1
2
Disclaimer Matters of copyright for all images and text associated with the abstracts and papers contained within the Global Competitiveness in Higher Education: New Marketing Challenges for Research and Practice - Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Higher Education Marketing. Proceedings are the responsability of the authors. The Universidade do Minho will not accept responsability for any liabilities arising from the publication of any of the submissions. Copyright: Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Higher Education Marketing Reproduction of this document or parts thereof is prohibited without written permission of the EDITORES. All copies of the individual articles remain the intellectual property of the individual author and/or their affiliated institutions. Please use the following format to cite Global Competitiveness in Higher Education: New Marketing Challenges for Research and Practice Proceedings ofFourth International Conference on Higher Education Marketing: Author(s), “Title of the Abstract”, Global Competitiveness in Higher Education: New Marketing Challenges for Research and Practice - Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Higher Education Marketing, Guimarães, Portugal, 1-3 April, 2009 page numbers. The papers appearing in these Abstracts and Proceedings compose the proceedings of the technical conference cited on the cover and title page of this volume. They reflect the authors’ opinions and are published as presented, in the interests of timely dissemination. Papers were selected by the Conference Scientific Commitee to be presented in oral or poster format. Some, where noted, were double blind refereed and others reviewed by volume editors or programme commitees. Global Competitiveness in Higher Education: New Marketing Challenges for Research and Practice - Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Higher Education Marketing ISBN 978 972 8533 22 9 Design: Miguel Neiva Ateier | Ana João Silva Published by Universidade do Minho, Dezembro 2009, Guimarães, Portugal
3
Global Competitiveness in Higher Education: New Marketing Challenges for Research and Practice Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Higher Education Marketing
Universidade do Minho, Guimarães, Portugal
4
CONTENTS:
6
Introduction to the proceedings for the 2009 ICHEM Conference
8
ICHEM 4 Program
12
The Implementation of Ethical Higher Education Marketing
28
1. Choice and Branding
28
Which University? An empirical study of applicant choice criteria
39
Selecting a Higher Education Institution: the Role of Information Search and Choice Factors
59
The impact of advertising on student choice
77
The use of university-provided information in the HE decision-making process—the case of Taiwanese Business Master’s students in Taiwan and in the UK
96
2. Globalisation and Internationalisation of Higher Education
96
International Student Complaint Behaviour: What are East-Asian Student attitudes towards complaining to their University?
113
Polish Student Recruitment to UK Universities: Push versus Pull Factors and their Marketing Implications.
129
The subjective perceptions of Israeli academics of their role in promoting their institution
131
Why the Barcelona’s postgraduate programme in Fine Arts overcomes a 60% index of internationalization?
133
3. Marketing strategy and theory development in higher education
133
Stakeholder prioritisation in the higher education sector: A case study of the university of portsmouth.
154
Hospitals no, universities maybe: will higher education in the UK become more competitive?
176
Marketing: An employability trajectory study.
190
Understanding student satisfaction with higher education services.
5
210
The development and embedding of a market research data cycle to assign in the development of more affective strategic planning to meet the needs of the global student marketplace.
230
4. Communication and recruitment in higher education
230
Online branding in british universities. An exploration of the online communication of british universities.
241
Hierarchi of effects (hoe) models and higher education advertising
256
Design Higher Education Programes Positioning: The Role of Candidates Expectactions on the Aquired Competences at Graduation
258
5. Service quality and relationship marketing
258
Marketing in higher education: A comparative between Brasil and Portugal
282
The Impact of Bologna Process on Professional Self-Efficacy: An Empirical Analysis for Marketing Graduates
283
The relationship between student satisfaction, loyalty and word of mouth
292
Marketing communication models in portuguese public universities
308
Special Workshop: Trends in Global Competitiveness on Design Higher Education
308
The role of project-based learning in product design and development education: meeting the industry needs
311
The Bologna Process Contribution for the Fashion Design Higher Education at the Context of Fashion Markets Globalization
313
European Staff Mobility Programme: An empirical experience in Communication Design
329
Higher fashion education vs Successful market professionals
365
Contribution of Product Design Methodologies Research
379
Integrated e-marketing communication: The customer perception
385
Citizens vs. users/ Consumers
6
Introduction to the proceedings for the 2009 ICHEM Conference Minho, Portugal
As chair of ICHEM, it gives me great pleasure to introduce the first Proceedings of our annual conferences. These set of papers, painstakingly put together by the enthusiastic team at Minho University under the leadership of Maria da Graça Guedes mark the coming of age of ICHEM. Four conferences down the line, we have our first permanent record of papers summarised in these Proceedings. Although we had a record 42 conference presentations at Minho, only 23 full papers were submitted which form the basis these Proceedings. Together they constitute a rich resource of materials on HE marketing which our membership can refer. Clearly, no attempt was made to edit the papers. They are reproduced here in their entirety and any errors or queries should in the first instance be directed to the authors. In line with our broad conference themes, the papers have been divided into five categories. The first is Service Quality with four papers. The papers provide coverage of a wide range of issues including a comparative analysis of service quality in Brazil and Portugal by Alves, H. et al; the award winning paper on the relationship between student satisfaction, loyalty and word of mouth by Alves, H; Marketing communication models in Portuguese public Universities by Ruao, T. and the impact of Bologna on professional self efficacy by Munteanu, C. et al. The second category, Communications and Recruitment has three papers on Online branding in British Universities by Castillo Diaz, A et al; Hierarchy of effects (HOE) Models and HE advertising by Hemsley Brown, J et al.; and Design HE Programmes Positioning by Graça, Guedes, M. The third category, Marketing Strategy has five papers. Chapleo, C et al. provide a case study of stakeholder prioritisation at the University of Portsmouth. A second
7
award winning paper at the conference was provided by Adcroft, A et al whose paper was entitled: Hospitals, No, Universities maybe. Will HE in the UK become more competitive? Thorne, T et al. wrote about the development and embedding of market research as a tool for more effective strategic planning in HE. Machado, I. et al. contributed a paper on an employability trajectory study of Marketing in HE while Gruber, T. et al. provide new understandings into student satisfaction with university services. Five papers belong to the fourth category on Globalisation and Internationalisation in HE. Hart, D. opens up the section with a paper about international students complaining behaviour. Grazyna, R. et al. investigated push and pull factors in the decision making of Polish students in UK HE. Oplatka, I. provides an Israeli study of subjective perceptions of academics and their role in institutional marketing. Remesar, A. discusses the reasons the Barcelona post graduate programmes in Fine arts go beyond the 60% index of internationalisation while Maringe, F. reports on a case study of internationalisation strategies in UK universities. The fifth and final category on Choice and Branding has 4 papers. Kolsaker, A. et al. replicate an Australian study the Which University Study and analyse applicants ‘choice criteria. Simoes, C et al. report on an empirical investigation on how students select a HE institution with a focus on the role of information search and choice factors. The third award winning paper at the conference was presented by Geraldine Ahearne who focused on the impact of advertising on student choice. The final paper is by Yang, H.S. et al on Taiwanese students HE decision making. Six of these papers were selected for the Journal of Marketing for Higher Education based in the USA. They are currently undergoing review. As we prepare for Barcelona in 2010, members are strongly encouraged to develop papers which focus on marketing in a period of economic uncertainty as the underlying theme. As chair, I would like to thank everyone who contributed papers to the fourth ICHEM Conference and colleagues at Minho for putting these together into our first Conference Proceedings. A start has been made. Much will be learnt from this. But equally, much will be anticipated at future conferences starting with the much awaited 2010 Barcelona Conference. Good luck and enjoy these readings. Felix Maringe Chair ICHEM
8
Centro Cultural Vila Flor (CCVF) 1st April 2009
Venue: Hall of Conference room S1 15:00 – 17:00
Registration
17:00 – 19:00
Visit to art exhibit present at CCVF
19:00 – 20:30
Welcome cocktail at CCVF restaurant MGG
Centro Cultural Vila Flor (CCVF) 2nd April 2009
9:00 – 9:15
Venue: Conference room S1 Welcome and Introductions Prof. Rosa Vasconcelos, President of Engineering School Course Council, Universidade do Minho (Portugal); Dr. F. Maringe, Conference Chair, Southampton University (UK) Introduce the scientific com.and org com. Visit to art exhibit present at CCVF Welcome cocktail at CCVF restaurant MGG
9
9:15 – 10:30
Key note Dr. Paul Gibbs, Middlesex University (UK)
11:00 – 13:00
CHOICE AND BRANDING
13:00 – 14:00
Lunch
14:00 – 17:30
(parallel session) Venue: Conference room S3 Globalisation and Internationalisation of Higher Education
Venue: Conference room S4 Marketing strategy and theory development in higher education
14:00 – 18:00
(parallel session) Venue: Conference room S1 Special Workshop on Higher Education Marketing – Trends in Global Competitiveness on Design Higher Education Key note speakers: Henrique Cayatte, Portuguese Design Centre Antoni Remesar, Universitat Barcelona Teresa Novais, Portuguese Architecture Association
CONFERENCE DINNER. 20:00
Venue : Casa do Arco (Guimarães Historic Centre)
10
Centro Cultural Vila Flor (CCVF) 3rd April 2009
9:00 – 9:15
Venue: Conference room S1 Welcome and Introductions
9:15 – 10:30
Key note Rosemary Stamp, Stamp Consulting Ltd (UK)
11:00 – 13:30
(parallel session) Venue: Conference room S3 Communication and recruitment in higher education
(parallel session) Venue: Conference room S4 Service quality and relationship marketing
13:30 – 14:30
Closing session Best paper award and prize giving Announcement of 2010 conference
14:30 – 19:00
Lunch and Social programme
11
4th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGHER EDUCATION MARKETING ICHEM 2009
Guimarães, 1st – 3rd April, 2009 Universidade do Minho, Portugal
12
The Implementation of Ethical Higher Education Marketing Authors: Paul Gibbs, Institute of Work Based Learning, Middlesex University
Corresponding Author: Paul Gibbs Institute for Work Based Learning Middlesex University Trent Park Campus Bramley Road London N14 4YZ
[email protected]
13
Abstract
With consumerism changing students to customers and teachers to service providers, ever more vulnerable and naïve students enrol and instead of collaboration between institutions, there is competition. There has been a call in the literature to face these challenges through ethical leadership in universities. Specifically, concern has been expressed over higher education marketing practices. In response, I attempt to construct a virtuous model of marketing ethics with higher education institutions’ values. I attempt to defend interconnectivity between the virtues of integrity, trust, fairness and empathy and seek to inform those responsible for marketing higher education. I envision marketing’s relationship with stakeholders as having the potential to endure, where universities lead rather than reflect ethical norms, and where academics are encouraged to speak out. I discuss how it might be implemented and conclude by discussing how institutions can achieve their marketing goals.
