Defining the Essence of a University: Lessons from Higher Education Branding

Author(s): Arild Wæraas and Marianne N. Solbakk

Source: Higher Education , Apr., 2009, Vol. 57, No. 4 (Apr., 2009), pp. 449-462
Published by: Springer

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40269135

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40269135?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Higher
Education

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Hieh Educ (2009) 57:449-462
DOI 10.1007/sl0734-008-9155-z

Defining the essence of a university: lessons from higher

education branding

Arild Waeraas • Marianne N. Solbakk

Published online: 13 June 2008

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Abstract Branding is a phenomenon that has become increasingly common in higher

education over the last few years. It entails defining the essence of what a university "is",
what it "stands for", and what it is going to be known for, requiring precision and
consistency in the formulations as well as internal commitment to the brand. This article
details what happened in the process of defining the essence of a regional university in
Northern Norway. Addressing the challenges, the article reveals that the notions of con-
sistency, precision, and commitment generated resistance from faculty members and made
the process very difficult to fulfill. An important finding is that a university may be too
complex to be encapsulated by one brand or identity definition. The article describes this
process, explains the reasons for the difficulties, and discusses some implications for higher
education branding.

Keywords Branding • Essentialism • Higher education • Norway • Organizational identity

Introduction

Branding is a management concept that has gained increasing popularity in higher edu-
cation institutions over the last few years. In the face of increased national and
international competition, universities and colleges in all parts of the world have begun a
search for a unique definition of what they are in order to differentiate themselves and
attract students and academic staff (Chapleo 2004; Hemsley-Brown and Goonawardana
2007). A new vocabulary such as branding, corporate communication, identity, and rep-
utation has emerged in academia, making higher education organizations more aware of
the link between what they "stand for" in terms of values and characteristics, and how they
are perceived.
The branding of higher education institutions occurs within a context that is charac-
terized by an increasing transfer of "good" business practices from the private sector.

A. Wœraas (El) • M. N. Solbakk

University of Troms0, Tromso, Norway
e-mail: arildw@sv.uit.no

4y Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 450 High Educ (2009) 57:449^*62

Universities and colleges not only

international education market (Hem
must also adapt to new government p
should be run and organized. Practi
Neumann 2007), managerialism (Am
(Clark 1998; Slaughter and Leslie 19
(Gornitzka et al. 2005; Sôrlin 2007) ar
the transformation of higher educat
gested that the higher education sect
2000), and that the modern university
a "republic of scholars" (Bleiklie an
However, despite the fact that bran
example, through the use of vision st
striking paucity of research on brand
branding policies in general or in spe
Judson et al. 2006) or focus on exte
2003). To our knowledge, no one has
how branding efforts unfold in spe
processes. We believe such a focus s
respect to the challenges of definin
known the attributes of the organisati
proposition" (Balmer 2001, p. 281). In
itself the essence of "what" and "wh
and characteristics. It is believed that
possible, and communicated very co
management knows the brand essen
managers and preferrably "live the
especially in higher education organiz
In this article, we present and analy
regional higher education institution
in the late 1960s with a special role in
severe competition and budget reforms
prospective students and employee
University's problems, as several ot
initiated or were about to initiate simi
of reexamining its raison d'etre and f
nizational identity.
t This was named
As it will be revealed, finding thi
rediscovering old institutional valu
process triggered existential question
as well as "what do we want to be" and "what do we want to stand for". Consistent
answers were difficult to find, leading the University to remain in a state of ongoing and
problematic self-definition without proceeding to the next step of communicating its
identity to its audience.
We present the lessons learned from this experiment and discuss its general implications
for branding in higher education. More precisely, we ask: What happened in the course of
the branding process? Why was it so difficult to define the University's essential charac-
teristics and functions? And finally, what lessons for branding higher education institutions
can be retained from this process?

£) Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
High Educ (2009) 57:449-462 451

Theory and literature review

What is branding?

