1 / 33

NYCOM Visibility Project

NYCOM Visibility Project. March 2, 2011. The Context for the Conversation. Raising the visibility of the osteopathic medical school in the context of NYIT will benefit the whole and each of its parts Branding NYIT and NYCOM separately is expensive and counterproductive

darius
Download Presentation

NYCOM Visibility Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NYCOM Visibility Project March 2, 2011

  2. The Context for the Conversation • Raising the visibility of the osteopathic medical school in the context of NYIT will benefit the whole and each of its parts • Branding NYIT and NYCOM separately is expensive and counterproductive • We need to find a way to develop NYCOM as a highly visible sub-brand of NYIT

  3. The Committee • Why improve visibility?” • Define audiences • Develop, administer, analyze survey • Brainstorm visibility initiatives • Evaluate initiatives in view of the survey results • Set priorities for action

  4. From the committee

  5. Improving visibility would improve… • Student and faculty quality • Donations • Pride • Prestige • Research support

  6. “Visibility” is not the whole story • “Pride” is critical (students, alumni, faculty), as is • “Reputation” (external audiences)

  7. Survey Research

  8. Goals • Determine baseline awareness, image, and perception of NYCOM in the context of NYIT • Establish key potential messages that reflect audience interests and institutional strengths

  9. Key constituencies for the survey • Current students • Alumni • Faculty (Old Westbury) • Faculty (Clinical) • Faculty (who are alumni as a sub-category)

  10. Survey Samplen= 1,011

  11. Survey results

  12. NYCOM’s Reputation

  13. What is your overall opinion of NYCOM today? • Would you recommend NYCOM to a friend or relative considering osteopathic medicine? • Looking back, how would you rate your decision to attend (work at) NYCOM?

  14. NYCOM Overall

  15. Observations • Perceptions of NYCOM are generally favorable • “Recommend” and “good decision” scores are very high

  16. Elements in Medical School’s Reputation • Student quality • Name recognition • Cutting-edge • Pride • Accomplishments of graduates • Innovative curriculum • Residencies at best hospitals • Research/ other newsworthy output

  17. NYCOM’s Reputational Strengths • Use of technology in teaching and learning • Attractive Long Island location • Clinical experiences and residency placements

  18. NYCOM’s Reputational Weaknesses • Cost • Availability of scholarships • Large classes

  19. NYCOM in the context of NYIT

  20. Respondents feel separate from NYIT “I know NYCOM is part of NYIT but we function almost completely independently. We might as well be separate.”

  21. There is a vocal, resentful minority “NYCOM is too much under NYIT’s thumb.”

  22. But NYIT is better known in the wider community and some make use of the association “Nobody knows what you are talking about when you say NYCOM…I just say I go to medical school at NYIT.”

  23. Committee Conclusions

  24. We must build visibility and reputation to deal with high cost • Students can’t keep paying higher tuition and NYCOM’s cost is its biggest weakness • Visibility, pride, and reputation can help support establishment of new revenue sources

  25. The high opinion about technology is an opportunity • How can we make use of it?

  26. Education isn’t sexy • Medical school visibility is ordinarily linked to its hospital affiliation • Can the high opinion of NYCOM’s clinical experiences and residencies work in a similar fashion?

  27. Are these things enough to build a reputation?

  28. What about the name?

  29. Many constituents are neutral or negative about the name “NYCOM” • Of total respondents, those who are positive are fewer but have stronger feelings (*p<.05)

  30. More than half of students and alumni are pro or neutral about a change (*p<.01) • Campus-based faculty are most opposed

  31. The committee’s view • Building quality and reputation are critical and are the most important things. • If the name is going to change, just go ahead and do it. • A name change should be part of something bigger that will build the visibility and reputation of the school

  32. The consultant’s view • There is much support for a more organized and effective brand strategy • Care must be taken to develop a brand architecture that aligns the NYIT super brand and the NYCOM sub-brand • This architecture must also include a graphic identity that clearly establishes the relationship between NYIT and NYCOM

  33. Next Steps

More Related