The antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in higher education: A parental perspective Elizabeth Bakkes A field study submitted to the UFS Business School in the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Magister in Business Administration at the UFS Business School University of the Free State Bloemfontein Supervisor: Professor Jacques Nel DATE: 20 November 2022 ii | P a g e DECLARATION: I declare that the field study hereby handed in for the qualification Master’s in Business Administration at the UFS Business School at the University of the Free State, is my own independent work and that I have not previously submitted the same work, either as a whole or in part, for a qualification at / in another university / faculty. I also hereby cede copyright of this work to the University of the Free State, South Africa. Name: Elizabeth Bakkes Student number: 1988607857 Date: 20 November 2022 Signature: iii | P a g e ABSTRACT Higher education institutions (HEIs) in South Africa are increasingly realising the differentiating role that corporate reputation plays in a very competitive higher education marketplace. However, from the literature reviewed, there are uncertainties towards the dimensions of a HEI’s corporate reputation that impacts specifically the perspective and behavioral responses of parents of Grade 12 learners. Parents play a critical role in the selection of a HEI for post-school studies for their Grade 12 child. The field study set out to identify the antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in higher education from a parental perspective. Service experience, information from others, and information from the media were identified as antecedents of corporate reputation of a HEI. Trust, identification, commitment, word- of-mouth intention, and supportive intention were identified as consequences of a HEI’s corporate reputation. A conceptual model of the parental perspective of a HEI’s corporate reputation was developed based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response Theory. The field study followed an ontological assumption, a positivism approach, and a cross-sectional time horizon. The theory development followed a deductive theory approach. A quantitative research method was followed using a simple random sampling technique to collect data from 163 Grade 12 learners’ parents of high schools in Bloemfontein, South Africa. Six high schools agreed to distribute the self-completion questionnaires to the parents of their respective Grade 12 learners. The self- completion questionnaire consisted of three sections. The first two sections contained screening and background questions, while the third section posed statements to test each of the eleven hypotheses according to a seven-point Likert scale. Data analysis was done to test the hypotheses using the statistical software package SmartPLS version 4.0. Findings indicated that the influence of information from others, information from media on corporate reputation were positive and statistically significant. The influence of corporate reputation on trust and identification was positive and statistically significant. Furthermore, the influence of trust and identification on commitment was also positive and statistically significant as well as the influence of commitment of word-of-mouth intention and supportive intentions. iv | P a g e The field study’s findings provided a basis for HEI management teams to understand the perspective of parents on corporate reputation of HEIs and the impact of their perceptions on the selection of a suitable HEI for post-school studies for their children. Recommendations were given to HEI management teams to practically improve the perspectives of the HEI’s corporate reputation. Key words: Higher education institution (HEI), corporate reputation, parental perspective, parental involvement, information from others, information from media, commitment, trust, identification, word of mouth intention, supportive intention. v | P a g e ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The following persons and high schools in Bloemfontein are hereby acknowledged and sincerely thanked: • God, who gave me a dream and through whose steadfast and everlasting love I can achieve everything. • Professor Jacques Nel, for your continued patience, guidance, and wisdom. Your assistance with especially the analysis of the data is greatly appreciated. I have learned so much from you. • Professor Francis Petersen, for your support, encouragement, and for allowing me the time and opportunity to further my studies. • Herman, Brendan, Andrea, and Gerhard for your encouragement, love, and support throughout the journey. Thank you for enduring the multiple heaps of research articles, for being my soundboard, and especially keeping the household afloat, while I was occupied with the writing of this dissertation. • My father, Nico Coertze, who passed away in August 2021, for your belief in me and always being proud of me. • The school principals and parents of Grade 12 learners in Grey College Secondary School, Navalsig High School, Jim Fouché Hoërskool, Hoërskool Sentraal, Fichardtpark Hoërskool, and C&N Sekondêre Meisieskool Oranje for respectively distributing the questionnaires and participating in the study. • Elvira Oberholzer, who epitomises the essence of the University of the Free State, which is “Inspiring excellence and transforming lives through quality, impact, and care”. Your understanding, excellent administrative support, kindness, and care made this journey joyful. You are a ‘rock star’! vi | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................xiii LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................. xiv 1.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.2. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.2.1 Corporate reputation defined .............................................................................................. 3 1.2.2 Corporate reputation in higher education .......................................................................... 3 1.3. THE ROLE OF PARENTS IN THE SELECTION PROCESS............................................. 5 1.4 ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION ........................................................................................................................ 6 1.4.1 Antecedents of corporate reputation .................................................................................. 6 1.4.1.1 Experience of services .................................................................................................... 7 1.4.1.2 Information from others ................................................................................................... 7 1.4.1.3 Information from the media ............................................................................................ 8 1.4.2 Consequences of corporate reputation ............................................................................. 8 1.4.2.1 Trust ................................................................................................................................... 8 1.4.2.2 Identification...................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.2.3 Commitment ................................................................................................................... 10 1.4.2.4 Word-of-mouth intention ............................................................................................... 10 1.4.2.5 Supportive intention ....................................................................................................... 11 1.5 RESEARCH GAP .................................................................................................................... 11 1.6 PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................. 12 1.6.1 Research problem statement ............................................................................................ 13 1.6.2 Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 13 1.7 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ............................................ 13 1.7.1 Primary research objective ................................................................................................ 13 1.7.2 Secondary research objectives......................................................................................... 14 vii | P a g e 1.8 CONCEPTUAL MODEL ......................................................................................................... 14 1.9 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 15 1.9.1 Research approach and design ........................................................................................ 15 1.9.2 Population and sampling strategy .................................................................................... 16 1.9.3 Data Collection .................................................................................................................... 17 1.9.4 Data analysis......................................................................................................................... 18 1.9.5 Ethical Considerations ....................................................................................................... 18 1.10 DEMARCATION AND POSSIBLE LIMITATIONS OF STUDY ....................................... 18 1.11 LAYOUT OF REMAINING CHAPTERS .............................................................................. 19 1.12 CHAPTER 1: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 20 2.1. INTRODUCTION - AN INSIGHT INTO THE STATE OF HIGHER EDUCATION ......... 22 2.1.1 Role of HEIs ......................................................................................................................... 22 2.1.2 The changing higher education landscape ..................................................................... 23 2.1.3 The South African context of higher education .............................................................. 24 2.2 CORPORATE REPUTATION IN THE FIELD OF MARKETING ..................................... 25 2.2.1 Higher education marketing .............................................................................................. 26 2.2.2 Fierce competitive landscape ........................................................................................... 27 2.3 THE CONCEPT OF CORPORATE REPUTATION ........................................................... 28 2.3.1 Definitions of corporate reputation ................................................................................... 29 2.3.2 Parental perspective of corporate reputation in higher education ............................... 32 2.3.2.1 Different phases of parental involvement ................................................................... 33 2.3.2.2 Choice factors influencing the selection of a HEI ..................................................... 34 2.3.3 Corporate associations ...................................................................................................... 35 2.3.4 Corporate reputation versus corporate brand equity ..................................................... 36 2.4 REPUTATION MANAGEMENT AS AN INSTITUTIONAL IMPERATIVE ...................... 36 2.4.1 Reputational risk management ......................................................................................... 37 2.5 CONSTRUCTS OF A HEI's CORPORATE REPUTATION ............................................. 39 2.6. BENEFITS OF A GOOD CORPORATE REPUTATION ................................................... 42 viii | P a g e 2.6.1 Corporate reputation - a barrier to market entry ............................................................ 42 2.6.2 Corporate reputation - a competitive advantage ............................................................ 42 2.6.3 Corporate reputation - a selection mechanism .............................................................. 