SYST 490
Final Report
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using
Social Networking
Final Report
Mary Barthelson
Issam Boumlic
Souheil El-Hage Hammoud
Ummer Shamma
Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
October 16, 2013
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Table of Contents
1.0 Context Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Private vs. Public Universities .............................................................................................. 4
1.1.1 Private Universities ........................................................................................................ 4
1.1.2 Public Universities ......................................................................................................... 4
1.1.3 Private vs. Public Universities: Cost.............................................................................. 5
1.1.4 Private vs. Public Universities: Academic Quality ....................................................... 5
1.2 Recruitment Process.............................................................................................................. 6
1.2.1 High School Recruitment Process ................................................................................. 6
1.2.2 Undergraduate Recruitment Process .............................................................................. 6
1.3 Social Networking ................................................................................................................ 7
1.3.1 Social Networking and Universities Interaction ............................................................ 7
1.3.2 Social Networking Websites ........................................................................................ 8
1.3.3 Universities Recruiting Tools ........................................................................................ 8
1.3.4 Social Network tools currently used .............................................................................. 9
2.0 Stakeholder Analysis .............................................................................................................. 11
2.1 Primary Stakeholders/Goals: .............................................................................................. 11
2.2 Secondary Stakeholders/Goals............................................................................................ 12
2.3 Stakeholder Tension Analysis............................................................................................. 12
3.0 Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 14
4.0 Gap Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 4.1 Gap Diagrams .......................................................................................................... 15
5.0 Problem Statement .................................................................................................................. 16
6.0 Win-Win ................................................................................................................................. 17
7.0 Need Statement ....................................................................................................................... 18
8.0 System Requirements.............................................................................................................. 19
9.0 Proposed Solutions.................................................................................................................. 20
10.0 Methodology of Analysis ...................................................................................................... 21
11.0 Design of Experiment ........................................................................................................... 22
11.1 Student Surveys ................................................................................................................ 22
11.2 Interview/Survey of Admissions Employees .................................................................... 22
11.3 Queuing model in Arena ................................................................................................... 22
12.0 Simulation Design ................................................................................................................. 23
12.1 Preliminary Simulation Overview (Current System) ........................................................ 23
12.2 Input Data.......................................................................................................................... 25
12.2.1 Entities ........................................................................................................................... 25
12.2.2 Attributes........................................................................................................................ 25
12.2.3 Processes ........................................................................................................................ 29
12.2.4 Decision Blocks ............................................................................................................. 29
12.2.5 Resources ....................................................................................................................... 30
12.3 Output Data ....................................................................................................................... 31
12.4 Assumptions...................................................................................................................... 31
13.0 Value Hierarchy .................................................................................................................... 32
14.0 Project Management ............................................................................................................. 33
14.1 Work Breakdown Structure .............................................................................................. 33
14.2 Budget ............................................................................................................................... 34
2
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
14.3 Project Schedule................................................................................................................ 35
14.4 Milestones ......................................................................................................................... 39
14.6 Risk/Mitigation ................................................................................................................. 40
References ..................................................................................................................................... 41
3
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
1.0 Context Analysis
1.1 Private vs. Public Universities
1.1.1 Private Universities
Many universities and colleges are private, operated as educational and research
nonprofit organizations. The term "university" is primarily used to designate graduate education
and research institutions.
1.1.2 Public Universities
In the US, most public institutions are state universities founded and operated by state
governments. Every state has at least one public university. This is partially due to the 1862
Morrill Land-Grant Acts, which gave each eligible state 30,000 acres of federal land to sell to
finance public institutions offering study for practical fields in addition to the liberal arts. Many
public universities began as teacher training schools and eventually were expanded into
comprehensive universities. A public university has a few features that distinguish it from private
universities:

Size - The size of public universities varies widely. The largest universities in the country
are all public (for example, UT Austin and OSU).

Division I Athletics - The great majority of Division I athletic teams are fielded by public
universities.

Low Cost - Public universities typically have tuition that is considerably lower than
private universities, especially for in-state students.

Commuter and Part-time Students - Public universities tend to have more commuter and
part-time students than private colleges and universities.

The Downside - Read the profiles of universities carefully. In many cases, public
universities have lower graduation rates, higher student / faculty ratios and more loan aid
(thus, more student debt) than private universities.
Public universities share many features with private universities:

Undergraduate and graduate student focus - large public universities have significant
masters and doctoral programs.
4
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013

Final Report
Graduate degrees - at large public universities, advanced degree offerings such as an
M.A., M.F.A., M.B.A., J.D., Ph.D., and M.D. are common

Broad academic offerings - students can often choose courses in the liberal arts, sciences,
engineering, business, health and fine arts.

