The strategy of internationalization in universities

Abstract

Purpose-The purpose of this research is to examine the extent to which UK universities' achal international achievements match their strategic intent on internationalization. Design/methodology/approach-Both factor analysis and cluster analysis were applied on data collected from HESA (2001), and on the data collected from the mission statements of 117 universities by the use of the content analysis technique. Findings-The study shows that 74 per cent of UK universities' mission statements include international dimensions. In addition, 48 per cent of these universities are internationally active. Four groups of (international action-international mission) matrixes have been reached. These groups are "international winners group, international actors group, international speakers group, and international losers group". Research limitations/implications-This analysis is limited to only four variables taken in a single year 2001. Therefore, future research in this area is encouraged to employ more variables related to internationalization and to apply the analysis on longitudinal bases in order to get results that cover larger range of international aspects and allow observing the matrix development overtime. Practical implications-The study finishes with a location model which can be used as an important tool by university managers in conducting their international business. This model can also be employed in various sectors other than the higher education sector. Originality/value-The paper is the first classification carried out amongst UK universities in terms of internationalization. It is also the first of its kind in the higher education management literature in terms of both; the comprehensiveness in dealing with all the three phases of the strategy of internationalization and the nature of data it uses for this purpose.

A Management Strategy for the Improvement of Private Universities Lecturers’ Professional Competences

“…To be more focused on the model or form of development of pedagogic and professional competences, Ayoubi and Massoud (2007) suggested, "differentiate four main models of professional development, depending on the type of work undertaken, its focus and the role of the unit staff, first, there is the professional service models, in which practitioner's service can be utilised for solving an identified problem. Second, the counselling model is adopted by staff (usually psychologists) whose their role as providing assistance to students and teachers with solving their learning/teaching problems.…”

Education for the ASEAN Community – The Case of Indonesia

“…Some Higher Education institutions (HEIs) are more advanced than others in progressing with the internationalisation of their universities (Wildawsky, 2010). A study held by Ayoubi and Massoud (2007) defined stages of internationalisation of higher education institutions from being International Losers (there is no intent nor having activities on becoming international) to become International Speakers (has the intention described in their vision or mission statement but not so much in the strategies) then to enter the International Actors stage (without any specific intentions but already took up activities related to internationalisation) and in the end become the International Winners (have the intent described in their vision and mission statements along with a set of strategies and some activities related to internationalisation being successfully implemented). Sullivan (2011) viewed the internationalisation activities taken at Higher Education Institution are represented by stakeholders of the industry which include the administrator (Planning and Administration), students (Student Education), and faculty (Faculty Development).…”

International academic franchises: Identifying the benefits of international academic franchise provision

“…This may have been due to the dominance of English as a world language and extant bilateral trade partnerships, which are often used as a determinant of potential student mobility, but as the British Council ((2012) (Teichler, 1999: Ayoubi et al, 2007 and Australia has become a dominant player (Pratt andPoole, 1999: Larsen andVincent-Lancrin, 2002). New players such as France and Germany also want to compete in this seemingly lucrative market (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2008).…”