Investigating the impact of university image on international students’ participation behavior: An empirical study

Introduction

The rising number of international students can have strong social effects such as creating diverse communities as well as an economic effect through educational investment in the form of paying their tuition fees, thus contributing to the host country and the home country’s wellbeing (Kumi-Yeboah & James, 2014). International students predominantly come from developing nations, pursue higher education with internationally recognized accreditations and seek lucrative jobs upon returning to their home countries (Ahrari et al., 2019). However, HEIs are currently under immense pressure from the decline of student enrolment and funding grants (Lee et al., 2018) as a result of the ongoing pandemic. Middle-class students in particular are likely to be affected most by the post-COVID-19 higher education situation, with a severe revenue crisis and uncertain impacts upon HEIs (Altbach & de Wit, 2020). In the last decade, the enormous investments from South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong in higher education projects to create “the best education hub in Asia” (Munusamy & Hashim, 2019, p. 2293) demonstrate the significant competition approaching Malaysia, a country that entices successful international students. To stabilize economies during and after the effects of COVID-19, a strict tightening of the future budget allocations to HEIs is very likely in Malaysia and elsewhere, which will make the universities more reliant on international student intake.

However, the usual mobility of Asian international students is towards Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries (OECD, 2014). This trend undoubtedly drives Malaysia, as Munusamy & Hashim (2019) state, towards rethinking and rebuilding their HEIs’ identity in terms of their image, reputation and ranking on a global platform. The concern is also a result of scholars’ prediction that in the post-COVID world, 20% of institutions may face closure (Altbach & de Wit, 2020). In this context, Manzoor et al. (2020) have defined university image as, “the result of an aggregate process using students’ mental perceptions of their own reality, based on the evaluation of various university attributes through the expression of their feelings, ideas, beliefs, impressions, and real-life experiences at the university” (p.2). As such, high-image universities with stable income streams might have better chances to survive due to their strong identity compared to their lower-performing counterparts.

Williams & Leahy (2020) point out in the U21 report that Malaysia is still ranked only 31st out of 50 countries in terms of connectivity despite its substantial investment in the higher education sector. Therefore, Munusamy & Hashim (2019) have expressed the necessity of taking extensive initiatives and forming strategies to make Malaysia’s approach towards internationalization more successful in establishing itself as the new global education hub. The trend also creates a challenge for the country to establish and sustain itself as an education hub in Asia and compete with other emerging hub nations such as South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.

The meta-analysis of Lafuente-Ruiz-de-Sabando, Zorrilla and Forcada (2018) reveals that university image is not only multi-dimensional but also that it needs to be viewed as a higher-order formative construct (HOFC). According to Hair et al. (2017), higher-order structures contain two layers of concrete constructs that capture separate attributes. Referring to Manzoor et al. (2020), the university image model in this study is considered as a higher-order construct containing three lower-order constructs (LOCs). These LOCs such as ‘External communication and values’, ‘National and international awareness and facilities’, and ‘Economic values’ possess formative relationships with university image as a higher-order construct thus termed as a HOFC.

Past researchers have viewed students as a direct and vital source of funding and survival for HEIs (Tamer, 2016). Manzoor & Al-Mahmud (2021) have acknowledged the importance of students’ participation considering their roles as active participants for service improvement and creating competitive effectiveness for HEIs, particularly during uncertain times such as the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, Frasquet-Deltoro, Alarcón-del-Amo and Lorenzo-Romero (2019) have emphasized the need for further research related to customer participation behavior in the service setting (such as that of students in the university context).

Hence, there is a serious need for a student-centered relational model that integrates the concept of ‘students as coproducers’ that can lead to international students’ prosocial behavior such as participation behavior (Elsharnouby, 2015). The importance and relevance of customer participation in service settings are endorsed by a lot of evidence (Eisingerich et al., 2013). Realizing this need in the current situation, this study explores how the university image as a HOFC influences students’ participation behavior. To address this central question, the current study analyzes the impact of the university image model developed by Manzoor, Ho and Al-Mahmud (2020) and its impact on international students' participation behavior as a multidimensional concept based on Yi & Gong (2013).

Literature review and hypotheses

Ahrari, Krauss, Suandi, Abdullah, Sahimi, Olutokunbo and Dahalan (2019) have mentioned that international students are vital to universities and the host and source countries in today’s neoliberal environment of global competition. Various researchers have considered students, and particularly university students, as the primary customers because they consciously choose and buy the services of their desired university. This modified view underscores viewing students “not only as customers who seek personalized services and high-quality outcomes but also as active players in shaping the university experience” (Tamer, 2016, p.680). The service firms’ capability for better quality service depends on a key step in the co-creation process, which is customer participation (Yi & Gong, 2013).

Firstly, this study is based on the social identity theory (SIT) (Boroş, 2008). According to this theory, organizational identification is “a form of social identification, whereby a person comes to view him- or herself as a member of a particular social entity - the organization” (p.2). Customers, who identify with the organization, have prosocial behavior (such as participation behavior) toward the organization and other stakeholders (Gruen et al., 2000). The meta-analysis done by Santini et al. (2017) reveals that one of the important constructs, which is image, is associated with the identity of HEIs. Customers, who identify with the organization, have prosocial behavior (such as participation behavior) toward the organization and other stakeholders (Gruen et al., 2000).

Various researchers (e.g. Azoury et al., 2014; Duarte et al., 2010; Wilkins & Huisman, 2013) have defined university image using various dimensions and as a first-order construct. However, Manzoor et al. (2020) have defined university image as a higher-order formative construct (HOFC) consisting of three dimensions: ‘external communication and values’, ‘national and international awareness and facilities’ and ‘economic value’. This means that a university’s image is formed by its national and international name and brand, academic practices and facilities, and psychological environment. The large influence of rising digital media has allowed “constant and active information flow from the inside of an organization to the outside” (Lee et al., 2018, p. 311). Therefore, as well as the course image, there is a clear connection between communications and a university’s image (Duarte et al., 2010). Azoury, Daou and Khoury’s (2014) research on university image shows that ‘cost to quality ratio’ is one of the cognitive factors of image that has the utmost positive impact. According to these researchers, students tend to evaluate if the tuition fees they pay truly complement the quality of their education and if the university support facilities are QS World University Rankings (2021) worth their value for money.

In this study, social exchange theory has also been used to analyze the role of students' participation behavior as an exchange and expected outcome due to the impact of the positive image of HEIs. According to Blau (1964), social exchange theory postulates that the relationship between an individual and his or her partner is an exchange. The researchers in this study postulate participation behavior as an exchange in the higher education context.

According to Mursid & Wu (2021), customer participation is significantly influenced by the image of the institutional services. Moreover, Cheng & Xue (2014, June) have also argued that, through a strong company image, service firms can influence customers’ participation behavior. Also, recent study findings by Manzoor et al. (2020) illustrate university image as a higher-order construct that influences prosocial behavior such as satisfaction and extra-role behavior.

Therefore, we propose the following main hypothesis based on the above literature review:

As suggested earlier, based on Yi & Gong’s (2013) ideas, the present study conceptualizes student participation behavior as a multidimensional concept that has four broad dimensions: information seeking, information sharing, personal interaction, and responsible behavior. In university settings, students seek information in various ways, such as asking other persons (e.g. students or employees). Likewise, information sharing in service settings includes providing employees with essential information that enables them to perform their roles better. Personal interaction between customers [or students] and service providers [or a university] is crucial for successful service delivery (Ennew & Binks, 1999). Customers must demonstrate responsible behavior accepting their duties (Deltoro et al., 2019) as a part of participation behavior (Yi & Gong, 2013). Accordingly, we postulate the H1 expansion and conceptual model (Figure 1) as follows:

Figure 1. The conceptual model.

The above conceptual model illustrates the relations of university image as a HOFC and its relationship with students’ participation behavior as a multidimensional construct consisting of elements such as information seeking, information sharing, personal interaction, and responsible behavior.

Methods

Results

Data were checked for common method bias (CMB) that used Harman's Single Factor test as a statistical fix (Podsakoff et al., 2012) as this study is based on cross-sectional data. No CMB issues were found as 48.98% of the variance is explained by just one factor (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The Cronbach’s alpha values in this study are greater than 0.7, thus indicating the stability of the scale (Nunnally, 1978).

Looking into the demographic profile of this study, the nationalities of the respondents broadly represented the international student population in Malaysia, with 35.1% from Bangladesh, 20.2% from Pakistan, 15.8% from Yemen, 12.6% from India, 8% from Indonesia, and 8.3% from other countries. The samples consisted of 70.5% male respondents and 29.5% female respondents. 55% of the students were postgraduate students and the rest (45%) were undergraduate students. The majority of the respondents (65%) were single and 35% of the respondents were married.

For the measurement of model validity, all the constructs reached the satisfactory level of average variance extracted (see Hair et al., 2017) with a value greater than 0.5 and composite reliability (CR) >0.8, thus ensuring the convergent validity. For discriminant validity, the values of the Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio (HTMT) also met the essential threshold of HTMT.85 (see Henseler et al., 2015), thus establishing discriminant validity for the constructs in this study.

By following Manzoor et al. (2020), university image was considered a higher-order construct in this study which also comprises three lower-order constructs, namely ‘external communication and values’, ‘national and international awareness and facilities’, and ‘economic value’ (p. 29). According to Hair et al. (2017), a two-stage approach is used “to assess the structural model validity for the higher-order formative construct” (p.23). In order to evaluate the validity of university image as a HOFC, this study used variance inflation factor and bootstrapped outer weights. The outer variance inflation factor (VIF) values for all indicators using the latent variable score (LVS) are less than 5 and the t-values for all the other indicators’ outer weights are significant (t-values>1.96) (see Hair et al., 2010 for the requirements) (Table 1).

The structural model validity was evaluated using a bootstrapping analysis to assess the direct effects of H1(a)-H1(d). The bootstrapping procedure is administered based on 5000 samples. The t-values of the bootstrapped results of above 1.645 at a 5% level of significance (one-tailed) show that all four hypotheses are supported (Table 2).

The hypotheses results show that there is a positive relationship between ‘university image’ and ‘information seeking’ (H1a: t-value=3.735, p<0.05); ‘university image’ and ‘information sharing’ (H1b: t-value=5.252, p<0.01); ‘university image’ and ‘personal interaction’ (H1c: t-value=2.554.735, p<0.03); ‘university image’ and ‘responsible behavior’ (H1d: t-value=6.121, p<0.01). The R2 values for the four dimensions of participative behavior are 0.26, considered substantial based on the threshold recommended by Cohen (2013). The Q2 values are obtained from the blindfolding procedure to examine the model’s predictive relevance. In a structural model, Q2 values larger than zero indicate that “exogenous constructs have predictive relevance for endogenous constructs” (Hair et al., 2017, p.37). The results of this study revealed that all Q2 values range from 0.001 to 0.398 and are more than 0, thus indicating that the model’s predictive relevance is satisfactory.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to analyze the university image as a higher-order formative construct and its impact on international students’ participation behavior in HEIs in Malaysia. The results have revealed that there are positive associations between university image and the dimensions of participation behavior such as information seeking, information sharing, personal interaction, and responsible behavior. This study’s outcomes complement the findings of Mursid & Wu (2021) that institutional image positively influences the customers’ participation (such as that of HEIs on student participation). Thus, HEIs having a sound image can ultimately encourage international students to interact openly and enhance the latter’s information exchange and spontaneous participation behaviors with their personnel or staff.

This study has revalidated the implications of social exchange theory, particularly in the higher education context. The relationship-oriented model used in this study addresses the importance of focusing on university image as a higher-order formative construct consisting of three lower-order constructs (i.e., ‘external communication and values’, ‘national and international awareness and facilities’ and ‘economic value’) enhancing a strong identity based on the underlying assumptions of social identity theory for the HEIs. This higher-order image model can then act as a relationship enhancement catalyst and encourage students in participation behavior that is defined by Yi & Gong (2013) as multidimensional. This indicates that the higher education practitioners need to develop their regional and global image through analyzing its multidimensional nature beyond one factor for the sustainability of other factors as well such as their ranking, facilities, and communications with various stakeholders.

Furthermore, the results of this study show that HEIs’ image can positively influence information seeking, information sharing, personal interaction, and responsible behavior as parts of students’ participation behavior. The study thus confirms the positive relationship between university image and participation behavior dimensions which is compatible with the views of Cheng & Xue (2014, June). In line with the fundamentals of social exchange theory, students' participation behavior is the outcome of their prosocial behavior derived as a reciprocal exchange between the customer and an organization.

Therefore, higher education administrators can create a flexible platform (both online and offline) to facilitate international students’ participation behavior in university service provision and equip them with knowledge of the university’s services, something that provides students with a ‘sense of belonging’. This ultimately helps the HEIs to nurture a relationship with their students even in cases of uncertainty such as during and post-pandemic situations (Manzoor et al., 2020).

Conclusion

By considering the competitive situation of HEIs around the world, this study has investigated the impact of university image on the participation behavior of international students in Malaysia. In this regard, the study has taken ‘image’ as a higher-order construct on the multidimensional participation behavior of students. International students have been concentrated particularly due to the imposition of travel restrictions worldwide due to the COVID-19 pandemic that has largely affected their mobility and interactions with university personnel. The study has confirmed the positive associations between university image and the multiple dimensions of participation behavior such as information seeking, information sharing, personal interaction, and responsible behavior. Future studies can assess this model of university image and students’ participation behavior among local students to perform the multigroup analysis to assess if any variability exists in their behavior. Moreover, the relationship-based behavioral model explored in this study could be tested with a larger sample size incorporating private colleges and community colleges to enhance the generalizability of the research findings. The outcome of this research has evidenced that university image can encourage students’ participation behavior such as information seeking, information sharing, and responsible behavior, which are perceived as positive behavioral outcomes towards their respective HEIs. This empirically tested behavioral model in the present study offers practical implications for universities particularly in this current period of uncertainty following the COVID-19 pandemic where HEIs are facing tremendous challenges to uphold their strong rapport with international students.

Data availability