89 Author/s Study Focus Main Findings
Gong (2010) Comparing SERVQUAL and SERVPERF in influencing student satisfaction
Both SERVQUAL and SERVPERF positively and significantly influence student satisfaction.
Source: Authors’ own compilation.
The international studies between service quality and student satisfaction, as reported in Table 3.5, were far more extensive than the South African studies. However, there is a dearth of information pertaining to the influence of Service Quality and the influence of its dimensions on Student Satisfaction, especially pertaining to South African higher education.
Based on the aforementioned discussion on the relationship between service quality and student satisfaction, it is hypothesized that:
H2: Service quality and its dimensions (Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy) have a significant positive effect on OVERALL STUDENT
SATISFACTION (OSS)
90 learning need to be able to effectively export their qualifications. But, to do this they need to be able to provide added value on which they are measured and rated, and the university as a brand is made based on its products such as its students who are its ambassadors, professors who publish in journals of high repute, to name a few (Kapferer, 2008:128-129).
According to Marrs et al. (2011:965), in the light of economic and financial constraints affecting many higher educational institutions, branding is viewed and used as a much needed and valuable strategic tool in differentiating such organisations in a positive way. For example, in order to bring about a strong competitive distinctiveness so as to set British education apart from other key competitors, and in order to appeal to and attract more students on a global level, the government of the United Kingdom supported an international re-branding campaign in the year 2000 (Hemsley-Brown & Goonawardana, 2007). Therefore, it is apparent that branding in a higher educational context is taking on higher levels of importance.
Menon, Terklz, and Gibbs (2014:81-82) argue that brand equity is becoming a topical issue in higher education marketing. Amongst other reasons, competition between higher educational institutions creates a need to differentiate one’s educational offerings. However, the exercise of branding does pose challenges in higher education because of a lack of funding, a limited marketing culture, and a lack of understanding of branding resulting in branding becoming an ad hoc process lacking strategic orientation (Menon et al., 2014:81-82).
However, Menon et al. (2014:82-86), allude to the importance placed on branding activities and branding issues and the view that it should be all encompassing including all touch points such as open days, tracking applications, business networking activities, and so on, all of which should feed into branding strategies and policies. In addition, due to the contribution branding makes to the value proposition by helping students make a better choice, higher education institutions create specific objectives for branding.
According to Menon et al. (2014:86) branding objectives include some of the following issues:
image related, differentiation of facets of the university, to sensitize staff on how to communicate with students and other stakeholders, and create a competitive advantage. However, the authors contend that problems arise, as there are often variances between universities regarding objectives,
91 some of which are difficult to quantify and lacking commonality and with the result is viewed as being wasteful by some.
According to Pretorius (2007), changes to the South African higher educational landscape that took place on 1 January 2004 ushered in opportunities for higher educational institutions to differentiate their service offerings through branding. There is consensus amongst marketing academicians that a brand extends beyond simply a name. It comprises a set qualities and principles that represent and relate to physical, social and psychological issues. Additionally, an organisation’s standing for proficient service and Reliability of its product quality help to build a brand. The aforementioned characteristics of a brand influence customer perceptions and connotations they attribute to the brand (Simões & Dibb, 2001:217, cited in Pretorius, 2007:2).
Pretorius (2007:2-3) contends that marketing communication with customers has become difficult, due to more competition, an escalation in mergers and acquisitions, differences in public characteristics and the influence of media and civic opinion that create problems in communicating with customers. Consequently, Pretorius (2007:3) recommends devoting attention to branding issues to create brand equity, and organisations differentiating themselves from the competition through creating their own uniqueness and individual features.
Moreover, according to Bastedo (2012:1929), branding is crucial in the creation of competitive advantage, and relating to this, brand equity that is “a brands tangible value to a firm”, contributes to the creation of such an advantage.
Subramaniam et al., (2014:67) contend that brand equity is becoming very important for service organisations especially those offering identical services and which are difficult to differentiate.
Hence, strengthening their brand image becomes an important focus.
In higher education for example, image-related issues played a more significant role in brand equity than awareness-related issues (Mourad et al., 2011:403). The aforementioned researchers contend that in a higher educational context, the image of the institution helps in reducing the risk related to that type of service essentially because service quality is assessed after consumption.
Therefore, through a strong brand, there is a reduction in risk and the customer’s decision-making is made easier.
92 Washburn and Plank (2002:47) argue that because positive brand equity makes many positive contributions, amongst which would be increased sales, lower costs, higher profits, better value of the brand and an overall more effective marketing mix, it is therefore important that brand equity be effectively measured.
In a higher education context, Toma (2003:201) contends that there are many potential advantages that brand equity can offer. It helps to benefit the institution through benefits being provided to students; marketing efforts become more efficient and effective; prices and margins become higher, revenue generation becomes more stable; opportunity to extend the brand become better;
a reduction in risk; and the institution becomes more competitive.