The Impact of Development Office Structure on Fund-Raising Efficiency for Research and Doctoral Institutions

By Grunig, Stephen D. | Journal of Higher Education, November-December 1995 | Go to article overview

The Impact of Development Office Structure on Fund-Raising Efficiency for Research and Doctoral Institutions


Grunig, Stephen D., Journal of Higher Education


Introduction

Concurrent with the recent increased growth of college and university fund-raising efforts, many development offices have explored alternative organizational structures. Instead of the traditional centralized development office which performs fund raising on behalf of the institution as a whole, some institutions have begun to decentralize their development activities by assigning constituent personnel to raise funds exclusively for individual college units (for example, the college of engineering or the athletic department). Many development administrators believe that decentralized development programs have distinct advantages over previous centralized forms. Some frequently mentioned benefits include the ability to capitalize on feelings of alumni loyalty to individual colleges rather than to monolithic institutions and more active participation in fund-raising problem solving by individual college units. These advantages are often believed to result in greater efficiency for decentralized fund-raising organizations.

Past Research

Organizational theorists have proposed that the special attributes of higher educational organizations lead them to adopt unique forms of administrative control and organizational structure [3, 6, 21, 25]. March and Olsen [19] and Weick [29] have proposed that educational organizations have "loosely coupled" internal structures; that is, the formal structures of educational institutions are largely disconnected from their technical activities, and activities are disconnected from effects. These structures arise because the success of educational organizations is determined by their ability to conform to ritual categories in the institutional environment, not by their outputs [20]. Changes in the organizational structures of higher educational institutions are most likely to occur in response to changes in the institutional environment rather than as a result of organizational growth or changes in technology.

Institutional theories of higher education are primarily concerned with explaining the relationships between the institutional environments of educational organizations, their structures, and the main activities of these organizations, instruction [20]. Yet, there are important differences between college development offices and instructional units. Unlike instructional units, development offices are profit-oriented organizations. The technology of college development is more clearly understood than the technology of college instruction; development programs have a relatively close correspondence between activities (solicitation) and outputs (money raised). Although the confidence of members of the institutional environment is important, the success of development organizations is primarily judged by the amount of money they raise. Palmer, Jennings, and Zhou [22] suggest that institutional forces are present, to some extent, even in the structural reorganization of conventional business firms; yet, they also emphasize the importance of other determinants of organizational change for profit-oriented enterprises. Thus, it may be helpful to seek alternative explanations for development office reorganization.

Theoretical Framework

Organizational Form and Profitability

Lawrence and Lorsch [15] proposed that organizational differentiation (decentralization) is a natural consequence of increased environmental complexity and dynamism. Because managers have a limited span of surveillance, organizations performing diverse tasks in unstable and heterogeneous environments must split into multiple operating units in order to perform effectively. Decentralization enables managers of each unit to react more appropriately to the specific demands of their external environments. The authors found that for organizational units performing complex tasks in dynamic and heterogeneous environments, increased decentralization was associated with increased performance. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • A full archive of books and articles related to this one
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Impact of Development Office Structure on Fund-Raising Efficiency for Research and Doctoral Institutions
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

    Already a member? Log in now.