Kotler, 1982:113). Such diffi- culty can be overcome by encouraging the staff to become marketing oriented. Also, vacant positions can be filled with persons who have the desired background training and client orientation. In their research, Peters and Waterman (1982:265) found that it was not unusual for companies to bring applicants back seven or eight times for in-depth interviews prior to hiring. If the faculty or staff of the organization do not know how to carry through the marketing tasks, the marketing organization cannot be expected to be effective. Nor can such a staff be expected to do the strategic planning necessary for effective marketing. 66 Strategic Orientation Effective marketing will depend on the organization's ability to design an innovative and profitable strategy out of its philosophy, organization, and information resources to achieve its long-range goals. This requires a formal system for annual and long-range planning, a base strategy which is clear, innovative and data-based and the organiza- tion to look ahead for contingent actions which might be needed to meet new developments in the marketplace. Most non-profit organizations operate very rudimentary systems. of planning and control which generally amount to a budgeting system. There is often resistance on the part of the members of the organization to spending time in prepar- ing formal plans. However, the increasing adoption of formal planning systems by businesses and non-profit organi- zations seems to indicate some apparent satisfaction with the results of such systems (Kotler, 1982:173). There are a number of benefits which can result from the use of a formal planning system. Such systems tend to encourage systematic thinking ahead by management. A formal planning system can lead to a better coordination of organizational efforts, and to the development of performance standards which aid in the control of the marketing operation. These systems can cause the organization to better define its guiding policies and objectives and result in better preparedness for sudden developments in the marketplace. A formal planning system can also stimulate a better sense of the interactive 67 responsibilities of organizational management and members (Branch, 1962:48-9). A formal planning system requires that the organization plan its marketing efforts by identifying attractive markets, developing effective marketing strategies, and assemblying detailed action plans. Next, the action plans are executed. The results are measured, analyzed, and corrective actions taken through adjustments to the plan and execution of the new formulation. This three part process is illustrated in Figure 5. Planning Execution Control identifying attractive J Carrying out the 4 Measuring results tarkat markets action programs Developing marketing Diagnosing results strategies ¢ Dmnflufimauflhm IhHMgommuaNe mum. I-d' action ‘T‘ T i Figure 5. A marketing planning and control system Source: P. Kotler, Marketing_for Nonprofit Organizations, 1982, p.174. Research has shown that an organization may go through a series of stages of marketing planning. The first stage is the unplanned stage where the members of the organization are so busy making day-to-day survival decisions that there is no time for planning. The second stage is the budgeting system stage where the budgeting system is installed to 68 improve the organization's cash-flow management. The third stage is the projectpplanning stage where organizations find that they need to develop plans for specific projects. The fourth stage is the annualgplanning stage where an organiza- tion recognizes the need for an annual plan based on manage- ment by objectives (McConkey, 1975). In the last stage, the organization refines the planning system in a number of different directions to improve its overall effectiveness and 'adds the long-range planning component to the system. Long-range planning provides a more strategic approach to thinking about the future of the organization in a changing environment and developing contingency plans which show how the organization would respond to specific threats and opportunities which might arise. To be an effective plan- ning tool, long-range plans must be reviewed and changed often to reflect current information gathered during market analysis (Kotler, 1982:174). The danger to organizations of the long-range and annual planning systems is that the plans may become "cast in stone" and adhered to despite environ- mental changes. Conversely, the planning systems and plans may be treated as meaningless exercises to be placed on the shelf and ignored. A good marketing plan must contain several key elements. The first is a summary of the main goals and objectives of the organization. In their research for In Search of Excel- lgggg, Peters and Waterman (1982) found that the excellent companies have very well defined goals and objectives, but 69 they only have one or two for the year. The excellent companies have accepted the position that although the world is complex, human beings are rather simple. Therefore, having multiple objectives will be frustrating because it will be impossible to meet them all, and the resulting information overload will cause paralysis within the organi- zation. When there are only one or two objectives, there are only one or two numbers to plan for and watch. Response can be rapid to take corrective action. At Emerson Electric, top management is examined closely every month on sales, inventory, and profit figures. They are told that what they have to do is make sure that the profit is delivered each month, each quarter, and the full year (Peters, 1988:15). Similar routines have been instituted at Mansanto which uses three to five objectives per year (Henley, 1974:18). At Hewlett-Packard (HP), the strategy review focuses on three to five objectives for the division managers. They believe that if the objectives are right then the desired financial outcomes will follow. HP's objectives are all activities which can be done and not Aabstract financials over which the manager has little control (Peters and Waterman, 1982:154). Objectives for the organization as a whole are even less complex than those for the managerial levels. At IBM there is only one: "IBM means service” (Watson, 1963:29 & 32). At Maytag, the objective is ten years trouble free operation (Faltermayer, 1977:193). At Caterpillar, it's reliability and parts 78 anywhere in the world within twenty-four hours or free (Cross, 1963:167). There can be no doubt in anyone's mind about what is expected if the organization has only one well known goal. The next section of the marketing plan incorporates a situational analysis of the organization in the environment. This consists of four parts: background, normal forecast, opportunities/potential competitor encroachment, and the strengths/weaknesses of the organization. This is all based on the information which the company's representatives have collected from customers in the field. A marketing strategy is outlined which will allow the organization to meet its goals and objectives. The marketing strategy is defined as ”the fundamental marketing logic by which an organizational unit intends to meet its marketing objectives. Marketing strategies consist of a coordinated set of decisions on target markets, marketing mix, and marketing expenditure levels (Kotler, 1982:188)." The excellent companies included in the Peters and Waterman study conduct: "crisp to-the-point analysis that is the envy and bedevilment of their competitors. Actually, the companies that we have called excellent are among the best at getting the numbers, analyzing them, and solving problems with them. Show us a company without a good fact base - a good quantitative picture of its customers, markets, and competitors - and we will show you one in which priorities are set with the most Byzantine political maneuvering (l982:38-1)." Like Texas Instruments (T1), the excellent companies insist that "those who implement the plans must make the plans." In TI's case, three line officers are assigned temporarily 71 as planning staff (Jelinka, 1979:124). In these companies, the feeling is that the organization should not constrain itself with plans at the beginning when ignorance is highest. Experience has shown them that prior to entry into the market, they can not know how to properly anticipate the sales growth of a new product. Therefore, market forecasts and detailed sales implementation plans are formulated after market entry (Roberts, 1978:123). In his analysis of effec- tive management, Leavitt (1978) points out that the role of quality analysis and planning is to help point the business in the right direction for 'pathfinding” and to eliminate the "dumb" options. Based on the quality information which the excellent companies use as the basis for their planning and control functions, their marketers are especially effective at establishing competitive position, targeting their market segments, developing a marketing mix, and achieving the organization's marketing goals. In the non-profit sector, there are a number of alternative objectives which organiza- tions may have, i.e. surplus maximization, revenue maximiza- tion, usage maximization, usage targeting, full cost recovery, partial cost recovery, and/or producer satisfac- tion maximization (Etgar and Tatchford, 1974). Strategies are modified by the non-profit organization as necessary depending on the objective to be reached. The last components of the marketing plan are the action plans and the budgets and controls which are used to 72 carry out the marketing strategy and measure the results. The purpose of marketing control system is to maximize the probability of the organization's reaching its short-term and long-term objectives in the marketplace. Three general types of marketing control can be distinguished. Annual plan control consists of the four tools used by management to check progress. These are sales analysis, market share, marketing expense-to-sales analysis, and market attitude tracking. Profitability control determines the actual pro- fit or loss of particular market expenditures and offers. At Dana, the invoice total and approximate profit are trans- mitted from the divisions to the main office at the end of each working day (Foster, 1976:61). Strategic control re- presents a critical look at overall marketing performance through the use of a marketing audit (Rotler, Gregor, and Rodgers, 1977:25). In companies which have been shown to be excellent marketers, systems are in place which provide sound analysis from quality information so that the members of the organi- zation know how they are doing relative to their objectives at any time. However, they are careful to avoid the "paralysis through analysis” syndrome. When this occurs, action stops while planning takes over because the analysis is too complex and precise about unknowns to be useful, and it is put together by staff personnel who have no experience on the line (Peters and Waterman, 1982:31). The excellent companies have formulated their objectives and action plans 73 to be clear and be able to be carried out. They depend on their members to meet the company's goals through efficient execution. Operational Efficiency To operate efficiently, marketing plans must be imple- mented in a cost effective manner, and the results monitored for quick, corrective action. For the organization to operate efficiently, all employees must believe that the client's interests are the most important factor that they are working to achieve. Adequate resources must be avail- able to do the job well, and organizational systems must be able to react quickly to on-the—spot developments in the marketplace. The costs of implementing each part of the marketing plan are available from the marketing control system. If particular costs are too high, corrective action will need to be taken quickly to avoid further drains on marketing resources. When parts of the marketing plan do not bring anticipated results from the target market, corrective actions will need to be formulated and imple— mented rapidly to improve the situation. Although operational efficiency within the organization is affected by a number of factors, efficiency really depends on the members of the organization all working toward the goal of client satisfaction. If the people in the organization are not aware of the organization's market- ing goals, they cannot be expected to behave in the best way 74 to achieve them. Further, if they do not receive timely and appropriate feedback concerning their performance, they cannot change or improve it. Obviously, the communication network which was so vital to the integration of the organi- zation also provides the base for its efficient operation. In the research-by Peters and Waterman, it was found that excellent companies supported, and even forced an environ- ment of intense, informal communication. This environment had few