The future of transnational education: stakeholder attitudes

846 views

Published on

The TNE landscape is a complex one, with multiple stakeholders, each having different perceptions, expectations and motivations. Differing starting points and expectations have spawned a vibrant and diverse range of engagement models. Some have been more successful than others, but all have contributed to the rich fabric of international higher education and in most cases benefitted their stakeholders either directly or indirectly. For institutions looking to enter into or reassess their existing TNE arrangements, understanding stakeholder attitudes and how their context is reshaping perspectives is critical to ensuring a program’s viability. It is now more important than ever to ensure that TNE programs are aligned, not just to the strategic goals of the foreign degree provider, but also the needs of the stakeholders in the hosting country. This presentation explores stakeholder attitudes to TNE utilising the most recent research and market based insights.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
846
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
36
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Title Slide to be updated with all the participants
  • My thoughts are developing on this as follows:2.5 hrsIntro, scene setting, who is who on the panel and in the audience1st section sets the foundation. Builds on the morning session and enables Nige, Kurt and Lorne challenge perceptions and models based on their experience and ideas.2nd section provides a socio economic perspective of view the TNE world. Nige, Kurt and Lorne to highlight how this relates to specific examples from their own experiences and speculate as to how these many apply in new TNE markets.3rd section is an opportunity to link motivations to feasibility, decision making and planning processes for new and existing TNE. This gives Nige the opportunity to share his views as to whether TNE is really the future and open the audience to challenge him.The group discussions are there to get the groups sharing ideas, expanding on areas and providing the presenters with new perspectives to build into the sections.Wrap upWhen Simon and I have down these previously we tag team the speaking which appears to work. As Simon may not be there, it will need to be Nige, Kurt and myself and therefore we need to know what you feel more comfortable with.
  • This is to get the audience aligned to the messages in the workshop
  • Probably don’t need this
  • Coming after the session in the morning, we probably don’t need to dwell on definitions. NB. I am trying to obtain more information as to what the morning session will cover.
  • I have kept the notes from 2013 below. The new 2012/13 data for the UK is out and the total TNE has increased to 598,000. I haven’t bought the data set this year, but Nige if you have a copy I can update my stats (need tables 20 and 21)Not withstanding this, the data should be similar.There are more students studying for UK degrees abroad than there are at home.The number of international students taking UK qualifications overseas is now 571,000 “compared with around 488,000 international students in this country”, according to the Higher Education Statistics Agency.report, The Shape of Things to Come – The evolution of transnational education: Data, definitions, opportunities and impacts analysis, which examines the development of transnational education and environmental factors conducive to its successful delivery.Transnational education is continuing to expand at a brisk pace; both in terms of scale – programme and student enrolment – and scope – diversity of delivery modes and location of delivery,” said the council in its release.Courses offered abroad are expected to expand under the government’s newinternational education strategy, which was published in July, and with the formation of an International Education Council to champion the strategy.Dr Jo Beall, the British Council’s director of education and society, said the research had shown that transnational education was a “complex and fast changing environment, and therefore it’s even more important that the UK is able to use its world-recognised quality assurance processes to set international standards”.
  • Depending on what was covered in the morning we can skip this slide
  • Depending on what was covered in the morning we can skip this slide
  • This is probably also covered in the morning but I think we need to keep it for our workshop. Kurt do you have any US examples?This can be referred to in one of the workshop activities as am exercise.
  • Distribution based on historical UK and AUS data onlyBased on what we know of US and other countries engagement models, we are likely to see a reduction in the Validated % with an increase in Fly-In-Fly-Out, Franchise and “schools” with foreign hired staff.
