INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ...3 1.1 Context and Need for this Research ...3 1.1.1 IBCs and the Trend Toward Localizing Academic Hiring ...3 1.1.2 The Need for Research on IBC Lecturers’ I
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
Context and Need for this Research
This research contributes to the expanding yet underexplored field of international branch campus (IBC) management, emphasizing the growing trend of localizing IBC academic hiring Despite this trend, there is a significant gap in existing research regarding the perspectives of locally-hired IBC lecturers To address this gap, organizational identity is utilized as a valuable framework to better understand IBC lecturers’ emic views, providing deeper insights into their experiences and perceptions within the international higher education landscape.
1.1.1 IBCs and the Trend Toward Localizing Academic Hiring
In recent decades, higher education has shifted towards a more entrepreneurial model, with universities engaging in market activities to strengthen finances and boost reputations (Slaughter, 2014) International student recruitment has become a crucial strategy for university expansion, with both onshore and offshore approaches gaining prominence (Wu & Naidoo, 2016) While traditionally, international students studied abroad in their host countries, there has been a growing trend of transnational education, where universities deliver educational programs and experiences directly to students overseas (Kauppinen & Cantwell, 2014) International branch campuses exemplify this form of transnational higher education and represent a significant method of global university expansion (Knight, 2016).
International branch campuses (IBCs) are overseas outposts of their parent universities, providing students in remote locations with access to global university programs According to the Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT, 2019), IBCs are defined as international campuses established by universities abroad to offer high-quality tertiary education outside the main campus These campuses enable universities to expand their global reach and offer culturally diverse learning environments for international students, fostering international collaboration and academic innovation.
An entity owned partially or fully by a foreign education provider, operating under the provider’s name, and delivering a complete academic program primarily on-site, ultimately granting a degree issued by the foreign institution.
263 IBCs are now in operation worldwide (Garrett, 2018), largely based in Asia and the Middle East and run by universities in countries including the U.S., U.K and Australia (C-BERT, 2019)
International Branch Campuses (IBCs) serve as expansion vehicles for their parent universities, relying heavily on student enrollments to ensure their viability (Guimon, 2016) Similar to multinational enterprise subsidiaries, IBCs derive value from the global reputation of their educational offerings (Howman Wood, 2011) Their primary goal is to replicate the student experience of the home campus at offshore locations, which necessitates effective image management and seamless cross-campus coordination (Wilkins & Rumbley, 2018; Wilkins & Huisman, 2015; Wood & Salt, 2018) Failing to deliver a brand-consistent student experience can negatively impact student retention, threatening the long-term sustainability of IBCs (Healey, 2018).
The success of International Branch Campuses (IBCs) in replicating parent-campus experiences largely depends on the engagement of dedicated staff involved in global service delivery (Hughes, 2011) Traditionally, IBCs relied on traveling parent-campus lecturers to transmit the core values and academic standards to these locations (Salt & Wood, 2014) However, in recent years, there has been a shift toward hiring staff from host and third countries, driven by the benefits of simplified logistics and cost savings associated with local recruitment (Shams & Huisman, 2016) This localization of IBC staffing mirrors broader trends among multinational enterprises (MNEs) that increasingly source talent locally to enhance operational efficiency and cultural integration (McFarlin & Sweeney, 2017).
In some literature, localizing IBC academic hiring is seen as involving significant risk, providing economic benefits but potentially undermining IBCs’ brand value
Locally-hired lecturers may lack the institutional loyalty necessary to effectively represent their global institutions, potentially steering the International Business College (IBC) culture away from its global foundations (Healey, 2018) Additionally, cultural differences can prevent local lecturers from fully embodying the values of their home institution, as noted by Shams and Huisman (2018) The broader literature on IBC management suggests that replacing parent-campus faculty with local or third-country staff might dilute the brand and reputation of these international colleges in host settings (Altbach, 2011).
From an identity perspective, assuming that locally-hired IBC lecturers' loyalties are solely determined by their national origins is an essentialist claim, which links identity to fixed outcomes However, a constructionist view of identity considers it as socially constructed, flexible, and subject to influence over time In the IBC context, where lecturers are exposed to diverse influences, viewing their identities as constructed rather than fixed shifts the focus from recruitment to cultivation This approach emphasizes developing locally-hired lecturers as globally-integrated university representatives, encouraging institutions to adopt broader talent management strategies that foster better integration into their global university networks.
Understanding how locally-hired IBC lecturers perceive their own identities and their role within their campuses is essential for advancing organizational integration in international branch campuses (IBCs) Despite its importance, this area remains significantly understudied in IBC literature, highlighting a critical research gap Exploring these self-conceptions can provide valuable insights into how IBC staff view their place within their global universities, ultimately supporting more effective organizational cohesion and integration strategies.
1.1.2 The Need for Research on IBC Lecturers’ Identity Constructions
Transnational higher-education research is a “relatively young” and
The "underresearched" sector remains largely understudied, with faculty perspectives representing only about five percent of this limited body of knowledge (Knight & Liu, 2017, p 16) Additionally, research on local perspectives in International Business Cooperation (IBC) studies is notably lacking, highlighting a significant gap in understanding regional viewpoints (Siltaoja, Juusola & Kivijọrvi, 2019).
