Research Journal of Recent Sciences _________________________________________________ ISSN 2277-2502 Vol. 4(8), 8-13, August (2015) Res.J.Recent Sci. International Science Congress Association 8 Discovering the Competitive Advantage of Higher Education on Consumer Behavior in International Campus UniversitiesAlireza Miremadi Ali Etemadolesllami Bakhtiyari and Arash DorvashSharif University of Technology, International Campus, IRAN Available online at: www.isca.in , www.isca.me Received 7th December 2013, revised 18th February 2015, accepted 24th June 2014Abstract The purpose of this study is discover the most vital factor that influence students choose model in international campus. To achieve it, we discovered the 53 attributes which categorized it in 13 groups after reviewing the Literature review. The result of this study lead us to believe that, most important factors impact on international campus were extracted from attributes with applying the statistical inferential. Out of all attributes which we studied in this study , Recognition by future employers, research reputation, corporate with foreign university, convenient registration process and improve the language captured the most vital factors influenced on student decision, therefore it would be wise for administrators to periodically reevaluated how student needs and changes are assessed.Keywords: Higher education, consumer behavior, university reputation, registration process, international campus, student satisfaction, Iran. IntroductionIn the last two decades of the twentieth century, universities around the world were forced to look at financial sources other than those provided by governments1-3 that would enable them to generate fee income for the sector. This fee income would need to come from overseas students and local students willing to pay for the privilege of doing a university course. Universities became creative in their course offerings and broadened their target markets. No longer did they focus solely on home country residents, but they sought out international students and targeted the corporate world through their newly established university commercial apparatus: apparatus that was designed to introduce the corporate world to the concept of “life-long learning”: the repeat purchaser. Marketing metaphors have become a natural part of the academic vocabulary in the marketing efforts directed towards prospective students. With the deregulation of the tertiary sector came the need for universities to actively compete for “market share”1-12. Students are seen as customers of knowledge at many universities. Likewise, universities regard themselves as suppliers of knowledge to these customers. In extension, many universities go a step further and regard their students as collaborators in the quest for knowledge. It is apparent that these universities have been strongly influenced by marketing metaphors. The Objectives of Study: the university choice depends on value which is a multifaceted and complex construct13,14, furthermore, the university “product” can be seen as a bundle of university-related attributes and student-related ones15. This study investigates the components of the university value, which affects students' choice, in order to develop a value approach that measures the total student experience and show the possible implications of the findings to university positioning and marketing strategies, In addition, most of the educational studies are conducted in countries in which competition is well established and universities compete with various marketing tools. Three research questions have been stated to get to the aim of the study as follows: What are the factors that influence students in choosing an international Campus university and the courses they intend to study?, Discover the most important factors that influence students to make a better decision in selecting international Campus University?, Find out the reason why student selected the international campus. Literature reviewThe Theoretical Models: The international education is not a frequent purchase and demands a high level of involvement from customers16. In order to determine their preferences, prospective students consider what is important for them, and then make a conscious/ unconscious trade off among the attributes17. The model presented in this work aims to explain the factors influencing the purchase intention of international students. The purchase intention is used as a predictor for the preferential choices of consumers, and is defined as the intention of the student regarding the destination country as provider of the education service18,19. The theoretical model comprises the purchase intention, as a dependent and not observable variable, and four factors with a total of 19 independent variables identified in existing literature. The factors identified are personal reasons20-29 country image18- Research Journal of Recent Sciences _____________________________________________________________ ISSN 2277-2502Vol. 4(8), 8-13, August (2015) Res.J.Recent Sci. International Science Congress Association 9 21,30-32, institution image17,19,20,25-27,29,33-40 and program evaluation18-21,25,30,40 Pupils Today’s Choice for Higher Education in Developed Countries as a Model: The developed country model is developed base on consumer behavior theories. These theories provide the practical and theoretical parameters that stipulate and regulate the environmental and behavioral context of developed-countries' student choice. The theories of consumer behavior in developed countries have raised a number of points that relate to higher education Institutions (HEIs) establishments. There is an incessant change in the profile of customer behavior consequent to corresponding changes in the wider marketing environment. Globalization demands re-segmentation and naturally re-targeting of the most attractive market segments, based either on profitability or on other factors. Higher needs are more likely to motivate potential students from developed countries than ones from less developed countries, even where the personal situations of the former are similar to the latter. Additionally, the more complex motivational processes of the former result in both quantitative and qualitative upgrades in their decision-making process. Regarding the consumer decision process; marketing communications have a comparatively greater effect on “need recognition” which arises consequently to these higher needs. Owing to technological accessibility, the intensity of marketing communications and increased options, “search for information” is more complex, more efficient and more effective. Similar causes and effects occur in relation to “pre-purchase evaluation of alternatives” though here branding appears to play a vital role in decision-making. “Purchasing” and “consumption”, which are practically a single step in relation to higher education, differentiate themselves in developed countries’' potential students' behavior through the ability to pay higher fees (on average). “Post-consumption evaluation” differences relate to the “mass-word-of-mouth” phenomenon and greater relative weight of the purchase and consumption “experience. Finally, “divestment” is practically unrelated to higher education. Regarding the individual determinants of behavior, attitudes and values relating to personal freedom and the drive for individual achievement appear as primary factors. Regarding the environmental determinants, a combination of economic and demographic factors enhances the attractiveness of less-traditional age-group segments. This may necessitate not simply strategic-targeting, but also product re-interpretation, extension and repositioning. Further, in relation to environmental determinants, there is an apparent shift from family to peers and media influences and a (questionable though) decline in the influence of religion and national culture. Finally, in relation to environmental determinants, “societal marketing” and corresponding demand for social responsibility is unmistakably an increasingly notable factor in decision-making. Though the latter may not be an explicit parameter in conscious evaluations, it is an inseparable part of an HEI's brand image. MethodologyThe purpose of this study was to bring an insight and better understanding of the important attributes for student decision making and student choice model in international campuses universities located in Iran .Due to this reasons, we did not have and require control over behavioral events. Thereupon, both case study and survey are suitable choices for our study. Our sample size calculation was 475. In this research, a simple random sampling was selected as the sampling method. The Students of International Campuses in Iran were sampled to respond to the questionnaires. To achieve diverse response from a expand scope of ideas, age, education, income and Level of education used; different International campuses like Sharif university of Technology-International Campus, Tehran University-International Campus of Kish, Tehran University–Alborz campus, Shiraz University of Medical Science- International campus, Ferdosi university of Mashhad- International campus, Uromieh University–international Campus and Allameh Tabatabaei University–International Campus. According to Fisher43 the number of distributed questionnaires will have to be larger than the minimum required and the response rate of 30% is considered very good. In this study 600 questionnaires were distributed and 480 questionnaires were returned providing an 80% response rate. Variables and constructs: Through extensive literature review and conducting deep interviews with the experts, we categorized 13 constructs and fifty three variables. Marketing thinkers have identified student choice model and decision model strategies in different ways and while there are similarities in their models there are some differences. We found 13 common strategies in the most credible Literature Review and pilot study, Personal Improvement, Corporate Image, Faculty, Program, Size and Schedule, Program Evaluation, Facility, University Staff, Recreational Activities, University Fee, City Image, Integrated Marketing Communication and Advice. Measurement: Our questionnaire is divided into four sections. In section one, students were asked to answer some descriptive and historical information about themselves such as, education, gender, income range, and the level of the education and parents education they had used. In section two and three, a set of questions were designed to evaluate variables related to our hypothesis. In this section all questions had five point Likert scale responses. The respondents were asked to reflect the extent of influence of variables on the measured variable from very important to low important. In the last section, there were open-ended question to provide the opportunity for respondent to express their idea about the selection if international campus which research didn’t come across. Research Journal of Recent Sciences _____________________________________________________________ ISSN 2277-2502Vol. 4(8), 8-13, August (2015) Res.J.Recent Sci. International Science Congress Association 10 Evaluating Measurement Scale: Reliability of the questionnaire was examined by calculating the Cronbach’s alpha. The total Cronbach’s alpha of all 53 measures is 0.962 which is above the cut-off value (0.70) recommended by Nunnally and Bernstein 44 and the reliability of the questionnaire is considered high 45. Table 1 Cronbach’s Alpha of Research VariablesConstruct Cronbach’s Alpha Personal Improvement ( PI ) 0.732 Corporate Image ( CI ) 0.858 Faculty ( FU ) 0.890 Program ( PR ) 0.739 Size and Schedule ( SS ) 0.788 Program Evaluation ( PE ) 0.724 Facility ( FC ) 0.924 University Staff ( US ) 0.795 Recreational Activity ( RI ) 0.919 University Fee ( UF ) 0.744 City Image ( CT ) 0.784 Integrated Marketing Communication ( IMC ) 0.805 Advise ( AV ) 0.802 The research applied the Face validity and content validity to determine the validity of the research. Results and Discussion Data profile of respondent: According to table-2, it is seen that majority of students who show interested in studding international campus are Male with 58.4 %.It is also interesting to know that 28.3% of respondent were the ages between 25-27 years and they were mature enough to select the best program in international Campus. The mentioned table also discovered that the Majority of Respondent were interested in Master Degree with 56.7 % which empower study with policy of international campus in Iran with income range between 1 to 3 million. Table 2 Respondent Profile in NutshellFrequency Percent Male 265 58.4 Between 25 t0 27 128 28.3 Master Degree 254 56.7 Bachelor Degree 177 40.0 Between 1 To 3 Million 127 30.4 Tehran 174 38.9 Working 168 38.0 Engineering M.S 108 24.4 Full Time 378 85.5 Personal Tend to Progress in Upper Education Level 207 47.6 The tables also reveal that out of 455 respondents, 38.0 % of them are currently working executives before entering the international campus. The data also discovered that the majority of respondent are interested in pursuing Master degree in Engineering field, coming up with MBA and preferred to conduct the program in full time rather than the part time program. It is also observed that 207 out of 455 respondents are interested in international campus with the aim of gaining upper education level in the future with excellent social status. Friedman Test: After applying the Friedman test, the following result came out and support that there are some deficit or shortages exist in international campus university located in Iran. the Vice chancellor of the university or committee member of the university should concentrate or focus on the following attribute in order to capture or sustain its ranking among the other international campuses and developing the existing market share with maintain the high standard level of education in Iran, therefore the following attributes are keen to influence the student decision in the choosing the international campuses such as: (table-3) Recognition by Future Employers, Research Reputation, Corporate With Foreign University, Convenient Registration Process, Improve The Language Skill, Size of Student-Population, Field of Study, Recreational Facility, Opportunity For Part Time Work, Safe and Security, Advertising and Local National Press Table-4 showed the level of importance of each construct and level of priority by the university staff and student in selecting international campuses in the future. Considering these attribute will equip international campus to penetrate in market with précised strategy and dominant its market share with quality and international standard of education. The result will prevent on student making decision in pursuing higher education in abroad and prefer to continue in Iran with economical expenses but high level of education with internationally recognized degree. Conclusion From statistical inferential, the results show shortage or deficit in international campus and university manager should highlight on attribute which highly importance in the students consumer mind in their advertising and focus on Low important attributes as weakness of the international campus universities in Iran. For instance, as statistical test indicated the importance or combination of part time job beside education is essential combination on student to select the international campus. Providing this could be appropriate strategy for universities to develop its market share. Explored attributes can inform and notice university manager about weaknesses and shortage of its institution and help managers to recover or improve them to increase student satisfaction. Research Journal of Recent Sciences _____________________________________________________________ ISSN 2277-2502Vol. 4(8), 8-13, August (2015) Res.J.Recent Sci. International Science Congress Association 11 Table-3 Mean Rank of Attributes in Student Choice Model Construct Attributes (indexes) Mean Rank Personal Improvement Future Job Prospects 2.65 Future Earnings Prospects 2.42 Higher Status 2.99 Improve Language Skills 1.95 Corporate Image Ranking Position 2.30 Brand Reputation 2.63 Academic Reputation 2.78 Researcher Reputation 2.29 Faculty Experience And Expertise 2.55 Number Of Emirates Professor 2.58 Academics Reputation 2.69 Corporation With Foreign Universities 2.18 Program Field Of Study 1.76 Courses 2.18 Course Structure 2.07 Size And Schedule Multiple Scheduling 2.00 Size Of Student-Population 1.99 Smaller Classes 2.01 Program Evaluation International Recognition 1.91 Quality Programs 2.21 Recognition By Future Employers 1.88 Facility Up To Date Computer Labs 6.58 Dining-Hall 5.21 Library With Resources 7.23 Silent And Comfortable Study Hall 6.51 Conference Hall 5.65 Locker 4.37 Equipped Laboratory Or Work Shop 6.23 In Campus Bookstore 5.88 Clean, Spacious Classrooms 7.00 Dormitory 5.36 Beautiful Internal and External Environment 5.98 University Staff Academic Staff Is Approachable 2.07 Administrative Staff Is Approachable 2.02 Convenient Registration Process 1.91 Recreational Activities Sport Facilities ( Equipment and Team) 2.85 Student Organizations 2.38 Student Activities 2.46 Recreational Facilities 2.31 University Fee Fees 2.18 Flexibility In Payment 2.15 Opportunities For Part Time Work 1.68 City Image Cost Of Living 2.06 Safety And Security 1.96 Social Facilities 1.98 IMC Advertising In Local And National Press 2.05 Public Relation And Publicity About Academic 2.96 Electronic Media 2.71 Marketing Communications 2.28 Advise Family Recommendation 2.33 Friend’s Recommendation 2.17 Professor’s Recommendation 2.75 Advice Of Alumni 2.75 Table 4 Students` Choice Model Ranking among International CampusHighly important Low important Program Evaluation Faculty University Staff City Image Facility Corporate Image Program University Fee Size And Schedule Recreational Activities Personal Improvement Advice IMC References 1.Delmonico M.J., Is treating students as customers the right move for community colleges?, St Petersburg, FL: St Petersburg Junior College, (2000) 2.Driscoll C. and Wicks D., The customer-driven approach in business education: a possible danger?, Journal of Education for Business, 74, 58-61 (1998)3.Marginson S. and Considine M., The Enterprise University: Power, Governance and Reinvention in Australia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (2000)4.Stilwell F., Higher education, commercial criteria and economic incentives, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 25, 51-61, (2003) 5.Aliff J.V., Are students ‘customers’ of collegiate education?, Proceedings of the Annual General Meeting of the Georgia Academy of Science, 25, (1998)6.Baldwin G., The student as customer: The discourse of ‘quality’ in higher education, Journal of Tertiary Education Administration, 16, 125-33 (1994)7.Lust P. and Osborn, Students as customers: would you like fries with your Shakespeare, Scholarship, Service, and Integrity: Benchmarks in a Changing Landscape, 60,54 (1998)8.Pitman T., Perceptions of academics and students as customers: A survey of administrative staff in higher education, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22, 165-75 (2000) Research Journal of Recent Sciences _____________________________________________________________ ISSN 2277-2502Vol. 4(8), 8-13, August (2015) Res.J.Recent Sci. International Science Congress Association 12 9.Seymour D. and Collett C., Total Quality Management in Higher Education: A Critical Assessment, GOAL/QPC. Methuen, MA, (1991) 10.Shupe D.A., Productivity, quality, and accountability in higher education, Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 47, 2-13 (1999)11.Spicuzza F.J., A customer service approach to advising: Theory and application, NACADA Journal, 12, 49-58 (1992)12.Tierney W.G., Building the Responsive Campus: Creating High Performance Colleges and Universities, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublicationS, (1999)13.LeBlanc G. and Nguyen N., Listening to the customer’s voice: examining perceived service value among business college students, International Journal of Educational Management, 13, 187-98 (1999)14.Sheth J.N., Newman B.I. and Gros B.L., Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values, Journal of Business Research, 22, 159-70 (1991)15.Keller K.L., Strategic Brand Management, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, (1998)16.Nicholls J., Harris J., Morgan E., Clarke K. and Sims D., Marketing higher education: the MBA experience, The International Journal of Educational Management, 9, 31-8 (1995)17.Soutar G.N. and Turner J.P., Students’ preferences for university: A conjoint analysis, The International Journal of Educational Management, 16, 40-5 (2002)18.Peng Z., Lawley M. and Perry C., Modelling and testing effects of country, corporate and brand images on consumers’ product evaluation and purchase intention, presented at the the ANZMAC 2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge Conference, (2000)19.Srikatanyoo N. and Gnoth J., Country image and international tertiary education, Journal of Brand Management, 10, 139-46 (2002)20.Binsardi and Ekwulugo F., International marketing of British education: research on the students’ perception and the UK market penetration, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 21, 318-27 (2003)21.Bourke, A model of the determinants of international trade in higher education, The Service Industries Journal,, 20, 110-38 (2000)22.Dawidow W.H. and Uttal B., Service companies: Fows or Faller, Harvard Business Review, 67, 77, (1989) 23.Gro¨nroos, Quo vadis marketing?, Towards a relationship marketing paradigm, Journal of Marketing, 10, 347-60, (1994) 24.Kotler P. and Fox K., Strategic Management for Educational Institutions, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, (1995) 25.Krampf R.F. and Heinlein A.C., Developing marketing strategies and tactics in higher education through target market research, Decision Sciences, 12, 175-93 (1981)26.Lin L., What are student education and educational related needs?, Marketing and Research Today, 25, 199-212 (1997)27.Mazzarol T. and Hosie P., Exporting Australian higher education: Future strategies in maturing market, Quality Assurance in Education, 4, 37-50 (1996)28.Qureshi S., College accession research: New variables in an old equation, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 12, 163-70 (1995)29.Turner J.P., An investigation of business undergraduates’ choice to study at Edith Cowan University: unpublished research report, Edith Cowan Universit, (1998) 30.Hooley G.J. and Lynch J.E., Modelling the student university choice process through the use of conjoint measurement techniques, European Research, 9, 158-70 (1981)31.Lawley M., Choice of destination in international education: a cross national model, unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, (1998)32.Mori and M. commissioned by UNITE, Bristol., Student Living Report 2001, Bristol, (2001)33.Ford J.B., Joseph F. and Joseph B., Importance-performance analysis as a strategic tool for service marketers: the case of service quality perceptions of business students in New Zealand and the USA, The Journal of Services Marketing, 13, 171 (1999)34.Gutman J. and Miaoulis G., Communicating a quality position in service delivery: an application in higher education, Managing Service Quality, 13, 105-11 (2003)35.Hall R., A framework linking intangible resources an capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage, Strategic Management Journal, 14, 607-18 (1993)36.Ivy J., Higher education institution image: A correspondence analysis approach, The International Journal of Educational Management, 15, 276-82 (2001)37.Mazzarol T., Critical success factors for international education marketing, The International Journal of Educational Management, 12, 163-75 (1998)38.Peters M., Performance indicators in New Zealand higher education: accountability or control?, Journal of Education Policy, 7, 267-83 (1992)39.Price L., Matzdorf and Agahi H., The impact of facilities on student choice of university, International Journal of Educational Management, 21, 212-22 (2003) Research Journal of Recent Sciences _____________________________________________________________ ISSN 2277-2502Vol. 4(8), 8-13, August (2015) Res.J.Recent Sci. International Science Congress Association 13 40.Qureshi S., College accession research: New variables in an old equation, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 12, 163-70 (1995)41.Cubillo M., Sánchez J. and Cerviño J., A model of international students` preferennes, ed: International Journal of Educational Management,(2006)42.Vrontis A., Thrassou and Y. Melanthiou, preliminary integrated generic higher education student-choice model., ed, (2007)43.Fisher M., Researching and writing a dissertation: a guidebook for business students, Second ed. Edinburgh Gate: Financial Times Prentice Hall, (2007)44.Nunnally C. and Bernstein I.H., Psychometric theory: McGraw-Hill, (1994)45.Hair J.F.J., Money A.H., Samouel P. and Page M., Research methods for business, West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons, Limited, (2007)