43 2.6.4 Corporate reputation - an institutional differentiator ...................................................... 44 2.7 CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION: A PARENTAL PERSPECTIVE................................................................................................................................... 44 2.7.1 Antecedents of corporate reputation ................................................................................ 44 2.7.1.1 Experience of service .................................................................................................... 44 2.7.1.2 Information from others and the media ...................................................................... 46 2.7.2 Consequences of corporate reputation ................................................................................ 47 2.7.2.1 Trust ................................................................................................................................. 47 2.7.2.2 Identification.................................................................................................................... 48 2.7.2.3 Commitment ................................................................................................................... 49 2.7.2.4 Supportive intention ....................................................................................................... 49 2.7.2.5 Word-of-mouth intention ............................................................................................... 50 2.8 CONCLUSION: CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................... 50 3.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 53 3.2 THEORETICAL ROOTS ......................................................................................................... 53 3.2.1 External stimuli (S) as antecedents of corporate reputation ........................................ 54 3.2.2 Organism (O) - an internal interpretation of corporate reputation ............................... 57 3.2.2.1 Trust ................................................................................................................................. 58 3.2.2.2 Identification.................................................................................................................... 59 3.2.2.3 Trust and commitment .................................................................................................. 59 3.2.2.4 Identification and commitment .................................................................................... 60 3.2.3 Behaviour responses as consequences of corporate reputation (R) .......................... 61 3.2.3.1 Word-of-mouth (WOM) intention ................................................................................. 61 3.2.3.2 Supportive intentions ..................................................................................................... 62 3.2.3.3 Corporate reputation and word-of-mouth intention .................................................. 62 ix | P a g e 3.2.3.4 Corporate reputation and supportive intention ......................................................... 62 3.3 HYPOTHESISED MODEL OF THE STUDY ....................................................................... 63 3.4 CONCLUSION: CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................ 64 4.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 66 4.2. RESEARCH DEFINED ........................................................................................................... 66 4.2.1 The nature of business research – an academic quest for knowledge ...................... 67 4.2.2 Characteristics of research ................................................................................................ 68 4.2.3 Criteria in business research............................................................................................. 68 4.2.3.1 Reliability ................................................................................................................. 69 4.2.3.2 Replication ............................................................................................................... 69 4.2.3.3 Validity ...................................................................................................................... 69 4.3 RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS AND PHILOSOPHIES ....................................................... 70 4.3.1 Beliefs and assumptions .................................................................................................... 71 4.3.1.1 Ontological assumptions ....................................................................................... 71 4.3.1.2 Epistemological assumptions ............................................................................... 72 4.3.1.3 Axiological assumptions ........................................................................................ 72 4.3.2 Research philosophies ....................................................................................................... 72 4.3.2.1 Objectivism .............................................................................................................. 73 4.3.2.2 Constructivism ........................................................................................................ 73 4.3.2.3 Pragmatism ............................................................................................................. 73 4.3.2.4 Positivism ................................................................................................................. 73 4.3.2.5 Realism .................................................................................................................... 74 4.3.2.6 Interpretivism ........................................................................................................... 74 4.4 APPROACH TO THEORY DEVELOPMENT...................................................................... 76 4.4.1 Deductive theory approach ............................................................................................... 76 4.4.2 Inductive theory approach ................................................................................................. 76 4.4.3 Abduction theory approach ............................................................................................... 77 4.5 METHODOLOGY CHOICE .................................................................................................... 77 x | P a g e 4.5.1 Quantitative research ......................................................................................................... 77 4.5.2 Qualitative research ............................................................................................................ 78 4.6 SAMPLING ............................................................................................................................... 78 4.6.1 Target population or sampling frame ............................................................................... 78 4.6.2 Sampling strategy ............................................................................................................... 79 4.6.2.1 Probability sampling techniques .......................................................................... 79 4.6.2.2 Non-probability sampling techniques .......................................................................... 80 4.6.2.3 Sample size ............................................................................................................. 81 4.7 RESEARCH STUDY STRATEGY ........................................................................................ 81 4.7.1 Questionnaire design and structure ................................................................................. 83 4.7.1.1 Measurement scales .............................................................................................. 83 4.7.1.2 Number of categories and questions ......................................................................... 84 4.7.1.3 Response rate and sampling error ...................................................................... 90 4.8 TIME HORIZON ....................................................................................................................... 90 4.9 DATA COLLECTION .............................................................................................................. 91 4.9.1 Request to schools to assist in questionnaire distribution ............................................ 91 4.9.2 Data collection errors ........................................................................................................ 92 4.10 ETHICS IN BUSINESS RESEARCH.................................................................................... 92 4.10.1 Nature of ethics in business research ............................................................................ 93 4.10.2 Protection from harm ......................................................................................................... 93 4.10.3 Informed consent ............................................................................................................... 94 4.10.4 Confidentiality and anonymity .......................................................................................... 94 4.10.5 Honesty and objectivity ..................................................................................................... 95 4.11 DATA ANALYSIS PLAN ........................................................................................................ 95 4.11.1 Item reliability ....................................................................................................................... 96 4.11.2 Internal consistency reliability ........................................................................................... 96 4.11.3 Convergent validity ............................................................................................................. 96 4.11.4 Discriminant validity ............................................................................................................ 97 xi | P a g e 4.12 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL MODEL ......................................................................... 97 4.12.1 Variance inflation factor (VIF) ........................................................................................... 97 4.12.2 R2 of endogenous constructs ........................................................................................... 97 4.12.3 Path coefficients and p-values ......................................................................................... 97 4.12.4. Ad hoc analysis ................................................................................................................. 98 4.13 CONCLUSION: CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................ 98 5.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 100 5.2 COLLECTED DATA .............................................................................................................. 100 5.2.1 Frequency tables ................................................................................................................ 101 5.2.1.1 Section A: Screening questions ................................................................................ 101 5.2.1.2 Section B: Background questions ............................................................................ 102 5.2.1.3 Section C: Beliefs on the corporate reputation of a HEI ....................................... 104 5.3 ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASUREMENT MODEL ........................................................... 106 5.4 ASSESSMENT OF THE STRUCTURAL MODEL ............................................................... 