administrative levels, lean staff, and -temporary groupings to work on problems with hands-on administration that often mixed line and staff functions (l982:Chapter 2). Thew overall goal(s) of these companies are clearly stated and demonstrated by the leaders; objectives are few and clearly attainable. Organizational fluidity and common goals have allowed these companies to react quickly to environmental change and to maintain competitive advantages. They have also been able to ”turn on" their employees. The excellent companies of the Peters and Waterman study have organizations which execute superbly. They foster internal competition and recognition of winners. However, what makes their systems constructive rather than destruc- tive is that comparative performance information is not provided in a way which is blatantly evaluative, and stan- dards are set so that everyone can be a winner. The excellent companies agree with the organizational theorist Mason Haire when he argued that the simple act of putting a measure on something is tanamount to getting it done. It 75 focuses management's attention on that area. Information is made available and people respond (Peters ‘and Waterman, 1982:268). For example, at G.E.'s Western Electric, absen- teeism was dramatically improved almost overnight by hanging a large board with everyone's name on it and awarding gold stars for each day a person came to work. At another plant, a foreman started chalking daily productivity results for each shift on the floor of the machine room. Competition surfaced and productivity leaped. At Mars, Inc., everyone gets a ten percent bonus for coming to work on time every day that week (Levy, 1988:92). At IBM, sales quotas are set so more than two-thirds of the sales force can achieve them. All of these winners are then inducted into the 188 Percent Club with great fanfare and hoopla to create enthusiasm. "Our early emphasis on human relations was not motivated by altruism, but by the simple belief that if we respected our people and helped them to respect themselves, the company would make the most profit” (Watson, 1963:15). The excel- lent companies have found that if they treat their people as adhlts, trust them, and provide feedback and recognition, then they will respond because they are proud to be part of the organization. Excellent companies execute extremely well; they are more productive. They work for superior performance in everything they do (Pearson, 1988:18). The emphasis on quality means that they do not have to do every- thing twice: 76 ”they seek to provide the best to every client which in turn acts as a goad to productivity. They have found that in the long-run, cost and efficiency follow from an emphasis on quality, service, innovativeness, result sharing, participation, excitement and an external problem-solving focus that is tailored to the customer (Peters and Waterman, 1982:321)." The excellent companies have not accepted the idea of cost effectiveness through ”economies of scale" which gener- ally lead to large bureaucracies which cannot act. Williamson (1975) points out that in traditional economic theory concerning efficiency, transaction costs have been vastly underestimated. Transaction costs are the costs of communication, coordination, and decision making. When many factors have to be coordinated, the costs of coordination usually far exceed technologically determined economies of scale. So when the membership of‘a division or plant exceeds approximately five hundred, the excellent companies split it into two or three smaller units; they ”chunk" it. In this way, high intensity communication is maintained. The excellent companies have attained efficiency through a motivated worker who is in communication with his/her peers and is encouraged by internal competition with the belief that he/she can ”win.” He/she is treated as an adult by the organization. Each worker is given the opportunity to perform and be recognized for their performance. The work force believes in providing the best for the customer. Marketing organizations which demonstrate strong client- centeredness have and use quality marketing information, maintain a strategic orientation through an integrated, 77 efficiently operated organization. Such organizations create an environment which is responsive, adaptive, and entrepreneurial. Such a responsive organization makes every effort to sense, serve, and satisfy the needs and wants of its clients and publics within the constraints of its budget (Kotler, 1982:33). It adapts to changes which its monitor- ing systems detect in its environment through modification of mission, objectives, strategies, organization, and systems so that it is maximally aligned with its marketing opportunities (Kotler, 1982:76). In addition, it takes advantage of the new opportunities it has identified to convert them into new products or business (Kotler, 1982:113). Summary This chapter has concentrated on the presentation of research relevant to the marketing orientation (Kotler, 1982). The literature search conducted for this study found limited research concerning marketing in institutions of higher education in the areas of admissions, institutional planning, small college survival planning, and the general application of marketing concepts to non-profit organiza— tions. Very little of the material located applied directly to the study of Marketing Agencies. As part of the literature search, the development of a broad definition of marketing was presented as it has evolved in the marketing literature. The field of marketing 78 has redefined its domain from the narrow exchange Of tangible goods to exchanges which involved anything of value between parties. A definition from Kotler (l982:6) was used since it has been widely accepted by educators (Hugstad, 1975; Lee and Gilmour, 1977; Trivett, 1978; Johnson, 1979; Litten, 1988; Grabowski, 1981). Although most researchers have accepted the broader definition of marketing, care is urged by both educators and marketers when applying marketing concepts to higher educa- tion (Hugstad, 1975). According to Weinberg and Lovelock (1978), non-profit institutions differ from profit organiza- tions, i.e. multiple publics, multiple objectives, public scrutiny, intangible services rather than tangible goods. These differences need to be considered when planning marketing activities for non-profit organizations. Further, organizations can demonstrate various orienta- tions toward marketing. They may concentrate their resources on the product itself, on the production process, on sales, on the good of society, or on satisfying the market. According to Kotler (1982), to be truly effective as a marketer, an organization must adopt the marketing orientation to satisfy the customer rather than one of the other four. When organizations are market oriented, they are characterized by the five characteristics: 1) client- centered philosophy, 2) adequate marketing information, 3) integrated marketing organization, 4) strategic orientation, and 5) operational efficiency. Evidence in support of the 79 marketing orientation is drawn from a major study by Peters and Waterman (1982) as well as from others in the marketing literature. The marketing orientation is applicable to non- profit organizations. Strategies for its application can be found in Kotler (1979; 1982). CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES This study was a survey of selected university Marketing Agencies. It sought to answer the following questions: 1. What are the characteristics of university non- print Marketing Agencies as they now exist? 2. What level of perceived marketing effectiveness currently exists in university non-print Marketing Agencies? 3. What characteristics of the university environment, if any, do Marketing Agencies perceive as hindering or facilitating their ability to operate as effective marketers? I In an effort to determine how the literature addressed these questions, a search of sources was conducted. Computer searches of the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) and Dissertation Abstracts did not reveal any publications on the topic of university non-print Marketing Agencies. Searches were made for a period from 1978 to the present in a number of journals. This range was selected because the application of marketing concepts to non-profit institutions is a fairly recent one dating from the contro- versy between Kotler (1969) and Luck (1969). The following journals were searched: College a University Business; £225: nal of Higher Education; Journal of Education Finance; New 88 81 Directions for Higher Education; Educational Record; Journal of Marketing and Harvard Business Review. Also, the publica- tion An Incomplete Bibliography of Works Relating to Market- ing for Public Sector and Non-profit Organizations (Roths- child, 1981) was carefully examined. Few articles of even peripheral interest were located except those which related to marketing and Kotler's marketing orientation (1982). References from bibliographies were also examined throughout the literature search. Population The following sources were used to locate university Marketing Agencies: 1. Brochures and catalogs collected by the Marketing Division of the Instructional Media Center, Michigan State University. 2. The Audio Visual Source Directory, Fall/Winter 1983 4 (NAVA). 3. The Association of Educational Communication and Technology (AECT) committee for cooperation between producers and distributors. 4. Audio-Video Marketplace: A Multimedia Guide 1984. 5. University Film and Video Association (UFVA) membership list. 6. Listing from An Investigation of the Use and Pro- tection of Intellectual Materials Created by Facul- ty Members for Instructional Purposes of univer- 82 sities with written copyright policies (Silver- stein, 1978). 7. Society of University Patent Administrators (SUPA) membership list. Forty-two potential Agencies were located. Twelve additional leads were supplied by Agencies contacted; this brought the total to fifty-four. To be included, a unit had to meet the five criteria established for this study: 1) they acted as a central service to the university; 2) they handled copyrighted rather than patented materials; 3) they handled materials developed primarily by the faculty; 4) they were located in a four year institution of higher education, and 5) Athey acted as a vendor of non-print materials. Following the examination of sales literature and telephone contacts to qualify the unit as a central service which sold primarily faculty developed non-print materials, this number was reduced to seventeen. Of the seventeen to qualify, thirteen were located in media centers, two were in video production units, one was in a film center, and one was located in a university press. All the participants agreed to have their names and addresses listed in this study (Appendix 3). Contact was made with the Director or Assistant Director of the larger unit when the staff did not include a Marketing or Sales Manager. It is interesting to note that during the search for members of the population, three universities were contacted which had recently discontinued their Marketing Agencies. 83 The reasons given fell into two areas. Two were discon- tinued because they were not central to the purpose of the unit in which they were located. One of these was a univer- sity press whose whole tradition had been print materials, and there are many differences between marketing print and non-print materials (Pike, 1985:4). The other was a media production unit whose director simply did not want to be involved in the risks associated with marketing. The third Agency was discontinued because of the financial losses sustained during the early years of its operation. Signif- icant capital was necessary to establish inventories, adver- tising and personnel for marketing, and returns through sales was slower than anticipated. These units were not included in this study. In addition, special attention was given to the possi- bility that university presses might be a logical place for Marketing Agencies to be located (Bowen, 1979:283). Al- though some university presses did handle a few non-print pieces, these were always as companion components to text- books which were selling well. Only one university press was located which acted as a central vendor for non-print materials for their university. There does seem to be a growing interest in non-print marketing among presses, but the differences between non-print and print marketing, and the capital investment required, are sufficiently great to cause presses to go very slowly into the area of non-print marketing (Pike, 1985). 