Faculty focus on research - At big-name public universities, professors is often evaluated
for their research and publishing first, and teaching second. Teaching may take priority at
branch campuses and regional public universities.
1.1.3 Private vs. Public Universities: Cost
It is general knowledge that public university tuition is less expensive for in-state
students than out-of-state students. Public tuition, even for out-of-state students, is far less
expensive than tuition for students at private institutions. For example, the 2010-11 tuition &
fees for an in-state student at State University of New York Binghamton is $4,970 per year and
for an out-of-state student $13,380 (Kiplinger’s ranks Binghamton as the top US out-of-state
public school value). With room & board of $11,886, the annual attendance cost for an in-state
student is $18,825. SUNY's smart marketers compare these costs to a private university, with
tuition & fees at $39,150, room & board $12,000 and an annual cost of attendance $51,150.
1.1.4 Private vs. Public Universities: Academic Quality
Public universities figure prominently in US News & World Report’s 2011 rankings of
the top 50 national universities. The public universities in the top 50 national universities
include: UC Berkeley, UCLA, U Virginia, U Michigan, UNC Chapel Hill, William & Mary,
Georgia Tech, UC San Diego, UC Davis, UC Santa Barbara, UC Irvine, U Washington, U Texas
Austin, U Wisconsin Madison, Penn State, and U Illinois Urbana-Champaign. However,
attending a public university may require trade-offs in the quality of the undergraduate
experience, such as larger class sizes. Public institutions in the top 50 have a percentage of
classes with fewer than 20 students ranging from 30% to 60%. Whereas private institutions in the
top 50 have a percentage of classes with under 20 students ranging from 47% to 80%.
5
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
1.2 Recruitment Process
1.2.1 High School Recruitment Process
This diagram shows High School student recruitment process. The student is either
approched or not. When students are approched they are either interested or not. If they are
interested they become inquiries and they apply or they loose interest. If they apply they either
get accepted or rejected. If they get accepted, they either enroll or refuse to enroll due to other
reasons.
1.2.2 Undergraduate Recruitment Process
The current undergraduate recruitment system is a “Drag-net” approach to recruiting,
which universities attempt to mass-recruit by contacting as many students as possible, in hopes
that most of the students will apply to the university. With this approach, universities neglect to
search for quality students; instead focusing on quantity.
In order to fill their enrollment targets, universities typically market toward under-filled
programs. This means that if a certain program at a university has a low amount of students, they
will work on encouraging prospective students to enroll in that program at their school.
Universities will also market towards sources of applicants in the past.
In order to stay under budget, universities will focus of recruiting systems that produce a
large number of results at the lowest cost. A good example of this is sending emails to students,
as it does not cost universities anything to send someone an email. They will also recruit out-ofstate students, as costs for these students tend to be much higher as opposed to in-state students.
6
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
To improve the quality of enrolled students, universities will increase the size of their applicant
pool in hopes of recruiting as many high quality students as possible. This approach helps to
beat other universities who are also looking for the best students.
1.3 Social Networking
1.3.1 Social Networking and Universities Interaction
This figure shows how users create profiles through social network websites. The process
begins with a student creating a profile. At this point, the student is now a user of the website,
which enables them to be noticed by universities. Once the user is accepted into the university,
7
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
they enroll in the university. After the student studies at the university, they exit the process as a
skilled laborer who can contribute to the economy.
1.3.2 Social Networking Websites
Social networking websites are platforms that build social relations among people who
share interests, activities, backgrounds, etc. It consists of users, their social links, and other
services. Most are web-based and provide means for users to interact with each other, such as
messaging, public chats, etc. They enable individuals to self-organize into communities, which
allow for swift communication. They also break geographical and social barriers, which allow
connections to be identified at the global level. Some examples of social networking websites in
the U.S. include Facebook, Twitter, and Google Plus.
1.3.3 Universities Recruiting Tools
Universities use various tools in order to recruit prospective students to their schools. Of
these tools, 94% of universities use traditional college fairs, where colleges visit high schools
and meet prospective students in person. 82% of schools contact students by phone call. 79% of
schools will send students either letters in the mail or emails that provide information about the
school, including various majors offered, recreational activities, university achievements, etc.
70% of universities will reach out to students via Facebook or various college search websites.
They use these two tools to connect students to online information about the university. Some
colleges, 25%, will reach out to students via Twitter, and send “tweets” encouraging students to
look into and consider their university.
8
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
1.3.4 Social Network tools currently used
CRM Tool: CRM (customer relationship management) is an information industry term
for methodologies, software, and usually Internet capabilities that help an enterprise manage
customer relationships in an organized way. For example, an enterprise might build a database
about its customers that described relationships in sufficient detail so that management,
salespeople, people providing service, and perhaps the customer directly could access
information, match customer needs with product plans and offerings, remind customers of
service requirements, know what other products a customer had purchased, and so forth.
According to one industry view, CRM consists of:

