Skip to main content

Strategic planning in higher education institutions: what are the stakeholders’ roles in the process?

Higher Education volume 79, pages 1039–1056 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

This article classifies and assigns degrees of influence to the stakeholders involved in the implementation of strategic planning at a Brazilian higher education institution. In order to test the stakeholder influence theory, we carried out a case study of a Brazilian university based on qualitative methods. The models of Frooman (Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205, 1999) and Mitchell et al. (Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886, 1997) served as the theoretical basis for assessing the stakeholders’ identification and management. Findings indicate that higher education institutions focus on the internal and external stakeholders that have the power to control them. In practice, this study provides insight into the stakeholder influences that have an effect on the implementation of strategic planning in a university. Based on the findings, university managers will be able to think more strategically about the institution’s objectives, taking into account the degree of influence that stakeholders have on the institution’s objectives.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Alarcón-del-Amo, M. C., Casablancas-Segura, C., & Llonch, J. (2016). Responsive and proactive stakeholder orientation in public universities: Antecedents and consequences. Higher Education, 72(2), 131–151.

  2. Andrade, J. C. S. (2002). Formação de estratégias socioambientais corporativas: os jogos Aracruz Celulose – Stakeholders. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 6(2), 75–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Atkinson, A. A., Waterhouse, J. H., & Wells, R. B. (1997). A stakeholder approach to strategic performance measurement. Sloan Management Review, 38(3), 25–37.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balbachevsky, E. (2015). The role of internal and external stakeholders in Brazilian higher education. In S. Schwartzman, R. Pinheiro, & P. Pillay (Eds.), Higher education in the BRICS countries: Investigating the pact between higher education and society (pp. 193–214). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Benneworth, P., & Jongbloed, B. W. (2010). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9265-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brasil. (2015). Censo da Educação Superior. Brasilia: INEP.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bryson, J. M. (1995). Strategic planning for public and non-profit organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Burrows, J. (1999). Going beyond labels: A framework for profiling institutional stakeholders. Contemporary Education, 70, 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cappiello, G., & Pedrini, G. (2017). The performance evaluation of corporate universities. Tertiary Education and Management, 23(3), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1329452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Casablancas-Segura, C., & Llonch, J. (2016). Responsive and proactive stakeholder orientation in public universities: Antecedents and consequences. Higher Education, 72(2), 131–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M. L., Toy, D., & Wright, L. K. (2010). Are student groups dysfunctional? Perspectives from both sides of the classroom. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Childress, L. K. (2009). Internationalization plans for higher education institutions. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(3), 289–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidences, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Donina, D., & Paleari, S. (2019). New public management: Global reform script or conceptual stretching? Analysis of university governance structures in the Napoleonic administrative tradition. Higher Education, 78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0338-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Duke, C. R. (2002). Learning outcomes: Comparing student perceptions of skill level and importance. Journal of Marketing Education, 24(3), 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Marshfield: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Freeman, E., & McVea, J. (2001). A stakeholder approach to strategic management. In M. Hitt, E. Freeman, & J. Harrison (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.263511.

  19. Freeman, R. E., & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 25(3), 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influences strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ian, K. A., & Hjortsø, C. (2019). Sources of complexity in participatory curriculum development: An activity system and stakeholder analysis approach to the analyses of tensions and contradictions. Higher Education, 77, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0274-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Idenburg, P. J. (1993). Four styles of strategy development. Long Range Planning, 26(6), 132–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. James, M. A., & Derrick, G. E. (2019). When culture trumps strategy: Higher education institutional strategic plans and their influence on international student recruitment practice. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00424-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jarzabkowski, P., & Wolf, C. (2015). An activity theory approach to strategy as practice. In Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 127–140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9128-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kettunen, J. (2015). Stakeholder relationships in higher education. Tertiary Education and Management, 21(1), 56–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lopes, L.A.C., & Bernardes, F.R. (2005). Estruturas administrativas das universidades brasileiras. VIII Seminários de Administração –SEMEAD proceedings.

  28. Lyra, M. G., Gomes, R. C., & Jacovine, L. A. G. (2009). Stakeholder management and organizational sustainability: A Brazilian case study from the forestry sector. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 13(special), 39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., Raposo, M., & Domingues, M. J. (2010). Categorização por importância dos stakeholders das universidades. Revista Ibero Americana de Estratégia, 9(3), 4–43.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mainardes, E. W., Raposo, M., & Alves, H. (2014). Universities need a market orientation to attract non-traditional stakeholders as new financing sources. Public Organization Review, 14(2), 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. McCune, S. D. (1986). Guide to Strategic Planning for Educators. Edited by Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Alexandria: Publication Sales.

