Design of a Recruiter-Student Connection System
Using Social Networking
Mary Barthelson, Issam Boumlic, Souheil El-Hage, Ummer Shamma
Department of Systems Engineering
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA
Abstract—
IV. SOCIAL NETWORKING AND UNIVERSITIES INTERACTION
Index Terms— (key words)
I. INTRODUCTION
The current undergraduate recruitment system is a “Dragnet” approach to recruiting, which universities attempt to massrecruit 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.
II. UNIVERSITY RECRUITING PROCESS
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-of-state students,
as costs for these students tend to be much higher as opposed to
in-state students.
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.
III. 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.
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, 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.
V. SOCIAL NETWORK TOOLS CURRENTLY USED
A. 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.
B. College Board
College Board is 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
C. Cappex
Cappex aims to try to 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 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.
 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 20112012.
VI. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
A. Primary Stakeholders/Goals
1) Students
 Earn an income
 Acquire experience
 Attend best colleges
 Stay under budget
2) Universities/University Recruiters
 Fulfill enrollment targets for all
departments
 Stay under budget
 Improve quality of students that enroll
3) Social Network Owners
 Make a profit
 Stay under budget and stay in business
 Maintain relevance to users
schools
and
B. Secondary Stakeholders/Goals
1) Governments
 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
2) Advertisers
 Maximize exposure of certain products based on
target’s interest/field/location
3) Administrators
 Keep website functional & secure
 Resolve STEM related member conflicts
4) Web developers
 Build a website in accordance to the owners’ vision
VII. STAKEHOLDER TENSIONS
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 long-term 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 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.
XI. 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.
XII. SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS



VIII. 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.
IX. GAP ANALYSIS

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%.
XIII. PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
A. 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
B. 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.
C. 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.
XIV. DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT
X. 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.
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.
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.
XV. 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.
XVI. 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 subprocesses will be used to determine possible process changes
that were not initially identified and their impact on the overall
system and sub-processes.
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.
The applicant 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.
A. 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.
B. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. Decision Blocks
The current decision blocks depicted correspond to the toplevel 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.
F. Resources
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.
G. 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. Sub-process 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.
H. 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.
XVII. VALUE HIERARCHY
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.
XVIII. RESULTS
XIX. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
[1] Angelescu, Laura, Easterlin, R. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://ftp.iza.org/dp2755.pdf
[2] Agapitova, Natalia [2003]: “The Impact of Social Networks on
Innovation and Industrial
[3] Development,”
DRUID
Summer
Conference,
Copenhagen/Ellsinore
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/update/02/
[4] Enriquez, Leon A [2002]. Editorial Thoughtscapes. [Online].
<http://www.et
writer.com/bview114ageofinnovation.pdf
[5] Porter, Mickael E. and Scott Stern, [2001], “National Innovative
Capacity”, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard.
[6] "Social Networking." Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon.
Dictionary.com, LLC. 15 Sep. 2013. <Dictionary.com
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Social Networking>.
[7] 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/socialnetworks-for
engineers>.