Helping an enterprise to enable its marketing departments to identify and target their best
customers, manage marketing campaigns and generate quality leads for the sales team.

Assisting the organization to improve telesales, account, and sales management by
optimizing information shared by multiple employees, and streamlining existing
processes (for example, taking orders using mobile devices)

Allowing the formation of individualized relationships with customers, with the aim of
improving customer satisfaction and maximizing profits; identifying the most profitable
customers and providing them the highest level of service.

Providing employees with the information and processes necessary to know their
customers understand and identify customer needs and effectively build relationships
between the company, its customer base, and distribution partners.
College Board: an organization that prepares and administers standardized tests that are used in
college admission and placement. In addition to managing tests for which it charges fees, the
College Board works with programs that claim to increase achievement by poor and minority
middle and high school students. Funded by grants from various foundations, such as the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation, the College Board Schools operate autonomously within New
York City public school buildings
Cappex: aims to try give students some relief by helping students connect with colleges and
universities that are interested in recruiting them. The site aims to help students, guidance
counselors and school administrators by connecting them all via the web. Students simply fill out
a profile and schools can look for students through Cappex based on profile criteria. Similar to
LinkedIn, Cappex enables schools to attempt to connect with students but students can choose
9
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
which schools they are interested in connecting with. School administrators can leverage Cappex
as a recruiting tool to search for prospective students. Guidance counselors can also get involved
with Cappex by registering to assist student throughout the school selection process.
According to Cappex.com:

47 percent of schools said college social media sites are important or critically important.

Nearly one third of colleges receive as many as 6 to 20 percent of their enrollments via
college search social media sites.

39% of schools cited an increase in enrollments resulting from college search social
media sites.

Nearly 50 percent of colleges said they will dedicate more resources to college search
social media in 2011-2012.
10
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
2.0 Stakeholder Analysis
2.1 Primary Stakeholders/Goals:
 Students

o
Earn an income
o
Acquire experience
o
Attend best colleges
o
Stay under budget
Universities/University Recruiters
o
Fulfill enrollment targets for all schools and departments
o
Stay under budget
11
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
o

Final Report
Improve quality of students that enroll
Social Network Owners
o
o
o
Make a profit
Stay under budget and stay in business
Maintain relevance to users
2.2 Secondary Stakeholders/Goals
 Governments

o
Improve quality of life for citizens
o
Improve the economy
o
Enable innovation
o
Increase size of labor pool
o
Maintain funding for operation
o
Generate revenue
o
Stay under budget
Advertisers
o


