design of a recruiter-student connection system using social networking

Mary BarthelsonIssam Boumlic

Souheil El-HageUmmer Shamma

Sponsored by STEMlete LLC

Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System

Using Social Networking

Agenda

• Context• Stakeholder Analysis• Scope• Gap Analysis• Problem Statement• Win-Win Analysis• Need Statement• Requirements• Possible Solutions• Simulation • Project Plan

Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research SYST 490 – 2013 Design of Recruiter – Student Connection System using Social Networking2

Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research SYST 490 – 2013 Design of Recruiter – Student Connection System using Social Networking

3

Private vs. Public Universities

• Have different funding models

• Have different mandates

• Have different admission policies and

procedures.


4

Public Universities

• Our main focus will be on public universities

for many reasons:

– Funded by state taxpayers.

– Policies are created or overseen by state

legislatures.

– Admissions policies are transparent.


5

HS Recruitment Process


6

Current Undergraduate Recruitment Process


7

Undergraduate Recruitment

• To fulfill enrollment targets:

– Market towards under-filled programs

– Market towards sources of applicants in the past

• To stay under budget:

– Focus on high producing/low cost systems

– Recruit more out-of-state students• To improve quality of enrolled students:

– Increase size of applicant pool– Beat competing recruiters


8

Social Networking Websites

• Enable individuals to self-organize into communities for swift communication

• Break geographical and social barriers to communication and connection

• Allows connections to be identified at the global level


9

Universities recruiting tools


10

Commonly Used Tools

CRM Tool – manages interactions with current and

future students

Cappex.com & Other college search sites – send

list of prospective students to universities

College Board website – Inquiry contact, marketing


11

Social Networking & UniversitiesInteraction


12

Process Summary

As-Is Find a recruiter Dragnet “Get Lucky”

Future Recruiter finds student Targeted pursuit Make informed

choices

High School

Universit

y Acceptan

ce Process

Student

Enrollme

nt Process

Student GraduateAccepted Student Enrolled

Student

Agenda



14

• Students• Recruiters• Universities• Social Networks• Government• Advertisers

Recruiters

Stakeholder Interactions Diagram


17

Stakeholder AnalysisUniversities

Primary Goals

• Fulfill enrollment targets for all schools and departments

• Stay under budget

Secondary Goals

•Improve quality of students that enroll


18

Stakeholder Analysis

Goals


•Make a profit•Stay under budget and stay in business

•Maintain relevance to users

Students

•Earn an income•Acquire experience•Attend best colleges

•Stay under budget


19


Goals

Government

• Improve quality of life for citizens• Improve the economy

• Enable innovation• Increase size of labor pool

• Maintain funding for operation• Generate revenue• Stay under budget

20

Stakeholder Tensions

Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research SYST 490 – 2013 esign of Recruiter – Student Connection System using Social Networking

University

•Budget constraints force trade-off between goals•Utilize fewer social network features•Less personal connections/guidance to prospects


•Limited incentive for university to change process•Receive lower profit•Limited ways to connect recruiters to student

Students

•Recruiting budget constraints limit connection quality•Less opportunities for experience and guidance

Agenda



Scope• George Mason University (GMU) undergraduate

recruitment process

– High school & university connection

– Transfer process will not be not considered

– Costs will include: labor of resources

• Travel/event expenses & marketing material costs

– Quality of students will be based on GPA & SAT

scores


Gap Analysis


2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20123.25

3.35

3.45

3.55

3.65

3.75

3.85

3.95

Freshman Applicants GPA

Applied Admitted EnrolledApplication Year

Aver

age

GPA

2%

9%

4%

Gap Analysis


2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20121070

1170

1270

1370

1470

1570

Freshman Applicants SAT

Applied Admitted EnrolledApplication Year

Aver

age

SAT

2%

27%

3%

Problem

• The labor, travel, and material costs to establish strong personal connections early in a student’s career is high due to geographical dispersion and high information costs.

