IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mup/actaun/actaun_2014062061385.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Conceptual Scheme for Managing University Stakeholders' Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • David Schüller

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Vít Chlebovský

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Karel Doubravský

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Vladimír Chalupský

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Kolejní 4, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Universities have to face many changes in the sector of higher education caused by the current dynamic development in this sector. With the decline in state support, increased competition and unfavourable demographic progress, universities are forced to establish and improve their relationships with new and existing stakeholders. Research on relationships among universities and stakeholders has historically focused on the different factors and their influence on improving stakeholder satisfaction with the quality of university services and on strengthening cooperation. Some studies are focused on stakeholders' classification according to their importance for higher education institutions. However, there are fewer scientific studies which concentrate on the intricacies of managing stakeholder satisfaction according to key areas of Universities. This study aims to design a conceptual scheme for managing stakeholder satisfaction depending on the importance of stakeholders in the key fields of Universities. The research was done in three steps. As the first stage, university stakeholders were identified via interview. In the second stage, the following key fields relating to university activities were identified via focus group - education, science and research, premises and technology. In the third stage, the importance of the particular stakeholders was identified for the fields mentioned in the stage two. In order to gain the necessary information, a set interview method was chosen. Native students were identified as the most important stakeholder for the field - education, academic staff as the most important for the field - research and development and enterprises as the most important stakeholder for the field - premises and equipment. The results of the research conducted provided the authors with a convenient base for formulating the conceptual scheme for managing stakeholder universities' satisfaction.

Suggested Citation

  • David Schüller & Vít Chlebovský & Karel Doubravský & Vladimír Chalupský, 2014. "The Conceptual Scheme for Managing University Stakeholders' Satisfaction," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 62(6), pages 1385-1393.
    • Handle: RePEc:mup:actaun:actaun_2014062061385
    DOI: 10.11118/actaun201462061385
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://acta.mendelu.cz/doi/10.11118/actaun201462061385.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.11118/actaun201462061385?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Voss, Roediger & Gruber, Thorsten & Szmigin, Isabelle, 2007. "Service quality in higher education: The role of student expectations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(9), pages 949-959, September.
    2. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 2005. "R&D cooperation between firms and universities. Some empirical evidence from Belgian manufacturing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 355-379, June.
    3. Lorraine Dearden & Alissa Goodman & Gill Wyness, 2012. "Higher Education Finance in the UK," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 33(1), pages 73-105, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lena Malačka, 2015. "Role of Marketing Communication in Applicants' Choice of University," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(4), pages 1311-1322.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Angulo-Ruiz, Fernando & Pergelova, Albena & Cheben, Juraj & Angulo-Altamirano, Eladio, 2016. "A cross-country study of marketing effectiveness in high-credence services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3636-3644.
    2. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    3. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2013. "Endogeneous matching in university-industry collaboration: Theory and empirical evidence from the UK," Economics Working Papers 1379, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    5. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    6. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. Erika Raquel Badillo & Rosina Moreno, 2016. "Are Collaborative Agreements in Innovation Activities Persistent at the Firm Level? Empirical Evidence for the Spanish Case," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 49(1), pages 71-101, August.
    8. David Schüller & Vít Chlebovský & Karel Doubravský & Vladimír Chalupský, 2014. "The Conceptual Scheme for Managing University Stakeholders' Satisfaction," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 62(4), pages 719-727.
    9. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Arts, Sam, 2018. "Mind the gap: Capturing value from basic research through combining mobile inventors and partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1811-1824.
    10. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Sandro Montresor, 2012. "Environmental Innovations, Local Networks and Internationalization," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 697-734, November.
    11. Emilio Bellini & Giuseppe Piroli & Luca Pennacchio, 2019. "Collaborative know-how and trust in university–industry collaborations: empirical evidence from ICT firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1939-1963, December.
    12. Konrad Kubacki, 2013. "Wpływ współpracy przedsiębiorstw z sektorem naukowo-badawczym na innowacyjność firm notowanych na GPW w Warszawie oraz NewConnect," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 5-6, pages 97-121.
    13. Li, Xiaoying & Tan, Ying, 2020. "University R&D activities and firm innovations," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    14. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Versaevel, Bruno, 2019. "One lab, two firms, many possibilities: On R&D outsourcing in the biopharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 260-283.
    15. Olga Slivko & Bernd Theilen, 2014. "Innovation or imitation? The effect of spillovers and competitive pressure on firms’ R&D strategy choice," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 112(3), pages 253-282, July.
    16. Chen, Guanghua & Yang, Guoliang & He, Feng & Chen, Kaihua, 2019. "Exploring the effect of political borders on university-industry collaborative research performance: Evidence from China’s Guangdong province," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 58-69.
    17. João M. Lopes & Sofia Gomes & Rosselyn Pacheco & Elizabete Monteiro & Carolina Santos, 2022. "Drivers of Sustainable Innovation Strategies for Increased Competition among Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.
    18. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Mancinelli, Susanna, 2007. "SME Performance, Innovation and Networking Evidence on Complementarities for a Local Economic System," Knowledge, Technology, Human Capital Working Papers 9554, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    19. Barge-Gil, Andres & D'Este, Pablo & Herrera, Liliana, 2018. "Corporate scientists as the triggers of transitions towards firms' exploration research strategies," MPRA Paper 85415, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Greta Falavigna & Roberto Ippoliti, 2018. "Industrial spatial dynamics, financial health and bankruptcy: evidence from Italian manufacturing industry," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(4), pages 533-554, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mup:actaun:actaun_2014062061385. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://mendelu.cz/en/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.