  • Whilst not referred to in the Shape of Things to Come 2 directly, this is related. I expect that some elements of the morning session will infer elements of this.It might be worthwhile developing some alternative examples based on the US experience and Latin America. These were for the APAIE audience’s benefit.Regression of GER % and per capita income indicates expected GER % at a specific level of per capita income
  • I have updated this slide with the most recent data from the World Bank Data Bank. I have also moved from a Gross National Indicator (Atlas) to GDP PPP base in the graphs. This is to align the data to the Shape of Things to Come data representation.A few surprises from the last data, notably India has dramatically increased its GER% and student population. 95% of this data is from the World Bank, with alternative sources used to fill in gaps.NB. The TNE population is probably the same size as the Netherlands or South Africa or Hong Kong, Singapore and New Zealand combinedOver 50% of the global student population is in countries with a GDP/Cap below USD 10,000Over 50% of the student population in countries with GER below 40%
  • I am not suggesting that we us this slide, however I have included it for reference and for the comments belowThe slide shows the est current global student population (BC shape of things to come uses a different source and presents it differently but basically tells the same story), then shows what proportion is in respective GNI/Capita and GER brackets. 52% of the global student population is in countries with a GNI below USD 10,000 and 53% below 40% GER.This slide to emphasize that TNE occurs in:Underdeveloped education systems and economies GER below 10% and GNI per Capita below USD 3,000Developing education systems and economies GER below 50% and GNI per Capita below USD 16,000Developed education systems and economies GER above 50% and and GNI per Capita above USD 16,000The British Council is talking about the significance of a GER of 40% and the USD 10,000 threshold, suggesting that there is a line which can be used to indicate higher educational efficiency. Below this line there is structural inefficiency that TNE can be used to bridge?The Mode of TNE engagement across these 3 areas different and more importantly evolving as TNE partners in these countries mature and the socioeconomic conditions in which they operated change..See next slide
  • This is a new slide which plots the total economic size of a country, its GDP per capita and its tertiary student population.As the stakeholder motivations are conceptualized on the same axis, this helps visualize the different circumstances for different countries.Some of the riches countries per capita are small, whereas some of the less wealth are economic giants.
  • This is another new slide which plots the GINI index (inequity of income distribution in a country, the higher the more inequity) v per capital income and student population.I plotted this as there is a view that traditional student mobility comes from the more wealthy classes in developing countries and that TNE is more likely to occur where there is a growing middle class.I wanted to try and get good data to also look at the top 10 and 20% of the population as a percentage of income, but it was too scattered.
  • GINI index (inequity of income distribution in a country, the higher the more inequity) v GER %If you are in a low GER country, then access to education is for the well to do.NB. The GINI index in the develop nations is increasing (becoming less equitable) where as the lower income should be moving other way!
  • I have been looking back over my old notes when I first started giving PD on TNE and the stakeholder list hasn’t changed much. That said I am more than happy for someone to tell me we need to add another group!
  • I am interested in your thoughts know that you can overlay these motivations against specific countries.
  • Ditto on both the economic and GINI maps
  • EmploymentThere is a concern that if foreign universities penetrate a market (e.g. India), many of the professors teaching at even the best government institutions (In the Indian case, the IITs and IIMs) might move to these institutions as they might find the reward incentives at these institutions more satisfactory plus more time and space for innovation and research.The flipside here is that the availability of full-time and part-time opportunities for indigenous academics/researchers improves the prospect of them staying ‘home’. In Greece, 85% of academics working in public universities/colleges are estimated to undertake some gainful (secondary) employment with a foreign provider or foreign provider backed private college.
  • Someone made a comment (in one of our sessions? Simon) about education following Multinational business expansion. The Employer/Industry comments are worth considering against the attractiveness of markets from a business perspective. The BCG, World Bank and ADB have all made comments about local HE not meeting the needs of employers in development markets.
  • The participants represent a mix of sending and receiving countries, institutions and agencies. The groups should be encouraged to actively look at both sides of the motivation fence.
  • The participants represent a mix of sending and receiving countries, institutions and agencies. The groups should be encouraged to actively look at both sides of the motivation fence.
