The Mediating Effect of Generic Strategies on Performance of Higher Education Institutions in Zambia
1Daphne Sowi Munsaka Phiri, 2Charles M. Mungule, 3Jackson Phiri
1PhD Candidate, Graduate School of Business, University of Zambia
2Lecturer, Graduate School of Business, University of Zambia
3Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science, University of Zambia
https://doi.org/10.47191/jefms/v8-i1-15
ABSTRACT:
Higher Education Institutions have joined the corporate world in adopting strategies in order to enhance their performance. This study sought to explore the mediating effect of Porter’s generic strategies on the relationship between internal resources and university performance in Zambia. The target population was 499 students from 4 universities. Data was collected via self-administered questionnaires. The study used SPSS version 27 and PROCESS macro version 4.2 to analyze data. The results indicate that differentiation strategy has both a direct and an indirect effect on university performance, while focus strategy has a limited indirect effect on university performance. The study also reveals that cost leadership has no effect direct or indirect on university performance. The implications of the study are that universities should embrace differentiation and focus strategies in their planning to enhance their performance
KEYWORDS:
Higher Education Institutions, University Performance Differentiation Focus Cost-Leadership Strategy
REFERENCES:
1) Abdurachman, E., Bandur, A., & Kosasih, W. (2023). Improving Competitive Advantages of Higher Education Institutions through IT Governance , IT Excellence , and IT Innovation : A Case Study in School of Informatics Management & Computing in Indonesia. 17(1), 103–119.
2) Amado Mateus, M., & Juarez Acosta, F. (2022). Reputation in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 7). Frontiers Media S.A. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.925117
3) Bal, H. Ç., & Erkan, Ç. (2019). Industry 4.0 and Competitiveness. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 625–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.096
4) Boone, H. N., & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2). https://doi.org/10.34068/joe.50.02.48
5) Coutts, J. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2023). Questions of value, questions of magnitude: An exploration and application of methods for comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 55(7), 3772–3785. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01988-0
6) David, F. R., & David, F. R. (2017). Strategic Management A Competitive Advantage Approach Concepts and cases.
7) De Beer, C. F., & Swanepoel, J. W. H. (1989). A modified durbin—watson test for serial correlation in multiple regression under nonnormality using the bootstrap. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 33(2), 75–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949658908811188
8) Griffin, R. W. (2015). Fundamental of Management 8th. 8th, 1–547.
9) Haan, H. H. de. (2015). Competitive Advantage, What Does it Really Mean in the Context of Public Higher Education Institutions? International Journal of Educational Management, 29(1), 44–61.
10) Hemsley-brown, J., & Oplatka, I. (2010). systematic review of the literature on higher education marketing Universities in a competitive global marketplace education marketing. 19(4), 316–338.
11) Islami, X., Mustafa, N., & Topuzovska Latkovikj, M. (2020). Linking Porter’s generic strategies to firm performance. Future Business Journal, 6(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-020-0009-1
12) Jeketule, J. S. (2018). Intangible Assets for Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Institutes of Higher Learning. Msingi Journal, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.33886/mj.v1i1.57
13) Mainardes, E. W., Ferreira, J. M., & Tontini, G. (2011). Creating a competitive advantage in Higher Education Institutions: proposal and test of a conceptual model. International Journal of Management in Education, 5(2–3), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMIE.2011.039482
14) Manyeki, K., Ongeti, W., & Odiyo, W. (2019). Influence of Porters Generic Strategies on Performance of Private Chartered Universities in Kenya: A Case of Nairobi County. Journal of Strategic Management, 2(5), 47–67.
15) Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (1999). Sustainable competitive advantage for educational institutions: A suggested model. International Journal of Educational Management, 13(6), 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513549910294496
16) Mohammad Alzoubi, A., & Lawrence Emeagwali, O. (2016a). Do generic strategies impact performance in higher educational institutions? A SEM-based investigation. Business and Economic Horizons, 12(2), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.15208/beh.2016.04
17) Mohammad Alzoubi, A., & Lawrence Emeagwali, O. (2016b). Do generic strategies impact performance in higher educational institutions? A SEM-based investigation. Business and Economic Horizons, 12(2), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.15208/beh.2016.04
18) Ngaruko, D. D. (2014). Building Competitive Advantage in Academic Programmes in Open and Distance Learning (ODL) Institutions: Case of The Open University of Tanzania. Huria: Journal of the Open University of Tanzania, 18(1), 135–154.
19) Okwemba, E. M. (2023). Influence of Focus Strategy on Performance of Public Universities in Western Kenya Region. International Journal of Business and Management Invention (IJBMI) ISSN, 12, 1–07. https://doi.org/10.35629/8028-12010107
20) Otuya Willis. (2019). Kenny and Baron 4 Step Analysis (1986): A Case of Employee Job Satisfaction as a Mediator Between Ethical Climate and Performance among Sugarcane Transport Smes in Western Kenya. Journal of Economics Ad Sustainable Development, 10(14). https://doi.org/10.7176/JESD
21) Porter, M. E. (2008). “The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy.” Special Issue on HBS Centennial. Harvard Business Review, 86(1), 78–93.
22) Porter, M. E., & Canada, M. M. (1985). Competitive Creating and Sustaining.
23) Pulaj, E., Kume, V., & Cipi, A. (2015). The Impact Of Generic Competitive Strategies On Organizational Performance. The Evidence From Albanian Context. In European Scientific Journal (Vol. 11, Issue 28).
24) Sánchez-Chaparro, T., Gómez-Frías, V., & González-Benito, Ó. (2020). Competitive implications of quality assurance processes in higher education. The case of higher education in engineering in France. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja , 33(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2019.1697329
25) Sigalas, C., & Pekka-economou, V. (2018). Arising From Its Conceptualization. February 2013. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA
26) Soko, J. J. (2014). Intangible Assest for Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Institutes of Higher learning: Kenya. Msingi Journal, 1(1), 1–25.
27) Tanwar, R. (2013). Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategies (Vol. 15, Issue 1). www.iosrjournals.orgwww.iosrjournals.org
28) Wang, J., Yang, M., & Maresova, P. (2020). Sustainable development at higher education in China: A comparative study of students’ perception in public and private universities. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062158
29) Yamin, S., Gunasekaran, A., & Mavondo, F. T. (1999). Relationship between generic strategies, competitive advantage and organizational performance: An empirical analysis. Technovation, 19(8), 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(99)00024-3
