©Please note: Peggie Ncube owns the copyright for the dissertation below. You may download and print one copy for educational purposes only. These pages may not be duplicated, distributed, redistributed or republished in any manner without express permission from the author.


CHAPTER 7


 

CONCLUSION

Overview of Study

Theodore Hesburgh, president emeritus of the University of Notre Dame, was one of the most successful university presidents in terms of fund raising.  At the time of his retirement in 1987, alumni giving rose from about 50% when he became president in 1952 to about 86% of the total funds received by the University in 1987 (Hesburgh, 1999).  Hesburgh’s renown as a successful university president is marked by the 146 honors and honorary degrees awarded to him.  Kerry Temple states, “Notre Dame’s growth under Hesburgh was the amassing of adequate financial resources to underwrite the University’s aspirations—an advantage Notre Dame lacked throughout its first century” (1979, p. 70).  Thomas Stritch contends that “Hesburgh’s achievement was like the mustard seed of the biblical parable. . . . His accomplishments are of a magnitude none of his predecessors would have dreamed of” (1987, p. 27).  Schaal (1987) confirms that with his new title as president emeritus, “Father Ted [as he is sometimes called] will still be involved in some administration functions, including fund raising” (p. 6).

In the fund-raising field, information is scarce on what makes presidents successful fundraisers.  Although educational costs continue to escalate, university presidents are increasingly expected to excel in raising funds for their institutions.   For those presidents who succeed, success is reported in terms of the amount of money they raise, and little is said about the techniques they use to raise funds.  This study examines Father Hesburgh’s success as a fund-raiser with the alumni at the University of Notre Dame.  It investigates how Father Hesburgh structured his rhetoric in his fund-raising speeches to alumni to affect their perceptions in ways that encouraged giving. 

The data used for this study are Hesburgh’s nine available tape-recorded fund-raising speeches and one video presentation that were transcribed for analysis.  The study assumes a rhetorical design, specifically the Burkean pentad, in an attempt to understand Hesburgh’s motive for developing his fund-raising rhetoric with the alumni.  Pentadic analysis allows for principles of act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose to be applied to a text to discover human motives.  The act refers to the action or actions taken by the agent.  The scene is the location, situation, or environment where the action takes place.  The agent is the individual, group, or main character the rhetor presents as player of the act.  The agency is the means or instrument for accomplishing the act.  The purpose suggests what the agent seeks to accomplish through the act--the reason for the act.

The second part of the pentadic analysis involves pairing the terms to create ratios.  The term that dominates or affects the other in the ratio is the controlling term.  Burke suggests that the controlling term then defines how the rhetor creates a worldview to make the audience consubstantial.  When an audience is consubstantial or identifies with the rhetor, persuasion results.

Interpretation of Pentadic Analyses

This section is divided into two parts, “Frequency of Dominant Terms” and “Meaning of Dominant Terms.”  The first section reports frequency of dominant terms in each speech and frequency of dominant terms by decades.  To determine Hesburgh’s organizing principle or conceptual schema, in the second section, I analyze the substance or content of the terms in the order of most frequently dominant--purpose, act, agency, agent, and scene--for Hesburgh.  

Hesburgh’s terms for purpose focus on enacting Notre Dame principles, creating a superlative Notre Dame, and supporting Notre Dame, with the first two the most important.  His terms for act focus on creating a superlative Notre Dame, engaging in Christian acts, connecting to Notre Dame, and building buildings, with the act of creating a superlative Notre Dame forming an interesting repetition of the purpose.  Hesburgh’s terms for agency center on human effort, human effort in conjunction with the divine, and money.  Agent includes the categories of the University of Notre Dame, students and alumni, University of Notre Dame administrators, Catholic universities, and the Ford Foundation.   Scene is insignificant for Hesburgh as it was controlling in only one pentad throughout all the speeches.

Frequency of Dominant Terms in Each Speech

Table 103 to 112 are frequencies of dominant terms in each of Hesburgh’s speeches listed according to most frequent terms.

                                   


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Table 103

 

Address to Gentlemen Alumni

Pentadic Terms

 

Frequencies

 Act

 

8

 Agent

 

3

Agency

 

1

Purpose

 

1

Scene

 

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 104

 

Fund Raising for the New Library

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

7

 

Act

4

 

Agency

4

 

Agent

3

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 105

 

Ford Foundation Challenge Grant

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

6

 

Agency

2

 

Agent

1

 

Act

0

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 106

 

Alumni Reunion Banquet

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

4

 

Act

2

 

Agent

1

 

Agency

0

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

Table 107

 

Fund-Raising Address

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Act

4

 

Agency

3

 

Purpose

3

 

Agent

2

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 108

 

Ford Foundation Grant Presentation

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

3

 

Act

1

 

Scene

1

 

Agent

1

 

Agency

0

 