Research on IBC faculty experiences mainly reflects perspectives from parent-campus staff, highlighting common challenges such as inadequate onboarding procedures (Cai & Hall, 2016), navigating conflicting local and global regulations (Dobos et al., 2011), and difficulties in cross-campus coordination (Edwards, Crosling, & Lim, 2014) These issues adversely affect faculty engagement, with recent studies showing that IBC lecturers exhibit lower organizational identification and commitment compared to their onshore counterparts (Wilkins, Butt, & Annabi).
Current insights into IBC lecturers’ perspectives primarily highlight the challenges faced by staff from their home university locations However, there is limited understanding of how locally-hired IBC lecturers perceive their roles and responsibilities As the trend toward localizing IBC academic hiring continues, understanding the viewpoints of these locally-hired lecturers becomes increasingly important for comprehensive research and policy development.
Understanding the orientations of locally-hired IBC lecturers toward their roles and institutions involves exploring how individual and organizational identities are constructed Individual identity is an ongoing process where self-conceptions evolve through an internal/external dialectic, blending personal self-definition with perceptions of how others view them (Jenkins, 2014).
Organizational identity construction examines how organizational members perform
Sensegiving actions are crucial for establishing a shared understanding within organizations, addressing Albert and Whetten’s (1985) fundamental question of “who we are as an organization” (Gioia & Hamilton, 2018) In international branch campuses (IBCs), organizational identity construction is particularly complex due to their "nested" position within global universities, which significantly influences their individual organizational image (Gioia, Price, Hamilton & Thomas).
Applying an identity-construction paradigm to the IBC environment reveals that locally-hired lecturers shape their identities around their campuses and roles, yet it remains unclear how these identities align with their global organizations Understanding how IBC lecturers perceive and construct their professional identities is essential for comprehending their approach to global service delivery Since identity influences action, examining how lecturers interpret and develop their identities provides valuable insights into the factors that facilitate or hinder organizational integration within IBCs These insights can inform targeted management interventions to improve organizational cohesion and effectiveness.
Research Approach
This study explores how locally-hired IBC lecturers develop their individual and campus identities within global universities, highlighting the organizational orientations that shape their experiences Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we examine the influences and outcomes of these identity constructions, providing insights into how these educators navigate their roles in a multicultural academic environment Understanding these processes enhances our knowledge of organizational behavior among international university staff and supports strategies for effective integration and professional development.
Constructivist grounded theory is an adaptation of the original grounded theory methodology developed by Glaser and Strauss in 1967, offering an alternative to positivistic research approaches by avoiding the imposition of pre-existing assumptions This research approach focuses on exploring participants' emic perspectives to build theories from the ground up, emphasizing openness and inductive exploration While maintaining the emic focus, constructivist grounded theory also highlights its social-constructionist foundations, promoting a nuanced understanding of how social realities are co-constructed through participant interactions.
Constructivist grounded theory is grounded in a specific philosophical perspective, emphasizing relativist ontology and subjectivist epistemology This approach is driven by an antifoundationalist motivation, setting it apart from critical theory By integrating these philosophical foundations, constructivist grounded theory offers a nuanced understanding of social phenomena while maintaining its unique interpretive stance.
This research aims to objectively explore how locally-hired IBC lecturers construct their professional identities and shape their campuses, providing valuable insights for management The study is not driven by any political agenda but focuses on understanding these dynamics to improve global service delivery By examining these identity formations, the research enhances organizational awareness of the cultural and social factors influencing international educational institutions.
My research on IBC lecturers’ identity constructions began in late 2016 and deepened over time, focusing on the limited understanding of their experiences within the rise of international branch campuses I concentrated on Southeast Asia, particularly Malaysia and Singapore, known as major IBC hubs (Knight, 2014) In 2018, I conducted fieldwork at four IBC sites in these countries, interviewing 36 locally-hired lecturers and leaders to gain insights into their professional identities Through semi-structured, one-hour interviews, I explored their work experiences and how these influenced their sense of self I analyzed the collected data both within individual cases and across multiple sites, employing coding techniques to develop a theoretical understanding of IBC lecturers’ identity constructions.
This research employed an inductive and iterative approach based on constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2014), focusing on key concepts such as identity, agency, and action Through coding participant data, I generated 257 initial codes, which were then synthesized into 27 focused codes and five overarching theoretical categories Collaborating with my supervisory panel and IBC leaders, I developed a comprehensive grounded theory that addresses the existing gap in literature regarding the organizational orientations of locally-hired IBC lecturers.
During my research, I realized that organizational integration of locally-hired IBC lecturers was a key concern for IBC leaders, prompting me to focus on their identities and perspectives As my data collection progressed, literature highlighted the importance of understanding non-parent-campus lecturers' global orientations, which reinforced my decision to study locally-hired IBC lecturers My participant pool, primarily composed of lecturers from the host and third countries, further supported this focus Consequently, I centered my research on how these lecturers construct their professional identities, addressing three main research questions related to their roles and global university orientations.
• How do locally-hired IBC lecturers construct and enact their individual and campus identities as part of their universities?
• How do locally-hired IBC lecturers’ relationships and experiences impact their identity constructions?
• What are the consequences of locally-hired IBC lecturers’ identity constructions for university integration and IBC viability?
Chapter 3 of this thesis provides further detail about the approach and iterative stages of this research Below I preview the comprehensive findings arising from this work which clarify locally-hired IBC lecturers’ identity constructions, offer insights into the mechanisms informing these constructions and the outcomes arising from them, and elucidate steps that university leaders could take to support locally-hired IBC lecturers’ organizational integration.
Findings and Theories
This thesis uses a sports analogy to illustrate how locally-hired IBC lecturers perceive their professional and campus identities, framing themselves as “free agents” serving “underdog” teams These lecturers prioritize their occupational identities, viewing organizational identities as temporary and superficial due to limited influence within the parent-campus operations They see their campuses as similar to disadvantaged “underdog” teams constrained by limited resources and high consumerist expectations Additionally, parent-campus coordinators are often viewed as disrespectful “coaches” who micromanage or neglect their colleagues, compelling IBC lecturers to independently navigate global expectations and local challenges.
Below I outline locally-hired IBC lecturers’ constructions of their course coordinators and their individual and campus identities—theories which are developed in Chapters 4-6 of this thesis, respectively Throughout this work I suggest that locally-hired IBC lecturers’ constructions of themselves as free agents serving underdog teams demonstrates their sense of isolation from their parent campuses; however I also suggest that within their constructions opportunities for more effective cross-campus engagement are visible Potential exists for locally-hired IBC lecturers to see themselves as globally- invested players on thriving, supported teams; the key to achieving this more productive orientation is robust, comprehensive and well-resourced engagement from parent-campus course coordinators
1.3.1 Relating to Headquarters Coaches: Constructing Cross-Campus Coordination Relationships
In Chapter 4, I examine how IBC lecturers perceive and construct their critical collective, the parent-campus course coordinators, who serve as essential links between the global university and the IBC These coordinators act as the primary point of contact and are metaphorically described as “coaches,” responsible for supporting IBC lecturers and ensuring that parent-campus academic experiences are effectively reflected at the satellite location This relational dynamic highlights the vital role of parent-campus coordinators in maintaining educational continuity and support within international branch campuses.
Cross-campus coaching relationships often face significant challenges, with locally-hired IBC lecturers perceiving inconsistencies in support from parent-campus coordinators While some IBC lecturers maintain positive individual relationships, they frequently view coordinators collectively as neglectful of their needs This perception of disrespect manifests in two common archetypes: the "Distant Dads," reflecting a perceived emotional or managerial distance, and other similar behaviors that hinder effective communication and collaboration between IBC staff and campus coordinators.
The article highlights the contrasting roles of Distant Dads and Micromanaging Mums in IBC operations Distant Dads are often disinterested and difficult to access, offering little support but granting autonomy for curriculum adjustments Conversely, Micromanaging Mums provide nurturing guidance and strict compliance with global practices, even when local contextualization could be advantageous Overall, Distant Dads tend to offer autonomy without support, while Micromanaging Mums prioritize support at the expense of autonomy.
In Chapter 4, I examine common negative perceptions of coordinator archetypes and introduce an alternative, highly valued archetype—the "Sympathetic Siblings." These coordinators foster respectful collaboration by balancing support and autonomy, promoting a more effective global service delivery approach I highlight how IBC lecturers exemplify this collegial archetype, demonstrating the importance of collaborative and respectful coordination in achieving successful international initiatives.
This article explores the dynamics of sympathetic sibling-style relationships and the tendency of IBC lecturers to seek autonomy when cross-campus negotiations falter It identifies key archetypes such as Distant Dads, Micromanaging Mums, and Sympathetic Siblings to illustrate unproductive engagement modes perceived by locally-hired IBC staff The analysis highlights the specific types of collaboration that IBC lecturers prefer, contrasting them with current practices, and offers insights into how university leaders can enhance organizational cohesion and foster more effective cross-campus relationships based on understanding these engagement styles.
These findings underpin the upcoming discussion on how locally-hired IBC lecturers construct their individual and campus identities within global universities Their identity framing is influenced by cross-campus relationships and can be strengthened through improved engagement by parent-campus course coordinators This highlights the importance of fostering stronger communication and collaboration to support lecturers' integration and effectiveness within the international university context.
1.3.2 Free Agents Donning Team Jerseys: IBC Lecturers' Layered Individual
Chapter 5 of this thesis explores IBC lecturers’ constructions of their individual identities as they relate to their professional work The central phenomenon observed in these data is identity layering: Participants construct powerful occupational identities which they position as their core guiding selves, and treat their organization-related identities as more superficial and ephemeral Drawing on emic metaphors I theorize IBC lecturers as akin to sports free agents They wear the “uniform” of their IBCs—and to some extent don global accessories—but at their core these lecturers are occupationally focused, treating their organization-related identities as removable: temporally bound and situationally enacted
The concept of identity layering highlights the distinction between local IBC membership and global university affiliation IBC lecturers often view their local identity as a familiar “uniform” they can easily wear or remove, whereas the global university identity is akin to a seldom-used accessory, conveying prestige but less accessible While some lecturers benefit from global university status, many feel disconnected due to geographic remoteness, making it challenging to claim full membership Consequently, local lecturers tend to identify more strongly with the IBC than with the distant parent campus.
IBC lecturers strategically differentiate their identities based on context, adopting their organizational or global-university roles during service activities like student recruitment In the classroom, however, they focus solely on their core occupational identities as educators, researchers, or industry professionals, avoiding organizational labels This behavior indicates a deliberate separation of organizational representation, highlighting a potential disconnect between leadership’s and lecturers’ perceptions of their roles in promoting the IBC brand.
Research indicates that locally-hired IBC lecturers often face challenges in identifying as members of their global organizations, primarily due to low global engagement rather than strong national loyalties Enhancing cross-campus coordination through the “Sympathetic Sibling” approach can improve these educators' sense of belonging and their roles as representatives of their international universities Strengthening global engagement among locally-hired lecturers is key to fostering a cohesive global university identity and improving their overall integration into the institution.
In the customer-service environment, IBC lecturers' organization-based identities are not activated, despite the IBC literature emphasizing the need for global-university representation Within the classroom, these lecturers do not act as representatives of their organization but function as independent agents, solely representing themselves This indicates that for locally-hired IBC lecturers to effectively serve as in-class brand ambassadors, the expectation must be clearly communicated and reinforced by local IBC management.
1.3.3 Playing for Underdog Teams: Constructing IBC Contextual Disadvantage
In Chapter 6, I explore how locally-hired IBC lecturers perceive their campuses' organizational identities within larger institutions These lecturers typically view their campuses as disadvantaged, facing unique challenges inherent to their settings Using a sports metaphor, they see their IBCs as "underdogs" compared to resource-rich parent universities Key aspects of this perceived disadvantage include the high consumer expectations linked to their private status, limited institutional resources, and the perception that local IBC students are less prepared for international-standard academic work than their on-campus counterparts.
IBC lecturers perceive their campuses as disadvantaged underdogs, which influences their professional behavior They often engage in a cycle of compensatory actions, adjusting their teaching methods to meet contextual challenges A key example is the tendency to “spoonfeed” students, reducing learning to memorization and reinforcing ineffective learning practices While some locally-hired lecturers attempt to uphold global standards and mitigate perceived disadvantages, these efforts are often hindered by peers’ compensatory behaviors Encouraging students to study abroad at the parent campus is viewed by some as the only way to provide a genuine global learning experience, highlighting the ongoing struggle to balance local realities with international educational standards.
Conclusion and Applications of this Research
Below I briefly outline the contributions of this thesis to IBC literature and practice, the limitations of this research and opportunities for future inquiry, and the implications of this work for IBC practice These points are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7
This research makes significant contributions to IBC literature by providing a comprehensive understanding of how locally-hired IBC lecturers perceive and construct their roles and campuses within their global universities The findings reveal that these lecturers see themselves as “free agents,” shaping their individual identities independently within the IBC sector Additionally, they view their campuses as disadvantaged “underdogs” struggling within the broader university system The study also highlights that parent-campus course coordinators are often perceived as disrespectful “coaches,” who tend to either micromanage or neglect the IBC staff, impacting their professional experiences and campus dynamics.
My research confirms existing literature suggesting that locally-hired IBC lecturers often face challenges integrating with their global institutions However, these challenges are influenced by specific contextual factors rather than being solely determined by national differences Locally-hired IBC lecturers seek more positive and supportive engagement from their parent-campus colleagues, highlighting the importance of fostering collaborative relationships Improving the course-coordinator role to facilitate better engagement is crucial for enhancing the global integration of IBC lecturers, ultimately strengthening the overall internationalization efforts.
Research indicates that locally hired IBC lecturers can be effectively engaged and nurtured as global-university advocates, offering valuable opportunities for international collaboration These findings provide key insights into strategies for fostering their involvement, serving as a foundation for future studies on enhancing international faculty engagement This approach not only benefits university global outreach but also promotes sustainable development of local academic talent.
Constructivist grounded theory research is inherently bound by time and space, offering a snapshot view of the specific context without claiming broader generalizability This study focuses on capturing the emic perspectives of participants at four IBC sites, meaning the findings reflect the views of these individuals at this particular moment As discussed in Chapters 3 and 7, the research emphasizes understanding localized experiences rather than making universal claims, highlighting the importance of context in qualitative research.
I have diligently ensured that my findings and theories accurately represent widespread phenomena within the contexts I studied However, their applicability to other contexts beyond my research requires further validation by individuals familiar with those specific environments.
The future of this research offers significant opportunities for further exploration based on my findings Charmaz (2014) highlights that constructivist grounded theory provides valuable "grist" for future inquiry, encouraging further development of theories such as IBC lecturers as “free agents on underdog teams” and the archetypes of parent-campus course coordinators Future studies could extend my work by examining these concepts in different contexts and employing diverse research approaches Additionally, comparing the perspectives of locally-hired versus parent-campus IBC lecturers could deepen understanding, as my current focus primarily centers on the former Finally, investigating the views of parent-campus course coordinators who collaborate with IBC lecturers is crucial, given their vital role identified in this study, and could enrich insights into the overall educational ecosystem.
This thesis explores how IBC lecturers perceive their own identities and their roles within university campuses, offering actionable insights to support universities’ global-integration objectives It emphasizes the critical role of parent-campus course coordinators, regarded as “identity custodians,” who possess the authority to integrate locally-hired IBC lecturers into the broader global university community By focusing on these key dynamics, the study highlights important avenues for intervention to strengthen university global engagement and foster cohesive identity construction among international faculty.
Currently, the course-coordinator role does not consistently support effective integration across campuses, contributing to a sense of isolation within the International Business Community (IBC) and perpetuating the IBC Othering Loop To address these challenges, it is essential for global university leaders to overhaul the existing oversight functions, transforming the course-coordinator role into ambassadorial "Sympathetic Siblings" who are trained in inclusive, cross-campus engagement strategies This redefinition will foster greater collaboration, reduce isolation, and promote a more unified international community within the university.
Parent-campus coordinators must be sufficiently resourced and held accountable to ensure consistent engagement with International Business College (IBC) initiatives This support enables IBC lecturers to avoid the challenge of independently reconciling perceived local limitations with global educational ideals Effective collaboration requires parent campuses and IBCs to openly address the realities of international education delivery, fostering cross-campus dialogue about shared educational goals, localization strategies, and the limitations involved Emphasizing accountability, resource allocation, and honest communication enhances the quality and relevance of international education programs.
Supporting cross-campus improvements involves recommending that IBC managers clarify the distinct institutional expectations for IBCs, which are often perceived as commercial enterprises Locally-hired IBC lecturers may feel responsible for IBC viability, potentially leading to perceptions of disadvantage and actions that contribute to the IBC Othering Loop To address this, IBC leaders can emphasize the goals of global service delivery while clarifying the boundaries between customer service and quality enforcement, enabling lecturers to fulfill their roles without the undue pressure of commercial expectations.
Addressing key issues within International Branch Campuses (IBCs) can effectively disrupt the IBC Othering Loop, enabling these institutions to fulfill their promise of providing mirrored global experiences By understanding the constructions that hinder or facilitate the organizational integration of IBCs and their locally-hired lecturers, this thesis aims to support the broader goal of fostering more cohesive and inclusive global educational environments.
ORGANIZATIONAL-INTEGRATION ORIENTATIONS OF LOCALLY-HIRED IBC LECTURERS: BACKGROUND AND EXPLORATORY FRAMEWORK
In the highly competitive landscape of 21st-century higher education, international student recruitment has become a key global strategy for universities seeking to strengthen their financial stability Many institutions are expanding their reach by establishing international branch campuses or “IBCs,” which deliver educational experiences to students in their home countries These international branch campuses function as organizational extensions of their parent universities, offering strategic advantages while also presenting unique challenges.
This chapter explores the rise of international branch campuses (IBCs) and the challenges faced by IBC leaders in global expansion, highlighting the trend toward localizing academic staff hiring It critiques the untested assumption that relying on locally-hired lecturers diminishes IBCs’ brand integrity, emphasizing the need for empirical research into how these lecturers construct their organizational identities within the international context Understanding IBC lecturers’ identity formations has significant theoretical and practical implications, especially regarding their organizational integration, as voiced by IBC leaders The chapter concludes by presenting key research questions that guided the investigation into IBC lecturers’ organizational identity development, culminating in the grounded theory developed in this thesis.
Offshoring Higher Education: Introducing International Branch Campuses
International branch campuses (IBCs) have emerged in recent decades as part of a broader trend of applying business strategies to higher education, treating learning experiences as marketable products designed to meet consumer demand This shift toward a consumerist approach presents both opportunities and challenges for IBCs, particularly in attracting and retaining student consumers in a competitive global education market.
Since the mid-twentieth century, higher education has transformed from an exclusive, elite institution into a widely accessible and mainstream offering for diverse populations This significant shift, often referred to as the “academic revolution” (Valimma, 2014), began post-World War II with universities expanding access across social classes, leading to millions more students worldwide pursuing higher studies (Altbach, Reisberg, & De Wit, 2017) As a result, global tertiary enrolments surged from 32 million in 1970 to nearly 200 million today, growing at more than three times the rate of world population (Calderon, 2018; World Bank, 2019), reflecting the increasing importance of higher education in global development.
The global trend toward university massification has significantly impacted higher education, especially in terms of funding strategies (Altbach & Reisberg, 2018) Historically, many governments supported universities directly, viewing them as a public good essential for societal development (Slaughter & Leslie, 1999; Slaughter, 2014).
As university enrollments increased, governments responded by shifting funding models to allocate financial aid directly to students rather than providing direct support to universities (Slaughter & Leslie, 2001) This change made students the key decision-makers in funding, prompting universities to fiercely compete for student enrollments (Dyson, 2015).
Facing unprecedented competition for resources, universities began establishing marketing departments and promoting their offerings directly to students, approaching them as consumers of educational products (Dyson, 2015) Naidoo, Shankar and Veer
In 2011, the sector experienced what is termed the “consumerist turn,” marking a significant paradigm shift in higher education that transformed university operations No longer solely dedicated to public service, universities began adopting competitive business practices to stay relevant and attract students (Slaughter, 2014) In recent decades, higher education institutions have increasingly focused on developing their brand identities as part of this strategic shift (Drori, Tienari & Wöraas).
(2015), marketizing aspects of their operations to generate revenue (Bok, 2003) and generally embracing an “academic capitalism” that emphasizes organizational advancement and profit (Slaughter, 2014)
Universities have increasingly focused on growing international student enrollments as a key profit-generation strategy (Wu & Naidoo, 2016) International students not only enrich campus culture but also represent an attractive market segment that often pays full tuition fees This expansion beyond domestic admissions helps universities boost revenue and diversify their student populations.
Over the past fifty years, universities have increasingly prioritized recruiting international students to study on campus, reflecting a fivefold growth in students studying abroad since 1975, totaling approximately 5 million globally (Kreuze, 2017; UNESCO, 2015; ICEF Monitor, 2017) The United States, United Kingdom, and Australia remain the top destinations for these students, many of whom originate from diverse countries, especially China and India, highlighting the global appeal of Western higher education institutions (ICEF, 2016; ICEF, 2017).
Contemporary universities are expanding their international enrollments not only by recruiting students to relocate for tertiary studies but also by targeting foreign students who wish to earn an international degree without leaving their home region (Levatino, 2017) With globalization facilitating easier cross-border trade, many institutions now offer remotely-delivered educational programs, enabling students to obtain global university qualifications closer to home (Kauppinen & Cantwell, 2014) This shift exemplifies how academic capitalism has become transnational, with educational programs and providers operating across geographic borders to meet diverse student needs.
Transnational higher education refers to internationally-transported academic programs in the tertiary sector, offering a diverse and expanding range of educational products and experiences Recognized as one of the most consumer-driven forms of education delivery worldwide, this phenomenon reflects the growing demand for globally accessible and flexible higher education options (McBurnie & Ziguras, 2007).
Comprehensive global data on transnational higher education (TNHE) enrollments is limited, but statistics from Australia—a leading TNHE provider—highlight the significant impact of this phenomenon In 2017, approximately 430,000 international students enrolled in Australian tertiary education, with nearly 120,000 studying offshore, mainly in China, Singapore, Malaysia, and Hong Kong (Australian Department of Education & Training, 2019) Notably, the demand for in-person TNHE programs remains high, as less than 10% of students participated in online distance education in 2017, with the majority engaging in face-to-face experiences at physical offshore locations (Australian Department of Education & Training, 2019) These insights reveal that face-to-face international education via transnational programs dominates the market over online delivery methods.
Face-to-face transnational higher education (TNHE) encompasses various delivery models, ranging from programs that are only superficially connected to global universities to fully-fledged satellite campuses of international institutions Some TNHE programs leverage the global university's brand without substantial integration, while others function as complete extensions, offering comprehensive academic experiences abroad (Wilkins & Rumbley, 2018).
2016 categorizes TNHE models into collaborative and independent types Collaborative models involve joint ventures between global universities and local higher education providers, offering products like co-branded dual degrees In contrast, independent models are characterized by direct administration from global universities, often through satellite campuses known as international branch campuses (IBCs) IBCs are among the most prominent forms of TNHE in the international higher education market (Wilkins, 2017).
2.1.3 The Popular International Branch Campus Model
International branch campuses (IBCs) serve as satellite extensions of their parent universities, offering a global university experience to students in remote locations According to the Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT, 2019), an international branch campus is defined as an entity owned partially or wholly by a foreign education provider, operating under their name, and delivering a full academic program onsite that leads to a degree awarded by the foreign institution.
C-BERT’s definition above highlights the role of each IBC’s global university in ownership, presence and provision of IBC programs: features that distinguish IBCs from collaborative TNHE models (Knight, 2016) C-BERT’s definition also emphasizes what is to many students IBCs’ most crucial selling point: the fact that the degree is awarded by the global university and is therefore equivalent to degrees awarded at the home institution (Hughes, 2011)
The demand for remotely-delivered global university education has grown significantly in recent decades, leading to the proliferation of International Branch Campuses (IBCs) since the 1990s to serve offshore student markets By late 2018, there were 263 IBCs worldwide, up from approximately 50 in the late 1990s, reflecting rapid growth in the sector Many of these IBCs are located in the expanding educational markets of East and Southeast Asia and are operated by leading universities from Australia, the UK, and the US Notably, Knight (2016) highlights that IBCs have become educational destinations in their own right, attracting not only local students but also international students from third countries who opt for IBCs instead of attending their parent universities abroad.
Leveraging Locally-Hired Lecturers for Global Service Delivery: Assumed
Assumed Implications of Localizing IBC Academic Hiring
IBC viability depends on their ability to consistently provide marketable academic products that deliver authentic overseas-study experiences The role of IBC staff is crucial in shaping these global experiences, with a focus on international engagement and quality education Moving away from relying on parent-campus lecturers toward hiring host- and third-country academics raises concerns about maintaining the global image and reputation of IBCs While IBCs aim to offer immersive international programs, literature suggests that localizing lecturer hiring may threaten the quality and global service standards expected by students Ensuring a balance between local staffing and international expertise is essential for IBCs to sustain their global credibility and deliver impactful educational experiences.
2.2.1 Challenges in Delivering a Globally-Reflective IBC Product
Just as multinational enterprise subsidiaries deliver globally-recognized products offshore, international branch campuses deliver global university experiences in satellite locations (Guimon, 2016; Healey, 2018; Lane & Kinser, 2011; Wilkins & Rumbley,
IBC models prioritize the student experience, setting them apart from other forms of transnational higher education that emphasize solely the final qualification At IBCs, the learning journey itself constitutes a key part of the educational product, requiring alignment with the “fundamental ethos” of the parent university to ensure success.
Wilkins and Rumbley (2018) emphasize the significance of a parent-campus-reflective student experience within the IBC model by proposing an expanded definition of International Business Courses (IBCs) This updated definition builds upon the original C-BERT framework introduced in section 2.1.3, highlighting the evolving understanding of effective international business education Integrating parent and campus reflections is essential for fostering a comprehensive learning environment that enhances student engagement and global competency development in IBC programs.
An international branch campus is a facility owned and partially operated by a foreign higher education institution, with responsibilities for overall strategy and quality assurance It functions under the name of the foreign university and provides programs and credentials bearing that institution’s name The campus typically includes essential infrastructure such as a library, open access computer labs, and dining facilities Overall, students at the branch campus experience a student life comparable to that of students at the home campus, ensuring academic quality and campus amenities are maintained.
Wilkins and Rumbley highlight that international branch campuses (IBCs), much like multinational enterprises (MNEs), are responsible for providing a customer experience in satellite operations that mirrors the standards of the home institution Their definition emphasizes that the value proposition of IBCs extends beyond global qualifications to include delivering a genuinely global experience for students Attending an IBC should feel as authentic and integrated as attending the parent campus, ensuring consistency and quality across all locations This commitment to "recreating" the home campus environment underscores the importance of maintaining the institution's reputation and student satisfaction worldwide.
International Branch Campuses (IBCs) represent the most ambitious form of transnational higher education, enabling the complete transfer of the home-campus educational experience across geographic borders (Hall, 2016, p 208) The global university experience in a remote location underscores the potential of IBCs to deliver authentic, cross-border academic programs, making them the purest expression of international higher education.
Delivering on the promises of the International Business Center (IBC) model presents significant challenges for IBC managers Transferring the “home-based institutional DNA” from the parent campus to the IBC is complex, demanding leaders to effectively manage multiple, interconnected images simultaneously (Salt & Wood, 2014; Wilkins & Huisman, 2013) Student perceptions highlight high expectations for IBCs, emphasizing that unmet promises can lead to serious consequences, as each service interaction shapes their overall experience and perception of the IBC’s credibility and quality.
The "moment of truth" during the referendum significantly influences students' decisions to attend, as their perception of the IBC experience plays a crucial role (Wilkins & Huisman, 2015) Students who believe that the International Business College (IBC) does not meet their expectations for a parent-campus-like experience may, as Hughes (2011) cautions, choose to enroll at a different institution, highlighting the importance of delivering a perceived high-quality educational environment.
IBC faculty play a critical role in this delivering on the IBC brand promise
(Hughes, 2011; Heffernan, Wilkins & Butt, 2018) Heffernan et al (2018) emphasize that
Ensuring that every student has a positive purchase and consumption experience is crucial for staff involved in service delivery and quality Maintaining a consistent, image-resonant global university experience is vital, as deviations may threaten student enrollments and the IBC’s financial sustainability According to Hughes (2011), successful International Branch Campuses (IBCs) require minimal gap between the institutional “brand” and students’ actual learning experiences, emphasizing the pivotal role of IBC staff in fostering brand resonance and student satisfaction.
IBC managers aim to deliver a globally-reflective student experience despite limited resources, often requiring strategic compromises on which elements of the parent-campus delivery model can be effectively adapted.
Institutions expect managers of transnational education to maintain the same high standards and results as at home campuses, despite operating with fewer resources and serving different student and staff profiles.
When designing the parent-campus experience for the IBC, leaders must balance fulfilling student expectations with managing budget constraints, logistical capacities, and stakeholder oversight Ensuring a coherent and engaging experience requires careful planning to align institutional goals with resource limitations, all while addressing student needs and stakeholder requirements (Guimon, 2016; Healey).
In 2018, additional pressures within the host environment have emerged, requiring the localization of specific IBC operations, such as adapting to local students’ learning preferences and complying with government guidelines for hiring local faculty These localization demands conflict with the need for globally standardized educational experiences, making IBC management decision-making more complex.
2.2.2 Applying the Global Integration-Local Responsiveness Framework to IBCs
Research insights reveal that IBC leaders determine which parts of their operations to globalize by considering decision-making processes in multinational enterprises (MNEs) Maintaining an optimal balance between global integration and local responsiveness in service delivery at remote locations is a common challenge shared by both global universities and MNEs (Healey, 2018; Shams & Huisman, 2016) The "Global Integration-Local Responsiveness" framework is a widely used tool in MNE literature for conceptualizing these critical global-local business decisions.
The Responsiveness (‘I-R’) Framework, developed by Prahalad and Doz (1987), has been extensively applied in multinational enterprise (MNE) studies to understand global-local balancing challenges As described by Meyer and Estrin (2014), this framework offers valuable insights into the internal and external responsiveness of firms operating across borders It is particularly useful for conceptualizing the complexities faced in the International Business Case (IBC) context, helping organizations navigate the tension between global efficiency and local adaptation (Shams & Huisman, 2012).
