Universities and colleges--United States--Administration

This study investigated the practice of enrollment management in public Research Universities. The study produced six key findings. First, the number of Research universities with an enrollment management plan is slightly lower than universities without a plan. Second, the Enrollment Management Division was the most prevalent organizational structure created. Third, increasing overall enrollment and improving graduation rates were chosen most frequently by the universities as their most important goals. Fourth, technology and physical structure strategies were utilized the most for recruitment. And, policies and procedures strategies were used the most for retention. Fifth, the strategies most frequently used were identified and discussed in greater detail. Finally, four to five was the average number of functional areas involved in the implementation of any goal. The study supports that an enrollment management plan must be unique for each institution and provides considerations for practitioners and leaders of higher education. However, it raises question to the need for a formal written enrollment management plan for success and to the relationship between strategic planning and enrollment management.

In the fields of organizational studies and business management there has been a growing emphasis on the practice of knowledge management (KM)---the process of generating, codifying, and transferring information assets for increased organizational performance. This once-theoretical discipline is expanding into other sectors such as higher education institutions. The purpose of this study was to (a) assess the use of KM and the strategies which further its use in research universities, (b) examine relationships between use and efficiency of the strategies and the effectiveness of KM, (c) develop a classification model for KM effectiveness, and (d) determine the critical success factors for KM effectiveness. A 43-item survey (rating strategies and processes on two dimensions---"use" and "importance") was adapted from a benchmarking tool created by Arthur Andersen Consulting and the American Productivity and Quality Center. The field test concluded that the instrument was reliable (96%) and a panel of experts validated the content (72% agreement rate). The survey was distributed to 1285 administrators at the 257 public and private United States research universities. Three hundred (300) participants from 161 universities responded. The response rate, calculated by number of organizations responding, was 62.6%. Descriptive statistics and inferential analyses (analysis of variance, correlational analysis, and discriminant analysis) were employed. Five key findings were discovered. First, universities demonstrated an above moderate level (above 3 on a 5-point Likert scale) "use" of strategies and a below moderate level "use" of processes. Second, technology was the most implemented strategy, and measurement was the least. Third, notable differences between public and private universities were found regarding use of leadership strategy and transfer process. Fourth, the proposed discriminant model for classifying institutions by KM effectiveness level was 76% accurate. Variance in KM Effectiveness ranged from 46.6% (measurement) to 30.1% (culture). Finally, the most critical factors for effective KM centered around technology and measurement strategies. Tactics within each of these strategies were further identified to enable higher education leaders to increase KM effectiveness. Other considerations are highlighted for organizations wishing to implement a KM initiative, and recommendations are made for further research.