Akhnovska Inna, PhD in Economics, Associate Professor of the Department of Entrepreneurship, Corporate and Spatial Economics, Vasyl’ Stus Donetsk National University, Vinnitsa, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-9731-3801
e-mail: i.akhnovska@donnu.edu.ua

Banzeliuk Iryna, Postgraduate student, Vasyl’ Stus Donetsk National University, Vinnytsia, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0002-0266-0569
e-mail: i.snisarchuk@donnu.edu.ua

Аdvantages and Obstacles of Using Benchmarking in Managing the Marketing Potential of Higher Education Institutions

Abstract. Introduction. Since the experience of using benchmarking by domestic higher education institutions is not rich in practical knowledge, in our opinion, the first step towards its use is to justify the advantages and obstacles in its implementation as a tool for managing the marketing potential in higher education institutions, which is why the relevance of the research topic is determined.

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to substantiate and identify the advantages and obstacles of the way of using benchmarking in managing the marketing potential of higher education institutions for further effective implementation of this tool in the activities of higher education institutions.

Results. The article substantiates the feasibility of using benchmarking in managing the marketing potential of higher education institutions by analyzing the advantages and obstacles faced by the organization during its implementation and use. It is revealed that during the implementation of activities in the tools of benchmarking institutions of higher education are experiencing difficulties of psychological, organizational, communication and financial nature. It is proved that all obstacles are equivalent to management based on benchmarking, and ignoring one category of difficulties leads to a decrease in the effectiveness of benchmarking in the management of the marketing potential in general. It is revealed that there are three areas of the existence of the organization that is in the permanent interaction, which is the result of the formation of expectations of consumers and leaders in each sector of the economy. It is substantiated the existence of advantages of using benchmarking in managing the marketing potential for each area of the interaction.

Conclusions. During the implementation of benchmarking in the management of the marketing potential of higher education institutions, organizations may face several obstacles of psychological, organizational, communication and financial nature. Overcoming these difficulties will allow for feeling the benefits of using benchmarking, as well as for making major changes in the marketing potential of higher education institutions in the direction of their increasing and improving, using the best experience of any organization.

Keywords: potential; marketing potential; marketing potential management; benchmarking; higher education institutions.

References:

1. Camp, R. (1995). Business Process Benchmarking; Finding and Implementing Best Practices. Milwaukee, WI: Quality Press.
2. Andersen, B. (2003). Biznes-processy. Instrumenty sovershenstvovanija. Moskva : Standarty i kachestvo [in Russian].
3. Arenkov,I. A. & Bagiev, E. G. (2001).Benchmarking i marketing ovyereshenija. Moskva [in Russian].
4. Golubeva, T. (2002). Benchmarking as an effective organization management tool. Kachestvo. Innovacii. Obrazovanie, 1, 60-62 [in Russian].
5. Shkljajeva, Gh. O. (2012). Benchmarking as a marketing technology for managing an enterprise’s competitiveness. Bjuletenj Mizhnarodnogho Nobelivsjkogho ekonomichnogho forumu, 1(5), 404-409 [in Ukrainian].
6. Kostjuk, M. K. (2016). Topicality of introduction of the concept of benchmarking in the market of educational services of Ukraine. Traektoryja nauky, 6. Retrieved from: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/trna_2016_2_6_3 [in Ukrainian].
7. Popovych, D. V. & Tarnavsjka, B. (2015). Benchmarking as an effective tool for managing enterprise performance. Global and national economic problems, 4, 544-546 [in Ukrainian].
8. Semenjuk, S. (2012). Development of innovative marketing in the market of educational services. Ghalycjkyj ekonomichnyj visnyk, 6(39), 151-158. Retrieved from: http://elartu.tntu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/2291 [in Ukrainian].
9. Prus, L. (2005). Benchmarking as a tool for managing competitiveness. Skhid, 4 (70), 33-37 [in Ukrainian].
10. Tikhonov, Ju. V (2007). Benchmarking and business intelligence as components of successful business development. Current problems of the economy. №9 (75), 126-132 [in Ukrainian].
11. Official site of the Independent Kazakh Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (NACCA) (2020). Retrieved from: https://iqaa.kz/glossarij [in Ukrainian].
12. Benchmarking higher education system performance: Conceptual framework and data, Enhancing Higher Education System Performance (2017). OECD. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/Benchmarking% 20Report.pdf.
13. Benchmarking Higher Education System Performance, Higher Education. (2019). OECD. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/benchmarking-higher-education-system-performance_be5514d7-en. https://doi.org/10.1787/be5514d7-en.
14. Levy, Gary & Ronco, L. Sharron. (2012). How Benchmarking and Higher Education Came Together. Special Issue: Benchmarking in Institutional Research, 156, 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.20026.
15. Kuźmicz, K. A. (2015). Benchmarking in university toolbox. Business, Management and Education,13(1), 158-174. https://doi.org/10.3846/bme.2015.259 [in English].