  • Simon and I talked about revisiting his 6 Rs in Seoul and I think it is a good idea.What I think would be interesting is to reassess the 6 Rs from a more broader stakeholder awareness and engagement perspective. I like the 6 Rs but to be honest I think that they are mostly applied from a sending institution’s academic only lens and fail to take into account the broader stakeholder network.I think that we can look at the 6 Rs as a means to plot potential and identify what elements are likely to change as partnerships mature and capabilities increase.
  • The 6Rs have significantly different positions depending on the socio economic status of the TNE operations. Without understanding the stakeholder motivations and requirements risks and benefits are likely to be under or overstated.
  • Is the objective of all partnerships to move outwards on all points. If so how do you achieve this without understanding and leveraging off the stakeholders.
  • How can each R be influenced by each stakeholder category?Where can additional benefits be gained through engagement and risks reduced or mitigated?
  • The future of transnational education: stakeholder attitudes

    1. 1. The future of transnational education: stakeholder attitudes Lorne Gibson, Deakin University (Australia) Nigel Healey, Nottingham Trent University (UK) Kurt Kirstein, City University of Seattle (USA) 1 PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOP TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2014 - 12:30 TO 15:00 MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER B112
    2. 2. Workshop Outline 2 Time Activity 1230 – 1240 Welcome and Introduction 1240 – 1300 Overview of TNE environment today and stakeholders 1300 – 1310 Group discussion 1 1310 – 1340 Positioning TNE in global higher education sector and stakeholder motivations 1340 – 1350 Group discussion 2 1350 – 1400 Afternoon tea 1400 – 1430 Is TNE the future for universities? 1430 – 1440 Group discussion 3 1440 Closing remarks and open questions 1500 Close
    3. 3. Key Messages 1. TNE is vast, complex and growing 2. TNE operations have many stakeholders 3. Stakeholder motivations and expectations vary according to the respective socio-economic status of the respective countries 4. TNE operations will mature, socio-economic status will develop and stakeholder requirements will change 5. Traditionally, ‘sending’ institutions overlook many stakeholder requirements, reflecting institutional biases and preconceptions 3
    4. 4. What is TNE? 4
    5. 5. What is TNE? • “Any teaching or learning activity in which the students are in a different country to that in which the institutional providing the education is based” (Global Alliance for Transnational Education, 1997) • “All types of higher education study programmes, sets of study courses, or educational services (including those of distance education) in which the learners are located in a country different from the one where the awarding institution is based” (Council of Europe, 2002) 5
    6. 6. How big is TNE? United Kingdom Australia ≈ 90,000 students Distance Branch CampusPartnershipDistance, Flexible or Distributed Collaborative Provision Other Partner Arrangement Branch Campus ≈ 599,000 students Other Countries 200,000 or 300,000+ students ? 6
    7. 7. UK’s HESA Data 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Overseas campus 7,120 9,885 11,410 12,305 15,140 17,525 Distance, flexible and distributed learning 100,345 112,345 114,985 113,065 116,520 123,635 Other students registered at HEI 59,895 68,595 74,360 86,630 96,060 103,795 Overseas partner organisation* 29,240 197,185 207,790 291,575 342,910 353,375 Other students studying overseas for HEI's award 70 35 50 125 345 600 Total 196,670 388,045 408,595 503,700 570,925 598,930 * Includes 337,000 Oxford Brookes University/ACCA students
