We often receive queries about the credibility of our survey responses and whether the response rate accurately reflects the entire alumni population. Concerns arise when surveys are exclusively sent to alumni with email addresses, potentially overlooking those without. Additionally, instead of using a randomly selected stratified sampling method, we typically send surveys to all alumni with emails, raising concerns about representativeness. These concerns are referred to as “selection bias” and “response bias.”
Understanding the purpose of an alumni survey is vital. We aim to understand what motivates alumni engagement and seek as accurate an understanding as possible across various population segments. This provides valuable insights for improved communication, programming, and fundraising. Moreover, the survey serves as an engagement opportunity, unlike other alumni communications that typically request event attendance or support; it simply asks for alumni opinions, signaling care from their alma mater.
Imagine receiving a 10% response rate from 100,000 alumni. These 10,000 respondents eagerly anticipate survey results, considering it a significant alumni event. Moreover, alumni with emails on file, whether respondents or not, become aware that their alma mater values their opinion, particularly if the university conducted pre-survey marketing.
Steven Covey emphasizes seeking opinions as a crucial step in building strong interpersonal relationships. Acknowledging and demonstrating that you’ve listened to opinions is equally essential. This process forms an integral part of our survey model, emphasizing a partnership with alumni.
The engagement potential of an alumni survey is paramount. Offering this feedback opportunity to as many alumni as possible outweighs the risk of needing a fully representative respondent population. While accuracy matters, its importance depends on the intended use of the findings. Accuracy’s significance correlates with the cost of error or research.
Alumni attitudinal research lies between the precision crucial for drug companies’ research and less critical scenarios like TV polls. While universities and colleges will communicate with alumni regardless, the survey aims to enhance these efforts. It targets alumni needs and interests while focusing on various segments within the population.
Although the survey may not mirror the entire alumni population perfectly, it offers a meaningful representation. Over 17 years and numerous surveys conducted with universities and colleges, we’ve identified some differences, especially regarding email and website usage, but found similarities in narratives about actionable issues across respondent groups.
Analyzing respondent demographics compared to the general population reveals disparities, particularly in donor status and graduation years. To comprehend these differences better, we include charts showcasing responses from various alumni groups, aiding in understanding potential oversampling influences.
While the Alumni Attitude Study may not perfectly represent all alumni, it remains a significant and valuable representation. Dismissing engagement opportunities for precision in data resembles sacrificing the good in pursuit of perfection.