This document summarizes a study that examined students' sentiments towards master's programs using the Corporate Character Scale (CCS). The study surveyed 100 students from 4 universities. It found that students generally had a positive view of master's programs, as represented by dimensions like agreeableness and competence. However, some dimensions like snobbery were more negative. Most hypotheses tested were validated, except that students' views did differ based on which university they attended. The study provides insight into how students perceive master's programs in terms of personality traits like the CCS. It found mostly positive views overall, but some variability based on university.

1. The sentiments of Corporate Character Scale
among students from different universities towards
to Master program
Pratik Iyengar, Khan Salman Raza, Elena Trubucheva
Abstract: Higher education has gained immense
importance in today’s world by the virtue of the
dynamism demanded by the Corporate World from
Students who choose a particular specialization whilst
advancing from the 1st cycle to the 2nd cycle of studies. In
order to ensure a detailed understanding of the
relationship between students and their choices of Master
programs, it is imperative for Deans or Management
Boards of Higher Education Institutions to be well aware
of all possible sentiments of the Corporate Character
Scale (CCS) and their significance among students across
different Universities towards Master programs.
To find a solution to the main research goal, we
performed descriptive and inferential analysis in order to
draw inferences with regards to the correlations between
variables (dimensions) and to test the truthfulness and
applicability of hypotheses that we formulated. Further, to
attain a legitimate solution to the main research question,
it was purposive to understand the influence of other
variables on the Corporate Character Scale which is
basically an amalgamation of all possible sentiments.
This survey was conducted to collect the data involved a
sample of 100 students from a total of 139 students that
enrolled in two academic years of four different
universities.
Hence, we conclude that the Corporate Character of our
respondents is dominated by positive dimensions of
agreeableness and chic, however chic has snobbery as the
only negative facet associated with it and almost
dimensions have a positive and strong relationship with
Corporate Character of Master Program. In the end, it is
possible to say with a statistical significance that there is
a positive correlation between dimensions and Corporate
Character of Master Program.
Keywords: Master Program, Corporate Character Scale,
sentiments, Higher Education, dimensions.
I.INTRODUCTION
Higher education has emerged as an indispensable
experience in the life of an individual seeking knowledge
and expertise in today’s world by the virtue of the
versatility necessitated by the Corporate World from
Students who choose a particular specialization whilst
advancing from the Bachelor level to the Masters level of
studies. In order to ascertain a detailed understanding of
the relationship between students and their choices of
Master programs, it is imperative for Higher Education
Institutions to be familiarized with all possible sentiments
of the Corporate Character Scale (CCS) and their
importance among students across different Universities
towards Master programs.
In this case study, using empirical data were collected
from random 100 students from a total of 139 students
that enrolled in two academic years of four different
universities, such as Polytechnic Institute of Braganca,
Polytechnic Institute of Cavado and Ave, Polytechnic
Institute of Porto and Polytechnic Institute of Viana do
Castelo. To collect the data a survey was conducted
applying a questionnaire in the classroom, between
September 2016 and January 2017.
In order to answer to the main objective of the study, this
paper is organized into three sections. First, an overview
of the relevant literature on relevance of Master Program
and the importance of student’s sentiments towards to
Master Program. In the second section, are provided
information about the methodology used and the results
of analysis. The paper concludes with some
considerations and some evidences of research that can be
relevant to develop in the future.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
Quality management systems in higher education are
based on the fulfilment of the stakeholders' needs and
expectations. Thus, HEIs should identify their customers
and establish processes to determine their specific needs
(Duque ,2013; Quinn, Lemay, Larsen, & Johnson, 2009;
Sahney, Banwet, & Karunes, 2004). Student's roles in the
higher education system are the subject of many
discussions in the higher education quality literature.
Some authors argue that students are customers, as in
other service industries, because they pay a significant
amount for their education (Kanji & Tambi, 2009). Other
researchers claim that students are products of the higher
education system (Harris, 1992). Recent studies accept
the definition of students-as-a-customers in higher
education, pointing out that students share responsibility
for the results they obtain in the education process (Eagle
& Brennan, 2007; Elassy, 2013).
