1. WEMBA Survey December 2003

2. Survey Objectives To determine what variables explain likelihood of passing to each stage of “funnel”: i) Inquire for Information or Attend Information Session ii) Apply to Duke EMBA Program Iii) Accept Duke EMBA Program

3. Sample Description Surveyed 106 people who were interested in the WEMBA program 30 people who Attended an Information Session and Applied – Group 1 24 people who Attended an Information Session and DID NOT Apply – Group 2 26 people who an DID NOT Attend an Information Session and Applied – Group 3 26 people who an DID NOT Attend an Information Session and DID NOT Apply – Group 4

4. Sample Description Surveyed 42 people who Applied were Admitted and Accepted admission offer – Group A Surveyed 14 people who Applied were Admitted and Declined admission offer – Group B Surveyed 50 people who DID NOT Apply – Group D

5. Descriptive Statistics 38 % Did not Apply to any school (yet) 9 % Did not apply to Fuqua, but applied to another 53% applied to Fuqua –20 % Applied to no other school –25 % Applied to 1 other school – 7 % Applied to 2 other schools – 1 % Applied to 3 other schools

6. Descriptive Statistics 18 students Applied to UNC’s WEMBA program 5 students Applied to Emory’s WEMBA program 2 students Applied to Emory’s Modular EMBA 2 students Applied to Chicago EMBA Europe 2 students Applied to Wake Forest Fast-Track EMBA 2 students Applied to Wharton EMBA –East or West Other programs with 1 applicant NWU International EMBA NWU January/September North America Program UNC EMBA Evening NC State MBA

7. Two primary Advantages of Best Alternative over Fuqua 32 – Proximity/ location 26 – Cost 12 – Other 10 – Convenient schedule 8 – Curriculum focus 8 – Curriculum flexibility 5 – Name recognition / reputation 4 – Friendly atmosphere 4 – Networking opportunities 4 – Quality of staff 4 – Rankings

8. Two primary Advantages of UNC WEMBA over Fuqua Out of 17 respondents 7 – Cost 4 – Curriculum flexibility 4 – Friendly atmosphere 3 - Quality of staff 2 - Curriculum focus

9. Two primary Advantages of Emory WEMBA over Fuqua Out of 5 respondents 4 – Proximity/ location 3 – Cost

10. Two Primary Advantages of Fuqua over Best Alternative 45 – Name recognition / reputation 15 - Other 12 – Proximity/ location 11 – Convenient schedule 9 – Rankings 8 – Quality of the Program 6 – Team culture 6 – Quality of students 5 - Curriculum focus 5 – Networking opportunities 4 – Cost urriculum 4 – Flexibility of format 4 – Recommended by friends/alumni/employer

11. Attribute Importance Rank No Ap Ac 1 12 Ability to continue career while going to school 2 21 School reputation recognized wherever I want to work 3 44 Teaching quality 4 33 Program will forward my career 5 65 Faculty reputation for thought leadership 6 9 10 Alumni network 7 88 Ability to time shift course work during the week 8 56 Quality of other students attending 9 77 Core curriculum excellence 10 17 17 Program Cost

12. Attribute Importance Rank No Ap Ac 111011 Innovative use of technology to aid learning 121412 Number and type of electives 1311 9 Mix of face to face and distance learning 141516 Program Selectivity 151315 Location 161613 Global content 171214 Time required to travel to campus

13. Duke and Competitor Rating on Attributes AAttributeDuke rating Best Competitor rating Ability to continue career.96.88 Time Shift.71.61 Time to campus.49.57 Location.71.72 School reputation1.41.73 Faculty reputation1.29.92 Teaching Quality1.08.92 Core Curriculum excellence1.11.94 Number & type of electives.58 -.44

14. Duke and Competitor Rating on Attributes AAttributeDuke rating Best Competitor rating Global content.98.53 Quality of students1.24.76 Innovative use of technology1.05.77 Mix of face to face and Distance.98.74 Selectivity of admissions.82.71 Forwarding Career1.28.91 Alumni Network1.06.78 Price.04.58

15. Differences between those attending an Info Session and applying and those NOT attending and info Session and applying Rating of Duke on location was significantly worse Rating of Duke on number and type of electives was significantly worse Reading of Delta magazine significantly less likely

16. Differences between those attending an Info Session and applying and those attending and Info Session and NOT applying Rating of Duke on number and type of electives was significantly worse Rating of Duke on use of innovative technology was marginally significantly worse Rating of Duke on alumni network was significantly worse Importance of price was marginally significantly less Rating of competitor on global content was significantly less Rating of competitor on ability to continue one’s career was marginally significantly better

17. Differences between those NOT attending an Info Session and applying and those NOT attending and Info Session and NOT applying Rating of competitor on faculty reputation was marginally significantly worse Rating of competitor on teaching quality was significantly worse Rating of competitor on core curriculum excellence was significantly better Rating of competitor on quality of students was marginally significantly worse Rating of competitor on innovative use of technology was significantly worse Rating of competitor on selectivity of admissions was marginally significantly worse

18. Differences between those NOT attending an Info Session and applying and those NOT attending and Info Session and NOT applying Rating of competitor on alumni network was marginally significantly worse Rating of competitor on price was marginally significantly better Reading of Delta magazine was significantly more likely Reading of Forbes magazine was marginally significantly more likely Reading of Fortune magazine was marginally significantly more likely Importance of quality of students was significantly greater

19. Differences between those accepting and those rejecting our offer of admission The weighted average rating of Duke vs the best competitor was significantly higher Reading the local paper was significantly less likely Importance of price was significantly less Importance of mix of face to face and distance was significantly greater Rating of Duke on time to campus was significantly better Rating of Duke on location was marginally significantly better Rating of Duke on school reputation was significantly better Rating of the best competitor on school reputation was significantly worse Rating of the best competitor on faculty reputation was significantly worse

20. Differences between those accepting and those rejecting our offer of admission Rating of Duke on teaching quality was significantly better Rating of Duke on number and type of electives was significantly better Rating of Duke on innovative use of technology was significantly better Rating of Duke on forwarding one’s career was significantly better Rating of best competitor on forwarding one’s career was significantly worse Rating of Duke on alumni network was significantly better Use of phone call to admissions office was marginally significantly less likely Use of campus visit was significantly less likely

21. Media 1.Business Week read by 56% of the sample –59 % of those who applied to Fuqua –61 % of those who applied to other schools –60 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –72 % of those who went to UNC 2.WSJ read by 49% of the sample –50 % of those who applied to Fuqua –57 % of those who applied to other schools –48 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –44 % of those who went to UNC

22. Media 3.Financial Times read by 37% of the sample –45 % of those who applied to Fuqua * –41 % of those who applied to other schools –45 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer** –22 % of those who went to UNC 4.Forbes read by 36% of the sample –46 % of those who applied to Fuqua –55 % of those who applied to other schools –47 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –50 % of those who went to UNC *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

23. Media 5.Fortune read by 36% of the sample –41 % of those who applied to Fuqua –50 % of those who applied to other schools –43 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –50 % of those who went to UNC 6.American Air read by 30% of the sample –30 % of those who applied to Fuqua –34 % of those who applied to other schools –33 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –28 % of those who went to UNC *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

24. Media 7.Economist read by 26% of the sample –34 % of those who applied to Fuqua* –41 % of those who applied to other schools** –33 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –44 % of those who went to UNC* 8.Local Paper read by 24% of the sample –27 % of those who applied to Fuqua –32 % of those who applied to other schools* –19 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer** –33 % of those who went to UNC *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

25. Media 9.USAir read by 13% of the sample –16 % of those who applied to Fuqua –18 % of those who applied to other schools –17 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer –28 % of those who went to UNC** 10.Delta read by 12% of the sample –20 % of those who applied to Fuqua** –16 % of those who applied to other schools –14 % of those who accepted Fuqua’s offer* –33 % of those who went to UNC ** *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

26. Media Business Week, Forbes, Fortune joint readership 75% of the sample read at least one of the three 23 % read BW alone 9 % read Forbes alone 4 % read Fortune alone 12 % read BW and Fortune 5 % read Forbes and Fortune 6 % read BW and Forbes 16 % read all three

27. Information Sources Used 1.School Websites – 1.88 2.Business Publication Rankings – 1.55 3.Program Brochures – 1.30 4.Information Session – 1.11 5.Alumni – 1.05 6.Campus Visit-1.01 7.Business Publication Ads -.94 8.Emails from schools -.92 9.Currents Students -.81 10.Admissions Office -.79 11.MBA Forum -.64 12.Online Ads -.32 13.Corporate HR -.26

28. Information Sources Used School Website – 1.88 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.93 –For those who applied to other schools – 1.36 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 1.90 –For those who went to UNC – 2.00 Business Publication Rankings – 1.55 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.70** –For those who applied to other schools – 1.75** –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer – 1.69 –For those who went to UNC – 1.83

29. Information Sources Used Program Brochures – 1.30 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.21 –For those who applied to other schools – 1.36 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 1.14* –For those who went to UNC – 1.44 Information Session – 1.11 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.23** –For those who applied to other schools – 1.23 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer – 1.21 –For those who went to UNC – 1.33

30. Information Sources Used Alumni – 1.05 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.20** –For those who applied to other schools – 1.20** –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer – 0.91 –For those who went to UNC – 1.33 Campus Visit – 1.01 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.38** –For those who applied to other schools – 1.20* –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer – 1.24** –For those who went to UNC – 1.50**

31. Information Sources Used Business Publication Ads – 0.94 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 0.89 –For those who applied to other schools – 1.07 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 0.90 –For those who went to UNC – 1.67 Emails from Schools -.92 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 0.98* –For those who applied to other schools – 0.98 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 0.87** –For those who went to UNC – 0.82 *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

