Year 2019, Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages 59 - 72 2019-07-01

Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda

Nikhil KANT [1]

7 12

Open and Distance Learning (ODL) in higher education has gained momentum in previous decades. ODL institutions too require competitiveness in the market place of educational products/ services through their capabilities and core competencies by adopting cost and/or differentiation strategy, especially due to the increasing competition arising from the existence of large number of institutions with similar objectives. The competition has further increased due to Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization, virtually collapsing the boundaries to access education being offered from any other country; technological developments; changes in demographics, societal & economic structures; and most importantly emergence of online institutions with different nomenclatures. ODL institutions in India are in dire need of making strategic efforts to create and maintain sustainability in competitiveness by reaching out to larger sections of different stakeholders to satisfy their needs/ expectations in view of the huge untapped potential in India and abroad. All stakeholders are not equally important and influential and their identification is a critical step in selecting appropriate strategy for achieving competitiveness. This study sets the research agenda on the topic of competitiveness in ODL in higher education from the perspective of the relevant stakeholders and not learners only, with the help of Systematic Literature Review (SLR), showcasing the findings to provide the future research framework with a deeper understanding of ODL, Competitiveness, stakeholders and their interrelations in the Indian context.

Competitiveness, open distance learning, stakeholders, stakeholders’ perspective
  • Abel, R. (2005), Achieving Success in Internet-Supported Learning in Higher Education: Case Studies Illuminate Success Factors, Challenges, and Future Directions, Learning, Lake Mary, FL: The Alliance for Higher Education Competitiveness. Retrieved July 17, 2018, from success in internet supported learning in higher education.pdf. Agha, S., Alrubaiee, L., & Jamhour, M. (2012). Effect of Core Competence on Competitive Advantage and Organizational Performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(1), 192–204. Al-alak, B. A., & Tarabieh, S. M. Z. A. (2011). Gaining Competitive Advantage and Organizational Performance Through Customer Orientation, Innovation Differentiation and Market Differentiation. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 1(5), 80–91. Anderson, G. (2006). Assuring quality/resisting quality assurance: Academics’ responses to “quality” in some Australian universities. Quality in Higher Education, 12(2), 161–173. Aragón-Correa, J. A., Rueda-Manzanares, A., & Sharma, S. (2008). The influence of stakeholders on the environmental strategy of service firms: The moderating effects of complexity, uncertainty and munificence. British Journal of Management, 19(2), 185–203. Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816. Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. Barney, J. B. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management, 27(6), 643–650. Barrett, M., Davidson, E., Prabhu, J., & Vargo, S. L. (2015). Service innovation in the digital age: Key contributions and future directions. MIS Quarterly, 39(1), 135–154. Bharadwaj, A. (2000). A Resource-Based Perspective on Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 24(1), 169–196. Bird, D. K. (2009). The Use of Questionnaires for Acquiring Information on Public Perception of Natural Hazards and Risk Mitigation – A review of Current Knowledge and Practice. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9(4), 1307–1325. Brown, T. H. (2006). Beyond constructivism: Navigationism in the knowledge era. On the Horizon, 14(3), 108–120. Carter, D. J. (2009). Distance Education in China and India: Collectivism and Connectivism. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 10(3), 1–7. 70 Cavanaugh, C. (2005). Distance Education Success Factors. International Journal of Educational Telecommunication, 7(1), 1–6. Chrispen, C. (2011). Revisiting quality in Open and Distance learning. Lambert Academic Publishers. Chrispen, C. (2016). Building Stakeholders’ Relatioons in Open and Distance Learning: The Quality Challenges at Play. European Journal of Business and Innovation Research, 4(2), 61–75. Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117. Creswell. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications Inc. Crouch, G. I., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1999). Tourism, competitiveness, and societal prosperity. Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 137–152. Dambudzo, I. I. (2013). Application of the value chain analysis framework to enhance understanding of competitive advantage at an Open and Distance Learning (ODL) Institution. Global Advanced Research Journal of Educational Research and Review, 2(3), 2315–5132. Delmas, M., & Toffel, M. W. (2004). Stakeholders and environmental management practices: An institutional framework. Business Strategy and the Environment, 13(4), 209–222. Diab, S. M. (2014). Using the Competitive Dimensions to Achieve Competitive advantage (A Study on Jordanian private hospitals). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 4(9), 138–150. Epetimehin, F. M. (2011). Achieving Competitive Advantage in Insurance Industry: The Impact of Marketing Innovation and Creativity. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences, 2(1), 18–21. Faridi, M. R., & Ouseph, S. N. (2014). New Directions and Challenges for ODL: Building Collaborative Business Approach. European Scientific Journal, 1(Special), 217–223. Freeman, E. (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman. Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205. Gaba, A., & Li, W. (2015). Growth and Development of Distance Education in India and China: A Study on Policy Perspectives. Open Praxis, 7(4), 311–323. Gagne, M., & Shepherd, M. (2001). A Comparison between a distance and a traditional graduate accounting class. T.H.E. Journal, 28(9), 4–9. Garvare, R., & Johansson, P. (2010). Management for sustainability – A stakeholder theory. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 21(7), 737–744. Grant, R. M. (1991). The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135. Hahn, T., & Scheermesser, M. (2006). Approaches to corporate sustainability among German companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 13(3), 150–165. Hart, S. L. (1995). A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014. Heywood, C., & Kenley, R. (2008). Evaluating the sustainable competitive advantage model for corporate real estate. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 10(3), 160–182. Holmberg, B. (1989). The Concept, Basic Character and Development Potentials of Distance Education. Distance Education, 10(1), 127–134. Hou, D. (2016). Divergence in stakeholder perception of sustainable remediation. Sustainability Science, 11(2), 215–230. 71 Hou, D., Al-Tabbaa, A., Chen, H., & Mamic, I. (2014). Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling of Sustainable Behaviour in Contaminated Land Remediation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 84(1), 439–449. Jung, I. (2005a). Cost-effectiveness of online teacher training. Open Learning, 20(2), 131–146. Jung, I. (2005b). Innovative and good practices of open and distance learning in Asia and the Pacific (APEID, UNESCO Bangkok Occasional Paper Series No. 3) (Vol. 3). Tokyo. Kassinis, G., & Vafeas, N. (2006). Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 145–159. Kaur, V. (2017). Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities and Competitive Advantage: A Study of MNCs in IT Sector. (Doctoral Dissertation). The Business School, University of Jammu. Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of Distance Education (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. Khan, N. Z. (2008). Higher Education and Sustainable Development : Quality vs Quantity. In 2nd International Conference on Assessing Quality in Higher Education, 1st – 3rd December, 2008 (Vol. 1, pp. 69–85). Lahore, Pakistan. Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Keele University (Vol. Keele Univ). Keele,, UK. Krell, K., & Matook, S. (2009). Competitive advantage from mandatory investments: An empirical study of Australian firms. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18(1), 31–45. Kuettner, T., & Schubert, P. (2012). IT-Based Competitive Advantage: A Cross-Case Comparison of Business Software Usage. Procedia Technology, 5(1), 181–189. LI, W., Yao, W., & Chen, N. (2014). Strategic development for advancing ODL institutions: A SWOT analysis from the Open University of China. In 28th AAOU Conference. Hong Kong. Lomas, L. (2007). Are students customers? Perceptions of academic staff. Quality in Higher Education, 13(1), 31–44. Maguad, B. A. (2007). Identifying the Needs of Customers in Higher Education. Education, 127(3), 332–344. Majeed, S. (2011). The Impact of Competitive Advantage on Organizational Performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), 191–197. Matikiti, R., Afolabi, B., & Smith, W. (2012). An empirical evidence on the usage of internet marketing in the hospitality sector in an emerging economy and its relationship to profitability. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(1), 181–197. McQuaide, S. (2009). Making Education Equitable in Rural China through Distance Learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(1), 1–21. MHRD. (2016). All India Survey on Higher Education (2015-16). Department of Higher Education, MHRD, Govt. of India, New Delhi. Retrieved July 17, 2018, from Mitchell B. R. Agle, and D. J. Wood, R. K. (1997). Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience:Defining The Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 853–886. Ndudzo, D., & Zinyama, T. (2014). Matching Core Competencies To Key Success Factors In Odl, Some Views From The Zimbabwe Open University. IOSR Journal of Business and Management Ver. II, 16(6), 2319–7668. ODA. (1995). Guidance Note on How to do Stakeholder Analysis of Aid Projects and Programmes. London. Retrieved July 09, 2018, from a25d-43ab-ae33-0e4811b7c5fb/guidance_stakeholderanalysis.pdf Peloza, J., Loock, M., Cerruti, J., & Muyot, M. (2012). Sustainability: How Stakeholder Perceptions Differ from Corporate Reality. California Management Review, 55(1), 74–97. 72 Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York: Free Press. Porter, M. E. (1985). The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: Free Press. Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. (Republished with a new introduction, 1998). New York: Free Press. Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competencies of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91. Prescott, M. E. (2014). Big data and competitive advantage at Nielsen. Management Decision, 52(3), 573–601. SADC. (2009). Capacity Building in Open and Distance Learning (ODL) Project: An Information, Education, and Communication Strategy for Open and Distance Learning (Final Draft). SADC Secretariat, Directorate of Human and Social Development, Gaborone, Botswana. Retrieved July 17, 2018, from Schatz, D., & Bashroush, R. (2016). The impact of repeated data breach events on organisations’ market value. Information and Computer Security, 24(1), 73–92. Seyoum, Y. (2007). Stakeholders Perceptions and Concerns on Open and Distance Education: The Case of Eastern Ethiopia. IER Flambeau, 15(1), 17–52. Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 159–180. Siaciwena, R., & Lubinda, F. (2008). The Role of Open and Distance Learning in the Implementation of the Right to Education in Zambia. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(1), 149–186. Sigalas, C., Pekka Economou, V., & B. Georgopoulos, N. (2013). Developing a measure of competitive advantage. Journal of Strategy and Management, 6(4), 320–342. Steg, L., & Gifford, R. (2005). Sustainable transportation and quality of life. Journal of Transport Geography, 13(Special Issue), 59–69. Sullivan, W., Sullivan, R., & Buffton, B. (2001). Aligning individual and organisational values to support change. Journal of Change Management, 2(3), 247–254. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. UGC. (n.d.-a). Growth of ODL System in Higher Education. Retrieved July 11, 2018, from https://www. UGC. (n.d.-b). ODL: What, Why and How? Retrieved July 13, 2018, from ODLwhatwhyandhow.pdf UNESCO. (1997). Open and Distance Learning : Prospects and Policy Considerations. Retrieved July 13, 2018, from UNESCO. (2002). Open and Distance Learning: Trends, Policy and Strategy Considerations. Retrieved July 13, 2018, from Ural, O. . b. (2007). Attidues of Graduate Students toward Distance Education, Educational Technologies and Independent Learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(4), 34–43. Vahid, M. D., Mirzajani, F. S., Izadi, S., & Asghar, A. (2013). Evaluation of the Relationship Between Competitive Advantage and Export Performance (Case study : Iranian Firms Exporting Biotech Products ). European Journal of Experimental Biology, 3(1), 364–370. Wolcott, L. L. (2003). Dynamics of Faculty Participation in Distance Education: Motivations, Incentives, and Rewards. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), HANDBOOK OF DISTANCE EDUCATION (pp. 549–565). London: Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Primary Language en
Subjects Social
Journal Section Articles

Orcid: 0000-0002-0157-2866
Author: Nikhil KANT (Primary Author)


Publication Date: July 1, 2019

Bibtex @research article { tojde598221, journal = {Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education}, issn = {1302-6488}, address = {Anadolu University}, year = {2019}, volume = {20}, pages = {59 - 72}, doi = {10.17718/tojde.598221}, title = {Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda}, key = {cite}, author = {KANT, Nikhil} }
APA KANT, N . (2019). Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 20 (3), 59-72. DOI: 10.17718/tojde.598221
MLA KANT, N . "Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda". Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 20 (2019): 59-72 <>
Chicago KANT, N . "Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda". Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 20 (2019): 59-72
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda AU - Nikhil KANT Y1 - 2019 PY - 2019 N1 - doi: 10.17718/tojde.598221 DO - 10.17718/tojde.598221 T2 - Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 59 EP - 72 VL - 20 IS - 3 SN - 1302-6488- M3 - doi: 10.17718/tojde.598221 UR - Y2 - 2018 ER -
EndNote %0 Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda %A Nikhil KANT %T Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda %D 2019 %J Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education %P 1302-6488- %V 20 %N 3 %R doi: 10.17718/tojde.598221 %U 10.17718/tojde.598221
ISNAD KANT, Nikhil . "Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda". Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 20 / 3 (July 2019): 59-72.
AMA KANT N . Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 2019; 20(3): 59-72.
Vancouver KANT N . Competitiveness in ODL from Stakeholders’ Perspective: A Review and Research Agenda. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 2019; 20(3): 72-59.