Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT ... - UC Davis

UC Davis UC Davis Athletics
2011 UC Davis Strategic Athletics Athletics Audit
Strategic Audit 2011
Strengths, Weaknesses
Opportunities, & Threats
collegiate athletics
C A S A
strategy advising

UC Davis Strategic Audit
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats
Current Context of Aggie Athletics
The eight core principles identified by the university in order to guide the process
of moving from NCAA Division II to Division I were:
1. UC Davis must offer a program that does not compromise the University’s
focus on the academic integrity of student–athletes
2. Admissions and graduation standards must in no way be specially altered or
amended for student-athletes
3. There can be no “tiering” among UC Davis sports with some sports and
their athletes receiving a better standard of treatment than others
4. UC Davis cannot retreat from its Title IX progress but must continue to
expand its efforts and compliance
5. UC Davis cannot reduce its broad-based program but rather must seek to
add sports
6. The athletics program cannot depend for its financial survival on its record
of wins and losses
7. Permanent core funding must come from students and the institution
rather than from a dependency on external resources
8. The athletics department at UC Davis must maintain a formal connection to
the mission of the University , including preserving the teacher/coach role
Many UCD administrators, faculty, coaches, alumni and staff that were
interviewed referred to these principles and described them as representing the
“The Davis Way” of athletics. Although worthy principles for NCAA Division III
programs, principles 3, 5, 6, and 7 contradict the philosophy of NCAA Division I
institutions. Principle 8 is also a principle seldom seen at Division I institutions. In
the late 1970’s, NCAA Division I institutions established a principle of selfsufficiency
for its intercollegiate athletics programs. As a result, Division I moved
farther away from the “educational model” of athletics and more toward the
SW 1

“business model”. At many institutions, especially those at the highest Division I
level, athletics programs are treated as auxiliary enterprises within the university.
This model has caused programs to place an emphasis upon potential revenue
generating sports by reinvesting their resources to insure those sports that have
the potential to generate income receive competitive funding to be successful.
Men’s basketball and football have historically received greater resources in an
effort for these sports to be self-sufficient and, hopefully, provide revenues for
the entire department. Often for Title IX purposes a selected number of women’s
sports have received comparable budgets. This practice has led to a tiering of
sports. Many institutions have had to reduce the number of sport offerings and
reinvest in those sports which the conference emphasizes in order to be
competitive. Without being competitive it is difficult for programs to generate
revenue to become as self-sufficient as possible. This need contradicts principles
3, 5, 6, and 7 in the core principles. Because of the need to be competitive,
coaches have broadened their duties to include increased emphasis on recruiting
and fundraising. The time commitments for these affect the teacher/coach
model suggested in the core principles.
A critical component of the transition from Division II to Division I was developing
creative solutions to close the funding gap between the NCAA Division II past and
the NCAA Division I future of the Aggies. Athletics is a part of UC Davis’ $1 billion
campaign goal. A $16 million goal is established to be reached by 2014 with an
ultimate goal of $30 million for a permanent endowment fund for intercollegiate
athletics. The drive targets investment in four key building blocks for success:
facilities, grants-in –aid, endowments and student support services. The existing
Davis level of support for each of these areas has historically been behind
competitive Division I standards.
The grants-in-aid, endowment, and student support deficiencies all continue to be
priorities, but the greatest funding challenges for developing a strong competitive
program is upgrading its athletic facilities. The next phases of the Aggie Stadium
expansion project are intended to address the strength and conditioning, athletic
medicine, administrative, coaching and academic support office spaces.
Additionally, expanding seating in the football stadium will be required in an
effort to increase revenue for the program.
SW 2