Aaker (1991, p. 7) points out that "a

intended to identify the goods or serv
differentiate those goods or services f
may be very similar to other produc
something that exists more in the min
zation itself. It may even be perceived
whom consumers may develop persona
express themselves (Aaker 1999). Thus
emotional ties with consumers and th
(Park et al. 1986).
Branding of organizations ("corpora
tance. It is generally seen as more co
brand is intangible and organizations
may vary considerably. Hence corpor
zational culture to a much larger exten
commitment to the corporate body
The goal is to articulate the organizat
making every communication consiste
Fombrun 2007). An organization's com
(van Riel 1995; van Riel and Fombrun
the same views about the organization
Thus, in order to achieve a uniform e
zation must not only strive for a cons
consistent, single identity.

Branding and identity

Organizational identity is believed to

brand definition. In order to communi
first know its essential and unique char
corporate identity emphasizes how or
measured (van Rekom and van Riel 200
existence of an "underlying reality"
characteristics" (van Riel 1995, p. 35) t
This essence can be referred to in terms
common starting points, and is assum
will be able to identify" (van Riel 19
Organizational theory presents an alter
is a
collective phenomenon (Albeit an
perspective, achieving a coherent and
zational identity is seen as encompas
Gioia et al. 2000), thus making a finit
Precise self-classification is also rest
identities, which emerge when differe

£} Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 452 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462

distinctive, and enduring about an or

Whetten suggested that precise classi
some contexts, as the complexities
identity impossible" (1985, p. 268).
Another important contribution tha
inition is Philip Selznick's institution
about organizations is that, though t
(1949, p. 10). Over time, organization
and meanings emerge. Specific values
its routines, work, and functions, th
value beyond its goal-attaining acti
deliberate attempt by top managemen
pertain to its integrity and distinct
strong traditions and deeply rooted
agement few degrees of freedom in ter
managers at treating organizational
likely to produce resistance and conf
insights are particularly valuable in o

Branding academia

Despite the growing importance of bra

papers that specifically address higher
on marketing of higher education (cf.
into papers that focus on marketin
marketing models (Mazzarol 1998),
(Balwin and James 2000; Reindfleisch
positioning (Gray et al. 2003) and fin
focus on external aspects of branding
The few empirical studies that exist
(Bélanger et al. 2002; Bulotaite 2003
architecture (Baker and Balmer 199
2007), and international branding (Gr
nature, discussing the emergence of
2007), the pros and cons of branding
successful brands (Chapleo 2005). Thu
very much at a pioneer stage (Hems
The views on higher education bra
lines when it comes to interpreting th
writers are optimistic, seeing brandin
reputation. For example, Melewar an

In a market where students are r

implement strategies to maintain an
develop a competitive advantage ba
more, universities need to commun
consistent way to all of the releva
universities have finally realised th
source of competitive advantage.

£} Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462 453

An opposite view would be to empha

myth or a symbol that universities u
environments (e.g. Meyer and Rowan
be similar to others than to different
rather bland and cliched self-presentat
lead to differentiation, may lead to a
expressing their unique features (Ant
tendency for universities to presen
etc. (Bélanger et al. 2002).
On the other hand, if branding is a r
that its implementation challenges t
general and within specific universiti
been institutions characterized by l
Olsen 1979) and a variety of values an
disciplines, branding leads to a searc
defined identity. It could thus be qu
branding processes, and whether such
primarily confirms the University a
objectivity, truth, freedom to teach a
potential for challenging the institutio