84 This study accessed the total population of identified university Marketing Agencies meeting the specific criteria. Since seventeen is well below the minimum fifty cases needed for basic descriptive statistics (Blalock, 1972:34), data from a sample would not have been reliable in identifying the population parameters. Collecting data from a popula— tion rather than from a sample of a population provides more reliable data since inferences about characteristics of the population from characteristics of the sample are unneces- sary (Blalock, 1972:189). Data Collection Instrument The questionnaire (Appendix 4) included five types of questions. They were: 1. Yes/no 2. Check alternatives 3. Interval scales 4. Multiple choice 5. Supply descriptive information For research question one concerning the characteristics of university Marketing Agencies, the majority of the questions required a "yes” or "no" response or a check mark. The three financial questions for research question one were in the form of interval scales ranging from $58,888 to $588,888+ for revenue and expenses, and $18,888 to $188,888+ for capital investment in inventory. There were a few items with such a variety of potential responses that the 85 respondent was asked to write a short description. An example of this type of question was the request to list the primary goals of the Agency and then to rank order them according to importance. This type of question was also used for research question three concerning the effects of the university site on the Marketing Agency's ability to function as an effective marketer. For research question two concerning perceived marketing effectiveness, the Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale (MERS) (Kotler, 1977) was used. MERS has been used in large for profit and non- profit organizations as a measure of perceived marketing effectiveness. Since this study was of smaller, university Marketing Agencies, changes in the wording of the multiple choice questions which comprise MERS were made to make the instrument better fit the situation. Two of the MERS questions contained more than one part. One was "How well is marketing thinking at the top communicated and‘ imple— mented down the line?”. This question was rewritten into two questions "How well is marketing thinking communicated throughout the organization?", and "How well is marketing thinking implemented throughout the organization?". The second MERS question to be rewritten was "Does management show a good capacity to react quickly and effectively to on- the-spot developments?". This question was rewritten into two questions "Does the Agency show a good capacity to react quickly to on-the-spot developments in the marketplace?", 86 and "Does the Agency show a good capacity to react effectively to on-the-spot development in the marketplace?". According to Nunnally (1967:88), the best way to ensure high content validity for a particular use of a measuring instrument is through the "...p1an and procedures for the construction of the instrument...which is formulated based on an outline or blueprint of the area (content) and illus- trates underlying values.” The particular areas of concern .during the planning and procedures used in the construction of the questionnaire include the items selected for inclusion, their order, the wording of the items, the format of the items, and the instructions which are included for the respondent. Nunnally goes on to say that the most feasible method for ensuring adequate content validity for an instrument is the approval of the plan and procedures by ”potential users or at least by persons in positions of responsibility" (1979:81). Validity of content "rests on appeals to reason regarding the adequacy with which content has been sampled, and the adequacy with which the content has been cast in the form of test items" (Nunnally, 1979:82). With these concerns in mind, the questionnaire was developed in four steps and was based on an accepted model from the field of marketing in non-profit organiza- tions (Kotler, 1982). The questionnaire was developed in four steps. In the first step, the researcher used her experience as the Instructional Media Center's Manager of Marketing at 87 Michigan State University to isolate what she thought were the critical characteristics of the Division's operations and structure. These characteristics were discussed with the chairperson of the dissertation committee until a reasonably complete list was developed. In the second step, the concrete activities which characterize each of the five attributes in Kotler's marketing orientation (1982) were isolated. The researcher's outline of operational char- acteristics was organized to conform to the five attributes of the marketing orientation, i.e. client-centered philo- sophy, adequate marketing information, integrated marketing organization, strategic orientation and operational effi- ciency. The language in the questionnaire was standardized to use formal marketing terminology. Concern for content validity led to the instrument being submitted to the members of the doctoral committee, a faculty member in the Office of Testing and Evaluation at Michigan State Univer- sity, and a faculty member in the Department of Marketing at Oakland University in Michigan. These experts were asked to judge the appropriateness and range of the items and indexes, given their knowledge of the area (Selltiz, et al., 1959:Chapter 5). Based on their feedback, the questionnaire was revised, and then administered to the Sales Promotion Manager of the Media Library at the University of Michigan. The Media Library is a marketing agency for the University of Michigan Medical School and not a member of the popula- tion. It was felt that the data derived from the pilot 88 which lead to the revision of the instrument would aid in increasing the content validity of the instrument (Ebel, 1979:298). The revised instrument was administered as a formal telephone interview followed by an evaluative discussion. The researcher read the items from the questionnaire and then wrote down her responses. During the follow-up discussion, the researcher and the Sales Manager went through the instrument item by item. As a result of this pilot, six questions were rewritten to increase clarity by providing additional information. The three financial questions were reconstructed from their original "fill in the blank” format to interval scales in order to encourage responses. In discussing the instrument, the Manager indicated that she had no difficulty with the terminology since she had a marketing background. She strongly recom- mended that the procedure for administering the instrument be changed. She thought it would help respondents to have the instrument in front of them during the interview. This would give respondents some time to think about questions which asked for descriptive information such as‘ goals, purpose, and criteria. Having the respondents fill out the questionnaire and then follow with an interview to clarify any questions the respondent might have, would help increase the uniformity of responses which should improve the reli- ability of the data. This suggestion was in accord with the literature on survey research summarized by Babbie (1979:344) concerning limiting the maximum duration of 89 telephone interviews to no more than ten to fifteen minutes each. The interviewer's notes would be added to the returned questionnaire later. As a last check,the revised questionnaire was administered to the administrative assist- ant to the Manager of Marketing at Michigan State Univer- sity. Although ‘there were no revisions to the instrument following this pilot, it did give the researcher practice in clarifying items on the questionnaire for a person who did not have a marketing background. The Marketing Agency at Michigan State University was not included in this study although it did meet the criteria for inclusion. The researcher felt that some bias might be introduced into the results if she were both the investigator and a respondent in the study. During the entire procedure to develop the questionnaire to its final form, the revised instrument was returned to the members of the dissertation committee for their input. Each time, the instrument was revised to incorporate comments and suggestions which were appropriate. In its final form, the questionnaire had six sections. Five of the sections concentrated on the five characteris- tics of the marketing orientation. These contained the appropriate items from MERS to measure perceived marketing effectiveness on the characteristics of client-centered philosophy, adequate marketing information, integrated marketing organization, strategic orientation, and opera- tional efficiency. Each included items based on the actual 98 activities which demonstrated the presence of the character- istic in the organization and provided the specific information for research question one concerning the charac- teristics of the Marketing Agency. For example, under the characteristic adequate marketing information, the MERS question is "How well does marketing management know the sales potential and profitability of different market segments, products, and channels?”. Preceding this item, the respondent was asked if his/her Agency carried out various activities which would provide information concern- ing the sales potential and profitability of different market segments, products, and channels. These questions asked if the organization: "Does research on the size of the current market for each product?” (Sd); "Does a market forecast for each product?" (5e); ”Does an estimate of the total market demand for each product?" (5j); and others (i.e., 5a,5c,5f,Sg,5h,5k, 51, 8). The sixth section of the questionnaire contained four general questions. The first question concerned the original purpose for which the Agency was established. The second requested a listing of the primary goals of the present Agency. The third item asked for a ranking of the goals. These items contributed information for research question one. And, the fourth item in this section sought information concerning research question three on the effects of the university environment on the ability of the Agency to operate as an effective marketer. 91 Data Collection Procedures A written questionnaire and a follow-up telephone inter- view were used for the data collection phase of the study. An initial telephone contact was made by the researcher to locate the Marketing Agency, administer the qualifying ques- tions (Appendix 4), ascertain the name of the person who would be filling out the questionnaire, and set a data and time for the follow-up telephone interview. The question- naire was then mailed to the person who had agreed to participate in the study. At the scheduled time, the follow-up telephone contact was made. This procedure was carried out by the researcher and required a total of approximately fifteen hours on the telephone. After the interview, the completed questionnaire was returned. If the unit contacted was not a central service unit or did not sell materials developed primarily by the faculty and staff, no further appointment was made. The unit was eliminated from the study. Of the fifty-four potential Agencies, five were eliminated after an examination of their sales litera- ture since they represented only a single college rather than acting as a central service. Following the initial telephone contact, fourteen were eliminated because they were solely rental and did not have a sales function. Eleven were dropped because they were not central service units, and two because they sold only student produced materials. All of the remaining seventeen university Marketing Agencies participated in the study. Initial 92 telephone contacts, questionnaire mailing, follow-up inter- views, and questionnaire returns were carried out between May 2 and June 18, 1985. All questionnaires were returned. The forms used for the evaluation of sales literature, administration of qualifying questions, the cover letter for the questionnaire, and the questionnaire appear in Appendix 4. Data Analysis The following procedure was used to analyze the data collected for research question one concerning the charac- teristics of university Marketing Agencies. For each item in the questionnaire, response frequencies, and percentages were calculated when appropriate. In instances when not every respondent answered every question, percentages may not total 188%. For item thirty concerning full time equiv- alents employed by the Agency, the range, mean, and median were calculated. For research question two concerning perceived marketing effectiveness using MERS, the scoring procedure developed by Kotler (1977:71) was used. On the questionnaire, all of the multiple choice items were from MERS. For each item marked in the "c" choice, two points were awarded. A mark in "b" received one point, and an "a" received zero points. The original MERS instrument contained fifteen items which gave a possible high score of thirty points if only "c's" were marked. Since two of the original questions were split into if! I "1" .l LUJ 39111 st; and :rk. IdII 93 two additional questions for a new total of seventeen, the responses on the split questions were averaged before being added into the MERS score. Given the range of scores in each of the MERS categories from "Superior" to "None,” this procedure did not cause any Agency to move into a different category. The scoring scale for this part of the question- naire appears below. 