Recommendations related to Current Context of Aggie Athletics
1. Evaluate and adjust the University’s Core Principles to more closely
coincide with NCAA Division I, Big West and Big Sky philosophies and
practices.
2. Develop facility priorities that will attract outstanding student athletes by
providing excellent training, tutoring, medical and fitness facilities.
Secondly, provide spectator facility enhancements that will provide
opportunity to significantly increase revenue. Obviously, the football
seating and fan services should receive a high priority.
3. With increased expectations on coaching staffs, the teacher/coach role
needs to be reviewed to determine whether another model might better
serve students desiring to develop athletic skills and increase their fitness
levels.
SWOT Analysis
Campus interviews and ongoing research have revealed a number of areas of
strength as well as weakness that UC Davis faces as the school confronts the
challenge of competing successfully at the Division I level and finding successful
balance in competitive, academic and financial terms.
Strengths
High level academics: UC Davis is currently a top ten public research I
institution and is in the internationally acclaimed crown of higher education that
is the University of California system. It is in the “most selective” category of
universities according to US News and World Report. UC Davis has a number of
nationally-ranked academic departments and programs.
Student-athlete development: With the transition to Division I athletics
being a fairly recent change (officially marked by the 2004-2005 competitive
season), the culture of athletics at UC Davis still retains a commendable sense of
athletics participation being a co-curricular part of the undergraduate experience.
Student-athletes continue to perform at a high level in the classroom even as the
level of athletics has risen. Increases in resources have allowed some teams to
SW 3

ecruit athletes with considerable academic and athletic ability, raising the bar for
performance in both areas. The bike-friendly setting, relative proximity to
Sacramento and San Francisco and charming college town atmosphere give
coaches powerful recruiting tools to use when appropriately leveraged. The
opportunity to convince prospects as to the nature of the student-athlete
experience at UC Davis as a holistic, balanced, and integrated chapter in their lives
is a clear recruiting advantage.
Effective and adaptable coaches: There are some very talented and
motivated coaches within the department who have the potential to coach and
lead teams to a higher competitive level. Their ability to gain relative success
during the transition from Division II is a testament to the creative use of
resources and adaptability to a changing and increasingly complex environment.
The 2004-2005 season, the first season in which all UC Davis sports teams
competed with Division I schedules, was evidence that UC Davis responded well
to Division I competition. Football finished the year 6-4, men’s basketball 11-17,
women’s basketball 9-18 and women’s soccer 8-9-1. Given the logistics and
timing of recruiting, it is expected that the Aggies will improve quickly with the
recruitment of Division I caliber scholarship student-athletes as more full
scholarships come online.
Student body support: A key strength of the university is clearly the support
of the undergraduate student body and their enthusiasm for quality competitive
athletics. The transition to Division I was made possible by the Facilities and
Campus Enhancement (FACE) initiative which levied a significant increase in
student fees in order to largely fund campus upgrades that would improve
athletic facilities. New projects include the Schaal Aquatics Center and the Multi
Use Stadium, both of which are significant improvements of antiquated
intercollegiate athletics and recreationally oriented facilities. Of the $22,542,7 83
million projected sources of funds for the 2010-2011 season, $18.7 million
(76.3%) comes from the FACE ($2,975,507 million), the Student Activities and
Services Initiative (SASI, $7,385,184 million) the Campus Expansion Initiative (CEI,
$5.0 million) and the Student Services fee ($3,169,279 million). Students on
campus are generally passionate about Aggie athletics and feel connected as a
result of broad participation and the integration of intercollegiate athletics
coaches into physical education activity programs.
SW 4