Allen Brown (1997) thinks that over the past few years
the number of universities the world over has increased as
a result of polytechnics and some colleges of higher
education being reclassified as universities.
Consequently, there are now considerably more
opportunities in all aspects of higher education, including
education to Master’s degree level. There is every
indication that this expansion will continue for
foreseeable future.
Higher education has gained immense importance in
today’s world by the virtue of the dynamism demanded

2. by the Corporate World from Students who choose a
particular specialization whilst advancing from the 1st
cycle to the 2nd cycle of studies.
Dave Ellis (2014) suggested that as students begin their
Education in the Master Program, they embrace a new
culture and need new tools to be successful. According
Clinton Conrad, Jenifer Grant Haworth and Susan
Bolyard Millar (1993) Master’s programs could be
categorized as follows:
a) Career advancement programs: Master’s
programs that focus on providing the student with
practical skills for well-understood career opportunities.
b) Ancillary programs: Master’s programs that are
defined largely in relation to, and are typically
subordinated to, doctoral programs. The master’s
program is frequently used as a screen for doctoral
program.
c) Apprenticeship programs: These Master’s
programs often coexist with doctoral programs and may
even be found in research-intensive institutions.
d) Community-centered programs. Some master’s
programs are focused on creating for their participants not
only an arena of intellectual engagement but also a strong
sense of giving the communities in which they work.
In order to ensure a detailed understanding of the
relationship between students and their choices of Master
programs, it is imperative for Deans or Management
Boards of Higher Education Institutions to be well aware
of all possible sentiments of the Corporate Character
Scale (CCS) and their significance among students across
different Universities towards Master programs.
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Study Objective and Research Hypothesis
To find a solution to the main research goal, what are the
sentiments or emotions that students possess towards the
selection of a Master program and what is their
significance on the Corporate Character Scale, we
performed descriptive and inferential analysis in order to
draw inferences with regards to the correlations between
variables (dimensions) and to test the truthfulness and
applicability of hypotheses that we formulated. Further, to
attain a legitimate solution to the main research question,
it was purposive to understand the influence of other
variables on the Corporate Character Scale which is
basically an amalgamation of all possible sentiments. For
this purpose, we formulated numerous research
hypotheses as depicted in the table 4 below:
Table 1. Hypothesis tested
№ Research Hypothesis
H1 Students have a positive Corporate Character
H2
There are differences in opinions ofstudents fromdifferent
specializations about Corporate Character
H3
There are differences between opinions ofmales and females about
Corporate Character
H4
There are differences between opinions ofpeople ofdifferent age groups
about Corporate Character
H5
There is inequality in the impact ofCorporate Character among people
from different marital status
H6
There is inequality in the impact ofCorporate Character among people
from different universities
H7
There is variability in influence ofCorporate Character between students
from first curricular year and second curricular year
B. Description of Data Collection and Data Analysis
The instruments used in this study were structured in two
parts. The first part focused on student’s profile (gender,
age, marital status and etc.); and the second part include a
group of 49 questions that will measure Corporate
Character Scale to Assess Master Program according to
significance of students’ sentiments and the five point
Likert scale from 1 ‘Strongly disagree’ to 5 ‘Strongly
agree’ was used to measure each item.
To collect the data a survey was conducted applying a
questionnaire in the classroom, between September 2016
and January 2017. In order to select a sample, a random
sampling approach was used. To the sample belong 100
students from a total of 139 students that enrolled in two
academic years of four different universities.
The authors identified potential dimensions of Corporate
Character to assess Master Program first by looking for
those common among all students and which were
reflected in the human personality literature. For example,
the most obvious was that labeled ‘agreeableness’ in
human personality. The only negatively valanced
dimension of Corporate Character is Ruthlessness that
was used to describe a negative Corporate Character of
Master Program. Words or phrases used to describe these
7 dimensions were taken from the various literatures,
concentrating on those common to validated scales, as
potential items for the proposed instrument. The authors’
overall approach to the detail of scale development
mirrors the various stages recommended by Churchill
(1979) and Spector (1992).
Table 2. The Corporate CharacterScale: Dimensions, Facets andItems
Dimension Facet Item
Agreeableness
Warmth
Friendly, pleasant, open,
straightforward
Empathy
Concerned, reassuring,
supportive, agreeable
Integrity
Honest, sincere, trustworthy,
socially responsible
Enterprise Modernity Cool, trendy, young
Adventure
Imaginative, up-to-date,
exciting, innovative
Boldness Extrovert, daring
Competence Conscientiousness Reliable, secure, hardworking
Drive
Ambitious, achievement
oriented, leading
Technocracy Technical, corporate
Chic Elegance Charming, stylish, elegant
Prestige Prestigious, exclusive, refined
Snobbery Snobby, elitist
Ruthlessness Egotism Arrogant, aggressive, selfish
Dominance
Inward-looking, authoritarian,
controlling
Informality None Casual, simple, easy-going
Machismo None Masculine, tough, rugged
An exploratory descriptive statistics and inferential
techniques to define the significance of sentiments as well
as the existence of correlation or differences between
variables was made. By always having the non-
infringement of assumptions intended to apply parametric
tests: namely the T-student test in order to analyze
whether students have a positive Corporate Character.
Second type of used test is about differences in opinions
of students from different specializations about Corporate
Character (Mann-Whitney U for two independent
samples as nonparametric test because samples don’t

3. follow normal distribution and n≥30). When not validated
the application of the assumptions of parametric tests and
for three or more independent samples a nonparametric
test it was applied, the Kruskal-Wallis test.
For the application of this test there is a need of sample
size for independent sample which is greater or equal to
30 elements and verify that follows the normal
distribution, resorting to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test
(as samples don’t follow normal distribution, there are
two independent samples and n≥30 we used Spearman’s
Correlation Coefficient). In all analysis, in order to make
decisions concerning the different research hypotheses a
significance level of 5 % was assumed.
IV. EMPIRICAL RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
A. Student Profile
Data were collected from random 100 students from the
Polytechnic Institute of Braganca, Polytechnic Institute of
Cavado and Ave, Polytechnic Institute of Porto and
Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo.
According with the information presented in Table 3, the
random sample included 36 male students (36 %) and 64
female students (64 %), were between the ages of 21 and
54 years old.
Furthermore, in the Table 3 is possible to observe that 76
% belonged to Management scientific field and the rest
came from Accounting and Finance (24 %). 90 % of 100
students were attending the 1st academic year of Master
program and 9 % the 2nd academic year.
Table 3. Respondents profile
Variable n
Percent
of
Sample
Variable n
Percent
of
Sample
Gender Master
Male 36 36 % Management 76 76 %
Female 64 64 %
Accounting
and Finance
24 24 %
Marital Status
Curricular
Year
Single 74 74 % 1st Year 90 90 %
Married 23 23 % 2nd Year 9 9 %
Divorced 3 3 % Age
Higher
education
institution
<=23 26 26 %
Polytechnic of
Bragança
46 46 % 24-31 41 41 %
Polytechnic of
Cávado e do
Ave
10 10 % 32-39 19 19 %
Polytechnic of
Porto
13 13 % 40-47 11 11 %
Polytechnic of
Viana do
Castelo
31 31 % +48 2 2 %
B. Descriptive Analysis
In our descriptive analysis, we took into consideration the
various facets (facets are fabricated by combining up to 4
items or sentiments that they imply) that would give us
more information about the positive or negative aspects in
terms of perception of the Master program by students.
We recorded the mean and standard deviation for each of
the facets to get an average value among all students.This
value would represent the average value of the facet for
the entire sample and would give us a general idea about
the significance of the facet as a part of the character
scale.
Through the descriptive analysis showed in Table 4, it
was found that popular response was close to 3 and 4 and
so in Likert scale corresponded to ‘Agree’ and produce a
positive feel and attitude. Also, the overall satisfaction
achieved a 3.60 points (standard deviation 0.996), that is
very gratified. The «egotism» facet was one that obtained
high value with a mean of 6.07 points (standard deviation
8.667), followed by «snobbery» (4.69 points of average;
8.224 of standard deviation).
