MSc BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION
Department of Marketing, Entrepreneurship and Strategy
Ulster Business School
University of Ulster
Eoin Killian Costello
Student Number B00570977
Coursework Assessment: Strategy in Practice
November 2010
1
Module Name:
Strategy
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Module Code:
Student Name:
Content
Critical insightful evaluation
& synthesis of complex
issues, high level of
originality & reflection.
Application
Extensive evidence of
advanced applications &/or
empirical results, where
applicable, informed
extensively by current
research & practice in the
area
Knowledge &
Understanding
Exceptional knowledge &
conceptual understanding of
complex &/or specialised
principles & concepts & the
development & advancement
of ideas & practice
Reading
Extensive evidence of
integrating supplementary
sources
Range
(%)
Descriptors
80 - 100
70 - 79
60 - 69
50 - 59
"Insightful", "Original"&"Reflective"
"Excellent" & "Comprehensive"
"Good" & "Wide""
"Limited" & "Occasional"
40 - 49
35 - 39
0 - 34
"Basic" & "Weak"
"Poor" & "Limited"
"Little" & "Insufficient"
Eoin Killian Costello
Analysis & Synthesis
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Application
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Little or no referencing and
bibliography
Structure
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Unacceptable Structure
Presentation
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Grammar & Spelling
Correct grammar and spelling
Little or no evidence of reading
Referencing & Bibliography
Presentation
Outstanding well directed
presentation
Virtually devoid of any evidence of
knowledge & understanding
Reading
Structure
Coherent Structure
Little or no evidence of relevant
application &/or empirical results
Understanding
Referencing & Bibliography
Outstanding referencing and
bibliography
Little or no evaluation & synthesis of
issues and material
Inappropriate presentation
Grammar & Spelling
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Unacceptable grammar and spelling
2
SECTION A
PROVISIONAL MARK AWARDED:
80
(Provisional denotes that the mark is subject to the moderation process)
Pass Mark: 50
COMMENTS:
(Feedback should include comments on the achievement of the learning outcomes)
(Strengths, weaknesses and areas for improvement should be highlighted)
Eoin, an outstanding report demonstrating rigorous critical analysis and well considered recommendations.
A contextual overview of the organisation and the current approach to strategy (30 %)
25
Detailed analysis of the current approach to strategy using PESTEL which sets the scene for the remainder
of the report. Excellent writing style and structure.
Application of relevant models of strategy to the organisation
and a critical evaluation of their relevance in practice (50%)
40
Thorough consideration of a range of strategy models, evidence of rigorous application and critical analysis.
Your ability to synthesise and integrate these models was outstanding.
The appended section on models you choose to disregard and the reasons for this was insightful and worth
including in the main body. Scope to include a little more critical analysis on the relevance of RBV.
Recommendations for improvement in terms of the process of strategy development
and strategic choices of the organisation (20%)
15
Relevant recommendations for based on a rigorous analysis process.
Your analysis of Irish High Level group seems more superficial and less evidence based.
Scope to develop these
further
Signed (1st Marker):
3
ABSTRACT
INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION
The sustainable strategy for Ireland - internationalisation or globalisation?
Third level education in Ireland is facing a period of sustained pressure from cutbacks in
public funding, many universities may view the potential income of International Students as
a commercial opportunity with their numbers in Ireland predicted to rise by 300% over the
next 15 years (Department Enterprise Trade & Employment 2010) however Ireland currently
performs relatively poorly in terms of attracting overseas students and is a net exporter of
students (Thornhill 2010).
Absence of clear government strategy has resulted in Ireland not claiming its share of the
global market in international education (Carroll 2009). In September 2010 the Government
High Level Group on International Education published a policy document (High-Level
Group on International Education 2010) identifying International Education as a strategic
growth industry for Ireland and outlining the intended strategy for achieving demanding
growth targets for International Student numbers.
However, how sustainable is the competitive advantage that this strategy seeks to build?
Australia, one of the early countries to recognise the potential of the International Student
opportunity, has built it to the country’s third largest export earner. Within this context
Monash University, Melbourne, has been one of the most successful and has consistently
enrolled the highest number of International Students in Australia.
This paper seeks to identify the strategies that have created sustainable competitive advantage
for Monash University in pursuing the International Student opportunity. It finds that, in
seeking a long term sustainable competitive advantage, a strategy of globalisation evolved out
of their internationalisation strategy. The factors underpinning the success of Monash is then
compared to the published High Level Group strategy and it is argued that there appears to be
a key deficiency in the current formulation of the Irish strategy.
4
INTRODUCTION
In September 2010 the Irish Government published its strategy for International Education,
the first such comprehensive strategy framework for the Irish International Education sector.
The objective of this paper is to identify sustainable competitive advantage in the exporting
of education and therefore analysis will be restricted to this strategy “lens” (Johnson, Scholes
and Whittington 2008) or perspective throughout this paper. The definition of terms used in
this paper is provided in Appendix 1.
AUSTRALIA AND THE INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION SECTOR
In less than two decades Australian tertiary education exports have built from a low base to
accounting for 9% of the global market (Marginson 2006). Within this Monash enrols the
highest number of International Students in Australia.
To establish the backdrop to the strategic decisions that Monash University took it is
necessary to apply the PESTEL framework to identify the key drivers for change in respect of
the International Education industry in Australia.
Political
Positive: Australia promoted by government since 1950’s as a location for International
Students under the “Colombo Plan for Cooperative Economic and Social Development in
Asia and the Pacific”.
Positive: Necessary deregulation introduced to facilitate universities pursuit of International
Students.
Negative: On-going under funding of tertiary education. In this respect Australia’s
performance does not compare favourably with other OECD nations (Datamonitor 2009).
From 1996, as public funding receded, international fees gradually became a substitute for
public funding and enrolments by International Students rose rapidly (Marginson 2008a).
Economic
Positive: Benefited from the sustained growth in the economies constituting its neighbouring
subcontinents of South East Asia and India.
Negative: Strong Australian dollar makes it a more expensive option for International
Students. Exchange rate changes have an influence on the choice of education destination
(Abbott 2005).
Negative: As the GNP of the importing nations of South East Asia and India rises their ability
to provide quality education options for their population increases. Increasing local provision
of education of a comparative quality has been found to have a positive link with GNP
growth (Abbott 2009). According to Mazzarol “overseas course better than local” was
5
traditionally a dominant “push” factor for International Students seeking tertiary education