The Implementation of Ethical Higher Education Marketing
With the advent of a global, market-driven economy, conditions for higher education have changed. Universities now face a proliferation of expectations and demands. Higher education’s contribution to the economic success of both developed and developing nations and of individuals has been widely recognized (De Coster et al., 2008) marked by its inclusion in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Moreover, the World Bank (2000) sees development of the knowledge economy being led by tertiary education, encouraging the European Union to develop both European higher education and research areas. These trends in massification, accountability, privatization, marketization and an unprecedented level of student participation have caused a shift in the boundaries between the public and the private sectors (Altbach, 2002). For individuals, the financial benefits of higher education may be measured in terms of anticipated lifetime income and access to interesting jobs. The precise wage premium attached to a degree is unclear, but what is clear is that it is substantial. The 2008 OECD Education at a Glance report claims that, despite massive increases in tertiary attainment across OECD countries, the earnings premium for tertiary education has remains high in most countries. This suggests that the existing shortage of skilled workers and the creation of skilled jobs have
14
matched the increase in tertiary education. Indeed, in 15 out of 21 countries with available data, the earnings premium for those with tertiary education increased during the last decade, and in Germany, Hungary, and Italy this increase has been between thirty and forty percentage points. On average across countries, completion of tertiary education now yields a 12 and 11 per cent return for males and females respectively, and returns are above 22 per cent for males in the Czech Republic, Poland and Portugal. In the UK the advantage is 14.3 percent, which is exceptionally high for OECD countries, taking into account foregone earnings, costs of tuition and tax rates. The premium attached to completing higher education is also huge in the US. According to Kantrowitz (2007), in 2005 Bachelor’s degree recipients earned 1.86 times the average earnings, and advanced degree recipients earned 2.71 times the average earnings for high school graduates. These gross figures obscure considerable differences among kinds of degree, and also among institutions. The premium is higher for science than for arts graduates, and may be higher for graduates of elite rather than low prestige institutions. Variation itself differs over time and across countries. Provision of higher education appears to be thriving but, I would argue, this is the case only if its main purpose is calculated as the economic value of attendance. If its purpose is to question current economic, social and political norms, then, for many, higher education is facing a mission crisis. This is one of identity: not something for which marketing is responsible per se, but one brought upon itself through higher education’s lack of persistence in retaining its intrinsic, public, educational values. This relinquishing of values to the market is being driven by an ideology that respects consumer rather than student power, and which sees the central goals of education being entrapped by increasingly demanding, and often unaccountable, requirements of business and government, whose philanthropy has changed to investment. These changes have brought a need for educational institutions to adapt to a competitive world through managerialism and, explicitly, through embracing a marketing ideology. This shift may seem to the unquestioning to be of superficial relevance, only pertinent to recruitment, but I will argue that it may divert many institutions’ intended values towards a new ethic for education. I approach this task from the philosophical perspective and then ground my thoughts in the practical. This is a deliberate, for I am seeking to illuminate the basis of my propositions within an ethical framework which provides resources for the defence and advocacy of marketing to all stakeholders in higher education.
15
Issues facing the marketing of higher education
The economic value of those who hold higher education degrees has increased demand for such degrees and competition between the institutions that provide them. In Europe, state-controlled universities have introduced student fees and engaged in institutional marketing to distinguish themselves at a time when higher education provision becomes available to increasing numbers of students. In meeting this demand and securing their own financial futures as competition intensifies, institutions are ‘engaging in professional marketing activities’ (Veloutsou, Paton & Lewis, 2005 p. 279), rather than enriching the educational and social offering to society. These activities run the risk of displaying overwhelming consumerism (Naidoo & Jamieson, 2005). I propose that universities have a special ethical role in mediating the advantage of social capital, personal wealth and civic responsibility. Moreover, they do not have to follow the norms of the market; they are not necessarily helpless in the face of consumerism. The choice to ‘sell the goods and clinch the sale is still greatly influenced by informational sources under the direct control of the university’ (Veloutsou, Paton & Lewis, 2005, p. 289). HoIver, a stronger discourse argues that, if universities do not use marketing, they risk failing to recruit (Kirp, 2004; Bok, 2003) and ultimately their missions fail. In more restrained language, Ivy (2001) argues that the image portrayed by an institution of higher education plays a critical role in how it is perceived by its stakeholders, including its rivals. Arpan, Raney and Zivnuska’s (2003) study of major American universities found that various non-academic aspects, for instance athletics, contributed greatly to their reputations. In the competitive times facing higher education, the risk of exploitation seems self evident. Moreover, Reich (2004) draws our attention to the shift from public good to private return. This is evident in a number of ways, for instance in the focusing of university marketing strategies on external threats or opportunities created by the introduction of ranking schemes (Brennan, Brodnick & Pinckley, 2007). Other examples are pushing prices up for the poorer potential student; developing expensive, consumer-friendly rooms; and landscaping the campus. This last can boost the superficial sensory appeal for a select segment of the market, but does little to enhance educational expectation and still less to promote participation from under-represented groups. The risks of a market derived notion of higher education is that it draws it strength from being promoted in our consumerist society as the most creditable form of
16
education designated as such through the currency of economic value and the immediacy of its provision. As consumers, I tend to reject the anxiety of the unknowable, implicit in a transformative mission of education, in favour of the utility of the truncated, knowable, consistent being, revealed through extrinsic and immediate reward (Gibbs 2001). In such a closed temporal frame, higher education collapses to the needs of the market and allows students to become customers, academics to become service providers, and pedagogical development to satisfy economic skills needs. Marketing becomes the process which both enables and shapes educational goals in terms of consumption and immanence. In so doing, it completely turns higher education into a technical endeavour whose utility is to provide the shortest time for the acquisition of skills. The danger of this is that it stifles notions of education as means a future of imagination and hope and substitutes a view of it as an educational endeavour based on the immanence of our being in a world of work designed for the benefit of others. This risks shifting marketing activities to become the purpose of higher education and not a means of supporting the university’s values. To ensure this does not happen needs judgments from administrators and marketers. It requires, I argue, an ethical relationship approach to educational marketing. Marketing is cultural and ideological, and to persuade or inform it uses images which embrace the political, social and economic stance of the owners both of the service or product advertised and the medium employed. It attempts to blend the needs of the marketing organization through the technologies of communication in ways that Slater claims are largely framed as ‘actions in terms of the meaningful constitution of everyday life’ (2002, p. 248). Doing this, it attempts to impose the ideology (Waide, 1987) of the market and everything it represents, thus minimising the autonomy of the agent. As Adorno (2001) describes, advertising propaganda and the suppression of critical skills to question the reality presented mean that an information search by the inquisitive finds only one choice. This turns market share and brands into the determinants of choice and, for Adorno and Horkheimer (1997), this is a negative principle, since anything not marketed is at risk of being considered suspect. Klassen (2000) reports that in one form of marketing – distributing promotional Year Books – institutional values and priorities are symbolized and, for most, ‘the message is that students will not need to change in order to be successful’ (2000, p. 21). Disturbingly, he concludes that for the students in half his sample, ‘the perspective of college life offered is practically devoid of commitment and loyalty to anything beyond having a good time while waiting to graduate’ (ibid).