8 ' 5 "9 "”““' effectiveness I ' effectiveness effectiveness and perhaps surpas ' effectiveness eting effectiveness tChr - r for me to ma . .de d at least two student 3551 ting effectiveness . ' nee or I will spect to the c guestions comprising MERS had With re 3r request cards. devoting more time each da. les calculated. These were rOjeCtSr I am riStiC Of Kotlerts marketing re completed. outine until they a v She provides an extremely C0 keting Information, strategic pporti e. . . ' - t ards the completion of my GP lane?! Integrated organiza nudging ow he demands of '5 She fully understood t em I stages and made allowances for th , ac estion three concerning the . tion factors of the univer- of the special bibliographic letion Icomp . . the Africana Library 1 g to similarities. Again :anding- In faCt’ were calculated. de >rk I am extremely grateful for the g D O 0 d. > amount of superv1510n prOV1de 93 two additional questions for a new total of seventeen, the respdnses on the split questions were averaged before being added into the MERS score. Given the range of scores in each of the MERS categories from "Superior" to "None," this procedure did not cause any Agency to move into a different category. The scoring scale for this part of the question- naire appears below. 8 - 5 No marketing effectiveness 6 - 18 Poor marketing effectiveness 11 - 15 Fair marketing effectiveness 16 - 28 Good marketing effectiveness 21 - 25 Very good marketing effectiveness 26 - 38 Superior marketing effectiveness Responses for the individual questions comprising MERS had both frequencies and percentages calculated. These were presented under each characteristic of Kotler's marketing orientation, i.e. adequate marketing information, strategic orientation, operational efficiency, integrated organiza- tion, and customer philosophy. Responses to research question three concerning the perceived hindering of facilitation factors of the univer- sity site were grouped according to similarities. Again both frequencies and percentages were calculated. 94 TABLE 1.--DISTRIBUTION OF QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS FOR THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS Items Question 1 1-3,5(a-m),8,9,12,13,16,17,l9-23,26-32,36-49, 53,56,57 Question 2 6,7,18-12,14,15,18,24,25,33-35,58-52,54,55 Question 3 4 Summer The research method used for gathering the data for this study was a questionnaire with a follow-up telephone inter- view. The actual instrument used was a combination of original questions developed by the researcher and an adapted version of the Marketing Effectiveness Rating Scale (MERS) (Kotler, 1977). A combination of multiple choice questions, "yes” or "no", check the appropriate item, and short descriptive responses were used to obtain the data. The instrument was validated by personnel in the College of Education and Office of Testing and Evaluation Services at Michigan State University, and a faculty member in the Department of Marketing at Oakland University, Michigan. It was pilot tested with the Sales Promotion Manager of the Media Library at the University of Michigan. The actual participants were the seventeen university Marketing Agencies located during the data collection phase of the study. All the Agencies were contacted by telephone and 95 asked to participate. All received questionnaires and follow-up telephone interviews, and all of the participants returned the instrument. The data was then analyzed by calculating the frequencies and percentages for each item of the questionnaire where appropriate. The items from MERS were tabulated using the scoring procedure developed by Kotler (1977:71). The results of the analysis of the data are presented in Chapter IV. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS This chapter presents an analysis and discussion of the data collected. An attempt is made to identify findings of particular interest which may assist in identifying the important characteristics of Marketing Agencies in univer- sities and which contribute to their degree of perceived marketing effectiveness. Three major areas were addressed: 1. To determine the characteristics of university Marketing Agencies as they currently exist in the United States. 2. To rate the degree of perceived marketing effectiveness which exists in these Agencies according to Kotler's MERS. 3. To identify characteristics of the university environment which these Agencies believe hinder or facilitate their effectiveness as marketers. Results are presented for each of the three major areas of concern. Questionnaires Received Questionnaires were mailed to seventeen qualified university non-print Marketing Agencies. All of the ques- tionnaires were returned after the follow-up telephone interview. Approximately half of the respondents had one or 96 97 two questions concerning particular items on the instrument. No single item appeared to give difficulty. None of the respondents reported having difficulty in answering the questions although most marked "not applicable" on one or more of the items. All of the questionnaires were used in the analysis. Current Characteristics of Marketing Agencies This section responds to the research question: What are the characteristics of university Market- ing Agencies as they now exist? Although the university Marketing Agencies identified by this study varied, all were located within larger service units which offered a wide range of services. Twelve of these larger units were housed in media centers, two were part of video production units, two were in film libraries, and one as part of a university press. Respondents were asked a number of questions concerning their university Marketing Agencies. The response frequen- cies and percentages were calculated for each question, when appropriate. In some instances, not all of the respondents answered every question. Therefore, the percentage of responses may not total 188%. An analysis of the data revealed the following information about the characteristics of university Marketing Agencies. 98 Primary Goals The participants were asked to list the original purpose of the Marketing Agency and its current goals. They were then asked to rank order the goals according to their importance to the Agency. The results are presented in Table 2. Frequently, the Marketing Agencies' goals were TABLE 2.--PRIORITIZED GOALS OE MARKETING AGENCIES Number andfPercentage of Respondents Listed Goals ‘3 Prim. ‘5 Sec. N, Tert. 1. Revenue generation 12 78% 9 53% 4 24% 2. Audio/visual support 2 12% 2 12% 8 8 3. Promote use on campus 2 12% l 6% 4. Broaden curriculum 1 6% 8 8 5. Acquire instr. media 1 6% 8 8 8 6. Outreach 1 6% 8 8 8 7. Teach production 1 6% 8 8 8 Non-respondents 8 8 3 18% 12 78% concerned with different types of revenue generation as in sales of faculty developed materials, handling sales orders, promoting sales, and rentals. Also, not every Agency listed multiple goals, so only the primary goal reflects 188% response. All but two of the respondents listed revenue generation as either their primary, secondary, or tertiary goal for the Agency. For many of the respondents, the goal of revenue generation represents a shift away from the original purpose for which the Agency was established. Only eight (47%) of the respondents reported that revenue genera- tion was the reason that they were established. The second 99 most frequently cited primary goal among Agencies was to provide audiovisual support to the faculty (12%). This also represents a shift in priorities among Agencies away from their original purpose. Four (23%) of the Marketing Agencies reported that providing audiovisual support to the faculty was the reason that the Agency had been established. Another goal cited by at least two (12%) of the respondents was the making of collections available to others, an out- reach function. Overall, the tendency was to become more revenue conscious, more sales oriented, since the Agency's founding. Most Marketing Agencies were either established or re-established since 1978, although one had acted as a vendor since 1915. This coincides with the growth of video production in universities and the resulting increase in both expenses and products. Twelve out of the seventeen Agencies reported handling motion formats exclusively, and most of these materials were available in video only. Operational Efficiency Although revenue generation was cited most frequently, only six (35%) of the Agencies were required to be 188% self-supporting. Table 3 shows the percentages of base budget provided through university appropriations for the fifteen respondents who filled in this item. 188 TABLE 3.--PERCENTAGE OF BASE BUDGET PROVIDED BY UNIVERSITY APPROPRIATIONS Percent of Base Budge; N Percent 1. 8 6 35 2. 1 - 38 5 29 3. 31 - 58 2 12 4. 51 - 78 2 12 5. 71 - 98 8 8 6. 188 8 8 Non-respondents 2 12 Although six Agencies (35%) reported that they were required to be 188% self-supporting, an analysis of expenses showed that facility rental and utilities were not paid by three of these Agencies (18%). The distribution of items included in expenses is in Table 4. TABLE 4.--EXPENSES PAID FROM INCOME BY MARKETING AGENCIES 18 6 14. License fees to others 15. Preview fee to library (for handling) Type of Expense N Percent l. Supplies 16 94 2. Advertising 15 88 3. Salaries 14 82 4. Royalties ’ 14 82 5. Reproduction 12 71 6. Benefit loading factors 11 65 7. Inventory (sales a rental materials) 18 59 8. Production costs 9 53 9. Equipment maintenance 9 53 18. New equipment purchases 9 53 11. Accounting and invoicing 9 53 12. Maintenance of facilities 6 35 13. Facility rental and utilities 3 18 3 l 181 Examination of expenses reveals that most of the Agencies were subsidized by their institutions in addition to the yearly budget appropriations. Most frequently, this support was in the form of university services and facilities including space, utilities, equipment, production, benefits, accounting, inventory, and maintenance. Although seven (41%) did not report inventory of sales, preview and rental materials among expenses, only one Agency reported that inventory expenses were handled by another department. Reported capital investment in inventory is shown in Table 5 for sixteen Marketing Agencies. TABLE 5.-CAPITAL INVESTED IN INVENTORY BY MARKETING AGENCIES In Thousands of Dollars N Percent 1. Under 18 6 35 2. 18 - 35 8 8 3. 36 - 68 3 18 4. 61 - 88 8 8 5. 81 - 188 1 6 6. Over 181 6 6 Non-respondents 1 6 Revenue is shown in Table 6 and expenses in Table 7. Although all seventeen Agencies reported their expenses, only sixteen reported revenue. 182 TABLE 6.--REVENUE OF MARKETING AGENCIES In Thousands of Dollars N' Percent 1. Under 58 5 2 2. 58 - 158 6 35 3. 151 - 258 l 6 4. 251 - 375 l 6 .5. 376 - 588 l 6 6. Over 581 2 12 Non-respondents 1 6 TABLE 7.--EXPENSES OF MARKETING AGENCIES In Thousands of Dollars N Percent 1. Under 58 4 24 2. 58 - 158 7 41 3. 151 - 258 3 18 4. 251 - 375 8 8 5. 376 - 588 l 6 6. Over 581 2 12 Non-respondents 8 8 Only two Agencies reported revenues/expenses greater than $588,888 for fiscal year 1983/84. Five (29%) reported income of less than $58,888, and four (24%) reported expenses of less than $58,888. Only one (6%) of the responding Agencies reported a deficit for last year which was covered by their university appropriation since this Agency was not required to break even. One (6%) Agency did not report its income although it did report expenses. 183 Of the seventeen respondents, ten (59%) indicated that the recovery of original developmental costs was not required by the university. However, twelve (78%) of the Marketing Agencies had royalty policies or cost recovery requirements which caused most of the revenue generated to go to the production unit or producer rather than to the faculty author. Marketing Agencies reported a variety of options which were used to cover material development costs at their particular universities. The most frequent method for covering production costs was to use departmental or production unit funds (sixteen, 94%). Seven (41%) reported more than one method for covering developmental and produc- tion costs at their institutions. One Marketing Agency reported being able to use a special vice-president's fund; one (6%) reported the use of grants. One (6%) Agency main- tained a ”speculative fund” for materials with good market potential; two (12%) others reported sharing production costs with the department. Only three (18%) reported being able to hire faculty to produce particular titles, and fourteen (82%) paid some royalty from sales to content experts. These royalties were most frequently negotiated on an individual basis depending on investment and university policy. Five (29%) reported a fixed royalty rate on sales and rental based on the list price of the item of between 28 - 25%. Five (29%) reported a royalty rate favoring the university until amorization of production costs, at which time the rate changed to favor the author(s). One Agency 184 reported that no royalties were paid as the material was considered to be the property of the university which had paid for its production. Table 8 shows the distribution of Marketing Agencies on royalty. TABLE 8.