The item that achieved a low average was «boldness»
with 3.10 points and 0.670 for the standard deviation.
Table 4. Descriptive Analysis that Measure the Corporate Character
Scale
№ Facets Mean
Std.
Deviation
If Master Programcame to life as a person, it
would have the following facets of personality:
1 Warmth 3,62 ,561
2 Empathy 3,60 ,662
3 Integraty 3,63 ,722
4 Modernity 3,43 ,675
5 Adventure 3,43 ,711
6 Boldness 3,10 ,670
7 Conscientiousness 3,69 ,774
8 Drive 3,50 ,703
9 Technocracy 3,68 ,802
10 Elegance 3,25 ,698
11 Prestige 3,29 ,584
12 Dominance 3,73 4,489
13 Egotism 6,07 8,667
14 Snobbery 4,69 8,224
Overall Corporate Character Scale 3,60 ,996
C. Inferential Analysis
To achieve the purpose of the study and answer the
research hypothesis we used the inferential analysis. To
start, we divided the variables into two levels; the first
level included variables connected to the individual
students’ personal characteristics (gender, age, academic
year and etc.) while the second level included the
sentiments of students regarding Master Program. This
level included the sum of answers of the main question of
used questionnaire «If Master Program came to life as a
person, what would his/her personality be like?».
According with the values presented in Table 5, almost
all hypotheses were validated apart from 1st and 6th.
Results of truthfulness of 1st hypothesis showed that
students have a positive Corporate Character, as p ≤ 0,05
and mean = 3,6 points while theoretical value was 3
points. According to other hypotheses from 2nd to 7th
(apart from 6th) we concluded that there aren’t differences
in opinions of students from different specializations,
gender, age groups, marital statuses and curricular years.
However, according 6th hypothesis there is inequality in
the impact of Corporate Character among people from
different universities (as p≤ 0,05).

4. Table 5. Validation of hypothesis
№ Variables Test p-value Results
H1 Corporate Character t-Student p≤0,05
Not
Validated
H2
Corporate Character &
Master program
Mann-Whitney
U for two
independent
samples
p≥0,05 Validated
H3
Corporate Character &
Gender
Mann-Whitney
U for two
independent
samples
p≥0,05 Validated
H4
Corporate Character &
Age
Kruskal Wallis
Test
p≥0,05 Validated
H5
Corporate Character &
Marital Status
Kruskal Wallis
Test
p≥0,05 Validated
H6
Corporate Character &
Higher education
Kruskal Wallis
Test
p≤0,05
Not
Validated
H7
Corporate Character &
Curricular year
Mann-Whitney
U for two
independent
samples
p≥0,05 Validated
Note: 5% Level of significance assumed (a=0.05).
In order to determine the correlation between different
dimensions and Corporate Character to assess Master
Program it was produced the Spearman correlation
coefficient, as the assumption of normality is violated. It
was discovered that the significance of chic and
agreeableness is the most in the Corporate Character
because r=0,777 and r=0,763. The significance of
enterprise and competence has an average level as
r=0,685 and r=0,710. Eventually the significance of
ruthlessness, informality and machismo is the least
(r=0,394, r=0,422 and r=0,173). Hence, we conclude that
the Corporate Character of our respondents is dominated
by positive dimensions of agreeableness and chic,
however chic has snobbery as the only negative facet
associated with it and almost all dimensions have a
positive and strong relationship with Corporate Character
of Master Program.
Table 6. Spearman correlation coefficient (n=100)
№ Dimensions
Correlation
coefficient
If Master Programcame to life as a person, it would have the
following dimensions of personality:
1 Agreeableness ,763
2 Enterprise ,685
3 Competence ,710
4 Chic ,777
5 Ruthlessness ,394
6 Informality ,422
7 Machismo 0,116
In this end it is possible to say with a statistical
significance that there is a positive relationship between
dimensions and Corporate Character of Master Program.
(Table 6, Figures 1-2).