Weaknesses
Culture: The prevailing culture of the athletics program at UC Davis explains
many of the challenges that the school faces in order to compete successfully at a
higher level within Division I. What was a commendable and noteworthy example
of competitive and participatory athletics program, integrated within an
environment that truly emphasized participation as a developmental component
of the undergraduate experience, leaves significant gaps when measured against
the current world of Division I intercollegiate athletics. There are examples of
schools that maintain high academic standards, support a large number of teams,
and compete at the highest level in Division I. Stanford University and the
University of Michigan are examples of institutions with high academic standards,
outstanding facilities and huge operating budgets. They have only been able to do
so as a result of a combination of fund raising and development, ticket sales
particularly from football and basketball, television rights income, sponsorships
and endowment funds. Their budgets are four to five times the current level at UC
Davis. Much of the resistance from faculty and students to these types of
initiatives comes from concerns that the Division I athletic culture would change
UC Davis’ identity. However, without a cultural reorientation towards a model
that is consistent with Division I, it will be difficult to elevate the Aggies’s level of
competitive success. The eight core principles that define the current culture are
completely consistent with UC Davis’ history of athletics but at least five of the
principles represent an impediment to increased competitiveness in Division I.
There is a portion of the coaching, professional staff and alumni that adhere to
these principles and will likely resist any cultural shift.
Facilities: In spite of the upgrades that the 1999 FACE initiative made possible,
many facilities are sub-standard when compared to institutions within even the
lowest tier of Division I athletics. In many sports, UC Davis athletics facilities are
also used by the Departments of Physical Education, Recreation and Intramurals.
Competitive and practice facilities, academic support facilities, medical facilities,
training facilities, and administrative and coaches offices are old and outdated.
Furthermore, in spite of the improvements in the Multi Use Stadium, expansion
will have to go beyond the planned 30,000 seat cap in order to create the scale of
program that has the potential to generate revenues to support all programs
through ticket sales and advertising. Currently, there is not a definitive date for
the additional 20,000 seats that would get the stadium to that cap level.
SW 5

Facility improvements have functional implications. They enhance the ability of
teams to train and compete at the highest possible level; however, the most
important impact is on recruiting. The condition of the current facilities creates a
recruiting disadvantage with relevant and potential competitors. In addition, it
will be very difficult, if not impossible, to generate additional revenues and
improve attendance without major renovations or new facility projects. The
basketball facility is adequate by Big West conference standards, but significant
expansion would be needed to meet Mountain West standards let alone the PAC
12 benchmark. Attracting, retaining, and maintaining quality staff and student
athletes will require considerable improvements in office spaces, athletic training
and strength conditioning facilities and academic support operations.
Operations: Key operational shortcomings that have been noted focus on
business operations (accounting), development, game day operations and
academic support. There are some coaches, staff and campus members who
think that, particularly, the development staff is already too large. However,
during the transition from Division II there has been only a moderate investment
in scaling up administrative and operational staff, not simply in terms of abilities
and skills but also in absolute numbers and processes. What was adequate for a
Division II education based model does not meet the standard for athletic
operations that are required to train and compete at a higher level, generate
significant revenue from game day operations and develop fundraising streams.
With an increase in expectations of competitive performances comes a
substantial increase in administrative support requirements for coaches, in terms
of compliance paperwork, promotions, recruiting correspondence, travel, etc.
There will also be an inevitable need for greater levels of direct academic support
for student athletes. Coaches currently multi-task and perform more
administrative functions and teaching requirements than their counterparts at
other institutions are required to do. This reduces coaching time that could be
spent improving team performance.
Division I Model: The key to being able to compete at the Division I level is
finding creative ways to generate enough revenue from multiple sources in order
to cross-subsidize the various intercollegiate athletics operations that are strictly
cost centers. All of these opportunities require an investment in human resources
and facilities that UC Davis has not made at this point. There is concern from
different quarters of the campus about moving to a Division I athletic model.
SW 6