The Global Integration-Local Responsiveness Framework, abbreviated as the “I-R Framework,” charts different ways that global institutions reconcile pressures to maintain globally-integrated approaches (“I”) and respond to local needs (“R”) (Shams &
Pursuing the Organizational Integration of Locally-Hired Lecturers
Foundations and Aims of this Research
Research on IBC management presents diverse perspectives on localizing academic hiring, with some viewing it as a strategic move posing brand-integrity risks, while others see locally-hired IBC lecturers as opportunities for identity expansion and embracing global university practices There is a need for improved organizational integration of these lecturers, but current literature offers limited insights into their organizational orientations My research highlights the challenges faced by IBC leaders in this regard and employs an organizational identity construction framework to explore how locally-hired lecturers navigate their roles, contributing valuable knowledge for IBC management practices.
2.3.1 IBC Literature Calls for Organizational Integration of Locally-Hired
There is ongoing debate surrounding localized IBC hiring, with some literature viewing it as a risk to institutional stability Conversely, another perspective advocates for global universities to improve the integration of locally-hired staff into their international operations Notably, this discourse references Shams and Huisman, who highlight concerns about the loyalty of locally-hired lecturers, illustrating the complex tensions between local recruitment and global institutional integrity.
Hughes (2011) clarifies that local lecturers are not adequate representatives of parent-campus culture on their own, emphasizing instead the vital role they play in representing their organizations She advocates for thoughtful International Branch Campus (IBC) management, including engaging staff with the global vision and providing proper training to align them with the institution's mores Hughes highlights the importance of IBCs aligning with global imperatives but does not suggest that parent-campus staff alone can achieve this Instead, she calls for greater integration of IBC lecturers into global-university communities, emphasizing the need for local staff to understand and embrace the expectations of the home campus, thereby viewing locally-hired staff as legitimate, trainable representatives of the global institution.
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
“culturally rich mix of academic staff” in transnational educational settings and advises that clear communication around academic standards can ensure that this diversity
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
This article highlights the importance of positively integrating locally-hired IBC lecturers into global university communities, emphasizing that transcending essentialist views fosters institutional support It advocates for a broader understanding of staff identity and stresses the need for more information on integration challenges faced by these lecturers Based on interviews with IBC leaders, it reveals key concerns regarding organizational integration and related identity issues among locally-hired IBC lecturers, underlining their significance for effective institutional cohesion.
2.3.2 Global-Integration Challenges of IBC leaders I Interviewed
IBC leaders highlighted organizational integration of academic staff as a major challenge, with 34 out of 36 interviewees originating from the host or third countries rather than the parent campus This high prevalence of locally-hired lecturers reflects broader trends within the IBC sector, emphasizing the importance of effective integration strategies for sustainable operations.
During my research, discussions with three senior leaders highlighted key challenges related to IBC lecturer identity, emphasizing organizational integration issues Leaders expressed concerns about the geographical and cultural challenges of operating within an IBC and collaborating with the parent campus of their global university They noted difficulties in engaging lecturers as integral parts of the wider organization due to the complex, matrixed structure of IBC operations These leaders sought a deeper understanding of how their academic staff experience and perceive their roles within the IBC and the broader institution, focusing on the identities that influence and are influenced by lecturers’ experiences.
In my interviews with IBC leaders, individual and campus-level identities of IBC lecturers emerged as critical areas of focus, revealing how lecturers perceive and embrace their roles within the IBC Leaders were particularly interested in understanding how faculty members identify with the IBC and how this relates to their connection with the broader university Notably, IBC leaders’ perspectives on these identity levels differ from those presented by Healey (2018) and Shams and Huisman, highlighting unique aspects of faculty identity within the international branch campus context.
In 2016, scholars primarily emphasized the issue of limited global representation in academic hiring within identity-related topics In contrast, IBC leaders highlighted their lecturers’ experiences, focusing on their engagement with colleagues and the impact on their identity development A crucial aspect of this process was how lecturers interacted with colleagues within the global organization, shaping their professional identities.
IBC leaders I interviewed expressed concerns about how IBC lecturers identify themselves as part of their global organization They highlighted that IBC lecturers are genuinely committed to fostering connections with the parent campus and collaborating with colleagues worldwide One leader remarked that IBC lecturers actively seek to build meaningful relationships within the broader institutional community, demonstrating their dedication to fostering a cohesive and integrated educational environment.
I think the desire to be part of something bigger and to reach out to connect is definitely a motive for people here (P2)
Leaders expressed concerns that parent-campus staff did not reciprocate their interest, causing locally-hired IBC lecturers to feel isolated within the larger organization They perceived these lecturers as feeling more like "contractors" delivering university products rather than as integral members of the institution This perceived disinterest from parent-campus colleagues hindered the development of a globally-connected identity among IBC lecturers Additionally, some leaders suspected that inadequate engagement and limited informal dialogue from parent-campus staff contributed to feelings of abandonment among IBC lecturers, further impacting their integration and professional growth.
Little things that [parent-campus colleagues] do… show us that “I'm not part of you” (H21)
IBC leaders highlighted that challenges in parent-campus engagement often stem from geographical distance and competing priorities, rather than a lack of respect or interest As P2 mentioned, these obstacles are natural consequences of physical separation and busy schedules, emphasizing the need for innovative strategies to foster stronger parent involvement.