Contacting a Local Governmental Elite by Mail Questionnaire and

Telephone: Georgia County Commissioners

VINCENT L. MARANDO RUSSELL WAYNE BOSS

The purpose of this research note is to report the results of supplementing mail questionnaires with per- sonal contact via telephone. Our findings show that some local governmental elites-in this case, Georgia county commissioners-are almost immune to contact by mail questionnaires and must be communicated with by other means. The basic question addressed is: How do you get county commissioners to answer survey questions? Specifically, this research note: (1) Describes the survev results of the Georgia County Commissioner Study, and; (2) Discusses the formulation of question- naire surveys and telephoning techniques applicable to county commissioners within the context of surveying various local governmental elites. Su rue y Procedures

During the summer of 1972, the Institute of *This research was funded by a grant from The Office of Water Resources Research, Llnited States Department of Interior and The Institute for Behavioral Research,The University of Georgia.

149

Government a t the University of Georgia conducted a study of Georgia county commissioners. Five hundred and seventy-nine Georgia county commissioners, from all 159 counties, received mail questionnaires dealing with their perceptions and attitudes concerning county problems, services, politics, and personal background.

Three separate questionnaire mailings took place over a two-and-onehalf month period starting in June 1972. During same week in June each county com- missioner received a copy of The Georgia County Government Magazine, the official publication of the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia, which contained a n article notifying the commissioners of the study and explaining its importance. The article also contained a statement from the Association's president endorsing the study and encouraging the commissioners to respond immediately to the questionnaire.

One month later each commissioner who had not responded received a second questionnaire. Included with the questionnaire was a copy of The Georgia County Government Magazine article published the previous month. The second mailing also included a letter from the chairman of the Committee on Local Government of the Georgia State House of Representatives endorsing the study and encouraging the commissioners to par- ticipate.

The response rate to each of the questionnaire mailings is contained in Table 1. The first mailing resulted in seventeen returns, representing 2.9 percent of the 579 commissioners. The second mailing produced a slightly higher response rate-twenty-six returns from 4.5 percent of the commissioners. Thus, with 1,158 questionnaires having been sent out in two mailings, forty-three questionnaires were returned, representing 7.4 percent of the total population (579). Telephone contact

Since the number of responses was too small for statistical manipulation and obviously did not meet acceptable requirements of being representative of the total population, the decision was made to supplement the third and final mailing with telephone calls. The

150

commissioners contacted by telephone made up a stratified sample of the total population. Since over 90 percent of the commissioners serve on a part-time basis and are not at their county offices a good deal of the time, there was no way of knowing when to contact the com- missioners or where they could be reached during the day. Therefore, they were called at their homes between 5:OO and 11:OO p.m.

Attempts at telephone contact were’made to 219 com- missioners; 122 of these were successful. About 80 per- cent of the total calling time was spent in preliminary ac- tivities, such as locating phone numbers, placing and replacing calls. The length of the phone calls varied from five to twenty-five minutes.

Telephone contact was divided into two conversa- tion components: social and professional. The social component was designed to establish rapport with the commissioner and consumed the majority of the total time spent for each call. The professional conversation included an explanation of the purpose of the study and why it was important for the commissioners to par- ticipate. Time was spent in answering questions about the study and assuring the commissioners that all infor- mation would be kept strictly confidential. Each com- missioner contacted consented to participate in the study by completing and returning the questionnaire.

The results of the third mailing with and without the supplementing telephone calls are also shown in Table 1. Of the ninety-three responses received in the third mail- ing, seventy questionnaires, representing 12.1 percent of the total population, came from commissioners who had been contacted by telephone. Thus, the combination of a third mailing combined with telephone contact yielded a greater response rate (12.1 percent) than that resulting from three separate mailings without the telephone con- tact (1 1.4 percent). Further, the impact of telephone con- - tact is illustrated by comparing only the response rates of the third mailing. Of the 122 commissioners contacted by telephone, 57.4 percent returned the questionnaire, com- pared to a 5.6 percent response rate from those who received only the questionnaire.

151

TABLE 1: Response Rates From Three Questionnaire Mailings and Telephone Calls to Georgia County Commissioners

'R Returned W Returned From Total From T h o s e

Number Number Population Cantacted In Contacted Returned (N2679) Each Mailing

First Mailing Total 79 17 2.9 2.9

Second Mailing Total 562 26 4.5 4.6

Total Mailing Without Telephone Contact 4 14, 23 4 .o 5.6

With Telephone

Total From Third Mailing 536 93 16.1 17.4

Total Responses From Survey 579 136 23.5 23.5

Contact 122 70 12.1 57.4

*Of the total 579 Georgia County Commissioners, 43 had responded and 122 were contacted by telephone, leaving 414 receiving only the third mailing.

