Yükseköğretimin Çevresel Koşullarının Değerlendirilmesi: Porter'ın Beş Güç Modelini Kullanarak Teorik Bir Yaklaşım

Yükseköğretime artan talep ve beraberinde getirdiği değişim ve rekabet süreci birçok çalışmaya konu olmuştur. Rekabet denildiğinde akla gelen en önemli isimlerden birisi de Porter'dır. Onun beş güç modelinde, "sektöre yeni girenlerin karşılaşacağı engeller, ikame ürünlerin tehdidi, alıcıların pazarlık gücü, tedarikçilerin pazarlık gücü ve firmalar arasındaki rekabet unsuru" olarak adlandırılan beş faktör, bir endüstri alanının dış çevre koşullarından kaynaklanan fırsatları ve tehditleri anlamak için kullanılır. Beş güç modeli, bir endüstri alanındaki kârlılık düzeyini ve rekabet yoğunluğunu belirlemek için analitik bir araç olarak sıklıkla kullanılmıştır. Böylelikle yöneticiler rekabet güçlerine karşı kurumları için strateji geliştirme ve kendilerini savunma yollarını keşfetme imkânına sahip olmuşlardır. Literatürde, bu model ile ilgili farklı sektörlerde çok sayıda çalışma karşımıza çıkmasına rağmen, yükseköğretim alanının kârlılık ve rekabet faktörleriyle birlikte bir sektör olarak değerlendirilip değerlendirilmeyeceğine dair yaşanan kararsızlık yüzünden, teorinin bu alan ile ilgili uygulamalarına çok da fazla rastlanamamaktadır. Özellikle bizim ülkemizde, yükseköğretimin bir sektör olarak görülmesi fikrinin batıya kıyasla daha tartışmaya açık bir husus olması, konuyla ilgili bir çalışmaya rastlayamamamızı açıklar bir sebep olarak görülebilir. Bu makalede, ilgili literatür çerçevesinde, beş güç modeli yükseköğretim alanı ile bağlantılı bir şekilde ele alınacak, sonrasında bu çerçevede ortaya konulan faktörler ve değerlendirmeler Türk yükseköğretiminin dış çevre koşulları ile ilişkilendirilmeye çalışılacaktır. Elde konuyla ilgili derli toplu kaynaklar ve yeterli veriler olmadığından, Türk yükseköğretim alanı ile olan ilişkilendirme çok detaylı yapılmayacak, yükseköğretim alanına yönelik dış çevre koşullarından gelebilecek tehdit ve fırsatları görebilmek için genel bir yaklaşım elde edilmeye çalışılacaktır. Çalışma ile ortaya konulan bu teorik alt yapının politikacılara, üniversite yöneticilerine ve akademisyenlere farklı bir bakış açısı kazandırmasının yanı sıra ileride Türk yükseköğretim alanının sunduğu fırsat ve tehditleri analiz etmek ve uygun stratejiler geliştirmek için yapılacak olan araştırmalara vizyon sağlaması ve temel oluşturması da umut edilmektedir.

Assessing the Environmental Conditions of Higher Education: In a Theoretical Approach Using Porter's Five Forces Model

Increased demand for higher education and the change and competition it has brought have been a subject for many studies. In Porter's five forces model, forces termed as the threat of new entrants, threat of substitute products, bargaining power of suppliers, bargaining power of customers, and established rivals between the companies are used to understand the threats and opportunities posed by the industry's environmental circumstances. The five forces model has been extensively used as an analytical tool to determine the intensity of rivalry and levels of profitability. Thus, managers can develop strategies and discover ways to defend their companies against competitive forces. Although there have been numerous studies conducted with this model for various sectors, the studies implementing this theory to higher education are very scarce due to uncertainty about whether higher education could be regarded as an industry together with its profitability and rivalry components. Specifically, in Turkey, with the idea of considering higher education to be an industry being disputable compared with western countries and even regarded as unmannerly and disloyal to academia explains the lack of studies on this subject. In this study, within the scope of the related literature, the five forces model will be discussed in conjunction with higher education. Subsequently, the factors and evaluations that are shown within this scope will be associated with the external environmental conditions of Turkish higher education. Since there is a lack of well-written sources and sufficient data, the association with Turkish higher education will not be deeply detailed. To perceive the threats and opportunities to higher education from external environmental conditions, an overall approach will be achieved. The theoretical substructure introduced by this study will bring a different viewpoint to politicians, university directors and academicians, along with being a basis for and providing vision to studies analyzing the threats and opportunities presented to Turkish higher education to develop proper strategies.

PDF

___

Altbach P. G., Reisberg L., & Rumbley L. E., (2009). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution--A report prepared for the UNESCO 2009 world conference on higher education. Paris: UNESCO.

Altunay, T. E. (2010). Profile of students and the reasons why they prefer private universities in Turkey. Doctoral dissertation. Boğaziçi University, Institute of Social Sciences, 2010, İstanbul, Turkey

Anand, K. A. (2012). Business of higher education-a business model for a higher education institution. International Journal of Business and Management Tomorrow, 2(2), 1-7.

Albanese, M. (1999). Students are not customers: a better model for medical education. Academic Medicine, 74(11), 1172-86.

Asaad, Y. (2011). An investigation into export market orientation in UK universities from the international marketing managers' perspective: A mixed-method approach. PhD submitted to University of Brunel. Retrieved from http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/ bitstream/2438/5838/1/FulltextThesis.pdf.

Aydin, O. T., & Bayir, F. (2016). The impact of different demographic variables on determinants of university choice decision: a study on business administration students of the foundation universities in Istanbul. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 16(4), 1147-1169.

Baron, P., & Corbin, L. (2012). Student engagement: rhetoric and reality. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 759- 772.

Bay, D., & Daniel, H. (2001). The student is not the customer: An alternative perspective. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 11(1), 1-19.

Belanger, C., Mount, J., & Wilson, M. (2002). Institutional image and retention. Tertiary Education and Management, 8(3), 217-230.

Belfield, C. R., & H. M. Levin (2002) Education privatization: causes, consequences and planning implications, Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/iiep

Bradmore, D. J., & Smyrnios, K. X. (2009). The writing on the wall: responses of Australian public universities to competition in global higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(5), 495-508.

Brown, R. (2008). Higher education and the market. Perspectives, 12(3), 78-83.

Çetinsaya, G. (2014). Growth, Quality, internationalization: a road map for Turkey higher education. Publication of Higher Education Council No: 2. Eskişehir: Anadolu University Printing House.

Chen, L-S. (1998). The distance learning program for vocational education and training. Retrieved from http://pnclink.org/ annual/annual1998/1998pdf/chen.pdf

Collis, D. (2001). When industries change revisited: new scenarios for higher education. In Devlin, M., Meyerson, J. (Eds.) Forum Futures. (pp. 103-126). San Francisco: Josey-Bass Inc., A Wiley Company.

Collis, D. J. (2000). New business models for higher education. In Brint S. (ed.). The future of the city of intellect: the changing American University. (pp. 181-202). Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

Çiftçi, M. (2015). Girişimci üniversite ve üçüncü kuşak üniversiteler. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 27(27).

Çokgezen, M. (2014). Determinants of university choice: a study on economics departments in Turkey. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 4(1), 23-31.

Dahan, G. S., & Senol, I. (2012). Corporate social responsibility in higher education institutions: Istanbul Bilgi University case. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(3), 95-103.

De Boer, H., Enders, J., & Jongbloed, B. (2009). Market governance in higher education. In Kehm B. M., Huisman J., & Stensaker B. (Eds.), The European higher education area: Perspectives on a moving target. (pp. 61-78). Rotterdam: Sense.

Deem, R., K.H. Mok & L. Lucas (2008). Transforming higher education in whose image? Exploring the concept of the 'world class' university in Europe and Asia. Higher Education Policy, 21(1), 83-98.

Dill, D. (2003). Allowing the market to rule: The case of the United States. Higher Education Quarterly, 57(2), 136-157.

Dobni, D., & Dobni, B. (1996). Canadian business schools: Going out of business? Journal of Education for Business, 72(1), 28-36.

Donaldson, B., & McNicholas, C. (2004). Understanding the postgraduate education market for UK-based students: a review and empirical study. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 9(4), 346-360.

Downey, C. J., Frase, L. E., & Peters, J. J. (1994). The quality education challenge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Sage Publications.

Duczmal, W. (2006). The rise of private higher education in Poland: Policies, markets and strategies. Enschede, the Netherlands: CHEPS.

Erçetin, Ş. (2001). Are academics ready to create higher education institutions for the future? Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 7(1), 75-86.

Erdem, A. R. (2015). Yükseköğretimi ve üniversiteyi farklılaştıran kritik öğe: Akademik strateji. In Aypay A. (Ed.), Türkiye'de yükseköğretim: Alanı, kapsamı ve politikaları. (pp. 243-261). Ankara: Pegem.

