the influence of marketing mix on the student’s choice of

ISSN 2309-0081 Kayani, Bagram & Hashmi (2021)

81

I

www.irss.academyirmbr.com February 2021

International Review of Social Sciences Vol. 9 Issue.2

R S S

The Influence of Marketing Mix on the Student’s Choice of

University in Pakistan

Dr. TANVIR KAYANI Director, BISP, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Dr. MUHAMMAD MAJID MAHMOOD BAGRAM Associate Professor, Department of Business Administration,

Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Email: [email protected]

Dr. AROONA HASHMI Assistant Professor, Institute of Education & Research,

University of the Punjab, Pakistan.

Abstract

In 2021, there is tough competition going on in the world among various sectors and educational sector is

not an exception. Keeping in view this factors, the authors of this research decided to conduct a research

on “The Influence of Marketing Mix on the Student’s Choice of University”. There are three-fold research

objectives, one is to understand the role of marketing mix 7 P’s namely product, price, place, promotion,

people, physical evidence and process on the student’s attitude and willingness to apply. Secondly to

explore that what are the marketing tactics which the universities are currently using to attract the students

from the literature. Thirdly, to provide clear understanding to universities that how they can effectively

blend the marketing mix to attract students and improve their services. The present research is based on

finding the impact of marketing mix on Pakistani student`s selection of a university. The research

instrument is the structured questionnaire for collecting primary data from students of Pakistan. There are

many factors that students pay attention to while applying in a university. The researchers tried to

investigate and find out the strength of these marketing mix 7 Ps. A 5 point Likert scale was used to collect

primary data. The researchers selected public and private sector universities of Islamabad as students from

all over Pakistan apply here. The researcher distributed a total of 250 self-administered questionnaires out

of which 180 were found complete is all respects having a response rate of 70% which is quite high. Among

180 respondents 95 (approximately 53%) were males and 85 (47%) were females. As the data has been

collected from the university students which are at the different stages of their educational level, 60 (33%)

of them were enrolled in the graduation, 65 (36%) Master, 40 (22%) were in MS/MPhil and the remaining

15 (9%) were PhD scholars. The major findings of the present research show that there is a high impact of

marketing mix on the decisions of students applying in a higher educational institution. In nutshell, the top

management of universities can use the findings of this research to strengthen their marketing strategies in

order to increase the enrollment and quality of their various educational programs. Furthermore, higher

educational institutions can also have in-depth understanding of their prospective students and this will

also help them design better marketing strategies to compete in the market.

Keywords: Product, Price, Place, Promotion, People, Physical Evidence, Process, University.

Introduction

The literature on the emergence of marketing in the education sector has been originated in the USA in the

decade of 1980s and that literature is theoretical and normative in nature. This literature consists of books

mailto:[email protected]


82

I



R S S

and manuals which emphasis on such topic “how to market your school” and the models which were given

in those manuals and books were developed from the non-educational sector (Gray, 1991). According to

Kotler and Fox (1995), in the decade of 1980s the importance of the marketing in the educational sector

increased. In the opinion of the Gibbs (2002), most of the educational institutes now recognize that now it

is the time to implement the marketing practices to remain competitive in the global world, there is enough

literature and practical concepts of marketing are available which tells how to implement marketing in

educational institutes. Currently due to bad economic conditions and financial crisis in the higher education

institutes the universities and colleges are now competing for the same students (Pinar et al, 2011).

According to the Mathew as the competition is severe at the global level for full fee paying foreign students

in the Higher Education in numerous nation states of the world made it compulsory for the academic

institution to understand the decision making criteria of the students to develop strategies accordance with

their needs and wants. The same thing is described in another study, as the competition is increasing so the

need to understand that how students make their decision is very important (Moogan et al, 1999).

Nevertheless, the immaterial aspect of any such product introducing in the market means that strategies

linked with ebbing price especially with consumed products are not applicable a very widespread problem

solving procedures which is vital to high involvement university degree choices (Brown et al, 2009).

In recent times the students possess more awareness regarding high involvement (Briggs, 2006), and

though students are highly informed and shrewd … “more urbane and are making more informed choices”

(Clarke and Brown, 1998, p. 85), yet there are umpteen factors which affect these youngsters causing

anxiety.

The existence and provision of better and flawless services is quite essential at least for competitive sake.

Higher education sector is loaded with complex actions and operations by default owing to its complex

hierarchy and it offers highly intangible services and promoting soft liaison relations with stakeholders like

(e.g. parents, students, tutors, industry, government, professional bodies, and alumni) extended over greater

span of time and it is always challenging. This intangibility or soft aspect affects the teaching-learning

processes (Douglas et al., 2008), and being more reputational the decision making process is intertwined

with complexities. (Anctil, 2008; Harvey and Busher).

According to Hina and Matlay, (2009), the expectations of the students and other stakeholders are growing

and they want better result or outcomes of their investment in the higher education. So in this paper our

focus will be on the impact of marketing activities used by the universities on the student‟s decision

making.

According to the Hamsley and Platka (2006), education is a relatively new marketing discipline in higher

education has encouraged more discussion in particular. The literature on the use of marketing in the higher

education is insufficient especially theoretical models. There has been very little or no published research

on the educational marketing or the role of 7 P‟s in the university selection from the student perspective,

especially in Pakistan. Applying marketing to the non-business or to the organizations whose major aim is

not to earn profit; this will surely help the marketing discipline into heights. This research paper in which

the authors examine the role of 7 P‟s in selection of the university will help universities to understand that

what are the factors that highly influence the students‟ (consumer) decision in selection of educational

institute for higher studies.

Joseph and Joseph (1997) has the opinion that educational reforms have been taking place in the number of

countries of the world to bring the efficiency accountability and quality in the educational system. In order

to maintain the competitiveness, the academic institutions need to incorporate marketing practices in their

institutions.

Licata and Maxham (1998) call Higher Education as a broad professional service ranging from a student

deciding which accommodation to adapt to developing their intellect over an extensive period of time. Thus

the acquisition of a Higher education administration matches to the assurance of future advantage, yet the


83

I



R S S

specific prizes are not known toward the beginning of this all-inclusive dynamic succession with the

apparent danger being high for every one of those parties concerned. Thus, to pull in the reasonable

researches for the marketing strategies promoting methodologies could be created in such manner, whereby

correspondence between the two parties, understudies and organizations can assist the expected

understudies with getting the required data in regards to their choice of foundations for Higher education

(Bonnema and Waldt 2008). Nevertheless, it may, the increased choices in the higher education commercial

center may constrain schools and colleges to use a more client arranged way of thinking in conveying their

administrations, and the individuals who figure out these standards will have a better likelihood of

accomplishing their goals all the more successfully (Kotler and Fox, 1995).

Research Objectives

The aim of this research paper is to understand the role of marketing mix 7 P‟s on the student‟s

attitude and willingness to apply.

To explore that what are the marketing tactics which the universities are currently using to attract

the students from the literature.

To provide clear understanding to universities that how they can effectively blend the marketing

mix to attract students and improve their services.

Literature Review

According to Kotler and Fox (1995), "the study, preparation, execution and control of carefully conceived

initiatives in order to attain organizational goals. According to the (Maringe, 2005) competition is growing

due to growth of academic institutions at level of higher education, and this intense competition is a cause

of higher education marketing around the world. Higher education is marked by more interpersonal

communication, ambiguity, deviation and personalization than any other service. (Patterson et al., 1998).

Services are different from goods, services consist of elusive components such as procedures, expertise of

people and resources that need to be properly organized to result in the correct or scheduled configuration

of the service.

The use of marketing in education is considered depraved in culture because the use of marketing would

raise the cost of education, which is the fundamental right, in their point of view.

Marketing Mix and Hypothesis Development

Marketing Merge Principle is the major principle of philosophy of marketing. According to McCarthy's,

1964, there are 4Ps of marketing which is highly criticized at present as there are number of other

marketing mixes presented by major philosophers from the area of marketing in the world.

Chrisistian Gronroos claims that the 4P paradigm can be useful for consumer packaged goods to be sold,

but the 4P concept is no longer and cannot be used for all forms of marketing circumstances. The most

rigorous critique has come from the marketing field of services.

In particular, the expansion of the 4P paradigm to include method, physical evidence and participants by

Booms and Bitner (1981) has gained popular acceptance in marketing literature services (Rafiq et al 1995).

According to Rafiq & Ahmad (1995), the 4Ps of marketing are highly criticized and mostly researchers are

not satisfied with 4P concept. The definition of the 4P is typically used for the invasive marketing.

On the other hand, Jonathan Ivy (2008) says that "a controllable set of controls". Typically, 4P's marketing

mix model is used in the marketing of physical products, but expanded marketing mix model with 7P's is


84

I



R S S

used in the marketing of the facilities, consisting of physical proof, people and method in addition to

conventional 4P's.

Product

According to Armstrong and Kotler (2006), a commodity is something that could fulfill a desire or need for

attention, acquisition, usage, or consumption. On the other hand, Borden (1984) says that the product is

defined by consistency and style. But here, in this case, students are considered explicitly in this research

paper as the client, while staff are considered as communication staff, which is the 5th P in the marketing

mix. The study programs offered by the university are one factor that is highly critical in creating the

Higher Education product (Darling et al).

According to Yavas and Shemwell, 1996; Landrum et al., 1998, brand of an institution plays a critical role

in the market. Paramewaran and Glowacka (1995) propose that universities are required to build and/or

preserve a unique image to establish exclusive position in the educational sector. Furthermore, Ivy, 2001

says that such a distinct image is likely to influence the willingness of a student. Hence, it is very necessary

to create these images in the minds of students. Branding is often seen as part of product policy so that it is

very important to build an appealing picture of an organization in the marketplace in order to design

successful product policy (Stensaker&D'Andrea, 2007).

The authors of this study consider two product components in the educational marketing mix:

a) Reputation/image of the university/institute

b) Number of programs of study offered by the university/institute

Price

According to Kotler et al, the pricing factor is another major factors while selecting any academic

institution for studies. When the value equals or exceeds the given price then student`s perception increases.

According to the Chartered Institute of Marketing 2009, subtle existence of services, prices are a key

predictor of quality where other information is accessible.

Zeithaml, 1981 also emphasizes the importance of pricing and says that as compare to services, pricing is a

tangible factor hence it should be given importance. In universities, pricing factor influence the revenues

that a university receives from its sources.

For the parents and students, high prices increase their worries and therefore has number of negative

consequences. Pricing also influences marketing strategies of academic institutions. Besides the tuition fee

flexibility in the payment of tuition fee, scholarships and bursaries are the factor of expense.

Place

According to Armstrong, Kotler, 2006, Hirankitti et al. 2009, location is seen as another major factor while

students apply for a program in any academic institution. The comfort of access associated with a service

such as location and delivery by potential customers. Place is the method of delivery adopted by the

university to deliver tuition to its market. The idea of distance learning is now very popular around the

world. The growth of alternative forms of tuition has expanded significantly; nowadays, there are virtual or

online classes and learners are not dependent on in class studies. According to Jonathan Ivy, 2008 and

Kotler, 2008, place denotes to the convenience of educational institutions/program to potential students in

the maximum convenient and available manner in the sense of higher education. According to Kotler &

Fox, 1995, place factor is now not limited to geographical location because of the advances in IT, but

substitutes are also being created for the delivery of educational services. Strategies such as e-learning and


85

I



R S S

distance learning may also be implemented by universities to support their students and to improve their

market competitive advantage.

a) Convenience to the students.

b) Distance from home.

c) Facility of distance learning.

Promotion

Promotion usually means the way through which the goods/service provider communicates to the target

market about his/her product or service. While (Borden,1984) defined promotion as sales promotion,

advertising, personal selling, public relations and direct marketing on the other hand promotion is defined

by the Lovelock and Wright as publicity. All these tools can be used by the universities for increasing their

enrolment in their various academic programs. When a university/educational institute wants to

communicate to a wide variety of public then they generally use electronic media such as own websites,

social media, and similar electronic platforms for effective communication with the target market. Lambset

al (2004) & (Soedijati, 2006) say that promotion is at the heart of marketing as it provides the awareness to

the target market which is one of the initial steps from market point of view

There are number of benefits of promotion but according to Mazzarol, 1998, not many academic

institutions utilize it well. Ivy,2002 says that there are number of persons who say that information

provided by electronic channels is sometimes inappropriate or is not complete. Communication activity can

be subdivided into two areas, personal and non-personal. Personal communication (selling) to students

frequently starts with visits by faculty or admissions officers to colleges and high schools. Non personal

communication (advertising) includes catalogues, brochures, descriptive pamphlets, newspaper articles, or

even ads, and direct mail activity.

According to (Bennet, 2006) universities should design their message in accordance with the student‟s

requirement, their message should convey what student think is important not like what the university

think. But no one can deny the role of promotion in the marketing of the e education sector promotion can

increase the reputation and image of the university (Rudd & Mills, 2008).

a) The visits of the university members to colleges (personal selling).

b) University prospectus.

c) Ads on the mass media.

d) Word of mouth communication.

e) Other.

People

It includes all the human resources that are involved in the delivery of services to students (Hartline &

Ferrell, 1996). The quality of these services by people strongly influences the student`s thinking about the

academic institution where he or she is applying.

These people include not only the staff but also the teachers/academicians. The potential students when

communicate with these people in the university, get a better awareness about the various academic

programs. Potential students when become the regular student then these people again interact with them.

Therefore, this people factor of marketing mix is one of the major factors influencing potential students

applying for any academic program of the university.

The image of the teaching staff at the undergraduate level and their impact on the student‟s perception is

highly debatable issue, while at the graduation level, the quality of teaching/academic staff plays vital role

on the student‟s selection of the university. (Cubillo et al., 2006; Ivy, 2001). Therefore, human resources of


86

I



R S S

universities who are responsible for teaching and other managerial activities respectively, are called people

(Kotler and Fox, 1995). The human resource is the most important asset of any organization hence it also

plays a major role in quality of services. Current and former students are also the element of the People

because the potential students often ask them to provide them some guidelines and their opinion about the

university. Lovelock & Wright (2004) suggested that as the customers are directly involved in the service

process, they evaluate value of human resources, their verbal and non-verbal communication, their

technical skills hence the quality of service is judged on these bases. Designing of the service delivery is the

most crucial part because as said by the Du Plessis and Rousseau (2005), the contact personnel should be

trained because their appearance their attitude and behavior have influence on the potential student`s

perception. Acquiring the best human resources, retaining, training and developing them as per the market

requirements is the core source of competitive edge (Mazzarol, 1998). Learning and expertise of the quality

of staff is a source of competitive advantage. In the education industry, students select the university on the

reputation of the teaching staff. People element of the educational marketing mix includes,

a) Quality of Teaching staff.

b) Administrative staff of the university.

c) Others.

Physical Evidence

Physical evidence includes tangibles like the building, furniture, teaching content, brochures, facilities, and

so on (Rafiq & Ahmed, 1995). These tangibles help improve the image of the universities in number of

ways. The potential students when observe these physical evidence, make up their minds for getting

admission. These factors influence the decision making of potential students who are selecting any

university for their studies.

The intangible nature of services of the higher education institutions makes the physical evidence more

important. Both tangible and intangible factors strongly impact the environment in which the potential

students make a decision (Ivy & Fattal, 2010). In the opinion of the Kotler et al (2008), first impression of

an organization is really important and potential students usually observe the facilities and building of the

university. In addition to that Gibss and Knapp (2002) suggests that physical location condition also greatly

contribute on the image of the institution. For example: cleanliness of rooms, technologies used, library,

etc.

Hence at the end we can conclude that followings are the elements of the physical evidence;

a) Infrastructure of the university (building etc).

b) IT labs.

c) Libraries.

d) Hostel facilities.

e) Others.

Process

Process involves the execution of all functions of the universities. These processes have a strong impact on

the target market as they are observing these processes keenly. Processes refer to the university‟s

administrative and bureaucratic functions like handling of enquiries to registration, course evaluation,

examinations, result dissemination and so on (Maula et al,2012). The way of doing business is also called

organizational processes (Kotler,2008). When a consumer owns a product after buying then there is a sense

of ownership nut this is not the case in universities. Universities charge fee from students and there is no

ownership or guarantee of getting a degree hence this becomes really challenging for the academic

institutions (Ivy, 2008 & Palmer, 2005).


87

I



R S S

Followings are major elements in the 7th

P „Process‟ of the educational marketing:

a) Admission process.

b) Examination system process.

c) Process of lecture delivery.

d) Others.

Conceptual Framework

Research Methodology

This research paper is about the educational marketing, in which authors tried to find out the relationship

between the marketing mix (7P‟s) and the students selection of the university particularly from the

Pakistanis students perspective. The researchers used a questionnaire as a research instrument to investigate

the factors that potential students consider while selecting a university in Islamabad, Pakistan. The research

instrument is adapted based on the in-depth literature review and present researches from the relevant

sector. Minor changes were made in the research instrument to customize it as per the environment of our

country. From this research instrument, the researchers evaluate different elements of the marketing mix. 5

point Likert scale was used to measure the potential student`s attitude and opinions while selecting any

university for their admission. The respondents were asked to rank the criteria that they used to select a

university ranging from (1) most unimportant to (5) most important.

PRODUCT

Image/reputation

No. of Programs of study offered

PRICE

Tuition fee

Flexibility in the payment of tuition fee

Bursaries

Scholarships

PLACE

Convenience

Distance from home

Distance learning

PROMOTION

Visits to

colleges (PS)

Advertising

Public relations

Publicity

Prospectus

Word of Mouth

PEOPLE

Quality of teaching staff

The attitude of other supporting staff

Student’s willingness

to apply

PHYSICAL

EVIDENCE

Infrastructure

(Building)

Appearance

IT lab

Library

Cleanliness

PROCESS

Admission process

Examination System

Lecture delivery Process


88

I



R S S

Sample and Data Collection

The data has been collected through convenience sampling method. The data has been collected from the

students in the different public and private sector universities situated in Islamabad. One important reason

for selecting the universities of Islamabad is that students from almost every part of Pakistan come to

Islamabad for higher degrees. In this way, authors tried to ensure the representation of the whole

population.

A total of 250 questionnaires were distributed, 180 questionnaires were received from the respondents,

response rate was above 70% which is quite high. Descriptive statistics were used to exhibit the

demographics of participants by frequency distribution as show in Table 1. The age of the respondents

ranges from 18 years to 53 years. Among 180 respondents, 95 (approximately 53%) were males and 85

(47%) were females. As the data has been collected from the university students which are at the different

stages of their educational level, 60 (33%) of them were enrolled in the graduation, 65 (36%) Master, 40

(22%) were in MS/MPhil and the remaining 15 (9%) were PhD scholars.

Data Analysis & Discussions

Findings of the study show that means of all the elements of the marketing mix are more than the mid-point

of 5 points Likert Scale, product element (Mean=3.97, SD = .56331) of the marketing mix is most

important when students selecting a particular university, to measure the importance of product element of

marketing mix items which includes, a) the image/reputation of the university b) number of programs

offered by the university c) Majors and specializations offered d) Subjects taught in the major you were

interested in.

The 2nd

most important factor which students consider while selecting a particular university is price

element (Mean=3.82, SD=.63851) which includes a) Tuition fee, b) Possibility of paying in installments c)

Availability of scholarships and bursaries. In the comparison of relevant importance given to the different

factors people element of marketing mix is at 3rd

people, people element (Mean = 3.80, SD=.54311) of

marketing mix includes a) Qualification of Teaching staff b) Reputation of teaching staff c) Quality and

support of nonacademic staff.

Table 1: Demographics

The 4th

most important factor which students consider while selecting a particular university is physical

evidence element (Mean = 3.49, SD=.63081). The 5th

most important factor which students consider while

f Percentage

Age (n=180)

Under 25 52 29%

26-35

36-45

71

42

40%

23%

Above 46 15 8%

Sex(n=180)

Male 95 53%

Female 85 47%

Profession(n=180)

graduation 60 33%

Master 65 36%

MS/MPhil

PhD

40

15

22%

9%


89

I



R S S

selecting a particular university is process element (Mean = 3.46, SD = .62786). The 6th most important

factor which students consider while selecting a particular university is promotion element (Mean = 3.43,

SD = .88046). Finally, the 7th

most important factor which students consider while selecting a particular

university is place element (Mean = 3.30, SD = .68149).

Physical evidence (Mean=3.43, SD=.88046) & promotion (Mean=3.80, SD=.63081) are respectively at 4th

and 5th

place, while place and process elements of marketing mix are considered as less important as

compared to the other marketing mix elements. Table: 2 and Graph I also shows the same results.

Table 2: Mean, Standard deviation

Item N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Product 180 3.00 5.00 3.97 .56331

Price 180 3.00 5.00 3.82 .63851

Place 180 2.00 5.00 3.30 .68149

Promotion 180 2.00 9.00 3.43 .88046

People 180 3.00 5.00 3.80 .54311

Physical evidence 180 2.00 5.00 3.49 .63081

Process 180 2.00 5.00 3.46 .62786

Graph: I

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Product Price Place Promotion People PhysicalEvidence

Process


90

I



R S S

Table 3: Correlation Matrix

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Product (0.815)

Price .605**

(0.798)

Place .419**

.431**

(0.816)

Promotion .274**

.436**

.334**

(0.738)

People .526**

.509**

.435**

.340**

(0.788)

Physical

evidence .573

** .504

** .352

** .453

** .727

** (0.804)

Process .517**

.511**

.558**

.543**

.762**

.872**

(0.821)

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above correlation matrix was used to find out the relationship among 7Ps of marketing mix of the

present research. This analysis shows the variables that are significantly correlated with each other.

Conclusion

The results of this present research demonstrate that all the 7P‟s which are generally used in service

marketing can be highly useful for the universities as well because students consider all of the 7P‟s (more

or little) while selecting a particular university. Furthermore, findings show that all the research variables

have significant influence on potential student`s selection of a university in Islamabad, Pakistan. This

research strongly recommends that in order to compete in the tough educational market, all educational

institutions should consider the 7P`s while designing their functions from registration to award of degree to

students.

The various functions and processes of academic institutions should be based on the real expectations of the

target market. Finally, this research can also guide universities while designing their recruitment and

selection policies.

Limitations and Future Recommendations

The data were collected from the Islamabad region with the hope that it represents the whole Pakistan, as

the students came here from all over the Pakistan for the higher education but the students who are not

financially strong usually select from the other small countries. Therefore, future research from the students

of other cities and universities will also be helpful for the higher education universities. Secondly, future

research is recommended to collect the data from those students who are applying in the universities or

deciding to apply in any specific university and the sample size should also be increased to make it more

generalizable for the universities. Thirdly, the time is changing rapidly and many other factors are also

affecting the students‟ decision in selection of higher education institutions, therefore future research is also

recommended to conduct interviews from the students to identify those unidentified factors.

References

Anctil, E.J. (2008), “Summary and conclusions”, ASHE Higher Education Report, 34(2), 99-100.

Bennet, D. (2006), “The effectiveness of current student ambassadors in HE marketing recruitment and

retention”, paper presented at the International Conference on HE marketing Cyprus, 3-5 January.

Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounter: The effects of physical surroundings and employee

responses. Journal of Marketing, 54, 69-82


91

I



R S S

Bonnema, J. and Van der Waldt, D.L.R. (2008), “Information and source preferences of a student market in

higher education”, International Journal of Educational Management,22(4), 314-27.

Booms, B. H., & Bitner, M. J. (1981). Marketing strategies and organization structures for service firms.

Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Borden, N. H. (1984). The concept of marketing mix. Journal of Advertising Research, 1(9), 2-7.

Briggs, S. and Wilson, A. (2007), “Which university? A study of the influence of cost and information

factors on Scottish undergraduate choice”, Journal of Higher Education Policy and

Management,29(1), 52-72.

Brown. J.H. and Oplatka. I. (2006),"Universities in a competitive global marketplace: A systematic review

of the literature on higher education marketing", International Journal of Public Sector Management,

19.

Clarke, G. and Brown, M.A. (1998), “Consumer attitudes to the higher education application process”,

Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,8(4), 83-96.

Cubillo, J.-M., Sanchez, J. and Cervino, J. (2006), “International students‟ decision-making process”,

International Journal of Educational Management, 20(2), 101-15.

Cubillo.J.M., Sánchez. J. and Cerviño. J, (2006),"International students' decision-making process",

International Journal of Educational Management,20.

Donalson, W.G. and Mcnicholas, C. (2004), “Understanding the postgraduate education market for UK

based students”, Journal of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Marketing,9(4), 346-60.

Du Plesiss & Rouseau, 2005, Buyer Behavior: a multi-cultural Approach, 3rd ed, Oxford.

Eagle, L. and Brennan, R. (2007), “Are student‟s customers? TQM and marketing perspectives”, Quality

Assurance in Higher Education,15(1), 44-60.

Gibbs, P. (2001), “Higher education as a market: a problem or a solution?” Studies Higher Education,26(1),

85-94.

Gibbs,P & Knapp,M (2002), Marketing Further and Higher Education Research: An Educators Guide to

Promoting Courses, Depatments and Institutions, London, Kogan

Goldstein.S.M, Johnston. R., Duffy. J., Rao. J (2002), The service concept: the missing link in service

design research? Journal of Operations Management 20 (2002) 121–134

Gray, L. (1991) Marketing Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Grönroos, C. (1994). From Marketing Mix to Relationship Marketing: Towards A Paradigm Shift in

Marketing. Management Decision, 32(2), 4-20.

Hartline, M. D., & Ferrell, O. C. (1996). The management of customer contact service employees. Journal

of Marketing,60(4), 52-70.

Harvey, J.A. and Busher, H. (1996), “Marketing schools and consumer choice”, International Journal of

Educational Management, 10(4), 26-32.

Hina Khan, Harry Matlay, (2009),"Implementing service excellence in higher education", Education +

Training,51(8), 769 – 780.

Hirankitti, P., Mechinda, P., & Manjing, S. (2009). Marketing strategies of Thai spa operators in Bangkok

metropolitan. Paper presented at the The International Conference on Applied Business Research

ICABR Valletta (St.Julians)–Malta.

Ivy, J&Fattal E.A. (2010), Marketing private EFL Programs in Damascus, TESOL Journal, 2, 130-143

Ivy, J. 2001, 'Higher education institution image: A correspondence analysis approach', The International

Journal of Educational Management, 15(6/7), 276-282.

Ivy, J. 2008, 'A new higher education marketing mix: the 7Ps for MBA marketing', The International

Journal of Educational Management, 22(4), 288-299.

Joseph, M. and Joseph, B. (1997), “Service quality in education: a student perspective”, Quality Assurance

in Education, 5(1), 15-21.

Keskinen, E., Tiuraniemi, J. and Liimola, A. (2008), “University selection in Finland: how the decision is

made”, International Journal of Educational Management,22(7), 638-50.

Kotler, P. and Armstrong, G. (1989), Principles of Marketing, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,

N.J.

Kotler, P. and Fox, K.A. (1995), Strategic Marketing for Educational Institutions, Prentice-Hall, New York,

NY. SS


92

I



R S S

Lamb C.W, Hair j. f. McDaniel, C, Boshoff C &Terbalancle, N.S (2004), Marketing Management, 2nd

edition, Oxford University Press.

Landrum, R.E., Turrisi, R. and Harless, C. (1998), “University image: the benefits of assessment and

modelling”, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 9, 53-68.

Licata, J.W. and Maxham, J.G. (1998), “Student expectations of the university experience: levels and

antecedents for pre-entry freshmen”, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,9(1), 69-91.

Lovelock & Wrirght (2004), Principles of Service Marketing Management, Prentice Hall.

Maringe, F. (2005),"Interrogating the crisis in higher education marketing: the CORD model",

International Journal of Educational Management,19.

Mazzarol, T. (1998), “Critical success factors for international education marketing”, International Journal

of Educational Management, 12(4), 163-75

McCarthy, E. J. (1960). Basic Marketing, A Managerial Approach. IL: Richard D. Irwin.

Mohammed Rafiq, Pervaiz K. Ahmed, (1995),"Using the 7Ps as a generic marketing mix: an exploratory

surveyof UK and European marketing academics", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 13.

Moogan, Y.J., Baron, S. and Harris, K. (1999), “Decision-making behaviour of potential higher education

students”, Higher Education Quarterly, 53(3), 211-28.

Muala. A.A and Qurneh.M.A., (2012). “Assessing the Relationship between Marketing Mix and Loyalty

through Tourists Satisfaction in Jordan Curative Tourism”.American Academic & Scholarly Research

Journal,4(2).

Nicholls.J., Harris.J. Morgan.E., Clarke. K. and, Sims. D, (1995),"Marketing higher education: the MBA

experience", International Journal of Educational Management, 9(2), 31 – 38.

Palmer A. (2005), principles of Service Marketing 4th ed, England, McGraw-Hill

Patterson, P., Romm, T. and Hill, C. (1998), “Consumer satisfaction as a process: a qualitative,

retrospective longitudinal study of overseas students in Australia”, Journal of Professional Services

Marketing, 16(1), 135-57.

Pinar.M., Trapp.P., Girard.T. And Boyt.E.T. (2011),"Utilizing the brand ecosystem framework in designing

branding strategies for higher education", International Journal of Educational Management, 25(7),

724 – 739.

Price, I., Matzdorf, F. and Agathi, H. (2003), “The impact of facilities on student choice of university”,

Facilities,21(10), 212-22.

Rudd.D & Mills.R, 2008, “Expanding Marketing principles for The Sale of Higher Educationz”.

Contemporary Issues in Education Research, Third Quarter, 2008, 1(3).

Soedijati (2006) The influence of marketing mix on student satisfaction and student loyalty, unpublished

paper, Widyatama University.

Stensaker, B., D‟Andrea, V. (2007), Branding – the why, what and how in Stensaker B. and D‟Andrea V.

(eds.) Branding in Higher Education. Exploring an Emerging Phenomenon, EAIR Series Research,

Policy and Practice in Higher Education, pp. 6-13

Yavas. U and Shemwell D.J, (1996), “Graphical Representation of the University Image: a correspondence

analysis”, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 7(2), 75-84.

Zeithaml, V. A. (1981). How consumer evaluation processes differ between goods and service Paper

presented at the National Service Conference ED., American Marketing Association Chicago.

the influence of marketing mix on the student’s choice of

Documents