大學校院對校務基金捐款者關儕經營之研究－要因分析法的改良與應用

A Study of the Ways of Relationship Management byUniversity to the Donors of School Affairs Fund-ApplyingModified Cause and Effect Diagram with Additional Cards

10.7067/JMU.201112.0091

吳勝傑(Sheng-Chieh Wu)陳美樺(Mei-Hua Chen)；陳美朱(Mei-Chu Chen)

大學校院 ； 捐款者 ； 關係經營 ； 募款 ； university ； donors ； relationship management ； fundraising

美和學報

31卷1期（2011 / 12 / 01）

89 - 114

繁體中文

本研究目的在比較目前大學校院與校務基金捐款者的關係經營方式與實際捐款者認同間差異之情形。研究方法以半結構訪談，來驗證學校與捐款者間關係經營的過程。由研究結果顯示，大學校院與校務基金捐款者的關係經營，依照執行的程序可分為募款前、募款中及募款後三個階段，並將各階段關係經營定義為募款前關係的建立、募款中關係的經營及募款後關係的維繫。本研究並提出大學校院對捐款者關係經營循環概念，將學校與捐款者間雙方形成之關係以一個循環概念圖表示。另外，本研究運用要因分析法（Cause Effect DiagramAnd Cards）的概念，修正其表示方法，比較目前關係經營方式與捐款者認同的差異。主要結論為（一）募款前關係建立的方式學校常以舉辦校慶等活動來建立關係，捐款者則希望以電子郵件定期聯繫，建立關係的對象：學校以校友為主，捐款者則不一定是選擇母校，而重視募款所得用途是否公開透明。（二）募款方式：學校及捐款者都認為舉辦校友會或慶典活動適合進行募款。募款時間點：學校認為校慶時，而捐款者則認為獲得薪資以外的收入時點適合。（三）募款後的回饋機制：學校以慶典公開表揚，捐款者只希望收到感謝函；維繫長期關係的方式：學校以面對面聯誼活動，捐款者較希望以書信為之。

This study examined the ways of relationship management by university to the donors of School Affairs Fund in order to highlight the ways of fundraising easily accepted by donors, and the differences among those ways, and to propose strategies for improving the university/donor relationship. Semi-structural interviews were used in this study, and the interview outline was designed according to the previous literatures and the research objectives. Relationship management was divided into three stages-prior to fundraising, during fundraising, and post fundraising. The relationship management in the stages was defined as the relationship establishment prior to fundraising, the relationship management during fundraising, and relationship maintenance post fundraising, and a diagram was created to show the relationship management. The interview data was summarized to show the differences among schools and donors at the three stages and was presented using a Modified Cause and Effect Diagram with Additional Cards (M-CEDAC). The results were as follows. When establishing a relationship prior to fundraising, schools prefer face-to-face contact with donors by means of special activities. However, donors prefer other forms of contact, such as mail or email. Obviously, donors will choose to avoid the embarrassing situation of talking about contribution amounts. Another focus is the objects of establishing a relationship. Schools prefer to choose alumni, but donors prefer the organization which can use the fund transparently and publicly. The relationship management during fundraising can be presented in two parts. One is the method of raising funds. Schools are inclined to hold alumni reunions, but donors like school celebrations. The other is the timing of fundraising. Schools prefer anniversary celebrations, but donors prefer to contribute when they have extra income. The relationship maintenance post fundraising can also be divided into two parts. One is the feedback mechanism. Schools prefer to give feedback through public acknowledgements during school celebrations; however, donors prefer to receive letters of thanks. The other is the method used to maintain the relationship. Schools prefer to have regular contact through activities; however, donors prefer indirect contact, such as email or mail instead of face-to-face contact.

1. 科技政策研究與資訊中心(2007)。取自http://www.wikipedia.org
2. 教育部(2001)。國立大學校院校務基金設置條例。
3. Conrad, D. L.(1974).Techniques of fundraising.Secaucus, NJ:Lyle Stuart.
4. Flexner, S. B.(1987).The random house dictionary of english language.NewYork:Random House Press.
5. Greenfield, J. M.(1991).Fund-raising: Evaluation and management the fund development process.New York:John Wiley & Sons.
6. Hopkins, B. R.(1996).The law of fund-raising.New York:John Wiley & Sons.
7. Kotler, P.,Fox, K. F. A.(1995).Strategic marketing for educational institutions.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
8. Morgan, M. R.,Hunt, D. S.(1994).The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing.Journal of Marketing,58,20-38.
9. Reilley, T. A.(1985).Raising money through an institutionally related foundation.Washington, DC:Council for Advancement and Support of Education.
10. 石雅惠(1994)。博士論文(博士論文)。國立政治大學教育學系。
11. 石雅惠(1999)。大學校院募款策略。台北市:教育部高等教育司。
12. 何高祿(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。中華大學經營管理研究所。
13. 李佳奇(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。淡江大學企業管理學研究所。
14. 李然堯(1996)。美國學校募款制度之研究。教育資料與研究，9，36-43。
15. 周逸衡(1992)。大學募款之相關研究。台北市:教育部。
16. 林雅莉(1997)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立政治大學公共行政研究所。
17. 林嘉慧(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立政治大學廣告學系。
18. 洪秀枝(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台北師範學院教育政策與管理研究所。
19. 洪麗晴(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立中正大學社會福利研究所。
20. 張志賓(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立中興大學行銷學系。
21. 教育部(2000)。國立大學校院校務基金問答彙編。台北市:教育部中等教育司。
22. 陳愛椿(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立中正大學社會福利研究所。
23. 彭瓊枝(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。銘傳大學公共管理與社區發展研究所。
24. 湯堯(2001)。高等教育經營策略分析以SWOT為例。教育學刊，171，47-161。
25. 湯堯(2001)。學校經營管理策略─大學經費分配、募款與行銷。台北:五南。
26. 湯堯、成群豪(2004)。高等教育經營。台北:高等教育。
27. 黃振剛(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立東華大學環境政策研究所。
28. 黃茹慧(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系。
29. 黃舒琳(2007)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學教育行政與政策發展研究所。
30. 萬育維(1994)。捐款行為之相關因素探究─實證資料的發現與回應。思與言，32(4)，197-217。
31. 董馨梅(1997)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。政治大學教育學系。
32. 謝清隆(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。大葉大學工業關係研究所。