Methods

The study is based on a partly prospective, partly retrospective longitudinal design. We

gathered qualitative data from three sources; (1) archive data, (2) two series of semi-
structured interviews, and (3) repeated unstructured conversations with the VI project
manager.
We carried out data collection in two phases. The first phase started in the fall of 2002
when the VI project was in its startup process. Our objective was to detect events that had
been important in the process until then, and to follow the subsequent events until the
project ended in the fall of 2003. The most important source from this phase was the
archive data. The analyzed documents included first drafts for a communication strategy
compiled by a PR firm, drafts for a communication platform, notes written by the project
manager, strategy documents, faculty memos, meeting minutes, as well as annual reports.
We also conducted semi-structured interviews with four key members of the project team:
the VI project manager, the Director of Communications, the University Provost, and one
consultant from the PR firm. A preliminary interview guide was used and detailed notes
were taken. Questions concerned the present status of the project, the purpose of the
project, and how they viewed its progression. In addition, during this phase we had several
informal conversations with the project manager in order to verify our early findings.
More focused data collection began in the fall of 2005. Because we were aware of the
outcome of the process at this point, we sought deeper insight into the challenges that had
affected the process. In-depth semi-structural interviews therefore represented the most
important data source. We interviewed the former project team about the process, which
consisted of the VI project manager, the Director of Communications, the University
Provost, The University President, and the then Assistant Director of Communications.

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 454 High Educ (2009) 57:449^162

Interesting topics that emerged dur

ducted interviews with faculty mem
participate in "identity workshops",
identity. With the exception of one e
and recorded and transcribed verbat
opinions about the VI process and its
history, as well as the challenges they
we also conducted a number of infor
In our analysis, we grouped the cent
categories, on which the remainder
identity definition, or "what to be
consistency, or "how to orchestrate"

Findings

The founding of the University in the late 1960s was largely justified on the basis of its
assumed regional value for Northern Norway. The regional role was an important frame of
reference for the organization, especially during the start-up years, forming an important part
of the University's "essence" and self-understanding. However, with the introduction of the
VI project, this essence necessarily had to be questioned. The mandate of the VI project was
to "establish a communication strategy for the University".1 In order to do so, the appointed
project group needed to look at a common platform for the strategy. The Director of
Communications explained that there was a need to know "who we really are, what we want,
and where we are going", and that the answers to these questions should "form the basis for
all internal and external communication". Thus, defining the value platform of the university
and finding what it is and wants to be, became a central aspect of the VI project.

What to be: a University in the north or for the north?

The university's role as the university in Northern Norway was emphasized as an essential
and unique characteristic in several documents written before and during the VI project.
The University's 2010 strategy document stated that "The University aims at fulfilling a
critical function in society, and will emphasize its long-term obligations to its environ-
ments". Also in our interviews with leading VI team members in 2002, a focus on the
northern region was advocated. The University President opted for a stronger use of the
terms "arctic" and "northern" as a basis both for promoting and understanding the
university's identity. The Director of Communications claimed that the university had "a
much stronger position in its region than the other Norwegian universities", and therefore,
that this position was an important differentiating characteristic.
As a result, the VI project group decided to proceed with a tentative overall identity
definition that reflected the University's regional role. The suggestion was "The University
in the North". The underlying principle was that the term "University" would reflect the
academic breadth that a university should have, while the addition "in the north" would
refer both to the geographical location as well as the research profile.
However, several faculty members who had attended the workshops disagreed that the
regional role was an essential frame of reference. They argued that the University

1 All quotes are translated from Norwegian by the authors.

£) Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462 455

encompassed a large variety of resear

with an organizational identity found
ironically:

We have an incredible provincial way of thinking. Samis [Laplanders], fish, and

northern lights. That's what we are supposed to do. Everything has to smell of fish in
[our university]. In Oslo they can do whatever they want.

Similarly, a professor asked rhetorically:

The government gives us grants for marine biotechnology. What will be the next?
Marine theology? ... Or indigenous fish?

