Personal development planning under the scope of self‐brand orientation

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to contribute to the empirical body of knowledge regarding the role of universities today. In addition, it aims to investigate the topic of personal development planning (PDP) programs, under a different perspective borrowed from marketing theory, namely, the “self‐brand orientation” approach.Design/methodology/approachThe study focused on investigating the core research topics and parameters perceived to be important to students. The theoretical perspectives of PDPs and brand orientation served as conceptual bases, and both have been operationalised through the empirical study conducted.FindingsThe study findings reveal a “gap” between today's student needs and what the universities offer. “self‐brand oriented” management, seems to support the development of PDPs in a promising way, since the majority of the students claim that they are willing to participate in such a program.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of sample limitations, the findings of the study are not generally applicable. Besides, the topics of PDPs remain unknown to the particular students, since they never had the opportunity to participate in such a program in the past.Practical implicationsThis paper can be seen as a guiding work to new means of delivery of PDPs. It contributes to the dialogue under progress regarding the role of the Universities today and the ways by which PDPs will increase their future possibilities.Originality/valueThe contribution of the paper is twofold: it meets students' needs as well as society's requests and allows marketing to make an ethical contribution to higher education.

Personal branding: A systematic review of the research and design strategies used reported in journal articles relating to critical elements of personal branding

“…• Article 21 indicated that the sample of the study was limited to business students from a single business school (McCorkle et al 2006). • Article 27 indicated that the research finding did not present a picture of the entire student population (Rigopoulou & Kehagias 2008). • In Article 29, a low response rate influenced the results negatively (Schults & Sheffer 2012).…”

Economics, Self-Awareness and Self-Mastery: a proposed Framework

“…The essence of this habit is to find out, first, what you want and, then, start planning backward, all the way to your current situation. Rigopoulou and Kehagias (2008) state that there is a gap between demand and supply in investigating student needs and university programs. They go on to say that personal development programs and, generally, college offerings focused on the self are considered valuable by most students because they are interested and willing to enroll in them.…”

Influence of leadership empowering behavior on employee innovation behavior: The moderating effect of personal development support

“…Employees’ innovation behavior is affected by not only the external leadership environment but also individual factors. Research at home and abroad showed that personal development support has a significant influence on employees’ innovation behavior ( Rigopoulou and Kehagias, 2008 ), but previous research failed to provide a clear answer on how this influence works. In addition, participative decision making was confirmed by a large number of studies to have an influence on the innovation behavior of employees within an enterprise ( Sarafidou and Chatziioannidis, 2013 ; Huang et al, 2015 ; Wilson, 2016 ; Salomé and Andrea, 2017 ), and delegation of authority typically emerges in the process of corporate management ( Li L. et al, 2020 ; Liu X. et al, 2020 ).…”