World Development Report 2004: through the lenses of Marketing of Education Service in India
Dr. Amalesh Bhowal,Professor, Department of Commerce, Assam University.
E-mail: amalesh_b1@rediffmail.com
1.1 Introduction:
Article 10, contained in the Declaration On The Responsibilities Of The Present Generation Towards Future Generations, mentions that “The present generations should ensure the conditions of equitable, sustainable and universal socio-economic development of future generations… Education is an important instrument…”
There is a new looking at the world of education using the lenses of marketing. Evidence is the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It aimed at deregulating international markets in services, including education. Corollary: Education is a commodity too which can be traded; in other words, there exists ‘Educational Service Market. To operate in that market, we need Principles and Theories for Marketing of Education Service.] “The idea behind these principles is the creation of a open, global market place where services, like education, can be traded… GATS covers the educational services of all countries whose educational systems are not exclusively provided by the public sector, or those educational systems that have commercial purposes.”
In the mean time, the World Bank has published “World Development Report 2004 – Making Services Work for Poor People”. It provides a practical framework for making the services that contribute to ‘human development work’ for poor people. The report included services that have the most direct link with human development – education, health, water, sanitation, and electricity.
1.2 Main Objective of the paper:
In the backdrop of the above-mentioned International Prescriptions, the paper attempted to explore about the rationality of application of Principles of Service Marketing and lessons to be learnt from World Development Report 2004 regarding Marketing of Education Service.
1.3 Rationality of the study:
This type of study may lead to the understanding of the debate whether “Marketing of Education Service” is synonymous with the “Commercialisation of Education Service”.
2.1 Marketing of Education Service [MES]:
Marketing of Education Service refers to performing of activities [either with profit motive or service motive] which directs the flow of educational goods and services from the producer, provider and developer to the consumer of goods and services to satisfy the needs of parties involved [i.e. policy makers, provider and customers] like Psychological, economic and safety, Social, esteem and self-actualisation needs.
2.2 Current Failure of MES:
Current Education Services to the poor are failing poor people due to: –
[1] Diversion of large share of the education budget spending towards the non-poor,
[2] Non-reaching of the share of the budget, directed to the poor, to the front line service providers
[3] Disincentives to service providers, Prevalence of public corruption and undesirable political influence in education,
[4] Lower level demand for education because of cultural factors.
Thus, education failed because of over dominance of Finance function; and under importance of Marketing Function.
2.3 Rationality Of Adopting The Principles Of Service Marketing In MES:
The report asks “putting poor people at the centre of the service provision”. This is akin to the thinking of Customer centric marketing of Srvices. The societies, generally, choose the long route because there are evidences of market failures. Similarly the societies feel traditional short route [i.e. consumers’ power over providers] is inadequate viewed from equity-dimension. But there exists evidences of the “government failures” associated with the long route; and, “they may be so serve that, in some cases, the market solution may actually leave poor people better off”. This is necessary for balancing the problems associated with the long route of accountability with the short route.
2.4 Dimensions Of MES:
Dimensions in respect of the Marketing of Education Service are of two types:
[A] Marketing functions related to educational goods: – These functions include [1] Marketing Research and [2] Targeting customers with appropriate Market Mix i.e. Developing, Pricing, Promoting, and, Distributing Educational Goods or Educational product.
[B] Marketing functions related to educational services: – These functions include [1] Marketing Research and [2] Targeting customers with appropriate Market Mix i.e. [a] Developing Product, [b] Pricing, [c] Promoting, [d] Distributing, [e] Orienting in-house People, [f] Processing, [g] Providing Physical evidence, [h] having and following policy, and, [i] Ensuring Peoples Participation in Education Service.
Interestingly, the report seems to be absolutely silent in respect of ‘Marketing functions related to educational goods’.
2.5 Relationships, Triangle And Types In MES:
The report argued for three key relationships in MES: [a] Between poor people and providers, [b] between poor people and policymakers, and [c] between policy makers and providers. Thus, there exists Education Service Marketing Triangle. Policy Makers, service providers and customers/poor people in fact, should work together for MES [from diagram]. But they require three different types of marketing -
[a] Internal marketing between Policy Makers and Providers-to enable service promise.
[b] External Marketing between Policy Makers and Customers/poor people – to make promises.
[c] Interactive Marketing or Real–time Marketing between Providers and Customers – to keep promises made. There must be perfect alignment in the three different type of Marketing.
