Guest editorial

Citation

Quintal, V.A. and Wong, D.H. (2012), "Guest editorial", Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 24 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/apjml.2012.00824eaa.001

Guest editorial

Article Type: Guest editorial From: Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Volume 24, Issue 5

About the Guest Editors

Vanessa Ann Quintal, Senior Lecturer of Marketing in the Business School, Curtin University, Australia. She has published in peer reviewed journals such as Tourism Management, International Journal of Tourism Research, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics and International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing. She has business and research experience in tourism, fashion, food, entertainment and education in Singapore, Japan, Korea, the United States, Britain, Germany and Australia. Her teaching experience spans across Australia, Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. She is the recipient of two Australia and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference best paper awards (Tourism Track). She has served as Co-Editor of Marketing Insights, a working paper series at Curtin’s School of Marketing.

David H. Wong, Lecturer of Marketing in the Business School, Curtin University, Australia. His research revolves around topics in innovation and the diffusion of technology, service quality, electronic modes of delivery, and emotional value in the banking and higher education sectors. He has been invited as a reviewer for many journals and conferences, and is keenly sought as a reviewer for texts in marketing research. He has consulted in a large number of commercial market research projects for both the profit and not-for-profit sectors, and is an Associate of the Australian Marketing Institute, a Certified Practising Marketer and a Fellow of The Academy of Marketing Science.

Globally, the demand for higher education has grown by 2.7 percent per annum and is estimated to rise from 2.17 million in 2005 to 3.72 million in 2025, accounting for a spectacular 70 percent increase over the 20 years (Bank et al., 2007). This growth is fuelled by global population growth (CIA, 2006); workplace requirements for more sophisticated education in the workforce (McIlveen and Pensiero, 2008); government-encouraged open education policies, scholarships and financial aid (Paswan and Ganesh, 2009); and perceptions that higher education is key to quality of life (Duderstadt, 2000). This has created more study choices and mobility for students (Alves and Raposo, 2010) and greater competition for the student dollar (Mavondo et al., 2004).

Management and operational models for tertiary institutions have changed significantly in the twenty-first century. Universities are now compelled to adopt self-funding business models as government support becomes limited (Brown and Mazzarol, 2009). The emergence and rise of own fee contributions by local students and full-fee contributions by international students have resulted in the perception of students as customers (Blackmore, 2009). Thus, universities increasingly find themselves operating as “enterprise universities” (Marginson and Considine, 2000) that are market-driven and customer-focused (Paswan and Ganesh, 2009).

Focusing the spotlight on students as customers implies that universities must consider their offerings from demand and supply perspectives. From a demand-related perspective, universities must consider the individual and collective student voice and their expectations (Sander et al., 2000). Demand-related issues take into account the “total student experience” that encapsulates “academic, administrative and support systems rather than focusing solely on instructional quality” (Kuo and Ye, 2009, p. 751). In Quintal et al.’s (2012) study of student behaviours toward Australian universities, students rank quality teaching and technology as critical to developing workplace skills that secure jobs. Students expect to acquire these workplace competencies while studying at university (Anderson et al., 2005) and they expect continued access to information about career opportunities from university when they graduate (Joseph and Joseph, 1997).

From a supply-related perspective, the priority for universities lies in a reassessment of their operating models to embrace the changing demands of a digital savvy student cohort that seeks quality education. The adoption of new pedagogical tools and Web 2.0 platforms by many universities has necessitated rethinking of how value is created in the learning process (Wong, 2012). Universities are increasingly accountable for assurances of learning, and vie for “triple crown” accreditation from The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), The Association of MBAs (AMBA) and the European Quality Improvement System (EQUIS). The ensuing communication of superior brand image these “crowns” provide is significant. It results in loyal students with intentions to further their studies at the university, recommend it to others (Quintal et al., 2012) and engage with their university even after graduation (Henning-Thurau et al., 2001). Such long term relationship behaviour has positive implications for university funding and future growth.

Technology functions as a key resource in the marketing curriculums at universities. In and out of class, in formal and informal contexts, learning platforms are accessed via wireless laptops, tablets and mobile phones (Clark et al., 2009). These platforms range from proprietary systems such as Blackboard or Moodle to open systems via social networks such as Facebook. Thus, next generation learners are profiled as being mobile, placing less emphasis on physical attendance and face-to-face communication and accessing learning resources at their own place and time (Daniel et al., 2009). There are urgent calls to better understand the attitudes, behaviours and expectations of these students and the implications for university management as we move forward (Wong, 2012).

The special issue opens with an invited paper by Mazzarol and Soutar that reviews changes in the international education sector that have taken place over the last decade. At the onset of the twenty-first century, host countries comprised few mainly English language instruction countries in the developed world. Competition for the international student was limited to major players such as the USA, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. In 2012, the playing field has expanded, with former source nations such as Singapore, China, India, taking on the role as host countries. In the meantime, competition among established nations has also intensified. This paper provides an expert opinion on the state of international education and offers a unique perspective on the trends that have shaped and will continue to shape this industry in the future.

The second paper by FitzPatrick, Davey and Dai focuses on the complaining behavior of international students at university. While several factors, including culture are found to influence complaining behavior, the Non-Action mode is largely overlooked by researchers. This qualitative exploratory study utilises focus group design to examine Chinese students’ complaining behaviour in New Zealand. Five key themes for Non-Action emerge – Futility, Inadequate Information, Fear of Consequences, Complexity and Internalization. Understanding complaining behavior is crucial to New Zealand, particularly since the concept has received scant attention. Findings have implications on the academic and personal well-being of Chinese students and on funding for universities.

The third paper by Sultan and Ho examines the antecedents and consequences of service quality in higher education. The authors identify marketing communication information and past experience as predictors of service quality, with trust, satisfaction and image as its outcomes. Using qualitative and quantitative samples in Queensland, Australia, the research model is assessed first with focus groups and then with structural equation modelling. The results suggest acceptable model fit and statistically significant paths, except for past experience’s effect on service quality. The study lends support to the body of literature on university branding through service quality.

The fourth paper by Zubcevic, Mavondo and Luxton addresses attitudes to academic achievement and post university success using attractiveness, personality, ethnic identity and social acceptance as antecedents. Adopting a quantitative approach with an online questionnaire, the study targets university students from various cultural backgrounds. Findings from multiple regression analysis suggest that attractiveness and ethnic identity are related to attitudes to academic achievement and success, whereas personality is negatively related to academic achievement. The study suggests that tertiary institutions and policy-makers should emphasise core personality values such as intelligence, communication skills and sincerity, instead of superficial values such as attractiveness in students’ endeavour.

The fifth paper by Harris focuses on the functional appropriateness of social media tools such as Facebook as learning and marketing platforms for tertiary students in hospitality programs. Adopting a qualitative approach, focus groups examine the essence of teachers’ experience with Facebook as a teaching and learning tool within the syllabus of a shared hospitality curriculum in Malaysia. Findings suggest that Facebook is effective for reflecting on experiential teaching and learning activities. Adoption of such social media tools by tertiary institutions could be used to promote experiential learning to tertiary students.

The observation paper by Murphy calls for an approach to learning without boundaries that is open and social. This paper offers an insightful look into two ideologies of technology-mediated education – learning management systems (LMS) and community learning. While most universities are likely to advocate a community learning ideology, in practice, many adopt LMS teaching. The paper includes a short case study to illustrate aspects of community learning and concludes with suggestions for shifting towards community learning and future research avenues. The paper’s contribution is its challenge to universities to (re)evaluate their educational ideology and subsequently, align that ideology with sound pedagogy and educational technology.

As demand for international higher education continues to grow, there are significant opportunities for further research and marketing. While traditional host countries continue to develop their brand image, more source nations will become host countries, making English just one of several languages of instruction. An imminent example is China which, as an emerging host country, already stakes claim to a universally-accepted university guide, the Shanghi Jiao Tong Index. As we forge forward into the second decade of the twenty-first century, more knowledge will be required and its acquisition through open and social platforms will increase. As explorers and purveyors of knowledge, universities are in a good position to contribute to this process.

We hope that you will enjoy reading this special issue. We trust it will prompt future research interests that provide greater insights and understanding of the marketing of international higher education, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.

Special issue reviewers

• •

  Charles Cui, University of Manchester.

• •

  Geoff Soutar, University of Western Australia.

• •

  John B. Ford, Old Dominion University.

• •

  John Gountas, Murdoch University.

• •

  Jong-Kuk Shin, Pusan National University.

• •

  Julie Lee, University of Western Australia.

• •

  Lau Kong Cheen, Market Probe Asia Pacific.

• •

  Matthew Liu, University of Macau.

• •

  Meredith Lawley, University of the Sunshine Coast.

• •

  Michael Polonsky, Deakin University.

• •

  Paul Chad, University of Wollongong.

• •

  Peter Ling, RMIT University.

• •

  Riza Mulyanegara, Swinburne University of Technology.

• •

  Steven D’Alessandro, Macquarie University.

• •

  Tim Daly, University of Akron.

• •

  Tim Mazzarol, University of Western Australia.

Vanessa Ann Quintal, David H. WongGuest Editors