17
A virtue ethics perspective
With consumerism changing students to customers and teachers to service providers, ever more vulnerable and naïve students enrol and there is competition instead of collaboration between institutions. There has been a call in the literature to face these challenges through ethical leadership in universities (Zipin & Brennan, 2003; Poff, 2005; Rucinski & Bauch, 2006). More specifically, concern has been expressed as to the marketing practice for higher education (Schwartz, 2005; Caldwell et al., 2007). In response I attempt to construct a virtuous model of marketing ethics with higher education institutions’ values. This approach is compatible with university as a place where virtues are nurtured and where models of ethical decision-making may be idealistic. I attempt to defend interconnectivity between the virtues of integrity, trust, fairness and empathy, overseen by practically wise judgements. In so doing I respect the values of the university and seek to inform those responsible for the marketing of higher education. I envision its relationship with its students, donors and other stakeholders as one having the potential to endure, where universities lead rather than reflect ethical norms, and where academics are encouraged to speak out rather than evaluate their academic freedom against research sponsors’ commercial self-interest. Having established the worthiness of such an approach, I discuss how it might be implemented and conclude by discussing how, under virtue ethical relationship marketing, educational institutions can achieve their marketing goals. The uncertainty of education, with its outcomes of potentiality and possibilities, makes judgements central and adherence to rules essential. Given that the university ought to encourage wisdom in its own structures and students, I propose a model based on wise practical judgements informed by virtuous practice, not one arrived at by decision-making. Practical judgement is not simply a logical analysis or a synthesis but a response to purposeful engagement with a specific context (Dunne, 1999). Moreover, it requires an ability to act appropriately, often in ways that help define a future which may be incomprehensible, incommensurate or just dogmatically blocked by others’ ways of being. Such ability sets the practically wise apart from those able merely to make practical judgements without any virtuous character. Should marketing practice involve this type of professional behaviour, as Hunt (2007) suggests it might, it requires the exercise of ethical practical judgement. Practical judgement is political as Ill as moral. It requires the development of enduring relationships between stakeholders to the judgemental decision. It is in
18
this sense I conceive the modern higher education institution as a multi-layered set of stakeholder relationships. Murphy et al. (2007) reviewed the literature of relationship marketing and its ethical attributes in both Europe and the US, and their model is founded on the basis of the virtue ethics model presented there, substantiated for marketing practice. It proposes that an ethical relationship marketing approach has three stages – establishing, sustaining and reinforcing – and that these are paired with specific virtues – trust, commitment and diligence. It is desirable that partners demonstrate these and other facilitating virtues such as honesty, fairness, and reliability, to commit them to the relationship and prove themselves worthy (Audi, 2008). In other words, ethical partners are sought. The approach proposed here examines more closely the notion of virtue ethics, in the sense of their context, by looking at a study of the ethics of marketing higher education (Macfarlane, 2002). Under the rubric of teaching with integrity, Macfarlane advocates practices of ‘virtues compatible with reflective professionalism. This requires that the exercise of professional judgment, based on core moral virtues and conceived as a central duty to academic life’ (2002, p. 127–128). I support such a position and expect it to be extended to the marketing of higher education. From Macfarlane’s work I see two major similarities with the relationship marketing approach advocated here. First, a need for professional judgment based on virtue and secondly, the non-exclusive, but prominent, virtues of ethical teaching the Macfarlane study identifies as: respectfulness, sensitivity, pride, courage, fairness, openness, restraint and collegiality. Indeed, both require the professional to act with integrity and this is achieved through a combination of qualities that enable the profession to be practiced, and practised ethically. In the Murphy et al. (2007) paper, the foundational virtues are trust, commitment and diligence, supported by firmness, integrity, respect and empathy, surrounded by transparency. I believe these apply even to issues facing marketers of education (Gibbs, 2004). I seek to develop the Murphy model and I discuss here the potential for understanding how judgements can be made on virtues. For Aristotle, the issue of applying the golden mean was essentially the form of response to a specific situation. This aspect of the virtue approach is the ‘ethic of the mean’, which states that practitioners of virtue ethics succeed by seeking balance in their lives. (For a more complete discussion of virtue ethics in marketing, see Murphy, 1999; Murphy et al., 2005; Williams & Murphy, 1992).The judgement to be made is to the correct response, and the location of the mean is uncertain,
19
balanced between defect and excess. The point of balance is never a middle point; it is a point dictated by the situation. The virtue of this wise judgement is called practical judgement (phronesis) and I turn to Gadamer, who considers it a form of moral knowledge that offers an intentionality to act. It is ontological knowledge which complements our skills, but is not at our disposal in the same way (1975, p. 316). The problem for institutional education in developing this wisdom is that phronesis is practical understanding in situ (situated understanding), therefore it cannot be realized in advance or outside the experiences that require it. Put differently, the kinds of experiences in which phronesis comes into play are understood only insofar as I actually live through them. Garrison has developed this idea in the teaching of students, claiming that ‘teaching students to distinguish what they immediately and unreflectively desire from what they ought to desire after reflection is the ultimate goal of education. It is an education that lies beyond knowledge alone’ (1997, p. 126). Although a precise definition of practical wisdom is problematic (Noel, 1999), for the purposes of this paper, it is assumed that it is not just rationality but also moral intent in action which distinguishes it from cleverness, and is concerned with principles that are the practicalities of living within the mortal world. Essential to this process is deliberation about what might be possible and then acting with the best interest of self and of humanity. Its virtuous footing characteristically ensures a proactive moral, although not infallible, approach to problem resolution based on integrated, practical and situated judgements. Such judgements can be revealed through reasonable action which distinguishes them from mere dogma (Heidegger, 1997; Barnett, 2003; Gibbs, 2007). The skill of knowing how and when to make timely judgements is based on deliberation, interpretation, reflection and practical reasoning, mediated by experience and a discernment of the situation. Deliberation is not measured by time, but by the correctness of what is beneficial; the right thing, the right way, and at the right time. As Heidegger (1997) reasons, a phronimos does not consider if they ought to be wise; rather, they deliberate how to be wise in a specific situation through ‘situational appreciation’ (Wiggins, 1980, p. 237). As for Aristotle, wise action is normative: (T)he person unqualifiedly good at deliberation is the one who tends to aim, in accordance with his calculation, at the best of the goods for a human being that are achievable in action. Nor is practical wisdom concerned only with universals. Understanding of particulars is also required, since it is practical, and action is
20
concerned with particulars. (2000, p. 110) Therefore, I propose the educational marketers deliberate upon the notion, images and promises they make to students and equally importantly the impact these actions have on the form of education that they develop. How, then, might I introduce a notion of ethical educational marketing?
The ethical architecture for educational marketing
My approach both builds an ethical marketing infrastructure of higher education institutions and eases the ethical tensions of marketing identified by Abela and Murphy (2008). Contextualising many of them within higher education, I suggest an ethical architecture can be built based on a virtue ethics approach, with phronesis at its core. The tensions are between:
•
Student autonomy and marketing effectiveness (Gibbs, 2007);
•
Student (and their stakeholder choice) and protection;
•
Student wellbeing and revenue growth (Gibbs, 2004);
•
Academic and administrator satisfaction and short term profit; and
•
Collaborative relationships (colleges and business) and cost reduction.
The introduction of ethical marketing throughout an institution, and the sector as a whole, requires, I believe, the following infrastructure:
•
Professional ethics;
•
Institutional ethical policy statements to include principle and value statements, and institutional credos and codes to set limits around ethical decisions; and
•
An ethical culture of collegiality.
In discussing each of these elements, based on Murphy et al. (2005), I make recommendations on how professional bodies, sector and institutional leaders might go about implementing an ethical marketing ethos.
Professional ethics
The most common feature of professional marketing ethics statements is a call to act with integrity for oneself and the profession and not to injure fellow professionals,
21
to act with honesty towards others, not to mislead through professional practice and to observe the requirements of the code and broader national and international legislation. In its own way, this is important for it assumes a universality which I feel is inappropriate for the higher education-specific marketing. Specific traits include the vulnerability of new entrants in higher education: the expansion debate; the length of time taken out to study; the veracity of estimates of the return of investment in higher education for specific institutions, as opposed to those in general; and the degree to which a student might be transformed by education. Moreover, what I propose requires an advocacy approach, an approach which has at its core the ideology of the educated person, not the need for an increased surplus to reinvest to secure more competitive scores on key indicators. It is interesting that, while the American Academy of Marketing and the UK Academy both have special interest groups in higher education, neither has a specific ethical code. Turning to the AMA, I find strength in their resolve. They state:
I expect AMA members to be courageous and proactive in leading and/or aiding their organizations in the fulfillment of the explicit and implicit promises made to those stakeholders. I recognize that every industry sector and marketing sub-discipline (e.g., marketing research, e-commerce, Internet selling, direct marketing, and advertising) has its own specific ethical issues that require policies and commentary. An array of such codes can be accessed through links on the AMA website. Consistent with the principle of subsidiarity (solving issues at the level where the expertise resides), I encourage all such groups to develop and/or refine their industry and discipline-specific codes of ethics to supplement these guiding ethical norms and values. (www.marketingpoIr.com/AboutAMA/Pages/Statement%20of%20Ethics.aspx )
My first firm proposal is that the professional bodies associated with marketing and the notional bodies for higher education collaborate to devise a code which does just what the AMA suggests, but debates the norms and values of higher education, and how marketing’s existing prejudices potentially corrupt these. Next, the collaboration of the specific in the rubric of ethical virtues should be openly and transparently expressed. To achieve this I need a concept of educational marketing which is built on its own research and practice. Absent in Europe, this is more developed in the US and supported by the AMA Higher Education Interest Group and CASE. It is based on practitioners with little theoretical underpinning of the
22
relationship between education and marketing in a consumer society. The ethical issues are complex, for they deal with civic society, distribution of community goods, the privileges of those who gain awards and the very nature of our future world in future generations. The profession is not of marketing but of educational marketing, which has yet to be established.
Institutional ethical statements based on institutional policies
Their statements denote how seriously organizations regard their ethical commitments and convey principles over time and space. They make expectations more concrete and raise ethical consciousness. Statements are derived from the company’s mission statement and speak of ethics and fairness, integrity, trustworthiness, openness and responsibility. Most importantly, they need to be promoted and reinforced through the behaviour of all the staff. In Table 1 I give the values of two universities which illustrate Ill this approach. The first is Marquette University in the US and the second is in the UK, where I use York St John’s University as an example.
Certainly both statements suggest passion, trust, esteem for one’s profession and relentless academic rigour. HoIver, based on the five principles set out by Murphy et al (2005 p. 217–219), they also need:
•
Communication, so the entire institution is able to understand and appreciate the statements’ importance ;
•
Specificity, to avoid the vagueness that allows exception and confusion;
•
Pertinence, to foreground the core issues of academic equality, access, academic freedom and economic social and ethical sustainability;
•
Enforcement of the principles, so that academic, administrators and students understand that sanctions follow any violation of the code; and
•
Regular updating, so that the code is alive and responsive to the environment in which the institution exists or seeks to create.
Based on these principles, my second proposal is that higher education institutions follow the best practice of other commercial sectors and explicitly provide clear and detailed statements to their stakeholders their values on how the institution is marketed. It might include statements that deal with issues such as the vulnerability of
23
new students from the first generation from their families to attend higher education; the administration’s and faculty’s responsibilities towards foreign students; and clarity as to how academic freedoms and/or teaching obligations relate to the brand equity of institutions. Further, issues of conflicts of interest, treatment of competitors, privacy, and gift giving and political contributions should be addressed. .
