Transcript G520: IU’s New Integrated Image — An Overview

Online Video: The Way to Go?
November 11, 2009 • PAGR Retreat Breakout • 1:30‒2:45 p.m.
Thom Atkinson, Office of the Provost
Sherri Knieriem, IU Foundation
Angela Tharp, Office of Public Affairs and Government Relations
Presentation overview
• IU Bloomington study
• Background, goals, methodology
• Survey and focus group findings
• Key recommendations
• Additional resources
Background
• May 2009: IU Bloomington launched new
site after 7.5 years
• Production timeline did not allow for
much front-end research
• Design based on IUPUI template
• More dynamic and promotional content
• Video as a regular hotspot
• Flash rotations of news stories
Research goals
• To better understand our campus target
audiences’…
1. Preferences: Use of, and interest in,
online video
2. Impressions: Reactions to the new
campus home page at www.iub.edu
3. Behaviors: Actual use of the Internet
and new technological devices and tools
Campus target audiences
# of
Groups
Audience
3
Prospective undergraduates
1
3
2
3
Influencers of prospects
Current students
Faculty and staff
Alumni and donors
Participant profile
• Over 100 participants carefully recruited
for diverse backgrounds across
audiences:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sex
Age
Race/ethnicity
Academic interest and ability
Education level
Geography
Methodology
• Same audiences, 2-pronged approach:
1. Online survey addressing typical online
behaviors and use of devices/tools
2. Qualitative, online focus groups to test
concepts and discuss in-depth
preferences
• Findings cannot be generalized to the larger population,
but can highlight trends and ensure a range of opinions
Survey/Focus group details
• Conducted online Aug.‒Sept. 2009
• Survey: Some overlap in questions from Pew
Internet to compare local/national snapshot
• Focus Groups: Used Breeze for sharing screens
and phone conferencing for sharing audio
• 1-Hour discussions moderated by
Sherri Knieriem and Angela Tharp
• Participants recruited with data lists from
campus partners
• Participants provided incentives of $25
Focus group discussion flow
•
•
•
•
Introductions and ground rules
Campus Web site at www.iub.edu
Internet habits
Reactions to non-IU college video
samples (30 minutes)
• Wrap-up/Challenge
Tested: Campus Web site
Knowledge of new site
• Most audiences had visited the site since its
debut in May (but not often)
• Prospective and current students were the most
likely audiences to visit often
• Most audiences felt the site wasn’t really
designed for them, but assumed it appealed to
another audience group
• When pressed, most audiences suggested the
site should prioritize the needs/interests of:
(1) prospects and (2) students
Page’s flash slideshow/hotspots
• Positive perceptions
• Negative perceptions
• “One of the better
designs out there”
(students)
• “A lot is going on. I
wish there were even
more pictures.”
(students)
• “Up with the times”
(prospects)
• Overall impact “lacks unity and continuity”
• Flash/color /hotspots are “too much, too
busy” (adult audiences)
• Adult audiences rarely understand that
hotspot/feature captions link to additional
content, and younger audiences don’t care
• “Just highlight one video from the campus
home like a tour” (students)
• “Scary” or “boring” photos that don’t
represent the campus
Oh, the irony…
“I don’t like anything about the design…
it looks like it would be more appealing to
prospective students than us” (adult audiences).
“Looks like all the photos are geared more to
older people” (influencers/prospects/students).
Tested: Online habits
• What online activities are audiences*
doing weekly (often)?
• Are they using social networks,
and if so, how?
• Are they watching online video?
• Do they want and expect video on
IU sites?
*Upcoming slides showcase combined audience usage.
Look to the full online report for individual audience data.
Combined use of the Internet:
Activities done at least once a week
Common Internet
activities done by
campus audiences is
similar to national
trends with higher
rates of activity at the
top and lower rates of
activity at the bottom
Social networks
• Many use Facebook, but…
• Use it primarily for staying in touch with family and
friends
• Are confused about which college pages are
“official”
• Wouldn’t remember to search for an IU fan page
• Are more likely to be interested in IU unit or
interest-area fan pages (students)
• Have mixed reactions to anything more than a
college fan page with news/event updates
Combined videos watched in the
last 30 days
Campus
audiences, like
national
audiences,
typically watched
more “comedy”
and national
“news” videos
than anything else
Importance of online video
on IU Web sites
Online video
viewership is on the
rise nationally, but
campus audiences
don’t think video on IU
sites is “very important”
Combined interest by topic area
Gray Bars:
The majority
of campus
audiences
were not “very
interested” in
any IU video
topic
Popular online videos
• YouTube, Facebook, and word-of-mouth drive
video viewership, but few watch college videos:
• “It’s a very nebulous thing, how you end up seeing a
video. If it’s worth seeing, then you’re more likely to hear
about it by word-of-mouth.”
• “Don’t compete with an already saturated market. You [IU]
won’t win.”
• “There are too many sites that are into ‘let’s make a video
because we can.’ I’d rather read about it in 15 seconds.”
• “Videos are entertainment, and if I want entertainment, I’ll
watch TV.”
•
A handful of staff/alumni/donors indicated they have watched IU videos highlighted in
IU e-newsletters. Even more prospects/students positively referenced IU videos
featured on the Admissions recruitment DVD.
Online video vs. text
• Regardless of age, most prefer text and claim video on
college sites is unnecessary, like icing on a cake:
• “I’m looking for information first.”
• “I’d rather read…unless it’s highlights of music or
athletics.”
• “I don’t watch videos about college.”
• “Video doesn’t give you big pictures [of campus].”
(prospects)
• “I don’t know what I would bother to watch. It doesn’t
seem necessary.”
• Most are never interested in watching video featuring a
college administrator unless it’s for “something
catastrophic”
IU video libraries
• Most would expect to find an IU video on
Facebook, YouTube, or with related content—not
on a central, searchable page
• “The home page is more general. Specific things like
videos should be on other pages.”
• “Videos should be mostly about students. These IU videos
look like they’re all adults. If I were 18, I wouldn’t want to
visit this site again.”
• “Leave videos to the students in film classes to create.”
• “Even prospective students just want to find the
information and get on with it—not spend a bunch of time
looking at videos.”
• “I’ve already visited IU. I don’t need to see video.”
Tested: “Popular” video samples
• Academics
• MIT: Walter Lewin physics promo
• UCLA: What it's like backstage at the Oscars
• Student Life
• Virginia Tech: I'm a Hokie rap
• Penn State: Music theatre majors
• Event-Inspired Promo
• Penn State: Holiday greeting
• UNC: Carolina celebrates its champions
• Giving
• Iowa: You are here
• Ohio State: Students first
• UNC: Carolina Covenant program
One Example: Reactions to
Penn State’s holiday greeting
•
•
•
•
•
•
Topic: Event-inspired promo
Tested with alumni/donors/faculty
Any communication is likely to be perceived as a solicitation
Appreciate communications that are personalized, that are from
students, and that produce a “warm and fuzzy” feeling (“probably
not video”)
Generally negative and described as too long, confusing, jerky,
and boring
Quotes:
• “The idea of a card is really nice, but a picture is enough.”
• “This is a waste of money.”
• “I can barely get through my email now.”
RECOMMENDATIONS…
…For the campus
•
•
•
•
Define metrics/success
Prioritize students
Limit click-through news stories
Invest in strong, iconic photography that
reinforces IU’s brand
…For the campus
• De-emphasize the campus video library
by removing it entirely or relegating it to a
second-tier container
• Replace the video hotspot with a tour
• Feature a few individual videos for
prospects in the rotating hotspot bank
• Look to content specialists in units like
Athletics and Admissions to develop
niche videos
…For you (our top 10)
Where should your unit
spend time and money?
#1—Tech trends
• Tech trends vary by audience, but in general,
spend more time on…
• Mobile technologies (most have cell phones)
• Facebook (observing and/or developing a fan page
strategy)
• Informative and scan-able text, intuitive usability,
and strong photography
• Opportunities for prospects/students to comment
on content
• Prominent forward-to-a-friend features (most share
links/photos)
• Blogs/journals for students/adults (prospect
behaviors suggest minimal interest)
#2—More tech trends
• Again, tech trends vary by audience, but spend
less time on…
•
•
•
•
Podcasts
Twitter and LinkedIn
Chats
Online video (unless it’s instructional, music,
sports, or tours)
• Click-through news and features
#3—Online video
• Video can be very effective for niche
audiences and for highly visual, emotive,
or instructive topics deeper within a
campus site.
• If your IU site offers video…
• Limit options (highlight one or two) and
house video with related content: “It takes
too much time to look at a bank of videos.”
#4—More online video
• Choose a varied distribution strategy
(YouTube.edu, Facebook fan page, IU
e-newsletters, etc.) and a title that
matches the content: “I don’t want to be
surprised.”
#5
• Feature students and rarely
administrators: “I’d want to hear from
students, people I’ll actually meet or know.”
#6—More online video
• Minimize scripted language: “Keep it
genuine.”
#7
• Keep it short (about a minute): “I would
watch ‘Thriller’ for seven minutes. In a
college video, get to the point.”
#8—More online video
• Have a point or call-to-action: “What is
the point if it doesn’t make me want to go
to the school?”
#9
• Ensure professionalism: “When I’m
looking at a college Web site, I don’t want
amateur.”
#10—Research
• Do your research and don’t guess:
• What do your metrics tell you?
• Do your audiences care about video?
• Is video more important than improving
other areas of your site?
• How will you define success?
Learn more
• Download a comprehensive research
presentation at: http://tinyurl.com/iuvideoppt
(*PowerPoint file, 3MB, IU authentication required;
includes detailed survey findings by audience and
reactions to every video tested)
• Review Pew Internet’s online video report (2009)
• Contact us with questions:
• Thom Atkinson, [email protected]
• Sherri Knieriem, [email protected]
• Angela Tharp, [email protected]