University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Joseph Wharton Scholars Wharton Undergraduate Research 5-2020 University Community Engagement and Its Effect on University Brand Image Lina Shi linashi@wharton.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.edu/joseph_wharton_scholars Part of the Advertising and Promotion Management Commons, Business and Corporate Communications Commons, Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, Educational Leadership Commons, Higher Education Commons, Marketing Commons, and the Nonprofit Administration and Management Commons Recommended Citation Shi, L. "University Community Engagement and Its Effect on University Brand Image," Joseph Wharton Scholars. Available at https://repository.edu/joseph_wharton_scholars/86 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons.edu/joseph_wharton_scholars/86 For more information, please contact repository@pobox. University Community Engagement and Its Effect on University Brand Image Abstract With rising competition between universities in recent years, higher education institutions face increasing pressure to establish a positive brand image among students, faculty, and other university stakeholders for a competitive advantage.
While there have been numerous studies showing how corporations’ brand images have been positively affected by corporate social responsibility initiatives, there are few that establish the effect of university community engagement on university brand image. This study uses a mixed-methods approach involving a secondary data analysis, a case study that includes interviews with administrators on the University of Pennsylvania and the Netter Center’s community engagement endeavors and branding, and a survey of 337 US college freshmen and sophomores to examine (i) the current levels of community engagement across universities, (ii) the use of community engagement in current university branding, and (iii) the role that university community engagement plays in affecting students’ brand images of universities. The combination of Carnegie Classification and Campus Compact designation data identifies trends of current university community engagement levels segmented by ranking. The case study provides an example on how a high engagement research university incorporates values of community engagement explicitly and implicitly in current university branding.
Survey results show that university community engagement has a statistically significant effect on branding, and that low engagement creates negative effects while high engagement produces positive effects on university brand image; additionally, results show differences in significance of community engagement with segmentation based on demographics and factor level preferences. Based on the research described, this study identifies what Penn, the Netter Center, and other higher education institutions could do to more successfully connect branding and community engagement. Keywords community engagement, communication, higher education, branding, brand image, media, university brand Disciplines Advertising and Promotion Management | Business and Corporate Communications | Education | Educational Administration and Supervision | Educational Leadership | Higher Education | Marketing | Nonprofit Administration and Management This thesis or dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.edu/joseph_wharton_scholars/ 86 University Community Engagement and Its Effect on University Brand Image Lina Shi An Undergraduate Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Joseph Wharton Scholars Faculty Advisor: Ira Harkavy Associate Vice President and Founding Director of the Barbara and Edward Netter Center for Community Partnerships The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania May 2020 Table of Contents 1 Abstract 2 2 Introduction 3 3 Literature Review 7 3.1 Brand Image in Higher Education 7 3.2 Community Engagement in Higher Education 9 3.3 University Community Engagement and Branding 13 4 Research Question and Hypothesis 16 5 Methodology 17 5.1 Secondary Data Analysis 17 5.2 Case Study: The University of Pennsylvania 18 5.4 Survey Design 19 6 Findings and Analysis 23 6.1 Current University Community Engagement Levels 23 6.2 Community Engagement in Current Branding 27 6.1 Overview of Community Engagement at Penn 27 6.2 Current University Branding 34 6.3 Implications of Current University Branding 37 6.3 Effect of Community Engagement on Branding Perceptions 49 7 Limitations 58 8 Recommendations and Conclusions 61 9 References 65 10 Appendix 74 1 1 Abstract With rising competition between universities in recent years, higher education institutions face increasing pressure to establish a positive brand image among students, faculty, and other university stakeholders for a competitive advantage. While there have been numerous studies showing how corporations’ brand images have been positively affected by corporate social responsibility initiatives, there are few that establish the effect of university community engagement on university brand image.
This study uses a mixed-methods approach involving a secondary data analysis, a case study that includes interviews with administrators on the University of Pennsylvania and the Netter Center’s community engagement endeavors and branding, and a survey of 337 US college freshmen and sophomores to examine (i) the current levels of community engagement across universities, (ii) the use of community engagement in current university branding, and (iii) the role that university community engagement plays in affecting students’ brand images of universities. The combination of Carnegie Classification and Campus Compact designation data identifies trends of current university community engagement levels segmented by ranking. The case study provides an example on how a high engagement research university incorporates values of community engagement explicitly and implicitly in current university branding. Survey results show that university community engagement has a statistically significant effect on branding, and that low engagement creates negative effects while high engagement produces positive effects on university brand image; additionally, results show differences in significance of community engagement with segmentation based on demographics and factor level preferences.
Based on the research described, this study identifies what Penn, the Netter Center, and other higher education institutions could do to more successfully connect branding and community engagement. 2 2 Introduction Competition between universities has been rising in recent years, exacerbated by an expected decline in the college-age population and a strained business model even with rising tuition.1 Since operations between schools are often quite similar, prospective students may have difficulty differentiating between universities. There are many factors to consider given a plethora of university options, which may result in students forming university brand consideration sets.2 In this current competitive landscape of student recruitment, higher education institutions face increasing pressure to establish a strong, positive brand image that could attract students during the decision process. Concurrently, universities are still grappling with their core purposes in this evolving modern world.