Ethical culture
My third premise is the task of developing an ethical culture which requires effort. Changing any institutional culture is a major challenge for institutional senior management. The management must lead, but must also encourage and enable others to follow. As Murphy et al. claim, ‘the consensus among informed observers is that corporate culture is explicitly linked with ethics, in the sense that cohesive and strong cultures tend to reinforce ethical behaviour’ (2005, p. 223). In an institution of higher education where faculty and administrators may not regard themselves as being part of the same team, and where academics may feel greater allegiance to their discipline than their institution, this can be even more problematic. I suggest that management must state clearly its position, philosophy or belief about what it considers to be the educational role of the institution and show by its actions that it means it. It needs to communicate expectations through informal leadership systems and then reinforce policy in ways that are culturally appropriate to the position it takes. In for-profit institutions, this might be bonuses for ethical behaviour. For non-for-profit institutions it may be a more ethereal communication – I am not here suggesting any mutual exclusivity. Publishing any instances when its adherence to ethical policies has, in the short term, penalised the institution, or institutional responses to critical events, perhaps, may be used to underscore its commitment to the ethical marketing principles and avoid any perception of a hidden agenda. Part of such an open environment is the development of an ethical audit for marketing. Its purpose is to gauge the ethical health of the marketing function and it activities. It is comprehensive, systematic, independent and periodic. This is never easy, and as Bodkin and Stevenson (2007) have shown, even attempting to affect change in the ethical perceptions of business administration students can be problematic. Table 2 shows a potential form of a marketing ethical audit checklist.
Source: Based on Ethical Marketing (Murphy et al., 2005)
24
My third proposal is that an ethical culture or ethos needs to be encouraged to grow. This, I believe, may return the institutions to the virtues of collegiality, transparency and trust. Together these build an environment where integrity can become the norm (Audi & Murphy, 2006). This cannot be expected to just happen; it grows by means of the virtuous character of the institution’s stakeholders, each of whom may require instructions or reminders of what this means for them. A systematic reinstatement and engagement with all aspects of the university’s marketing activities to match , support and uphold the values of the institution needs to be undertaken regularly. This is not surveillance, but active democratic assessment and evaluation premised on a common goal. It mirrors the quality academic criteria of the institution, and is primarily the responsibility of the senior administrators but the duty of all, and it is unambiguous.
Conclusion
I have built this notion of higher education marketing from the perspective of relationship marketing, as outlined by Murphy et al. (2007), and expanded it through a discussion of professional judgement. I have paid specific attention to the substance of the relationship – education – so its goals are not unquestioningly distorted by introducing marketing ideology alongside institutions’ own academic imperatives. From this discussion I have formulated three proposals for the sector and wish to conclude with an outline of what I see as an agenda for ethical higher education marketing:
•
Discussion is needed on ethical approaches to marketing of higher education. I support the application of relationship marketing principles as outlined by Murphy et al. (2007), adding sound practical judgement to the mix. In so doing, I reflect the particulars of the marketing subject and highlight the potential damage to the form and reputation of higher education, and its potential to become consumerist education, should marketing principles alone drive higher education institutions through the increasingly competitive environment. This requires from institutional leaders moral strength to remain true to their values. In this sense, I believe that entrepreneurial activity and size is no excuse for compromise.
25
•
Relationship marketing is ethical marketing, as I have envisioned it, and forms a basis for discussion. This is because it bridges the commercial issues facing an institution and its responsibility for moral leadership, answering the question, ‘Are there ways in which the benefits of competition can be gained without ethical damage?’
•
I advocate holistic marketing, where the ideology of academic excellence, openness and emancipation is enhanced by the application of an educational marketing ideology. Such an ethical position needs to be introduced into institutions and I have suggested ways in which this might be achieved, building from ethical statements to institutional programmes.
References
Abela, A.V., & Murphy, P.E. (2008). Marketing with integrity: ethics and the service-dominant logic for marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 39–53. Adorno, T.W., & Horkheimer, M. (1997). Dialectic of enlightenment. London: Verso Books. Adorno, T.W. (2001). The culture industry. London: Routledge Classics. Altbach, P. (Ed.) 2002. The decline of the guru: The academic profession in developing and middleincome countries. New York: Palgrave Publishers. Aristotle. (2000). Nicomachean ethics. Trans. R. Crisp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Arpan, L.M., Raney, A.A., & Zivnuska, S. (2003). A cognitive approach to understanding university image. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 8(2), 97–113. Audi, R. (2008). Some dimensions of trust in business practices: From financial and product representation to licensure and voting. Journal of Business Ethics, June 80(1), 97–102. Audi, R., & Murphy, P. (2006). The many faces of integrity. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(1), 3–22. Barnett, R. (1988). Does higher education have aims? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 22(2), 239–250. Barnett, R. (2003). Beyond All Reason: Living with ideology in the university. Buckingham, UK Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University. Bernstein, R.J. (1996). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics and praxis. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Bodkin. C., & Stevenson, T. (2007). University students’ perceptions regarding ethical marketing practices: Affecting change through instructional techniques. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(13), 207– 228. Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the market place. Princeton University Press.
26
Brennan, J., Brodnick, R., & Pinckley, D. (2007). De-mystifying the U.S. news rankings: How to understand what matters, what doesn’t and what you can actually do about it. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 17(2), 169–188. Caldwell, C., Shapiro, J., Poliner, G., & Gross, S.J. (2007). Ethical leadership in higher education admission: Equality vs. equity. Journal of College Admission. Spring (195), 14–19. De Coster, I., Forsthuber, B., Oberheidt, S., Parveva, T., & Glass, A. (2008). Higher education governance in Europe: Policies, structures, funding and academic staff. Eurydice, (accessed 4.7.08) http://www.eurydice.org/ressources/eurydice/pdf/0_integral/091EN.pdf. Dunne, J. (1999). Professional judgement and the predicaments of practice. European Journal of Marketing, 33(7/8), 707–720. Gadamer, H.-G. (1975). Truth and method. Trans. G. Berden & J. Cummings. New York: Seabury Press. Garrison, J. (1997). Dewey and Eros: Wisdom and desire in the art of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press. Gibbs, P. (2001). Higher education as a market: A problem or solution? Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 85–94. Gibbs, P. (2004.). Marketing and the notion of Well-being. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(1), 5–13. Gibbs, P. (2007). Does advertising pervert higher education? Is there a case for resistance? Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 17(1), 3–11. Heidegger, M. (1997). Plato’s sophist. Trans. R. Rojcewicz & A. Schuwer. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Hunt, S.H. (2007). A responsible framework for marketing as a professional discipline. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 26(2), 277–283. Ivy, J. (2001). Higher education institution image: A correspondence analysis approach. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6), 276–282. Kantrowitz, M. (2007). The financial value of a higher education. NASFAA Journal of Student Financial Aid, 37(1), 19–27. Kirp, D.L. (2004). Shakespeare, Einstein and the bottom line. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Klassen, M.L. (2000). Lots of fun, not much work, and no hassles: Marketing images of higher education. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10(2), 11–26. Laczniak, G.R., & Murphy, P.E. (1991). Fostering ethical marketing decisions. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(4), 259–271. Macfarlane, B. (2002). Teaching with integrity: The ethics of higher education practice. London: Routledge. Murphy, P.E. (1999). Character and virtue ethics in international marketing: an agenda for managers,
27
researchers and educators. Journal of Business Ethics, 18, 107–124. Murphy, P.E., Laczniak, G.R., & Wood, G. (2007). An ethical basis for relationship marketing: A virtue ethics perspective. European Journal of Marketing, 41(1/2), 37–45. Murphy, P.E., Laczniak, G.R., Bowie, N.E., & Klein, T.A. (2005). Ethical marketing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Naidoo, R., & Jamieson, I. (2005). Empowering participants or corroding learning? Towards a research agenda on the impact of student consumerism in higher education. Journal of Education Policy, 20(3), 267–281. Noel, J. (1999). On the varieties of phronesis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 3, 273–289. OCED. (2008). Education at a Glance 2008: OECD Indicators (accessed 11.11.08). http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_2649_39263238_41266761_1_1_1_1,00.html#1. Poff, D.C. (2005). Challenges to integrity in university administration: Bad faith and loyal agency. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2, 209–219. Reich, S. (2004). Human security as a global public good. The Courier ACP-EU 202, (accessed 5.11.2008). Rucinski, D. A., & Bauch, P. (2006). Reflective, ethical, and moral constructs in educational leadership preparation: effects on graduates’ practices. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(5), 487–508. Schwartz, S. (2005). Ethics matters: Managing ethical issues in higher education. London: CIHE. Slater, D. (2002). From calculation to alienation: Disentangling economic abstractions. Economy and Society, 11(2), 234–249.
Veloutsou, C., Paton, R.A., & Lewis, J. (2005). Consultation and the reliability of information sources pertaining to university section. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(4), 160–171. Waide, J. (1987). The making of self and world in advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(2), 73–79. Wiggins, D. (1980). Deliberation, and practical reasoning. In A. Rorty (Ed.) Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics pp. 221–240. Berkeley: University of California Press. Williams, O.F., & Murphy, P.E. (1992). The ethics of virtue: A moral theory for business. In O. Williams & J. Houck (Eds.) A virtuous life in business pp. 9–27. Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield. World Bank. (2000). Higher education in developing countries: Peril and promise. Washington. DC: The World Bank. Zipin L., & Brennan, M. (2003). The suppression of ethical dispositions through managerial governmentality: A habitus crisis in Australian higher education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6(4), 351–370.
