International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

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

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 11, Issue 9 (September 2024), Pages: 164-172

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

 Original Research Paper

Model for increasing interest in enrolling in private universities based on a segmentation, targeting, and market positioning strategy in Indonesia

 Author(s): 

 Bob Foster *

 Affiliation(s):

 Faculty of Business and Economics, Universitas Informatika dan Bisnis Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4008-4910

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.09.018

 Abstract

This study aims to examine the factors that influence interest in enrolling in private colleges in the DKI Jakarta area, with a focus on how the Segmentation, Targeting, and Positioning (STP) strategies of these colleges affect student enrollment decisions. The research addresses a gap in understanding how these marketing strategies impact enrollment in this specific region, which has not been widely studied. Using a survey method with a quantitative approach, the study explores aspects like accreditation, ranking, and clustering of colleges. Data were collected from 283 non-official and non-religious colleges, with a sample of 166 colleges, through questionnaires sent to policymakers. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods and Structural Equation Modeling-Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS) analysis. The results show that the segmentation strategy is particularly successful, while the targeting and positioning strategies are moderately effective. Unlike previous studies that generalize the effects of marketing strategies on college enrollment, this research offers a detailed analysis specific to the DKI Jakarta region. The hypothesis testing confirms that segmentation, targeting, and positioning strategies positively influence enrollment interest, both individually and together. However, the study is limited to one region and one type of college, indicating a need for further research in different contexts. The study concludes with recommendations to strengthen each part of the STP strategies by addressing identified weaknesses to improve their overall impact.

 © 2024 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

 Enrollment decisions, Marketing strategies, Private colleges, Segmentation strategy, Regional analysis

 Article history

 Received 7 April 2024, Received in revised form 10 September 2024, Accepted 12 September 2024

 Acknowledgment

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and their confidentiality was maintained. The study was reviewed and approved by the relevant institutional ethics committee, ensuring compliance with ethical research 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:

 Foster B (2024). Model for increasing interest in enrolling in private universities based on a segmentation, targeting, and market positioning strategy in Indonesia. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(9): 164-172

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2  

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

 References (50)

  1. Abdul-Kahar ADAM and Mahmoud MA (2014). Market positioning of public and private universities: Students perspective. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 2(1): 123-154.   [Google Scholar]
  2. Ada S, Baysal ZN, and Erkan SSS (2017). An evaluation of service quality in higher education: Marmara and Nigde Omer Halisdemir Universities' Department of Education students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(11): 2056-2065. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051122   [Google Scholar]
  3. Agrey L and Lampadan N (2014). Determinant factors contributing to student choice in selecting a university. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(2): 391-404.   [Google Scholar]
  4. Ahmed S (2015). Attitudes towards English language learning among EFL learners at UMSKAL. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(18): 6-16.   [Google Scholar]
  5. Akareem HS and Hossain SS (2016). Determinants of education quality: What makes students' perception different? Open Review of Educational Research, 3(1): 52-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2016.1155167   [Google Scholar]
  6. Ali N, Ahmed L, and Rose S (2018). Identifying predictors of students' perception of and engagement with assessment feedback. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(3): 239-251. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417735609   [Google Scholar]
  7. Bizimana T, Kayumba PC, and Heide L (2020). Prices, availability and affordability of medicines in Rwanda. PLOS ONE, 15(8): e0236411. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236411   [Google Scholar] PMid:32745100 PMCid:PMC7398547
  8. Brkanlić S, Sánchez-García J, Esteve EB, Brkić I, Ćirić M, Tatarski J, Gardašević J, and Petrović M (2020). Marketing mix instruments as factors of improvement of students' satisfaction in higher education institutions in Republic of Serbia and Spain. Sustainability, 12(18): 7802. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187802   [Google Scholar]
  9. Cachón-Rodríguez G, Blanco-González A, Prado-Román C, and Del-Castillo-Feito C (2022). How sustainable human resources management helps in the evaluation and planning of employee loyalty and retention: Can social capital make a difference? Evaluation and Program Planning, 95: 102171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102171   [Google Scholar] PMid:36209653
  10. Cattaneo M, Horta H, Malighetti P, Meoli M, and Paleari S (2017). Effects of the financial crisis on university choice by gender. Higher Education, 74: 775-798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0076-y   [Google Scholar]
  11. Chatzipanagiotou K, Veloutsou C, and Christodoulides G (2016). Decoding the complexity of the consumer-based brand equity process. Journal of Business Research, 69(11): 5479-5486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.159   [Google Scholar]
  12. de la Cruz del Río-Rama M, Peris-Ortiz M, Álvarez-García J, and Rueda-Armengot C (2016). Entrepreneurial intentions and entrepreneurship education to University students in Portugal. Technology, Innovation and Education, 2: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40660-016-0013-5   [Google Scholar]
  13. de Queiroz Machado D, Matos FRN, and de Mesquita RF (2022). Relations between innovation management and organisational sustainability: A case study in a Brazilian higher education institution. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(9): 11127-11152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01900-4   [Google Scholar]
  14. Dearden JA, Grewal R, and Lilien GL (2019). Strategic manipulation of university rankings, the prestige effect, and student university choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4): 691-707. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243719831258   [Google Scholar]
  15. Dennis C, Papagiannidis S, Alamanos E, and Bourlakis M (2016). The role of brand attachment strength in higher education. Journal of Business Research, 69(8): 3049-3057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.020   [Google Scholar]
  16. Dimitrova G and Dimitrova T (2017). Competitiveness of the universities: Measurement capabilities. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 15(1): 311-316. https://doi.org/10.15547/tjs.2017.s.01.055   [Google Scholar]
  17. Dobre C, Milovan AM, Duțu C, Preda G, and Agapie A (2021). The common values of social media marketing and luxury brands. The millennials and Generation Z perspective. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(7): 2532-2553. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16070139   [Google Scholar]
  18. Fantauzzi C, Frondizi R, Colasanti N, and Fiorani G (2019). Creating value in the entrepreneurial university: Marketization and merchandising strategies. Administrative Sciences, 9(4): 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9040082   [Google Scholar]
  19. Fitri AZ, Nasukah B, and Tayeb A (2019). Strategic planning model of Islamic religious higher education (PTKI) in Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 8(2): 287-308. https://doi.org/10.14421/jpi.2019.82.287-308   [Google Scholar]
  20. Gamage KA, Silva EKD, and Gunawardhana N (2020). Online delivery and assessment during COVID-19: Safeguarding academic integrity. Education Sciences, 10(11): 301. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10110301   [Google Scholar]
  21. Hackley SG (2014). Negotiation and the fight for social change. Negotiation Journal, 30(4): 479-485. https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12072   [Google Scholar]
  22. Hadi WP, Muharrami LK, Hidayati Y, Rosidi I, and Maryamah S (2019). Development of magazine on Madura salt theme with ethnoscience approach to improve student's character. Unnes Science Education Journal, 8(2): 118-129. https://doi.org/10.15294/usej.v8i2.31524   [Google Scholar]
  23. Hüther O and Krücken G (2018). Higher education in Germany—Recent developments in an international perspective. Volume 49, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61479-3   [Google Scholar]
  24. Idowu BA, Vaidyanathan S, Sambas A, Olusola OI, and Onma OS (2018). A new chaotic finance system: Its analysis, control, synchronization and circuit design. In: Pham VT, Vaidyanathan S, Volos C, and Kapitaniak T (Eds.), Nonlinear dynamical systems with self-excited and hidden attractors: 271-295. Volume 133, Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71243-7_12   [Google Scholar]
  25. Johansyah MD, Sambas A, Mobayen S, Vaseghi B, Al-Azzawi SF, Sukono, and Sulaiman IM (2022). Dynamical analysis and adaptive finite-time sliding mode control approach of the financial fractional-order chaotic system. Mathematics, 11(1): 100. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11010100   [Google Scholar]
  26. Johansyah MD, Sambas A, Qureshi S, Zheng S, Abed-Elhameed TM, Vaidyanathan S, and Sulaiman IM (2024). Investigation of the hyperchaos and control in the fractional order financial system with profit margin. Partial Differential Equations in Applied Mathematics, 9: 100612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.padiff.2023.100612   [Google Scholar]
  27. Johansyah MD, Sambas A, Zheng S, Benkouider K, Vaidyanathan S, Mohamed MA, and Mamat M (2023). A novel financial system with one stable and two unstable equilibrium points: Dynamics, coexisting attractors, complexity analysis and synchronization using integral sliding mode control. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, 177: 114283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114283   [Google Scholar]
  28. Kayombo K and Carter S (2017). Competitive positioning of a higher education institution in Zambia: The case of ZCAS. Journal of Education and Vocational Research, 8(2): 6-21. https://doi.org/10.22610/jevr.v8i2.1858   [Google Scholar]
  29. Kurniawan DA, Perdana R, and Kurniasari D (2018). Identification of student attitudes toward physics learning at Batanghari District High School. The Educational Review, USA, 2(9): 475-484. https://doi.org/10.26855/er.2018.09.003   [Google Scholar]
  30. Lapiņa I, Kairiša I, and Aramina D (2015). Role of organizational culture in the quality management of university. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213: 770-774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.472   [Google Scholar]
  31. Marshall S (2016). A handbook for leaders in higher education: Transforming teaching and learning. Routledge, Oxfordshire, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315693798   [Google Scholar]
  32. Morphew CC, Fumasoli T, and Stensaker B (2018). Changing missions? How the strategic plans of research-intensive universities in Northern Europe and North America balance competing identities. Studies in Higher Education, 43(6): 1074-1088. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1214697   [Google Scholar]
  33. Moshood TD, Nawanir G, Sorooshian S, Mahmud F, and Adeleke AQ (2020). Barriers and benefits of ICT adoption in the Nigerian construction industry. A comprehensive literature review. Applied System Innovation, 3(4): 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi3040046   [Google Scholar]
  34. Mushketova N, Bydanova E, and Rouet G (2018). National strategy for promotion of Russian universities in the world market of education services. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(1): 46-56. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-10-2016-0207   [Google Scholar]
  35. Mustaffa WSW, Ali MH, Bing KW, and Rahman RA (2016). Investigating the relationship among service quality, emotional satisfaction and favorable behavioral intentions in higher education service experience. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 224: 499-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.426   [Google Scholar]
  36. Neuwirth LS, Ebrahimi A, Mukherji BR, and Park L (2018). Addressing diverse college students and interdisciplinary learning experiences through online virtual laboratory instruction: A theoretical approach to error-based learning in biopsychology. In: Ursyn A (Ed.), Visual approaches to cognitive education with technology integration: 283-303. IGI Global, Hershey, USA. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5332-8.ch012   [Google Scholar]
  37. Njagi C, Mutinda M, and Mwangi B (2023). Influence of service quality on emotional satisfaction in game lodges. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 3(2): 20-35. https://doi.org/10.47672/jht.1514   [Google Scholar]
  38. Opatha HHDNP (2020). Influence of lecturers' competence on students' satisfaction of lecturing: Evidence for mediating role of lecturing behaviour. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(4): 1167-1179. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080406   [Google Scholar]
  39. Poon AY and Lau CM (2016). Fine-tuning medium-of-instruction policy in Hong Kong: Acquisition of language and content-based subject knowledge. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 20(1): 135-155.   [Google Scholar]
  40. Proudfoot K and Boyd P (2024). The instrumental motivation of teachers: Implications of high-stakes accountability for professional learning. British Journal of Educational Studies, 72(3): 295-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2023.2267657   [Google Scholar]
  41. Shahzad M, Qu Y, Zafar AU, Rehman SU, and Islam T (2020). Exploring the influence of knowledge management process on corporate sustainable performance through green innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(9): 2079-2106. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2019-0624   [Google Scholar]
  42. Sigl L and Leišytė L (2018). Imaginaries of invention management: Comparing path dependencies in East and West Germany. Minerva, 56(3): 357-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-018-9347-3   [Google Scholar] PMid:30147147 PMCid:PMC6096520
  43. Soni S and Govender K (2018). The relationship between service quality dimensions and brand equity: Higher education students' perceptions. Central European Management Journal, 26(3): 71-87. https://doi.org/10.7206/jmba.ce.2450-7814.236   [Google Scholar]
  44. Taute HA, Sierra JJ, Carter LL, and Maher AA (2017). A sequential process of brand tribalism, brand pride and brand attitude to explain purchase intention: A cross-continent replication study. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 26(3): 239-250. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-08-2016-1289   [Google Scholar]
  45. Telci EE and Kantur D (2014). University reputation: Scale development and validation. Bogazici Journal: Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, 28(2): 49-73. https://doi.org/10.21773/boun.28.2.4   [Google Scholar]
  46. Vettori O (2018). Shared misunderstandings? Competing and conflicting meaning structures in quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 24(2): 85-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2018.1491786   [Google Scholar]
  47. Walsh C, Moorhouse J, Dunnett A, and Barry C (2015). University choice: Which attributes matter when you are paying the full price? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 39(6): 670-681. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12178   [Google Scholar]
  48. Wang TH (2011). Developing web-based assessment strategies for facilitating junior high school students to perform self-regulated learning in an e-learning environment. Computers and Education, 57(2): 1801-1812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.003   [Google Scholar]
  49. Wut TM, Xu J, and Lee SW (2022). Does university ranking matter? Choosing a university in the digital era. Education Sciences, 12(4): 229. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040229   [Google Scholar]
  50. Xu X and Yao Z (2015). Understanding the role of argument quality in the adoption of online reviews: An empirical study integrating value-based decision and needs theory. Online Information Review, 39(7): 885-902. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-05-2015-0149   [Google Scholar]