 

 

 

 


                                                                               

 

 

Table 109

 

Opening Campaign Century Center

Pentadic Terms

 

Frequencies

Act

6

 

Agency

3

 

Agent

2

 

Purpose

2

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 110

 

Alumni Reunion Talk

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

4

 

Act

4

 

Agency

2

 

Agent

0

 

Scene

0

 

 

                               


 

Table 111

 

Edward Fredrick Sorin Society

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Agency

2

 

Act

1

 

Agent

0

 

Purpose

0

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 112

 

Alumni Reunion Banquet

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

5

 

Agency

3

 

Act

1

 

Agent

0

 

Scene

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summary of Dominant Terms by Decades

            Table 113 to 115 are summary frequencies of dominant terms in Hesburgh’s speeches by decades, beginning with the most frequently dominant term.

 

 

 

 

Table 113

 

Summary of All Dominant Terms From the 50s and 60s

Pentadic Terms

 

Frequencies

Purpose

 

14

Act

 

11

Agent

 

7

 

Agency

7

 

Scene

 

0

 

 

 

 

 

Table 114

 

Summary of All Dominant Terms From the 70s

Pentadic Terms

 

Frequencies

Act

 

13

 

Purpose

12

 

Agent

 

6

 

Agency

6

 

Scene

 

1

 

 

 

 

Table 115

 

Summary of All Dominant Terms From the 80s

Pentadic Terms

Frequencies

 

Purpose

9

 

Agency

 

7

Act

 

6

Agent

 

0

Scene

 

0

 

 

 

Dominant Terms for All Speeches

 

            The following terms were found to be dominant in Hesburgh’s speeches from the 50s to the 80s:

1.                  Purpose: To embody and model Notre Dame principles (Table 12)

To make Notre Dame students and alumni grow and become more significant in the state of Michigan (Table 16)

To make this the next magnificent building next to the Dome (Table 17)

To consolidate cultures (Table 18)

To get them into a chorus so they add up into something good for mankind (Table 23)

To bring power, unity, strength, and understanding to the attention of modern life and modern culture (Table 24)

To keep the thing moving (Table 28)

To make Notre Dame the best in the tradition of what the church did in the Middle Ages (Table 29)

To make Notre Dame a great, outstanding bastion of education (Table 31)

To create a great university (Table 32)

To create a great university (Table 33)

To create a living, working memorial of all that Notre Dame is striving to be in the years to come (Table 34)

To create a great new Notre Dame focus on the great new library (Table 35)

To show what can be done, symbolized in the great new library (Table 36)

To express appreciation for the growth of their children (Table 44)

To express appreciation for what Notre Dame did for Bonnie (Table 45)

Purpose:  To convey the positive impact of Notre Dame on her life (Table 46)

To show that Notre Dame is still that kind of place to those who study there (Table 47)

To renew the dignity of human life (Table 53)

To educate people on values and principle of how to live with change (Table 54)

To vindicate the faith of the young French priest (Table 58)

To support Notre Dame (Table 59)

Not to let Notre Dame go out of existence (Table 60)

To make the University a better place (Table 61)

To reach 100% of the goal (Table 67)

To surpass the goal of $130 million (Table 69)

To redeem himself and be renewed (Table 81)

Do what could never be done before (Table 83)

To get pulse of campus, to receive greatest grace (Table 86)

To love God by loving our afflicted neighbors (Table 88)

To make progress (Table 94)

To represent the University of Notre Dame in everything they do (Table 95)

To support the University of Notre Dame (Table 96)

To serve the poor (Table 98)

To cultivate the love of God and love of our fellow man (Table 101)

 

2.                  Act:        Building new buildings on campus (Table 4)

Getting internal transformation (Table 5)

Learning to be Christian (Table 7)

Developing a competitive spirit (Table 9)

Flunked out of Notre Dame (Table 10)

Pulling out all the stops--surpassing goals of fund drive (Table 11)

Walking around Notre Dame campus (Table 13)

Chose Notre Dame to be among the universities designated to receive funds (Table 21)

Getting involved in the problems of the world (Table 22)

Building new labs (Table 27)

Make Notre Dame the best place on earth (Table 30)

Making Notre Dame a reality (Table 41)

Presided over the Notre Dame alumni for 31 years (Table 42)

Grew 10 times (Table 45)

Went out of existence or became secularized (Table 55)

Will make it (Table 58)

Contribute more than $130 million (Table 59)

Decided to join the priesthood (Table 63)                 

Building to a new level of accomplishment (Table 70)

Founded the Universite de Notre Dame du Lac (Table 71)

Burned down the university (Table 72)

Has made progress since 1945 (Table 74)

Moving up the list of university endowments (Table 75)

Campaign for the University of Notre Dame (Table 76)

Coming back to ideas (Table 80)

Built $200 million facilities (Table 84)

