Mission Statement Analysis of CCCU Member Institutions

Firmin, Michael W.; Gilson, Krista Merrick

doi:10.1080/15363750903181922

Cited by 39 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The engagement of the higher education sector in the implementation of MS dates to the early 1980s (Davies & Glaister, 1997;Kotler & Murphy, 1981). Since then, scholars on the topic have emphasized the relationships between MS content (Cochran & David, 1986), overall objectives (Firmin & Gilson, 2010), institutional status (i.e., private or public) (Morphew & Hartley, 2006) and external factors (e.g., private sector or community) (Seeber, Barberio, Huisman & Mampaey, 2017). Hence, strategic planning and MS development process has a direct and strong influence on institutional policies for internal or external purposes, strategic programs, operational goals, and performance indicators (de Lourdes Machado, Farhangmehr & Taylor, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet the first study, to our knowledge, on MS, its content, and its effect on corporate communication in business schools was conducted by Cochran and David in the 80s (Cochran & David, 1986). Since then, research has been focused on MS in individual academic units (Orwig & Finney, 2007), their effect on universities' identity (Firmin & Gilson, 2010), their relation with the university's environment (Kuenssberg, 2011), and their difference among private and public universities (Efe & Ozer, 2015). The majority of those studies were focused on individual countries and universities from the global North (i.e., US, Germany and UK), and the average of the sample was 89.6 observations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mission statements of universities worldwide: Text mining and visualization

Cortés-Sánchez¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To conduct a transnational study of universities’ mission statements (MS) through content analysis to identify characteristics related to language (e.g. number of words, the most and least frequently used words) and if those characteristics are related to universities’ location, size, focus, research output, age band and status (i.e. private or public). Design/methodology/approach: Content analysis by using Voyant Tools.Findings: The main results showed: (1) a necessity for self-awareness; (2) an overall emphasis on society and students, as stakeholders; (3) there were no discernible similarities in terms between firms and universities; (4) MS tend to be longer in universities from Asia and shorter from Europe; (5) the absence of quantitative elements; (6) small universities prioritized knowledge over research; (7) the youngest universities tend to use more of the least frequently used terms; (8) public universities emphasized students and private universities emphasized education; and (9) the private sector has a noticeable interest in the society and the public sector on community.Research limitations/implications: Sub-samples of certain regions should more inclusive in further studies. Considering that the mean sample of MS studies was 89.6, this study used a sample more than two times larger. Although, the African (4) and Latin-American (5) samples were not significant compared with European (94) or North American (79) subsamples. Thus, further studies should consider a more-inclusive ranking in research databases than the QS world university ranking.Practical implications: University planning offices can use these results and the digital database to construct a global outlook on MS trends or uncommonly used terms to define the purpose of their university and future course of action, embrace an overall isomorphism, or seek a distinctive strategy to differentiate their institution from others. In addition, this research can be used by strategic planning scholars to conduct regionally or nationally focused studies.Social Implications: Universities’ MS serve as public pronouncements of their purpose, ambition, and values. In this study, we presented and analyzed the contents of those purposes, in which mission-oriented universities, some of them as global influencers, seek to perform in multiple levels of importance for every country (i.e. education, research, and services with both private and public sectors and the community).Originality/value: Most of the previous studies are restricted to national contexts and based on reduced samples with no open access digital data. In this study we considered a wide sample of universities from Europe, North America, Asia, Oceania, Latin America and Africa; and delivered a digital open access database of MS from those universities.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mission statements of universities worldwide: Text mining and visualization

Cortés-Sánchez¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another research by Morphew and Hartley (2006) involving approximately 300 colleges/universities (both state and public) concluded that state and private universities/colleges had different wording in their mission statements compared to those most commonly used. Firmin and Gilson (2010) analyzed the mission statements of 107 universities/colleges and found that the most common topics were educational matters, religion, community, life, and university, and confirmed that colleges/universities declared their reason of existence through mission statements. The study by James and Huisman (2009) from Wales concluded that the mission statements of higher education institutions were not consistent with the regional policies and were not in line with the market intentions.…”

Section: Mission and Visionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Mission and Vision Statements of Foundation Universities in the Context of University Roles: A Content Analysis

Gözükara¹

2015

CUBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Higher education institutions are associated with social transformation throughout the history. In this sense, universities, as the most crucial constituent of higher education system, are known to have three main functions, teaching and training, research, and public interest. Today, it is important for these institutions to have a strategic planning with mission and vision statements in order to declare their reason for being and their future goals due to the competitive educational market. The objective of this study was to conduct a content analysis regarding mission and vision statements of foundation universities in the context of university functions. The study included 72 foundation universities from Turkey. Foundation universities do not have a long history in Turkey and strategic planning is still under development in these institutions. The study data were collected from mission and vision statements published on the official websites of the foundation universities. The results of semantic content analysis demonstrated that foundation universities put greater importance on the teaching and training function in their mission and vision messages compared to research and public interest functions. The results of the present study suggest that foundation universities should improve their strategic planning with well-defined mission and vision statements, and should not ignore the other two main functions in this process.

show abstract

“…The analysis was framed by investigations into similar documents carried out by Firmin and Gilson (2009) and Fitzgerald and Cunningham (2016)—that is, by formulating categories to use in classifying statements and then using those categories to identify the aligned cyber security responsibility. Statements in the countries’ cyber security strategy policies were analyzed to reveal the stances of the governments with respect to managing the cyber risk.…”

Section: Revealing Responsibilities and Intervention Stancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cyber Security Responsibilization: An Evaluation of the Intervention Approaches Adopted by the Five Eyes Countries and China

Renaud

Orgeron²,

Warkentin

et al. 2020

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governments can intervene to a greater or lesser extent in managing the risks that citizens face. They can adopt a maximal intervention approach (e.g., COVID‐19) or a hands‐off approach (e.g., unemployment), effectively “responsibilizing” their citizens. To manage the cyber risk, governments publish cyber‐related policies. This article examines the intervention stances the governments adopt in supporting individual citizens managing their personal cyber risk. The authors pinpoint the cyber‐related responsibilities that several governments espouse, applying a “responsibilization” analysis. Those applying to citizens are identified, thereby revealing the governments' cyber‐related intervention stances. The analysis reveals that most governments adopt a minimal cyber‐related intervention stance in supporting their citizens. Given the increasing number of successful cyber attacks on individuals, it seems time for the consequences of this stance to be acknowledged and reconsidered. The authors argue that governments should support individual citizens more effectively in dealing with cyber threats.

show abstract

Mission Statement Analysis of CCCU Member Institutions

Cited by 39 publications

References 13 publications

Mission statements of universities worldwide: Text mining and visualization

Mission statements of universities worldwide: Text mining and visualization

Mission and Vision Statements of Foundation Universities in the Context of University Roles: A Content Analysis

Cyber Security Responsibilization: An Evaluation of the Intervention Approaches Adopted by the Five Eyes Countries and China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About