109 5.5 AD HOC ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 111 5.6 CONCLUSION: CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................. 112 6.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 114 6.2 HYPOTHESES FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................................. 114 6.2.1 The influence of service experience on corporate reputation (H1) ............................. 114 6.2.2 The influence of information from others on corporate reputation (H2) ..................... 115 6.2.3 The influence of information from media on corporate reputation (H3) ..................... 115 6.2.4 The influence of corporate reputation on trust (H4) ...................................................... 115 6.2.5 The influence of corporate reputation on identification (H5) ........................................ 115 6.2.6 The influence of trust on commitment (H6) .................................................................... 115 6.2.7 The influence of identification on commitment (H7) ...................................................... 116 6.2.8 The influence of commitment on word-of-mouth intention (H8) .................................. 116 6.2.9 The influence of commitment on supportive intention (H9) ......................................... 116 6.2.10 The influence of corporate reputation on word-of-mouth intention (H10)................ 116 xii | P a g e 6.2.11 The influence of corporate reputation on supportive intention (H10) ....................... 116 6.3 THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTIONS ....................................................................................... 117 6.3.1 Antecedents of corporate reputation ............................................................................... 117 6.3.2 Consequences of corporate reputation ........................................................................... 117 6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANAGERIAL INTERVENTIONS ..................................... 118 6.4.1 Identify and operationalise functional reputation drivers .............................................. 118 6.4.2 Form parent reference groups ......................................................................................... 119 6.4.3 Leverage the media ........................................................................................................... 119 6.4.4 Establish a parent-focussed programme ........................................................................ 120 6.4.5 Strengthen identification with HEIs .................................................................................. 121 6.4.6 Corporate reputation capital value chain ........................................................................ 121 6.5 ACHIEVEMENT OF FIELD STUDY OBJECTIVES ............................................................. 122 6.6 LIMITATIONS OF STUDY ....................................................................................................... 124 6.7 CONCLUSION: CHAPTER 6 .................................................................................................. 125 REFERENCE LIST .......................................................................................................................... 126 APPENDIXES ................................................................................................................................... 138 Appendix 1: Self-completion questionnaire .............................................................................. 138 xiii | P a g e LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Conceptual model of the antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in higher education from a parental perspective based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response Theory 15 Figure 2.1 Drivers of reputational risk 38 Figure 2.2 Drivers of corporate reputation of a HEI 41 Figure 3.1 Hypothesised model based on the Stimulus-Organism- Response Theory 63 Figure 4.1 The research onion 71 Figure 4.2 Primary data collection methods 82 Figure 5.1 Assessment of the structural model 110 xiv | P a g e LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 Overview of research assumption, philosophies, and methods 75 Table 4.2 Category ES: Experience of service 84 Table 4.3 Category IO: Information from others 85 Table 4.4 Category IM: Information from the media 85 Table 4.5 Category CR: Corporate reputation 86 Table 4.6 Category TR: Trust 86 Table 4.7 Category ID: Identification 87 Table 4.8 Category CO: Commitment 87 Table 4.9 Category IWM: Word-of-mouth intention 88 Table 4.10 Category SI: Supportive intentions 89 Table 5.1 Breakdown of respondents per high school 101 Table 5.2 Age distribution of sample 102 Table 5.3 Home language distribution of sample 103 Table 5.4 Distribution of highest levels of education of sample 103 Table 5.5 Employment distribution of sample 104 Table 5.6 Distribution of selected HEIs 104 Table 5.7 Constructs and number of statements per construct 105 Table 5.8 Measurement model results 108 Table 5.9 HTMT results 109 Table 5.10 Results of the testing of the indirect results 111 Table 6.1 Evidence of the achievement of the objectives of the field study 122 1 | P a g e 2 | P a g e 1.1 INTRODUCTION Warren Buffet famously said that a company’s reputation takes twenty years to be built but can be destroyed in five minutes. If companies would contemplate on the importance of corporate reputation, they would do business differently (Keh & Xie, 2008). Corporate reputation is a significant and major component of corporate marketing (Abratt & Kelyn, 2012). Corporate reputation is regarded as an essential intangible asset of a company (Badri & Mohaidat, 2014; Safón, 2009). It is a stimulus for a customer's decision to buy or not buy a product or service (Terblanche, 2009). Companies with good reputation management practices enjoy differentiation in the marketplace and can increase awareness and desire from current and potential stakeholders to engage, thus increasing the competitive advantage and likeliness to attract more customers (Skallerud, 2011). Reputation management is a tedious process and simultaneously fragile. It can change in a moment if not effectively managed (Akova & Kantar, 2020). Very often, companies’ corporate reputation dominates the headlines due to scandalous actions. Many companies have learned the hard lesson about the scope of a damaged reputation's effect on customer loyalty and eventually on the financial well-being of a company (Guckian, Chapman, Lickel & Markowitz, 2017). The explosion of information through media channels, investors' demands for more profit and transparency, and the growing awareness of social responsibility recognise the building and maintaining of corporate reputation as a strategic activity of corporate marketing management (Argenti & Drukenmiller, 2004). Similar to organisations in the private sector, the management of corporate reputation is also important for higher education institutions (HEIs) (Lee, Park, & Cameron, 2018). HEIs have many stakeholders, including parents of students (Lee et al., 2018). Parents are viewed as consumers, like students, with perceived consumerist needs which include the desire to ‘know’ what it is that they are paying for (Pugsley & Coffey, 2002). Therefore, it is imperative to understand the role corporate reputation plays in parents’ higher education decision-making. The intended research will study the formation of corporate reputation in higher education from a parental perspective. At the same time, trust, 3 | P a g e identification, commitment, advocacy, and supportive intentions will be studied as corporate reputation consequences. 1.2. BACKGROUND 1.2.1 Corporate reputation defined Keh and Xie (2009) state that corporate reputation finds a place academically in economics, sociology, management, and marketing fields of study. Albassami, Alqhatani, and Saleh (2015) view corporate reputation in the marketing literature as a construct with a wide range of variables such as trust, loyalty, and commitment. Walsh and Beatty (2007: 129) provide an external perspective on corporate reputation. They define it as the overall assessment of an organisation about its character or identity: The customer's overall evaluation of a firm based on his or her reactions to the firm's goods, services, communication activities, interactions with the firm and/or its representatives or constituencies (such as employees, management, or other customers) and/or known corporate activities. Akova and Kantar (2020) define corporate reputation as the perception of public opinion on an institution's whole, including values, identity, and images. Argenti and Druckenmiller (2004) see corporate reputation as the collective representation of the company's image and identity held by multiple constituencies over time and how they perceive its behavior and performance. From the above definitions, corporate reputation is constructed by an image, perception, experience of services and/or goods over time, and how ethical a company conducts its business. Lee (2019) studied the impact of the communication and promotion of a HEI’s identity and images on parents’ perception of reputation, attitudes, and behavioral intentions towards an institution. 1.2.2 Corporate reputation in higher education HEIs progressively realise that they form part of the service industry (Khanna, Jacob & Yadav, 2014), despite the struggle to reconcile the historical status as institutions of educational teaching and learning excellence (Davies, 2021). Davies continues that HEIs 4 | P a g e are coming to terms with students' consumer status and understand the need to adapt to a business-orientated approach. This approach would require of a higher education institution (HEI) to build mutually beneficial relationships with 'stakeholders' such as prospective students, parents, alumni, potential and existing donors, and the media. Skallerud (2011) states that research within the fields of management, marketing, and corporate strategy, elucidated that corporate reputation influences a company’s success. Therefore, the concept of corporate reputation applies to HEIs in the anticipation that a good reputation will attract quality and quantity students. Christensen and Gornitzka (2017) agree with the above notion and believe that modern HEIs cater to many stakeholder groups and are socially embedded. HEIs project a unique image, communicate information, and are contextually connected to different actors in the environment. These actors, such as alumni, donors, parents, and prospective students, are essential for commitment, trust, support, and legitimacy towards a HEI. Astin (1984) cited in Lee (2019) proposed that higher education reputation marketing should be approached differently from the usual service or product marketing and promotion. The selection of a suitable HEI by parents is complicated due to the combination of consumption and investment properties against the background of a positive corporate reputation. Pires and Trez (2016) highlight that corporate reputation is the accumulated views and opinions of the organisation's history and the expectations on its future actions, given its efficiency in relation with its competitors. In addition, Walsh, Mitchell, Jackson, and Beatty (2009) state that corporate reputation relates to other concepts or corporate associations such as corporate identity and image. Therefore, a higher education institution’s (HEI's) corporate reputation is forthcoming from the perception in stakeholders’ minds based on their expectations compared to the lived experience, what they have heard from others, and the facts they have gathered from friends, family, the internet, and media. 