It's complicated: Exploring the co-creation of land-grant brand identity amongst faculty members at Oklahoma State University

Abstract

Land-grant institutions (LGIs) are tasked with providing accessible education to the common man and improving their quality of life. This study examined faculty members' awareness, perceptions, and interpretations of the land-grant mission at Oklahoma State University (OSU). Branding is the theoretical framework for this study. Faculty members are the primary deliverers university missions. Universities' effectiveness are often called into question by the public and funds continue to be reduced. Past studies have indicated some personnel are unaware of pieces of the land-grant mission. A strong brand presence increases the likelihood of a positive public image. Participants were recruited using a purposive sampling method. Eleven focus groups were conducted in the summer of 2020. The audio was transcribed and imported into MAXQDA20. The data were analyzed using Glaser's constant comparative method to identify themes, which were confirmed by assistant moderators. The data were triangulated using artifacts from OSU's website, faculty orientation materials, and a post-focus group questionnaire. All participants had heard about the land-grant mission, but not all had a grasp of what it meant. Participants were unsure if the public or students understood the land-grant mission. Participants had multiple definitions of the land-grant mission. Although the land-grant mission did not specifically influence which behaviors faculty members engaged in, it did seem to affect how faculty members worked. There was a general state of concern for the future. Participants did not mention Extension when asked about OSU. As university brands should be consistent with its missions, one could argue the internal branding of OSU could be improved. Results indicate a need to improve the internal understanding of the land-grant mission at OSU. Given the less than prolific understanding of the land-grant mission amongst faculty members, internal communication of the land-grant mission should improve. I suggest hosting an annual summit where faculty members could discuss their efforts related to the land-grant mission, network with colleagues from other colleges, and learn more about the land-grant mission in action. Future research should explore the internal brand of other LGIs. University staff, administration, and student perceptions of the land-grant mission should be explored.