The role of universities is historically tied to the nature of its intellectual and educational objectives, which lends its contribution to society to be more public-spirited, geared towards inspiring participatory democracy and civic engagement.3 As a general tradition, there has always been a sense that universities should “‘belong’ to all members of the community” and serve the public good, as stated by reformer John Dewey.4 Yet while higher education institutions may have civically minded principles, these responsibilities may be lost as universities shift focus to being a 1 Gephardt, Dennis M, and Kendra Smith. “Moody's: Small but Notable Rise Expected in Closures, Mergers for Smaller US Colleges. Moody's Corporation, September 25, 2015.com/research/Moodys-Small-but-notable-rise-expected-in-closures- mergers-for--PR_335314., Gurumurthy Kalyanaram, Murali Chandrashekaran, and Ronald J. “Brand Retrieval, Consideration Set Composition, Consumer Choice, and the Pioneering Advantage.” Journal of Consumer Research 20, no.
A Larger Sense of Purpose: Higher Education and Society.): Princeton University Press, 2005, (13-20). 4 Benson, Lee, Ira Richard. Harkavy, and John L. Dewey's Dream: Universities and Democracies in an Age of Education Reform Civil Society, Public Schools, and Democratic Citizenship.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2007, (84). 3 means to “prepare students for jobs.”5 The model of a “neoliberal entrepreneurial institution [leads] to the widespread sense that.college is exclusively used to gain career-related skills and credentials” and has “severe negative impacts on both research and education for the public good.”6 Especially with the current COVID-19 crisis demonstrating the need for universities to benefit public good, there has been a wave of educational reformers who seek to “radically transform the research university to advance the….implementation of knowledge” to benefit communities and the world.7 This push has brought into focus the role of university community engagement, which can serve to be mutually beneficial and transformative for universities and communities. Although there have been studies about brand image and community engagement in the context of higher education, these disciplines have remained mostly independent, despite how these areas of research could benefit each other. Given the extensive research on the effect of corporate social responsibility on brand image for for-profit companies, investigation of this effect in higher education is necessary.
Additionally, the current amount, usage in branding, and perceptions of university community engagement have not been extensively researched, suggesting that there may be potential opportunities that universities are currently missing. Current university branding often focuses on selling rankings and “unparalleled” undergraduate experiences that suggest exclusivity and eliteness.8 These same universities are now 5 Berrett, Dan. “The Day the Purpose of College Changed.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.com/article/The-Day-the-Purpose-of-College/151359. 6 Harkavy, Ira, Sjur Bergan, Tony Gallagher, and Hilligje van't Land.
“Universities Must Help Shape the Post-COVID-19 World.” University World News. 7 Benson, Lee, Ira Harkavy, John Puckett, and Matthew Hartley. Knowledge for Social Change: Bacon, Dewey, and the Revolutionary Transformation of Research Universities in the Twenty-First Century. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2017. “Positioning for Prestige in American Higher Education: Case Studies of Strategies at Four Public Institutions toward ‘Getting to the next Level.’” In Building Organizational Capacity: Strategic Management in Higher Education.
Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 2008. 4 under fire for athletics bribery scandals,9 for unfair admissions policies, which act as “engines of inequality” and appear to discriminate by socioeconomic status, race, and legacy status,10 and for heavily pre-professional post-graduation outcomes, which are at odds with the more altruistic missions of universities.11 Thus, perhaps a different method of branding that emphasizes their impact on society would benefit university brand images. A better understanding of how university community engagement can affect university brand image will inform university administrators on how to have more effective branding and university-community partnerships. The purpose of my research is to explore how Penn, the Netter Center, and other universities can more effectively link community engagement and brand image.
This thesis seeks to examine: (i) the current levels of community engagement across universities, (ii) the use of community engagement in current university branding, (iii) and the role that university community engagement plays in affecting students’ brand images of universities. This paper will first examine the relevant literature on community engagement and brand image, and explore the effects of these constructs on each other in the context of both the corporate world and higher education. Then, objectives will be analyzed using a mixed-methods approach that involves both quantitative research, including a survey of current undergraduate students and 9 Anderson, Nick, and Susan Svrluga. “Bribery Scandal Points to the Athletic Factor: A Major Force in College Admissions.” The Washington Post.com/local/education/bribery-scandal-points-to-the-athletic-factor-a-major-force-in-colleg e-admissions/2019/06/12/b2fc39dc-7e3a-11e9-8bb7-0fc796cf2ec0_story.
“Some Colleges Have More Students From the Top 1 Percent Than the Bottom 60.” The New York Times.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent -than-the-bottom-60. “The Lower Ambitions of Higher Education.” The New York Times.com/2014/08/13/books/excellent-sheep-william-deresiewiczs-manifesto. 5 community engagement designation data, and qualitative research, including research interviews and a case study of the University of Pennsylvania. From these methods, this paper will discuss results, analysis, implications, and recommendations.
6 3 Literature Review This review contains three sections. Section I will explore brand image in the context of higher education. Section II will provide an overview of university community engagement in terms of definition and contemporary evaluation mechanisms. Section III will connect the two, discussing how social impact initiatives have positively affected the brand image of corporations, which reinforce studies on the positive reputational effects of university community engagement.
This review will provide context and justification for my research questions and hypotheses.1 Brand Image in Higher Education For prospective students, universities can only promote tangible information, such as rankings and academic program details, but cannot fully explain their experiential value propositions. However, studies show that prospective students utilize both tangible and intangible factors, such as university brand image and personal preferences, to inform their decisions on which university to attend.12 Since intangible factors serve as mental shortcuts in the decision-making process for prospective students, universities have expanded their integrated marketing techniques to bolster branding and promotional efforts.13 As an important marketing concept since the 1950s, brand image is “both a concrete and an abstract expression.”14 In the traditional marketing sense, brand image reflects consumer perceptions 12 Durvasula, Srinivas, Steven Lysonski, and A.