  32. Miller, K., McAdam, M., & McAdam, R. (2014). The changing university business model: A stakeholder perspective. R&D Management, 44(3), 265–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mintzberg, H. (1987). Crafting strategy. Harvard Business Review, july-august, 66–75.

  34. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of the who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Morphew, C. C., Fumasoli, T., & Stensaker, B. (2018). Changing missions? How the strategic plans of research-intensive universities in northern Europe and North America balance competing identities. Studies in Higher Education, 43(6), 1074–1088. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1214697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Najan, A. (1995). Learning from the literature on policy implementation: A synthesis perspective (working paper WP-95-61). Laxenburg: International Institute for Applied Systems analysis.

  37. Neave, G. (2000). The Universities’ Responsibilities to Society: International perspectives. Issues in Higher Education Series: ERIC.

  38. Neuendorf, K. A. (2016). The content analysis guidebook. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Oliva, E. J. D. (2009). La gestión de la universidad como elemento básico del sistema universitario: una reflexión desde la perspectiva de los stakeholders. Innovar. Revista de Ciencias Administrativas y Sociales, (1), 25–41.

  40. Pavičić, J., Alfirević, N., & Mihanović, Z. (2009). Market orientation in managing relationships with multiple constituencies of Croatian higher education. Higher Education, 57(2), 191–207

  41. Pinheiro, R. (2015). The role of internal and external stakeholders. In Higher education in the BRICS countries (pp. 43–57). New Ypurk: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Pinheiro, R., Charles, D., & Jones, G. (2017). Translating strategy, values and identities in higher education: The case of multi-campus systems. Tertiary Education and Management, 23(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2016.1248858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Reavill, L. R. P. (1998). Quality assessment, total quality management and the stakeholders in the UK higher education system. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 8(1), 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sam, C., & Dahles, H. (2017). Stakeholder involvement in the higher education sector in Cambodia. Studies in Higher Education, 42(9), 1764–1784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sampaio, R. M., & Laniado, R. N. (2009). Uma experiência de mudança da gestão universitária: o percurso ambivalente entre proposições e realizações. Revista de Administração Pública, 43, 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Savage, G. T., Nix, T. W., Whitehead, C. J., & Blair, J. D. (1991). Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, 5(2), 61–75.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sin, C., & Neave, G. (2016). Employability deconstructed: Perceptions of Bologna stakeholders. Studies in Higher Education, 41(8), 1447–1462. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.977859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sucozhanay, D., Santos, E., Witte, K. D., & Euwema, M. (2016). A stakeholder management approach for university change: A case study in Latin America. INTED2016 proceedings.

  49. Universidade de Brasília. (2018). Resultados do PDI anterior (2014–2017). Resource document. Universidade de Brasília. Retrieved from http://www.planejamentodpo.unb.br/index.php?option=com_phocadownload&view=category&download=49:resultados-do-pdi-2014-2017&id=1:plano-de-desenvolvimento-institucional&Itemid=800. Accessed 28 Dec 2018.

  50. Vos, J. F. (2003). Corporate social responsibility and the identification of stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 10(3), 141–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Yang, R. (2015). Cost sharing in China’s higher education: Analyses of major stakeholders. In Higher education in the BRICS countries (pp. 237–251). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  52. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, University of Brasília, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Prédio da FACE, Brasília, DF, 70910-900, Brazil

    Júnia Maria Zandonade Falqueto, Valmir Emil Hoffmann, Ricardo Corrêa Gomes & Silvia Satiko Onoyama Mori

  2. Genetics Resource and Biotechnology- Embrapa, Parque Estação Biológica- PqEB, Brasília, DF, 70770-901, Brazil

    Silvia Satiko Onoyama Mori

Authors
  1. Júnia Maria Zandonade Falqueto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Valmir Emil Hoffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ricardo Corrêa Gomes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Silvia Satiko Onoyama Mori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Júnia Maria Zandonade Falqueto.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 12 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Falqueto, J.M.Z., Hoffmann, V.E., Gomes, R.C. et al. Strategic planning in higher education institutions: what are the stakeholders’ roles in the process?. High Educ 79, 1039–1056 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00455-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Stakeholders
  • Strategic planning
  • Stakeholder theory
  • University-stakeholder relationships