Reciprocal transfer of brand identity and image associations arising from higher education brand extensions

Stakeholder influence on branding strategy at an international branch campus

“…While current research argues the importance of stakeholder engagement in the home and host countries (Chee et al, 2016;Hill et al, 2014;Wilkins, 2016) and their influence on brand in both locations (Shams & Huisman, 2016;Yuan et al, 2016), scholarship on how stakeholders influence brand development at IBCs is limited. This study was designed to address this gap, using stakeholder theory and branding theory as a conceptual framework to explore how stakeholders were engaged in and influenced a branding strategy at an existing IBC.…”

“…Studies document the importance of stakeholder influence on brand development (Balmer, 2013;Gregory, 2007;Gyrd-Jones & Kornum, 2012;Hatch & Schultz, 2010;Iglesias, Ind & Alfaro, 2013;Merz, Yi, & Vargo, 2009), an issue that is especially important for IBCs as they rely on stakeholder perceptions and support to establish legitimacy and reinforce brand image in both locations Farrugia & Lane, 2013). The reputation of the HC can have strong influence on the image of the IBC, and the brand image of the IBC can affect the overall image of the home university (Wilkins & Huisman, 2015;Yuan, Liu, Luo, & Yen, 2016). Leaders and managers who establish and operate IBCs must be able to engage and rely on diverse stakeholders in both the home and host locations in order to develop and maintain a strong reputation and brand both locally and globally.…”

“…In addition, while quality academic programs, reputation, and brand are key to success for both home and host campus partners (Kinser & Lane, 2014;Pyvis, 2011;Yuan et al, 2016) and studies have argued that stakeholders influence reputation and brand (Farrugia & Lane, 2013;Gregory, 2007;Karram, 2014), there is limited empirical research on how stakeholders influence brand in HEIs (Waeraas & Solbakk, 2009) and at IBCs in particular (Wilkins & Huisman, 2015). Lane (2011b) identified the need for more field based study on stakeholder influence on strategy development at IBCs and Owens and Lane (2014) called for more empirical evidence that goes beyond current research using secondary data.…”

“…IBCs, as when they expand globally stakeholder relationships and their influence on corporate brand become increasingly complex (Jongbloed et al, 2008;Werhane, 2011;Yuan et al, 2016).…”

“…Universities that develop IBCs in order to position themselves as global are likely to find that reputation varies across locations (Xavier & Alsagoff, 2013) and that legitimacy in the home country may not carry over to the host country (Farrugia & Lane, 2013;Hill et al, 2014). In some situations the HC brand may increase the prominence of the branch campus because associations with the HC dominate as primary elements, while the host campus brand becomes secondary (Chee et al, 2016;Yuan et al, 2016).…”