Exploring academic reputation – is it a multidimensional construct?

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore the possible congruence of an academic organization's reputation among various stakeholder groups. A potential measure of reputation that can be applied across multiple stakeholder groups gives an opportunity to compare their perceptions and therefore work toward a consistent reputation. The authors also tested the model of academic reputation as a multidimensional concept. Design/methodology/approach -The qualitative stage included 25 in-depth interviews with members of key stakeholder groups. In the quantitative stage, the initial questionnaire was based on the reputational quotient of academic institutions, comprised of 26 items representing eight dimensions of reputation. It was administered among three key stakeholder groups, the general public (n ¼ 400), employees of the business school that was the focus of the study (n ¼ 154), and fourth year students of the school (n ¼ 446). Findings -Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that criteria applied by various stakeholder groups were similar, but the model of academic reputations as a multidimensional concept was not confirmed. The theoretical assumption of an eight factor solution for the concept of academic institutions was not supported. It seems that, in this particular case, only one main dimension emerged. Theoretically, that implies a general factor determining overall reputations across stakeholders. Research limitations/implications -Future research should apply a new, reduced questionnaire in multiple academic organizations and try to avoid some of the limitations such as differing methods of data collection, and ensure complete anonymity for all respondents. Practical implications -This study offers input for the development of a robust and general questionnaire that could be developed to be used across organizations and their publics. Originality/value -The study demonstrates that reputation is a unidimensional construct and that it should also be measured as such.

Grey Regulatory Focus Theory Weighting Method for the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problem in Evaluating University Reputation

“…In other words, every survey participant answered 72 questions as the variables. The main reasons these criteria were selected are because it can serve as a repetition of the quality of the past activities of the university [80][81][82]. Also, these deduced criteria capture the reflected image the university creates of the students.…”

Applying A Binary Logistic Regression Model To Analyze The Educational Service Quality In The Context Of Globalization. Evidence From Vietnam

“…As previously mentioned, the term reputation was commonly used without a clear explanation, operationalization or a unique definition. One of the reasons for this lack of universal definition was the number of scientific disciplines that focus on reputation, such as strategic management, economics, marketing, market research, sociology, psychology and public relation (Verčič et al, 2016).…”

“…the universal appeal that an organization had for its key constituents in comparison with others (Fombrun and Van Riel, 1997). A later extension of this definition added that reputation was an estimate of the way an organization is experienced both, internally, among employees and externally, among other stakeholder groups, within its competitive and institutional surroundings (Verčič et al, 2016) Vidaver-Cohen(2007) suggested a conceptual framework for studying business school reputation. The proposed concept draws from the Reputation Institute and as major predictors of corporate reputation offers organizational performance, quality of products and services, leadership characteristics, management procedures, corporate social responsibility procedures, workplace climate and approach to innovations.…”

“…By identifying the strengths and weaknesses of a business school's capability to satisfy the expectations of its stakeholders, it should be possible to determine the best way to ISSN:0097-8043 Vol-118-Issue-10-October-2019 P a g e | 156 channel resources and get the best possible results. Further, by testing the reputation in each stakeholder group separately, it is possible to potentially improve programs (Verčič et al, 2016).…”

Evaluating University Reputation Based on Integral Linear Programming with Grey Possibility

“…Rankings quickly attracted the attention of universities and politicians as they challenged opinions on reputation and excellence [19]. Verčič et al [20] explored academic reputation and compared their perceptions and work towards consistent reputation with 25 in-depth interviews with members of key stakeholder's groups. The high competition among universities for attracting students, public resources, social demand for transparency and competence use of funds has resulted in a growing interest in evaluating their performance through rankings.…”