Grupos estratégicos en el sector privado de la educación superior

  1. Dorys Yaneth Rodríguez Castro 1
  2. Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitia 1
  3. Juan Aparicio 2
  1. 1 Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao, España
  2. 2 Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche
    info

    Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche

    Elche, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01azzms13

Journal:
Educación XX1: Revista de la Facultad de Educación

ISSN: 1139-613X,  2174-5374

Year of publication: 2021

Volume: 24

Issue: 1

Pages: 163-187

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5944/EDUCXX1.26657 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Educación XX1: Revista de la Facultad de Educación

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to characterize the institutional diversity of the private side of a higher education system. The classification techniques used in the literature have a propensity to compare private higher education institutions with their public counterparts and run the risk of underestimating the impact of the market as a source of institutional differentiation. In this paper we propose an alternative classification that allows this limitation to be overcome. We obtain a multidimensional classification of private higher education institutions and analyze the relationship between their institutional characteristics and the sources of differentiation. The study has been conducted in the Colombian higher education system, as it constitutes one of the systems with the highest rates of privatization worldwide. Our results identify five strategic groups of private higher education institutions. Distance learning, the offer of technical and technological programs, and postgraduate training are key factors determining the differences across Colombian private higher education institutions. The approach followed in this paper could be used to identify potential paths for the development and expansion of private higher education institutions, further contributing to the sustainability and competitiveness of higher education systems.

Bibliographic References

  • Aldas, J., Escribá, A., Iborra, M., y Safón, V. (2016). La Universidad Española: Grupos estratégicos y desempeño. Fundación BBVA.
  • Álvarez, G. (2013). Tipologías de las instituciones de educación superior privadas ¿para qué? En J. Silas (Ed.), Estados de la educación superior en America Latina, el balance público- privado. ITESO.
  • Arimoto, A. (2014). The Teaching and Research Nexus in the Third Wave Age. In J., Shin, A. Arimoto, W. Cummings, & U. Teichler. (Eds.), Teaching and Research in Contemporary Higher Education (pp. 15–35).
  • Benneworth, P., Pinheiro, R., & Sánchez- Barrioluengo, M. (2016). One size does not fit all! New perspectives on the university in the social knowledge economy. Science and Public Policy, 43(6), 731–735, https://doi.org/10.1093/ scipol/scw018
  • Borg, I., Groenen, P., & Mair, P. (2012). Applied Multidimensional Scaling, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 81-322-0763-4
  • Brunner, J. (2009). Educación Superior en Chile: Instituciones, mercados y políticas gubernamentales, 1967-2007. [Tesis doctoral]. Leiden University.
  • Carpentier, V. (2018). Expansion and differentiation in higher education : the historical trajectories of the UK , the USA and France. Center for Global Higher Education.
  • Dan, M., Ritchie, W., & Geiger, S. (2009). Strategic Group Membership and Nonprofit Organization Performance. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20(1), 23–39.
  • DANE (2011). Clasificación Internacional Normalizada de la Educación adaptada para Colombia CINE 2011.
  • Daraio, C., Bonaccorsi, A., Geuna, A., Lepori, B., Bach, L., Bogetoft, P., … Eeckaut, & P. Vanden. (2011). The European university landscape: A micro characterization based on evidence from the Aquameth project. Research Policy, 40(1), 148–164
  • Darraz, E. y Bernasconi, A. (2012). Elementos conceptuales para el análisis organizacional de universidades en contextos de mercado. Innovar, 22(46), 87–97.
  • de La Torre, E., Casani, F., & Sagarra, M. (2018). Defining typologies of universities through a DEA- MDS analysis: An institutional characterization for formative evaluation purposes. Research Evaluation, 27(4), 388–403.
  • De Witte, K. & Hudrlikova, L. (2013). What about excellence in teaching? A benevolent ranking of universities. Scientometrics, 96, 337–364.
  • Duan, S. (2019). Measuring university efficiency: An application of data envelopment analysis and strategic group analysis to Australian universities. Benchmarking, 26(4), 1161–1173.
  • Huisman, J., Lepori, B., Seeber, M., Frølich, N., & Scordato, L. (2015). Measuring institutional diversity across higher education systems. Research Evaluation, 24(4), 369–379.
  • Ketchen, D., Snow, C., & Hoover, V. (2004). Research on competitive dynamics: Recent accomplishments and future challenges. Journal of Management, 30(6), 779–804.
  • Kwiek, M. (2017). De-privatization in higher education: a conceptual approach. Higher Education, 74(2), 259–281.
  • Kwiek, M. (2018). Private Higher Education in Developed Countries. In Shin J. & P. Teixeira (Eds.), Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems and Institutions. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017- 9553-1_92-1
  • Levy, D. (2009). Growth and Typology. In S. Bjarnason, K. Cheng, J. Fielden, M. Lemaitre, D. Levy, & N. Varghese (Eds.), A New Dynamic: Private Higher Education (pp. 7–27), UNESCO.
  • Levy, D. (2013). The decline of private higher education. Higher Education Policy, 26(1), 25–42.
  • Meilich, O. (2019). Strategic groups maps: review, synthesis, and guidelines. Journal of Strategy and Management, 12(4), 447–463.
  • Navas, L. P., Montes, F., Abolghasem, S., Salas, R. J., Toloo, M., & Zarama, R. (In press). Colombian higher education institutions evaluation. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences.
  • OECD. (2018). Education at a Glance 2018 : OECD Indicators. http://dx.doi. org/10.1787/eag-2018-en
  • OECD (2016). La educación en Colombia: Revisión de políticas nacionales de eduación. http://dx.doi. org/10.1787/9789264250604-en
  • Raza, R. (2009). Examining Autonomy and Accountability in Public and Private Tertiary Institutions. Zhurnal Eksperimental’noi i Teoreticheskoi Fiziki, 1–36.
  • Rossi, F. (2009). Increased competition and diversity in higher education: An empirical analysis of the Italian University system. Higher Education Policy, 22(4), 389–413.
  • Sagarra, M., Mar-Molinero, C., & Rodríguez-Regordosa, H. (2015). Evaluating the success of educational policy in Mexican Higher Education. Higher Education, 69(3), 449–469.
  • Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M. (2014). Articulating the “three-missions” in Spanish universities. Research Policy, 43(10), 1760–1773.
  • Teixeira, P., Rocha, V., Biscaia, R., & Cardoso, M. (2012). Competition and diversity in higher education: An empirical approach to specialization patterns of Portuguese institutions. Higher Education, 63(3), 337–352.
  • van Vught, F. A., Kaiser, F., File, J. M., Gaethgens, C., Peter, R., & Westerheijden, D. (2010). U-Map. The European Classification of Higher Education Institutions, 1–46.
  • Wilkins, S. (2019). The positioning and competitive strategies of higher education institutions in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(1), 139–153.
Data source: Dialnet