Understanding Universities in Ontario, Canada: An Industry Analysis Using Porter's Five Forces Framework

In analyses of higher education systems, many models and frameworks are based on governance, steering, or coordination models. Although much can be gained by such analyses, we argue that the language used in the present-day policy documents (knowledge economy, competitive position, etc.) calls for an analysis of higher education as an industry. In this paper, the university sector in Ontario’s higher education industry is analyzed by applying Michael Porter’s five forces framework defined by the following forces: the threat of new entrants, supplier power, buyer power, the threat of substitutes, and industry rivalry. Our assessment revealed that competition in Ontario’s higher education industry (university sector) is currently mixed. The findings suggest that policy-makers, the sector, and individual institutions will need to consider more seriously the impact of technology and globalization when seeking a competitive position for the Ontarian higher education system.

[1]  James A. Perkins,et al.  The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective , 1985 .

[2]  M. Porter.  The five competitive forces that shape strategy. , 2008, Harvard business review.

[3]  Rajani Naidoo.  Building or Eroding Intellectual Capital? Student Consumerism as a Cultural Force in the Context of Knowledge Economy , 2008 .

[4]  C. Hood.  The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management , 1998 .

[5]  B. Jongbloed.  Marketisation in Higher Education, Clark's Triangle and the Essential Ingredients of Markets , 2003 .

[6]  Glendell Jones,et al.  The Academic Senate and University Governance in Canada , 2004 .

[7]  Glendell Jones,et al.  The political economy of post-secondary education: a comparison of British Columbia, Ontario and Québec , 2009 .

[8]  Terry Anderson,et al.  The Theory and Practice of Online Learning , 2009 .

[9]  D. Dill.  Allowing the Market to Rule: The Case of the United States , 2003 .

[10]  W. Duczmal.  The Rise of Private Higher Education in Poland: Policies, Markets and Strategies , 2006 .

[11]  Jeroen Huisman,et al.  Accountability in higher education: Bridge over troubled water? , 2004 .

[12]  Colin Scott,et al.  Controlling modern government : variety, commonality and change , 2004 .

[13]  E. P. Michael.  Strategy and the Internet. , 2001 .

[14]  A. Usher,et al.  On the Brink: How the Recession of 2009 Will Affect Post-Secondary Education. Canadian Higher Education Report Series. , 2009 .

[15]  Karri A. Holley,et al.  Undergraduate Student Socialization and Learning in an Online Professional Curriculum , 2009 .

[16]  Clayton M. Christensen.  The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail , 2013 .

[17]  Naomi Rosh White,et al.  Tertiary Education in the Noughties: The Student Perspective. , 2006 .

[18]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning , 1994 .

[19]  M. Porter.  Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , 1985 .

[20]  Academic Careers from a European Perspective , 2002 .

[21]  Barbara Means,et al.  Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies , 2009 .