International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 10, Issue 4 (April 2023), Pages: 53-62

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 What drives selection decisions of private universities in Jakarta?

 Author(s): 

 Tri Waluyo 1, *, Abd. Rahman Kadir 2, Nuraeni Kadir 2, Andi Aswan 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas National, Jakarta, Indonesia
 2Faculty of Economics and Business, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4252-4542

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2023.04.007

 Abstract:

In many circumstances, the issues of competitiveness and selection decisions are becoming more important as a strategic focal point of the institutional function in higher education (HE). With the implementation of a social market economy in Indonesia, as an intermediary stage between socialism and capitalism, the need to incorporate competitiveness within an institutional role becomes more pressing. Despite the fact that private higher education in Indonesia grew steadily, there has been no published research on the competitiveness of private higher education. The purpose of this study is to examine the assessment of the competitiveness and selection decision of private universities (PTS) and the implications for the decision to attend a private university. The sample size is 300 students who choose to continue their education at PTS as part of the Higher Education Service Institute (LLDIKTI) Region III Jakarta. We employed the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), the SWOT analysis, and the Business Model Canvas. The AHP results showed that a variety of variables could be utilized to choose private universities in LLDIKTI Region III Jakarta. Meanwhile, the SWOT analysis findings were located in the third quadrant (defense). In this situation, private universities have a big market opportunity, yet there are hurdles inside the private universities themselves. As a result, the PTS strategy should focus on minimizing internal PTS issues in order to capture the greater possibilities to compete with other PTS in LLDIKTI Region III Jakarta. Furthermore, the results of the business model canvas analysis proved that optimizing the role of websites, social media, alumni, scholarships, and competitiveness was expected to be able to make private universities superior and of high quality through the provision of accurate, fast, and easy information and communication channels that followed the technological developments and needs, as well as customer segments.

 © 2023 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Competitiveness, Selection decision, AHP, SWOT, Business model canvas

 Article History: Received 3 April 2022, Received in revised form 8 July 2022, Accepted 4 January 2023

 Acknowledgment 

Funding for this paper was provided by the University of National, Jakarta, Indonesia.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Waluyo T, Kadir AR, Kadir N, and Aswan A (2023). What drives selection decisions of private universities in Jakarta? International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(4): 53-62

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 Fig. 4 Fig. 5 Fig. 6 

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 

----------------------------------------------    

 References (22)

  1. Al-Fattal A (2010). Understanding student choice of university and marketing strategies in Syrian private higher education. University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  2. Armstrong G, Adam S, Denize S, and Kotler P (2014). Principles of marketing. Pearson Australia, Melbourne, Australia.   [Google Scholar]
  3. Baker J, Parasuraman A, Grewal D, and Voss GB (2002). The influence of multiple store environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions. Journal of Marketing, 66(2): 120-141. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.2.120.18470   [Google Scholar]
  4. Corcoran J, Faggian A, and McCann P (2010). Human capital in remote and rural Australia: The role of graduate migration. Growth and Change, 41(2): 192-220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2257.2010.00525.x   [Google Scholar]
  5. Cubillo JM, Sánchez J, and Cerviño J (2006). International students' decision‐making process. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(2): 101-115. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540610646091   [Google Scholar]
  6. Drewes T and Michael C (2006). How do students choose a university?: An analysis of applications to universities in Ontario, Canada. Research in Higher Education, 47: 781-800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9015-6   [Google Scholar]
  7. Fahim A, Tan Q, Naz B, Ain QU, and Bazai SU (2021). Sustainable higher education reform quality assessment using SWOT analysis with integration of AHP and entropy models: A case study of Morocco. Sustainability, 13(8): 4312. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084312   [Google Scholar]
  8. Hair JF, Bush RP, and Ortinau DJ (2000). Marketing research: A practical approach for the new millennium.  Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  9. Khalid J, Ali AJ, Khalee, M, and Islam MS (2017). Towards global knowledge society: A SWOT analysis of higher education of Pakistan in context of internationalization. Journal of Business, 2(2): 8-15. https://doi.org/10.18533/job.v2i2.65   [Google Scholar]
  10. Leiber T, Stensaker B, and Harvey LC (2018). Bridging theory and practice of impact evaluation of quality management in higher education institutions: A SWOT analysis. European Journal of Higher Education, 8(3): 351-365. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2018.1474782   [Google Scholar]
  11. Madsen DØ (2016). SWOT analysis: A management fashion perspective. International Journal of Business Research, 16(1): 39-56. https://doi.org/10.18374/IJBR-16-1.3   [Google Scholar]
  12. Malhotra N, Hall J, Shaw M, and Oppenheim P (2006). Marketing research: An applied orientation. Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.   [Google Scholar]
  13. Maringe F (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6): 466-479. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540610683711   [Google Scholar]
  14. Moogan YJ, Baron S, and Harris K (1999). Decision‐making behaviour of potential higher education students. Higher education quarterly, 53(3): 211-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2273.00127   [Google Scholar]
  15. Nadiri H (2006). Strategic issue in higher education marketing: How university students' perceive higher education services. International Journal of Quality Innovation, 7(2): 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1108/15982688200600020   [Google Scholar]
  16. Nanath K, Sajjad A, and Kaitheri S (2022). Decision-making system for higher education university selection: Comparison of priorities pre-and post-COVID-19. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 14(1): 347-365. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-08-2020-0277   [Google Scholar]
  17. Nasreen K and Afzal MT (2020). Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in higher education: A SWOT analysis of Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad (Pakistan). Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(3): 321-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-11-2019-0052   [Google Scholar]
  18. Osterwalder A and Pigneur Y (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  19. Saaty TL (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1): 83-98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590   [Google Scholar]
  20. Sangka K and Muchsini B (2018). Accommodating analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for elective courses selection. Indonesian Journal of Informatics Education, 2(2): 135-144. https://doi.org/10.20961/ijie.v2i2.24436   [Google Scholar]
  21. Ürer Erdil D, Tümer M, Nadiri H, and Aghaei I (2021). Prioritizing information sources and requirements in students’ choice of higher education destination: Using AHP analysis. SAGE Open, 11(2): 21582440211015685. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211015685   [Google Scholar]
  22. Wiese M, Van Heerden N, Jordaan Y, and North E (2009). A marketing perspective on choice factors considered by South African first-year students in selecting a higher education institution. Southern African Business Review, 13(1): 39-60.   [Google Scholar]