While it is true that several departments direct their research foci on a wide spectrum of
arctic topics (auroral light research, fishery science, and Sarni culture), a number of
departments (e.g. mathematics, foreign languages, economics, management, law, medi-
cine, etc.) have a more general profile. Representatives from these fields highlighted the
need for a more international and broad profile for the official identity definition. Con-
sequently, the VI project group was faced with a dilemma: If they created an overall
identity definition that matched the arctic and northern research foci, representatives from
other fields would feel left out. On the other hand, choosing a more general profile would
represent challenges in terms of differentiating from the other Norwegian universities.
The VI team found no solution to this dilemma. Soon other issues related to values and
consistency overshadowed the problem of "what to be". As a result, the final suggestion
for a communication strategy did not say anything specific about the university's overall
identity or position, leaving the question of the university's regional value unresolved.

What to stand for. finding core values

Traditionally, university organizations build on extensive autonomy and a cultural heritage

of academic values. However, the VI project team based their work on the notion that
traditional academic values were insufficient for differentiation. This view was particularly
clear in the Assistant Director of Communication's explanation:

Many people here believe that we don't need values other than the typical traditional
university values - the typical basic values. They must be at the core anyway. But in
today's society where there is competition among universities, there is a need to
differentiate. The basic values that all universities have, simply won't do.

Fulfilling this idea in practice turned out to be a challenging venture. After doing a
thorough in-depth search in the organization with the PR firm as facilitator, the university's
value platform was proposed to be open, different and vigorous. The argument was that the
platform "captures many of the values and characteristics that employees and students use
to describe their university". However, much of the invited feedback from workshop
participants and from various academic departments and schools was very negative. For
example, one critique made by a workshop participant was whether the suggested values
really said something specific about the university:

They were so banal and so outrageous, those headlines ... Did this cost several
hundred thousand kroner, one could not even stand the thought ... It seemed so
outrageous ... Totally useless. To conclude that the university should be open ... I
believe [top management] could have figured out the same in only half a day.

£) Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 456 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462

As a result of the received feedback,

the value platform. When a new valu
built on the previously suggested val
open. The platform reflected an attem
need to build on traditional virtues. "S
research and teaching, and "important"
University units found it hard to see
for comments. The response from t

The suggested values neither resonat

employees, students, or external con
say to the outside world, or to ourse
to use empty phrases that neither w
meaning in.

The Department of Research and Academic affairs gave a similar feedback:

It appears difficult to imagine ... a value platform in which the university's core
values are strong, important, and open. What university should not be like that, or at
least have such values as guiding principles? (emphasis in original)

The mounting resistance made the VI project members less willing to proceed as planned.
The VI project manager became concerned that academic values might be undermined by
the focus on defining an attractive identity and, consequently, that these efforts might
"threaten our long-term existence and deprive us of our soul". Tension among the Provost
and the Director of Communications also emerged. While the Director of Communications
continued to argue for the value of having a precise and consistent value platform, the
Provost saw no purpose in it. In 2005 he reflected on his doubts in the following way:

I believe we risk making a too big a deal out of this focus on the value platform. A
university is a university and, therefore, by definition you get some values, goals, and
ideals to stand for and represent. I believe you would get off the right track searching
for specific core values.

Towards the last year of the project, the University Provost became increasingly negative
to the process. A decisive moment was when the Provost - backed by the President -
refused to recommend the value platform to the University board

The process had gone too far and it had gone on for too long. There were no results.
It was starting to become embarrassing. Someone might question the value of all this.

By doing so, the Provost ended the process with no final result or decision regarding the
content of a value platform. Instead of offering a specific, agreed upon value platform to
the University board, he suggested in his proposition to the University board:

Instead of continuing the discussion regarding whether the core values are appro-
priate and the project is useful, and thereby devoting additional time to the process,
the Provost wishes to focus on concrete measures in order to follow up the strategy
work that has been done.

