Measuring and managing franchisee satisfaction: a study of academic franchising

Abstract

PurposeThis paper attempts to explore different approaches of franchisee satisfaction within an academic setting, develop and validate a new measuring instrument, examine the key factors and the intention to remain in the network, and eventually manage the franchise network for long‐term continuity.Design/methodology/approachThe survey instrument was drawn from a multi‐stage process involving extensive review of literature, focus group interviews, pilot testing and validation by the experts before being administered to a sample population consisting top managers of franchised colleges. The new instrument was empirically tested for unidimensionality, reliability and validity using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.FindingsThe findings suggest five dimensions of franchisee satisfaction namely social interaction, service support, financing, assurance and competence. Results also indicate that the dimension “competence” which relates to possession of required skills, knowledge and the right attitude to perform franchise services has significantly influenced the overall satisfaction.Research limitations/implicationsThe five dimensions of franchisee satisfaction may be specific to academic setting.Practical implicationsAcademic institutions should be able to ascertain the level of services provided, and to determine which dimensions need improvement. Knowing the strengths and weaknesses of these dimensions and their relative influence may result in better allocation of resources so as to provide a better service to the franchised colleges.Originality/valueAnother contribution to the franchising literature by advancing a new 23‐item measuring instrument, specifically tailored for academic franchising. This is a tool that academic institutions could use to improve their performance in the light of increased competition with the development of global academic franchising.

Making Franchising Work: A Framework Based on a Systematic Review

“…Moreover, studies show almost unequivocally that high-quality, frequent communication and information exchange between franchisors and franchisees reduce the probability of negative franchisee exit (Frazer and Winzar 2005). Moreover, it has a positive effect on franchisee satisfaction, intention to remain, success and perceived competitive position across countries and industries and regardless of the methodology used (Abdullah et al 2008;Bordonaba-Juste and Polo-Redondo 2008b;Chiou et al 2004;Dubost et al 2008;Falbe and Welsh 1998;Gassenheimer et al 1996;Hing 1996;Lee et al 2008;Rodriguez et al 2005). Only Gillis and Combs (2009) indicated possible negative effects of exchanging knowledge.…”

“…Irrespective of the industry, the country and the operationalization of the support provision, studies always show positive effects on franchisee satisfaction, financial performance and survival (Abdullah et al 2008;Dubost et al 2008;Frazer and Winzar 2005;Hing 1995Hing , 1999Rajagopal 2007;Roh and Yoon 2009;Tuunanen and Hyrsky 2001). However, franchisees' valuation of the support provision generally decreases over time (Grünhagen and Dorsch 2003;Tuunanen and Hyrsky 2001).…”

“…Although it is frequently argued that payments serve as an incentive for franchisees, in practice, higher levels of ongoing payments rarely have a positive effect at the franchisee level. On the contrary, predominantly negative relationships have been found with survival (Michael and Combs 2008), financial performance (Frew and Jud 1986) and satisfaction if the franchisees perceive the payments as too high (Abdullah et al 2008;Frazer et al 2007a;Hing 1996;Knight 1986;Tuunanen and Hyrsky 2001). Only Benjamin et al (2007) found that the effect on financial performance depends on the region.…”

“…Six studies highlighted the importance for franchisee satisfaction of contractual regulations (e.g. regarding termination and restrictions) that are clear, that do not exclusively benefit the franchisor's interests, and that are perceived by franchisees as reasonable, given the benefits that they obtain from the franchisor (Abdullah et al 2008;Dubost et al 2008;Hing 1996;Morrison 1996;Tuunanen and Hyrsky 2001;Withane 1991).…”

Implementing English Further/Higher Education Partnerships: the Street Level Perspective

“…From one perspective, partnership can be distilled into a minimalistic and transactional interpretation of a set of franchise arrangements where the franchiser grants the authority to the franchisee to operate in the delivery of its awards (Abdullah et al, 2008). However the term 'partnership' implies more than a set of administrative operations.…”