Three studies were jointly conducted by the Office of Research Administration and Office of Proposal Development at Tufts University to evaluate the services within each respective office. The studies featured assessments that used, respectively, (1) quantitative metrics; (2) a quantitative satisfaction survey with limited qualitative questions; and (3) a mixed-methods survey that evaluated both satisfaction and learning using quantitative metrics and equally weighted qualitative responses. These studies are used as case studies, and are described congruently to demonstrate that varying assessment methods have utility, separately and together, in evaluating the research administration enterprise. Findings illustrate that several factors influence which method should be used, including the goals of the evaluation itself. Additionally, findings indicate that judicial use of quantitative metrics supplemented with qualitative measures in mixed methods approaches allows the user to paint a more comprehensive and detailed picture. Finally, methods and inferences from such studies can be leveraged to gain or sustain competitive advantage among peer institutions and position the research administration enterprise for future success.