Franz, R. S. (1998). Whatever you do, don't treat your students like customers! Journal of Management Education, 22, 63-69.

Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. (1996). Institutional Identity, Image, and Issue Interpretation: Sense making during Strategic Change in Academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3), 370-403.

Gök, E., & Gümüş, S. (2015). Akademik bir alan olarak yükseköğretim yönetimi. In Aypay Ahmet (Ed.), Türkiye'de yükseköğretim: Alanı, kapsamı ve politikaları. (pp. 3-27). Ankara: Pegem.

Gunay, D. 2014. Turkish higher education system, new developments and trends. Keynote presented at the international conference on new horizons in education. ISSN: 2146-7358. Retrieved from http://int-e.net/kis2014ppt/ DurmusGunay.pdf.

Grotkowska, G., Wincenciak, L., & Gajderowicz, T. (2015). Ivorytower or market-oriented enterprise: the role of higher education institutions in shaping graduate employability in the domain of science. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(5), 869-882.

Hacıfazlıoğlu, Ö., & Özdemir, N. (2010). Undergraduates expectations of foundation universities: recommendations for university administrators. Education and Science, 35(155), 118-131.

Ho, H. F., & Hung, C. C. (2008). Marketing mix formulation for higher education: An integrated analysis employing analytic hierarchy process, cluster analysis and correspondence analysis. International Journal of Educational Management, 22(4), 328-340.

Hoyt, J. E., & Brown, A. B. (2003). Identifying college choice factors to successfully market your institution. College and University, 78(4), 3-10.

Hua, L. T. (2011). Sustainable competitive advantage for market leadership amongst the private higher education institutes in Malaysia. Journal of Global Management, 2(1), 216-226.

Huang, H. I. (2012). An empirical analysis of the strategic management of competitive advantage: a case study of higher technical and vocational education in Taiwan. Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University.

Hossler, D., Braxton, J., & Coopersmith, G. (1989). Understanding student college choice. In Smart J. C. (Ed.) Higher education: handbook of theory and research. (pp. 231-288). New York: Agathon Press.

Jongbloed, B. (2003). Marketization in higher education, Clark's triangle and the essential ingredients of markets. Higher Education Quarterly, 57(2), 110-135.

Jongbloed, B. (2004). Regulation and competition in higher education. In markets in higher education. (pp. 87-111). Netherlands: Springer.

Kaynama, S. A., & Smith, L. W. (1996). Using consumer behavior and decision models to aid students in choosing a major. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 7(2), 57-73.

Kenny, J. D. (2009). Managing a modern university: is it time for a rethink? Higher Education Research & Development, 28(6), 629-642.

Kısabacak, G. (2011). Private universities as a working place through the eyes of academics. Doctoral dissertation. Available from Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni. jsp.

Kim, D. (2002). What do high school students and their parents expect from higher education? A case study of South Korea. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24(2), 183-196.

Kim, J. K., & Gasman, M. (2011). In search of a "good college": decisions and determinations behind Asian American students' college choice. Journal of College Student Development, 52(6), 706-728.

King, M. A. (2008). A strategic assessment of the higher education industry: applying the Porter's five forces for industry analysis. In Southeastern Decision Sciences Institute Annual Conference, Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Polytechnic and State University.

Koç, M., & Yılmaz, E. (2010). Webometric ve Arwu tarafından yapılan üniversite sıralamalarındaki performansın artırılmasına yönelik akademisyen görüşleri. SDÜ Uluslararası Teknolojik Bilimler Dergisi, 2(3), 17-30.

Kumar V. (2011). Technology Enabled Open Education for Innovative Universities. Paper presented at the International Higher Education Congress: New Trends and Issues, Istanbul, Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.uyk2011.org/kitap/pages/ uyk2011_s_269_272.pdf

Lynch, R., & Baines, P. (2004). Strategy development in UK higher education: towards resource-based competitive advantages. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26(2), 171-187.

Maringe, F. (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 466-479.

Martinez, M., & Wolverton, M. (2009). Enriching planning through industry analysis. Planning for Higher Education, 38(1), 23-30.

Mathooko, F. M., & Ogutu, M. (2015). Porter's five competitive forces framework and other factors that influence the choice of response strategies adopted by public universities in Kenya. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(3), 334-354.

Mazzarol, T., Hosie, P., & Jacobs, S. (1998). Information technology as a source of competitive advantage in international education. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 7(1), 113-130.

Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (1999). Sustainable competitive advantage for educational institutions: A suggested model. International Journal of Educational Management, 13(6), 287- 300.

Michael, R. K., Sower, V. E., & Motwani, J. (1997). A comprehensive model for implementing total quality management in higher education. Benchmarking for Quality Management and Technology, 4(2), 104-120.

Naidoo, R. (2005). Universities in the marketplace: the distortion of teaching and research. In: Barnett R. (Ed.) Reshaping the University. (pp. 27-36). Maidenhead, U. K.: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.

Naidoo, R. (2008). Building or eroding intellectual capital? Student consumerism as a cultural force in the context of knowledge economy. In Cultural perspectives on higher education. (pp. 43-55). Netherlands: Springer.

Özkan M., (2015). Üniversite Sıralama Sistemleri. In Aypay A. (Ed.), Türkiye'de yükseköğretim: Alanı, kapsamı ve politikaları. (pp. 341-369). Ankara: Pegem.

Pasternack, P., Bloch, R., Gellert, C., Hölscher, M., Kreckel, R., Lewin, D., Lischka I. & Schildberg, A. (2007). Current and Future Trends in Higher Education. Federal Ministry for Education, Science and Culture Austria Bm: Bwk.

Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.

Porter, M. E. (2008). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Simon and Schuster.

Pringle, J. & Huisman, J. (2011). Understanding universities in Ontario, Canada: an industry analysis using Porter's five forces framework. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 41(3), 36-58.

Robinson, A. W., & Long, G. (1988). Substance v. Trappings in the Marketing of Non-Advanced FE. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 12(1), 42-53.

Ronquillo, T. A. (2012). Analysis of competitiveness of Batangas State University College of engineering using porter's five competitive forces model. In Profession of Engineering Education: Advancing Teaching, Research and Careers: 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education 2012. (pp. 875-884). Engineers Australia.

Scrabec Jr, Q. (2000). Viewpoint: A quality education is not customer driven. Journal of Education for Business, 75(5), 298- 300.

Sezgin, A., & Binatlı, A. O. (2011). Determinants of university choice in Turkey. Paper presented at the International Higher Education Congress: New Trends and Issues, Istanbul. Retrieved from http://www.uyk2011.org/kitap/pages/ uyk2011_s_1651_1657.pdf

Sidin, S. M., Hussin, S. R., & Soon, T. H. (2003). An exploratory study of factors influencing the college choice decision of undergraduate students in Malaysia. Asia Pacific Management Review, 8(3), 259-280.

Soutar, G. N., & Turner, J.P. (2002). Students' preferences for university: a conjoint analysis. The International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1), 40-5

Stage, F., & Hossler, D. (1989). Differences in family influences on college attendance plans for male and female ninth graders. Research in Higher Education, 30(3), 301-315.

Strasser, S. E., Ozgur, C., & Schroeder, D. L. (2002). Selecting a business college major: An analysis of criteria and choice using the analytical hierarchy process. American Journal of Business, 17(2), 47-56.

Strayhorn, T. L., Blakewood, A. M., & DeVita, J. M. (2008). Factors affecting the college choice of African American gay male undergraduates: Implications for retention. National Association of Student Affairs Professionals Journal, 11(1), 88-108.

Tavares, D., Justino, E., & Amaral, A. (2008). Students' preferences and needs in Portuguese higher education. European Journal of Education, 43(1), 107-122.

Teker, S., & Özer, B. (2012). New Foundation Universities Location Selection and Academic Area Recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.isarder.org/isardercom/2012vol4Issue2/ Vol.4_Issue.2-04_full_text.pdf

Webb, M. S. (1993). Variables influencing graduate business students' college selections. College and University, 68(1), 38-46.

Weymans, W. (2010). Democracy, knowledge and critique: rethinking European universities beyond tradition and the market. London Review of Education, 8(2), 117-126

Wolff, E. N., Baumol W. J., & Saini A. N. (2014). A comparative analysis of education costs and outcomes: the United States vs. other OECD countries. Economics of Education Review, 39, 1-21. Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S0272775713001696#.

Yalçıntan, M. C., & Thornley, A. (2007). Globalization, higher education, and urban growth coalitions: Turkey's foundation universities and the case of Koç University in Istanbul. Environment and Planning C, 25(6), 822.

Yamamoto, G. T. (2006). University evaluation-selection: a Turkish case. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(7), 559-569.

Yurdabakan, İ. (2002). Approaches to globalization and education. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 6, 61-64.

ISSN: 2146-5959
Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 3 Sayı
Başlangıç: 2011
Yayıncı: Bülent Ecevit Üniversitesi (Önceden Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi)