The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.

com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0951-354X.htm

IJEM 19,7

Interrogating the crisis in higher education marketing: the CORD model

Felix Maringe
School of Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
Abstract
Purpose Higher education (HE) marketing the world over is in a state of crisis that manifests itself on three fronts. First, there continues to be sizeable resistance towards the marketing idea in the academy of many universities across the world. Second, HE itself has failed to identify its core business without which the sector can not have a rm marketing foundation. Third, HE marketing has not adequately domesticated itself and continues to rely on imported wisdom from the business sector. The purpose of this paper is to explore these problems using evidence from international research and propose a curriculum focused marketing model which should help refocus HE marketing, domesticate it appropriately and reduce the internal resistance with which it is frequently associated. Design/methodology/approach The paper begins by examining the imperatives for marketisation in HE. It then reviews the extent of the three obstacles using evidence from research in different parts of the world. It concludes by offering a curriculum focused marketing model (CORD) which could serve the basis for future HE marketisation. Findings Based on wide ranging data from the developed and less developed countries, obtained through national and regional surveys and a review of secondary ndings, the paper suggests that a way out of this crisis is for universities to identify their core business as the development of their curricula and to base their marketing on a proposed curriculum centred marketing model. Originality/value The CORD model represents an attempt at addressing the crisis that HE marketing faces today. Keywords Higher education, Marketing strategy, Curriculum development Paper type Research paper

564

International Journal of Educational Management Vol. 19 No. 7, 2005 pp. 564-578 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0951-354X DOI 10.1108/09513540510625608

Introduction Higher education (HE) marketing is still in its infancy in many parts of the world. Its future appears to be in jeopardy because of a three-pronged crisis. First, is the formidable obstacle of internal resistance to marketisation in HE manifesting itself in attitudes and public responses to the idea of marketing HE (Foskett, 1995). Second, is the failure of HE to identify itself with a specic product, epitomised in the battles between competing positions whether HE should primarily be about research or teaching. Third, is the failure of HE to domesticate the marketing idea and make it into a home grown philosophy (Gray, 1991) resulting in the utilisation and application of marketing ideas based on borrowed wisdom from the business sector. This paper explores these problems using evidence from international research and proposes a curriculum focused marketing model which, it is argued, will help refocus HE marketing, domesticate it appropriately and reduce the internal resistance with which it is frequently associated. The paper begins by examining the imperatives for marketisation in HE. It then reviews the extent of the three obstacles using evidence from research in different parts

of the world. It concludes by offering a curriculum focused marketing model (CORD) which could serve the basis for future HE marketisation. Marketisation imperatives in HE: a global perspective Expansion, increasing variety of institutions, growing heterogeneity of HE products and increasing competition among this growing industry have been the key drivers of HE marketisation across the world. Studies which have traced the emergence of marketing in HE across the world attest to these forces. In the UK, Megson (1988), Gray (1991), Smith et al. (1995)), Foskett (1995) and Naude and Ivy (1999) have provided a unied rationalisation of the emergence of marketing in HE. Smith et al. (1995), p. 7) have described the above factors as the overarching forces for HE marketing in the UK. Similarly, in the USA, Canterbury (1999) and Cicarelli (1990) have written about the push from rising enrolments and inter-college competition for students and resources in a typically American environment which values free enterprise as key drivers of the marketisation of HE. Among the Asian-pacic nations, Australia has maintained dominance in reporting HE marketing. Emerging from Governments vision of enhancing the quality of HE through the encouragement of market forces, HE marketing in Australia has been linked to the privatisation agenda and the introduction of market-like relationships to achieve both greater institutional efciency and adaptability (Meek and Wood, 1997, p. 253; Scott, 1999). In the Southern African region, Maringe and Foskett (2002) have concluded that current HE environments are replicating the forces that have driven marketisation in the developed world some two decades ago. The evidence indicates that universities are responding by employing a variety of strategies that borrow heavily from the marketing philosophy as practiced in the business sector:
The universities of the region are at different stages of marketisation and their levels of marketing sophistication and understanding, which closely resemble those in the business sector, vary from one institution to another and also from country to country (Maringe and Foskett, 2002, p. 47).

The crisis in HE marketing

565

The study showed that there was a possible relationship between the adoption of marketing philosophies and strategies in a country and the political orientation of the nation. Centralised command economies tended to be less open and amenable to the marketisation agenda while open economies tended to embrace marketing with a resultant higher level of marketing sophistication and understanding exhibited in the HE institutions. In an environment where HE is expanding globally, where new institutions are created to meet growing demand and where the diversity of university programmes and products are increasingly becoming heterogeneous, students are increasingly faced with broader choices and institutions are left competing with one another to wrestle business from rival providers. HE is thus left with no choice other than to embrace the marketing idea. The evolving concept of marketing The meaning of marketing has evolved over time but the most enduring theme in these developments has been the centrality of the customer in the decisions of the

IJEM 19,7

566

organisation. Marketing is a term that describes any exchange relationship to ensure that parties in this relationship derive the maximum benet from the exchange. Institutions however differ in the extent to which they conceptualise and implement the marketing idea. Currently there are ve distinct but interrelated marketing conceptualisations or orientations. The rst is the product orientation of marketing. Kotler (2003) considers this as being driven by a need to offer the highest quality, performance and innovative features. Universities all over the world pride themselves in being excellent at what they do and in delivering quality products and programmes of the highest standards. Unfortunately, standards for this quality and excellence are usually internally determined and assumed to be what the customers want or need. One Vice Chancellor of a university in Zimbabwe illustrated this product driven approach by saying:
We tell our students that if they want hamburgers they should go to McDonalds. If they are looking for chicken, they should try Nandos.

The product view of HE marketing is associated with the expert model and ivory tower symbol of universities where the role of the university is that of developing and offering programmes believed to be desired by the clients. Such an approach often exhibits marketing myopia (Levitt, 1960) which can lead to a rapid irrelevance of institutions and their programmes. The production view is the second philosophy. It is often linked with institutions that see themselves as being in competition with other providers and are keen to push their products more widely and at reduced cost to the customer. Open University systems and new emerging HE institutions tend to base their marketing strategy around the philosophy of production (Naude and Ivy, 1999; Maringe and Foskett, 2002). The key challenge for these universities is that of developing products that are desired by their customers, rather than ones considered desirable. Fundamentally however, the initial development of the products tends to reect a product orientation in that decisions are based on internal constructions of quality and relevance. Third is the selling philosophy. This is probably the least acknowledged yet the most applied in HE. It captures the broad understanding which key university managers and marketers across the world hold about HE marketing. Central to this philosophy is a desire to achieve a critical mass of publicity and public awareness about the universities offerings. It is about projecting the right image, providing university information and maintaining a steady or increasing stream of applicants through a range of strategies that include advertising, public or external relations, direct promotion and personal selling. Research around the world has indicated that marketing in HE institutions is often very narrowly associated with these activities (Murphy and McGarrity, 1978; Gray, 1991; Foskett, 1995; Smith et al., 1995; Naude and Ivy, 1999; Ivy, 2002; Maringe and Foskett, 2002; Maringe, 2004). The hard sell approach normally associated with this marketing philosophy does not always reap the expected rewards of higher enrolments and satised customers, nor does it always help to counter negative feelings, sentiments and attitudes about institutions as Ivy (2002, p. 26) has recorded in South Africa.
The growth in advertising and personal selling activities did not always result in full programmes, neither did it always result in happy customers.

The fourth is what has been labelled the marketing philosophy originally proposed by Kotler. It has been uncritically accepted in the literature as the panacea for organisations to adopt in their quest to become more accountable to their publics both in terms of providing required products and services and in terms of guaranteeing customer satisfaction. The philosophy holds that:
. . . the key to achieving the organisations goals depends on determining the needs and wants of target markets and by delivering the desired satisfactions more effectively and efciently than the competitors (Kotler, 2003, p. 13).

The crisis in HE marketing

567

The approach draws upon the needs and wants of customers as a prelude to designing products and services aimed at satisfying those needs and wants. It differs from the other three philosophies in that product development is preceded by marketing research rather than the other way round. In the product, production and selling philosophies, the market often becomes a signicant preoccupation after the product has been developed in a typical fashion epitomised by the view that this is what we have to offer, if you dont like it look elsewhere. Its application in the education sector however is conditional upon meeting certain requirements. Etzel et al. (1997) have identied three critical conditions to be met in applying this philosophy to marketing in the education sector. First is a complete focus on students needs in developing qualications and programmes that satisfy those needs. This requires concerted market research as an integral aspect of the development of curriculum. Second is the need for an integrated effort through co-ordinated activities to ensure that different aspects of the university focus on the same mission: that of delivering students needs. Third is the related issue of developing a goal achievement orientation. In marketing terms, the success, the quality, and the entire outcome of the university experience should be determined by the extent to which the institution has satised its customers. In implementing this philosophy, HE institutions are often faced with three dilemmas. The rst is whether students should be seen as customers all the time. Sharrock (2000) argues that to label students as customers is failing to recognise the many other hats they wear in their day to day lives. He describes four identities of students as: (1) Customers: when they want routine information from a department or faculty ofce. (2) Clients: when they are in need of expert guidance such as choosing a course or reviewing an assignment. (3) Citizens: who have rights as when students appeal against certain institutional decisions. (4) Subjects: when they are the subject of certain obligations such as being ned/sanctioned for a late submission or when they need to work to a grade. Essentially however, the purpose of marketing is to provide customer satisfaction. An understanding of the changing needs of students in their different roles as customers, clients, citizens and subjects can only help to guarantee all round greater satisfaction to the students. Therefore, what ever label we chose to give students, the primary motivation behind the customer focus is to deliver customer satisfaction. This can only be done through a thorough understanding of their needs and wants at any give time.

IJEM 19,7

The second dilemma is whether education should be about delivering customer satisfaction. The question is often asked whether educational institutions should be pandering to every need and want of its students and indeed whether students are always right. LeBoeuf (1987) and Zikmund and Amico (2002) have dealt with this issue and concluded that:
Even though the marketing concept stresses consumer orientation, this does not mean that every eeting whim of every customer must be met (Zikmund and Amico, 2002, p. 18).

568

The middle ground position is that students have a lot to contribute to the educational process. Delivering educational programmes that ignore this fact becomes an exercise in imposition and deception. The third dilemma is the fear that by adopting a customer focus, power gets shifted from the educators to the learners (Aaker et al., 1995). Students however never have the intention of wrestling power from product and service providers. They only seek to become empowered to solve their day-to-day problems and to cope with demands of their lives. Without a complete understanding of the needs and wants of customers, it is inconceivable how educators can design programmes that deliver customers satisfaction. Scott (1999) allays fears about this power shift:
The application of the marketing perspective to HE does not then involve a dramatic shift of power from educator to student, but does suggest that in order to achieve quality, the expectations of students need to be taken into account and ideally their views and those of the educators be brought into harmony (Scott, 1999, p. 199).

In a complex world where decisions at one level have a cascading inuence on operations at other levels, delivering customer satisfaction should not be the omnipotent goal of marketing. Beyond delivering customer satisfaction, developers need to minimise the possible harmful effects of current decisions which creates a basis for the fth marketing philosophy. The fth marketing conceptualisation, the societal marketing philosophy embraces the notion of conducting business with the long-term interests of the consumers in a clear perspective. In recent times, universities have come under severe criticism for conducting animal experiments, for sourcing funds from controversial donors such as cigarette manufacturers, for establishing links with other institutions in rogue states (Batty, 2000). Essentially, the societal concept calls for universities to be ethical and to embrace a social responsibility consciousness that rejects the idea of pushing products and services at any cost. Kotler (2003) has developed a sixth marketing philosophy based on the need to tailor products, not to global customer needs or societal needs but to individual needs. He has labelled this new approach the customised marketing approach. Dell, the giant computer company now develops computers to meet individual specications. In education, individualised learning and instruction programmes would sit very comfortably with this marketing philosophy including aspects of inclusion and differentiation aimed at addressing specic needs of individual learners. The application of marketing ideas in education Expansion, diversication, increasing competition and greater choice have been described as the overarching forces (Smith et al., 1995; Maringe and Foskett, 2002; Maringe, 2004) that have driven educational institutions to embrace the marketing idea

across the world. The approaches used in education have tended to vary reecting issues of institutional background, the nature of the manpower base and the available resources (Gray, 1991). However, marketing in HE has only recently begun to have an overt presence at least in the developed world, after a protracted concealment under more traditional structures and functions (Maringe, 2004). The public relations ofce, the external relations ofce, the international students ofce, students affairs departments, publicity and publications ofce, the press release ofce have traditionally been claimed to be the bases for university marketing across the world. The purpose of marketing as understood by the internal marketers has tended to reect the core business of the hosting department. It has not had a mission unique to itself. In this period of transition, several models have been suggested to try and raise the prole and efciency of those working as institutional marketers. Hardie (1991) for example suggested the three Cs of marketing. He argued that to develop a marketing edge, institutions needed to exhibit a responsive culture, heightened creativity and a commitment to serve the needs of customers in new ways, nding new advantages over competitors and exploring new organisational strengths. During the same time, Gray (1991) also developed a typology for sustaining a home-grown marketing orientation which included the following: . establishing marketing objectives; . systematic collection of marketing information through audits and research; . the development of a marketing plan based upon the 5Ps of marketing; and . the implementation and evaluation of strategies and tactics used. Curran (2001) has suggested ve key strategies which university departments could utilise to support a growing marketing orientation. He has argued for support of senior management, the creation of structures to serve a marketing function, developing an in house marketing training programme, hiring marketing trained staff and developing a system of rewarding good marketing practice. What stands out clearly in all these models is the desire to domesticate the marketing idea to become a home-grown concept. The idea of domesticating the marketing into the strategic focus of HE is however further threatened by a failure within universities to identify with their real core product. This is largely manifested by the debate whether universities should be research or teaching focused faced. Research and teaching: the false dualism Two broad theories have shaped the debates on the relationship between research and teaching in HE over the decades. On the one hand is the incompatibility theory (Baker and McLean, 2004) which assumes a real division between research and teaching including the existence of a hierarchical relationship between the two activities, with research enjoying a heightened status in the academic profession. This incompatibility theory is however defective in a number of ways. First, it dichotomises the key activities of the academy in a way that gives the impression that the two have no relation to each other and that they can be taken as discrete entities whose aims are at best at cross purposes. This cannot be further from the truth. Research is the basis for knowledge, being both a mechanism for generating it and a strategy for acquiring it.

The crisis in HE marketing

569

IJEM 19,7

570

As a mechanism for generating knowledge, research is the main vehicle used in postgraduate research schools for the development of student thesis at various levels. It is the method used by faculty to understand their world in a better way and to communicate new ndings in the new knowledge and information markets characterising todays globalised world. On the other hand, research as a strategy for interrogating knowledge and increasing understanding has grown in stature as an authentic way in which students at all levels are expected to learn. Thus the separation of research from teaching reects at best, a limited focus on the dynamic relationship existing between the two activities, frequently reinforcing and informing each other in a way that makes the world more understandable and comprehensible. At worst it smacks of elitism, as one activity, (in this case research) is considered more important than the other. Both research and teaching are activities in university institutions that relate to the curriculum, for which Beyer and Liston (1996) have cogently argued is the mainstay and centrepiece of activity for all working in the education sector. There are not many people in HE who would claim that their research projects are of no use to their teaching. Admittedly, some university personnel spend more of their time doing one or the other activity. Research and teaching though are activities that inform the curriculum development process, which is the core business of university staff. Data base for the paper The data upon which this paper was developed was obtained through a combination of desk and empirical research. Nine university vice chancellors in Zimbabwe were interviewed to determine their understanding of the marketing idea, their perception of how marketing was organised, and what needed to be done in future. A total of 24 university marketers in ten of Zimbabwes 11 universities responded to a questionnaire with the same aims but which also focused more sharply on the day to day organisation of university marketing functions. A total of 480 sixth form pupils in ten schools responded to a questionnaire designed to estimate the extent to which they as a representative customer group were satised with current university marketing. University strategic plans, calendars and other policy documents were used to triangulate information provided at interviews. Key research reports on university marketing in the UK, the USA, Australia, Canada and South Africa were also used in the development and interpretation of ideas explored in this research. Key ndings of research on HE marketing Research conducted in universities in developed and less developed countries has identied the following regarding the conceptualisation of the marketing idea, its application and organisation at institutional levels. Marketing conceptualisation On the whole, marketing is narrowly perceived as advertising or promotion by both senior executives and marketing operatives in university institutions. The concepts of customer satisfaction, customer needs, marketing research, relationships building rarely feature in the discourses related to this idea. The perception appears to be pervasive across the world in developed and less developed countries (Smith et al., 1995; Naude and Ivy, 1999; Ivy, 2002; Maringe, 2004).

The place of marketing in the academy The overall perception amongst senior executives and operatives is that marketing is highly valued and indispensable given the overarching forces and challenges universities across the world are faced with. The overall responsibility for marketing in most institutions lies with fairly senior personnel. However, in the majority of institutions, those with a marketing responsibility generally do not have related marketing qualications. Thus although the marketing idea is highly valued its prole in institutions is rather diminished. Although many senior executives and marketing operatives consider marketing as a strategic issue, there is little evidence in the university planning documents to indicate strategic marketing planning. The absence in many universities of forecasting plans, product differentiation documents, customer needs surveys, customer satisfaction records suggest that the marketing function remains at the operational rather than the strategic level in the majority of universities. The organisation of the marketing function A variety of organisational models for marketing exist across university institutions including decentralised, diffuse and amorphous patterns (see Smith et al., 1995; Maringe, 2004). Most of the marketing units exist under the umbrella of other more traditional departments such as public relations, external relations, information and communications, students affairs, international ofce. However, in the developed world (very rarely in the less developed world) it is common these days to see a marketing ofce designated as such as a stand alone department within the university system. Research has also indicated that the co-ordination of the marketing function within universities is weak as evidenced by a lack of clarity about who has the ultimate responsibility for marketing and the widely different perceptions about the marketing budgets within institutions. It is thus safe to conclude that in the majority of universities, marketing organisation lacks an overt presence being deeply buried under the structures of more traditional university departments. Application of the marketing idea in universities Overall, the product orientation of marketing pervades the university sectors, based on the perception of expertise with which universities tend to associate themselves. Newer and smaller universities and more signicantly Open University systems, show a greater tendency to embrace the customer perspective of marketing. This may be because of the specic circumstances in which they nd themselves which include the need to nd and establish their niche, a desire to become more competitive, the need to recruit students for existing programmes, the need to appeal to a more mature applicant base and in some cases a clear belief in the efcacy of the marketing model. In the majority of universities, the communication (dissemination) model of marketing rather than a relationship building model forms the basis of the application of the marketing idea. The widespread application of imported wisdom The importance of domesticating the marketing idea in the education system has been highlighted by several authors especially Gray (1991), Smith et al. (1995), Foskett (1995), Naude and Ivy (1999), Ivy (2002) and Maringe (2004). A key source of dissatisfaction with marketing in education is that it is an alien concept borrowed from

The crisis in HE marketing

571

IJEM 19,7

572

the business world and having little resonance with the educational enterprise. Indeed the overall perception, conceptualisation and practice of marketing in universities reect this notion of imported wisdom to a great extent. As long as we do not have models of marketing deriving from within our very context and circumstance to deal with our own problems and challenges and to become an integral part of universities strategic thrust, marketing will remain a peripheral activity useful only as a responsive mechanism not as a strategic tool. The CORD model for domesticating university marketing The model proposed is based on four distinct principles that are translated into a range of separate but related activities, all aimed at domesticating the marketing idea and ensuring that it becomes part of the strategic planning process of universities. Research suggest that current university marketing lacks an appropriate contextualisation, is poorly organised and co-ordinated, is largely responsive and not strategic and its application lacks formal operational guidelines. The CORD model, standing for Contextualisation, Organisation and co-ordination, Research and Development provides a framework for raising the prole, the strategic focus and for developing a home grown educational marketing philosophy (see Figure 1). Contextualisation Models cannot be universally applied and thus need to show sensitivity to context. Contextualising the marketing development helps to engender the feeling a home-grown initiative while allowing users to develop a deeper understanding and appreciation of the relevance of any proposed solutions. Four broad aspects have a direct relevance to this contextualisation issue. Reecting the broad purposes of the development. Key questions that can be addressed here are: (1) What is inadequate about the current situation? (2) Why do we need to change? (3) Why have we not changed before? (4) Why should we be changing now? Reecting the ideology and mission of the organisation. This allows developers to have a deeper and clearer sense of the institutional mission under the prevailing circumstances, thus providing opportunities for feedback to the overall institutional processes. It also increases a sense of belonging to the organisation through a belief that they are contributing to its overall goals thus bringing a sense of ownership of the developed curriculum. Key questions to guide reection here could be: (1) What is the institutional mission? (2) In what ways does the envisaged development contribute to this mission? (3) Does the current mission adequately reect prevailing circumstances? Reecting the challenges and competences of the organisation. The core business of any university and hence its greatest challenge is the development of its curriculum in the widest possible sense. All other challenges such as funding, resources, stafng emanate from this central mission of the university. Viewed this way, universities can

The crisis in HE marketing

573

Figure 1. The CORD model

align their marketing to reect their core purpose that is the curriculum. Key questions that can guide reection at this level could be: (1) What are the organisational strengths and weaknesses? (2) What are the opportunities internally and externally that can be harnessed to enhance chances of success in the new development? (3) How does the envisaged development address organisational needs? (4) How does this development contribute to the core business of the university? Reecting the nature of competition. Marketing implies survival in a competitive environment and establishing the organisation outside the shadow of rival institutions. Key questions that can aid reection here include:

IJEM 19,7

574

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Who has done what we intend doing? How successful have they been? What is the nature of demand for our development? How shall we differ from the competition? In what ways will our development be distinctive?

Organisation and co-ordination framework In order to strengthen the weak and frail organisational framework for marketing existing in many universities and to give the marketing function a more conspicuous presence than currently prevails, three key aspects need addressing. Structures for co-ordination and development. Most of the marketing activities of universities currently take place in disparate entities in the framework of traditional departments. Without a proper form and discernible structure of their own, there is little hope for universities to embrace a proper marketing orientation. The creation of structures necessitates the denition of functions and roles, something which research has shown to be lacking across many universities. In addition, because research has also determined that current marketers work in isolation as experts in their various elds, it is proposed that the marketing effort be driven by teams which bring synergy and cross fertilisation of ideas to a HE environment where interdisciplinary working is on the ascendancy due to the blurring of boundaries between subjects and disciplines. It is hoped that this will also encourage universities to address the current malpractice of delegating marketing responsibility to people without requisite marketing qualication or expertise. The development of structures also requires a concomitant marshalling of resources to fuel the marketing roles. The reliance on informal mechanisms for data gathering and obtaining marketing intelligence observed in the universities is partly the result of inadequate resources in the marketing area. Parasuraman (1991) has indicated the need for proper marketing information systems which he dened as:
Interacting structures of people, equipment and procedures designed to gather sort analyse evaluate and distribute pertinent, timely and accurate information to decision makers (Parasuraman, 1991, p. 144)

Researching the customer interface The core business of the university is the development of its curriculum. Delivering an appropriate and relevant curriculum is the key to achieving customer satisfaction in the university sector. Researching the customer interface deals with three fundamental questions. Who are the customers? Which customers are we going to serve and why? How best can we meet the needs of these customers? These questions address three crucial issues of marketing research. Market segmentation. Segmentation is an activity that allows the accurate identication of needs in a selected group of the customer base. Degree courses in many universities are often developed on the basis of perceived rather than real needs. For example, at one university a BSC (Ed.) is offered as a concurrent science and professional programme. More than 90 per cent of sixth form pupils interviewed in the Zimbabwean study indicated that they would prefer a programme which offered them

choice between pursuing a professional or an academic route. Because the university had already decided and developed a concurrent programme, which reects the product orientation of many university institutions, students were frequently told to accept what they were being provided or to look elsewhere. Application of market segmentation principles allows universities to more accurately identify the benets that customers are really looking for so that needs can be more sensitively served. Customer needs research. Customer need research closes three gaps that normally exist between curriculum developers and their customers. The rst is the gap between real and perceived needs. As experts we often assume that we understand the market place sufciently and that we can design and develop curriculum on that basis. Most universities studied worked on perceived rather than real needs in the development of curriculum. Consequently a range of problems was noted including inadequate enrolment into certain subject areas, students switching courses midstream, students demonstrating against university administration expressing a lack of satisfaction with current provision and poor performance in some curriculum areas. The likelihood of acceptance and therefore institutionalisation of programmes is increased when curricula are developed on the basis of real rather than perceived needs. A second gap exists between the given and the received curriculum. Without a concerted effort to determine how the customers perceive of the curriculum provision, there is always a danger that developers evaluate their efforts on the basis of what they believe the curriculum to be and not what it is to the learners. A third gap is what could be termed the quality gap. Often universities tended to use internal mechanisms for evaluating the quality of provision which included the various committees along the development al line of curriculum. Gerson (1993) has however argued that the only view of quality that counts is that of the customer (Gerson, 1993, p. 14). These gaps can only be meaningfully closed if the university invested resources and time into researching the customer interface. This also helps universities move from a pervasive inward looking culture to a more responsive, sensitive and outward looking perspective. Blending the elements of the marketing mix. The marketing mix is a group of elements which researchers in the eld have isolated as critical to any marketing activity (see Kotler, 2003). Currently there are seven elements including product, price, place, promotion, people, physical aspects, and the process elements. Blending these aspects implies that all of them are important and that a successful marketing strategy would not ignore any one. The research in Zimbabwe found that female students were more inuenced by physical evidence elements than male pupils. Ignoring elements of the physical environment can therefore be detrimental to recruitment of females into universities. Similarly, the research has also found that some elements were considered more important than others. For example, pupils are more interested in understanding the benets to be derived from studying a given subject than they would wish to know what actually comprises the subject or indeed how much it costs them to do so. Such an understanding of the marketing mix elements can only come from a thorough analysis of the customer needs. Proportionate amounts of marketing effort can thus be determined. Developing the curriculum. The model proposed here is an adaptation of the Tyler Rationale (Tyler, 1949) upon which most current curriculum development models are

The crisis in HE marketing

575

IJEM 19,7

based. While Tyler identies four stages including identication of objectives, deciding on methods and procedures, implementing the curriculum and evaluating it, this model has added two steps of small scale trials and full scale implementation before formal evaluation.

576

Summary and conclusion Marketing in HE is still a relatively underdeveloped concept in many parts of the world. Despite its acknowledged signicance in the face of new challenges, it has not yet become fully embedded within the strategic operations and vision of many HE institutions especially in the universities of the less developed world. The belief that marketing is about advertising and promotion remains dominant at key levels of university administration. Its role as a model for developing products and services wanted and needed by university customers remains largely unrecognisable in many HE institutions. On the back of this pervasive narrow view, HE marketing is further threatened by failure to locate its core business as that of developing curriculum in the broadest sense, preferring rather to be associated with either research or teaching. In addition, the failure to domesticate the idea of marketing and a continued use or misuse of the marketing idea on the basis of borrowed wisdom from the business sector, poses yet another serious threat to its viability in the peculiar HE environments of universities across the world. Inevitably, attitudes towards HE marketing have remained negative especially among academics. As long as HE does not interrogate these issues, the prospects for success remain bleak. The CORD model for HE marketing proposed here has the potential to address the three-pronged crisis that the sector experiences. Contextualisation is a process that requires universities to understand in a more intimate way both the internal and external environments in which they intend to develop their curriculum. Organisation and team building ensure that the marketing function becomes a grassroots process involving a diverse range of staff of the university. Researching the marketing interface allows developers to employ a variety of marketing techniques that enable the developers to come up with a curriculum which not only reects the needs and wants of potential customers, but one which also can make a valid claim for inclusion and incorporation in the new educational environment. The development phase encompasses a well rehearsed cycle of curriculum development which includes trials and evaluation as integral aspects of the development process. As long as universities see themselves as either research centres or teaching academies, and fail to realise that ultimately these processes can not be separated as they both contribute to curriculum development, the prospect of identifying with their core business will remain a pie in the sky. There are no guarantees that this model will solve all the problems related to HE marketing today. What can be said with reasonable condence is that as long as long as we base our developments on imported wisdom, and as long as HE does not identify with its core business of curriculum development, it will be difcult to embrace a marketing orientation which the system so badly needs. The CORD model thus represents an attempt at addressing the crisis that HE marketing faces today.

References Aaker, D.A., Kumar, V. and Day, S. (1995), Marketing Research, Wiley, New York, NY. Baker, H. and McLean, M. (2004), Students making progress and the teaching research nexus debate, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 407-19. Batty, P. (2000), Scholar attacked for links to junta, Times Higher Education Supplement, 16 March, p. 23. Canterbury, R.M. (1999), Higher education marketing: a challenge, The Journal of College Admission, Vol. Fall No. 165, pp. 22-30. Beyer, L.E. and Liston, D.P. (1996), Curriculum in Conict, Social Visions, Educational Agendas and Progressive School Reform, Teachers College Press, New York, NY. Cicarelli, J. (1990), Are college students customers or products?, The Journal of College Admissions, Vol. Fall No. 129, pp. 4-6. Curran, P.J. (2001), Competition in UK Higher Education: competitive advantage in the research assessment exercise and Porters Diamond Model, Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 223-51. Etzel, M.J., Walker, B.J. and Stanton, A. (1997), Principles of Marketing, 11th ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Foskett, N.H. (1995), Marketing, management and schools: a study of a developing culture in secondary schools, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Southampton, Southampton. Gerson, R.F. (1993), Measuring Customer Satisfaction, Kogan Page, London. Gray, L. (1991), Education Marketing, Open University Press, Buckingham. Hardie, B. (1991), Marketing the Primary School: An Introduction for Teachers and Governors, Northcote House, Plymouth. Ivy, J. (2002), University image: the role of marketing in MBA student recruitment in state subsidised universities in the Republic of South Africa, unpublished D Ed thesis, University of Leicester, Leicester. Kotler, P. (2003), Marketing Management, Pearson Educational International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. LeBoeuf, M. (1987), How to Win and Keep Customers, Putman, New York, NY. Levitt, T. (1960), Marketing myopia, Havard Business Review, July-August, pp. 45-56. Maringe, F. (2004), Vice Chancellors perceptions of university marketing: a view from universities in a developing country, Higher Education Review, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 53-68. Maringe, F. and Foskett, N.H. (2002), Marketing university education: the southern African experience, Higher Education Review, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 35-51. Meek, V. and Wood, F.Q. (1997), The market as a new steering strategy for Australian Higher Education, Higher Education Policy, Vol. 10 Nos 3-4, pp. 253-74. Megson, C. (1988), The merits of marketing, Education, Vol. 172 No. 16, p. 382. Murphy, P. and McGarrity, R.A. (1978), Marketing universities: a survey of student recruiting activities, College and University, Spring, pp. 249-61. Naude, P. and Ivy, J. (1999), The marketing strategies of universities in the United Kingdom, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 126-34. Parasuraman, A. (1991), Marketing Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Scott, S.V. (1999), The academic service provider: is the customer always right?, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 193-203.

The crisis in HE marketing

577

IJEM 19,7

578

Sharrock, G. (2000), Why students are not (just) customers (and other reections on Life After George), Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 149-64. Smith, D., Scott, P. and Lynch, J. (1995), The Role of Marketing in the University and College Sector, Heist Publications, Leeds. Tyler, R. (1949), Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. Zikmund, W.G. and Amico, D. (2002), Effective Marketing, Thomson Learning, London. Further reading Aaker, D.A. (2001), Strategic Market Management, Wiley, New York, NY. Bindura University of Science Education (2000), Five-Year Strategic Plan 2000-2004, BUSE, Bindura. Bindura University of Science Education (2001), University Calendar, BUSE, Bindura. Catholic University of Zimbabwe (nd), Mission Statement of the Catholic University of Zimbabwe, CUZ, Harare. LeBlanc, G. and Nguyen, N. (1999), Listening to the customers voice: examining perceived service value among business college students, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 187-98. Sallis, E. (1993), Total Quality Management, Kogan Page, London. Smith, H.W. (1991), Strategies of Social Research, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Orlando, FL. University of Zimbabwe (1998), The University of Zimbabwe Five-year Strategic Plan, 1998-2002, UZ Publications, Harare. Williams, P.R. (1989), Report on the Need for a Second University in Zimbabwe, Government Printers, Harare. Wragg, E.C. (1993), Humanity looses out in competition, Times Educational Supplement, 10 September, p. 18.