28
1. CHOICE AND BRANDING
Which University? An empirical study of applicant choice criteria Ailsa Kolsaker, Jane Hemsley-Brown, School of Management, University of Surrey Becky Lewis, Opinionpanel Research
Abstract
The principle of competition amongst universities is firmly engrained in UK government higher education policy. Universities now embrace market-driven discourses, axioms and practices formerly found only in the private sector. As competition intensifies and students become increasingly consumerist, universities are purposively exploiting the promotional mix to carve out differentiated positions. We argue that this is not being executed as accurately or efficaciously as it could be; many universities do not fully understand applicant choice criteria and government policy often distorts admission decisions. Universities often try to be ‘all things to all people’, promoting ‘excellence’ across teaching, research, sporting and entertainment facilities, accommodation and so on, with little or no obvious segmentation or targeting. This paper reports the findings of a study of over 10,000 undergraduates about their choice criteria. How did they choose between universities? Which criteria most influence decisions? Are there any discernable differences between applicants based on social background, psychological type, age, gender or academic achievement at school?
The findings indicate that two factors influence choice significantly: love of subject and location. The prospectus, website and open days are reasonably influential
29
overall. The relative importance of choice criteria varies markedly according to age, character and academic achievement at school. In general, students choosing Russell Group and 1994 Group universities rate far more attributes ‘important’ than those at post-1992 institutions; the latter are influenced more by proximity to home and future employability. Those particularly influenced by the subject studied include younger applicants, those with higher UCAS points, those attending Russell Group and 1994 universities. On the basis of clear differences between groups, we argue that universities are wasting opportunities and resources by failing to segment and target adequately. We call for improved segmentation and targeting such that the sector achieves a better ‘fit’ between students and universities, to their mutual advantage and the benefit of society at large.
Keywords: universities, UK, undergraduates, choice criteria
Introduction
UK universities have three main revenue streams: government funding, research income and student fee income. In recent years government grants have reduced and universities have become more reliant upon student fees as a key source of income. Marketing departments have sprung up across the sector as institutions realise the imperative of attracting students in a competitive market. They embrace marketing theory to build ‘university brands’ and promote their institutions using the marketing communications mix. Despite their best efforts, universities remain public sector bureaucracies and are embracing corporate discourses and techniques often without the requisite resources, skills or experience to exploit them fully. Consequently, a quick scan of university websites indicates little differentiation between institutions, and few signs of segmentation or targeting. All institutions offer ‘academic excellence’, ‘leading-edge teaching and research’ and ‘studentcentricity’. This suggests that they do not yet fully understand their target audience, are not targeting or positioning themselves effectively and therefore possibly not fully optimising the promotional mix. This paper reports the findings of an extensive survey of the choice criteria of 10,000+ undergraduate students at UK universities. It exposes how applicants choose between universities and which criteria most influence decisions. It explores differences between applicants based on social background, psychological type, age, gender or academic achievement at school. It is hoped that the paper may
30
be of interest not only to academics but to managers and marketing practitioners at UK universities. Please note that this paper is based on the OpinionPanel report Higher Expectations; we do not have access to the raw data set and therefore are limited to analysing descriptive statistics. The report does, however, indicate where statistically significant differences occurred between groups and use this as the basis of the differences cited in this paper.
Higher Education Marketing
Since the 1980s the UK government has systematically altered the funding regime for higher education with the dual goals of reducing universities’ reliance on public funding and increasing tuition fee income. The sector now operates in quasi-market conditions (albeit highly regulated) in which universities are pitched against each other in competition for students. The 2004 Higher Education Act ‘encouraged’ universities to remain competitive in the world economy by introducing top-up fees for home undergraduates. Initially there was a flat fee of £1,100, but in 2006 universities were permitted to introduce variable fees. Although universities can vary the amount, the majority charge fees or around £3,300 which is near the cap imposed by Government. With little difference in fee levels, universities are challenged to differentiate themselves in some other way. Marketing and Public Relations departments now proliferate throughout the sector and as fees increase, so does the influence of consumerist discourses as students redefine themselves as paying customers. In essence, relations between academics and students are being reconstituted from student/teacher to something more akin to a commercial buyer/seller exchange; with funding following students it may be anticipated that students will become more demanding and universities will have to respond appropriately to maintain fee income. The logic of the market states that those universities that provide high quality education and good value for money will attract more students, more revenue and enter a benign cycle of success. Concomitantly, higher education services that are below standard will be rejected, thus forcing higher education providers to improve or lose out on ‘customers’ and revenue (Naidoo and Jamieson, 2005: 270). It is assumed that competition between institutions for limited resources will produce a more effective, efficient and equitable higher education system (Naidoo and Jamieson, 2005: 270). Ignoring awkward realities such as negative externalities and artificial constraints, market-driven ideology now predominates and universities
31
must understand their audience if they are to survive in an increasingly competitive, demanding environment. There is some evidence that universities do not fully understand their market and therefore may be relying too much on mass advertising and a glossy prospectus at the expense of more sophisticated, targeted techniques that potentially could reap greater rewards. One such example was the (now defunct) University of Luton which merged with De Montford’s Bedford campus in 2006 to become the University of Bedfordshire. Since the merger the university has been rebranded and leapt up the Times league table and the National Student Satisfaction Survey (NSSS). According to the Independent (August, 2006) much of the turnaround can be credited to the Director of Communications and Marketing who eliminated unfocused spending on advertising and concentrated on turning applications into places by giving applicants ‘tender loving care.’ The conversion rate for applications into places improved from one in seven to one in five. According to the Marketing Director, “It’s about giving people what they want, and giving them what they want is a lot cheaper than an advertising campaign” (The Independent, 2006). It is reported that the university works closely with local feeder further education colleges as ninety-five per cent of students come from within a forty-four mile radius of Luton (The Independent, 2006). In this case analysing applicants’ profiles enabled Bedfordshire to target communications and save significant resources formerly wasted on national advertising campaigns. This and other similar examples suggest that universities must become knowledgeable about student choice criteria; specifically, how applicants choose between universities. Upon what critieria do they base their decisions, and how do they prioritise? How can universities identify prospects and what can they do to attract them? Why do some applicants reject some institutions out of hand, and what appeals to them about their favoured universities? These questions, amongst others, are explored further in the remainder of the paper.
Understanding student choice criteria
Student choice is subject to multiple influences (James, 1999; Connor et al, 2001, Kinzie et al, 2004 in Briggs and Wilson, 2007). The existing literature suggests that academic reputation, quality of facilities and employment prospects are highly influential (Soutar and Turner, 2002). Moogan and Baron (2003) find the location of the university and distance from home to be important to decision-making, whilst Cole and Thompson (1999) observe that the opinions of peers and family and the
32
applicant’s socio-economic background are also determinants of university choice. More recently, Briggs and Wilson (2007) find that cost is also a key criteria; this is not entirely unexpected in light of the cap on tuition fees having risen from around £1k to over £3k.
A study by Dehne (1997) finds that compared to earlier generations, today’s applicants seek to make a more informed decision about which university to attend. For some, the volume of information available means that they are knowledgeable and certain about their final choice; however, for others the sheer volume of information from multiple sources may simply seem confusing. Information overload presents a complexity gap in which the amount of information provided is simply too great for the individual to process and absorb. For universities the challenge is to understand the market, identify applicants’ decision-making criteria and priorities, what information sources they use, how much third parties influence decisions, how extensively applicants use the web to aid decision-making and so on. Without this universities cannot expect to recruit successfully (that is to say, not just meeting recruitment targets, but ensuring that there is a good ‘fit’ between student and institution). The remainder of this paper reports the findings of an extensive 2007/08 survey of first year undergraduates at UK universities. The aim of the survey was to identify how students choose their university. It identifies information sources, key choice criteria and distinguishes between different groups of students according to UCAS points, demo- and psychographics. The survey produced some interesting findings that may be of interest to the conference.
Influences on Student Choices
The Subject
An extensive survey of over 10,000 first year undergraduate students (2007 intake), the authors found that 68% of students chose their subject ‘because they love it’. Younger students under 21 cited this reason (69%) more than the 25 plus age group (59%), as did those with 300+ UCAS points (67 – 76%) compared to those with 101 – 200 points (60%). Only 59% of the ‘life goes on’ group chose the subject for the love of it, compared to the other groups (between 68- 73%). Younger students (39%) were also more influenced than the 25+ age group (4%) by their best subject at school; as were those with higher UCAS points (for example, 45% of those
33
with over 500 points cited this reason as a key criteria compared to just 16% of those with under 100 points). There were few differences across groups relating to choosing their subject because they thought it would help with future careers (28% of the sample), whereas studying because the subject was needed to enter the chosen career was significantly more powerful a driver for students aged 25+ (28%) than younger (21%). Pleasingly perhaps, only 2% of the sample chose their subject because ‘it was easy to get in’. This means that for the majority choice is strongly influenced by love of the subject meaning that their options are limited to those universities offering that subject; for universities the message here is that they do not need to compete with all other institutions, only those that offer the same (or similar) subjects and courses. Career prospects are relatively unimportant as choice criteria for the ‘average’ entrant coming to university straight from school.
Distance from Home
Reflecting Moogan and Baron’s (2003) findings, the next influential criterion was ‘distance from home’; 12% of students chose a university close to home, with 64% opting for one ‘a moderate distance’ from home. Only 13% consciously wished to study far from home. The sample was grouped according to gender, age, university type, ward participation and psychographics. Significant age-related differences were identified, with under 21 year olds most keen to be a moderate distance away (66%), compared to only 33% of over 25 year olds. The profiles of the psychographic groupings are illustrated in figure 1.
Figure 1 Student Type (‘Size of 06/07 intake’ provides a rough guide to the current expected distribution).