5 | P a g e 1.3. THE ROLE OF PARENTS IN THE SELECTION PROCESS Beneke and Human (2010) believe that reciprocal relationships with a broader network of stakeholders are integral for reputation management. Parents and prospective students may be equally important to establish a high level of loyalty and trust towards a HEI. Walsh et al. (2009) support the notion of relationship marketing towards beneficial stakeholder management. A reciprocal relationship is an essential determinant of the reputation and perception a customer holds of a company. Parents want their children to receive the best possible education at a university, which they believe and perceive as most reputable (Akova & Kantar, 2020). The available literature on parental involvement and influence in selecting a university is limited (Wong, Ng, Lee & Lam, 2019) and even more so regarding the relationship between the HEI's reputation and parents' behaviour and power during the selection phase. Lee (2019) agrees and states that despite valid evidence that parents play an integral role in their child’s selection processes of a HEI, there is scant research available to understand the parental perspective. Lee (2019) motivates that most research is on the prospective student’s perspective and not from the parental perspective. Gao and Ng (2017) confirm that parental involvement is a crucial determinant of the selection of a preferred HEI, affordability of the institution, admission to the institution, attendance, and completion of the degree. Parents want the best for their children. Parents involvement in the choice of higher education is likely to increase when a significant financial layout and commitment are required. Parental involvement during the selection phase is critical for preparing the school leaver for university life. Parental involvement can be categorised into the following categories, i.e., (1) economic capital, (2) cultural capital, and (3) social capital. The intertwining and complex relationships between these three capital types strengthen the dynamic process of parents' contributions to university selection and access (Gao & Ng, 2017). The cost of tertiary education, household income, and socioeconomic status are among the most common determinants when post-school options are discussed. The higher the household income, the higher the propensity to continue post-school education (Sá, 6 | P a g e Florax & Rietveld, 2003). Studying in the proximity of a university offers relief on the financial investment and emotional cost as the support systems are close to ensuring students' emotional and physical wellness. Akova and Kantar (2020) state that parents, from as young as pre-school, investigate and evaluate schools that would best suit their children. A Norwegian study conducted by Skallerud (2011) across primary schools investigated parent-based school reputation as being predominantly influenced by parent satisfaction and loyalty. This behavior continues into secondary school. When the learner reaches senior high school, parents investigate and consider information on HEIs, which includes infrastructure, accommodation, achievements, qualities of teaching staff, and job opportunities upon graduation, and especially corporate reputation of HEIs (Skallerud, 2011). In Iacopini and Hayden (2017), parents viewed the importance of educational teaching and qualifications in a very serious light. Parents interviewed felt a deep sense of responsibility to assist their children with post-school options to become better qualified. Parents regarded a good corporate reputation, significant contribution to employment opportunities once graduated, and a university free of corruption as critical considerations when evaluating and selecting a university. Based on the discussion to this point, it can be asserted that reputation management for HEIs is vital to acknowledge parents as customers (Skallerud, 2019) and as a very important stakeholder group for the success of a HEI (Lee, Park, & Cameron, 2018). 1.4 ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION 1.4.1 Antecedents of corporate reputation Knowledge and information of a company either motivates or discourages customers to engage with the company to acquire its goods or services. Shamma, and Hassan (2009) highlighted the impact of various sources of information on different stakeholders’ perceptions about a company. The antecedents of corporate reputation discussed in this 7 | P a g e section are personal experience that customers have with a company, information gathered from others such as friends or family, and information gathered from media sources. 1.4.1.1 Experience of services Walsh and Beatty (2007) believe that the customer is pivotal to the concept of reputation and highlighted corporate reputation as a customer's evaluation based on the firm's interaction (experience) with goods and services, constituencies, or other corporate activities. The authors describe corporate reputation as a positive and general perception (estimation) that the public holds of a company or for the purpose of this study, HEIs that positively impact the public’s attitude and behaviour towards the HEI. The assessment translates into a quality promise or a value proposition, which directs the company to serve customers with high-quality services. Shamma and Hassan (2009) agree that personal experience and interactions with a company are the main drivers of knowledge gathering to form perceptions about corporate reputation. The concept of quality needs to be de-constructed, as it is reliant on various customer variables. The quality of services is difficult to determine since customers have different expectations, biases, and values, which articulate into pre-purchase and post-purchase evaluation (Walsh & Beatty, 2007). Lee (2019) identifies HEIs’ culture and value system as determinants of corporate reputation. Values and culture are influential factors for selecting a HEI include academic quality, tradition, sense of belonging and care, innovativeness, engaged scholarship, and student-centredness. These touchpoints of culture and values translate into the institution’s performance. Furthermore, performance links experience and parent satisfaction as key antecedents for corporate reputation. 1.4.1.2 Information from others Teo and Soutar (2011) state that HEIs need to take note of informal knowledge sharing between a potential customer (parent and student) and non-commercial senders. Informal knowledge sharing plays a significant role is the preference and selection of a HEI (Teo & Soutar, 2011). Traditional advertising and promotion tactics are no longer the 8 | P a g e predominant sources of knowledge gathering and have fallen victim to the increasingly popular informal reference sources and social networks. 1.4.1.3 Information from the media The media is a crucial tool for influencing how customers views brands. While customer experiences may improve views of a company's goods or services and the level of credibility and trust toward a company, information learned from the media could give hint about other attributes of a company's reputation that are crucial for reputation (Shamma & Hassan, 2009). Einwiller, Carroll, and Korn (2010) also state that the media is a primary source of a company’s information on their activities and general news. Media favourability and visibility influence a company’s prominence in the market and the general public’s perception of the corporate reputation. Einwiller et al. (2010) further indicate that stakeholders rely increasingly on media to learn about a company’s attributes that are challenging to relate directly to personal experience and other people's knowledge. Applying the statement to the current study, parents are likely to rely on traditional and digital media channels to obtain information about a HEI that they are not able to gather from informal and influential social networks. 1.4.2 Consequences of corporate reputation Walsh et al. (2007) state that companies, such as HEIs, need to manage corporate reputation by measuring it and understanding its consequences on customer outcome variables. A general view is that a 'good' corporate reputation is an important signal of quality, credibility and trust focused on sound transactions with stakeholders in the environment (Walsh et al., 2009). The reverse is also true; a 'bad' corporate reputation will elicit unfavorable evaluation from the customers who engage with the company. 1.4.2.1 Trust Diaconu and Pandelica (2011) highlight the importance of relationship marketing and relationship building with a prospective customer to secure trust, loyalty, and confidence towards an institution for long-term success, which Beneke (2011) refers to as the lifetime value of a customer. In the context of HEIs, the lifetime value of the student should stretch 9 | P a g e beyond the registration and graduation phases into the postgraduate or alumni donor phase. Walsh et al. (2009) found that a positive corporate reputation holds benefits for the company such as loyalty, trust, and retention, which concurs with the customer's lifetime value explained by Beneke. In the context of the field study, trust is a comprehensive outcome from corporate reputation (Van der Merwe & Puth, 2014). Keh and Xie (2009) state that trust will be established when one party, the trustor (parent), has confidence and believe in the integrity, reliability, ability, and benevolence of the trustee or the service provider (HEI) to act in a specific context. Trust is the foundation of corporate reputation and is fueled by trustworthiness, honesty, and competence. Public relations, as a function of marketing and relationship management provide the bedrock on which trust is built and fostered. Van der Merwe and Puth (2014) explain trust flowing from the Social Exchange Theory, as a multi-dimensional, inter-subjective, and systemic social reality and has affective, cognitive, and behavioral dimensions. The affective dimension is characterised by emotion and an inherent moral element present in the trust relationship (Van der Merwe & Puth, 2014). The emotional bond between the two parties is based on the trustee's goodwill, values, and ethical character to meet the trustor's needs. The cognitive dimension is grounded in the trustor's perception that the trustee can act with integrity and benevolence. The third dimension of trust lies in the behavioral evidence of the practical execution of trust. 1.4.2.2 Identification Van der Merwe and Puth (2017) define identification as the familiarity and similarity a customer has towards an organisation. Identification allows stakeholders to align themselves with the values and integrity of an organisation. Akova and Kantar (2020) motivate that HEIs with a good reputation for student-centric teaching and learning practices encourage a strong sense of belonging. These students have the desire to be emotionally associated with their universities. They become ambassadors and participative alumni and hold potential donor abilities, thus have a high customer lifetime value. Stemming from the Organisational Identification Theory and the 10 | P a g e Social Identity Theory, Bhattacharya and Sen, cited in Keh and Xie (2009), state that when a company satisfies one or more of a customer's key self-definitional needs, a solid customer-company relationship forms, which result in a positive perception towards corporate reputation. Customer identification is critical for building meaningful relationships and lasting commitment between the two parties. Despite its value and influence on purchase behavior, customer identification is underutilised, and research literature is limited (Keh & Xie, 2009). Customer identification is a construct that extends beyond purchase behavior and is cemented on a deeper identity level. A strong brand identification leads to loyalty, an influential advocacy role, resilience to negative information, and willingness to try new services or products (Keh & Xie, 2009). From a higher education perspective, parent identification is conceptualised as a variable resulting from corporate reputation to form a committed, loyal, and trusting relationship with a HEI. 1.4.2.3 Commitment Commitment, embedded in the Social Exchange Theory, is regarded as the manifestation of a long-term willingness to maintain a meaningful relationship between two parties (Keh & Xie, 2009). The interaction between a HEI and the customer (parent) leads to satisfaction or dissatisfaction. It influences the reputation held by and ultimate commitment levels from the parent for further engagement and investment (Nguyen, Yu, Melewar, & Hemsley-Brown, 2015). 