Added to endowment (and passing other schools on the endowment list) (Table 85)

Praying (Table 87)

Helping to write the Notre Dame story (Table 92)

Tutoring, serving as big brother/big sister, caring for the old, sitting with the dying, helping Mongoloid children, looking out for minority children (Table 99)

 

3.                  Agency:  Monetary contribution (Table 8)

Willing spirit in support of Notre Dame (Table 14)

Willing spirit (Table 15)

Revised terms of funding (Table 20)

Money to be raised in less time than required (Table 26)

Peace Corps project (Table 37)

The endowment (Table 39)

38th anniversary (Table 48)

Catholic influence (Table 50)

Leadership of John Cavanaugh (Table 52)

Notre Dame Night (Table 66)

Indomitable faith and vision (Table 73)

Special people with blood on the bricks (Table 77)

Rebirth (Table 79)

Spiritual reality, faith, commitment, and enthusiasm (Table 89)

Enormous dedication (Table 90)

Panoply of experience, film, mass, sermon (Table 91)

Different approaches to problems (Table 93)

Recognition of enthusiasm on campus (Table 97)

 Students praying and celebrating mass (Table 100)

 

4.                  Agent:    Returning alumni (Table 3)

The University of Notre Dame (Table 6)

Notre Dame alumni (Table 8)

The University of Notre Dame (Table 16)

Catholic universities (Table 19)

Ford Foundation (Table 25)

New library (Table 30)

Notre Dame (Table 43)

Father Sorin (Table 49)

Father Sorin (Table 51)

Notre Dame University students and alumni (Table 64)

Notre Dame people (Table 65)

The Rosenthals (Table 68)

 

Scene:  Alumni Hall Chapel (Table 62).

Summary of Dominant Terms of All the Speeches

A summary of all the dominant terms in all of the speeches revealed that purpose was dominant 35 times, act was dominant 30 times, agency was dominant 20 times, agent was dominant 13 times, and scene was dominant once.

Table 116 is a summary of dominant terms from the 50s to the 80s according to most frequent.

 

 

Table 116

 

Summary of All Dominant Terms

Pentadic Terms

 

Frequencies

 

Purpose

 

35

 

Act

 

30

 

Agency

 

20

 

Agent

 

13

 

Scene

 

1

 

 

Meaning of Dominant Terms

In this section, each type of dominant term from all of the speeches is divided into categories based on content.

Purpose

Of all the dominant terms Hesburgh used, purpose is most frequent.  The following categories of purpose were identified: to enact Notre Dame principles, to create a superlative Notre Dame, and to support Notre Dame.

1.         To enact Notre Dame principles:

To create a living, working memorial of all that Notre Dame is striving to be in the years to come

To educate people on values and principles of how to live with change

To represent the University of Notre Dame in everything they do

To get the pulse of campus, to receive greatest grace

To show that Notre Dame is still that kind of place to those who study there

To convey the positive impact of Notre Dame on her life

To express appreciation for what Notre Dame did for Bonnie

To express appreciation for the growth of their children

Not to let Notre Dame go out of existence

To embody and model Notre Dame principles

To make Notre Dame students and alumni grow and become more significant in the state of Michigan

To consolidate cultures

To bring power, unity, strength, and understanding to the attention of modern life and modern culture

To serve the poor

To love God by loving our afflicted neighbors

To redeem himself and be renewed

To vindicate the faith of the young French priest

To renew the dignity of human life

To get them into a chorus so they add up into something good for mankind

To cultivate the love of God and love of our fellow man

 

2.         To create a superlative Notre Dame:

To do what could never be done before

To create a great university

To create a great university

To make Notre Dame the best in the tradition of what the church did in the Middle Ages

To make the University a better place

To make Notre Dame a great, outstanding bastion of education

To create a great new Notre Dame focus on the great new library

To make this the next magnificent building next to the Dome

To make progress

To show what can be done, symbolized in the great new library

To keep the thing moving

To reach 100 percent of the goal

To surpass the goal of 130 million dollars

 

3.         To support Notre Dame:

To support the University of Notre Dame

To support Notre Dame

 

Among the five terms of the pentad, Hesburgh emphasizes purpose the most.  The two primary purposes that are evident in his speeches are to enact the University of Notre Dame’s principles and to create a superlative University of Notre Dame.   Enacting principles of the University of Notre Dame is most important for him.  Hesburgh’s primary purpose, as evidenced in his rhetoric in constructing his world, is not to gain financial support for the University of Notre Dame but to enact the University’s principles in the lives of the alumni.  These are the principles of love, service, Christian living, vindicating faith, consolidating cultures, and conveying what the University of Notre Dame does to the lives of students. 