abroad (Mazzarol 2002). The two countries where this will have the largest impact are two of
Australia’s key export markets, China and India (Fahey 2009a), for a detailed breakdown
please see Appendix 4. This will likely move International Student demand from
undergraduate to post graduate places in exporting countries (Marginson 2008b).
Social
Positive: The exporting Australian universities have traditionally benefitted from a positive
perception of Australia as a host country (climate, hospitality, English speaking). As well as
appealing to International Students wishing to improve their English, the fact that English is
the sole language of international research publications confers an advantage on English
speaking language institutions (Marginson 2007).
Positive: In most OECD countries there has been a rising demand for post-secondary
education over the past decades and a significant increase of the tertiary enrolment rates.
Negative: The perception of the host country has suffered in recent years as a result of attacks
on students (Kremmer 2010) and a lack of social inclusion for visiting International Students
(Marginson 2008b).
Negative: Relatively weak position of Australian Universities in international university
rankings (particularly in research where Australia has just 2 ranked in the top 100 Research
Universities compared with 53 in the USA (Marginson 2007)) outweighing climate,
hospitality factors in the increasingly competitive market for International Students.
Negative: The competitive advantage conferred by English is diminishing as it is becoming
the language of tuition across the industry internationally (Fahey 2009a).
Legal
On the negative side work and immigration visa issues have restricted the number of eligible
students and, once arrived in Australia, their ability to fund their fees from paid employment.
PESTEL SUMMARY
Therefore in summary, through the strategy lens adopted for this paper, the key drivers for
Australian Universities appear to be:
1. A need to reduce foreign exchange exposure.
2. Increased student numbers needed to reduce reliance on public funding.
3. A need to mitigate evolving competition from local education provision in importing
countries.
4. A need to reduce explicit dependence on the host country factors that attracted
students to Australia in the past.
Looking briefly at a SWOT analysis through the lens of this paper, Australia has traditionally
differentiated itself on low price (strength), location (strength), safety (strength), and climate
(strength), not academic content (weakness) (Marginson 2007). In terms of international
6
rankings the Shanghai Jiao Tong University survey of research performance finds that
Australia is less strong in research (weakness) where demand will increase internationally but
strong in cross-border degrees (strength). While Australia has very strong under graduate
education exports (strength) in its Asia-Pacific orientation however the basis is narrow as a
result of this geographic focus (weakness).
The key risk drivers that emerge from a SWOT analysis are:
1. Need for Australian institutions to move up the league of international research
rankings and improve international standing of post graduate offerings.
2. Need to reduce over dependence on Asia Pacific.
Monash in the context of Australian International Education
The writer visited the Media Office at Caulfield campus of Monash University while in
Melbourne in April 2010 as part of his research during his travel year. Established in 1958
Monash is a public university and a member of Australia's Group of Eight (a “strategic
group” (Ghemawat, P. 2010) of elite universities). Monash enrolls approximately 39,000
undergraduate and 16,000 graduate students making it the largest university in Australia with
the percentage of International Students standing at 31.7% (IDP Statistics 2008). It is the
most popular choice in the state with more applicants than any university in Victoria. Monash
is the largest provider of cross-border degrees in Australia (Marginson 2006).
While Australia as a whole does not rank strongly on research rankings internationally,
Monash has a good international reputation in research, the university houses 75 research
centers, is involved with 17 Co-operative Research Centres, and has research and exchange
links with more than 110 institutions throughout the Americas, Asia, Africa, Middle East and
Europe (IDP Statistics 2008). The university has eight campuses: six in the state of Victoria,
one in Malaysia and one in South Africa. Monash also has a research and teaching centre in
Prato, Italy and a graduate research school in Mumbai, India.
In the Academic Ranking of World Universities compiled by the Shanghai Jiao Tong
University rankings it lies at 151st, 61st in the QS World University Rankings Results 2010
and 178th in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings.
MONASH – ESTABLISHING THE STRATEGIES UNDERPINNING THEIR
SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN INTERNATIONALISATION
Johnson, Scholes and Whittington states that “strategy is an understanding of the direction
and scope of an organisation over the long-term which achieves advantage for the
organisation in a changing environment through its configuration of resources and
competences with the aim of fulfilling stakeholder expectations” (2008).
While external factors create the dynamics and opportunities of the industry within which the
organisation operates, in the case of a service business like Monash it is argued that internal
factors such as the combination of an organisation’s unique resources and core competences
creates their sustainable competitive advantage.
7
In respect of resources thinking in this area originates from the work of the Resource Based
View (RBV) school, the key principle of the RBV is that the basis for the competitive
advantage of a firm lies primarily in the use of the assembled resources at the organisation’s
disposal. Barney grouped capabilities in the catchall of resources arguing that the firm’s
resources include all its assets, capabilities, organizational processes, firm’s attributes,
information, knowledge, etc. owned and/or controlled by an organization ( Barney 1991).
Building on Barney’s work Collis and Montgomery state that the tests of a resources
uniqueness include the fact that it's hard to copy, its value is controlled by your company, it's
not easily substituted by alternatives and it is better than competitors' similar resources
(Collis 2008).
While the RBV model has limited prescriptive abilities it is useful to analysing the strategy in
respect of Monash.
Prahalad singles out competences (knowledge, skills and abilities) from the more inert
resources of an organisation to identify the core competences that contribute to sustainable
competitive advantage. Prahalad states that a core competence requires the following key
criteria:
1. It is not easy for competitors to imitate.
2. It can be leveraged widely to many products and markets.
3. Should make a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefits of the end
product. (Prahalad 1990)
For the purposes of this paper the final relevant concept is that of the evolution path. While
resources and competences are the elements that create a company’s strategic capabilities, the
strategic choices that the organisation made in the past (or the “evolution path(s) it has
adopted or inherited” (Teece 1997) ) are key to shaping its strategic position.
An analysis of stakeholder expectations is beyond the scope of this paper. The relevance of
other strategy models is assessed in Appendix 2.
To identify the resources and competences of Monash University through the lens of this
paper, one must examine Monash University's Statement of Purpose (Monash University
2005) and their Strategic Priorities 2009–2013 (Monash University 2009).
Identifying the Resources of Monash in respect of Internationalisation
Below the tangible and intangible resources relevant to internationalisation identified in
Monash documentation filtered according to the uniqueness tests outlined above.
Full details of the features associated with each resource is contained in Appendix 5.
Tangible Resources

Physical global campuses. Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason: Passes the “uniqueness” tests when the resource is taken in combination with
their unique resource of corporate culture.

Staff. Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason: Is not inimitable by importing countries or competitors.
8

Research facilities. Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason: While this asset does support the competitive advantage of Monash it is not
inimitable by importing countries or competitors.
Intangible Resources

Internationalised Curriculum. Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold: All institutions seeking to attract international students require
this as a minimum requirement.

Subject disciplines taught. Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason is unique: It takes many years to ensure that an institution’s qualifications are
accepted by the relevant regulatory bodies and once the market is sufficiently
resourced it is difficult for new entrants to enter and achieve accreditation.

International Collaboration. Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold: All universities internationally are seeking to achieve high
quality international collaborations and while the perceived quality of the initiating
institution may be key to the quality and quantity of partnerships it does not pass the
tests of uniqueness.

Student international experience. Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason this is unique resource: Monash dedicates a considerable budget to ensuring
that its Australian students can spend time at each of the Monash global campuses
thereby supporting its continued selection as provider of first choice in the home
market and providing the critical mass of numbers to fledgling global campuses.

High Quality results for its internationalised education programmes. Category:
THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold is that in the highly competitive market for international students
high quality is a minimum requirement.

Pre-existing substantial international student population. Category: THRESHOLD
RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold is that in the highly competitive market for international students
this is a minimum requirement.

Corporate Culture. Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason this is considered to be unique is outlined in further detail below in the
Evolution Path Analysis.
Identifying the Competences in respect of Internationalisation
Turning now to identifying the competences of Monash in respect of Internationalisation
using the Hamel and Prahalad tests for singling out the core competences.
Full details of the features of each competence is contained in Appendix 5.
9

Leveraging of Monash international partnerships in North America and Europe.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason is threshold: It does not pass the test as all institutions are now pursuing this
strategy of developing partnerships and the strategy of Monash may be imitated.

Making itself first choice for more Australian students.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason: It is an objective of all Australian universities to maximise student numbers
and the strategies of Monash may be imitated.

Excellence in education.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason: It is an objective of all Australian universities competing for international
students to have high standards and the strategy of Monash may be imitated.

Excellence in management.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason: It is an objective of all Australian universities competing for international
students to achieve operational efficiency.

Embedding campuses abroad within local eco-systems.
Category: CORE COMPETENCE
Reason: This competence passes the tests of inimitability, ability to leverage to many
markets and it makes a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefit of
the end product both for domestic Australian students (via the Monash Passport) and
the students in the importing nation.
Evolution Path Analysis
The history of strategic choices made by the organisation is fundamental to how the
organisation’s strategic position has evolved. Monash began offering international
scholarships in 1961under the Columbo plan (shortly after the university was established).
Many Monash Colombo scholars are now industry, government and community leaders
within the countries where Monash has established local campuses and partnerships
( Simmonds 2001). It is clear that “first mover advantage” (Lieberman 1988) has accrued to
Monash both in its achievement of the highest concentration of International Students in the
Australian market and its establishment of two global campuses, Marginson states that in the
international student market first mover advantage can be vital (Marginson 2006).
Therefore the components underpinning the sustainable competitive advantage in respect of
Internationalisation that emerge from this analysis are:
Figure 1: Plotting the factors underpinning the sustainable competitive advantage of Monash
University
Unique Resources
Core Competences
Evolution Path
Physical global campuses
Embedding global campuses
abroad in local eco-systems
Since foundation the organisation has
made choices that configure their
activities to take full advantage of the
International Students market globally
10
Subject disciplines taught at global
campuses are concentrated in
regulated professions
Student international experience
gained on Monash global campuses
Corporate culture of Monash
developed over decades of
internationalisation towards
execution of a globalisation
strategy
It is clear from this list that a strategy of globalisation has emerged at Monash as the
sustainable competitive advantage. No doubt “they were a series of smaller decisions that
ultimately lead to a final dramatic outcome” (Burgelman 2002) and this strategy is not
without its risks. Public letters from the Vice Chancellor attest to the slow process of gaining
access to the Malaysian eco-system (Larkins 2004) while, as a private education institution in
South Africa, Monash could not access any of the services or financial streams available at
the National Research Foundation until a breakthrough in 2010 (Burger 2010).
Why does Globalisation yield a sustainable competitive advantage to Monash?
This strategy leads to a virtuous circle amongst the activities of the organisation or what
could be characterised as Porters “Third-order fit” as it goes beyond activity reinforcement to
what Porter refers to as optimization of effort (Porter 1996).
High International Student numbers onshore leads to financial funds for globalisation,
circulation of Monash Passport students helps critical mass at global campuses, mature
Monash Alumni group globally eases the way past local red tape, concentration in restricted
professions (where Monash has a high onshore reputation) contributes to lock out of both
onshore and offshore competitors in importing countries, tacit knowledge of Monash global
team grows thereby ensuring rapid access to research funding and qualification accreditation
in other future global markets.
Further information on how the globalisation strategy of Monash addresses the risks
identified in the Pestel and SWOT is contained in the Appendix 3 to this paper.
COMPARISON WITH STRATEGY DOCUMENT OF THE IRISH HIGH LEVEL
GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION
Under the section headed “Making it happen” the strategy document identifies ten strategic
actions intended to increase onshore International Students. The relevant strategy section for
the purposes of this paper is the section entitled “Strategic action 5: Ireland’s higher
education institutions will be globally competitive and internationally oriented” which
itemises the following objectives which are categorised using the same analysis as was
applied to Monash:
• Higher education institutions will develop comprehensive internationalisation strategies.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
• Institutions should have regard to the medium term national target, to be reached in the
11
period between now and 2020, that International Students should comprise 15% of the
fulltime. Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE
• Internationalised curricula should be a key component of internationalisation. Category:
THRESHOLD RESOURCE
• The Irish quality assurance authorities will consider the quality assurance implications of
the growing importance of transnational education as part of Ireland’s overall international
education offering. Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE
Under the section entitled “3.5.7 Transnational education” it is stated that “At present, Irish
institutions are involved in delivering transnational education in a number of ways,
including through overseas campuses (in both the higher education and English-language
sectors), joint degree programmes, and overseas delivery of programmes by Irish institutions.
And that these efforts account for approximately “three thousand students can be classified
as offshore students.”
While it notes that transnational education is an arduous strategy it does not provide viable
strategy options for engaging in such a necessary strategy, to quote:
“Larger transnational education projects require financial support in the start-up phase; the
time-frame for such operations to reach a break-even point can be up to ten years.
Successful models for the development of branch campus property include the use of the
Business Expansion Scheme.”
The Irish Business Expansion Scheme has a maximum limit of €2 million that can be raised
and would not be sufficient to fund a serious globalisation strategy by an Irish University.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN IRISH INTERNATIONAL
EDUCATION STRAGEGIC CHOICES
The scope of this paper precludes an individual examination of the strategy and current or
past initiatives of individual Irish third level institutions; it is confined to an examination of
the strategy objectives outlined in the High Level Group report.
Drawing from the analysis of Monash’s unique resources and core competences it is clear
that the national strategy of choosing not to position itself as 'a mass-market player' (Carroll
2010) avoids some risks identified by the PESTEL and SWOT. However it is clear that its
current strategy will only concentrate Irish universities on building threshold competences in
respect of Internationalisation. While it briefly mentions “Transnational education” there is
no strategy for putting the necessary resources in place to make this happen.
Universities are typically resilient institutions and some have survived centuries of change. It
might be argued that, due to the recession and current technological and commercialisation
trends, a strategic inflection point (Grove 1996) has been reached and that Irish universities
need to become more radical in their choice of strategies and globalisation is one of the
options that Irish Universities need to address. Mintzberg’s study of the strategic choices of
McGill university (which I visited in Montreal in May 2010) over a period of 151 years
12
would find against the need for radical approaches, “while strategic revolution may be
unlikely in universities, steady incremental change seems to be endemic” (Mintzberg 2009).
It could be argued by the High Level Group that an adequate period of internationalisation is
an essential precursor to globalisation. However the time scales involved in successful
globalisation initiatives are of such a length (upwards of 10 years (Liddell 2007) ) as to make
it essential to commence globalisation now before the opportunity is addressed by the
importing countries.
Academic literature appears to support the logic of the globalisation approach. Hawawini
favours the network model of internationalisation; “business schools will have to build the
infrastructure required to distribute knowledge continuously in time (over the active life of
their members) and space (over multiple locations around the world)” (Hawawini 2005).
Recommendations
There are a number of strands under which the High Level Group’s strategy could be
improved to reflect the lessons learnt from the Monash analysis and drawing on the
theoretical models of RBV and Core Competences. It is clear that any improvements to the
strategy of the High Level Group needs to focus on addressing the areas of unique resources
and core competences that have been identified as underpinning the sustainable competitive
advantage of Monash.
The key recommendation is that the strategy should be amended to prioritise and
incentivisation globalisation by those institutions best positioned to do so. It is further
recommended that, in an era of scarce financial resources, that the strategy prioritises one
particular institution. The reason this is key is that a role model must be established that will
demonstrate to the entire Irish International Education sector what represents a sustainable
competitive advantage in this area.
Strategy entails making choices (Markides 1999) and some form of trade off invariably
defines a successful, sustainable strategy. Government resources could then be concentrated
on enabling it to pursue a global strategy at the expense of providing small amounts of
financial incentives to all the institutions who wish to market their services to onshore
International Students.
There are two paths as to how this could be achieved and incorporated within the High Level
Group’s strategy, namely adopting a strategy of concentrating scarce resources on an
institution with competences and necessary Evolutionary Path to pursue globalisation or
concentrating scarce resources on an institution on the basis of resources in terms of existing
global locations and Subjects Taught. It is beyond the scope of this paper to comment on the
potential political difficulties that the suggested strategy may encounter.
Competence Approach - Concentration of Resources on institution with Corporate
Culture and necessary Evolutionary Path
One sustainable strategy would be to select one Irish institution with an evolution path and
corporate culture that would indicate the potential to seize the globalisation opportunity with
strategic intent. All other things being equal (quality of staff, quality of teaching etc.) if one
13
assumes that evolutionary path and strategic intent is the best guide to identifying a university
with the most probability of implementing a successful globalisation strategy, then it is
recommended that, once appropriately selected, resources and public funding be concentrated
on that university.
An Irish university with a similar evolutionary path to Monash is Dublin City University
(DCU). This university has grown rapidly since its foundation in 1975 to 6,000
undergraduate students, over 600 research postgraduates, 1,800 taught postgraduate students
and 1,100 distance learning students. Through its 'Leadership through Foresight', (DCU
2005) strategy it is focussed on developing a national and international reputation in its
chosen priority areas and as such would appear to be a potential candidate for this
competence approach strategy.
Resource Approach - Concentration via selection on the basis of resources of existing
global locations and Subjects Taught
Another sustainable strategy would be to select one Irish institution that has a concentration
on tuition in regulated professions and has existing global campuses. A potential candidate
here would be the Royal College of Surgeons (RCSI), established in 1784. It has a reputation
as a leading international medical institution and is active around the globe. In 2005, RCSI
Dubai was founded and in Malaysia, Penang Medical College was established by the RCSI in
1995.
Corporate Culture that is adequately orientated to the International Student
opportunity
It is clear from the capabilities analysis of Monash that a culture of internationalisation is
endemic in the organisation. A threat to any strategy of Internationalisation may arise from
organisational “culture” that exhibits complacency or institutional rigidity. To counteract this
Markides (ibid 1999) recommends the promotion of an organisational culture that welcomes
change.
While a number of the more venerable Irish institutions have an international reputation it is
possible that institutional rigidities and their evolutionary path will render them less likely to
have the desire or impetus to embark on the opportunities presented by globalisation thus,
given the impending severity of potential cuts in funding, penalties for not engaging in
Internationalisation, beyond those recommended in the High Level Group’s report (Under the
section “Monitoring and benchmarking“ it states “Institutions that do not contribute to the
promotional efforts fund will not be permitted to use the national brand and promotional
materials and will not be facilitated by”) should be considered by the High Level Group.
Conclusion
It is clear that if globalisation is not a key component of the national strategy Ireland’s share
of the International Student market is exposed to all the risks identified in the PESTEL and
SWOT above. The experience of New Zealand might be instructive for Ireland where, after a
number of years of surging international student numbers, numbers declined sharply after
2004 forcing a number of universities to retrench staff (Xiaoying 2009).
While the High Level Group strategy document is a very worthwhile document and a first
step very much in the right direction, it must be noted that in focussing on the “pull” factors
14
involved in the selection of the destination for their tertiary education, the High Level Group
fails to legislate for the erosion of the “push” factors in the coming decade. Therefore, while
the Group exhorts Irish institutions to be “globally competitive” it fails to ensure they are
“global” with a strategy of developing branch campuses in the importing countries. As
competition intensifies in the next 10 years this distinction may be very telling.
REFERENCES
Abbott, M., (2005) The impact of exchange rate variations and university reputation on the choice
of destinations of international students in Australia and New Zealand. Research Paper - Centre for
Research in International Education (CRIE).
Barney, J., (1991) Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management ,
vol. 17, 1: pp. 99-120.
Burgelman, R., (2002) Strategy is Destiny - How strategy making shapes a company's future. First
ed. Stanford: Free Press.
Burger, D., (2010) Monash South Africa launches partnership with the National Research
Foundation. [online]. Monash University. Available from:
http://www.monash.ac.za/news/2010/nrf-launch.html
Carpentier, A., (2008) The internationalization of higher education. [online]. Academici. Available
from: http://www.academici.com/blog.aspx?bid=5249 [Accessed 11/12/2010].
Carroll, N., (2010) Strategy's focus on quality welcome but momentum must be sustained.
[online]. Irish Council for International Students (ICOS). Available from:
http://www.icosirl.ie/eng/news/media_releases/strategy_s_focus_on_quality_welcome_but_mome
ntum_must_be_sustained [Accessed 11/11/2010].
Carroll, N., (2009) Opinion: Ireland needs to attract more International Students. [online]. Irish
Council for International Students (ICOS). Available from:
http://www.icosirl.ie/news/opinion_ireland_needs_to_attract_more_international_students
[Accessed 11/7/2010].
Christensen, C.M., (2001) The Past and Future of Competitive Advantage. MIT Sloan Management
Review. Vol 42, No2, pp105109
Collis, D.J. and Montgomery, C.A., (2008) Competing on Resources. Harvard Business Review,
(July–August), Vol.73 No.4 pp118-28
Datamonitor, (2009) COUNTRY ANALYSIS REPORT: Australia In-depth PESTLE Insights.
Datamonitor, June Source: UU Portal
DCU Strategy - Welcome to the first Dublin city university strategy website [online]. Available
from: http://www.dcu.ie/strategy/strategy2008/index.shtml [Accessed 11/19/2010].
15
Department Enterprise Trade & Employment, (2010) DETE - International students generate
€430m for economy but we need greater market share - Minister O’Keeffe. [online]. Dept.
Enterprise Trade & Employment. Available from: http://www.deti.ie/press/2010/20100513a.htm
[Accessed 11/7/2010].
Fahey, S., (2009a) Trends in Internationalisation and Implications for Universities. In: Anonymous
Trends in Internationalisation and Implications for Universities. Melbourne: Higher Education
Summit, www.monash.edu.au/international/dvc/.../internationalisation2009.pdf.
Fahey, S., (2009b) Developing research-led university alliances and the challenges for Australia.
In: Anonymous Asia Pacific Association for International Education,
www.monash.edu.au/international/dvc/assets/apaie2009.pdf.
Ghemawat, P., (2010) Strategy and the Business Landscape. 3rd ed ed. Upper Saddle River :
Pearson, 2010.
Grove, A., (1996) Only the Paranoid Survive. 6 April 1998 ed. Profile Business.
Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K., (2005) Strategic Intent. Harvard Business Review, (Jul 01), Vol. 67
Issue 3, p63-78,
Hawawini, G., (2005) The future of business schools Journal of Management Development, Vol 24
(9), 770 <last_page> 782.
High-Level Group on International Education. (2010) Investing in Global Relationships - Ireland’s
International Education Strategy 2010-15. Dublin: Education Ireland, (2010).
IDP Statistics, (2008) Monash University Facts and Figures. [online]. IDP Statistics. Available from:
http://www.students.idp.com/university/monash_university.aspx [Accessed 11/11/2010].
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R., (2008) Exploring Corporate Strategy. 8th ed.
London: Harlow : Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Kim, W.C. and Mauborgne, R., (2005) Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market
Space and Make Competition Irrelevant. 1 edition (February 3, 2005) ed. Harvard Business Press.
Kremmer, J., (2010) Australian Conference Focuses on Drop in Foreign Students - International The Chronicle of Higher Education. [online]. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Available from:
http://jobs.chronicle.com/article/Australian-Conference-Focuses/124908/ [Accessed 11/8/2010].
Lane, B., (2010) Monash University limits funds to Johannesburg campus. [online]. The Australian
Newspaper. Available from: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/monashuniversity-limits-funds-to-johannesburg-campus/story-e6frgcjx-1225946931506 [Accessed
11/8/2010].
Larkins, R., (2004) Monash University submission to the Australia-Malaysia Free Trade Agreement
Negotiations. [online]. Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Available from:
http://www.dfat.gov.au/fta/mafta/submissions/MonashUniversity.pdf
Liddell, M., (2007) Sunway rising. Monash Magazine, Spring/Summer 2007 (Issue 20),
Lieberman, M.B. and Montgomery, D.B., (1988) First Mover Advantages. Strategic Management
Journal, Volume 9 (S1),
Marginson, S., (2008a) Prospects Of Higher Education, Globalization, Market Competition, Public
Goods and the Future of the University. First ed. Rotterdam: Sense Publications.
16
Marginson, S., (2008b) Sustainability and risks of internationalisation. In: Anonymous ‘Rankings
and Internationalisation’. Sydney: The Australian Financial Review Higher Education conference,
www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/.../ Financial%20Review%20conference%20140308.pdf.
Marginson, S., (2007) The global positioning of Australian higher education: Where to from here?
In: Anonymous Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education,
www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/.../Marginson/MarginsonDeansLecture161007.pdf.
Marginson, S., (2006) Australian Universities in a Global Context-Business. In: Higher Education
Round Table Conference ed. Tomorrow's Universities: The Need for Change in Australia.
Melbourne: Higher Education Round Table Conference, www.bhert.com/activitiesarchives/2006.../Marginson.pdf.
Markides, C.C., (1999) A Dynamic View of Strategy. MIT Sloan Management Review. Volume 40,
Number 3, pages 55-63
Mazzarol, T. and Soutar, G.N., (2002) “Push-pull” factors influencing international student
destination choice International Journal of Educational Management, 16 (2), 82 <last_page> 90.
Mintzberg, H. and Rose, J., (2009) Strategic Management Upside Down: Tracking Strategies at
McGill University from 1829 to 1980. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue
Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 20 (4), 270 <last_page> 290.
Monash University, (2009) Strategic Priorities 2009–2013. [online]. Monash University. Available
from: http://www.monash.edu.au/about/monash-directions/excellence2013.html [Accessed
11/8/2010].
Monash University, (2005) Monash Directions 2025. [online]. Monash University. Available from:
http://www.monash.edu.au/about/monash-directions/directions.html [Accessed 11/5/2010].
Moodie, G., (2010) Shrill response to falling numbers. The Australian Newspaper Available from:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/opinion-analysis/shrill-response-to-fallingnumbers/story-e6frgcko-1225940850515
Porter, M., (1996) What is Strategy. Harvard Business Review, (Nov 01),
Porter, M., (1990) The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Harvard Business Review, (March/April),
Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G., (1990) The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business
Review, (May,1990),
Simmonds, M., (2001) Research Brief- The Colombo Plan. Monash Magazine, 2010 (Issue 8),
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A., (1997) DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND STRATEGIC
MANAGEMENT. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18:7
Thornhill, R., (2010) The role of education in rebuilding the economy. [online]. MacGill Summer
School. Available from: www.irisheconomy.ie/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/Thornhill.doc
UNESCO, (1996) Declaration and Integrated Framework of Action on Education for Peace,
Human Rights and Democracy. Paris.
Xiaoying, M. and Abbott, M., (2009) Entering International Markets: New Zealand's Challenges International Educator. International Educator, 2009 (Jan/Feb 2009),
17
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Australian Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development (2008) Overseas
Student Education Experience Taskforce (Victoria).
Ansoff, I. (1991) Critique of Henry Mintzberg’s ‘The Design School: Reconsidering the
Basic Premises of Strategic Management’, Strategic Management Journal, 12, 449-461.
Christensen, C. (2001) The Past and Future of Competitive Advantage. MIT Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 105-109.
Banks,M.,Olsen,A., (2007) Global Student Mobility: An Australian Perspective Five Years
On, IDP Research
D’Aveni, R.A. (2007) Mapping your Competitive Position, Harvard Business Review, Vol.
85, Iss. 11, pp. 110-120.
Delaney,L.,Gubbins, S.A.,Harmon,C. ( 2010) Report on International Students in the Irish
Universities
Frery, F. (2006) The Fundamental Dimensions of Strategy, MIT Sloan Management Review,
Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 71-75.
Lynch, R.L. (2009) Corporate Strategy, 5th Edition, Harlow, Financial Times Prentice Hall,
Chps. 1 & 2.
Marginson, S. (2007) The global positioning of Australian higher education:
Where to from here?, The University of Melbourne Faculty of Education
Dean’s Lecture series.
Mintzberg, H. (1990) Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management, Strategic
Management Journal, 11, 171-195.
Porter, M.E. (2008) The Five Forces that Shape Strategy, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86,
Iss. 1, pp. 78-93.
18
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Definitions
Is it important to understand what is meant by the terms used in the context of this paper. By
international education it might be interpreted as an education that imparts an “intercultural
understanding which encourages the convergence of ideas and solutions to strengthen
peace” (p.9) (UNESCO 1996),however for the purposes of this paper it signifies the market
for International Education as a commercial opportunity arising from fee paying International
Students. Within that definition the distinction identified by Marginson is important,
international education “onshore” (International Students attend educational institutions in
the exporting country) versus “offshore” (the exporting institution provides education at
physical campuses located in the importing country) (Marginson 2006).
Internationalisation is defined as “the process of integrating an international, intercultural or
global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of higher education” (Carpentier
2008) and is an essential prerequisite to attracting International Students. If
Internationalisation is a process which enables the institution to best position itself to attract
“onshore” International Students, globalisation refers to the process of locating operations,
either physically or virtually, within the borders of importing countries around the world. By
International Student it is meant a consumer of onshore International Education as opposed to
the UNESCO understanding of the term (a student with an education that reflects
international aspirations).
APPENDIX 2
Other Relevant Strategy Models
While it would be a useful tool if one was determining whether to enter the international
tertiary education market place or analyse existing competitive rivalry, Porter’s 5 forces
model provides little illumination of the internationalisation strategy pursued by Monash.
Furthermore Porter’s model neglects the key component of the culture of the organization in
his analysis.
19
It might be noted however that there is some evidence for Porter’s finding (Porter 1990) that
fierce competition in the home market underpins the evolution of good international
competitors, Victoria State is home to a number of the Group of Eight strategic group within
the Australian University industry.
It would appear that Blue Ocean Strategy (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005) has more in common
with Christensen’s analysis of disruptive innovation as a method of redefining the parameters
on which a market competes. With its focus on strategic leaps out of “competing in
overcrowded industries” ibid, its narrow evidence base makes it unlikely to be a generic
strategy option and does not advance the analysis in this paper.
Value chain and value network analysis are also beyond the scope of the current paper and
through the lens of this paper are unlikely to add further illumination beyond that achieved by
RBV and Core Competence to the analysis of the sustainable competitive advantage of
Monash.
APPENDIX 3
How the globalisation strategy of Monash addresses the risks identified in the Pestel and
SWOT
The benefits of their sustainable competitive advantage include a mitigation of many of the
key risk drivers identified in the PESTEL and SWOT:
1. Protection from scale of falls in onshore international student numbers: The biggest
falls in international student enrolments due to the recession and strong Australian
dollar will be felt by the non-Group of Eight universities, not by highly selective
universities such as Monash which can attract students previously expecting to study
at less prestigious universities (Moodie 2010).
2. Monash University's reliance international student fees are higher than the national
average at 18%. “However, 38% of Monash's International Students study offshore at
Monash campuses, much higher than the average of 26% across all universities. And,
to that extent, Monash is also protected from changes in student visa requirements
and the value of the Australian dollar.” Ibid (Moodie 2010).
3. From the offshore capital intensive campuses to the onshore capital intensive research
facilities, Monash has built up assets that complement each other where an offshore
undergraduate will work towards an onshore post graduate qualification at a Monash
facility due to their high research standing. Due to the time and cost involved other
institutions may be unable to duplicate benefits of the strategy long term thereby
giving rise to a sustained competitive advantage.
4. Both Malaysian and South African campuses have now become highly embedded
thereby making it difficult for local or global competitors to compete - Monash
University at Sunway(Malaysia) is working towards it objectives of being one of the
research power houses of South East Asia with substantial support for research from
industry and the Malaysian government. While South Africa recently achieved its
participation with the National Research Foundation (Burger 2010).
5. The competitive advantage of Monash is unlikely to be undermined by Christensen’s
belief that “competence residing in proprietary processes is also built upon
20
temporary underpinnings” (Christensen 2001). His examples of BMW crash text
software and DuPont’s proprietary experience with new organic compounds is not
applicable to Monash as their core competence in respect of globalisation resides in
the tacit knowledge of the staff in the organisation.
APPENDIX 4
Monthly Summary of International Student Enrolment YTD August 2010
Sector
YTD Aug
YTD Aug
Growth on YTD Aug
09
YTD Aug
YTD Aug
2009
2010
Higher Education
197,731
VET
2009
2010
214,984
8.7%
83,877
86,061
2.6%
202,889
205,968
1.5%
102,445
94,604
-7.7%
ELICOS
107,825
88,108
-18.3%
76,224
58,211
-23.6%
Schools
26,214
23,414
-10.7%
11,810
9,989
-15.4%
Other2
28,876
28,795
-0.3%
22,650
22,148
-2.2%
Total in Australia
563,535
561,269
-0.4%
297,006
271,013
-8.8%
Top 5 nationalities contributing 57.3% of Australia’s enrolments in all sectors
Nationality
YTD Aug
YTD Aug
2009
2010
Nationality
YTD
Growth on YTD Aug
09
Double-digit increases and decreases in markets with over 4,000 enrolments
{{outside top 5}}
Growth on YTD Aug 09
Growth on YTD Aug 09
Share of all nationalities
Rank
Aug 10
China
139,447
India
152,826
108,292
9.6%
90,753
27.2%
-16.2%
16.2%
Republic of
Korea
31,915
30,570
-4.2%
5.4%
Nepal
19,772
-10.6%
7
Vietnam
20,685
23,555
13.9%
4.2%
Saudi Arabia
12,194
10.1%
10
Malaysia
22,433
22,728
1.3%
4.0%
Pakistan
7,542
11.8%
16
Other
Nationalities
240,763
240,837
0.0%
42.9%
Hong Kong
7,085
-16.4%
18
All
Nationalities
563,535
561,269
-0.4%
100.0%
Philippines
4,344
20.9%
23
More information is available
at:
http://aei.dest.gov.au/AEI/MI
P/Statistics/Default.htm
Mauritius
France
4,254
4,131
13.6%
-16.6%
24
25
21
Source:
http://aei.gov.au/AEI/Statistics/StudentEnrolmentAndVisaStatistics/2010/2010Aug_Monthly
Summary_pdf.pdf
APPENDIX 5
Identifying the Resources of Monash in respect of Internationalisation
Below the tangible and intangible resources relevant to internationalisation identified in
Monash documentation filtered according to the uniqueness tests outlined above.
Tangible Resources

Physical global campuses: Along with Malaysia and South Africa, their Prato Centre
has raised the profile of Monash University in Europe. Their global campuses in other
countries are capital intensive, to date $100 million spent on South African facility
( Lane 2010).
Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason: Passes the “uniqueness” tests when the resource is taken in combination with
their unique resource of corporate culture.

Staff: The University’s stated objective is to be known for the way that they
successfully combine internationalism with research-led teaching.
Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason: Is not inimitable by importing countries or competitors.

Research facilities: Monash has traditionally concentrated on high capital cost
projects research facilities such as the Australian Synchrotron which makes it difficult
for other universities to compete directly. Monash University now has the top-ranking
biomedical research departments in Australia and houses the world-ranking Monash
Institute of Medical Research.
Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason: While this asset does support the competitive advantage of Monash it is not
inimitable by importing countries or competitors.
Intangible Resources

Internationalised Curriculum: Monash has consistently expanded its International
Students population by thorough internationalisation of its curriculum in many subject
areas.
Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
22
Reason is threshold: All institutions seeking to attract international students require
this as a minimum requirement.

Subject disciplines taught: Monash has traditionally concentrated on highly
regulated/restricted professions (such as medicine) where the providers track record
and longevity are key considerations for students. In these fields Monash has
broadened and deepened its tutoring thus making it less economically attractive for
competitors to enter the market for that discipline whereas for example in the business
school market it is far easier for new entrants to undermine existing market positions.
Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason is unique: It takes many years to ensure that an institution’s qualifications are
accepted by the relevant regulatory bodies and once the market is sufficiently
resourced it is difficult for new entrants to enter and achieve accreditation.

International Collaboration: Priority Partnerships is the term Monash gives to its
international collaboration strategy. The Partnerships involve a range of activities in
research, education and management collaborations (Fahey 2009b). Specific examples
include the research academy with the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay and the
development of extensive student exchange and research collaborations with Sichuan
University.
Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold: All universities internationally are seeking to achieve high
quality international collaborations and while the perceived quality of the initiating
institution may be key to the quality and quantity of partnerships it does not pass the
tests of uniqueness.

Student international experience - Monash Passport Programme provides experiences
for students in plural campuses, countries and disciplines. The programme involves
links with more than one hundred universities in thirty countries.
Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason this is a unique resource: Monash dedicates a considerable budget to ensuring
that its Australian students can spend time at each of the Monash global campuses
thereby supporting its continued selection as provider of first choice in the home
market and providing the critical mass of numbers to fledgling global campuses.

High Quality results for its internationalised education programmes from relevant
quality assurance audits carried out by Australia's Committee for Quality Assurance
in Higher Education. Monash was recognised as Australia's University of the Year for
its internationalisation of undergraduate education as far back as 1994.
Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold is that in the highly competitive market for international students
high quality is a minimum requirement.

Pre-existing substantial international student population: A key determinant in
destination choice on the part of International Students is a pre-existing substantial
international student population (Mazzarol 2002).
Category: THRESHOLD RESOURCE.
Reason is threshold is that in the highly competitive market for international students
this is a minimum requirement.
23

Corporate Culture: In a conversation I had with UU Professor Mark Durkin about his
experience in Monash he stated:
“The perspective I gained from my few months there was that Monash is
engaged in a real strategy for international expansion”.
The organisation regards it as a key long term strategy and signified its intent by
appointing a Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Global Engagement. Therefore it could be
argued that the organisation displays at all levels the obsession in their quest for
internationalisation that Hamel and Prahalad (2005) would term “strategic intent”.
Category: UNIQUE RESOURCE.
Reason this is considered to be unique is outlined in further detail below in the
Evolution Path Analysis.
Identifying the Competences in respect of Internationalisation
Turning now to identifying the competences of Monash in respect of Internationalisation
using the Hamel tests for singling out the core competences.

Leveraging of Monash international partnerships in North America and Europe to
obtain more international research funding and international experience for students.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason is threshold: It does not pass the test as all institutions are now pursuing this
strategy of developing partnerships and the strategy of Monash may be imitated.

Making itself first choice for more Australian students, without this funding base the
costs involved in international expansion is not sustainable.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason: It is an objective of all Australian universities to maximise student numbers
and the strategies of Monash may be imitated.

Excellence in education: A key objective of Monash has been to ensure that their
degrees become synonymous with innovation and educational excellence.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason: It is an objective of all Australian universities competing for international
students to have high standards and the strategy of Monash may be imitated.

Excellence in management – Monash strategic documents place considerable
emphasis on effective cost management and efficiency.
Category: THRESHOLD COMPETENCE
Reason: It is an objective of all Australian universities competing for international
students to achieve operational efficiency.

Embedding campuses abroad within local eco-systems: a global campus can only
survive and grow if it can rapidly integrate itself within the eco system of research
grants, degree accreditations and increasing student numbers from the host country
24
using alumni contacts, tacit knowledge in the organisation and the credibility/track
record of the organisation. Porter would term this access based positioning (Porter
1996).
Category: CORE COMPETENCE
Reason: This competence passes the tests of inimitability, ability to leverage to many
markets and it makes a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefit of
the end product both for domestic Australian students (via the Monash Passport) and
the students in the importing nation.
25