    8. 8. General agreement on trade in services (GATS) • Cross-border supply corresponds to the common form of trade in goods; only the service itself crosses the border.Mode 1 • Consumption abroad refers to a situation in which a service consumer moves to another country to obtain the serviceMode 2 • Commercial presence refers to the commercial establishment of facilities abroad to deliver the serviceMode 3 • Presence of natural persons refers to people travelling to another country on a temporary basis to provide the serviceMode 4 8
    9. 9. General agreement on trade in services (GATS) 9 • Distance education Mode 1 • Export education, articulation, dual/joint degreesMode 2 • International branch campuses, franchising/twinning, validationMode 3 • Flying facultyMode 4
    10. 10. GATS Applied to Current TNE Landscape 10 Joint Double Degree Delivery Partner Twinning
    11. 11. GATS Applied to Current TNE Landscape 11 Joint Double Degree Delivery Partner Twinning Joint Double Degree Delivery Partner Twinning 11% 20% 3% 15% 37% 14%
    12. 12. TNE typologies and reputational risk 08 May 2014 12
    13. 13. Limits of existing typologies 08 May 2014 13 …and some TNE partnerships off the radar
    14. 14. Further reading on TNE typologies • Healey, N. and Michael, L. (2014), Towards a new framework for analysing transnational education, Higher Education Policy (in press) • Healey, N. (2014), Towards a risk-based typology for transnational education, Higher Education, (DOI) 10.1007/s10734-014-9757-6
    15. 15. Group Discussion 1 • What TNE models are your experienced with? • Can you name a successful TNE operation? • Can you name a failed TNE operation? • What are the key elements which determine success or failure in TNE partnerships? • Why would someone want to engaged in a TNE program as a student, teacher, partner or government? 15
    16. 16. TNE Environment Positioning Definitions / Explanations • Countries above this regression line nominally have a more efficient/effective higher education sector than forecast based on their level of per capita income Position Efficient • Countries below this regression line nominally have a less efficient/effective higher education sector than forecast based on their level of per capita income Position Inefficient • Demand for higher education significantly exceeds supply via existing institutions • The market/government is facilitating entry of new supply purely to meet growing demand Demand Absorbing • Focus on building institutional capacity across all areas including, teaching; research; engagement; and, student support • Demand is increasing at a slower rate and supply is more targeted Capacity Building •Existing high level capabilities and generally no supply constraints •Seeking to leverage skills internationally in partnership to mutual benefit Capability Leveraging South Korea UAE Pakistan Malaysia Japan 16
    17. 17. TNE Environment Positioning Map (GER%) Per Capita Income Low Middle High ParticipationRates HighMiddleLow Position Efficient Position Inefficient Demand Absorbing Capacity Building Capability Leveraging China India United States Russian Federation Brazil Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Japan Turkey Korea, Rep. Mexico Germany Philippines ArgentinaUkraine Thailand United Kingdom France Egypt, Arab Rep. Vietnam Poland Bangladesh Venezuela, RB Italy Spain Colombia Pakistan Nigeria Canada Australia Algeria Chile Malaysia Saudi Arabia Peru Romania Netherlands South Africa Kazakhstan Ethiopia Belarus Ecuador Morocco Greece Iraq Sweden Belgium Czech Republic Portugal Bolivia Nepal Hungary Israel Tunisia Austria Paraguay Finland Dominican Republic Uganda Ghana Bulgaria Uzbekistan Hong Kong SAR, China Yemen, Rep. Sudan New Zealand Guatemala Kyrgyz Republic Switzerland Denmark Jordan Cameroon Singapore Sri Lanka Norway Serbia Slovak Republic Cambodia Lebanon Ireland Cote d'Ivoire Costa Rica Tajikistan Lithuania Azerbaijan Mongolia Uruguay Kenya El Salvador Honduras Croatia Angola Armenia Panama Moldova Lao PDR Georgia Nicaragua Benin Bosnia and Herzegovina Slovenia Latvia United Arab Emirates Guinea 17