Maximize exposure of certain products based on target’s interest/field/location
Aministrators
o
Keep website functional & secure
o
Resolve STEM related member conflicts
Web developers
o
Build a website in accordance to the owners’ vision
2.3 Stakeholder Tension Analysis
Many of the stakeholders’ goals are mutually beneficial. Students want to connect to
universities, universities want to connect to students, and social networks want to enable these
connections. It is not a conflict of goals that cause tension and prevent the system from
changing. Conflict occurs because stakeholders must prioritize their goals in order to work with
their budget and constraints. For example, while universities want to improve the quality of their
students, they first need to ensure they meet enrollment target rates and stay under budget. These
two goals have an immediate impact on funds for operation, while quality of students has a longterm impact on revenue. A university could spend all of its resources recruiting ten of the
highest quality students in the world, but unless these students are able to pay millions of dollars
12
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
for tuition, the university will not earn enough revenue to stay in operation for long. As a result
of this, universities must look for systems that produce a high number of connections at a low
cost. Universities need to recruit out-of-state students in order to increase revenue, so there is an
incentive to spend money for recruiters to travel – but only to events that will produce many
possible connections for each recruiter sent, reducing the probability that high quality
connections will occur. Social networks have many features that can be utilized to establish
personal connections between recruiters and geographically dispersed students, but there is no
incentive for the university to change the current system and take advantage of all of these
features. Universities are more likely to utilize only those features that produce a higher number
of connections per recruiter. The constraint of resources and capital for university recruiting
limits the ability for social networks to be better integrated into the recruitment process and
lower the cost of recruiting geographically dispersed students. This prevents social networks
from making a profit and may impact their ability to stay in business. With a high information
cost, students do not receive the best visibility for the opportunities they desire. These conflicts
create a cycle, as the initial sacrifice of quality of connection impacts the university’s ability to
win the highest quality students from competing universities.
13
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
3.0 Scope
The process being designed will be based on the George Mason University (GMU)
undergraduate recruitment process. It will consider high school and university interactions.
Transfers will not be considered. Costs will include labor, travel/event expenses, and marketing
materials. The quality of students will be based on student GPA & SAT scores.
14
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
4.0 Gap Analysis
Figure 4.1 Gap Diagrams
15
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
5.0 Problem Statement
•
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.
16
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
6.0 Win-Win
17
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
7.0 Need Statement
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.
18
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
8.0 System 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%.
•
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%.
19
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
9.0 Proposed Solutions
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.
20
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
10.0 Methodology of Analysis
21
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
11.0 Design of Experiment
11.1 Student Surveys
• Surveys of high school and college students will be conducted via Google Forms in
January and February (In Development).
•
Distributions will be determined for student demographics and corresponding social
networking preferences that could impact their decision to enroll and intermediate steps
in an altered recruiting process.
•
Distributions will be determined for student demographics and the manner by which
students interacted with universities prior to their application and enrollment. This
information will be used to supplement historical data that is either missing or not
available.
11.2 Interview/Survey of Admissions Employees
• Distributions will be determined for the number of applicants, admissions, and
enrollments and their associated GPAs and SAT scores. A more detailed breakdown for
student demographics will be used, if available. Essential missing data will be
supplemented by the student surveys.
•
Information will be gathered about the admissions process and sub-processes that is not
currently known. This information includes employee job function and task descriptions
as well as estimated time spent on vital tasks.
•
This information will be used to scope the model and determine which employees and
processes are essential to the model. Any other necessary costs will be identified, such as
marketing materials and social networking subscription fees/budgets. Most salary
information is known (see 11.2.5 Resources), but information gathered from the
employee surveys will supplement any missing cost information.
•
An attempt will be made to assemble a detailed breakdown of system costs that are not
available in the budget executive summaries in order to estimate a budget for the essential
tasks and materials identified.
11.3 Queuing model in Arena
• A model will be built based on research and survey data. The simulation will begin when
a university and student first make contact and will end when the student exits the
recruitment process or enrolls.
22
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
12.0 Simulation Design
The goal of the simulation is to determine the recruitment process that produces the
highest number of applications of the highest quality students at the lowest cost and which social
networking tools facilitate this modified process. The components of the recruitment process