• The highest quality students are being lost to competing universities in the current system set up to manage these costs.


Win-Win

26

Social NetworksMake a profit by enabling

universities and students to reach their goals in the most time and cost

effective manner

Universities

Identify, compare, and recruit the highest quality students at the lowest cost, regardless of location

Students

Be identified for the best opportunities early in their academic career and receive experienced guidance

Need

There is a need for an increase in the quality of students enrolled to be established under budget and in enough quantities to meet target enrollment rates.


Agenda



Requirements

• The system shall produce between 2580 and 2690

enrollments.

• The system shall maintain or reduce the cost of the

undergraduate recruiting process compared to

enrollment service revenue by at least 8%.


Requirements

• The system shall maintain or decrease the

difference between the average GPA of accepted

students and enrolled students to less than 2%.

• The system shall maintain or decrease the

difference between the average SAT of accepted

students and enrolled students to less than 2%.


Possible Solutions

• No change• Add social networking tool• Change resource allocation to social

networking tools


No Change

Pros• No significant drop in

enrollment rates, budget or student quality will occur.

Cons• Freshman enrollment rates

may continue to decrease• Losses will still be seen in

failed recruiting attempts for the top students

Add Social Networking Tool

Pros• Potential increase in

enrollment rates• Potential increase in

student quality• Potential decrease in cost

Cons• Potential risk to enrollment

rates, budget or student quality will occur.

Change Resource Allocation

Pros• Potential increase in

enrollment rates• Potential increase in

student quality• Potential decrease in cost

Cons• Potential risk to enrollment

rates, budget or student quality will occur.

Alternatives

Requirements

Alternatives

- = No Potential Fulfillment

= Potential to Fulfill

Meet enrollment target

Reduce or maintain cost

Close GPA gap

Close SAT gap

No Change - - - -Add Social

Networking Tool Change Resource

Allocation

Agenda



Method of Analysis


Method of Analysis

Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research SYST 490 – 2013 Design of a Recruiter – Student Connection System using Social Networking38

Simulation Goal

• Determine the recruitment process that produces the highest quality students at the lowest cost, and which social networking tools will facilitate this.


Design of Experiment

Student Surveys (High school and College)• Google Forms• Distributions for student demographics• Social networking preferences• Develop assumptions



Interview/Survey of Admissions Employees• Distributions for the number of applicants,

admissions, and enrollments and their associated GPAs and SAT scores

• Admissions process and sub-processes• Finalize scope• Develop assumptions



• Queuing model in Arena– Model processes a high school student goes

through once contact is made with the university until the student exits the system or enrolls


Preliminary Simulation

Goal: Determine the recruitment process that produces the highest number of applications of the highest quality students at the lowest cost and determine which social networking tools facilitate this modified process.


Inputs (In progress)Research and survey data will determine what inputs are used in the model. EntitiesCurrently the only numerical data available on student entry into the system is a broad overview, although the model below depicts multiple known sources of entry into the system


Inputs (In progress)

AttributesAttributes will be assigned for GPAs, SAT scores, and predetermined values for whether a student will contact the university, apply, be accepted, and enroll. A cost will also be added to each student’s total recruitment cost to reflect costs associated with subscriptions to the various social networking sites.


Inputs (In progress)

Sample Statistical Analysis Freshman ApplicationsBudget Executive Summaries 2001-2012

Number GPA SAT

Distribution: Uniform Weibull Beta

Expression:UNIF(8.11e+003,

1.47e+004)3.03 + WEIB(0.299, 2.06)

1.05e+003 + 66 * BETA(0.77, 0.613)

Square Error: 0.036111 0.023713 0.047138

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Test Statistic 0.233 0.0859 0.17

Corresponding p-value > 0.15 > 0.15 > 0.15

Data Summary

Number of Data Points 12 12 12

Min Data Value 8110 3.08 1050

Max Data Value 14700 3.54 1120

Sample Mean 11800 3.29 1090

Sample Std Dev 2370 0.141 21.2

Assumptions

• The scope will be finalized after a full data analysis of the survey and interview results. Assumptions will be developed to supplement information deemed essential that is unobtainable. Most assumptions will either involve simplification of processes or estimation of cost.


