Porter’s five competitive forces framework and other factors that influence the choice of response strategies adopted by public universities in Kenya

Abstract

2014),"Guidelines for applying Porter's five forces framework: a set of industry analysis templates", Competitiveness Review, Vol. 24 Iss 1 pp. 32-45 http://dx.Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:198285 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to establish the extent to which Porter's five competitive forces (PFCF) framework, among other factors drive the choice of response strategies adopted by public universities in Kenya. Design/methodology/approach -The study design was descriptive and utilized a cross-sectional survey of all the public universities in Kenya by administering a structured questionnaire to the top management team. Additional primary data were collected through observations and interviews. Secondary data were also collected in order to corroborate the data collected from the primary sources. Findings -PFCF framework influenced the choice of response strategies adopted by the public universities "to a great extent", the most influence being the threat from new entrants. The influence of the choice of response strategies by PFCF framework was independent of the age and category of the universities. Pressure from stakeholders, changes in government policies and regulations, reforms in higher education, unethical response strategies by some universities and university location also influenced the choice of response strategies.Research limitations/implications -The study collected data from the top management team only; however, other stakeholders could have given additional information not reported here. Further, the research only considered public universities and not all higher education institutions (HEIs) in Kenya, and was cross-sectional, hence generalization and application of the results over a long time, respectively, may be limited. Practical implications -The value of this study lies in HEIs achieving a competitive advantage and shaping strategic policy direction in the face of changing environment and global commodification of higher education. Originality/value -Current public universities in Kenya have adopted a business-like approach in their operations in view of changing environm...

Assessing the environmental conditions of higher education: in a theoretical approach using porter’s five forces model

“…These parameters include time, convenience, and application (Martinez & Wolverton, 2009). Convenience drives an adult learner to seek out alternative modes of delivery, such as the distance/online programs and their delivery methods of weekend and evening classes (Mathooko & Ogutu, 2015). In this way, the students can meet their ongoing training needs in-house or with a third-party supplier (Collis, 2001).…”

“…Mathooko and Ogutu (2015) sought to understand how Porter's five forces, among other factors, shape the choice of response strategies adopted by public universities in Kenya. In parallel with Collis study, they emphasized that, in the past, the barriers to entry in higher education used to be high, primarily because of the cost of building a campus; however, using recent technologies has led to the decrease of such entry barriers.…”

The Impact of Organizational Justice on the Quality of the Leader-Member Relationship in Public versus Foundation Universities

“…University education is a vital tool for dealing with changing labor market demands in knowledge-based economies (Sam & van der Sijde, 2014). In recent decades, higher education has witnessed many significant changes, such as rapidly increasing demand, decreasing availability of financial support from governments, proliferation of private universities, development of cross-border academic programs and increased mobility of students and academics (Dill, 2003;Erdem, 2012;Mathooko & Ogutu, 2015). All these changes led to an intense competition among universities for successful academics, students, financial support, and research funds (Dill, 2003).…”

“…All these changes led to an intense competition among universities for successful academics, students, financial support, and research funds (Dill, 2003). Attracting and maintaining a strong faculty is a key success factor for universities because it is the academic staff that defines a university, provides legitimacy for the credentials a university confers, and helps secure research funds (Mathooko & Ogutu, 2015).…”

Types of information technology capability and their impacts on competitiveness

“…Since Porter published his book "Competitive Advantage of Nations" in 1990 and create a base for developing national policies on competitiveness, there are many studies have been applied to many industries about _________________________________________________________________________________________________ DOI: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.477 214 competitiveness. Some of them are Waheeduzzaman and Ryans (1996), Hove and Masocha (2014), Ortega et al (2014), Sutherland (2014) , Yunna and Yisheng (2014), Zeng et al,(2008), Mathooko and Ogutu (2015), Ozer and Saldamli (2015), Bakan and Doğan (2012) …”