Alternativas de diseño

One of the limitations of this study was with reference to the quality of the available data on prospective study participants. It was, by example, not possible prior to the interviews held, to determine if participants were donors to one of the constituent universities that made up the NMMU. This limitation may have inadvertently provided an interesting insight in that it made it impossible to disqualify participants who were previously donors to one of the constituent institutions. In the event, it turned out that almost all the participants were in fact donors to the constituent institution they were from.

48 The finding that current non-donors were mostly donors before was made evident in the coding analysis through reference to the following coding results:

Coding Result Interpretation

Alumni engagement, at first not now (15). Most alumni were engaged, including through giving, for some time after their studies concluded.

Giving, constituent organisation (2). Some of the participants were donors to the constituent organisation they studied at.

This study also broadly confirmed the relationship between positive study experiences and a propensity to be engaged as an alumnus, including as a donor.

Coding Result Interpretation

Alumni engagement, at first not now (15) COOCCURENT with student experiences, social positive (4).

There is a significant relationship between positive social experiences and alumni future engagement with the institution, including as a donor.

It was previously shown in this study that prior research has demonstrated that positive student experiences make alumni more likely to become donors. This highlights that we cannot assume that because people are non-donors therefore they must have had a bad study experience.

A participant in the study who was not a prior donor was Autumn (Autumn, 2010) who retained a very negative social construct at least of her experience in residence.

“I think the first thing that I remember very, very clearly is I stayed in Res on campus from my first year and I found that actually extremely unpleasant.”

“I think also something that particularly sticks with me is the first week or so of an initiation process at the residence, which I also found extremely unpleasant and unnecessary, which involved having to dress up in student outfits, at one point having to go out, being woken up and having to go out, off somewhere in the middle of the night and find your way back, these kinds of ridiculous things, although I actually didn’t take part in which, I think shakes my position in my particular faculty, my particular group, as being very much an outsider, not wanting to take part.”

This high level of detailed recollection of a negative social experience is consistent with findings in prior studies on the persistence and influence, as well as negative impact on donor behavior, of negative social constructs of university life (Caboni & Eiseman, 2003) (Mael & Ashforth, 1992) (Murphy, 2000).

All the other participants who were donors to the constituent institutions reported positive university experiences.

Malcolm, who was an initial donor, reported:

49 “So my time at university sport-wise, academic-wise, socially, was not to be missed and I can recommend that to anybody if that is the case and style that can prevail at any university.”

This is a good reflection of the views of those who were initial donors to the constituent institution. Past donors share two prominent reasons for not giving anymore – A loss of contact and a feeling of not being wanted by the institution. These findings are supported by the coded results, in particular:

Coding Result Interpretation

Giving, future maybe (14) COOCCURENT with giving not asked (5) AND obstacles to engagement, no contact (4).

Those alumni who are open to considering future giving are reporting “not being asked” and not being in contact with the university as major obstacles to their future engagement, including giving.

Giving, not asked (14) COCCURRENT with giving, future maybe (5) AND obstacles to engagement, no contact (12).

There is a high level of reporting by participants of not being asked to give and the fact that they have not been asked is a very important reason in their decision not to give.

Obstacles to engagement, not wanted (22) COOCCURRENT with NMMU identity, negative identification (7).

There is a very significant relationship between the feeling of not being wanted by the NMMU and a negative perception of the NMMU.

Christo (Christo, 2010) reported his experience:

“I became a regular donor for the University, not that we had lots of money to donate but just your contribution…”

“…you tend to carry on with your own life and in my case I think it’s a question of you know you did very little contact and it’s something that, I wouldn’t say that died but that stopped…”

Kobus (Kobus, 2010) had a similar story:

“I also contributed financially on an annual basis until I stopped receiving correspondence from UPE in this regard”

“Since contact was broken off years ago, I just never got around to following up.”

The issue of broken contact, severed as it is perceived, by the university rather than by the alumnus, takes one into the perception amongst alumni of no longer being wanted by the NMMU. None of the participants failed to express some notion of not being wanted. This is supported by coding analysis that shows that:

Coding Result Interpretation

Obstacles to engagement, not wanted (22). All the alumni interviewed expressed some feeling of not being wanted.

On this, Kobus (Kobus, 2010)held that:

“NMMU needs to re-establish (“build”) ties with the “UPE Alumni” and re-orientate them to become part of the new NMMU “community” to which they may not feel as attached.”

50 Other participants were more emotional. Malcolm (Malcolm, 2010) felt excluded and said:

“I attended a seminar, a discussion by the top brass of NMMU, when they changed rectors and the statement that was made, and we actually went up afterwards to discuss the point at that point in time, and it was boldly stated, and I stated that to the Marketing Committee of NMMU later on, on two occasions at school here as well as at the site at NMMU, was the policy that was vocally mentioned over a microphone to a very (I thought) excluded group of prominent people in the city, was that there is no real place for the Afrikaans student”

The issue of not feeling wanted was not limited to a particular political point of view. Some of the views were more personal. Hendrik felt that:

“For my part no, as I said if they can - I will be more than willing if somebody contacted me… Well, I would think in a case like that they can contact you and tell you listen here, we’re now collecting money for this or this thing, and if you feel like listen here, you could help somebody else to better their lives and get things done quicker that side, then I would say ja, if it speaks to me then I will definitely give money for the process, whatever it might be…Nobody has ever asked me, ja...Nobody contacted me or anything after I’ve left.”