A Move Towards A More Sustained Competitive Institution: Using theories of Structure and Change

Authors

  • Cerease Gillian Nevins-Bennett Excelsior Community College

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.14.227

Keywords:

Education, social sciences

Abstract

Many technical and vocational colleges have gone through a number of transformations in its structure and functions as a result of increased competition, increased Government pressures to stay within its mandate as technical vocational institutions, and to become more sustainable. The Porter’s Five Forces will be used to determine the extent of the institutions level of competitiveness and sustained competitive advantage.

 

Results of the study show that the threats to new entrants, threats to substitute products, suppliers bargaining power, and buyers bargaining power were all statistically significant predictors of the level of competitiveness among the technical and vocational colleges.  However, the log of the odds of the institutions maintaining sustained competitive advantage was negatively related to threats to suppliers bargaining power, as these technical and vocational colleges were .389 times less likely to maintain sustained competitive advantage, being 95% confident that the population value of the odds ratio lies between [CI]0.157 and 1.009.

Author Biography

Cerease Gillian Nevins-Bennett, Excelsior Community College

Cerease Nevins-Bennett is a lecturer of Accounting, Finance and Management in the Schol of Business and Entrepreneural Studies at the Excelsior Communty College, Jamaica.

References

Barney, J., (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, Vol. 17 (1): 99-120.

Burns, T., Stalker, G.M., Mechanistic Organic Organizational Structure Contingency Theory.

Clegg. S., Kornberg. M., and Pitsis. T., (2001) Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. 2nd Edition. pp. 528

Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Eckel, P., Hill, B. &Green, M. (1998). On change: En route to transformation. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education. An occasional paper series of the ACE project on leadership and institutional transformation, pp.85

Ehmke, C., (). Strategies for Competitive Advantage

Farmer, D.W. (1990). Strategies for change. In D.W. Steeples (Ed.), Managing change in higher education (pp. 7-1 8). New directions for higher education, Vol. 71. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

Gallivan M. J. (2001), Striking a balance between trust and control in a virtual organization: A content analysis of open source software case studies, Info Systems J 11, 277–304.

Hana, U., (2013). Competitive Advantage Achievement through Innovation and Knowledge, Journal of Competitiveness, 5: 1, pp. 82-96, DOI: 10.7441/joc.2013.01.06

Herbert T. T., (1977), Is The Contingency Theory Of Organization a Technology-Bound Conceptualization? Journal of Management Volume 3, Number 1 pp 1 to 10

Lies and Sutherland, NCCSDO (2001) Managing Change in the NHS: Organizational Change. Available on line at www.sdo.lshtm.ac.uk (accessed November 2003), pp.13.

Porter, M. E., (2008). The Five Competitive Forces that Shapes Strategy. Leadership and Strategy, Harvard Business Review.

Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for analyzing Industries and Competitors, New York: The Free

Press.

Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive Advantage. Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, New York: The Free Press.

Puiu, S., (2010). The Model of the Five Competitive Forces on Romanian Retail Market. Annals of the University of Petroşani, Economics, 10(1): 289-298

Ronquillo, T., (2012). Analysis of Competitiveness of Batangas State University College of Engineering Using Porter’s Five Competitive Forces Model. AAEE 2012 Conference

Melbourne, Australia.

Schein, E., H. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 10

Thomas, H., Waxler, R. P., (1993), Corporate Cultures for the 1990’s: What is needed? Corporate Environment January/February 1993, pp.356.

Tsichritzis D. (1999), Reengineering the University June 1999/Vol. 47 No 6 Communications of the ACM, pp.94 – 97.

Torraco R. J. (2005), Work Design Theory: A Review and Critique with Implications for Human

Resource Development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 1,Wiley Periodicals, Inc, pp.90

West A. (1999), ‘Re-engineering’ student administration – a practical case-study PERSPECTIVES, Volume 3, Number 3, Autumn1999, pp.115.

Wheelen, T.L & Hunger, J. D. (2000) Strategic Management and Business Policy – Entering

st Century Global Society, 7-th edition, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey

Wilms, W. W. (1996). Restoring prosperity: how workers and managers are forging a new culture of cooperation. New York: Times Books, pp.81

Zaridis, A., D., (2009) Competitive Advantage and its Sources in an Evolving

Market. Computational Method in Science and Engineering, Advances in Computational Science Vol. 2.

Downloads

Published

2014-07-28

How to Cite

Nevins-Bennett, C. G. (2014). A Move Towards A More Sustained Competitive Institution: Using theories of Structure and Change. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 1(4), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.14.227