IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/adm/journl/v9y2020i2p34-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theoretical Approach and Analysis of Stakeholders’ Impact on Quality Processes in Higher Education - The Case of Greek Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Panagiota Xanthopoulou

Abstract

The issue of identifying and managing stakeholders has been largely explored by international literature and articles focusing on private sector organizations (Christopher et al., 2002; Rutterford et al., 2006), and the importance of this issue is also gradually increasing in public sector organizations (Maassen, 2000; Wit and Verhoeven, 2000; Peters, 1996; Kettle, 2002). However, less extensive research efforts have been observed in the application and analysis of stakeholder theory in public universities. Stakeholder recognition and management as well as the measurement and subsequent evaluation of their impact on quality service delivery are important in terms of effective management (Mitchell et al., 1997), strategic decision making and rational planning (Bryson, 2004), and by consistency in the application of the principles of Total Quality Management. Identifying and understanding the stakeholders related to an organization and the influence they have on the organization are crucial for managers and policy makers. The purpose of the present research is to explore the specific gap in the literature, that is, to understand the nature, needs and expectations of stakeholders, the satisfaction of which is a sufficient and necessary condition for the effective delivery of quality services at a University. In this context, the study focused on identifying stakeholders of a University as well as the degree of influence they have on providing quality educational services but also on the dropout rate of students, using case studies from two Greek Universities. Specifically, Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences has been selected as a foundation based on traditional, life-long teaching, and the Hellenic Open University, focusing on its undergraduate and postgraduate programs. In this way, a comparison is made of the quality criteria as perceived by the stakeholders of the two Universities with a different approach and philosophy of providing educational services.

Suggested Citation

  • Panagiota Xanthopoulou, 2020. "Theoretical Approach and Analysis of Stakeholders’ Impact on Quality Processes in Higher Education - The Case of Greek Universities," International Journal of Sciences, Office ijSciences, vol. 9(02), pages 34-45, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:adm:journl:v:9:y:2020:i:2:p:34-45
    DOI: 10.18483/ijSci.2269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ijsciences.com/pub/article/2269
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.ijsciences.com/pub/pdf/V92020022269.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18483/ijSci.2269?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Neville & Bulent Menguc, 2006. "Stakeholder Multiplicity: Toward an Understanding of the Interactions between Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 377-391, July.
    2. Agle, Bradley R. & Donaldson, Thomas & Freeman, R. Edward & Jensen, Michael C. & Mitchell, Ronald K. & Wood, Donna J., 2008. "Dialogue: Toward Superior Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 153-190, April.
    3. Muhammad Asif & Muhammad Awan & Muhammad Khan & Niaz Ahmad, 2013. "A model for total quality management in higher education," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1883-1904, June.
    4. AVRAM, Emanuela Maria & AVRAM, Remus Marian, 2011. "Quality Management In Higher Education Institutions," Holistic Marketing Management Journal, Holistic Marketing Management, vol. 1(2), pages 41-47, June.
    5. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, 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. Vassilis Zakopoulos & Panagiota Xanthopoulou, 2024. "Overcoming Barriers to Openness: The Transformative Role of Digital Technologies in the Case of Theatre Education," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(4), pages 149-169.

    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. Michel Ferrary, 2019. "The structure and dynamics of the CEO's “small world” of stakeholders. An application to industrial downsizing," Post-Print hal-03214823, HAL.
    2. Pera, Rebecca & Occhiocupo, Nicoletta & Clarke, Jackie, 2016. "Motives and resources for value co-creation in a multi-stakeholder ecosystem: A managerial perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4033-4041.
    3. Ferrary, Michel, 2019. "The structure and dynamics of the CEO's “small world” of stakeholders. An application to industrial downsizing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 147-159.
    4. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    5. Dean Neu & Gregory D. Saxton & Abu S. Rahaman, 2022. "Social Accountability, Ethics, and the Occupy Wall Street Protests," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 17-31, September.
    6. Shahzad Khurram & Sandra Charreire Petit, 2017. "Investigating the Dynamics of Stakeholder Salience: What Happens When the Institutional Change Process Unfolds?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 485-515, July.
    7. Carmen Nastase & Carmen Chasovschi & Mihai Popescu & Adrian Liviu Scutariu, 2010. "The Importance of Stakeholders and Policy Influence Enhancing the Innovation in Nature Based Tourism Services Greece, Austria, Finland and Romania Case Studies," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 137-148.
    8. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    9. Päivi Myllykangas & Johanna Kujala & Hanna Lehtimäki, 2010. "Analyzing the Essence of Stakeholder Relationships: What do we Need in Addition to Power, Legitimacy, and Urgency?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 65-72, August.
    10. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    11. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    12. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    13. Pia Lotila, 2010. "Corporate Responsiveness to Social Pressure: An Interaction-Based Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 395-409, July.
    14. Hannah Charlotte Joos, 2019. "Influences on managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience: two decades of research in review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 3-37, February.
    15. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    17. Caroline Flammer, 2015. "Does Corporate Social Responsibility Lead to Superior Financial Performance? A Regression Discontinuity Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2549-2568, November.
    18. John Manso Frimpong & Jacob Kuutoume & Christiana Abrafi Gyamfi, 2024. "Supply Chain Integration and Organizational Resources and Capabilities: The Moderating Effect of Stakeholders’ Support," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 72-82, July.
    19. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    20. Sandra Ricart & Antonio M. Rico-Amorós, 2022. "Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 589-604, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:adm:journl:v:9:y:2020:i:2:p:34-45. 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: Staff ijSciences The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Staff ijSciences to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.