1.4.2.4 Word-of-mouth intention Another consequence of corporate reputation the literature review word-of-mouth intention. Walsh et al. (2009) has done considerable research on word-of-mouth resulting from customer-based reputation perceptions. Reichfeld (2003, 2006), cited in Walsh et al. (2009), stresses that to grow and succeed, a company should ask whether a customer would recommend its services or not. Walsh and Beatty (2007) stress that positive or negative corporate reputation are concomitant with positive or negative word of mouth or influential advocacy. Customers 11 | P a g e enjoy sharing their experiences, whether it is on social media or face-to-face conversations, especially when these experiences were poor or excellent. A company or a HEI with a positive reputation will enjoy an extensive reservoir of benevolence (goodwill), and their happy customers (parents) will have the advocacy power to proclaim their endorsement of the performance. As mentioned before, social media platforms gave every consumer a loud voice to either endorse or reject a company's credibility and reputation. On social media, opinions frequently emerge in comments. The integration of technology collects these comments and opinions, and the analyses thereof will enable a company to obtain valuable knowledge of its intangible elements (Ramos et al., 2019). 1.4.2.5 Supportive intention Corporate reputation is constructed through a perceptual, balanced articulation of an institution's actions into values of trustworthiness, respect, loyalty, admiration, and confidence (Foruodi, Gupta, Melewar, & Fourodi, 2016). Akova and Kantar (2020) found that the more important reputation is for the customer, the importance of prestige, respectability, and awareness of the company grow parallel. Customers are the organisation's most valuable assets, as they are the primary revenue generators (Walsh et al., 2009). Behavioural intentions such as support intentions are determined the customer is treated throughout the purchase experience. This study will take a customer-based approach from the parents' perspective to identify the antecedents and customer behavioural responses as consequences of corporate reputation in higher education. 1.5 RESEARCH GAP As mentioned above, there is limited literature available on the nature of interactions between HEIs and parents (Lee, 2019; Wong et al., 2019). To date, research is lacking 12 | P a g e on the unique parental perspective on the antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in the higher education environment (Lee, 2019). The higher education sector could benefit from research focusing on understanding the parental perspective of factors influencing corporate reputation. HEIs invest increasingly more funds in reputation marketing tactics and communication messages and therefore it is worthwhile to track reputation marketing trends that influence parents’ perceptions. (Lee, 2019). 1.6 PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS There are twenty-six public higher-education institutions in South Africa. The competitive nature of the higher education landscape encourages tertiary institutions to aggressively recruit qualifying prospective students through various marketing messages, tactics, and promotions. Lee (2019) warns against the limited appetite parents might have for communication messages in an already flooded advertising space. Motives or wants and needs influence parents’ perceptions and expectations about the comprehensive offerings of HEIs (Lee, 2019). These perceptions and expectations are amongst others; location, application and admission processes, student culture and tradition (Lee, 2019), variety of academic programmes, tuition fees, accommodation, as well as the opinions of 'influencers' such as parents, teachers, friends, the reputation, and finally the local and international rankings (Safón, 2009) of the institution (Wong et al., 2018). Corporate reputation plays an important role in attracting customers, which refer to parents of prospective students in the context of the field study. (Wiid, Cant & Makhitha, 2016). The aforementioned perceptions and expectations vs initial and/or post- experience realities affect and influence the reputation management processes directly. When the expectation falls short of the lived experience, the reputation of the university is severely impacted, and the institution ends up not as the first choice, but as the fall- back choice. On the other hand, a good institutional corporate reputation strengthens and supports the selling effectiveness of the recruitment team (Wiid et al., 2016). Through this study, more insights will be obtained to deliver a more accurate picture of the parent’s 13 | P a g e perspective on the reputation of HEIs and how this perspective influences the decision- making process of choosing an institution. 1.6.1 Research problem statement The problem statement guiding the study is: Parents form perceptions on the corporate reputation of HEIs through service experience, obtaining information from others such as friends and family, and information gathered from media reports. In context of the study service experience, information from others, and information from media are antecedents of corporate reputation and may translate into behavioural consequences such as trust, identification, commitment, word-of-mouth intention, and supportive intention. Parents are crucial role players when a HEI is selected and therefore insight is needed to clarify the role of corporate reputation in influencing the selection decision. 1.6.2 Research Questions The overarching research questions are: • What are the antecedents that influence corporate reputation perceptions of parents of prospective undergraduate students? • What are the consequences of corporate reputation in the higher education environment? 1.7 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY RESEARCH OBJECTIVES To find answers to the research problem stated in paragraph 1.6, the following primary and secondary objectives will direct the research in a focussed manner. 1.7.1 Primary research objective The primary research objective is: • To identify the antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in the higher education context from a parental perspective. 14 | P a g e 1.7.2 Secondary research objectives The secondary research objectives are: • To identify from literature the antecedents of corporate reputation of tertiary institutions of higher education • To identify from literature the consequences of corporate reputation of tertiary institutions in higher education • To determine the extent which corporate reputation influences parents in selecting a HEI • To develop a conceptual model on the antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in the higher education environment • To empirically test the conceptual model • To recommend interventions based on the research results the HEIs can introduce to improve corporate reputation amongst parents of Grade 12 parents 1.8 CONCEPTUAL MODEL HEIs in South Africa are realising the importance of reputation building communication messages, however from the literature reviewed, there are still uncertainties towards the dimensions of corporate reputation that impact parents’ behaviour towards a HEI. The Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) Theory forms the basis of the conceptual model depicted in Figure 1.1. Based on the S-O-R Theory, the experience of service, information from others and information from the media are regarded as the stimuli (S) from the external environment. The internal perspective (O) held by parents (the organism), which influences trust, identification, and commitment of parents towards a HEI. The behavioral intentions depicted in the conceptual model as word-of-mouth intention and supportive intention, represent the responses (R) in the Theory. Additional theories such as the Source Credibility Theory, Social Exchange Theory, Social Identity Theory, and the Commitment- Trust Theory support the S-O-R Theory and are discussed in Chapter 3. 15 | P a g e The conceptual model proposes to address the relationship between the antecedents and the consequences of corporate reputation that influence of parents’ perspectives on the corporate reputation of HEIs in South Africa. Figure 1.1: Conceptual model of antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in the higher education environment 1.9 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 1.9.1 Research approach and design Bryman, Bell, Hirschsohn, Dos Santos, Du Toit, Masenge, Van Aardt, and Wagner (2014) state that research can be approached quantitatively and qualitatively. The main distinction drawn between the two approaches is that a quantitative research approach involves reflecting data in numbers (numerical data). In contrast, a qualitative research approach reflects data through the emphasis on words, such as interviews. According to the above distinction, the intended research study will follow a quantitative research 16 | P a g e design to find answers to the research questions, as it intends to gather statistical data through self-completion questionnaires. 1.9.2 Population and sampling strategy The population consists of parents or guardians of Grade 12 learners in 2022 of public and private schools in Bloemfontein. Six schools in Bloemfontein agreed to participate in the study by disseminating the questionnaire to the parents of the Grade 12 learners. It is estimated that each school has 100+ Grade 12 learners in 2022. Only these six schools in Bloemfontein, who agreed to disseminate the self-completion questionnaires either through emailing the link to the online survey or the hard copy questionnaire to their Grade 12 parents, will be included in the screening questions at the start of the questionnaire. These schools are Grey College, Hoërskool Sentraal, C&N Sekondêre Meisieskool Oranje, Navalsig High School, Fichardtpark Hoërskool, and Jim Fouche Hoërskool. A specific type of non-probability sampling technique called convenience sampling, often referred to as availability sampling, collects data from population members who are easily available to take part in the study. Convenience sampling is a sort of sampling in which the research will rely solely on the first primary data source that is available (Bryman et al., 2014). To put it another way, this sampling technique entails gathering people anywhere they can be found and usually wherever it is convenient. Prior to choosing the participants for convenience sampling, no inclusion criteria were established. Everyone is encouraged to take part. It is, in fact, the recommended option in some research studies. This approach can be used in business research to gather early primary data on specific topics, such as how consumers perceive a particular brand or how prospective buyers feel about a new product design. However, in some circumstances, convenience sampling may be the sole choice (Hair, Page, & Brunsveld, 2020). As not all high or secondary schools agreed to participate, the sample is limited to only the abovementioned six schools in Bloemfontein who have agreed to disseminate the self-completion questionnaires. Not all parents in the population will have an equal chance to participate; therefore, a convenience sampling strategy (non-probability 17 | P a g e sampling) is applicable. It is estimated that approximately 200 respondents would respond. 1.9.3 Data Collection The field study received ethical clearance from The General/Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of the Free State to conduct research amongst parents of Grade 12 learners in Bloemfontein, with reference number: UFS-HSD 2022/1060/22. Data was gathered through online and hard copy self-completion questionnaires since the study is quantitative of nature. Both the online and hard copy self-completion questionnaires were designed in an attractive horizontal format, so as to keep the attention of the respondents and consist of screening, background, and a series of open- ended and close-ended questions. The self-completion questionnaire consisted of three sections, which were (A) screening questions, (B) background questions, and (C) beliefs on the corporate reputation of a HEI. The questionnaire was pre-coded according to a seven-point Likert-scale and subdivided into separate categories or themes (Bryman et al., 2014) in line with the research questions. The questionnaire took 15 minutes to complete. The online version, developed on the Evasys online survey system, provided buttons per questions which the respondent had to click to select. The hard copy version presented the questions in a table format. The respondent had to select the appropriate column that represents his/her evaluation. The researcher does not have access to contact detail of parents and will rely on schools to disseminate the self-completion questionnaire to Grade 12 parents on their database. Those schools who opt for the dissemination of the internet-based questionnaires will email the link to the online Evasys system, which consists of the preamble, POPIA consent, and the questionnaire. The schools who opted for the option to disseminate hard copy questionnaires were provided with copies of the preamble, POPIA consent form that each respondent had to agree to, as well as the questionnaire. The learners were provided with copies for each parent, which had to be returned to the school on an agreed upon date. The completed 18 | P a g e hard copy questionnaires were placed and sealed in an envelope with the school’s name and the number of questionnaires received and it was personally collected by the researcher on an agreed upon date. The participating schools provided written consent to assist in the study. 1.9.4 Data analysis 190 Responses were received, and the statistical analyses are based on the responses with clean, valid, and usable data, which total 163 responses. 27 Responses contained insufficient and or invalid data and were excluded from the statistical analysis. To test the hypotheses in the conceptual model, developed in Chapter 3, the statical software package SmartPLS version 4.0 was used to test the hypotheses in the conceptual model. To evaluate the structural model, PLS-SEM results were used. (Hair, Risher, Sarstedt, & Ringle, 2019). 1.9.5 Ethical Considerations Agwor and Adesina (2017) explain that ethics are moral principles that govern conduct and decision-making behavior about interactions or dealings between individuals. Since this research will entail gathering data from people about their behavior, considerations regarding ethics, to protect the researcher and participants, will be paramount throughout the research process. Bryman et al. (2014) classify ethical considerations into four main areas, which are harm to participants, informed consent, protection of privacy, and level of deception. Throughout the research, strict adherence to all the above ethical considerations was ensured. Chapter 4 will elucidate more on the research methodology and ethical considerations pertaining to the conducted study. 1.10 DEMARCATION AND POSSIBLE LIMITATIONS OF STUDY The research is in the field of Marketing. Fombrun (1996) cited in Badri and Mohaidat (2013) stated that the measurement of corporate reputation of HEIs attracted ample 19 | P a g e attention in the marketing and business management literature. Many studies on corporate reputation confirmed the link between a good reputation and customer behavior (Badri & Mohaidat, 2013), which is embedded in the marketing and promotion of goods and services. The geographical demarcation of the study is limited to the University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, Free State Province, South Africa and is a sample representing HEIs in South Africa. It is furthermore demarcated to only one of the three UFS campuses, namely the Bloemfontein Campus. Possible limitations of the study which offer future research opportunities are the geographical and population boundary of Bloemfontein parents and the generalisation of the findings to all universities, universities of technology, and parent populations throughout South Africa and in other countries. Furthermore, parents’ specific perception on specific South African HEIs’ corporate reputation is another possible limitation of the study. 1.11 LAYOUT OF REMAINING CHAPTERS The existing literature, theoretical framework, data analysis, findings, and recommendations will be arranged and presented in the following chapters: Chapter 2: Literature Review Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework Chapter 4: Research Methodology Chapter 5: Data analysis Chapter 6: Findings, conclusions, and recommendations 20 | P a g e 1.12 CHAPTER 1: CONCLUSION Chapter 1 provided an overview of the higher education landscape and the increasing realisation of HEIs that they exist in a service industry; the importance of a good corporate reputation becomes increasingly evident. The perceptions and experience that parents of school leavers hold of the corporate reputation of a HEI, are influenced by specific antecedents, and have consequences on the trust, identification, commitment, loyalty, and advocacy of parents. The perspective of parents as customers will receive more attention in chapter 2. The management dilemma, research questions, the primary objective and secondary objectives of the study were presented. A conceptual model of antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in higher education from a parental perspective was introduced. while a design for the research methodology and ethical considerations were discussed. An overview of the data analysis, which are discussed in detail in Chapter 5, has been alluded to. The demarcation of the study as well as possible limitations were highlighted. 21 | P a g e 22 | P a g e 2.1. INTRODUCTION - AN INSIGHT INTO THE STATE OF HIGHER EDUCATION Chapter 1 set the scene of the field study and provided an overview of how antecedents influence the corporate reputation of a HEI that have consequences on the formation of trust, identification, commitment, and behavioral intentions that include word-of-mouth intention and supportive intention. The perspective from parents of Grade 12 learners in high schools on the corporate reputation of HEIs was explicitly alluded to. Chapter 2 is structured as follows: an overview of worldwide change in higher education, followed by a literature review that alludes to the concept of corporate reputation, drivers that contribute to the formation of corporate reputation, parental perspectives on the corporate reputation of HEIs, management of corporate reputation, benefits of an excellent corporate reputation, and finally discussing the antecedents and consequences of corporate reputation in higher education. The value of corporate reputation across various disciplines is gaining momentum among academics. Each of the disciplines articulate corporate reputation in context to the overall discipline (Shamma & Hassan, 2009). Intangible assets, such as corporate reputation, are also seen as a source of competitive advantage by strategists. Corporate reputation is defined by communication experts as a collection of corporate characteristics that contribute to the formation of a company's connection with its constituents (Fombrun, Gardberg, & Sever, 2000). Corporate reputation is now seen as having broader positive or negative outcomes that go beyond consumer relationships. Companies or HEIs should strive for a positive reputation across a variety of stakeholder groups, including parents, and bear a large portion of the responsibility for this achievement on the marketing and communications function (Shamma & Hassan, 2009). 2.1.1 Role of HEIs According to Diaconu & Pandelică (2011), the role of HEIs focuses on scientific research, learning, training, and shaping the minds of the student cohort through the imparting of knowledge by dedicated academic staff. Furthermore, HEIs are responsible for 23 | P a g e integrating new and existing knowledge into society's technological, scientific, and economic advancements. Qazi, Qazi, Raza, and Yousufi (2021) state that, as social and educational structures, HEIs are microcosms of society and responsible for the formation of citizens to advance society at large. Qazi et al. (2021) continue stating that education is a driving force in a country’s economic and social growth. Furthermore, a country’s overall development is partially mirrored by the level of education advancement. Therefore, as Qazi et al. (2021) indicate, HEIs are pillars of innovation, creativity, constructive thinking, and the insertion of trained specialists into the labor market. 2.1.2 The changing higher education landscape Against the role of HEIs, it is no surprise that technology and communication advancements (Erisher, Obert, & Frank, 2014), the rise of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the recent global Covid-19 pandemic, and the changing demands of the labor market have necessitated a change in the learning and teaching methodologies. In addition, higher education in, amongst others, the United States of America, Malaysia (Munisamy, Jaafar & Nagaraj, 2013), Europe (Christensen & Gornitzka, 2017), and Pakistan (Qazi et al., 2021) face intense challenges such as a decrease in government funding, fewer funding grants, and donations (Lee et al., 2018; Pérez-Dias and Rodriquez, 2015) coupled with a reduction in quality and quantity of student enrolments (Lee, 2019). The increasing international competition aggravates the mounting pressure to meet and expectations and demands of the developmental goal (Qazi et al., 2021) due to global student mobility (Hemsley-Brown, Melewar, Nguyen & Wilson, 2016). According to Azouri, Daou, and Khoury (2014) cited in Qazi et al., (2021), a HEI is regarded as a business and not just a tertiary institution. The sizeable changes in funding sources, internationalisation, quality of first-time entry undergraduate students, and intensification of competition have stepped up the rivalry between HEIs worldwide to attract the attention of home-based and international students and academic staff (Lafuente-Ruiz-de-Sabando, Zorrilla & Forcada, 2017). Qazi et al., (2021) go further stating that the intense rivalry not only include recruitment of the brightest young minds, 24 | P a g e but also research investments. Qazi et al. (2021) state that HEIs are becoming more like one another and finding it challenging to draw in excellent students as a result. As a result, universities' competitive advantage is diminishing. According to Erisher et al., (2014) HEIs management teams are increasingly concerned with the brand image that links with the HEI’s identity or corporate reputation that articulates their existence. The main strategy to navigate a challenging competitive higher education landscape is to establish a distinctive brand identity or corporate reputation (Erisher et al., 2014). A strong corporate reputation might enable HEIs to stand out from the competition and get a competitive edge. While reputation is the degree of trust or mistrust in a HEI’s ability to live up to stakeholder expectations, brand image is a crucial predicate to a HEI's strong reputation and is the perception that stakeholders have in their thoughts (Qazi et al., 2021). 