Value Hierarchy

Choose Best Recruitment Alternative

Enrollment Yield (# Students)

Cost($)

Quality Recruits (Avg GPA & SAT)

0.5 0.3 0.2

Agenda



Work Breakdown Structure OverviewSocial Networking

Management

Meetings

Material Review

Task Delegation

Project Schedule

Project Risk/Mitigation

Critical Path Analysis

Budget

Research

Stakeholders

Undergraduate Recruiting Process

George Mason Process

Historical Data

Athletic Recruiting Process

Social Networking

Analysis

Context Analysis


Gap Analysis

Problem Statement

Need Statement

Sensitivity Analysis

Value Hierarchy

CONOPS

Vision Statement

Mission Statement

Use Cases

Alternatives

Potential Match List

Advanced Search Feature

Connection Suggestion

Mentor/Mentee

Documentation

Requirements

Deliverables

Preliminary Report

IEEE Paper

Poster

Final Report

Presentations

Simulation

As-is Model

Alternative Models

Results

Trade Off Analysis

Validation

Verification

Conclusions

Work Breakdown in DetailManagement Analysis Research

Meetings Context Stakeholders

Material Review Stakeholder Recruiting Process

Task Delegation GAP George Mason

Schedule Problem Statement Historical Data

Risk/Mitigation Need Statement Athletic Recruiting

Budget Sensitivity Social Networking

Critical Path Analysis Value Hierarchy

Work Breakdown in DetailDocumentation Simulation Alternatives

Requirements Requirements Potential Match List

Deliverables Deliverables Advanced Search

Preliminary Report Preliminary Report Connection Suggestion

IEEE Paper IEEE Paper Mentor/Mentee

Poster Poster

Final Report Final Report

Presentations Presentations

Budget

Estimated Total $289,885.07

Direct Labor Costs

$136,096.28 (47%)

Adjusted Labor Costs

$153,788.79(53%)

• Pay rate: $45/hour

• Highest costs:

• Research• Simulation design &

build

• Management

Budget

PV/AC/EV

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38$0.00

$20,000.00

$40,000.00

$60,000.00

$80,000.00

$100,000.00

$120,000.00

$140,000.00

$160,000.00

$180,000.00

$200,000.00

Planned Value - (PV) Actual Cost - (AC) Earned Value - (EV)

CPI/SPI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

Cost Performance Index - (CPI) Schedule Performance Index - (SPI)

Weeks

Ratio

Project Schedule

MilestonesPreliminary Project Plan & Briefing 1 9/30/13

Modified Project Plan & Briefing 2 10/21/13

Dry Run Presentation 11/4/13

Faculty Presentation 11/15/13

Final Report, Draft Conference Paper & Poster 12/2/13

Preliminary Simulation Results 12/23/13

Finalized Simulation Design & IEEE Proposal 1/27/13

Critical Path Analysis

Context research (completed)

Problem definition (completed)

Obtain admissions data (In progress)

Design simulation (In progress)

Build simulation (In progress)

Results analysis (In progress)

Risk/MitigationRisk Risk Level Mitigation

Delayed access to data 15 In progress

Access to incomplete data 20 In progress

Incorrect assumptions 23 In progress

Consequences

Likelihood

1 2 3 4 5

1 1 2 3 4 5

2 2 4 6 8 10

3 3 6 9 12 15

4 4 8 12 16 20

5 5 10 15 20 25

Low Risk

High Risk

Questions?


design of a recruiter-student connection system using social networking

Documents

operations research

social networking2private

social networking6

social networking5

social networking11

social networking9

social barriers

social networking12asisfind