    18. 18. TNE Environment Positioning Map (Economic Size) 19 Per Capita Income Low Middle High EconomicSize HighMiddleLow China India United States Russian Federation Brazil Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Japan Turkey Korea, Rep.Mexico Germany Philippines Argentina Ukraine Thailand United Kingdom France Egypt, Arab Rep. Vietnam Poland Bangladesh Venezuela, RB Italy Spain Colombia Pakistan Nigeria Canada Australia Algeria Chile Malaysia Saudi Arabia Peru Romania Netherlands South Africa Kazakhstan Ethiopia Belarus Ecuador Morocco Greece Iraq Sweden Belgium Czech Republic Portugal Bolivia Nepal Hungary Israel Tunisia Austria Paraguay Finland Dominican Republic Uganda Ghana Bulgaria Uzbekistan Hong Kong SAR, China Yemen, Rep. Sudan New Zealand Guatemala Kyrgyz Republic Switzerland Denmark Jordan Cameroon Singapore Sri Lanka Norway Serbia Slovak Republic Cambodia Lebanon Ireland Cote d'Ivoire Costa Rica Tajikistan Lithuania Azerbaijan Mongolia Uruguay Kenya El Salvador Honduras Croatia Angola Armenia Panama Moldova Lao PDR GeorgiaNicaragua Benin Bosnia and Herzegovina Slovenia Latvia United Arab Emirates Guinea
    19. 19. TNE Environment Positioning Map (GINI Index) 20 Per Capita Income Low Middle High IncomeInequity HighMiddleLow China India United States Russian Federation Brazil Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Japan Turkey Korea, Rep. Mexico Germany Philippines Argentina Ukraine Thailand United Kingdom France Egypt, Arab Rep. Vietnam Poland Bangladesh Venezuela, RB Italy Spain Colombia Pakistan Nigeria Canada Australia Algeria Chile Malaysia Peru Romania Netherlands South Africa Kazakhstan Ethiopia Belarus Ecuador Morocco Greece Sweden Belgium Czech Republic Portugal Bolivia Nepal Hungary Israel Tunisia Austria Paraguay Finland Dominican Republic Uganda Ghana Bulgaria Uzbekistan Hong Kong SAR, China Yemen, Rep. New Zealand Guatemala Switzerland Denmark Jordan Cameroon Singapore Sri Lanka Norway Serbia Slovak Republic Cambodia Ireland Cote d'Ivoire Costa Rica Tajikistan Lithuania Azerbaijan Mongolia Uruguay Kenya El Salvador Honduras Croatia Armenia Panama Moldova Georgia Nicaragua Benin Bosnia and Herzegovina Slovenia Latvia Guinea
    20. 20. TNE Environment Positioning Map (GINI Index v GER%) GER % Low Middle High IncomeInequity HighMiddleLow China India United States Russian Federation Brazil Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Japan Turkey Korea, Rep. Mexico Germany Philippines Argentina Ukraine Thailand United Kingdom France Egypt, Arab Rep. Vietnam Poland Bangladesh Venezuela, RB Italy Spain Colombia Pakistan Nigeria Canada Australia Algeria Chile Malaysia Peru Romania Netherlands South Africa Kazakhstan Ethiopia Belarus Ecuador Morocco Greece Sweden Belgium Czech Republic Portugal Bolivia Nepal Hungary Israel Tunisia Austria Paraguay Finland Dominican Republic Uganda Ghana Bulgaria Uzbekistan Hong Kong SAR, China Yemen, Rep. New Zealand Guatemala Switzerland Denmark Jordan Cameroon Singapore Sri Lanka Norway Serbia Slovak Republic Cambodia Ireland Cote d'Ivoire Costa Rica Tajikistan Lithuania Azerbaijan Mongolia Uruguay Kenya El Salvador Honduras Croatia Armenia Panama Moldova Mozambique Georgia Nicaragua Benin Bosnia and Herzegovina Slovenia Latvia Guinea 21
    21. 21. Overview of TNE stakeholders Academic Partners Faculty and Staff Students and Families Host Government Home Government Employers and Community Local Institutions 22
    22. 22. Stakeholder Motivations Host Government • GER <30% • GER >30% Per Capita Income Low Middle High EconomicSize HighMiddleLow • Access Provision • White Knight • Economic Development • Increase Supply • Capacity Building • Economic Alignment • Private v Public Supply • Private v Public Supply • Middle Class Supply • Local Elite Enhancing • Middle Class Supply • Economic Development • Local Elite Enhancing • Increase Supply • Capacity Building • Joint Partnering • Private v Public Supply • Has Internal Capacity to Meet Demand • Capacity Building • Local Elite to Global Elite • Capability Leveraging • Niche Provision • Competition • Capability Leveraging • Local Elite Enhancing • Joint Partnering • Capability Leveraging • Private v Public Supply • Local Elite Enhancing 23
    23. 23. Stakeholder Motivations Students and Families • Access • International • Financial • Work • Employability • PG Access • Mobility 24 Per Capita Income Low Middle High EconomicSize HighMiddleLow • Limited Access to Local Institutions • Question on Local Quality • Award Based Choice • Working and Studying • Limited Access to Local Institutions • Question on Local Quality • Degrees v non- Degrees • Mode of Delivery • Easier Entry? • Differentiation? • English Based? • Easier Entry? • Differentiation? • English Based? • Experiential? • Limited Access to Local Institutions • Working and Studying • Niche Programs ElitetoMiddleClass
    24. 24. Stakeholder Motivations Faculties and Staff • Sending (to) • Hosting • Shared 25 Per Capita Income Low Middle High EconomicSize HighMiddleLow • Employment (primary/secondary) • Access to international expertise • IP transfers • Methodology transfers • Training/mentoring • Status benefits • International exposure • Off-shore experience • Mentoring • Access to local Institutions/cases/data • Career development • RRR • (Potentially) more professional autonomy • Research collaboration • Research collaboration • PhD/Doc. students • > Direct teaching Transferring PLUS • Academic peer exchanges • Status benefits • Reciprocal knowledge transfers • Research collaboration • Access to local Institutions/cases/data • Career development • RRR Diminishing symmetry
    25. 25. Stakeholder Motivations/Impacts • Local (Educational) Institutions • Competitive effects on indigenous players • Tendency towards net-quality enhancement • Potential wage determination effects = ‘salary dispersion’ • Talent switching • Scope for Vertical linkages • Scope for Horizontal linkages Employers/Industry • Better education at lower employment cost • Stopping the ‘Brain Drain’ • Boosting talent supply • Employment creation • Economics spill-over effects 26
    26. 26. Group Discussion 2 • Choose a country you are familiar with 1. Do these stakeholder categories and respective motivations reflect reality? 2. Was the situation 5-10 years ago different? • Pick a TNE engagement model and a country 1. Which stakeholder motivations are most likely to align or not? 2. What can be done to increase alignment? 27
    27. 27. Is TNE the future for universities? 08 May 2014 28 S(domestic) = ƒ(domestic HE capacity) D(domestic) = ƒ(population and GDP growth)
    28. 28. All other things equal… • Demand for transnational education will increase: – If population (especially 18-22 years) grows – Per capita income grows • Demand for transnational education will decrease: – If capacity/quality of domestic higher education increases • In many developing countries, population and per capita income are growing… • …but governments are investing in major expansion of domestic higher education 08 May 2014 29
    29. 29. Balance will change by country and over time 08 May 2014 30 Population growth, GDP growth Domestic HE capacity, regulatory regime Hi Lo TNEmarket
    30. 30. What about us as stakeholders (the ‘supply-side perspective)? • Healey, N. (2013). Is UK transnational education “one of Britain’s great growth industries of the future”? Higher Education Review, 45(3), pp.6-35 • Qualitative study of the attitudes of senior university decision- makers to expanding TNE 08 May 2014 31
    31. 31. Attitudes to expansion of transnational education: positive themes 1. Broaden the market for UK higher education – ‘never will be more than a tiny minority [of students] who can go overseas… There is going to be an increasing need for TNE because of the growing numbers going into higher education’. – ‘TNE is also becoming a core recruitment tool…some big universities have the majority of their international students coming from TNE programmes’ 2. Build a global brand for UK universities – ‘any good research university needs to be globally connected… [TNE] hits the soft power agenda’ 3. UK government is driving TNE across all ministries – ‘*government+ see TNE as a key part of export education, which doesn’t need international students coming here’ – ‘the British Council, the International Unit of UUK, UKTI, the new BIS unit, Education UK, they are all trying to get us to do TNE’ 08 May 2014 32
