DeShields, Kara and Kaynak (2005:30) contend that due to the dynamic nature of the market, business schools internationally are being driven to reassess their business strategies in order to provide quality education. This is because of strong global competition that impels organisations to embrace a marketing oriented approach, in order to distinguish their products from that of their competition. However, service businesses including higher educational organisations, have been hesitant to embrace this type of focus as they were in a comfortable situation of seeing growing enrolments and budgets in the past as alluded to by Ford et al. (1999:171) cited in Gbadamosi and de Jager (2008:3). Unfortunately, the period of boom in the 1970s and 1980s was changed to a period of bust in the 1990s and 2000s, and tertiary education went through an intense decline in government subsidies and an escalation in student fees in several countries especially ones whose educational structures paralleled that of South Africa (Mok, 2003; Palihawadana, 1999; Soutar and Turner, 2002) cited in (Gbadamosi & de Jager, 2008:3). Similarly, Kotler (2003) in Gbadamosi and de Jager (2008:3) showed that student enrolments at business schools in the United States of America has “levelled off or declined” due to environmental changes and new competition.
Seemingly, tertiary institutions in both developing and developed countries are facing market- related and financial burdens resulting in an educational environment where they are having to compete for the most talented students (who are their customers) through the use of logical business ideologies in order to acquire and retain students. (De Jager & du Plooy, 2006) cited in (Gbadamosi & de Jager, 2008:3). The situation is no different in South African higher education.
South African universities have experienced budgetary and government subsidy cuts with a corresponding pressure to increase student numbers (Gbadamosi and de Jager, 2008:10). Similar challenges in South African higher education have been documented recently by other researchers (Badat & Sayed, 2014; Mitra & Edmondson, 2015:388).
Furthermore, there has been a decline in student numbers in certain disciplines (Hibbert & van der Walt 2014:54-55) at South African universities giving rise to students having greater choice (Bigalke & Zurbuchen, 2014:217) and greater pressure being placed on service delivery (Wang, 2012:193).
55 In addition, owing to increased competition between higher educational institutions in South Africa, it becomes imperative for higher educational institutions to use effective techniques to improve the quality of their service offerings (Gbadamosi & de Jager, 2008:10).
In view of the importance of improving the quality of the service offering, a report on the quality of education at South African universities concluded the following: “The quality movement and quality assurance in South African higher education is now, with the establishment of the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) of the Council on Higher Education (CHE), entering a new era. In general, a permeating quality culture is still sadly lacking in South African universities.
However, institutions can no longer afford to sit back and wait for policy directives in this regard.
Universities will have to be pro-active in establishing self-evaluation (quality assurance) systems at institutional and programme level. The biggest challenge for South African universities is to establish a quality culture and quality assurance systems in such a way so as to promote a sense of ownership among all stakeholders in the institution — academic, administrative and professional staff, students, and funders. A second major challenge is the prioritization of quality measures and linking them closely with the strategic planning of the institution. In order to meet these two challenges, a combination of top-down and bottom-up processes is required” (Fourie et al., n.d:15).
Similar sentiments have been recently expressed by various other authors alluding to the importance of moving towards a quality culture in South African higher education (Nair, 2010:91;
Rhoten & Calhoun, 2011:400).
It is apparent from the aforementioned discussion that South African institutions of higher education are increasingly being forced to compete based on service quality and student satisfaction due to higher education becoming more competitive, changes in market demand patterns, and an increasing concern for quality assurance (Radder & Han, 2009:108).
Consequently, Harris and Paddey (2010:3) contend that it becomes imperative for South African tertiary institutions to display excellence in service provision. Furthermore, Russell (2005:69) proclaims that providing a quality service is an essential purpose of tertiary educational institutions as perceived quality influences student satisfaction and which in turn affects profitability.
56 McBurnie and Ziguras (2007) cited in Gbadamosi and de Jager (2008:3) postulate that as an important factor of service delivery, quality increasingly dominates as a key aspect that impacts on students’ decision making for learning and the quality of students’ overall experience is critical to the programme’s success. Thus, it is evident that service quality will play an important role in higher educational institutions wanting to attract and keep students and in the overall success of such institutions.
Similarly, Abouchedid and Nasser (2002:198) posit an intimate link between the idea of higher education service quality and the success of the organisation. In fact, more recently, Kats (2013:94) explored many studies that showed the link between service quality and eLearning success.
Furthermore, Abouchedid and Nasser (2002:198) also contend that the quality of service offered by universities assists in helping to achieve the basic objectives of sustaining academic reputation, and retaining and getting students to enrol. In support of the importance of service quality, Abdullah (2006:31) states that service quality is a significant strategic management concern as it has developed into a widespread strategic force. This is because of a more competitive higher educational market with decreased government funding giving rise to many higher educational institutions pursuing funding from other sources. In view of these apparent difficulties experienced by higher educational institutions, Gbadamosi and de Jager (2008:4) suggest that apart from looking at traditional areas such as accreditation, teaching and research, higher educational institutions must also look at “students as customers”.
A similar view is taken by Bisschoff (2001:232) who based on empirical evidence, contends that there has been a movement away from the traditional approach in education to an approach that is more customer-centred whereby students are viewed as valued customers. In support of this, various authors view the student as an important customer (Rutland, 2013:131; Dunne & Owen, 2013; Buller, 2015).
It is important to understand that higher educational institutions are service organisations and their quality of the service is not only based on tangible issues such as lecture venues and course notes, but also on intangible issues such as human resources in providing good service to their students (Yeo,2009) cited in Harris and Paddey (2010:5).
57 The following section tries to put into perspective the meaning of higher education service quality.