34
Dissecting the data on the basis of student type, statistically significant differences were observable between the ‘party minded’ (71% wishing to be a ‘moderate distance from home’) and ‘mature minded’ (42%); this is not to say that the ‘mature minded’ wish to travel far however, on the contrary, 28% wish to stay ‘close to home’, in line with their profile in table 1. Taken together, even this relatively unsophisticated data about choice of subject, age, lifestyle and distance from home provides guidance for universities; for a given subject ‘university X’ could target two distinct segments: ‘mature minded’ students, typically females aged over 25, possibly with family commitments, living locally and motivated by finding a university close to home. Simultaneously, another segment could be targeted; specifically ‘party minded’ students, typically male, under 21 who wish to live ‘a moderate distance’ from the university. Understanding the attributes that motivate these segments provides an indication of how these two distinct segments could be targeted; the mature-minded with reference to ease of access, flexibility and easy access to learning resources, whilst party people are attracted by the availability of (good quality) accommodation, fun and entertainment.
Distance from Home
Reflecting Moogan and Baron’s (2003) findings, the next influential criterion was ‘distance from home’; 12% of students chose a university close to home, with 64% opting for one ‘a moderate distance’ from home. Only 13% consciously wished to study far from home. The sample was grouped according to gender, age, university type, ward participation and psychographics. Significant age-related differences were identified, with under 21 year olds most keen to be a moderate distance away (66%), compared to only 33% of over 25 year olds. The profiles of the psychographic groupings are illustrated in figure 1.
Information Sources
It is crucial for universities to know the sources applicants use to gather information, prior to making a definite decision. Survey participants were asked to think back to when they were choosing a university, and identify sources of information they consulted. Primary sources were the university website (visited by 86% of the sample), and the printed prospectus (79%). 69% participated in Open Days, whilst 39% talked to current students. Sub-dividing the sample according to student type,
35
statistically significant differences emerged between the ‘life goes on’ group and the others in relation to visiting the university website, attending the Open Day and talking to existing students (fewer ‘life goes on’ students did than those from other groups). Both ‘life goes on’ and ‘mature minded’ referenced the prospectus less than other groups; since members of these groups tend to be older, they have a narrower choice and tend to make direct contact with their preferred university. Being more tied by family and social commitments than younger students or ‘party people’, they are looking for an institution close to home.
Somewhat surprisingly perhaps, given the high profile of the Times and Guardian league tables, only one in ten students consulted a newspaper to find out about universities prior to making a decision. This suggests that league tables have little influence on student choice (flying in the face of prevailing discourses of measurement and ranking). In contrast, the influence of family and friends is relatively strong. Under 21 year olds (the ‘typical’ post- A level entrant) are reasonably influenced by friends (38%), family (34%) and teachers (34%); these influences diminish with age such that only one in four mature students aged 25+ consulted friends and only 12% asked family for their views. In aggregate, the data suggests that applicants are only moderately influenced by third parties, even those close to them, relying instead upon information from the university itself. This means that universities are potentially extremely influential; but given the emphasis on inter-institutional competition in the higher education press and practitioner publications, one might speculate whether they realise the extent of their influence.
Another area we were interested in examining was the use of the Internet. Modern narratives of social networking and ‘the net generation’ led us to anticipate that a large number of applicants would visit university websites and other, more informal, online sources such as third party and social networking sites. The first interesting finding was that, overall, 79% of applicants had visited a university website to get information about the institution. We also observed a number of statistically significant differences in visiting official university websites; female applicants (82%) used these more than males (75%) as a source of information, and younger applicants aged under 21 (80%) compared to the plus 25 age group (72%). There were also marked, statistically significant differences in behaviours based upon UCAS scores; for example, whilst 45% of those with between 1 – 100 UCAS points visited university websites, 91% of those with 500+ points did so. Those in the
36
500 points plus group were significantly more likely to have used the university website as a source of information than any other group. Similarly, the ‘life goes on’ cluster is significantly less likely to visit an official website than any of the other groups. In aggregate, the findings demonstrate how extensively applicants turn to the official university website as a source of information; again, indicating the extent of influence that universities have in the decision process. Another interesting finding was the low influence of third party and social networking sites. The NUS site was visited by only 22% overall, with the under 21 year olds (23%) using this as an information source much more than the over 25s (14%). Again, UCAS points appeared to reflect differences in behaviours; none of those with under 100 points visited the NUS site, whilst 30% of those with 500 + points did. The behaviour of ‘new lifers’ and ‘party people’ was significantly different to the other groups (for example, 30% of ‘new lifers’ contrasted with only 15% of the ‘life goes on’ group). Similar patterns of behaviour were reflected in applicants’ use of newspaper websites and the third party site ‘Aim Higher’. Most interestingly of all, perhaps, was the limited use of social networking sites; overall only 12% of the sample had visited them for the purpose of finding out about universities, females (13%) more than males (10%), the under 21s (12%) more than the 25 plus group (6%) and ‘new lifers’ (18%) and ‘party people’ (13%) more than the other groups (8%). Still fewer referenced social networks attached to official university sites, indicating that these are of very limited use in informing prospects.
Finally, it is worth noting that 29% of our sample found universities via a search engine, such as Google. Males (31%) used this more than females (27%), and the ‘life goes on’ group significantly less (21%) than other groups (between 29 – 32%). It is also worth noting that student and lecturer blogs were of very limited use as information sources (4 – 5%). Thankfully perhaps, ‘consumer action sites’ such as ratemyprofessor.com did not feature at all (they were included in the survey, but nobody indicated that they had visited such sites). Only 6% of the sample used no online sources at all as part of their information search.
Conclusion
This paper has provided a brief overview of some of the patterns discernable in the OpinionPanel survey data. Our starting point was the observation that universities are not particularly skilled at differentiation, segmentation or targeting. The research
37
data indicates that, even with relatively unsophisticated data, it is possible to discern some patterns in motivations and behaviours which may be useful pointers for segmentation, targeting. If universities could improve their understanding of their ‘customer profile’, they could then differentiate themselves more successfully. This paper highlights that institutions play a key influential role in student choices (perhaps more than they realise); and that it is not necessarily facilities and cost that determine choice, but fundamental factors like subjects offered and distance from home. Prospects must be reached directly, not through third parties; today’s applicants do not seem to be particularly influenced by the opinions of others, even family and friends. It would seem to be important to undertake psychographic profiling, as the OpinionPanel data throws up, time and again, significant differences in motivations, attitudes and behaviours between student type (based on age, life stage, lifestyle, preferences). Finally, we conclude that universities really must embrace the web; too many sites are unwieldy, out of date or unresponsive; as applicants’ use of online sources of information grows (and it is doing so, rapidly), universities need to reallocate resources away from indirect publicity to the online arena, taking full advantage of the opportunities for customised, targeted communications with students as they make critical decisions affecting their future. We are conscious that this paper provides just a snapshot of some of the key criteria affecting student choice. We are aware that our data is unsophisticated and that lack of access to the original dataset severely limits both the depth of the analysis and quality of discussion. Nonetheless, we hope that even this broad-brush overview of student choice criteria provides some useful points for discussion as well as serving as a timely reminder of the imperative for universities to embrace some of the fundamentals marketing theory and practice, jettisoning the ambition to be ‘all things to all people’.
References
Briggs and Wilson (2007) Which university? A study of the influence of cost and information factors on Scottish undergraduate choice, Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, Mar2007, Vol. 29 (1): 57-72 Cole, L., & Thompson, G. W. (1999). Survey of current students: Implications for recruitmentand retention. NACTA Journal 43 (3): 15–20 Connor, H., Pearson, R., Pollard, E., Tyers, C., & Willison, R. (2001). The right choice? A follow up to making the right choice. London: Institute for Employment Studies/Committee of Vice-
38
Chancellors and Principals Dehne, G. C., et al. (1997). The new student: Are we ready? Do we care? Available at http:// www. dehne.com/news_research/research_new_student.html. Accessed 18.12.2008 Independent (2006) Luton University: taking on a new identity. 3rd August. Available at: http://www. independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/luton-university-taking-on-a-new-identity-410287.html. Accessed 16.12.2008 James, R. H. (1999) Non-traditional students and their university participation: An Australian perspective on persistent inequities and the new ideology of ‘student choice’. Paper presented at 21stEuropean Association of Institutional Research Conference, Lund University, Sweden, 175–196. In Briggs and Wilson (2007) Kinzie, J. P., Hayek, M., Hossler, J., Jacob, D., & Cummings, H. (2004). Fifty years of college choice: Social, political and institutional influences on the decision-making process. Lumina Foundation for Education, New Agenda Series , 3(5), 1–72. Moogan YJ and Baron S (2003) ‘An analysis of student characteristics within the student decision making process’. Journal of Further and Higher Education Vol. 27 (3): 271-87 Naidoo, R & Jamieson, I. M. 2005 Empowering participants or corroding learning?: Towards a research agenda on the impact of student consumerism in higher education’, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 20 (3): 267-281 OpinionPanel Research (2008) Higher Expectations 2007/08, London, Opinionpanel Research and The Knowledge Partnership Soutar, G. and Turner, J. (2002) Students’ preferences for university: a conjoint analysis, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol 16 (1): 40 – 45
39
Selecting a Higher Education Institution: the Role of Information Search and Choice Factors Cláudia Simões, Ana Maria Soares
Abstract
Higher Education Institutions (HEI) face increasingly complex challenges (e.g., changing demand patterns, intensifying global competition and declining in funding). Such context demands a deeper understanding of which sources prospective students resort to when applying to a HEI. This research centres on students’ decision making process for HEIs focusing on the pre-purchase stage. The study aims at contributing to a deeper understanding of the information sources and choice factors that students resort to when applying to HEIs. An exploratory study was carried out in a Portuguese University focusing on the sources and determinants used when selecting a HEI. A survey was applied to students enrolling for the first time, yielding a sample of 1641 cases. Findings revealed that the ‘university website’ and ‘Former/ current ABC university students’ are among the most used sources of information. Results also showed that ‘geographical proximity’ is the most important choice factor for a HEI. An additional relevant factor relates to the ‘academic reputation’ for both the university and the degree. Conclusions, implications and avenues for future research are presented.
40
Introduction
Higher Education Institutions (HEI) face increasingly complex challenges. In particular, their operating environment is undergoing major transformations, such as, changing demand patterns, intensifying global competition and declining in funding. Consequently, institutional attention is increasingly focused on attracting high quality (human) resources and students. Such context demands a deeper understanding of which sources prospective students resort to when applying to a HEI. This research centres on students’ decision making process for HEIs focusing on the pre-purchase stage. The importance of effective and focused student recruitment practices is paramount and such an understanding may greatly enhance HEIs’ marketing policies. Additionally, from an applicant’s perspective, it is crucial that adequate information is available so that a well-informed decision is made. Only by relying on the right information, prospective students are able to make better decisions/judgements (Briggs and Wilson 2007). Studies in Higher Education are founded in several backgrounds such as economics (e.g., Cardoso et al., 2007; Marcenaro-Gutierrez et al., 2007) and public policy (e.g., Dill 1997; Archer et al., 2003). This research follows a marketing perspective, building on consumer behaviour and services marketing literatures. Information search has been object of a number of studies covering a variety of products/services, such as, women shoes (Newman and Lockeman, 1975), new automobiles (Punj and Staelin, 1983; Moorthy et al., 1997), professional services (Frieden and Goldsmith, 1989), restaurant and financial services (Mitra et al., 1999). Nonetheless, there is the need for a deeper understanding of search behaviour, in particular in services. It has been acknowledged that consumers’ information search is distinct between goods and services. As McColl-Kennedy and Fetter (1999: 242/243) contend “[g]iven the generally risky nature of services, and the basic tenet that consumers engage in search activities as a means to reduce risk, it seems that understanding consumer search behaviour may be especially important in a services marketing context”. Indeed, when faced with a service buying decision consumers will tend to seek for more information (Murray, 1991; McColl-Kennedy and Fetter, 1999).
In what concerns HEI choice behaviour, a parallel line of inquiry has focused on generic student-choice models (e.g. Vrontis et al., 2007, Punj & Staelin, 1978). Yet, specific aspects of HEI decision making process are open to a deeper investigation.
41
This paper attempts to shed some light on the pre-purchase information search and choice factors for the Higher Education services. As Murray states (1991: 10) “(…) of particular importance to managers is an understanding of the pre-purchase information acquisition process used by service consumers. Knowledge of information acquisition strategies is vital to both marketing managers and scholars because information search is an early influential stage in the purchase decision process”. Theoretical and empirical issues surrounding information sources and choice factors, when applying to a HEI, are discussed. This paper reports an exploratory study carried out in a Portuguese University focusing on the sources and determinants used when selecting a HEI. The paper is organised as follows. First, a review of extant literature is presented in order to better describe the matters underlying the decision making process for a HEI. Then the research design is presented. The next section portrays the findings from the empirical study. Finally, conclusions, implications and avenues for future research are presented.
Choice of Higher Education Institutions
This section addresses the main theoretical concepts that underpin this research, in particular, it briefly introduces the decision models for HEIs. Subsequently, the prepurchase stage is described in more detail. Since HEIs are service organisations, we broadly present the service buying process in order to better understand its dynamics and stages. The choice of which university to attend has been characterized as a highly complex decision being subject to multiple influences (Briggs and Wilson, 2007). Understanding how students make decisions regarding college selection has attracted the attention of a number of authors. Vrontis et al. (2007) contend that student behaviour models arising from the literature can be classified into economic models, status attainment models and combined models. Economic models assume consumers are highly rational and suggest choices result from a calculation of the costs and perceived benefits for each institution. Choice would, thus, fall on the institution offering the highest value. Punj and Staelin (1978), for example, propose a stochastic model which allows estimating how specific variables related to the school or student affect the university choice process. This model does not entail the cognitive process that the student goes through when deciding which university to attend. Status attainment models consider that students’ choice of a
42
HEI is influenced by the interaction between behavioural and background variables (Sewell and Shah, 1978). Combined models draw simultaneously on the rational approach of economic models and on the sociological perspective, thus providing a more comprehensive explanation for choice (Hossler et al., 1999). Vrontis et al. (2007) consider the contributions by Jackson (1982), Chapman (1984) and Hanson and Litten (1982) to be the most representative combined models.
Building on these approaches, Vrontis el al. (2007) develop a contemporary higher education student-choice model for developed countries. The model represents a holistic view of the process considering both the sequence of the decision steps and the various influences. These determinants include: (1) individual (customer and personal attributes); (2) environment (general public policy and influences/media); (3) high-school characteristics (e.g., social composition, quality); and, (4) HEIs (characteristics and actions).
Having these models as a background, this study focuses on information search and choice factors for HEIs. We take a simplified view of the decision-process steps building on service literature. According to Lovelock (2001), the general buying stages for purchasing a service are: pre-purchase stage, service encounter stage and post-purchase stage. The pre-purchase stage embraces the awareness of a need, information search and evaluation of alternative suppliers. The service encounter phase involves the actual service purchase from a chosen supplier and its delivery. The post-purchase stage implies the assessment of the performance and future intentions. It is at this phase that clients evaluate the service quality and satisfaction (this is important as loyalty emerges at this stage). We will now consider the pre-purchase stage as it is the main focus of this research.
The pre-purchase stage
The relevance of the pre-purchase stage derives from the fact that it leads to the final decision to service purchase/consumption. Actions at this stage will vary depending on the specific needs or expectations to be fulfilled. An important aspect to consider at this point is the perceived risk associated with the purchase (Lovelock, 2001). The notion of risk in buying decision is related to the fact that consumers make decisions under a certain degree of uncertainty regarding a specific product or service; it, thus, refers to the chance of negative outcomes and the possibility of loss (Taylor,
43
1974; Murray, 1991).
Consumers face uncertainty since choices’ outcomes can only be fully known in the future. Bauer (1960: 389) argued that “[c]onsumer behaviour involves risk in the sense that any action of a consumer will produce consequences which he cannot anticipate with anything approximating certainty, and some of which at least are likely to be unpleasant”. In this line of thought, Cunningham (1967: 84) distinguished risk and perceived risk since “the consumer can only react to the amount of risk she actually perceived and only to her subjective interpretation of that risk” 1.
Perceived risk has been conceptualised as product-specific (Cunningham, 1967). Due to their nature and basic features (simultaneity, intangibility, variability), service purchases are considered to be riskier than product purchases. In fact, it is not possible to experience services before the consumption (Murray, 1991). Consistent with this idea, for example, Frieden and Goldsmith (1989) contend that the purchase of professional services is higher in perceived risk than that of products. In these type of services, assessment is hampered by service intangibility and variability, the lack of warranties and guarantees, and their technical nature.
There are several types of risks/consumers’ perceived losses associated with the purchase. Several typologies of losses have been proposed (Roselius, 1971; Jacoby and Kaplan, 1972; Taylor, 1974). Measures of risk perceptions have converged to financial (the risk that the product/service purchased will not worth its cost); performance/functional (the risk that the product/service will not perform as expected); physical (the risk that the product/service may cause an health hazard to the consumer or others); psychological (the risk that a poor choice will bruise the consumer’s ego), social (the risk that a poor product/service choice affects negatively the perception of other individuals about the purchaser) or time /convenience (the risk that the consumer’s time/effort and/or convenience have been wasted if the product/service does not perform as expected) (Stone and Gronhaug, 1993; Stone The notion of perceived risk has been widely accepted both considering its two-dimensional (importance and probability of loss) and multi-facet approaches. Yet the construct has been conceptualised and operationalised at different levels of abstraction (Dowling, 1986): low-level (single product’s perceived risk); medium-level (across product-categories); and high-level (resembling a personality trait). Moreover, risk research has focused on specific products (e.g., Hoover, Green, and Saegert, 1978; Mitchell and Boustani, 1994; Stone and Gronhaug, 1993); services (e.g., Mitchell and Vassos, 1997; Mitra, Reiss and Capella, 1999), or buying situations (e.g., Akaah and Korgaonkar, 1988; Jasper and Ouellette, 1994; Choi and Lee, 2003). This diversity of research warrants a clearer specification of the construct’s boundaries. A profound discussion of the notion of (perceived) risk goes beyond the scope of this research. However, more detailed insights may be obtained in Dowling, 1986. For the purpose of this work, we take on the insights described in this section.
44
and Mason, 1995; Mitchell, 1992; Schiffman and Kanuk, 2000). For example, when defining which University to attend, prospective students may face functional risks (whether the University and chosen degree will fulfil the requirements to get a proper job); financial risk (the investment related to the tuition and living expenses); social risks (what others will think regarding the decision to attend a certain University course) and, psychological risk (the ego consequences caused by a bad choice). In order to deal with perceived risk, consumers resort to risk reducers such as information search. The following section will focus on this aspect.
Information search
Risk is particularly relevant in the alternative evaluation stage of decision-making, being an aspect consumers try to reduce to acceptable levels (Blackwell et al., 2006). In general, research has shown that the higher the level of perceived risk, the more complicated is the buying situation for the consumer. Similarly, the higher the involvement with the purchase, the higher the product’s perceived risk (Dowling, 1986; Dowling & Staelin, 1994; Mitchell, 1999). In order to reduce risk perception, consumers employ strategies such as information search, service provider reputation, visit service facilities, talk to employees, check internet to compare service settings, etc... (Lovelock, 2001). Consequently, information search is considered as a means used by consumers to reduce uncertainty and perceived risk (Urbany et al., 1989; Cox, 1967). In general, the higher the degree of perceived risk, the higher the tendency to look for information about a service (Murray 1991).
Therefore, consumer’s information search constitutes a key element of consumer decision models (Beatty and Smith, 1987). Information search covers the process undertaken by consumers to acquire information and identify possible solutions for their problem which can be internal or external (Blackwell et al., 2006). Internal search is based on retrieving existing information in memory or knowledge from previous related experiences. External search is information search beyond one’s memory and refers to collecting new information from a number of personal and non-personal sources. External search occurs when internal search is not perceived as sufficient for a confident decision and whenever the benefits of the additional information prevail over its costs (Bloch et al, 1986; Schmitt and Spreng, 1996). In particular, first-time buyers may frequently be uncertain about available alternatives.
45
After the process of information search, the consumer should be able to identify a set of possible alternatives (the evoked set) for satisfying his/her need. Consumers also collect product-related information even when they are not planning to buy a product immediately (ongoing search) (Bloch et al., 1996). There are three types of attributes that affect services’ search behaviour: search attributes, experience attributes and credence attributes. Search attributes are the most tangible attributes and include those aspects that consumers can easily evaluate before the consumption/service delivery (e.g., tangible and physical dimensions). Credence attributes are the most intangible attributes which consumers may only assess long after the service has been delivered. Essentially, consumers rely on the trust they have on service performers (e.g., a medical surgery). For example, the search for a HEI, may be quite high in credence attributes as, only long after the service delivery, students are able to assess their education and whether it has positively contributed to their lives/careers. In between the two types of attributes are the experience attributes. Experience attributes are essentially assessed during service delivery and/or immediately after. It is difficult to evaluate experience attributes prior to service delivery. Experience and credence attributes tend to be more peoplethan equipment-dependent (Kasper et al., 2006). In credence/experience-based services consumers tend to engage in more information acquisition activities (Mitra et al., 1999).
The information search process depends on the importance of satisfying the need, familiarity with available solutions and the amount of time available for the search. Kiel and Layton (1981) refer to three aspects for information seeking: (1) sources of information; (2) number of brands and (3) time. The next section addresses issues related to sources of information.
Choice factors
Choice factors play a relevant role in the decision-making process as they constitute basic determinants for the final decision. Student choice of a higher education institution is influenced by a wide variety of choice factors. Previous research in the area has identified the following factors: academic reputation, teaching quality, distance from home/proximity and location, influence of others (e.g., friends, parents), costs, potential marketability of the degree, employability/job prospects, quality of education, facilities; degree supply variety, (etc.) (Hoyt and Brown, 1999;
46
Briggs and Wilson, 2007; Murphy, 1981; Webb, 1993; Kallio, 1995; Lin, 1997; Donnellan, 2002; Soutar and Turner, 2002; Shanka et al. 2005; Holdswoth and Nind, 2005; Briggs and Wilson, 2007).
Sources of information
Consumers resort to different information sources, which can be broadly classified as internal and external (Murray, 1991). Beatty and Smith (1987) propose the following typology of external information sources: media, retailer, interpersonal and neutral. Olshavsky and Wymer (1995) classify sources as marketer controlled (e.g., advertising); reseller information (e.g., catalogues); third-party independent (e.g., consumer reports); interpersonal sources (e.g., relations); by direct inspection of the good by the consumer. Information search effort is related to perceived risk levels (Murray, 1991). In fact, consumers tend to collect more information when faced with higher priced, more visible and more complex product purchases (Beatty and Smith, 1987). Thus, as perceived risk levels increase, trial ability and direct observation tend to be privileged by consumers (Lutz and Reilly, 1973).
Therefore, preference for information sources varies according to factors such as perceived risk, purchase involvement and type of product. In general, the greater the perceived risk, the greater the importance of interpersonal influences (Locander and Hermann, 1979; Price and Feick, 1984). Consumers appear to use interpersonal sources primarily in situations in which perceived risk and uncertainty have not been sufficiently reduced by formal sources, and in which uncertainty and involvement justify seeking further information through informal sources (Cox, 1963; Murray, 1991). Indeed, word-of-mouth has been considered as the most relevant source for risk reduction since it allows elucidation and feedback. Furthermore, it has been argued that information from interpersonal sources plays a key role in decision making for products dominant in social aspects (Midgley, 1983). Moreover, a connection between individual factors and preference for certain information sources may be established. Previous research suggests that individual factors affect risk and information search effort (e.g., Taylor, 1974; Schaninger, 1976; Dowling, 1986; Beatty and Smith, 1987). Vrontis et al. (2007) identify a number of determinants of student behaviour, such as academic aptitude and gender. In this line of thought, empirical studies reported that the level of education positively affects the amount of external search (Swartz and Stephens, 2001). Similarly, Briggs and Wilson
47
(2007) found evidence of gender and discipline differences for information sources. Additionally, West et al. (2001) detected differences in decision making process when selecting a field of study. Hence, more detailed insights into how specific individual factors may affect information sources preferences for HEIs’ are relevant to explore. Research design
This research followed a quantitative design. In order to identify student’s perceptions about choice factors and information sources when applying to a HEI, a questionnaire was developed. The research instrument was pre-tested and refined in the previous two academic years. Data was collected in a Public University located in the Minho Province in the North of Portugal, hereafter referred to as the ABC University. The questionnaire was applied as a computer survey to students enrolling for the first time. Questionnaires were filled-in during registration. This allowed capturing students’ perceptions shortly after the decision-making (similarly to Briggs and Wilson, 2007). The yielded sample includes 1641 respondents, corresponding to a 78% response rate. The research instrument included three sections: (1) individual background information; (2) information sources; and, (3) choice factors. The first part covered demographics, academic aptitude (application grade) and field of study. The following fields of study were considered: Arts & Humanities (e.g., architecture, applied languages, history), Health Studies (e.g., medicine, biomedical engineering, nursing), Sciences (mathematics, chemistry, psychology), Social Studies (e.g., economics, management; sociology), Engineering & Computer Sciences (e.g., civil engineering; communications engineering; information systems and technology).
In what concerns the information sources’ section, Olshavsky and Wymer’s (1995) typology was followed. Thus, the following groups were considered: (1) Marketer controlled – University brochures and leaflets; University website; University official guides; promotional visits to secondary schools; (2) Third-party independent – secondary school counsellors; media/publicity; (3) Interpersonal – teachers; former/ current ABC University students; (4) By direct inspection of the good/service by the consumer – organised campus visits. Based on previous research, the third section entailed the following choice-factors: geographical proximity, academic reputation, guidance from vocational advisors/ teachers; personal influences (family members and current university students) (Hoyt and Brown, 1999; Briggs and Wilson 2007; Murphy, 1981; Webb, 1993; Kallio,
48
1995; Lin, 1997; Donnellan, 2002; Soutar and Turner, 2002; Shanka et al. 2005; Holdswoth and Nind, 2005). Data analysis at this exploratory stage consisted essentially of descriptive statistics and chi-square tests using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences). Findings
In Portugal, admissions to first degrees in HEIs are managed centrally by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education (MSTHE). Enrolment in the public higher education system is limited by government pre-specified vacancies for each institution. Candidates apply to up to six institutions and/or academic program by order of preference. Admissions are then allocated based on the applicants’ relative performance and the number of available vacancies for each program. As referred earlier, data was collected in a Public University located in the Minho Province (North of Portugal). The majority of respondents are female (54,8%) and the age range is mainly 17-19 years old (86,3%). Students distribute across the following areas of study (n=1641): Arts and Humanities (10,7%); Health Studies (3,9%); Sciences (12,6%); Social Studies (29,6%); and, Engineering & Computer Sciences (33,3%). The great majority of students come from the Northern area of Portugal (91,7%), among which 71,4% are from the Minho Province. Respondents, predominantly, chose ABC University as their first choice (76,3%). Moreover, the majority selected the degree for which they applied to as their first choice (53,5%). These results constitute an important indicator of the ABC University’s reputation.
Sources of information
One of the main drivers of this research is to outline some of the sources of information that students use when evaluating which HEI to attend. Information sources’ relevance and individual factors are now considered in more detail. Respondents were inquired about their overall assessment of the available information. The great majority of the respondents reported a positive opinion (85%) regarding the quantity and the quality of the information about the ABC University and its offers. Moreover, 92,8% of respondents stated no difficulty in obtaining information about this institution. Additionally, respondents were asked to indicate the 3 most important information
49
sources they used. Table 1 summarises the results. The marketer controlledsource ‘University website’ is considered the most important source by 16% of the respondents and is highlighted as one of the three most significant sources by 81% of respondents. Interpersonal sources also play a significant role. ‘Former/current ABC University students’ are the second most important source of information. It was rated as the number one source by 17% of respondents and considered among the three most important by 59%. The third-party independent information sources included in the study were ‘secondary school counsellors’ and ‘media/publicity’. These were ranked as the most important source by 6% of respondents and as one of the three most important sources by 23%. Finally, the direct inspection of the goods through ‘Organised campus’ visits’ was considered most important by only 2% of respondents. This may be explained by the fact that not all prospective students have the opportunity to participate in tours to the university facilities.
Table 1: Most used information sources
Individual factors vs. information sources
It was highlighted earlier that individual factors affect information sources’ preference. In order to get further insights into this matter, an additional analysis relating specific individual factors sources preferences for HEIs’ was conducted.
50
The relationships between the most important information source (1st preference) vs. gender, academic aptitude (secondary school performance) and field of study were explored. Chi-square tests were performed in order to detect differences among groups. No significant difference was found between the most relevant information source and gender. Hence female and male applicants tend to recur to similar information sources when applying to a HEI. As referred earlier, the academic aptitude was operationalised using the application grade. This is the final secondary school grading and values range from 9,5 to 20. Three intervals were considered: low (< 14); medium (14-16,99) and high (1720). Results show that there are significant differences among groups of students (p