Hesburgh demonstrates these principles by referring to alumni whose lives left indelible impressions on those with whom they worked or came into contact: Jim Cleary from Detroit, who lived a Christian life and died a Christian, and Albert Schweitzer, who sacrificed opportunities so he could spend his life working among the poor in Gabon, Africa.  What is interesting in the purpose of enacting the University’s principles is the idea of conveying what the University of Notre Dame does in the lives of students.  Hesburgh seems to suggest that conveying what the University does in the lives of students is as important as living a Christian life and helping the poor.  The stories that the alumni tell about the University of Notre Dame convey principles to which alumni must conform; they are expected to convey those stories and experiences inasmuch as they are expected to live Christian lives. 

The purpose of creating a superlative University of Notre Dame projects the University’s vision, a typical fund-raising approach.  Hesburgh wants the alumni to know that there are great things to be done by the University: to do what could never be done before, create a great university, have an outstanding bastion of education, build a magnificent library, surpass fund-raising goals, and make the University a better place.  The implication here is that the alumni’s monetary contribution can help the University do these things.  Interestingly, Hesburgh does not explicitly state that the alumni should make a monetary contribution.  There is an enthymeme here—audience members are expected to fill in the conclusion that they ought to contribute to the University so that great things can be done, but he does not directly state this.

Burke suggests that if purpose is featured in a pentadic analysis, the corresponding philosophy is mysticism--the element of unity is emphasized to the point that individuality disappears.  Identification becomes so strong that the individual is unified with some cosmic or universal purpose.  Hesburgh wants his audience members to have the sense that they are united with the University of Notre Dame and its principles so much that they cannot separate those principles from any aspect of their lives.  He wants them to see a connection between the University of Notre Dame’s principles and God and Christianity because many of the things he wants the audience to enact are those kinds of things.  Thus, there is a unity with the University of Notre Dame and a uniting with the cosmic God as well.

The purpose of supporting the University of Notre Dame is almost insignificant in the stated rhetoric of Hesburgh’s speeches.  Hesburgh’s rhetoric features the University’s principles that the alumni must enact in their lives; in doing so, the implication is, the alumni will support the University.

Act

Act is the second dominant term used by Hesburgh.  The following are the categories that characterize the nature of the act: creating a superlative Notre Dame, engaging in Christian acts, connecting to Notre Dame, and building buildings.

1.         Creating a superlative Notre Dame:

Developing a competitive spirit

Flunked out of Notre Dame

Will make it

Has made progress since 1945

Moving up the list of university endowments

Making Notre Dame the best place on earth

Pulling out all the stops--surpassing goals of fund drive

Chose Notre Dame to be among the universities designated to receive funds

Campaign for the University of Notre Dame

Contribute more than $130 million

Added to endowment

Grew 10 times

 

2.         Engaging in Christian acts:

Getting internal transformation

Getting involved in the problems of the world

Decided to join the priesthood

Praying

Tutoring, serving as big brother/big sister, caring for the old, sitting with the dying, helping Mongoloid children, looking out for minority children

 

3.         Connecting to Notre Dame:

Coming back to ideas

Making Notre Dame a reality

Went out of existence or became secularized

Helping to write the Notre Dame story

Walking around Notre Dame campus

Presided over the Notre Dame alumni for 31 years

Founded the Universite de Notre Dame du Lac

 

4.         Building Buildings:

Building new buildings on campus

Building new labs

Burned down the university

Built $200 million facilities

Hesburgh’s featuring of act is essentially equal to the featuring of purpose.  Four acts emerge: creating a superlative University of Notre Dame, engaging in Christian acts, connecting to the University of Notre Dame, and building buildings.  The act of creating a superlative University of Notre Dame is parallel to the purpose of “to create a superlative University of Notre Dame.”  There is almost a total overlap between act and purpose here.  Hesburgh is featuring and emphasizing the creation of excellence and downplaying the actual asking for financial support. 

In creating a superlative University of Notre Dame, Hesburgh wants the alumni to see the University as being in competition and succeeding.  There is momentum to excel in making the University of Notre Dame the best place on earth and growing 10 times more.  Creating a superlative University requires the act of campaigning for the University of Notre Dame, moving up the endowment list, pulling out all the stops—surpassing the goals of the fund drive, and contributing to the University of Notre Dame.  Of the 13 acts of creating a superlative University of Notre Dame that appear in Hesburgh’s speeches, only 2 specifically mention the act of adding to the endowment and contributing more than $130 million.  Again, he leaves the audience members to fill in the conclusion that they ought to make monetary contribution so the endowment will increase and more than $130 million can be raised.