--ROYALITY DISTRIBUTION BY MARKETING AGENCIES Type of Distribution Policy ‘N Percent 1. Fixed percentage of list or net 5 29 2. Negotiated individually based on invest. 5 , 29 3. Amortization formulas 5 29 4. No royalties paid 1 6 5. Paid to producer who distributes 1 6 Non-respondents 8 8 Ten (59%) made a distinction between costs for original development and costs to make materials ”market ready." Although original production costs could not be recovered by most Agencies, costs to make materials ready to market were recovered as an expense from sales revenue. This distinc- tion allowed Agencies some ability to bring new materials up to required quality standards for release when other funds were not available. Integrated Organization Sixteen (94%) of the Agencies reported that the new product development process in their institutions was either ill-defined or lacked sophistication. Only three (18%) reported being able to hire an author to produce a 185 particular title. Although all the Agencies accepted materials from faculty authors, fourteen (82%) also allowed staff to act as authors. Eleven (65%) would accept materials from persons outside their own institutions, and six (35%) allowed students to act as authors. Table 9 gives the distribution of Marketing Agencies concerning who can act as authors of materials accepted for marketing by sixteen respondents. TABLE 9.--DISTRIBUTION OE AUTHORSHIP T e of Person N Percent I. Faculty 16 94 2. Staff 14 82 3. Departments 11 65 4. Individuals outside the university 11 65 5. Students 6 3S 6. Production units 4 24 7. Government agencies or companies 2 12 Non-respondents l 6 Seven (41%) of Marketing Agencies reported having control of some production processes. Examination of the data indicated that new products generally come to the Agency from production units or by chance. This was reflected in the media formats which Marketing Agencies offer for sale. Fully, ten (59%) offered motion formats such as film and video. In addition, the majority of Marketing Agencies offered fewer than fifty titles for sale. Ten (59%) offered between seven and fifty independent 186 titles; two (12%) handled between fifty-one and one hundred, and the remainder over five hundred. Agencies reported a number of criteria which they used when accepting materials for marketing. All respondents listed usability by others as the primary consideration in accepting materials. Four (24%) specified that the material had to fit within one of the market segments which they already served. Six (35%) listed usability of material by their own faculty, and six (35%) cited quality as a primary consideration. Other criteria listed were uniqueness, life span, investment recovery, and lack of copyright problems. Only two (12%) Agencies listed'accuracy of information as an important criterion. Although six (35%) of the respondents indicated that they felt that the Agency was adequately staffed to carry out the marketing functions, the mean number of full time equivalents (FTE) was six. Agencies ranged from a low of 1/28 of one FTE assigned to marketing to a high of thirty- two FTE. The median number was three full time equivalents. In a subsequent discussion with the respondent who reported thirty-two FTE, he explained that the marketing function was not assigned separately. This number represented the total number of FTE for the entire film production unit. Twelve (78%) indicated that the Agency's employees had job descrip- tions which described their marketing tasks, and eight (47%) reported that the person in charge had a marketing back- 'ground. Invariably, the person in charge of marketing 187 reported to the director of the larger unit or was the director of the larger unit. Adequate Marketingylnformation University Marketing Agencies reported doing little customer research or other market research. Of the variety of potential types of information which marketers need, the majority of Agencies reported collecting evaluative data from clients about the products purchased (thirteen, 76%). Seven (41%) reported using this evaluative data to improve existing and future products. Three-quarters, thirteen (76%), reported that they define the potential market for each product, and nine (53%) indicated that they do an estimate of the total market demand for the product. Further, nine (53%) of the respondents indicated that they develop a marketing mix of product, price, place, and promo- tion for each product. However, without having collected other than product evaluation data on their customers, these estimates seem to be based more on experience and intuition for the market on the part of the marketer rather then on real data. Table 18 gives the distribution of Marketing Agencies on the various activities performed by marketers. 188 TABLE 18.~-MARKETING ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY MARKETING AGENCIES Type of Marketing Activity Collects evaluations from customers 1 Defines potential market for each prod. 1 Percent N l. 3 2. 3 3. Develops a marketing mix for each prod. 9 4. Does est. of total market demand for each 9 5. Uses evaluations to improve prod. regularly 7 6. Segments the market for each product 6 7. Research. size of current market each prod. 5 29 8. Does a market forecast for each product 5 9. Est. area market demand for each product 5 l8. Researches needs and preferences of cust. 4 11. Uses customer info. when develop. new prod. 3 12. Does a customer analysis of chosen segments 8 13. Estimates market share for each product 8 8 Non-respondents Three-quarters, nine (76%), reported occasionally doing some form of market forecast for products. Of the four types of forecast methods, buyer intention surveys were the most frequently cited at five (29%). The survey simply asks customers what they intend to buy' from proposed new products.- The middleman survey involves asking distributors to estimate how many of a new product they will be able to sell. Five (29%) reported using this method. Four (24%) indicated that they used a market test to forecast the market for new products. This method requires a limited release of the product within a given market segment; the resulting volume of sales is used to forecast sales in the larger market. 189 University Marketing Agencies used mass mailing more than any other method for promoting their products. Sixteen (94%) reported using this form of advertising. Twelve (78%) reported taking exhibits to conferences and conventions. Table 11 shows the actual distribution of Marketing Agencies on promotional activities. TABLE ll.--PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES USED BY MARKETING AGENCIES Type of Activity ‘N Percent 1. Mass Mailing 16 94 2. Exhibits at conferences/conventions 12 71 3. Telephone solicitation 7 41 4. Journal advertising 6 35 5. External sales force 4 23 6. Publicity (news releases) 4 23 7. Film festivals l 6 8. TV spots 1 6 Non-respondents 8 8 Strategic Orientation The majority- of Marketing Agencies do little formal planning, either annual or long-range, and little contin- gency planning. Three (19%) reported that they develop an annual, written plan for marketing. Only two (12%) did an annual and a detailed long—range plan. More than half, ten (59%), indicated that their Agencies did not have written goals and objectives. In addition, ten (59%) reported that they feel that their marketing strategy is unclear while the 118 remainder are simply continuing the same strategies used in previous years. Although all of the respondents reported having to support themselves at least partially and all cited revenue generation as one of their primary goals, only ten (59%) reported that their planning focused on long-range profit- ability. Nine (53%) reported that their planning focused on long-range growth. Customer Philosophy Most university Marketing Agencies concentrated on selling the products they have to whomever will buy them, as well as selling and servicing their present clients. Four- teen (82%) reported that the bulk of their efforts go to selling and servicing their present customers. Nine (53%) reported thinking primarily in terms of current and new products to whomever will buy them rather than thinking in terms of serving the needs of well defined market segments. Eleven (65%) of the respondents indicated that they were either unable or could develop only somewhat different offerings and marketing plans for different market segments. Nine (53%) reported that new products are not developed based on information about the needs and wants of given market segments. Within their own operating systems, sixteen (94%) were willing to modify their policies and procedures, if necessary, to meet customers' needs. 111 In addition to the marketing services offered by univer- sity Marketing Agencies, the respondents offered a variety of other services to the university. Since most of these auxiliary services were non-revenue generating, they are supported either from revenues, university appropriations, or a combination of the two. The most frequently listed services were instructional development consultation (four- teen, 82%) and the maintenance of a central non-print library, (twelve, 71%). Ten (59%) reported providing copy- right consultation, registration, presenting workshops, and seminars for faculty. Twelve (71%) purchased non-print programs from other sources for the library. Table 12 shows the distribution of university Marketing Agencies for other services which they provide. TABLE 12.--OTHER SERVICES PROVIDED BY MARKETING AGENCIES Type of Service N Percent . Instructional development consultation 14 82 2. A central non-print library 12 71 3. Acquisition non-print prog. from others 12 71 4. Copyright consultation/registration 18 59 5. Seminars and workshops for faculty 18 59 6. Research other than market research 8 47 7. Courses for student credit hours 5 29 8. Book publication w/o non-print compon. 2 12 Non-respondents 8 8 112 Perceived Marketing Effectiveness (MERS) This section responds to the research question: What level of perceived marketing effectiveness currently exists in university Marketing Agencies? Only one (6%) of the seventeen Marketing Agencies located rated its marketing effectiveness as high as the "very good" category on Kotler's Marketing Effectiveness Scale (MERS) (1977). Two (12%) others scored a rating of "good.” The distribution of the scores and the percentage of the population represented appears in the following table: TABLE l3.--DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES ON MERS Range Rating ‘N Percent 38 - 26 Superior marketing effectiveness 8 8 25 - 21 Very good marketing effectiveness 1 6 28 - 16 Good marketing effectiveness 2 12 15 - 11 Fair marketing effectiveness 8 47 18 - 6 Poor marketing effectiveness 2 12 5 - 8 No marketing effectiveness 4 24 Non-respondents 8 8 Adequate Marketing Information Although eleven (65%) reported that they had not done any customer research more recently then five years ago, fifteen (88%) felt that they were somewhat knowledgeable about the sales potential and profitability of different market segments and products. The corroborating items in this section of the questionnaire showed that at least half 113 of the respondents collected evaluative data about the ‘ products the Agency sold. They defined the potential market, did an estimate of total market demand, and devel- oped a marketing mix for each product. In addition, thirteen (76%) used one of four possible methods for performing a forecast of the market. It appears that the majority of Marketing Agencies felt that they know what their customers want without having collected that informa- tion within the last five years. Also, only two (12%) reported making substantial efforts to track their cost effectiveness. Fifteen (88%) made some or little, to no effort to measure cost effectiveness of their marketing expenditures. The distribution of Agencies on the MERS items which comprise the variable adequate marketingginfor- mation appears in Tables 14, 15, and 16. TABLE 14.-~RESEARCH ON CUSTOMERS, BUYING INFLUENCES, CHANNELS, AND COMPETITORS When Conducted ‘N Percent 1. More than five years ago or never 11 65 2. Three to four years ago 4 24 3. This year or last year 2 12 Non-respondents 8 8 114 TABLE 15.--KNOWLEDGE OF SALES POTENTIAL AND PROFITABILITY OF DIFFERENT MARKET SEGMENTS, PRODUCTS, AND CHANNELS Degree of Knowledge 4N Percent 1. Not at all 2 12 2. Somewhat 15 88 3. Very well 8 8 Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 16.--DEGREE OF EFFORT MADE TO MEASURE COST EFFECTIVE- NESS OF EXPENDITURES Degree of Effort ‘N Percent 1. Little or no effort 6 3 2. Some effort 9 53 3. Substantial effort 2 12 Non-respondents 8 8 Strategic Orientation Only two (12%) of the respondents reported formulating and annually revising detailed long-range marketing plans as well as developing a written annual plan. An additional three (18%) developed a written annual marketing plan. Ten (59%) felt that their marketing strategy was unclear; ten (59%) respondents felt that the strategy was clear, but traditional. Eleven (65%) reported that marketing manage- ment did some informal contingency thinking; five (29%) reported doing no contingency thinking. In the support items for 'this section on the questionnaire, only seven (41%) reported having written goals and objectives for the 115 Marketing Agency. Although ten (59%) reported that their Agency's plans focus on profitability, all claimed to either partially or wholly support themselves through revenues generated. The distribution of Marketing Agencies on the MERS items which comprise the variable strategic orientation appears in Tables 17, 18, and 19. TABLE 17.--EXTENT OF FORMAL PLANNING BY MARKETING AGENCIES 4 Extent of Planning 'N Percent 1. Little or no formal planning 11 65 2. A written annual plan is developed 3 l8 3. A detailed annual and careful long- 2 12 range plan which is updated at least annually are developed Non-respondents 1 6 TABLE 18.--QUALITY OF THE MARKETING STRATEGY USED BY MARKETING AGENCIES Agency's Assessment .E Percent 1. Current strategy is not clear 18 59 2. Strategy is clear and traditional 6 35 3. Strategy is clear, innovative, and l 6 data-based Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 19.--EXTENT OF CONTINGENCY THINKING Extent ‘N Percent 1. Little or no contingency thinking 5 29 2. Does informal contingency thinking 11 65 116 Table 19 Cont'd. 3. Formally identifies contingencies and 8 8 develops plans to meet them Non-respondents 1 6 Integrated Organization A little over half, nine (53%), of the Marketing Agencies reported that the Agency worked well with others to resolve problems in ways which would benefit the organiza- tion as a whole. Seven (41%) felt that relations with other departments were friendly, but each department acted to primarily serve its own interests. Almost half, eight (47%) believed that the major marketing functions of analysis, planning, implementation, and control were effectively inte- grated within the Marketing Agency. Five (29%) reported that there was less than satisfactory coordination and cooperation, and four (24%) reported a lack of integration leading to unproductive conflict. In a support item for this section, Marketing Agencies reported staffing which ranged from 1/28 FTE to thirty-two FTE with a median of three. In such small units, the various marketing functions are often carried out by the same people rather than being split into separate departments. The size of university Marketing Agencies assists the degree that functions can be carried out in a coordinated matter; a higher degree of integration of the functions results. 117 Unfortunately, Marketing Agencies report that the new product development process is not well integrated with Marketing Agencies. Only one Agency (6%) reported that they thought that the new product development system at their university was well-structured and professionally staffed. Seven (41%) said that the system formally exists but lacks sophistication, and slightly more than half, nine (53%), believed the system to be ill-defined. On a supporting item, only three Agencies (18%) reported being able to hire a content expert to produce a particular product, or other- wise directly influence the new product development process to meet client needs. Tables 28, 21, and 22 present the distribution of Marketing Agencies on the MERS items for integrated organization. TABLE 28.--DEGREE THAT THE MARKETING AGENCY WORKS WELL WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS Responses N Percent 1. Other departments complain about the 8 8 demands marketing makes 2. Somewhat relations are friendly, but 7 41 each dept. acts to serve own interests 3. Dept. cooperate effectively and resolve 9 53 issues for the good of the whole org. Non-respondents 1 6 118 TABLE 21.--LEVEL OF INTEGRATION AND CONTROL OF MAJOR MARKETING FUNCTIONS Level of Integration and Control ‘N Percent 1. Not integrated and some conflict 4 2 2. Somewhat integrated and formally 5 29 controlled, but unsatisfactory cooperation and coordination 3. Effectively integrated 8 47 Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 22.--ORGANIZATION OF THE NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS De ree of Organization N Percent I. System is ill-defined 9 2. System formally exists but unsophist. 7 41 3. Well-structured and profes. staffed 1 6 Non-respondents 8 8 Operational Efficiency This section of the questionnaire was comprised of five MERS items. The first pair concerned the communication and implementation of marketing thinking throughout the organi- zation. The next involved the use of resources, and the last pair concerned organizational response to on-the-spot developments in the marketplace. Only two Agencies (12%) reported that marketing thinking was successfully communicated and implemented throughout the organization. Five (29%) felt that marketing thinking was poorly communicated; over half, ten (59%), believed that 119 marketing thinking was fairly well communicated throughout the organization. On the second half of this pair of ques- tions, a larger number, twelve (71%), felt that marketing thinking was implemented fairly well throughout the organi- zation. Only three (18%) thought that marketing thinking was implemented poorly throughout the organization. On the question concerning the use of marketing resources, only two (12%) reported that marketing resources were both adequate and deployed optimally. Eight (47%) felt that the resources were adequate, but they were not being used optimally, and seven (41%) felt that the marketing resources were inadequate for the job to be done. The last pair of questions for this section concerned the ability of the organization to react quickly and effec- tively to on-the-spot developments in the marketplace. Approximately one-third, six (35%), reported that their reaction time was slow because sales and marketing informa- tion was not current. 'Six (35%) believed that the Agency lacked the ability to react effectively to on-the-spot developments in the marketplace because of out-of—date sales and marketing information. Nine (53%) of the Agencies reported that their reaction time varied, and eight (47%) believed that their effectiveness varied in this area. One Agency (6%) reported that it had installed systems which yielded current information and fast reaction time. Distri— bution of Marketing Agencies on the five MERS items for operational efficiency appears in Tables 23 - 27. 128 TABLE 23.--DEGREE TO WHICH MARKETING THINKING IS COMMUNICATED THROUGHOUT THE ORGANIZATION Degree N Percent l. Poorly communicated 5 29 2. Fairly well communicated 18 59 3. Successfully communicated 2 12 Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 24.--DEGREE TO WHICH MARKETING THINKING IS IMPLEMENTED THROUGHOUT THE ORGANIZATION Degree ‘N Percent 1. Poorly implemented 3 l8 2. Fairly well implemented 12 71 3. Successfully implemented 2 12 Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 25.--DEGREE OF EFFECTIVENESS IN USING MARKETING RESOURCES Degree of Effectiveness ‘N Percent 1. Marketing resources are inadequate for 7 41 the job to be done 2. Somewhat. Resources are adequate but 8 47 not employed optimally 3. Resources are adequate and deployed 2 12 optimally Non-respondents 8 8 121 TABLE 26.--CAPACITY TO REACT QUICKLY TO ON-THE-SPOT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE MARKETPLACE Capability N Percent 1. No. Sales and market information is 6 35 not current, and reaction time is slow 2. Somewhat. Fairly up-to-date information 9 53 and reaction time varies 3. Yes. Systems yield current information 1 6 and fact reaction time Non-respondents l 6 TABLE 27.--CAPACITY TO REACT EFFECTIVELY TO ON-THE-SPOT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE MARKETPLACE Capability ‘N Percent I: No. Sales/market information is not - 7 41 current, and reaction is not effective 2. Somewhat. Fairly up-to-date information 8 47 and reaction effectiveness varies 3. Yes. Systems yield current information 1 6 and effective reactions Non-respondents 1 6 Customer Philosophy This section of MERS contained three questions. These questions were concerned with developing different offers for different market segments using a whole systems view of markets during the planning process and designing the organ— ization to serve the needs of market segments. Only six (35%) reported that they developed different offerings and marketing plans for different market segments. Two (12%) felt that they did not do this at all while nine 122 (53%) felt that they were somewhat able to develop different offerings and plans for different market segments. Only two (12%) reported using a whole marketing system view (suppliers, channels, competitors, customers, environ— ment) in planning their business. The largest number, eight (47%), reported that their Agencies did not use a whole systems perspective but concentrated on selling and servic- ing current customers. Seven (41%) reported using somewhat of a systems view, but that the bulk of the Agency's effort went into selling and servicing current customers. Over half, nine (53%), reported that their Agencies did not design the organization to meet the needs and wants of customers. Rather, they felt that the Marketing Agency thought primarily in terms of selling current and new products to whomever will buy them. Three (18%) of the Agencies reported that they thought in terms of serving the needs and wants of market segments chosen for their long- range growth and profitability to the Agency. Five (29%) reported thinking in terms of serving a wide range of markets with equal effectiveness. On a related support question for this section, sixteen (94%) reported that they were able to modify their policies and procedures, if necessary, to give customers what they needed. The distri- bution of Marketing Agencies on the three MERS items for the variable customer philosophy is presented in Tables 28-38. 123 TABLE 28.--DEGREE TO WHICH DIFFERENT OFFERINGS AND MARKET PLANS ARE DEVELOPED FOR DIFFERENT MARKET SEGMENTS Offerings & Plans Differ for Market Segments N Percent 1. No 2 12 2. Somewhat 9 53 3. Yes 6 35 Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 29.--DEGREE TO WHICH THE AGENCY TAKES A WHOLE SYSTEMS VIEW WHEN PLANNING N Percent 1. No. Market. concentrates on selling and 8 47 servicing its immediate, current cust. 2. Somewhat. Takes a long-term view of 7 41 channels but concentrates most of its efforts on sell. and serv. current cust. 3. Yes. Takes a whole systems view and 2 12 recognizes threats and opport. for the company in changes anywhere in the system Non-respondents 8 8 TABLE 38.--IMPORTANCE OF DESIGNING THE AGENCY TO SERVE THE NEEDS AND WANTS OF CHOSEN MARKETS N Percent 1. No. Thinks primarily in terms of 9 53 current/new prod. to whomever will buy 2. Somewhat. Thinks in terms of serving 5 29 wide range of markets/needs with equal effectiveness 3. Thinks in terms of serving needs and 3 l8 wants of well-defined markets chosen for their long-term growth and profit potential for the Agency Non-respondents 8 8 124 Overview of Marketing Effectiveness MERS is the instrument developed by Kotler (1977:71) to_ measure' the degree of perceived marketing effectiveness present in non-profit organizations. The items in the instrument are based on the five characteristics of the marketing orientation model (Kotler, 1975; 1982) which have been used as the basis for this study. In his research, Kotler used MERS for a population which was different from the population of university Marketing Agencies which was the focus of this study. In order to use MERS, changes in both the instrument and the method of administration were necessary. Therefore, increased caution must be applied in interpretation of the data collected. The marketing orientation model, as proposed and used by Kotler, is meant to be used as both a descriptive and causal model which can be applied as an evaluative tool for organi- zations to improve their marketing effectiveness. Kotler contends that those organizations which operate with high levels of the five characteristics of the marketing orienta- tion will be more effective in reaching their marketing goals then those organizations which have lower levels or are lacking in the five areas. Analysis of the data collected from MERS for the seven- teen Marketing Agencies resulted in three Agencies with scores in the "good" and "very good" categories of marketing effectiveness. Table 31 presents the Agencies' scores on 125 MERS in comparison to their reported revenue and their primary goal. 126 cmuuommm uoz «. mam: co muoom cmemz « .HmsmH>oHosmv mamEmu co mm: ouOEoum\3ouo amv m\oz N a H a 5 .NH A.>ouv monm usono mocovcommmuuoo chcnm 5N «\02 H a H H H .5 H.>wuv coHuosvoum uuommsm ou mEoocH muouocmu u\cz «\02 H H H H H .v Hmscm>ouv mHmHumuoe HnsmH>oHcso umxuoz amv «\oz 5 N N a a .N H.>muv oooH>\meHHu moscm>mu Hmucou mucouocH +aum m\uoom H N H a N .m Hmsco>muv mHoucmu omcH> can EHHu mucouocH amv m\uoom N H m a N .a auHsoou 0» “bemoan >¢ mcs>oum aaH HH\usmm N m m H m .m coHuospoum >9 zooms aaH HH\uHmm N N m N N .H Hosco>ouv anucou EHHm mumwuocH am HH\uHmm« N N v m m .HH A.>mu. mHmsumume .Ho>mo auHaoau HHmu\muoaoua uaH aquwmm H m m N m .m Hoscmcou. mHmHuoune .umem mo .uume mmomuocH th vH\uHmm v n v H N .m Hoocm>wuV anou.oocouu< am mH\uHmm. v m c N N .mH noawuuso am mH\uHmm N m v H m .mH Hoscm>ouv uHoonom ou mmHmu Ucomxu +uam mH\unm m N v N N .vH Hoscm>muv wHom wow .uoE mHumHonou waanuunHa auN mH\cooU e m v m N .NH momma .umcH auHmum>Hcs poms ou oHoma muHsvo¢ uuH mH\pooU m m w m m .NH H.>muv .>umm .xuma choB HmcoHuouscm 00H>oum amv moom aum> m mrt w m « .NH Hmoo anon—Hum Mm... m.“ Mm. Waco mm... mace. MN m. 0A on 1.3 1.3 6.... ti 1.: s na 18 I3 F1 28 an OX d su a 00 as us u: 13 0 90. SW 1.1. 1.1 1.3 m1. 0 ua oe at.ze 26 e! P P d: no a: «3:16 a S? Q on 18 ID ID 0 u .A rAe .!D. o o a» 7; o u u u .# .zmwc .m42 mom adoo N¢mm Daemommm .mmmoom mam: mo zomHm80§83mh 8.300 8000.. 5.3 0000.. 0.00.00.00.90 0.0 a... $0.00.. 000 00.00.000.000 .0. ~0.3.8008. 00.. .0000... 8000.0. 0.50 00... .N .00.... 0.0..0 0.32. ”.25. .26 .. 00000 6.0.0.0000 80.0.80 90.000: 000 80... .0. 00.0.80 00.00000. .0. 3.3.8008. 8.. 800005 80.0.0. 80.0.80 00.. .N 0000000. 0.00000 0000006 00.08 80.0.80 80.00 .050 .— lm0000 0. 00.0.0; 000 «0.0300 000 00.05 0008. 000 80020.0 «0.00.080 3000. 8000.0 300 0000208 000 «5000.0... “80.200 000 20000.0 300 00.300000 .0. 3.3.0.0008. 00.. .000000. 800090.300 00.— .N ..o.00..0 200090-300 “80.00 .050 .— Km0.. 00.3 000 $00. .0 00.0 00. 0. 00.00000 80.6.0 800000. «00.00.020.000 0...- .N 00.0000 00000.90 8.3 000 00.0.0000 0000000. 00.0.0000 ”80.00 .050 .— 000..00..00 00.0.0. 000 .0008. 0... 0002.090 0000.00.90. 0.0 >0... .0... 0.0.08 80.0 000 8.00.0.3 8000.0 00000.0 £000 000 8.0.0030 0000.0 00.800... 000.00. 0.8... 00.00.0000 0... .0 E0800§0§30003§§100§8.£§§0§090< .N 0000000. 000... 0000000. 0.0.00.0 80.00 .050 .— 000 "80.00 .050 .— 0000; 0.0.0003! 9.0.0.300 02.5525 03wa0 N ugh—2m???0 170 APPENDIX 3 University Marketing Agencies Addresses .APPEEHILX 3 UNIVERSITY MARKETING AGENCY ADDRESSES University of Arizona Microcampus Harville Building #76, Box 4 Tucson, AZ Ms. Eileen Matz, Director Extension Media Center University of California 2223 Fulton St. Berkeley, Cal. 94720 Mr. D. Bickley, Mktg. & Promo. Man. Instructional Resource Center East Hall University of Delaware Newark, DE 19716 -Mr. D. Nelson, Director Audiovisual Center University of Iowa C315 Seashore Hall Iowa City, IA 52242 William Oglesby, Director Film Center University of Illinois 1325 Oak St. Champaign, Ill. Mr. S. Johnson, Mktg. Man. Audio-Visual Center Indiana University Bloomington, IN 47405 Ms. P. Witmore, Director Michigan Media University of Michigan 400 Fourth St. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Mr. G. Williams, Assoc. Dir. Department of Media Services University of New Hampshire Durham, NH 03824 Ms. Marsha Kennedy, Marketing Audio-Visual Resource Center Cornell University 8 Research Road Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 Ms. C. Doolittle, Prod. Man. *Not included in the study 171 Faculty Media Dev. Office University of Akron Akron, OH 44325 Ms. L. DeYoung, Mktg. Man. Media Serv. Audio Visual Center Kent State University 330 Library Kent, OH 44242 Mr. Kerstetter Audiovisual Center Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK 74078 Mr. R. Payne Audio-Visual Center Pennsylvania State University 208 Special Services Building University Park, PA 16802 Ms. K. Egan, Assistant Dir. Audio Visual Services Brigham Young University 290 HRCB Provo, UT 84602 Mr. S. Harman University of Washington Press Box 85569 Seattle, WA 98145 Ms. J. Pike, Non-Book Dept. Man. Center for Television Production University of Wisconsin Green Bay, WI 54301-7001 Mr. J. Gaunt, Man. Admin. Serv. University Telecommunications University of Wisconsin 120 Communication Arts Center Stevens Point, WI 54481 Mr. R. Weseloh, Director *Instructional Media Center Marketing Division Michigan State University E. Lansing, MI 48824 Ms. Betty L. Decker, Manager APPENDIX 4 Verification Questions to Qualify Population Cover Letter for the Questionnaire Survey Instrument Used APPENDIX 4 «lineman QUESTIONS Tl QUALIFY "Fulfill LlrsnssmmumumumtuMMusmthmfl-W __n-: It: mus-s ammrmmumm-muuw ____m ___Is an» titl- tailoring stats-om but muons! manila-I m __Illsmulumsprlmsthlulus-tflsm _ulommmmmmmmumwummumm «hum-savanna.“— WWWWMHWW tum-(shaded I. 2. I. 4. I. I. “Haul-child I. 2. a. 4. I. I. 7. I. human-Imam“ __ns; ___u mm __ns: _.Is WM _m ___II 173 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY mummm mm-mumw-mu May, 1985 Dear Thank you for agreeing to fill in the attached questionnaire concerning the characteristics of your university Marketing Agency. This instrument has been field tested in similar Agencies and should require no more than thirty minutes to fill out. The multiple choice questions have been adapted from an instrument by Dr. Phillip Kotler; I have tried to adapt the wording to better fit academic marketing organizations. Many of the items in the questionnaire use marketing terminology which may be unfamiliar; part of the purpose of the follow-up telephone interview is to clarify questions which may arise while filling it in. Confidentiality for all information is guaranteed, and data will be reported in percentages of participating Agencies, means and medians. A list of all located central Marketing Agencies with their addresses is planned as an Appendix to the study. If you do not wish to have your Agency listed, please let me know during the telephone interview. Also, if you wish to receive a synopsis of the findings, please let me know, and I will be glad to send one during the summer when the dissertation has been completed. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, ~PTT;LAJ¥5:::>JLL_S2JL__. Betty Decker, Manager, Marketing & Visual Production Services Instructional Media Center Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824 (517)355-4493 M5 U is m A/fimufl'vs Adios/Equal Opportunity Institution 174 Lite-aetlemeatalllalefllbatwaaltaerlelaelearaeeet lllataetaeearreaterlmaryaealaetthew seam lPIeeeeraaItIeaIeeeleereereH-aertaaeewltal aablaleet. tummmmmmumuummmmmuhnumma m1! ”DIET!“ MRI-III“ IIIeIettaetelleulaeaetlrltleaIeeayeerIaeaeyeerterm‘? Balleetaeralaatlrelatatremclleataaleettleareeeetatlelaeasvaeue. Regularly ease this data ta lmereve axletlae aaI tetare areIaeta. Iatlaea the potential market tar each ereIeet Iaeareeearaleatbealaeettaecematlartettereaelerelaet _e| leeaamarhettereeeattereaehareeeet Iagmeetataemartetlereaeaereeast‘ __fl Iaeaaeaeeameraaalyetaettaemarteteeelaetaeaeeeetareaeaarelast ___H Mumnautbmeanflenmmusflmanmumlamuuunm llaea later-atlas cutest“ abeet caste-er aretereaeea whee Ieveleelaa aew areeaata Ieeaaaeattmateetthetetalmerteteemaaeterttearaaeet less as estimate at area market Iemaae tar ereeaeta. Estimates market share tar ereeaeta. ___m| Melenamartetmlxetareeefl.”alumina-attenuates“ I. has were the last martetlae research ataIIea eeaeaetee at cashmere. levies Iatleeaeea. ctaaaeta aaa eemaetltera? __a| lerattaeflveyearaaaa. __fl Threateteeryearaaae. _e) manarerlaatyear. . Ila-wetleeeemartatlaalaaaeemeatlaewtleealeaaeteetlalaaeeretltaellltyetllttereetmarketaea-eeta. 175 IlhlehetthelellellaeeeeatearuIBIaaetelereeaetthemmhett _mlayerlateatleaaarvee _hl Ilaelemeaaervev _cl larhetteat __I| l'lmeeerleaaaalnla IPleeeeeheehthearemetleealaetleltleeeeeereaalm'l'hnearIaeaet. _almmmalllne _llIIhIr _hlleeraelaevertlalaa _eleahlhltaateeeteraaeeaheeaveetleae ateleeheaeaellcltatlea _eleateraalealealeree lIIheteflefllameIetemumtheeeetefleeflreaeaadmmm _alllttleeraeettart. _hlIameeflart _elsahetaatlalellert. "MING ORIENTATION ILIhetlatheeateetetlermalalaaalaahvthelmhetlaaIaeaeyt _allherelallttlearaelermelmarhetlaeelaaalae. _flamrlttemaeaeelmarhetlaaalaalaeeteleaea. _qhmhemmaembatnaeeahamflehhammheetaaudnmem ltlathemarheflaeahanvleeeewbatheyemteaeeemmelateaatereeeeeeeeataf __!OO: _ae ltleeathelarhetlaelaeaevheeewrltteaeedaaeiw _na: _ae Mlhetlatheeaalltyeltheearreetmarhetlaeatreteen _allhecarreatetratenlaaeteleer. _fltheeeneatatratenlaelearaaelaaeeatlaeatleeettraelfleamm _eHheeamatatrateeylaeleerJaaevatlreleta-heelaaemaI-rneeaee. ltlhetlatheexteateteeatlaaeeeythlehlaet _ al leaaaemeet Ieea llttle er ae ceetlaaeaey thlahlaa. _fllaaaaemeatleeaeeetlaaeacythlahlaahetaetlermmh. _qammummnummlwmummumm; lIhaeetheIaeaey’aeleaaleeaeeIealeaa-raeaeerewtht yea: ae Pretttahllltyt yea: ae l1.cauewmtmaummmummameemaeelathemmw _m ___II mum Illullllfllll lllewvelleraeelaeelatheaemereiaeteereleameatereeeee? _ m The system la lll-Ietleee. _hll'heayatemlermallyealatahetleehaaeehlatleatlea. _ellheayatemlawelI-atraetareeeaeereteaeleaallyatatlee. lthreaathera/eeateateaaertahlreeaaeaalah'thehaeaeyteareeaeeerelastal'eraale? _yea: _ae ulneathera/ceeteatexaertaaellreyaltlealramaalea? _yea: _ae zl.lhlehelthelellemlaamavaetaaaetherat _allaealty _nlaelvleaalaeetaleetheaalverslty _hlataleata _uathera: _clmfl _Ilareeaetleaaeeaelea _elIesartmeata 22.MallmmmamumummmutheaumMI eraahleaataIleaaIlereeerIlae? _tfl: _ae; aaeallv 23. Ihleh arelactlea aervleee. ll aay. are aaatrellel he the Iarhetlaa leaner! _alrleeeereeaetlea _ncameraraaeyartareeaetlea _DlImm areeaetlea _alererhealtraaeeareaelea __ cl ellIe ereeaetlea __ H eemaater aaltware _QIIIIII'IIIrIl' _llether: _Ilrlatllt u. Ieea larhetlae merh val wlth ether Ieeartmeata llhe research areeaetlea. almlalatratlee. earahaalae aaI aeeIemle Iaaartmeata‘l _alle. There are eemalalatethat larhetlae laeareaaeaahle la the demands aaI seats It alaeaaeaether Iasartmeata. _fl IamemhatTherelatlaaaanMeaelyanheeeheaehIeaanmeatamtymeehaetete aerveltamlatereata. _el'eathelehanmeataeeeaerataefleetleel'aaereaelvelaaaealatheheetlateraataeltheeraaalzatleaaaa whale. 176 talcum-meamuumnumeumumemmmummm aadceatrel? _qnmuduhmmuheuuanaumtmnuemauthmalaaemamm _numnmmmunmmmummmmmmmm ceardlaatleaaadceaaeratlea _cltaathamalarmarhetlaateactlaasaraaflectlvelvlateratad. allusthehaeacyhanaMmamuammedMaemmlm-hlchamaaunsm III: II 21. mmmumurmummmnwummmmmumm rasaaaslhllltlas? _raa: _ ulsmmmnmumnmumunmmmmum _yas; ummmleagetmammwmmwnmmum yea: ea a. law may tell-time aeatvelaats are employed la theIaeacy? Il.‘|’amhem dummlacheraeettheleeastreeertlhytttlelt uMMmumnmamuAm-ummmmm IPEIITIM EFFICIEIBV nhewwdllathamuhetmathlahtaecemmameatedthraaehaetthew _IIM _Ill'fltlt _clIaccesetalle ~ Ithamuelllamarhetlaathlahlaalmelemeatedwtheersaalaatteat _Ilhwlt _llF-lflv ___c|8eceesatdla Ithmeaaaemeatdetaaaaatteettralehmlthmarhatlaareseercest _allethamerhetlaereeearcesaralaadeeaatelerthelahtahedeaa. . _flIameIhatThemarhulaamurcumadeeaatahatthavuaaetamabndM cl'eathemarhetlaarasealceaareadeeeetaaadaradaslavedeetlmetl'. nIeestheMarhatlaeIaaacytermelateaaaaaaalhadaet? ____yes: _ae 31. la theIaeacy resalred ta aaaaert ltaalt tram reaeaaes assented? _yas: as filamlsthehaeacytaadedtfleasaaaeaaarealmatteas. m Shuttersltyaaarearlattea fl__%salesaadreatalreteaae cl_%araata m__%taescharaedlaraea-marhatlaeaervlces nlhetwesthehaeaeraaeeraalmetetetalaalesravaaaetertlfllflt “C.I.: 5 ; 3 4W4- 1m III.“ 313.“ nihetwerathelaeacratatalaearaatmateeaaeaeeatartII/Ifl “u“: .L t A. ,moeu III.” III.“ 315.“ ILIhatltamsaralacladedlaaxaeasest __a| selarles ___I) adverttslaa _fl haaetltlaadlaatacters .___II maltlas __c| laclllt' reatel aad attlltles __h| acceaatlae ead leeelclae _Q “DINO! _ ml laveatery _l rearedactlea _a) malateaaaca/Imarevamaatste tacllltles _q llceaeetaesteathera ___.) m __ 0 asalameet malataaeace __ ' audactlaa casts __ i saw aealemeat aarchaees 42. Iaaraxlmately ham mach caaltal Ia carraatlv lavasted la laveatery? 31‘“: 4 : I 4. SI 00.000 + sum none emcee ‘ II. lees the Iaaacy mate a dlstlactlea hetmeea casts ta mahe axlstlae tltles marhet ready aad arlalaal deeelasmaatal/ aredactlaa casts? yes; __ ae 177 «Pleasedescrlhehemerlslsaldeyelesmestalasdsrehatlescestsaremst “MWWMNflm-UUMINIIL tI.lsthermyeterlflseldeeetesmestelceatsrasslred? ___yss: __ 41. nummmmunmmmmmmummm__ II.ltthehsescycharsesalaaasalsstsalasrlcalsrhssdlssthesalaatmetedalsratherthassaylssallsedsercestasa aareyaltlesasdheeslasthehalanewhatlsthatsercestsset—Sh II. Please descrlhe the tee stractare. Itleesthahsascyshasasssdcasacltytereactealchlytaes-the-ssetderelesmestslsthemarhetslace? _alhasalesaadmarhetlstarmatlesaresetrarycsnastaaduactlaslsslew. __ hl Iemewhat. lasasemast recelyes lalrly as-ta-date sales aad marhetlss lslermetles: reactles tlma yarlas. _. cl tea. Iasasemsst has lastalled systems yleldlss lalrly csrrast Istermstles asd last reectles tlma. ItJeestheInheflashsescyehemaudcesacflyteuacteflecflvdyuerthessmdnebsmutslsthe marhatslece? _alhs.Ialaaasdmarhatlsslstsrmatleaansetyerycanastasdnactlestlmelsslem. _flIamemhat. lmhaflssncehutshlysptedabsahsasdmuhaflsslmssdnactbstlmemhs _cltea. lssasememhabatahedsyuemsyhldbslmuycsrnnmermatbaasdteatnacuaume “SID-El PIIIIDSOPII' Ill-simulssdetdesMeflubssasdmarhushuMIMmNusmesudthemuhet? _ I) It. __ hl Iamamhat cl Ts a seed aatest. Ithrasessredectsdeyelesedhaeedeslstarmetlescescerslssthesaedselchssesmarhetsesmests? '08: as It. less the hsescy tahe a whale marhetlss system stem (sassllers. chassels. camsetlters. castemars. astlresmastl ls slasstss lta hsslsess? __ a) la. larhetlss cescestratas es selllss aad serylclss lts lmmadlate castemars. _fl Isms-hat. Iarhetlsstahesaless-termrlavalnachasselsanheashthehslhatlueltertssatssalllssasd sarylclas lmmadlate castemars. _ ct Yes. lsrhatlss tehas a whale marhetlss systems rte! racssalzlss the threats asd essertultles created tar thecemsasyhychasseslsasysartetthesystam. II. lees masasemaat recasslza the lmsertaaca at daslsslss the cemsasy ts serve the seeds asd seats at chases marhats? __ a) Iarhatlss srlmarlly thlshs ls terms at carrest aad saw sradacts ta whammr IIII hey them. _ ht larhatlss thlshs ls terms at serylss a slde raasa at marhats aad seeds wlth easel atlactlresass. _ cl larhetlss thlshs ls terms at miss the seeds asd waste at well-datlsad marhats chases tar thalr less-term srewth asd sretlt setsstlal lsr the Isescy. II less the Isescy sreelde say at the telleerlss serrlcss? _ a) I cestral sss-srlst Ilhrary. __ I The sarchase at sassrlst aresrams tram ether searces. __ cl Issyrlsht cesssltatles aad reslstratlas. _ s lsstractlesel derelasmest cesseltatlas. __ a) lesetlatles at cestracts wlth estslda dlstrlhstars. __ 0 Research ether thas marhet research. ._ s) Bearses mhlch sassrate stadest credlt hears. fl 8emlsars aad werhshass tar tacslty. I) Pahllcatlas at heahs slthest accemsasylss sassrlst camsssests. 51. la the hsescy ahle ta medlty Its sellcles. ll secessary te slye castemers what they seed. whee they seed It? yes: se APPEND I X 5 Relevant Definitions APPENDIX 5 RELEVANT DEFINITIONS Adaptive organization - one that operates systems for monitoring and interpreting important environmental changes and shows a readiness to revise its mission, objectives, strategies, organization, and systems to be maximally aligned with its opportunities (Kotler, 1982:76). Adequate marketing information - a component of the marketing orientation. It involves sufficient, timely, and adequate information to allow management to make decisions concerning the allocation of resources to ensure greatest marketing effectiveness. Available market - the set of consumers who have an interest, income, and access to a particular market offer (Kotler, 1982:198). Competitivegpositioning — the art of developing and communicating meaningful differences between your offer and those of your competitors (Kotler, 1982:166). Concentration strategy - a strategy which concentrates resources in the strongest markets while phasing out efforts elsewhere (Kotler, 1982:301). Consumerism - a social movement seeking to increase the rights and powers of buyers in relation to sellers (Kotler, 1977:49). Continuation strategy - the organization continues its past marketing strategies, i.e. same market segments, pricing, channels, and promotion (Kotler, 1982:301). Co ri ht - ”Original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device (Public Law 94-533, Section 201b, Oct. 19, 1976)." Client-centered philosophy - the key component to the marketing orientation. Requires that all of the Agency's efforts and resources be directed to satisfying identified client needs and wants. Decision evaluation - the third stage of the consumer buying process which involves the application of various 178 179 evaluation procedures by consumers to make choices among multiattributional objects (Boyd, Ray, and Strong, 1972:27). Decision execution - the fourth stage of the consumer buying process which involves the identification of the method by which the consumer is most likely to carry through his/her decision to buy (Fishbein, 1967:477). Direct attitude survey - a sample of potential customers who are interviewed about whether or not they would buy the offer at a given price (Kotler, 1982:314). Diseconomies of scale - the increased coordination, com- munication costs associated with large organizations where errors and breakdowns increase to off-set the theoretical advantages of "economies of scale (Williamson, 1975)." Economies of scale - the theoretical cost advantages gained by having large, centralized organizations rather than small, duplicative ones (Williamson, 1975). Entrepreneurial organization - an organization with high motivation and capabilities to identify new opportunities and take advantage of them by turning them into successful businesses (Kotler, 1982:113). Full cost recovery - a pricing strategy applied with the objective of breaking even each year. Service is provided to the extent that revenues cover costs (Kotler, 1982:271). Information gathering - the second stage of the consumer buying process which involves the identification of what the consumer is likely to do to gain additional_ information concerning a product (Kelman and Hovland, 1953:327). Integrated organization - a component of the marketing orientation. It involves the ability of the staff to work cooperatively and in coordination with others to carry out the marketing functions of analysis, planning, implemen- tation, and control. This includes the new product develop- ment process. Internal records system - a system which holds the in- formation accumulated in the regular course of an organiza- tion's operation (Kotler, 1982:152). Market - a distinct group of people and/or organizations that have resources which they want to exchange for some- thing of distinct benefit to themselves (Kotler, 1982:56). Marketing - "...is the analysis, planning, implementa- tion, and control of carefully formulated programs to bring about voluntary exchange of values with target markets for 180 the purpose of achieving organizational objectives. It relies heavily on designing the organization's offering in terms of the target market's needs and desires, and on using effective pricing, communication, and distribution to inform, motivate, and serve markets (Kotler, l982:6).” Marketing agency - a formal organization within a uni- versity's structure with the primary purpose of marketing the non-print copyrighted materials developed by the faculty and staff of the institution as part of or as the result of their employment. Marketing audit - ”...a comprehensive, systematic, inde- pendent, and periodic examination of an organization's marketing environment, objectives, and recommending a plan of action to improve the organization's marketing perform- ance (Kotler, Gregor, and Rodgers, 1977:25).” Marketing information system - a continuing and inter- acting structure of people, equipment, and procedures designed to gather, sort, analyze, and distribute pertinent, timely, and accurate information for use by marketing decision makers to improve their marketing planning, execu- tion, and control (Smith, Brien, and Stafford, 1968:7). Marketing_intelligence system - the set of sources and procedures by which marketing executives obtain their every- day information about developments in the external marketing environment (Kotler, 1982:154). Marketing mix - the particular blend of controllable marketing variables that the firm uses to achieve its objec- tives in the target market (Kotler, 1982:108). Marketing opportunity - an attractive arena of relative marketing action in which a particular marketing organiza- tion is likely to enjoy superior competitive advantages (Kotler, 1982:87). Marketing oriented - the main task of the organization is to determine the needs and wants of target markets and to satisfy them through the design, communication, pricing, and delivery of appropriate and competitively viable products and services (Kotler, 1982:22). Marketing research - the systematic design, collection, analysis, and reporting of data and findings relevant to a specific marketing situation or problem facing the organiza- tion (Kotler, 1982:156). Marketing strategy - the selection of a target mar- ket(s), the choice of a competitive position, and the devel- opment of an effective marketing mix to reach and serve the 181 chosen customers. Also, the fundamental marketing logic by which an organizational unit intends to achieve its market- ing objectives (Kotler, 1982:103 & 180). Market test - a procedure by which the price is changed temporarily or in one segment of the market so that the results can be observed (Kotler, 1982:315). Need arousal - the first stage of the consumer buying process whichiinvolves the identification of the needs and wants of the consumer which gives rise to an interest in buying the product (Kotler, 1982:247). Qperational efficiency - a component of the marketing orientation. It involves the optimal use of resources, the cost effective implementation of plans, and the ability to react quickly, and effectively to on-the-spot development in the marketplace. Partial cost recovery - a pricing strategy which acknow- ledges that there is no reasonable price and marketing expenditure level which would bring the organization close to the breakeven point, and the pricing objective is to keep the organization from exceeding a certain deficit amount each year (Kotler, 1982:271). Postdecision assessment - the last stage of the consumer buying process which involves the analysis of how the consumer's experience with the product affects subsequent attitude and behavior toward the product (Donnelly and Ivancevich, 1970:400). ' Producer satisfaction maximization - a pricing objective which seeks to satisfy the needs of the staff of the organi- zation over the needs of the client (Etgar and Ratchford, 1974). Product - anything which can be offered to a market to satisfy a need. It can include physical objects, services, persons, places, organizations, and ideas. \Other names for a product would be offer, value package, or benefit bundle (Kotler, 1982:291). Product oriented - the major task of an organization is to put out products which it thinks would be good for the public (Kotler, 1982:21). Production oriented - the major task of the organization is to pursue efficiency in production and distribution (Kotler, 1982:21). 182 Public - a distinct group of people and/or organizations that has an actual or potential interest and/or impact on the organization (Kotler, 1982:47). Responsive organization - an organization that makes every effort to sense, serve, and satisfy the needs and wants of its clients and publics within the constraints of its budget (Kotler, 1982:33). Revenue maximization - a pricing objective which has the objective of maximizing total revenues regardless of increased expenses (Kotler, 1982:270). ' Sales or Sellingyoriented - the main task of the organi- zation is to stimulate the interest of potential consumers in the organization's existing products and services (Kotler, 1982:22). Satisfaction - a state felt by a person who has exper- ienced a performance or outcome that has fulfilled his/her expectations (Kotler, 1982:67). Societal orientation - the main task of the organization is to determine the needs, wants, and interests of target markets and to adapt the organization to delivering satis- factions which preserve and/or enhance the consumer's and society's well-being (Kotler, 1982:22). ‘ Strategic orientation - a component of the marketing orientation which involves the setting of goals, objectives, and formulating both annual and long-range plans for reach- ing those goals. Includes planning for contingencies which may occur so that the Agency can optimize or minimize the effects. Strategic planning - the managerial process of develop- ing and maintaining a strategic fit between the organiza- tion‘s goals and resources, and its changing marketing opportunities (Kotler, 1982:83). Surplus maximization - a pricing strategy where the objective is to maximize revenue over expenses, i.e. profit (Kotler, 1982:270). Target markets - a selection of one or more specific segments from the total available markets to serve rather than trying to serve all markets. Those selected are segments most likely to allow the organization to reach its goals (Kotler, 1982:? a 17). Transaction costs - the costs of communication, coordin- ation, and decision making which usually far exceed deter— mined economies of scale (Williamson, 1975). 183 Usage maximization - a pricing objective which seeks to maximize the usage of the service or product (Kotler, 1982:270). Usage targeting - pricing is set to fill a.fixed capa- city. If the service is under-utilized, the price is lowered; if the service is over-utilized, the price is increased to decrease usage (Rotler, 1982:271). '5»