These concrete measures included, among others, a common visual design for all uni-
versity publications, publishing an alumni newspaper, establishing research awards for

£) Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462 457

outstanding researchers, and greater

accepted the Provost's proposition un

How to orchestrate: defining and pre

In general, there is no tradition for

munication in universities. Individua
autonomous individuals. As a result, i
to the efforts of a symphony orchest
hold them together" (Baker and Balm
The VI team members were initially
as they believed it would lead to a c
tencies, the Director of Communicati
share the same understanding of the

We were very conscious that we n

involving many people, so that we w
and framework. You must have this
One can surely do a lot of good thin
thought behind the things that we w
There are gaps regarding how the m
Communications Department deals w
are perceived. The goal is to try to

Thisview of identity as a consistently

concerns by our interviewees. One of
concerns:

I believe they were thinking almost totalitarian, that we all should mar
direction, as an organization, and be at management's beck and call. I
a horrid and foolish notion. ... Does that mean that we all answer in th
journalists? That nobody criticizes the university? What about freed
freedom of research? ... We can't expect people to have only one i
The notion that everything has to be consistent - they must have mis
world we live in.

Like the Director of Communications, the President was initially concerned with getting
faculty members to see the university as a whole. He worried that the university was
becoming increasingly fragmented, and complained that "everyone wanted to put his own
label on the university". But, interestingly, in the course of the VI process, he came to see
the breadth of the university as its main strength. With the benefit of hindsight, the
President said in the 2005 interview that he thought it might be possible "to agree on a few
messages", but also that:

The work on the communication strategy has made it quite clear to everyone
involved that the university is a remarkably heterogeneous institution. Even if we
have been here together for 33 years, many of us carry differences all the way from
the start.

Furthermore, quite contrary to the ambition of defining and promoting a single overarching
identity, he described the logic of his acquired insight in the following way:

£} Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 458 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462

... if I give a presentation to an audie

I say that this is a marine university
peace studies are the focus, I promot
pick from a menu. It is a good thing
[Our university] is the red university
.... We have many profiles.

The President's idea of communicati

different identities and strengths depe
that there can be much to gain from
organization accordingly. Ironically,
which the VI project initially sought

Lessons from the VI project

The data have clearly revealed conside

identity; its "essence". We believe tw
data. First, as could be expected at a
central values and of the university's
of identity difficult to achieve. The
with a coherent, single identity - r
selves" (Albert and Whetten 1985) wh
meaning, or purpose of the univer
Regardless of managerial efforts to con
will always be a secondary (not to me
essence. Bridging these differences in
The complexity of the organization, i
tradition of granting a significant deg
of consistency seem irrelevant, inapp
For faculty members, consistency im
selves and
their organization in a ve
their personal
identities regulated. A
corporate commitment", it meant im
members. Consequently, we see the f
the omission of the identity formula
compromise. It is not clear to what
from the traditional university value
entiating the university from othe
increased the inherent danger of bra
Second, the data point to the signific
"the University in the North" was ide
from other Norwegian universities an
the University's origin, as the very r
needs. In the course of the years, how
regional-political reasoning and had g
employees, departments, and academi
long become a more general universit
Norwegian universities. Defining the

£} Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
High Educ (2009) 57:449-462 459

would imply going "back in time" an

existence based mainly on political an
was not the way faculty members pre
attempts to confine the identity defin
lower in the organization, especially f
were more or less unrelated to northern
Thus, while the main finding is clearly
one may ask if the outcome of the V
university. More generally stated: Is i
tiated essence of a university? If not,
of higher education?
The lesson learned from the VI exper
fragmented to both understand and
plexity is difficult to encapsulate sim
definition, as one definition would rul
only one definition would be the sam
are more valid than others. As universit
disciplines and units than with the
reduction of variety is, not surprising
The implication is that one should co
the complexity of higher education in
perhaps one should refrain from reduci
somewhat unclear, as they are several
noted that universities are hybrid or
oriented towards economic productio
Universities run a business at the sam
values. They have to be competitive an
and knowledge. Thus, their purpose
forward or consistent way, which m
commented by Temple (2006, p. 18), "
like? What word should the universi
A pragmatic approach to higher educ
that exists within the organization. Th
precisely such an approach. In the Pre
and therefore, should have many vo
definition of the organization and to
practical to emphasize a repertoire of
a number of interpretations of the o
convey a richer variety of its stren
chances of creating positive percep
accordance with a notion of "polyph
speaking with "one single voice".
Although this pragmatic approach go
does have benefits. First, it provides a
possibility of presenting itself in a w
locking the organization in a standard
cation, the pragmatic approach allow
different contexts. Such a flexibility
ambiguous and complex demands fr

£} Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 460 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462

multiple values and identities may pr

better chances of becoming strong
strengths and virtues, however inco
petitors by having a unique identity,
displaying multiple identities (cf. Pr
the "conformity trap" described by A
conserve some of their historic an
respecting their institutional integri

Conclusion

This article has reported on the process of defining the organizational identity of a
university. We interpreted this process as an attempt to define and articulate this univer-
sity's essential characteristics, or "essence", and related the attempt to the current
tendencies of branding in the corporate as well as the academic world. We have described
the suggested characteristics and values and reported faculty members' reactions to them,
as well as outlined the various challenges of arriving at a precise and coherent identity
definition. We have also discussed some implications of our findings for branding higher
education institutions.
We believe the study raises more questions than it has answered. We have not yet
touched upon the question of the usefulness of branding, although our data show a rather
disappointing outcome of the VI project. Clearly, if branding is used in the same way as in
this case, the result will not be as hoped for. The findings can be used in support for those
who are skeptical of branding as an instrument of managing higher education institutions.
A too stringent focus on precision, consistency, and "corporate commitment" in academia
is likely to fail.
However, currently we know very little about branding in academia, simply because of
the lack of empirical studies. More case studies are needed, particularly of institutions
where branding approaches are tested that do not emphasize consistency and precision in
the identity definition. At the very least there a need for research that reports successful
results of both defining a university brand and making it known among constituencies.
Only then can we begin to provide insight into the usefulness of branding in a more general
sense. Thus, case-studies of branding may help broaden our understanding of the chal-
lenges faced by higher education institutions today as they struggle for legitimacy,
students, and financial resources in an increasingly competition-oriented education market.

References

Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. New York: Free
Press.
Aaker, J. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 347-356.
Aaker, J. (1999). The malleable self: The role of self-expression in persuasion. Journal of Marketing
Research, 36, 45-57.
Albert, S., & Whetten, D. (1985). Organizational identity. In L. L. Cummings & B. Staw (Eds.), Research in
organizational behavior (pp. 263-295). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Amaral, A., Meek, V. L., & Larsen, I. M. (2003). The higher education managerial revolution? Dordrecth:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Anderson, G. (2008). Mapping academic resistance in the managerial university. Organization, 15(2),
251-270.

^ Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 High Educ (2009) 57:449-462 461

Antorini, Y. M., & Schultz, M. (2005). Cor

Y. M. Antorini, & F. F. Csaba (Eds.), Cor
K0benhavn: Copenhagen Business School
Argenti, P. A., & Forman, J. (2002). The po
Baker, M. J., & Balmer, J. M. T. (1997). Vi
Marketing, 5/(5), 366.
Balmer, J. M. T. (2001). Corporate identity, co
fog. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3
Balwin, G., & James, R. (2000). The market
informed consumer. Journal of Higher E
Bélanger, C, Mount, J., & Wilson, M. (2002
Mnnnop.mp.nt. RCW. 217-210.

