Author:
Topaler Başak,Ayvaz-Çavdaroğlu Nur
Abstract
Purpose
Being a prestigious institution depends on gaining respect in the eyes of various stakeholders with diverse expectations. Existing research is silent on how university characteristics affect judgments of prestige and, therefore, presents an incomplete picture of prestige dynamics in higher education. This paper aims to fill this gap in the literature by empirically examining the stakeholders’ evaluation of university characteristics in terms of prestige value.
Design/methodology/approach
The entire population of universities (public and private) in Turkish higher education constitutes the sample of the study. The analytic hierarchy process technique is applied to ascertain how stakeholders prioritize university characteristics in terms of prestige value, and regression analysis is used to determine the effects of these characteristics on university selectivity.
Findings
The findings suggest a novel conceptual model of university prestige, which establishes its multilayered and fragmented nature. Accordingly, universities may be subject to multiple prestige hierarchies based on universal or context-specific criteria, in the eyes of various stakeholders, and based on different markers of success.
Research limitations/implications
The empirical analyses are limited to the stakeholder groups that are key to university outcomes in Turkish higher education, and to selectivity in admissions as the only visible marker of success in this context.
Originality/value
The study enhances existing literature that posits that universities are subject to a single prestige hierarchy based on common metrics of performance. It illustrates the uneven landscape in which university prestige evolves by developing a wider and deeper focus on university characteristics.
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Strategy and Management
Reference54 articles.
1. The evolution of class inequality in higher education: competition, exclusion, and adaptation;American Sociological Review,2009
2. When does main street prefer wall street? Legitimacy, status, and decision-making;Management Decision,2020
3. Status-aspirational pricing: the ‘chivas regal’ strategy in US higher education, 2006-2012;Administrative Science Quarterly,2016
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献