2.1.3 The South African context of higher education The South African higher education context looks no different than the situation described in section 2.1.2. According to Beneke and Human (2010), increased demand for more access to higher education, restricted government funding, shifting demographics, and the emergence of private education institutions forced HEIs to become more innovative in their student recruitment marketing endeavors. The national government-supported historically HEIs in South Africa to some degree. Beneke and Human (2010) highlighted in their exploratory study that the national government insisted on more representative student councils, equitable distribution of tertiary education spending, while implementing strict budgetary constraints. Over the past few years, the increasingly competitive nature of higher education necessitated HEIs in South Africa to turn more towards corporate principles such as an integrated institutional strategic marketing programme, relationship marketing to different stakeholders, strategic positioning of a corporate reputation, and personalised student recruitment processes. HEIs in South Africa realise that it is no guarantee that quality students will organically apply and therefore turns to innovative marketing solutions to address contextual student preferences and the changing job market requirements (Beneke & Human, 2010; Beneke, 2011). 25 | P a g e 2.2 CORPORATE REPUTATION IN THE FIELD OF MARKETING More HEIs' leadership are realising the importance of integrated marketing and strategic positioning of their institutions to manage and mitigate the impact of the fierce competition in the education landscape (Diaconu & Pandelică, 2011). A definition of the marketing concept is a good starting point since the demarcation of the study is in the discipline of marketing. Marketing is required to create awareness of the university's product offerings, education, student life, and ultimately increase the number of enrolled students. (Khoshtaria, Datuashvili & Matin, 2020). Kotler and Armstrong (2010), in the web article by Friesner (2016), define marketing as the process to create value for customers through the building of solid relationships with these customers to extract value from the customers in return. This definition highlights the value exchange process between an organisation or company or, in the case of the study, a university and the customer and the benefits of long-term relationships. Wiid, Cant, and Makheta (2016: 8) define strategic marketing as “the process of planning, implementing, and controlling the marketing efforts of the organisation to meet the goals and objectives of the organisation and successfully satisfy customer needs and wants”. In addition, Gundlach, Achrol, and Mentzer (1995) motivate that marketing has moved from a transactional orientation towards a relational orientation, which is characterised by commitment, trust, loyalty, forsaking of alternatives, and mutuality. In terms of relevance to the conceptual model presented in the study, the consequences of corporate reputation amongst others, include trust and commitment. To identify the link between marketing and corporate reputation, Chun, Argandoña, Choirat, and Siegel (2019) report that corporate reputation as an academic discipline is relatively young but evolved considerably over the last two decades. Initially, the term corporate reputation was referred to as a function of marketing, and its understanding was limited to the constructs of customer evaluation (judgment) and image. Since then, significant insights into the relationship between multiple disciplines and corporate reputation have resulted in a multiple stakeholder approach. Corporate reputation is a vulnerable and fragile concept and can be tarred by any stakeholder. According to Chun 26 | P a g e et al. (2019), numerous disciplines of corporate reputation include human resources, media, strategy, marketing, philosophy, and especially business ethics. All the above definitions for the intended research are suitable and relevant. 2.2.1 Higher education marketing Lenore-Jenkins (2016) identify higher education marketing tactics as mailings, telephone calls, and the old-fashioned boots-on-the-ground visits to high schools. In referring to the predominantly used mass marketing tactics such as advertising, outdoor advertising, sponsorships, Beneke and Human (2010) add that direct and semi-direct selling techniques such as open days, career exhibitions, and school visits to Grade 11 and 12 learners complete the suite of traditional marketing tactics that most institutions of higher education deploy. These tactics, as stated above, involve predominantly one-way communication, have a short-term focus, and are very costly. However, they are essential to establish a favorable judgment of a HEI's reputation in the minds of the prospective students. The higher education landscape in South Africa is complicated because competitors and prospective students alike are no longer limited by geographical borders and are spoilt for choice between many public and private universities and colleges. To improve and retain a competitive advantage among competitors, it becomes increasingly critical to include digital public relations, advertising, and marketing in the marketing mix (Gifford, 2010). Lee (2018) states that despite acknowledging education marketing as a necessity and a reality, the value of a theoretical model is not reflected in the literature dealing with higher education marketing. Diaconu and Pandelică (2011) elaborate that marketing in HEIs is necessary to create different stakeholder and institutional benefits related to its strategic plan, vision, and mission. These benefits refer to customer satisfaction, attracting students, obtaining donors, and other means of financial resources. Diaconu and Pandelică (2011) state that the marketing strategy of a HEI should align with the institutional strategic positioning strategy, which articulates into making the right decisions on the marketing mix components. In addition, all marketing tactics and communication 27 | P a g e messages should be crafted contextually for each stakeholder to address the specific needs of each stakeholder. 2.2.2 Fierce competitive landscape A significant factor in the marketing of a HEI is an analysis of the competitive environment and how it can be navigated to get the best yield in terms of student enrolment and building reputation. Munisamy, Jaafar, and Nagaraj (2014) highlight the need to understand how and why students choose a HEI in relation to the increasing competition in the higher education market. As a significant equivalent for quality, corporate reputation guides the selection and evaluation of HEIs. Within the battle for market dominance, the institution of higher education that wins is the one that can adapt speedily to the changing landscape to create and maintain traction within the tertiary education environment. Corporate reputation links strongly with business topics such as (1) market-entry barriers, (2) quality management, and (3) transaction costs. A good reputation, especially applicable to HEIs, can be a barrier to entry for competitors. A good corporate reputation is difficult and costly to replicate (Smith, Rupp, & Motley, 2013). Lee (2018) proposes that communication specialists should elevate the strategic positioning of a HEI through its images and identities while influencing parents' attitudes, perception of the corporate reputation, and behavioural intentions towards a HEI. Therefore, within this higher education ecosystem, the key is to leverage each element at the right time, target the right audience with the right message, and position an institution's brand among all internal and external stakeholders. This leveraging action refers to contextual marketing (University of the Free State, 2020). Lee (2018) supports the view mentioned above and adds that corporate reputation management has become vital for HEIs to gain and maintain a competitive advantage. Attracting students and quality academic and support staff, donors, and grants pivot around an excellent corporate reputation. Lee (2018) continues and links the above concepts of public relations and communication to the context of reputation management 28 | P a g e by HEIs. Lee (2018) further emphasises that higher education marketing should intensely focus on a relational approach to engage stakeholders to strengthen its competitive advantage effectively. Through a focussed and strategic relationship-driven approach, the appeal and perception of a HEI are positively secured. Alessandri, Young, and Kinsey (2006), state HEIs can redirect perceptions of academic performance, external performance (integration of knowledge), supportive and caring engagement to improve corporate reputation. Kotler (2003), cited in Diaconu and Pandelică (2011), identifies the application of contextual communication messages in the higher education landscape as the four C's, namely customer (student or parent) needs, costs incurred by the customer (student or parent), purchase convenience and comfort, and finally communication activities. Increasingly, HEIs feel the pressures of reduced funding due to declining government subsidies (Beneke & Human, 2010). The width and depth of available resources also add to the success or failure to recruit sufficient and the right-fit students for an institution of higher education, which aggravates the competitive nature of the higher education landscape. Nan Dawkins (Blumenstyk, 2006) states that within the competitive environment, the companies - and in this case, institutions - with higher budgets are the most successful in recruiting enough and the right-fit students. The general perception that people have of a HEI is influenced by its corporate reputation (Khoi, 2020). Corporate reputation includes a person's perceptions of a person, organisation, institution, or entity (HEI) based on past and present events, including their beliefs, feelings, thoughts, ethical behaviors, and experiences (Plewa, Ho, Conduit, & Karpen, 2016). 2.3 THE CONCEPT OF CORPORATE REPUTATION Walsh and Beatty (2007) motivate that the concept of corporate reputation may be associated with three business topics: (1) transaction costs research, (2) quality management, and (3) barriers to entering the market. A favorable reputation reduces transactional costs between the seller (company) and the buyer (customer). Reichfeld (1996), cited in Walsh and Beatty (2007), states that increasing the frequency of 29 | P a g e interaction reduces the uncertainty customers might hold. They become less dependent on the company's constituencies for advice and information, which translates to lower transaction costs. Reputation is beneficial to ensure the delivery of quality services or the production of quality products. Customers will quickly indicate poor services or products through advocacy power and refusal to further engage, which will tarnish the reputation severely. The last business topic, barriers to entering the market, links up with the competition in the market as discussed in the preceding paragraph. A good corporate reputation is tough to replicate; thus, competing companies or companies considering entrance to a mature market might consider the financial layout too much to establish their reputation and decide not to enter the market. 2.3.1 Definitions of corporate reputation Most definitions like those provided by Scheepers and Sheldon (Caruana, Cohen, & Krentler, 2005) focus only on the public's or stakeholders' perceptions involved with a particular firm or its brand. Walsh and Beatty (2007: 129) provide an external perspective on corporate reputation, namely a reputation based on the customer's view and experience, and therefore defined the terms customer-based reputation as: The customer's overall evaluation of a firm based on their reactions to the firm's goods, services, communication activities, interactions with the firm and its representatives or constituencies (such as employees, management, or other customers) and or known corporate activities. Tangible and intangible assets exist within any organisation. Tangible assets refer to physical infrastructure, human and financial resources, while intangible assets are difficult to manage and measure. Smith et al. (2013) acknowledge that corporate reputation is a significant intangible asset to produce a strategic competitive advantage. However, Doorley and Garcia (2015) provide another view on the asset status of corporate reputation. They state that the historical perspective of a reputation as an intangible asset is not correct and should be viewed as a tangible asset since it has real and tangible monetary value. They state that as nebulous as corporate reputation can be, it can and should be measured. 30 | P a g e Caruana et al. (2005) acknowledge corporate reputation as a construct gaining attention and popularity amongst companies with increasing amounts of time and financial resources invested into building a positive corporate reputation. It is vital to nurture and guide the corporate reputation in the beliefs, values, and benefits embedded in the corporate identity, which should articulate into the corporate culture (Smith et al., 2013) since reputation has a significant impact on the bottom line. A robust corporate reputation encourages a strong sense of belonging for internal stakeholders and a high level of belief and trust among external stakeholders. Well- managed corporate reputation has increasingly attractive influences on potential stakeholders. Lee et al. (2018) agree that the corporate image mirrors the public's overall impression of an organisation. The authors acknowledge the relationship-driven characteristic of reputation building and the organisation’s collective past and future actions, which also supports the definition by Fombrun and Van Riel in 1997 as cited in Caruana (2005). This view shows that corporate reputation is linked to past performance and expected or anticipated performance. On the other hand, the relational approach implies an engagement between the customer, as the external stakeholder, and the company's staff (internal stakeholder). Thus, the notion that corporate reputation results from perceptions before (antecedents) transaction or engagement and the company's performance during the transaction, which leads to specific post-engagement behavior and attitudes (consequences) towards the company, is supported. Kossovsky (2014) defines reputation as an expectation of behavior. He states that: Customers have expectations when they buy products or services, employees have them when they accept jobs, vendors have them when they partner, creditors and investors have them, and even regulators have them. Not to be left out, members of society at large have expectations too. The expectations of your company's stakeholders govern their behaviors—how much and how quickly they buy, what they are willing to work for, and what they will charge your firm for credit. 31 | P a g e Corporate reputation can thus be defined as a multi-faceted business asset that entails the careful influencing of the perception of public opinion on the whole of an institution, including values, identity, and images (Akova & Kantar, 2020). Therefore, it is understood from all the above authors that corporate reputation is grounded in the corporate perspectives and perceptions of multiple internal and external stakeholders. Smith et al. (2013) stipulate that public perceptions involve opinions on a company's financial stability, quality of leadership, quality of services and or products, quality and integrity of employees, investment worth, social responsibility, and innovativeness. Therefore, the relevance of corporate reputation on the triple bottom line (people, profit, planet) is evident in the observation by Smith et al. (2013). From a different organisational perspective, Chun et al. (2019) state that reputation is a socially constructed concept underpinned by a causal relationship between good behaviour and the communication of the excellent behaviour itself. This view is built on organisational ethics and virtues (values) that portray the culture through individuals' character throughout the organisation. In addition, Qazi, et al., (2021) state that corporate reputation reflects the HEI’s perceived status about the goals, values, governance and working practices, student treatment, and a shared experience and service expectations. Khoi (2020) describe a reputable HEI as an institution that is well-respected in the community, holds stakeholders’ confidence, has ethical and respected leadership, and an image that contributes to the value of their qualification. Quality of performance and meeting customers' expectations directly affect the capital reservoir or equity of an organisation's corporate reputation (Walsh & Beatty, 2007). A literature review reveals that some authors state that corporate performance (antecedent) drives corporate reputation (consequence). In contrast, others argue the exact opposite: corporate reputation (antecedent) drives corporate performance (consequence) (Pires & Trez, 2018). The field study will accept the concept of corporate reputation in higher 32 | P a g e education as described by Van Vught (2008). Van Vught (2008: 169) provides a suitable and applicable definition of corporate reputation to HEIs: The reputation of a HEI can be as the image (of quality, influence, trustworthiness) it has in the eyes of others. Reputation is the subjective reflection of an institution's various actions to create an external image. An institution's reputation and its quality may be related, but they need not be identical. HEIs try to influence their external images in many ways, not only by maximizing their quality. Van Vught (2008) recognises the impact of the competition for reputation as a 'reputation race' between HEIs. He highlights the excessive cost that HEIs pay to constantly improve their image and gain an attractive position in this race as highly reputable academic institutions. The objective of this 'reputation race' is cemented in recruitment, the recruitment of quality students, and the recruitment of quality faculty staff. Pérez-Diaz and Rodriquez (2015) state that reputation is a social phenomenon referred to as a reputational currency in higher education markets. 2.3.2 Parental perspective of corporate reputation in higher education Christensen and Gornitzka (2017) state that modern HEIs are socially embedded through engaging a more comprehensive network of diverse stakeholder groups. The authors recognise different role-players as essential sources of support, resources, commitment, legitimacy, and trust. Beneke and Human (2010) agree that HEIs should extend relationship marketing to the broader network or different publics (Pérez-Diaz & Rodriguez, 2015) beyond the prospective student. Relationships with key feeder schools and especially parents to create an even better competitive advantage, build brand equity, and establish a high level of loyalty towards the institution through a long-term, reciprocal relationship, should all be integrated as reputation management strategies in the marketing plan. Walsh et al. (2009) support the notion of relationship marketing toward stakeholder management. 33 | P a g e The relationship is an essential determinant of a customer's perception of the corporate reputation of an organisation. If applied to the context of the field study, parents are more than willing to engage with a HEI and build relationships that will last for at least three years while their child studies for a first degree. According to a study conducted by Matherly (2011), reputable HEIs have an impact on the likelihood of parents sending their children to them for academic post-school studies (Simiyu, Komen, & Bonuke, 2019). 2.3.2.1 Different phases of parental involvement The corpus of literature on parental involvement and influence in selecting a HEI is rare and even more so regarding the relationship between the corporate reputation and parents as the customers. Gao and Ng (2017) motivate that parental involvement is crucial for university selection, attendance, and completion. Parents want the best for their children. More so when a significant financial layout and commitment is required. Thus, parents want their children to receive the best possible education at a university they believe and perceive as the most reputable (Akova & Kantar 2020). Promoting parental involvement is critical for preparing the school leaver for university life during the selection phase. Akova and Kantar (2020) state that parents investigate and consider information on universities, including infrastructure, accommodation, achievements, qualities of teaching staff, job opportunities upon graduation, and especially reputation. In a study by Iacopini and Hayden (2017), parents viewed the importance of educational teaching and qualifications in a very serious light. Parents interviewed felt a deep sense of responsibility to assist their children with post-school options to become better qualified. Parents regarded an excellent reputation, significant contribution to employment opportunities once graduated, and a university free of corruption as critical considerations when evaluating and selecting a university. Lee et al. (2018) also recognise parents as critical stakeholders in searching for information on higher education options that significantly influences the selection of a HEI through various avenues such as media, the internet, high school, friends, and family. Parents' perspective on the antecedents of the reputation of a HEI is hard to articulate as 34 | P a g e it is inherently subjective due to the parents' different priorities, expectations, and experiences. HEIs can improve and influence corporate reputation through consistent, honest, and authentic behaviour. The familiarity and interest in a specific HEI that stakeholders such as parents and prospective students hold also affect the institution's positive predisposition. Experiences with an institution affect the customer emotionally and articulate into specific consequences such as satisfaction, attitude, loyalty, and endorsement (Ramos, Casado-Molina & Ignácio-Peláez, 2019). The aforementioned customer behaviors and attitudes will serve as the consequences of the post-performance corporate reputation and perception during the intended study. Lee (2018) states that despite parents' influential role in choosing a HEI, research to understand the parental perspective is very scarce. Most literature reviewed reveals the student's perspective on making post-school choices, not the parental perspective. This study intends to provide insights into how parents view corporate reputation when choosing a suitable and reputable HEI for post-school studies. 2.3.2.2 Choice factors influencing the selection of a HEI Many choice factors could influence the decision-making process of selecting a HEI. Jordaan and Wiese (2010) identified and researched twenty-three choice factors, namely geographical location, choice of academic programmes, admission requirements, quality of academic teaching, facilities, the attractiveness of the campus, tuition fees, student life, sport and recreation programmes, safety and security, on-campus residences, academic reputation, financial aid and support, diversity profile and multi-culturalism, image, language policy, links with international universities and industries, employability, flexible study mode options, and whether parents, siblings or friends are alumni. Knowing which of the above is or are essential to each target segment, an institution can craft a specific and targeted recruitment strategy and deliver that message through either traditional or digital platforms or a combination of both to encourage a prospecti