Bleiklie, I., & Kogan, M. (2007). Organization and governance of universities. Higher Education Policy,
20(4), 477-493.
Bulotaite, N. (2003). University heritage - an institutional tool for branding and marketing. Higher Edu-
cation in Europe, 2#(4), 6.
Chapleo, C. (2004). Interpretation and implementation of reputation/brand management by UK university
leaders. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 5( 1 ), 7-23.
Chapleo, C. (2005). Do universities have 'successful' brands? International Journal of Educational
Advancement, 6(1), 54-64.
Christensen, L. T., Torp, S., & Firat, A. F. (2005). Integrated marketing communication and postmodernity:
An odd couple? Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 70(2), 156-167.
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial university organizations: Pathways of transfomation. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Corley, K. G., Gioia, D. A., & Fabbri, T. (2000). Organizational identity in transition over time. In
D. Rousseau (Ed.), Advances in organizational behavior. Wiley & Sons.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. The
Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-373.
Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M., & Corley, K. (2000). Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability.
Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 63-81.
Gornitzka, Â., Kogan, M., & Amaral, A. (2005). Reform and change in higher education: Analysing policy
implementation. Dordrecht: Springer.
Gray, B. J., Fam, K. S., & Lianes, V. A. (2003). Branding universities in Asian markets. Journal of Product
and Brand Management, 72(2), 108-120.
Gumport, P. J. (2000). Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives. Higher
Education, 39( 1), 67-91.
Guthrie, J., & Neumann, R. (2007). Economic and non-financial performance indicators in universities - the
establishment of a performance-driven system for Australian higher education. Public Management
Review, 9(2), 231-252.
Hemsley-Brown, J., & Goonawardana, S. (2007). Brand harmonization on the international higher education
market. Journal of Buusiness research, 60, 942-948.
Hemsley-Brown, J., & Oplatka, I. (2006). Universities in a competitive global marketplace: A systematic
review of the literature on higher education marketing. International Journal of Public Sector Man-
agement, 79(4), 316-338.
Humphreys, M., & Brown, A. D. (2002). Narratives of organizational identity and identification: A case
study of hegemony and resistance. Organization Studies, 23(3), 421-447.
Ind. N. (1997). The corporate brand. Houndmills: Macmillan.
Ind, N. (2004). Living the brand: How to transform every member of your organization into a brand
champion. Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
Jongbloed, B. (2003). Marketisation in higher educaion, Clarke's triangle and the essential ingredients of
markets. International Journal of Educational Management, 75(6), 1 10-135.
Judson, K., Aurand, T., & Gorchels, L. (2006). Building a university brand from within: A comparison of
Coaches' perspectives of internal branding. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 76(1 ), 97-1 14.
Klassen, M. (2002). Relationship marketing on the Internet: The case of top- and lower-ranked universities
and colleges. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 9, 81-85.
Lowrie, A. (2007). Branding higher education: Equivalence and difference in developing identity. Journal of
Business Research, 60(9), 990-999.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1979). Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Oslo; Boston: Scandinavian
University Press.

£} Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
462 High Educ (2009) 57:449^162

Maringe, F., & Foskett, N. (2002). Marketin

Education Review, 34(3), 18.
Mazzarol, T. (1998). Critical success factors f
Educational Management, 72(4), 163.
Melewar, T. G, & Akel, S. (2006). The role
study. Corporate Communications: An In
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutio
American Journal of Sociology, 26Y1), 34
Mortimer, K. (1997). Recruiting overseas g
satisfied? Higher Education Quarterly, 5
Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & Macinnis, D.
of Marketing, 50(4), 135-145.
Pratt, M. C, & Foreman, P. O. (2000). Class
tities. Academy of Management Review,
Reindfleisch, J. M. (2003). Segment profilin
Higher Education Policy and Managemen
Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots:
University of California Press.
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administrat
Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic
versity. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Un
Sôrlin, S. (2007). Funding diversity: Perform
higher education systems. Higher Educat
Stensaker, B. (2007). The relationship betw
Management and Policy, 79(1), 1-18.
Temple, P. (2006). Branding higher education
Education, 70(1), 15-19.
van Rekom, J., & van Riel, C. B. M. (2000).
existing methods. Corporate Reputation
van Riel, C. B. M. (1995). Principles of corp
van Riel, C. B. M., & Balmer, J. M. T. (199
management. European Journal of Marke
van Riel, C. B. M., & Fombrun, C. (2007). E

4y Springer

This content downloaded from

203.109.101.50 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:58:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms