مدل ساختاری تأثیر دوسوتوانی برند دانشگاه بر تعهد دانشجویان با توجه به نقش میانجی عملکرد برند و تصویر برند دانشگاه (مورد مطالعه: برند پیام نور)

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران

چکیده

هدف تحقیق حاضر بررسی نقش دوسوتوانی برند دانشگاه بر تعهد دانشجویان به دانشگاه برای ادامه تحصیل در مقاطع تحصیلات تکمیلی با توجه به نقش میانجی عملکرد برند و تصویر برند دانشگاه بود. تحقیق از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی و از نظر روش، توصیفی از نوع پیمایشی بود. جامعه آماری دانشجویان دانشگاه پیام نور استان یزد بود و حجم نمونه با فرمول کوکران، 359 تعیین شد. ابزار گردآوری داده‌ها، چهار پرسش­نامه بود. برای بررسی پایایی پرسش­نامه­ها از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ و برای بررسی روایی از روش روایی منطقی (روایی محتوا) و روایی سازه (تحلیل عاملی تأییدی) استفاده شد. تحلیل­های توصیفی و آزمون همبستگی با استفاده از نرم­افزار اس­پی­اس­اس و تحلیل­های مربوط به مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری با نرم­افزار لیزرل انجام شد. نتایج مدل ساختاری نشان داد که در دانشگاه پیام نور استان یزد، بعد اکتشافی دوسوتوانی برند بر عملکرد برند تأثیر دارد اما بعد بهره­برداری تأثیر ندارد. عملکرد برند دانشگاه بر تصویر برند دانشگاه و همچنین تصویر برند بر تعهد دانشجویان تأثیر دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Structural Model of Influence of Brand Ambidexterity on Studentsʼ Commitment with Considering Mediating Role of Brand performance and Brand Image (Case: Brand of Payame Noor)

نویسنده [English]

  • Hamideh Shekari
چکیده [English]

Abstract: The aim of this research is to investigate the effect of brand ambidexterity on studentsʼ commitment for higher education with considering mediating role of brand performance and brand image. This study is an applied research in terms of purpose and a descriptive-survey research in terms of method. The statistical population is the students of Payam-e-Noor University in Yazd province. A sample comprising of 359 members was selected using simple random sampling method. The statistical instruments consisted of four questionnaires. Reliability of the scales was confirmed by Cronbach’s alfa and validity of the scales was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. For analyzing data, Structural Equation Modeling was employed.The results revealed that exploratory strategy has a direct, positive and significant impact on brand performance. Exploitative strategy has no effect on brand performance. Brand performance has a direct, positive and significant impact on brand image. Brand image has a direct, positive and significant impact on studentsʼ commitment.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Brand ambidexterity
  • Brand performance
  • Brand image
  • Studentsʼ Commitment

اسماعیل‌پور، مجید و شیربان، لیلا (۱۳۹۴). بررسی اهمیت جلب رضایت و وفاداری دانشجویان به‌عنوان مشتری دانشگاه‌ها و عوامل مؤثر در ایجاد آن، کنفرانس سالانه مدیریت و اقتصاد کسب و کار، تهران.

شکاری، حمیده و ضماهنی، مجید (1395). مدل ساختاری سازمان فضیلت­گرا در دانشگاه‌های منتخب استان یزد. فصلنامه مدیریت ‌سازمان‌های دولتی، 3 (15)، 49 – 63.

لگزیان، محمد؛ یوسف­پور، افسانه و تقوی، سیده فریماه (1395). بررسی تأثیر عوامل مؤثر بر اشتراک­گذاری اطلاعات G2G میان سازمان­های دولتی. فصلنامه مدیریت ‌سازمان‌های دولتی، 4 (16)، 9 – 30.

 

Beverland, M. B.; Wilner, S. J. S. & Micheli, P. (2015). Reconciling the tension between consistency and relevance: Design thinking as a mechanism for brand ambidexterity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43 (5), 589–609.

Chang, Y., & Ko Y. J. (2014). The brand leadership: Scale development and validation. Journal of Brand Management, 21, 63–80.

Chung, K. H.; Yu, J. E.; Kim, W. & Shin, J. I. (2016). The antecedent and consequences of brand image in a low-priced cosmetic brand of South Korea: The moderating effect of gender. International Journal of u- and e- Service, Science and Technology, 9 (2), 175-184.

Chapleo, C. (2004). Interpretation and implementation of reputation/brand management by UK university leaders. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 5 (1), 7–23.

Davis, D. F.; Golicic, S. L. & Marquardt, A. J. (2008). Branding a B2B service: Does a brand differentiate a logistics service provider? Industrial Marketing Management, 37 (2), 218–227.

Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: designing dual structures for innovation. In: Kilmann, R. H., Pondy, L. R. & Slevin, D. P. The management of organization design, Strategies and Implementation, vol. 1, North – Holland, New York, 167-188.

Franzen, G. & Bouwman, M. (2001). The mental world of brands. Oxfordshire, UK: World Advertising Research (WARC).

Geerts, A.; Blindenbach-Driessen, F. & Gemmel, P. (2010). Achieving a balance between exploration and exploitation in service firms: A Longitudinal study. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the academy of management.

Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy Man. J. 47, 209-226.

Goosen, M. C.; Bazzazian, N. & Phelps, C. (2012). Consistently capricious: The performance effects of simultaneous and sequential ambidexterity. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the academy of management.

Hsiao, Y. C. & Chen, C. J. (2013). Branding vs contract manufacturing: Capability, strategy, and performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 28, 317–334.

Jansen, J. P. (2005). Ambidextrous organizations: A multi – level study of absorptive capacity, exploratory and exploitative innovation and performance. Erasmus research institute of management, Rotterdam, Erasmus University Rotterdam (PHD: 196).

Junni, P.; Sarala, R.; Taras, V. & Tarba, S. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analysis. The Academy of Management Perspectives, AMP-2012. Published online before print July 9, 2013.

Liao, Y.; Wang, Y. & Yeh, Ch. (2014). Exploring the relationship between intentional and behavioral loyalty in the context of e-tailing. Internet Research, 24 (5), 668-686.

Lynch, J. & DeChernatony, L. (2004). The power of emotion: Brand communication in business-to-business markets. Journal of Brand Management, 11(5), 403–419.

Marchs, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organization learning. Organizatin science, 2, 71-87.

Melewar, T. C. & Nguyen, B. (2014). Five areas to advance branding theory and practice. Journal of Brand Management, 21, 758–769.

 Morgan, R. M. & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment–trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58 (3), 20–38.

Nguyen, B.;Yu, X.; Melewar, T. C. & Hemsley-Brown, J. (2016). Brand ambidexterity and commitment in higher education: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Research,

 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.026

Oh, L. B.; Teo, H. H. & Sambamurthy, V. (2012). The effects of retail channel integration through the use of information technologies on firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 30 (5), 368-381.

O’Reilly, C. & Tushman, M. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27 (4), 324-338.

Paliokaite, A. & Pacesa, N. (2014). The relationship between organizational foresight and organizational ambidexterity. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.03.004

Prieto, E.; Revilla, E. & Rodriguez, B. (2007). Information technology and the ambidexterity hypothesis: an analysis in product development. Social Science Research Network, Working Paper.

Rutter, R.; Roper, S. & Lettice, F. (2016). Social media interaction, the university brand and recruitment performance. Journal of Business Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.025

Simsek, Z.; Heavay, C.; Vegia, J. F. & Souder, D. (2009). A typology for aligning organizational ambidexteritys conceptualizations, antecedents and outcomes. Journal of management studies, 46, 864-894.

SyedAlwi, S. F. & Kitchen, P. (2014). Business schools brand image: A design perspective. Journal of Business Research, 67 (11), 2324–2336.

SyedAlwi, S. F.; Nguyen, B.; Gupta, S. & Melewar, T. C. (2015). Explicating industrial buyer commitment: Integrating brand trust, brand performance and industrial brand image in the HVAC industry. Working paper.

Teo, T.; Lee, C. B.; Chai, C. S. & Wong, S. L. (2009). Assessing the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers in Singapore and Malaysia: A multigroup invariance analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Computers & Education, 53.

Tuan, L. (2012). Behind brand performance. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 4 (1), 42-57.

Vorhies, D. W.; Orr, L. M. & Bush, V. D. (2011). Improving customer-focused marketing capabilities and firm financial performance via marketing exploration and exploitation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 736–756.

Watkins, B. A. & Gonzenbach, W. J. (2013). Assessing university brand personality through logos: An analysis of the use of academics and athletics in university branding. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 23, 15–33.

Wiklund, J. & Shepard, D. (2003). Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1307-1314.

Wulf, T.; Stubner, S. & Blarr, H. (2010). Ambidexterity and the concept of fit in strategic management – Which better predicts success? A study conducted by the chair of strategic management and organization at HHL – Leipzig graduate school of management, HHL – Arbeitspapier HHL working paper, no. 89.

Yu, X.; Chen, Y.; Nguyen, B. & Zhang, W. (2014). Ties with government, strategic capability and organizational ambidexterity: Evidence from China's information communication technology industry. Information Technology & Management, 15(2), 81–98.

Zhang, Y. (2015). The impact of brand Image on consumer behavior: A literature review. Open Journal of Business and Management, 3, 58-62.