There are aspects of the Division I model that are indispensable to an institution
that hopes to compete on a level playing field with other universities that fully
embrace the Division I philosophy. One important consideration is the scope of
the athletic program. UC Davis has a broader program than most universities in
the Big Sky, Big West, Mountain West and PAC-12 conferences. Only Stanford
University and the University of California Berkeley have a more extensive
program than UC Davis. UC Berkeley has struggled trying to maintain a broad
based program and is faced with a huge annual financial deficit. Without a
significant increase in revenues, UC Davis will need to consider reinvesting its
resources in order to be competitive in even its current conference alignments.
Opportunities
Innovation in Division I model: There is an opportunity for UC Davis to
pursue a new model that can leverage its existing strengths and address some of
the key challenges facing the department. There is a demand for universities that
can provide excellence in both academics and athletics, and yet provide an
environment that preserves the notion of student-athlete development as a
priority. An analysis of Stanford University’s intercollegiate program to determine
the possibility of UC Davis developing a version of its operation that preserves
high levels of academic integrity but provides adequate resources for conference
success in the Big West and Big Sky Conferences may be useful.
ICA/PE/Recreation: Broad-based participation in recreation, intramurals,
physical education and intercollegiate athletics is a critical part of UC Davis culture
and should be retained, but as previously noted, a structural evaluation of the
relationship may be beneficial for each unit. Sharing of facilities should be
possible, but a fully allocated cost model should be created to better understand
operating and replacement costs between the different units. A consistent
concern expressed during interviews with current coaches indicates a weakness in
communication among staffs in the separate areas. In athletics staff interviews
many felt that intercollegiate athletics should be given greater flexibility and
priority in scheduling use and access to various facilities.
SW 7

Business Operation: UC Davis has an excellent record of fiscal responsibility.
According to the EADA dataset included in the report, the department
consistently operates within tight budget constraints. As the level of athletic
performance improves the university must assert sound financial operation as
part of a new model of sound athletic management which includes greater
transparency.
Added revenue: Opportunities for revenue come from high profile sports
that attract fans and their disposable income for on-campus contests. Athletics
must have administrative and operational responsibility for athletics support
groups, event parking and concessions. In addition, ICA should have increased
percentages of revenues from these areas as well as from online athletics apparel
and licensing rights. The latter should be promoted by ICA in its publications and
other marketing programs. Consideration should be given to revenues from
major and gift campaigns to ICA. The athletics ticket office should be under the
control of the Department of ICA. Not all of these areas can be improved
concurrently, but the new department leadership should model the potential that
each area has and engage the business office in creative solutions to increased
profitability.
Technology applications: In the face of limited resources, every effort
should be made to leverage low-cost/no-cost opportunities for staff functions like
marketing and promotions, broadcasting games and results, connecting with
alumni and donors, etc. There are a wide variety of applications of social and
digital media that are not currently being utilized but are critical to current
fundraising/friendraising and public relations efforts. Several coaches discussed
the relative invisibility of UC Davis athletics and that problem could be solved with
minimal investment through the application of technology. The current
administrative and coaching staffs may require training on various platforms;
therefore, some thought should be given to the creation of a media lab facility
where staff can obtain tutorials on the use of platforms such as Face book and
Twitter. There may be opportunities to employ undergraduate interns to staff a
lab and possibly provide regular support for teams and department activities.
Travel management: Travel is reportedly inefficient in terms of
organization and the ability to manage costs. Significant savings in cost and time
management can be realized by either using a central travel agency or by training
those who travel. Assistant coaches, secretaries, and other staff with minimal
SW 8

training can benefit by learning to use internet sites. The possibility of value
managed relationships with local providers (e.g. bus companies and hotels)
should also be evaluated by the business office staff.
Outsourcing: The business office should evaluate the possibility of an
outsourcing contract with vendors to automate some of the bureaucratic
requirements and manage administrative and oversight costs. It is possible to
bridge the gap between current levels of administration and the need at the next
level through the use of web-based data management tools to facilitate
compliance audits and tracking of recruiting activities.
Promotions and Marketing: Almost every coach expressed enthusiasm and
passion for the brand that UC Davis could potentially have, but almost all believe
that the brand is not currently being adequately promoted. Even within the local
Sacramento media market, there is not sufficient awareness of Aggie events or
results. This is another challenge that can be addressed through the application
of digital media. For example, every sport should have sideline “reporters” who
tweet results at a play-by-play level and the availability of each sport’s Twitter
feed should be well-publicized to current students, alumni, parents, fans and
media. Professional sports are beginning to use this channel with great effect.
The same technology conclusion is true for improvement in development/donor
operations through use of digital media and web-based technologies for
communication and friendraising.
Game day experience: Another consistent theme is the difficulty of
creating game day experiences that attract and retain fan interest. The
relationship between Campus Recreation and Intercollegiate Athletics apparently
creates logistical complication and customer service issues that mitigate against
increasing attendance. ICA control of the game day fan experience would open
up opportunities for increased ticket sales and a deeper level of community
connection as well as reduced game day stress for coaching staffs.
Culture: There is an opportunity for the new leadership to dramatically improve
department morale through the development of unifying departmental themes
and approaches to training, competition, and team building. Many of the coaches
do not have a sense of where the department is going as a whole, have little or no
contact with their colleagues, and do not feel as if they have a clearly defined role
in a larger enterprise. Though the athletic department offices are not yet
centrally aggregated, an intentional effort by the new athletic director to regularly
SW 9

meet with all head coaches will greatly aid in communication and unity. In
addition, some consideration should be given to developing a best practice
database for recruiting, marketing and development work in order to enable
sharing and collaboration across the department. Resource limitations mean that
coaches will have to follow an entrepreneurial model of management, but they
should be able to access the significant expertise that already exists in the
department among their colleagues. Other possible steps include regularly
scheduled coaches’ roundtables, creation of a formal coaches’ leadership
structure to increase their sense of empowerment and unity, and regular
communication of policy changes and decisions by the athletic director. Not
every decision must be explained or approved by the coaches, but there is a clear
sense of disconnect that increases the sense of isolation by coaches from
administrative functions.
Service attitude: A frequent complaint from coaches across NCAA
institutions is the attitude of service in administrative offices. UC Davis is no
exception. The coaches perceive that the Athletics Department lacks a culture of
customer service. Rather, the coaches often experience a sense of being “policed”
by administrators and put into a mode of serving administrators, rather than
being supported as the most direct influencers in the lives of student-athletes. In
the interview process with coaches there was a number of comments regarding
“demotivating” styles of leadership, management, and communications from
administrative and support staff.
Student pride: A relatively simple opportunity for cultural change would be
to enhance and develop a culture of pride among student-athletes. Some student
athletes expressed disappointment that is no annual recognition program for
student-athletes in their sport. Recognition programs celebrate the achievements
of student athletes and can help capture a sense of loyalty and institutional pride.
Acculturating student-athletes to the idea of institutional support and annual
giving is far easier before they are graduated than five years post-graduation.
SW 10

Threats
Haste: Appropriate and strategic pacing is rare in intercollegiate athletics when
it comes to major departmental changes. No athletic department has successfully
moved up through the hierarchy of Division levels and conferences without first
achieving a leadership position in both athletic and financial performance at their
current level. It is impossible to simply purchase a leap from one conference or
Division to the next. Therefore, one of the greatest threats facing UC Davis is
overreach, that is setting aspirations and goals for the athletic department that
are not adequately matched by available resources. While it is possible to
dramatically increase the amount of financial resources available for investment
in facilities, operations, and coaching salaries, it will require judicious
consideration of the order, scale, and timing of investments if the university is to
avoid the overreach that characterizes the majority of programs that chase the
elite success in intercollegiate athletics.
Stagnation: Another threat is loss of momentum from the initial transition to
Division I. Initially, there was considerable enthusiasm and excitement on campus
and in the local community about the change. However, there appears to be a
sense within the department that interest has lessened. No doubt the financial
reductions across the campus as well as in athletics have affected that interest.
There is currently a perception among the coaching staff that the department is
not uniformly moving in the direction of being highly competitive in Division I.
Leadership: The current culture seems to be fraught with a sense of futility,
frustration, and concern for the lack of visible leadership. A number of coaches
identified the absence of a clear and compelling vision for the department as one
of the major stumbling blocks to progress. There are also coaches,
administrators, and support staff who have lengthy tenures that have been
unable to evolve their mindset regarding operations and expectations from the
Division II past. The new athletic director will have to clearly delineate an
elevated level of expectations in terms of performance and efficiency as he or she
considers new and creative models that may require a re-organization in order to
facilitate a more professionalized sport management approach.
SW 11