Figure 1. Spearman correlation coefficient (n=100)
Figure 2. Overall Corporate Character Scale
V.CONCLUSION, LIMITATION AND FUTURE
RESEARCH
The purpose of this study was to ensure a detailed
understanding of the relationship between students and
their choices of Master programs, as it is imperative for
Deans or Management Boards of Higher Education
Institutions to be well aware of all possible sentiments of
the Corporate Character Scale (CCS) and their
significance among students across different Universities
towards Master programs. To find a solution to the main
research goal, we performed descriptive and inferential
analysis in order to draw inferences with regards to the
correlations between variables (dimensions) and to test
the truthfulness and applicability of hypotheses that we
formulated.
In this case study, using empirical data were collected
from random 100 students from a total of 139 students
that enrolled in two academic years of four different
universities, such as Polytechnic Institute of Braganca,
Polytechnic Institute of Cavado and Ave, Polytechnic
Institute of Porto and Polytechnic Institute of Viana do
Castelo. To collect the data a survey was conducted
applying a questionnaire in the classroom, between
September 2016 and January 2017.
According to descriptive analysis the popular response
was close to 3 and 4 and so in Likert scale corresponded
to ‘Agree’ and produce a positive feel and attitude. Also,
the overall satisfaction achieved a 3.60 points (standard
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Agreeableness
Enterprise
Competence
ChicRuthlessness
Informality
Machismo

5. deviation 0.996), that is very gratified. The «egotism»
facet was one that obtained high value with a mean of
6.07 points (standard deviation 8.667), followed by
«snobbery» (4.69 points of average; 8.224 of standard
deviation). The item that achieved a low average was
«boldness» with 3.10 points and 0.670 for the standard
deviation.
In order to determine the correlation between different
dimensions and Corporate Character to assess Master
Program the Spearman correlation coefficient was
produced, as the assumption of normality is violated. It
was discovered that the Corporate Character of our
respondents is dominated by positive dimensions of
agreeableness and chic, however chic has snobbery as the
only negative facet associated with it and almost
dimensions have a positive and strong relationship with
Corporate Character of Master Program. In the end, it is
possible to say with a statistical significance that there is
a positive relationship between dimensions and Corporate
Character of Master Program.
REFERENCES
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007). Conceptual Model of
Student Satisfaction in Higher Education. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 18(5): 571-588.
Allen Brown (1997). Gaining the Master’s degree: How
do invest in your own future. Student handbooks, 15-16.
Asif, M., & Searcy; C. (2014). Determining the Key
Capabilities Required for Performance Excellence in
Higher Education. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 25(1-2): 22-35.
Clinton Conrad, Jenifer Grant Haworth, Susan Bolyard
Millar (1993). A Silent Success: Master’s Education in
the United States. The Johns Hopkins University Press,
24-25.
Churchill, G.A., Jr. (1979) ‘A paradigm for developing
better measures of marketing constructs’, Journal of
Marketing Research, 64–73.
Dave Ellis (2014). Becoming a Master Student. 15th
Edition. Cengage learning, 265-267.
Duque, L.C. (2013). A framework for analyzing higher
education performance: Students’ satisfaction, perceived
learning outcomes, and dropout intention. Total Quality
Management and Business Excellence, 25(1–2), 1–21.
Eagle, L., & Brennan, R. (2007). Are students customers?
TQM and marketing perspectives. Quality Assurance in
Education, 15(1), 44–60.
Elassy, N. (2013). A model of student involvement in the
quality assurance system at institutional level. Quality
Assurance in Education, 21(2), 162–198.
Kanji, G.K., & Tambi, A.M.A. (1999). Total quality
management in UK higher education institutions. Total
Quality Management, 10(1), 129–153.
Owlia, M.S., & Aspinwall, E.M. (1996). Quality in higher
education – a survey. Total Quality
Management, 7(2), 161–171.
Quinn, A., Lemay, G., Larsen, P.,
& Johnson, D.M. (2009). Service quality in higher
education. Total Quality Management, 20(2), 139–152.
Sahney, S., Banwet, D.K.& Karunes, S. (2004). Conceptu
alizing total quality management in higher education. The
TQM Magazine, 16(2), 145–159.
Spector, P.E. (1992) ‘Summation Rating Scale
Construction: An Introduction’, Sage Publications,
Newbury Park, CA.