Discussion Following commonly accepted data gathering

procedures and in spite of numerous precautions, the combined response rate from two mailings was extreme- ly low.' County commissioners in Georgia are not only difficult to contact, but they are dramatically different from other local governmental elites, such as city managers and local political party officials. The consen- sus of survey research indicates that the target popula- tion plays a significant role in the formulation of the research design.2 What is not apparent in the literatureis the wide variation of responses to questionnaires from a relatively narrow target population: local governmental elites. Our research indicates that the response rates ex- pected from one local governmental elite (city managers) cannot necessarily be expected from other local elite groups (county commissioners). Response rates of seven- ty percent to mail surveys are quite common for city managers.3 Our observation is that research techniques

152

need to be designed and differentiated to fit the specific sub-classification of local government elites being studied.

The obvious question is, “Why is the response rate so low?” A number of characteristics may make the Georgia county commissioner an “atypical” local governmental elite.

First, a general profile of the Georgia county com- missioner depicts an older, native Georgian who was born and reared in or near the county in which he currently serves. Not only were 90 percent of the com- missioners born and reared in Georgia, but more than 60 percent never resided outside the county in which they held office. The majority are rural in orientation (70 per- cent lived in rural areas) with approximately one-fourth of the commissioners involved in agricultural or livestock production activities. In addition, about one- fourth of the commissioners are not high school graduates.4

Generally speaking, the characteristics of the com- missioners approximate more closely those of the Georgia population than they do other local governmen- tal elites, such as city managers and mayors. In fact, the average Georgia county commissioner has less educa- tion, comes from more rural areas, and is less mobile than the general population.5 We have dealt with an “elite” that resembles in many ways the public. In fact, some research on mail questionnaire response rates from the public is higher than those obtained from Georgia County Commissioners.6 We would not attempt to reach the public with the techniques employed-why should we expect something different from Georgia county com- missioners? From this perspective, we did not have a “low” response rate and should not have been surprised at the small percentage of questionnaires returned.

Second, the nature of the commissioner’s job may function as an intervening variable to decrease the effec- tiveness of mail surveys. Since almost all Georgia county commissioners (90 percent) serve part-time, few visit the county offices more than once a week. Further, many Georgia commissioners do not have a private office or

153

even a desk at which they can respond to the question- naire, nor do they have secretarial assistance. In addi- tion, the commissioners reported in the telephone conver- sations that they receive a large amount of “junk-mail”: advertisements, form letters, and brochures. Anything that resembles this type of material is generally disposed of without further attention. Thus, a formal looking questionnaire would likely get the same treatment- waste basket -as would advertisements, form letters, and brochures.

Third, the degree of professional development of commissioners may also influence their response rate. Over half (53.7 percent) have never held public office before their election to the commissioner post; and 81 per- cent reported that they have no future political aspirations. Thus, Georgia county commissioners make up an elite which has not had vast experience in dealing with the various groups and publics that make requests for information. The commisioners also do not have a vested interest in responding to requests which originate outside their political jurisdictions. Therefore, in retrospect, it is almost predictable that there would be dif- ficulty in getting a significant response from them.

Furthermore, the commissioners apparently do not respond to endorsements in their professional publica- tion, The Georgia County Government Magazine. We are dealing with a local governmental elite which does not define the position of a county commissioner in terms of information and communication demands and func- tions. By comparison, city managers are professionals who see responding to questionnaires as a part of their job and recognize the value of mail surveys. They com- municate among themselves both informally and through their professional organizations. The Inter- national City Managers’ Assocication, for instance, sponsors national and regional conferences, publishes a monthly journal and a variety of handbooks, offers train- ing courses, supplies technical advice or materials, and reports on new municipal developments. City managers have ties to their profession that extend beyond the city in which they are employed. City managers are very

154

responsive to requests from the professional associations and universities to participate in “research” that might eventually be of benefit to them in their jobs.8

Georgia commissioners make up a local governmen- tal elite which needs personal contact in order to get their cooperation. They are, for the most part, rural localities who respond positively to personal and informal interac- t i ~ n . ~ The questionnaire was a “forma1”request for infor- mation which probably meant little to the com- missioners and their duties. The telephone call, however, was an “informal” contact. Our experience showed that after the personal contact was made, via telephone, the commissioners were receptive and the response rate in- creased significantly.

In conclusion, these findings have significant im- plications for future research with local government elites. It appears that a number of critical factors deter- m i n e t h e success of various data-gather ing methodologies. These factors include: the nature of the job, the personal characteristics of the respondents, their degree of professional development, their commitment to their profession, and the degree of their involvement in professional association activities.

Generally speaking, any combination of the follow- ing conditions would suggest the need for some degree of personal contact by the researcher:

1. a part-time commitment to the governmental respon-

2. a relatively low level of education; 3. a strong rural orientaition; 4. a high degree of political immobility; 5. a low level of professional development; 6. a relatively narrow political jurisdiction and orientation; 7. a minimum involvement in professional association ac-

sibilities;

tivities. It seems to us that the most important of these fac-

tors is the degree of respondent involvement in professional association activities. Substantial research evidences the powerful influence of reference groups on individual behavior.10 Where the influence of the reference group is strong, the members will have a

I55

greater inclination to adhere to the norms of that group. Assuming the reference group, in this case the professional association, is predisposed to respond to re- quests for information, the researcher will have little dif- ficulty in getting responses from a large percentage of the total population. If such a predisposition does not ex- ist, however, the methodology must include a vehicle for personal contact if the research project is to be successful.

Personal contact would take a variety of forms: a telephone call to each respondent, a personal interview with a carefully selected sample from the total popula- tion, or a combination of the two. The specific methodology would be tempered by such constraints as the objectives and context of the research, the precision required, the financial support available, and the time constraints associated with the project.

IWilliam J . Crotty. ‘The Utilization of Mail Questionnaires and the ‘Problemofa Representative Return Rate,” Western Political Quarterly, XIX(March, 1966), 48-56.

‘See Bruce K. Eckland, “Effects of Prodding to Increase Mail-Back Returns.” Journnl of Applied Psychology, Vol. 49 (1965). 165-169; Dean J. Champion and Alan M. Sear, “Questionnaire Response Rate: A Methodological Analysis,” Social Forces, Vol. -17 (1969). 335-339; and Herbert H. Blumberg, Carolyn Fuller, and A. Paul Hare, “Response Rates in Postal Surveys,’’ The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 38, No. 1 (Spring, 1974). 113-124.

Timothy Almy, “Local-Cosmopolitan and United States City Managers,” Ur- htrn Affoirs Qunrterly (March, 1975); and Edward Lewis, Role Behavior of United

Stntcms City Mnnngers. ., Unpublished Dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, 1975.

T h e biographical data of Georgia County Commissioners were obtained from the records of the Georgia Association of County Commissioners. Although the ussocintion’s records were not completely current and contained ommissions, we felt our respondents were not unduly unrepresentative in biographical characteristics from the universe of county commissioners.

Tomparisons were made with da ta taken from U.S. Department of Commerce, lJ.S. Cen.ws of Population: 1960 and 1970, General Social and Economic Chtrrnrtmistics; United States Summary, Alabama. Florida, Georgia, North Cnrolrnn. Sourh Cnrolinn. Tennessee Final Reports PC(l)-lC, 2C, 11C, 12C, 35C, .I”C’. 44c.

‘‘Srt. Deun J. Champion and Alan M. Sear, “Questionnaire Response Rate: A MKTHO1)OLOGICAL Analysis.” OD. Cit.. 338.

-Ronald 0. Loveridge. City Managersin Legislative Politics, (IndianapoliR, In- diana: The Bobbs-Memll Co., Inc., 1971) 45.

“bid.. see acknowledgements and Chapter 4 for discussion on development of professional and policy roles of city managers. Also see John C. Bollens, The City Manager Profession: Myths and Reality (Chicago, Illinois: Public Administration Service. 1966) Chapter 3.

156

*For nn annlysis of rurnl political styles, see Alvin D. Sokolow, Gouernmental Kesponse to Urbanization: Three Townships on the Rural-Urban Gradient, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Dept. 132 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1968).

‘OAmold S. Linsky, “Stimulating Responses to Mailed Questionnaires: A Review,” Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 1, 82-101; and Kurt Lewin, “Group Decision and Social Change,” in T.H. Newcomb and E.L. Hartley (eds.), Readings in Social Psychology (New York: Henry Holt, 1947).

157