IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jmkthe/v8y1997i1p69-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selection Criteria Used by Graduate Students in Considering Doctoral Business Programs Offered by Private vs. Public Institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Marion S. Webb
  • Ronald L. Coccari
  • Augustine Lado
  • Lida C. Allen
  • Alan K. Reichert

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether doctoral business students' perceptions of private and public institutions differed and whether these differences provide the potential for sustained competitive advantage. The results of this study indicate that private institutions tend to be more attractive to students because these institutions: (a) are perceived to have a strong reputation for quality, (b) employ more effective promotional strategies, (c) are more competitive in terms of program length, and (d) provide more attractive nonacademic opportunities. On the other hand, public institutions appear to have the following advantages: (a) appeal more readily to students where considerations are important, (b) offer additional graduate study opportunities (Ph.D./D.B.A.) in the business areas beyond the Master's Degree, and (c) appear to offer more in the way of physical facilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion S. Webb & Ronald L. Coccari & Augustine Lado & Lida C. Allen & Alan K. Reichert, 1997. "Selection Criteria Used by Graduate Students in Considering Doctoral Business Programs Offered by Private vs. Public Institutions," Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 69-90, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jmkthe:v:8:y:1997:i:1:p:69-90
    DOI: 10.1300/J050v08n01_06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1300/J050v08n01_06
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1300/J050v08n01_06?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:jmkthe:v:8:y:1997:i:1:p:69-90. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/WMHE20 .

    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.