that will be analyzed and modified are tool placement and cost along with resource (labor)
allocation and cost. Initial analysis of outputs and sub-processes will be used to determine
possible process changes that were not initially identified and their impact on the overall system
and sub-processes.
12.1 Preliminary Simulation Overview (Current System)
Below is a close-up of the first half of the simulation. It depicts entity entry into the
system through various create blocks before passage through assign blocks that assign attributes
that guide each student through the system. Prospects entering the system go through intial
processing (and subprocesses) that utilize marketing and recruiting resources. After this step,
students may choose to return contact to the university or exit the system. All prospects at this
stage are considered inquiries and go through student profiling processes with other students that
enter the system as inquiries. This process utilizes marketing and recruiting resources as well.
Inquiries move on from here and either apply or exit the system.
23
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Below is a close-up of the second half of the simulation. It depicts the application
process, starting at a student’s decision to apply. The applicant then goes through the
university’s application review process and subprocesses. Some students that were not initially
identified enter the system at this phase. The university makes its decision whether to accept a
student or not, and the applicant either leaves the system or moves on to make an enrollment
decision.
24
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
12.2 Input Data
Research and survey data will determine what inputs are used in the model. This section
provides an outline of what information will be used for each component of the simulation and
gives a brief analysis of data that is currently available.
12.2.1 Entities
Information on sources of student entry into the recruiting process will be used to
determine how many different sources are modeled. All create blocks represent a student, but
different sources will have different manners of entry and different costs associated with them.
Students may arrive randomly or in batches (lists). Currently 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: students from Cappex, prospects from other sources,
students from Facebook, students from Twitter, students from Instagram, students from College
Board, and inquiries from other sources. Whatever historical data is not available for these
sources will be inferred by survey data of college students.
12.2.2 Attributes
Attributes 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. For example, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter are free, while there is a
$17,000 budget associated with Cappex. As more data becomes available, more decision blocks
might be added to subprocesses, each corresponding to a new attribute generated in the initial
assign blocks. Placement of and the number of assign blocks will change depending on what
data is available and whether any correlations between student quality and preference are
identified. A preliminary analysis of student demographics for entities and attributes can be
found on the next few pages.
25
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Statistical Analysis Freshman Applications
Budget Executive Summaries 2001-2012
Distribution:
Expression:
Square Error:
Number
GPA
SAT
Uniform
Weibull
Beta
UNIF(8.11e+003,
3.03 + WEIB(0.299,
1.05e+003 + 66 *
1.47e+004)
2.06)
BETA(0.77, 0.613)
0.036111
0.023713
0.047138
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Test Statistic
Corresponding pvalue
0.233
0.0859
0.17
> 0.15
> 0.15
> 0.15
Data Summary
Number of Data
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
Points
Histogram Summary
Histogram Range
Number of Intervals
= 8.11e+003 to
= 3.03 to 3.59
1.47e+004
5
5
= 1.05e+003 to
1.12e+003
5
26
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Statistical Analysis Freshman Admissions
Budget Executive Summaries 2001-2012
Distribution:
Expression:
Square Error:
Number
GPA
SAT
Uniform
Beta
Beta
UNIF(5.52e+003,
3.23 + 0.53 *
1.1e+003 + 80 *
9.67e+003)
BETA(1.38, 1.27)
BETA(0.744, 0.564)
0.036111
0.007278
0.018859
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
0.121
0.0998
0.156
> 0.15
> 0.15
> 0.15
12
12
12
Min Data Value
5520
3.28
1100
Max Data Value
9670
3.71
1180
Sample Mean
7550
3.51
1150
Sample Std Dev
1360
0.139
26.1
Test Statistic
Corresponding pvalue
Data Summary
Number of Data
Points
Histogram Summary
Histogram Range
Number of Intervals
= 5.52e+003 to
= 3.23 to 3.76
9.67e+003
5
5
= 1.1e+003 to
1.18e+003
5
27
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Statistical Analysis Freshman Enrollments
Budget Executive Summaries 2001-2012
Distribution:
Expression:
Square Error:
Number
GPA
SAT
Beta
Uniform
Beta
2.15e+003 + 547 *
UNIF(3.15,
1.08e+003 + 79 *
BETA(0.439, 0.379)
3.7)
BETA(0.92, 0.695)
0.039663
0.008333
0.105844
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Test Statistic
0.296
0.117
0.187
Corresponding p-value
> 0.15
> 0.15
> 0.15
Data Summary
Number of Data Points
12
12
12
Min Data Value
2150
3.2
1080
Max Data Value
2690
3.65
1160
Sample Mean
2440
3.43
1120
Sample Std Dev
202
0.15
24.2
Histogram Summary
Histogram Range
= 2.15e+003 to 2.69e+003
= 3.15 to 3.7
Number of Intervals
5
5
= 1.08e+003 to
1.16e+003
5
28
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
12.2.3 Processes
The current processes depicted are top-level: university processing prospects, university
profiling student, and university analyzing applications. The employee interviews and surveys
will be used to separate these processes into their subcomponents. A cost will be added to
students at each step in the process, which will add up to be the total cost of recruiting or
attempting to recruit that student.
12.2.4 Decision Blocks
The current decision blocks depicted correspond to the top-level processes: prospect
decision to contact inquiry, inquiry decision to apply, university admission decision, and
applicant decision to enroll. The employee interviews and surveys will be used to determine
what additional decision blocks need to be added and what criteria will be used to determine
entity path.
29
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
12.2.5 Resources
Below is a current list of all employees. Employee surveys and interviews will narrow down
the list of which employees will be included in the model, as well as what processes they are
assigned to and their associated costs and schedules. The employees listed below are full-time,
but there are seasonal employees that need to be identified along with their salaries.
Department/Employee Composition
Obj/Tasks
Salary
Admissions Information Systems and Technology
*
Director
*
$78,557
Associate Director
*
$68,135
Communication and Data Management Analyst
*
*
Database Developer and Report Designer
*
*
Information Technology Specialist
*
$48,000
System Support Analyst
*
$43,740
Sr. Web Developer & Webmaster
*
$56,587
*
Admissions Operations
Associate Dean
*
112,875
Associate Director
*
$84,242
Document Center Manager
*
*
Document Center Specialists (2)
*
$31,500
*
K-12 Partnership
K-12 Partnerships Director
*
$82,775
K-12 Partnerships Associate Directors (2)
*
*
*
*
Admissions for Special Programs
Events Manager
*
*
Events Coordinator
*
*
*
*
Undergraduate Admissions
Director of Undergraduate Admissions
*
$80,340
Senior Associate Director
*
$42,000
Associate Director
*
$42,025
Assistant Director
*
$36,300
Administrative Counselors (5)
*
$37,413
Administrative Fellows (4)
*
$32,240**
*
Marketing
Director
*
*
Assistant Directors (2)
*
*
Senior Admissions Counselors (3)
*
$33,000
Admissions Counselors (2)
*
$32,000***
Customer Operations Manager
*
*
*Still being determined, ** Salary for Administrative Assistant, *** Salary for Admissions
Coordinators
30
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
12.3 Output Data
The model will record the following data as the entities leave the system: number of uninterested
prospects, the number of uninterested inquiries, the number of enrolled students, the number of
uninterested applicants, and the number of rejected applicants. GPAs and SAT scores will be
recorded for each of these categories in addition to total cost to process each student. Subprocess information will also be output in the report which will help identify bottlenecks in the
system and the effectiveness of different social networking options. Analysis of this information
from the model of the current system will lead to a better understanding of the recruitment
process, which will lead to a more comprehensive list of requirements, and the development of a
more complete list of alternatives.
12.4 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.
31
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
13.0 Value Hierarchy
0.5
0.3
0.2
Three factors will be used to determine the best recruitment process alternative:
enrollment yield, cost, and the quality of the students recruited. Enrollment yield was given the
highest weight, as enrollment targets must be met in order for the university to make revenue for
operation. The cost of the process was given the next highest weight. The admissions
department has a set budget that they must not go over. The quality of student recruits was
weighted slightly less than the cost. Quality students are essential to ensure improved university
standing in the long run.
32
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
14.0 Project Management
14.1 Work Breakdown Structure
33
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
14.2 Budget
The budget was estimated by organizing project tasks into Microsoft Project and
assigning approximate time frames for their completion. The estimated total budget is
$289,885.07. This includes $136,096.28 from direct labor costs and $153,788.79 from overhead
and charges for research by George Mason University. Researchers earn 47% of total labor
charges, according to their standard rate. Each team member has a pay rate of $45/hour, in
accordance with average rates of junior systems engineers. Research and management account
for the highest costs, as they continue from the commencement of the project until its
completion. Simulation design, build, and analysis are the next most labor intensive tasks.
34
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
14.3 Project Schedule
Figure 14.3.1 Projected Budget
35
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Figure 14.3.2 PV/AC/EV
36
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
Figure 14.3.4 CPI/SPI
Figure 14.3.5 Project Schedule
37
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
38
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
14.4 Milestones
39
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
14.5 Critical Path Analysis
Tasks falling along the critical path are highlighted in red on the schedule. These tasks
fall along the path of the simulation, and a delay in any of these tasks could lead to a delay in the
project.
14.6 Risk/Mitigation
Access to data from all sources was either incomplete or delayed. As a result of this, many
project components are not finalized. To mitigate the data constraints, surveys are being
developed. The surveys will help requirements be developed. From the requirements, a more
comprehensive list of alternatives can be developed and simulated.
40
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking
November 30, 2013
Final Report
References
Angelescu, Laura, Easterlin, R. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://ftp.iza.org/dp2755.pdf
April 2013 World Economic Outlook (WEO)
Agapitova, Natalia [2003]: “The Impact of Social Networks on Innovation and Industrial
Development,” DRUID Summer Conference, Copenhagen/Ellsinore
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/update/02/
Enriquez, Leon A [2002]. Editorial Thoughtscapes. [Online]. <http://www.et
writer.com/bview-114ageofinnovation.pdf
Porter, Mickael E. and Scott Stern, [2001], “National Innovative Capacity”, Institute for
Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard.
"Social Networking." Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon. Dictionary.com, LLC. 15 Sep.
2013. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Social Networking>.
Sue, Karlin. "Social Networking For Engineers." IEEE Spectrum. 06 JUN 2011. Web. 15
Sep 2013. <http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/tech-careers/social-networks-for
engineers>.
41
Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System Using Social Networking