    32. 32. Attitudes to expansion of transnational education: negative themes 1. Risk aversion – ‘There have been lots of issues and there has been a reduction in these projects [franchising and validation]. They are very one sided’ – ‘too many failed IBCs, like UNSW Asia and George Mason University’ 2. Some TNE activities are not scalable – ‘most [academics] do not understand or care…they want to concentrate on their research’. – ‘people see [TNE] as a pain in the arse’ – ‘the QAA i(Quality Assurance Agency) s so overstretched, how can we ensure that quality is maintained?’ 3. Some forms of TNE are not sustainable – ‘*This+ is not a sustainable model, you’re just plugging the gap until their own sector fills it’ 08 May 2014 33
    33. 33. Attitudes to expansion of transnational education: negative themes (cont’d) 4. No pot of gold – ‘if it’s about making money, there are more interesting things to do — you’ll never make money in the medium term’ – ‘always a mismatch between promise and delivery… Projections in terms of numbers never materialise’ – ‘the costs of tutors, academic overheads, etc are not taken into account. If you included everything, you probably don't make money’ 5. Internal resistance – ‘it is not our core business, we shouldn't be doing something that takes up resources that could be used elsewhere’ 08 May 2014 34 Oxford undergraduates head for class
    34. 34. Group Discussion 3 • In your own university, what do you think are the attitude of fellow academics and/or administrators to: 1. Establishing an international branch campus? 2. Franchising the university’s degree to a foreign college? 3. Validating the degrees of a foreign college? 35
    35. 35. Closing remarks: Modelling the benefits of strategic partnering • Across TNE partnership categories there are some broad benefits of partnership that can be assessed and examined. • Examination may be linked to existing or proposed arrangements, each of which can be modelled (or visualised) in relation to the 6Rs: – Reputation (R1) – Revenue (R2) – Risk (R3) – Reach (R4) – Resource (R5) – Recognition (R6) Thanks to: Prof Simon Mercado, Nottingham Trent University 36
    36. 36. 6Rs Explained • Reputation - encouraging measurement of association benefits linked to brand development, positioning, status and/or ranking. • Revenue – encouraging measurement of fiscal or monetary benefits, both direct and indirect. • Risk – the extent to which a partnership exposes or protects the institution to/from some combination of political, security, financial and legal risk. • Reach – the extent to which a partnership takes the institution and its stakeholders into new and/or targeted markets or territory. • Resource – encouraging measurement of resource demands and/or the extent to which engagement leads to resource enhancements. • Recognition - encouraging measurement of association benefits linked to recognition for excellence, specialisation and/or membership (e.g. of high value projects or networks). Pre-supposes a preliminary test based on: • Relevance – the extent to which a partnership and its focus aligns directly with institutional priorities. 37
    37. 37. Using 6Rs to Visualize TNE 38 Small Program Dual Degree Highly Reputable Partner Large Growing Program Up and Coming Institution Mid Risk Market Strong Revenue Program Higher Risks on Most Categories
    38. 38. How Stakeholders Can Influence the 6Rs 6Rs Reputation (R1) Revenue (R2) Risk (R3) Reach (R4) Resource (R5) Recognition (R6) Stakeholders Academic Partners Faculty and Staff Students and Families Government Employers and Community Local Institutions
    39. 39. Open Discussion And Q&A 40
    40. 40. Lorne Gibson lorne.gibson@deakin.edu.au Nigel Healey nigel.healey@ntu.ac.uk Kurt Kirstein kdkirstein@cityu.edu Thank you 41

    ×