The acts of engaging in Christian acts and connecting to the University of Notre Dame parallel his purpose.  In engaging in Christian acts, Hesburgh wants his audience to experience internal transformation, learn to be Christian, and get involved in the problems of the world.  He wants them to live prayerful lives and be of use in society.  When the alumni were students at the University, they learned how to be Christian, and now Hesburgh is reinforcing these virtues so they will continue to practice them in their daily lives.  In doing so, the alumni are connecting with the University in that they are coming back to ideas (which they learned during their years as students), making the University of Notre Dame a reality.  Hesburgh believes the reality of the University is shown in the lives of its students and alumni wherever they are.  Thus, when students and alumni engage in Christian living, the reality of the University of Notre Dame comes into being.  The world must see and know the University through the lives of the alumni and not necessarily through the physical Notre Dame.

Hesburgh’s interest in the lives of the alumni as demonstrative of the reality of the University of Notre Dame is again seen in his minimal references to the physical aspects of the University.  In his rhetoric, Hesburgh names 31 acts, and only 4 of them make direct reference to building buildings on campus:  building new buildings on campus, building new labs, and building $200 million facilities.  He also makes reference to the act of the burning down of buildings during the University’s early stages.  Even though his main interest in fund raising is to get money for physical things--and often buildings--that is not what he emphasizes.  His emphasis is on universals, particularly universal principles, and he leaves the audience to decide what needs to be done to get there.

Because Hesburgh’s featuring of act is so close to his featuring of purpose as the dominant term and because of the overlap between his terms for purpose and act, the corresponding philosophical school for the featuring of act should be considered as well as the philosophical school for purpose.  Act corresponds to realism, the doctrine that universal principles are more real than the objects sensed through the senses.  Hesburgh demonstrates this in the kinds of acts he names.

Agency

The categories for agency Hesburgh creates are as follows:  human effort, human effort in conjunction with the divine, and money.

1.         Human effort:

Notre Dame Night

Recognition of enthusiasm on campus

Peace Corps project

Leadership of John Cavanaugh

Special people with blood on the bricks

Different approaches to problems

Panoply of experience, film, mass sermon

38th anniversary

Students praying and celebrating mass

 

2.         Human effort in conjunction with the divine:

Catholic influence

Indomitable faith and vision

Rebirth

Spiritual reality, faith, commitment, and enthusiasm

Enormous dedication

Willing spirit in support of Notre Dame

Willing spirit

 

3.         Money category:

Monetary contribution

Revised terms of funding

The endowment

Money to be raised in less time than required

Hesburgh sees three ways for accomplishing the acts.  These are through the agency of human effort, human effort in conjunction with the divine, and money.  The human effort includes the agencies of participating in Notre Dame Night, Peace Corps projects, recognizing enthusiasm on campus, celebrating anniversaries, watching films, and listening to sermons at mass.  The agency of human effort also encompasses the leadership of John Cavanaugh, special people with blood on the bricks, and different approaches to solving problems.  Again, these are not typical ways of raising funds.

The agency of human effort in conjunction with the divine includes Catholic influence, indomitable faith and vision, rebirth, dedication, commitment, and willing spirit in support of the University of Notre Dame. These are things people do with divine assistance.  Although Hesburgh wants his audience to act, he believes they need divine assistance to do what they need to do. 

The last agency Hesburgh features in his speeches is money.  Interestingly, this agency is of less importance to Hesburgh in that it is mentioned the least—only four times in the 20 agencies he names.  Money is rarely the means he discusses.  This leaves human effort as agency in Hesburgh’s world.  This is noteworthy in that Hesburgh has been talking about enacting Christian and spiritual principles as the most important in his purpose and act, but he does not direct his audience to go to divine intervention as the means for getting resources.  For the first time, a slightly more direct link emerges to what he wants the people in the audience to do—engage in financial efforts on behalf of the University of Notre Dame.  Their effort is seen as the most important, even if some connection to the divine in involved.  Many of the human efforts do not seem very hard or very difficult--for example, attending Notre Dame Night, taking different approaches to problems, watching films, and attending sermons. 

When Hesburgh wants the work to seem hard, he does not get very concrete so that people can come up with their own interpretations of what working hard is.  The agency of blood on the bricks, for example, is one that makes the work seem hardest but leaves the nature of the work unclear.  This is true of all of the terms for the efforts that are the grandest—faith and vision, rebirth, faith, commitment, dedication, and willing spirit.  The audience members are not likely to share the same definition for these terms, and they do not know exactly what they mean, making them function as the charismatic terms as Richard Weaver (1953, p. 227) describes charismatic terms “have a power which is not derived, but which is in some mysterious way given.  Their meaning seems to come from a popular will that they shall mean something.  In effect, they are rhetorical by common consent, or by ‘charisma’.”  Clearly, there is not much of a focus on actually contributing money, but there is a vague sense that the people in the audience should join other people who are working on behalf of the University of Notre Dame.

Agent

The following are the categories for agent Hesburgh names his speeches: University of Notre Dame, students and alumni, Notre Dame administrators, Catholic universities, and the Ford Foundation.

1.         University of Notre Dame:

Notre Dame

The University of Notre Dame

The University of Notre Dame

New library

 

2.         Students and Alumni:

Notre Dame University students and alumni

Notre Dame people

Returning alumni

Notre Dame alumni

 

3.         Notre Dame Administrators:

Father Sorin

Father Sorin

The Rosenfelds

 

4.         Catholic universities

 

5.         Ford Foundation.

 

Hesburgh’s most important agents are the University of Notre Dame and the students and alumni of the University of Note Dame.  The University of Notre Dame is co-dominant for Hesburgh, but this agent is much more vague and abstract in the sense that who or what exactly is the University of Notre Dame is unclear.  The audience members are allowed to fill that in, and, of course, in filling in what the University of Notre Dame as an agent is, they can choose to put themselves in that category as well.  So Hesburgh suggests that the responsibility is on them, although he never states that directly. 

The agent of students and alumni fits well with his agency of human effort.  He believes that students and alumni of the University of Notre Dame and Notre Dame people should do the work.  Again, this notion of the agent ties in with his purpose of advancing the reality of the University of Notre Dame through the lives of students and alumni, wherever they may be.

Another agent that Hesburgh names are the administrators, although they are quite insignificant and seem to function largely as role models for alumni and students:  These people work hard, so should the audience.  Featured most among administrators is Father Sorin, the founder of the University.  His experience in establishing the University is the kind of working hard that Hesburgh creates in his world and that the audience is called upon to do. 

Catholic universities and the Ford Foundation do not have much significance as agents in Hesburgh’s speeches.  That makes sense in that Hesburgh wants the focus to be on the alumni and students; he does not want them to count on or think they do not need to work for the University because funding agencies are.  Such agencies can model giving to the University, but the important agent is the students and the alumni.

Scene: Alumni Hall Chapel

 

The absence of scene in Hesburgh’s world is striking.  One might expect someone who is raising funds for physical things such as buildings to talk more about scene.  Often, when Hesburgh talks about scene, he casts it as something else--either as agent, act, or other terms of the pentad.  If scene were controlling in Hesburgh’s rhetoric, the corresponding philosophical school would have been materialism.  That is, physical laws and the sensory world of facts and reality would be viewed as important and controlling.  As Hesburgh has demonstrated, universal laws and principles are controlling in his speeches--more cosmic ones--not concrete, physical ones.

Pentadic Analyses and Hesburgh’s Fund-Raising Rhetoric

Hesburgh’s fund-raising rhetoric models purpose as controlling—he features enacting University of Notre Dame principles and creating a superlative University of Notre Dame.  By enacting the University’s principles, Hesburgh creates a world whereby the lives of the students and alumni are the very places where these principles should exist.  Principles such as loving God and fellow human beings, serving the poor, representing the University in everything they do, and conveying what the University did for them all embody Christianity.  Hesburgh expects these Christian principles to be evident in the lives of his audiences. 

Hesburgh believes that these Christian principles are instrumental in creating a superlative University of Notre Dame, which is his second major purpose.  A superlative University of Notre Dame is one that is great, it is a better place, it does what could never be done before, it is an outstanding bastion of education, and it is making progress.  It is a University that keeps moving when others quit, reaches 100% of its goal, and surpasses its goal of $130 million.  Everything about a superlative University of Notre Dame succeeds.

Hesburgh’s acts reinforce or duplicate his purposes.  His acts endorse creating a superlative University of Notre Dame and engaging in Christian acts, which require a connection to the University.  His acts also embody Christianity and creating a superlative University of Notre Dame.  The primary agency is human effort on behalf of the University, sometimes connecting with the divine because effort connected to the University of Notre Dame is, by Hesburgh’s definition, connected to the divine as the University embodies the principles of Christianity.  Working on behalf of the University of Notre Dame, then, is going to be work that is consistent with and embodies Christian principles because that is what the University of Notre Dame is.  The primary agents are the students and alumni who are engaged in the human effort.

Hesburgh is setting up a world in which the only real option for the agents are alumni and students—the people to whom he is talking.  He believes that if they buy into his world at all, they are going to see themselves as the people who can control what happens at the University.  This is being done, though, not so much to raise money but to take the connection they have with the University of Notre Dame and to disseminate Notre Dame principles into the world.  Hesburgh is building on their identification with the institution from which they graduated and their desire to spread the connection they feel and the benefits they gained from it as they go out into the world.  He focuses them outward on spreading University of Notre Dame principles, not inward to what needs to be done on the campus.  When he gets them to focus on acting in Christian ways and embodying University principles, however, working hard and giving money become connected; he makes giving money a way to embody the University’s principles and acting in Christian ways.  By engaging in effort, students and mostly alumni embody the University principles and create a superlative University of Notre Dame that shines in the external world.  Support of the University financially now becomes one way in which to enact the University of Notre Dame’s principles. 

Hesburgh’s schema explicitly creates identification with the audience.  He identifies them as agents who are already connected to the school and rightly so because the University of Notre Dame is their alma mater.  That is a given connection.  Hesburgh builds on their identification by creating a world in which the primary thrust is to work hard to keep the University’s principles going in the external world.  He constantly reminds them of the principles and values the audience learned from the University and urges them to practice these principles and values in their lives, wherever they may be in this world.  The only position the audience is allowed to assume is as the primary agent who works hard.  Thus, Hesburgh talks about commitment, dedication, forsaking opportunities for professional development in order to serve to the poor, and conveying University of Notre Dame principles.  Within that schema, giving money becomes an easy way of working hard.  If the audience hears that some people have left blood on the bricks from their hard work, surely, giving money is an easier task.

As president of the University of Notre Dame, Hesburgh was a very successful fund-raiser, and identifying his formula for success is important in the fund-raising field.  In raising funds for the University of Notre Dame, Hesburgh constructed his world for the alumni in such a way so that he persuaded them to give to the institution.

His formula for success has five key components.  Hesburgh begins by building on the connection the alumni have with the University of Notre Dame.  He reminds them that they are connected to this school and urges them to let that connection shine throughout the world.  Building on the connection the alumni have with the institution is a standard approach in fund raising, but Hesburgh gives it a strikingly different twist.  Usually, the standard fund-raising approach is that alumni are connected to the school, so the appeal is to give or support one’s alma mater.  In contrast, Hesburgh’s idea of the connection with the University of Notre Dame is for the alumni to serve the world. 

The second component of Hesburgh’s strategy builds on the idea of service to the world.  His focus is outward rather than inward.  He calls the alumni to give to the world the values and to live by the Christian principles they acquired from the University.  He focuses on dissemination of the University of Notre Dame principles in the world.  He projects an external focus, creating a rhetorical world rooted in arguments by genus rather than arguments by cause and effect (Weaver 1953).  These arguments of genus focus on the principles and values alumni acquired from the University.  These principles and values are not in contention; they already are established and accepted in the minds of the audience.  Hesburgh does not have to prove them.  Thus, Hesburgh states his arguments with an assumed acceptance of certain principles—Notre Dame principles--and urges alumni to live by these Christian principles as they reach out to the world.  As the alumni attend to universal principles, they actually engage in responding to the needs of the University.  Hesburgh avoids the explicit statement of arguments of cause and effect, where the alumni’s connection and identification would be used to cause them to reciprocate by giving to the University.

The third piece of Hesburgh’s strategy is that he magnifies the hard work the alumni must do to keep the University of Notre Dame in the world. He states that some have blood on the bricks to make the University what it is.  Hesburgh does not want the alumni to forget the University’s past—how, for example, Father Sorin worked hard to establish the University given the meager resources he had and the dedication and commitment of others who came before them.  He gives the alumni the impression that there are lots of ways to work, but giving money now becomes seen as an easy way to accomplish the work.  Again, Hesburgh is not explicit in suggesting this but refers to what the University is doing to produce individuals who will make a difference in the world.  If these programs are supported, the alumni will be engaging in working hard for the institution.  This is contrary to what many fund-raisers would say when alumni are called to work hard and dig deep, sacrifice, and help the institution with money because they owe this to the institution.  There is no such pay-back attitude expressed by Hesburgh.  He makes the giving seem easy compared to the hard work he knows alumni will want to do to ensure that their experience at the University of Notre Dame is disseminated through the world. 

Hesburgh virtually never discusses current students when talking to alumni, which constitutes a fourth aspect of his formula.  He does not ask alumni to give, for example, so that students who are poor and smart who are on campus now can have the same experience they did.  This is another point of departure for Hesburgh from traditional fund-raisers.  He limits himself to the alumni’s experiences while at the University, how those experiences have gotten them to where they are in life, and how the alumni should keep the University in the world so those experiences spread out.  He wants the alumni to see themselves as key players as the University drama plays out. 

Hesburgh also focuses on what the University of Notre Dame has and not on what it does not have, another difference from the standard fund-raising approach.   Usually, the standard approach is to outline institutional needs so people know to what they are giving.  In this fifth aspect of the formula, Hesburgh explains the principles that the University holds high, that the University is among high-ranking institutions of higher education, that the University has people engaged in effort, that it has world-class facilities, and that it is making progress on all fronts.  Hesburgh does not project a situation of desperation for the University.  He focuses on the strengths, not the weaknesses, of the University of Notre Dame.

Hesburgh’s formula of success in raising funds from the University of Notre Dame alumni is summarized below:

1.      He establishes connection and identification with the alumni.

2.      He focuses outward on universals not inward on institutional needs.

3.      He constructs an appeal that asks alumni to work hard for the University by achieving universals and makes giving money seem like easy work.

4.      He focuses on the alumni and not on current students.

5.      He focuses on the University’s strengths and not its weaknesses.

In his fund-raising strategies, Hesburgh embraces some of the existing approaches in fund raising but uses unique techniques that apparently have contributed to his success as a university president.

Recommendations Arising From the Study

As educational costs continue to rise, it is in the interest of university presidents to engage the alumni in institutional funding.  This is especially true with private colleges and universities whose financial sources are not always guaranteed.  The university presidents’ rhetoric and the rhetoric of all those involved in fund-raising activities for the colleges or universities need to create identification with the alumni in ways that will encourage the alumni to support their alma mater.  To create rhetorical strategies for fund raising, the following recommendations are made for review, consideration, and possible adoption by university presidents and development officers:

1.      Presidents need to focus in their communication on the strengths of the university and the quality of education the university offers.  The strength of the university is based on what the university has, while the quality of education is determined by what the alumni do in society.

2.      The university must posture outwardly rather than inwardly.  It must focus on what it gives to society rather than on what it receives from society.  It can do this by encouraging its alumni to contribute to public life, which will bring greater returns for the university.

3.      Presidents should follow students’ success stories as a means of promoting their influence on society.  The university will reap benefits from that influence.

4.      Apart from the degrees that students receive from the university, presidents must identify what other things students take away from the university such as values the university is assured were imparted to the students and for which students can be held accountable.  The idea is to give students something with which they can identify and to which they can be attached while on campus and something that will trigger pleasant memories of their university experience.

5.      In private universities that function on Christian principles, presidents must highlight those principles.  Students must experience that the university practices what it preaches.

6.      Presidents must connect with students the moment they arrive at the college or university and, after they leave, make an effort to bring them back on campus periodically so that their experiences can be renewed.  Presidents must be accessible to students as well as to parents. 

7.      The president must oversee the organization of alumni chapters wherever the alumni are.  These chapters will echo the voice of the university and keep the alumni informed about the university.

 

An Interview With Father Hesburgh

            At the completion of the study, I had an opportunity to interview Father Hesburgh on the findings.  He appreciated the study and was excited to talk about his involvement in raising funds for the University of Notre Dame at the time of his presidency.  He stated that the alumni are members of a family, the Notre Dame family and that they ought to support the family, the kind of family that brought them along educationally, giving them a better chance in life through the advanced degrees they received from the University.  This is the standard approach that most institutional fund-raisers hold.  In his opinion, this is what he has been saying all along during his presidency.  However, his communicative style of this message to the alumni is unique as revealed by the results of this study.

            When asked about his formula that focuses outward on universals and not inward on institutional needs--where alumni disseminate established Notre Dame principles and values learned at the University of Notre Dame, and engage in these activities (and respond to the needs of the University), his response was, “I have never found an alumnus who disagrees with that statement.”  This implies that the alumni were aware of what was expected of them and that Hesburgh was aware and conscious of his actions as well.  So Hesburgh’s speeches were intentional and motivational as both the speaker and the audience shared common experiences about the University. 

            Hesburgh explains that his communication style was motivational because his “ideals are pictures of Notre Dame that alumni should share.”  So, he really wanted the alumni to see Notre Dame from his perspective, through his worldview as theorists would suggest, given their experience while they were students.  Hesburgh has a claim on the principles and values that he believes the alumni received while at the University.  He believes that if a university teaches students principles and values, then the university can call on the students to demonstrate those principles and values in their everyday lives.   As the alumni demonstrate these principles and values, they display the kind of education they received from the University and that gives value to that education.  Hence, the alumni should support what is of value--the institution that promotes valuable education.  Hesburgh calls on the alumni to practice these virtues and, as they do, they support the University.   Hesburgh’s view of his fund-raising strategies is consistent with the findings of this study.

Suggestions for Future Research

To further understand Hesburgh’s success as a fund-raiser, the following are suggested for future research:

Further research needs to be done to determine the role or impact of other possible techniques that may have contributed to Hesburgh’s success.  For example, organizational structure of the University of Notre Dame should be studied to see if and how it contributed to Hesburgh’s success.  Personality aspects of Hesburgh also might account for his effectiveness and should be studied as a complement to this rhetorical analysis.  Such studies will further explore other means that contributed to Hesburgh’s success.  

Further research also should be done on the impact of Hesburgh’s legacy on his successor(s).  Such a study would be designed to discover which strategies the successors carry on, signaling strategies that can be replicable and those other presidents can apply. 

Much more needs to be done on the rhetorical strategies of fund raising by university presidents, but this analysis of Hesburgh’s speeches provides an initial examination of one president’s effective fund-raising strategies.  This study constitutes a starting place for understanding the rhetorical worldview Hesburgh constructed in his speeches and the means of identification this worldview created with alumni audiences.