Comparison of Donor Motivations in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I vs Division II

Authors: Soojin Kim, Yongjae Kim

Abstract:

Continuous economic downturn and ongoing budget cuts poses higher education with profound challenges which has a direct impact on the collegiate athletic programs. In response to the ever-changing landscape of the fiscal environment, universities seek to boost revenues, resorting to alternative sources of funding. In particular, athletic programs have become increasingly dependent on financial support from their alumni and boosters, which is how athletic departments attempt to offset budget shortfalls and make capital improvements. Although there currently exists three major divisions within National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the majority of the sport management studies on college sport tend to focus on Division I level. Particularly within the donor motivation literature, a plethora of donor motivation studies exist, but mainly on NCAA Division I athletic programs. Since each athletic department functions differently in a number of different dimensions, while institutional difference can also have a huge impact on athletic donor motivations, the current study attempts to fill this gap that exists in the literature. As such, the purpose of this study was to (I) reexamine the factor structure of the Athletic Donor motivation scale; and (II) identify the prominent athletic donor motives in a NCAA Division II athletic program. For the purpose of this study, a total of 232 actual donors were used for analysis. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed to test construct validity, and the reliability of the scale was assessed using Composite Reliability. To identify the prominent motivational factors, the means and standard deviations were examined. Results of this study indicated that Vicarious Achievement, Philanthropy, and Commitment are the three primary motivational factors, while Tangible Benefits, was consistently found as an important motive in prior studies was found low. Such findings highlight the key difference and suggest different salient motivations exist that are specific to the context.

Keywords: college athletics, donor, motivation, NCAA