In the course of two years, the outlook on Div. III's future has changed rather dramatically.
Since last fall, the division has been unveiling the results of its identity initiative, a project aimed at identifying and articulating the values shared by its 432 active member institutions. The effort is, on one hand, an attempt to market and rebrand Div. III — often seen, plain and simple, as the group within the NCAA that doesn't award scholarships — and to better convey what it offers prospective student athletes. Thus far, the initiative's efforts have resulted in videos, slogans and signage that portray Div. III institutions as places unique in the landscape of college athletics for their ability to provide enriching experiences, both in the classroom and on the playing field.
But while at least parts of the initiative are targeted at external audiences that may hold certain misconceptions about Div. III, a great deal of the effort is also geared toward the division's own constituents. For a conglomeration of institutions that stretches from northern Maine to southern California, the identity initiative is its expression of its common philosophies.
"We're a very large division, and it's really important for us to focus on our shared values," Div. III Vice President Dan Dutcher told the Daily. "Certainly we want folks to understand what Div. III represents, what Div. III stands for. But ultimately, [the identity initiative] is more focused on a fundamental understanding and reaffirmation of the values we share as a division."
The fact that the NCAA's largest membership institution is now so concerned about what unites it reflects a significant shift in how it views its diversity. After all, it was as recently as 2008 when members of the governance structure felt that Div. III had grown to be so big that it was accommodating too many competing viewpoints and that achieving a consensus on critical issues was nearly impossible. Those discussions even prompted the division to engage in a serious conversation about whether it should maintain its existing structure or split up once and for all.
How, then, did Div. III get from that point two years ago, when it seemed divided enough to consider pursuing the most drastic of solutions, to today, when it is undertaking a project that communicates the goals and ideals its members have in common? And how did that shift in thinking culminate in a landmark expression of the division's identity? Eighty−two percent: an overwhelming show of support
In January 2008, a working group examining membership issues in Div. III recommended the creation of a "Div. IV" as a means of resolving the apparent philosophical schism between constituent institutions. The proposal implied that the so−called traditional schools, which backed such core Div. III tenants as broad−based athletics programming, could no longer coexist with newer entrants to the division that tended, for instance, to sponsor fewer sports.
But pushback against that point of view was vocalized almost immediately, beginning at Div. III's annual convention and continuing at a series of subsequent town hall meetings that further discussed membership concerns. What started to emerge from this early resistance to the proposed split was a sense that there was perhaps more affinity for the Div. III model than was being suggested.
"I think that whole movement [to split] was more a function of the agenda of a few people than it was representative of a larger feeling within Div. III," Tufts Athletics Director Bill Gehling said. "But in the end, I feel things worked the way they should. On the convention floor, people stood up — and I was one of them — and pushed back, and the committee did what they should do, which is to reach out and get a sense of whether the feelings that some of us were expressing were more broadly held. And when they found that they were, they began to move it in a new direction."
The most forceful expression of opposition, however, came later that year in April, when a membership survey confirmed that Div. III was suiting an overwhelming majority of its constituents just fine. Of the over 420 schools that responded to the survey, a whopping 82 percent either supported or strongly supported maintaining the existing divisional structure, while just 16 percent expressed at least some support for creating a new NCAA division.
The results sent a clear message that in spite of certain philosophical differences that may have existed within the membership, institutions still generally believed in Div. III and what it stood for.
"I think it's important to remember the NCAA is a member association — it's very democratic," Dutcher said. "We have a good faith responsibility to explore structural options, and we did that thoroughly. But it was clear from the membership response in the survey that a clear majority of the membership didn't want to go there.
"I wouldn't say there wasn't any value in those discussions — I think there was great value in those discussions," Dutcher added. "One of the things it reinforced was that a large majority of our member schools want to stay together under the Div. III banner."
With the survey results in mind, the division formally tabled discussions of a possible split. But if restructuring was no longer a viable option in the membership's mind, Div. III needed to figure out how it was going to proceed into the future as one extremely diverse entity.
Enter the identity initiative. Toward a shared identity
The need to articulate a common Div. III philosophy was an idea that originated in a series of white papers a Presidents Council subcommittee produced in the aftermath of the division's restructuring debate. Now that Div. III had opted to remain intact for at least the foreseeable future, the white papers suggested, it was especially important that its members come to some consensus about the ties that bound them together.
Institutional diversity — which just months prior was seen by some as reason for Div. III to split — was now being embraced, so long as there was general agreement within the membership regarding certain core beliefs.
"The clear membership direction was to move forward, but to move forward as a division," Dutcher said. "The white papers said, OK, if we're going to move forward as a division, what we first need to recognize are the values that bind us together. So one of the issues they identified as needing to be addressed immediately was the division's philosophy and identity."
Div. III members then began a process of identifying precisely those unifying principles and, in the process, answering a most fundamental question: Who are we? Thus began the identity initiative, a project that was the hallmark focus of the division's 2009 agenda.
"I think this was really an opportunity to take the time to reflect and identify really those key points that bring Div. III together," said Andrea Savage, executive director of the New England Small College Athletic Conference. "The identity initiative helped the membership speak with, for lack of a better term, one voice when talking about all those important attributes and what we think is really critical to Div. III."
The initial stages of the effort involved collecting research — for instance, by soliciting responses to an online survey, conducting interviews with various constituencies within the membership and meeting with the division's governance bodies — that would help elucidate a common Div. III philosophy. The thousands of student athletes, coaches, faculty members, presidents and conference administrators who offered their opinions tended to portray their institutions as places where athletic participation complemented a more comprehensive educational experience, one in which primary emphasis was placed on academic achievement.
This led in September 2009 to the first product of the identity initiative: a strategic−positioning platform that spoke of Div. III as a place for student athletes to "follow their passions and develop their potential."
"The entire Div. III experience is really all about following passions and discovering potentials — first and foremost in the classroom, second on the playing field and then third through co−curricular or extracurricular activities," Dutcher said. "That's really, we think, a unique experience in Div. III. We're not necessarily talking about a balance with competitive interests. We're really talking about a more comprehensive educational experience that benefits all three of those settings."
With its core philosophy now clearly defined, the division's next goal was to communicate it. Activating the platform
Since its 2010 Convention in January, Div. III has unveiled additional pieces of its identity effort. It has, for instance, already developed a new logo and produced two videos to better convey some of the central themes of the initiative. Furthermore, signage promoting Div. III identity will be seen this spring at NCAA championship events, while a publically focused Web site, which Dutcher characterized as "Div. III 101," will be launched in late May or early June.
The aim of this marketing stage of the identity initiative is to begin communicating to both the division's internal and external audiences its central tenants.
"Frankly, what the videos talk about is precisely why I work in Div. III and have never really sought to move up divisions," Gehling said. "I feel at this level, we really have the balance right.
"Quite honestly, that's what we've been trying to sell at Tufts and within the NESCAC for years," Gehling continued. "This is a place where you can go to college and be very serious about your athletics but not at the expense of a broader college experience. That obviously includes primarily your academics. So I think the videos do a pretty darn good job of painting Div. III in a positive light."
Certainly, the identity initiative and its subsequent activation have not resolved all the issues that prompted the division to consider splitting up as early as two years ago. They have, however, offered a reason for the membership to stay together and a unifying objective to rally behind.
"This is definitely a step toward answering some of the issues that came up during that whole conversation about the structure of the division," said Keri Alexander Luchowski, acting executive director of the North Coast Athletic Conference. "We are a very large division, and all of our institutions have different goals and different needs, and they all serve a different purpose. So anything that can help us remember just what the philosophy of Div. III is I think is a good thing."
