| Abstract: | The purpose of this study was to determine, through a questionnaire, the actual and ideal roles and responsibilities of chief development officers in public and private institutions of higher education. More specifically, the objectives of the study were to determine if significant differences existed among and between chief development officers at public and private institutions and whether significant differences existed among those same chief development officers with regard to their years of development experience, levels of education, and size of employing institution. Data were received from 78% of the 230 (114 public and 116 private) chief development officers who represented the nationwide sample. Analysis of variance was used to test seven null hypotheses, which were formulated from the objectives established for the study. Scheffe tests were performed on six of the null hypotheses to determine if significant differences existed between groups. The respondents revealed in the study that public and private chief development officers have more in common than they have differences. On only six of the 39 descriptors did they show any significant differences in terms of the actual tasks they performed. However, there does seem to indicate in these six tasks a more aggressive approach on the part of private chief development officers to the identification and solicitation of donors for planned giving. The data also revealed that public chief development officers are opting for a more expanded role than they have played in the past. This may be attributed to the importance they attached to their ideal roles and responsibilities. Evidence of this importance is found in the 10 tasks found significant at the .01 and .05 confidence levels when their mean perceptions were compared to the mean perceptions of their private sector counterparts. Some of these dealt with university-business relations, presentations to private corporate boards, and advice to donors about living trusts... |
|---|