32. Information Sources Used Current Students – 0.81 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 0.96** –For those who applied to other schools – 0.93** –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 0.90 –For those who went to UNC – 1.11* Admissions Office – 0.79 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 1.04** –For those who applied to other schools – 1.00** –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 0.95* –For those who went to UNC – 1.06 *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

33. Information Sources Used MBA Forum – 0.64 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 0.49** –For those who applied to other schools – 0.55 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer - 0.48* –For those who went to UNC – 0.41 Online Ads - 0.32 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 0.27 –For those who applied to other schools – 0.28 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer – 0.24 –For those who went to UNC – 0.17 *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

34. Information Sources Used Corporate HR – 0.26 –For those who applied to Fuqua – 0.27 –For those who applied to other schools – 0.28 –For those who accepted Fuqua’s offer – 0.24 –For those who went to UNC – 0.17 *- Marginally significant – p<.10 ** -Significant – p<.05

35. Predicting Who Attends an Information Session The importance of location (.67) and the importance of the faculty reputation (.67) are related to whether one attends an information session at Fuqua. The more important these two attributes are, the more likely one was to attend an information session. This function correctly classified 73% of the respondents. Extensive use of information sessions (.84) and business publication rankings (.37) are related to whether on attends an information session. The more heavily these sources of information were used the more likely one was to attend an information session. This function correctly classified 63% of the respondents.

36. Predicting Who Applies to Fuqua Extensive use of campus visits (.67) and the Admissions office (.53) are related to whether one applies to Fuqua. The more heavily these sources of information were used the more likely one was to apply to Fuqua. This function correctly classified 81% of the respondents.

37. Predicting Who Attends Fuqua, UNC or not The importance of price loaded highly (.59) was related to whether one attends Fuqua, attends UNC, or not. The more important price was the more likely one was to attend UNC. The means on this function were.46 for those not attending either Fuqua or UNC, -.79 for those attending Fuqua and.90 for those attending UNC Weekend. This function correctly classified 72% of the respondents.

38. Predicting Who Attends Fuqua, UNC or not Importance weight * (Duke’s rating – Best Alt rating) Faculty reputation (.56) and forwarding one’s career (.54) were related to whether one attends Fuqua, UNC or not. The higher the score on these two factors the more likely one was to attend Fuqua. The means on this function were -.93 for those not attending either Fuqua or UNC, 1.66 for those attending Fuqua and –1.45 for those attending UNC Weekend. This function correctly classified 82% of the respondents.

39. Predicting Who Attends Fuqua, UNC or not Extensive use of campus visits (.57) and the Admissions office (.49) were related to whether one attends Fuqua, attends UNC, or not. The more heavily these sources were used the more likely one was to attend UNC. The means on this function were -.64 for those not attending either Fuqua or UNC,.58 for those attending Fuqua and 1.24 for those attending UNC Weekend. This function correctly classified 67% of the respondents.

40. Predicting Who Attends Fuqua, UNC or not Reading Delta Air magazine (.72) was related to whether one attends Fuqua, attends UNC, or not. Those using this medium were more likely to attend UNC. The means on this function were -.43 for those not attending either Fuqua or UNC,.12 for those attending Duke, and 2.35 for those attending UNC.

41. Pricing Issue The importance of price (.59) was related to whether one attends Fuqua, UNC or not. The more important price was the more likely one was to attend UNC. The means on this function were.46 for those not attending either Fuqua or UNC, -.79 for those attending Fuqua and.90 for those attending UNC Weekend. This function correctly classified 59% of the respondents.

42. Pricing Issue When price importance is alone in the model, it is highly significant. It alone correctly classifies 59% of the students. The coefficient on price importance is 1.19. When one includes percentage of cost that the student pays along with price importance, both price importance (.86) and percentage pay (.62) are related. The coefficient on price importance drops to.95 and the model correctly classifies 62% of the students. Similar analyses were conducted for whether or not one applies to Fuqua. The pattern of results is identical. This suggests that price is important on the decision to attend Duke, even when one controls for the percentage of the cost that a student pays.

43. Comments I don’t know how to quantify it exactly it was the atmosphere from when I was at campus between UNC and Duke. The atmosphere..more friendly when I got into the classrooms people just weren’t friendly at Duke. Lindy was great at Duke but the people in the classrooms weren’t friendly. At UNC people were friendly. I had lunch with the UNC students and I learned more about the UNC program and the UNC professor introduced me and made me feel a lot more at home. life long learning initiative - go back after graduation and take courses for nominal fee

44. Comments staggering of classes for finals so not too heavy on one day I think UNC had formal networking opportunities in a sense they would schedule events and panels and Duke doesn’t have formal program that would allow people to network the classes were more team oriented and more like a family at UNC and Duke there were too many students and hard to feel that. There were only 60 students per class at UNC.

45. Comments Number of electives UNC offered. They offer 8-10 electives. It really impressed me and gave me flexibility and allowed to choose. I felt like UNC administrative staff was more receptive than the Fuqua administrative interns of the admission and staff. More engaging at UNC.