Bachelor Thesis in Business Administration
Atlantis Program
Eco-Friendliness As A University Choice
Factor
− A Study Of Swedish Students’ Attraction Towards Linköping
University
Hesam Jafaei
Manon Lespinasse
Supervisor: Nandita FarhadSpring semester 2015
ISRN number: LIU-IEI-FIL-G--15/01283--SE
Department of Management and Engineering
Title:
Eco-Friendliness As A University Choice Factor – A Study Of Swedish Students’ Attraction Towards Linköping University
Authors:
Hesam Jafaei & Manon Lespinasse Supervisor:
Nandita Farhad Type of publication:
Bachelor Thesis in Business Administration Atlantis Program
Undergraduate level, 15 credits Spring semester 2015
ISRN number: LIU-IEI-FIL-G--15/01283--SE Linköping University
Department of Management and Engineering www.liu.se
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis is the final part to complete our Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration and Economics at Linköping University in Sweden, as a part of the Atlantis program.
We would like to express our gratitude to all the participants of this thesis process, whether it be as counselors, contributors or influencers in either intellectual help or moral support, and most particularly to:
• Nandita Farhad, our tutor, for her continuous support, advice and encouragements;
• Ida van der Woude, who kindheartedly took time to answer our questions and provided us with valuable information;
• Hugo Guyader, for his advice regarding the writing of our survey;
• Omar Moushe Ashak for her helpful answers to our statistical concerns; • Our peer-groups, for their irreplaceable feedback and active contribution
during our refreshing discussions;
• The Swedish students from Campus Valla who made this whole project possible by kindly answering our survey;
Hesam Jafaei & Manon Lespinasse Linköping, Sweden
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between eco-friendliness as part of University Social Responsibility (USR) and the impact it has on students and their attraction towards a university. Previous research have so far not investigated on such a connection due to a general focus on the private sector, companies and therefore Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
However, the literature is full of workable information, theories and conclusions through the acceptance of a specific model considering students as customers. It makes the assumptions being made within the private sector applicable to the public sector of the higher education. The latter is a driving force for any country’s economy by training and shaping a large number of future professionals and citizens. Yet, so far, barely any association has been made with another growing consideration of our developed economies: eco-friendliness and the protection of the environment.
The present quantitative study seeks to find the existence of a positive impact of the implementation of eco-friendly measures by Linköping University on Swedish students, notably in terms of attractiveness.
Our findings demonstrate that most of LiU Swedish students are attracted towards an eco-friendly university, around 44% of them consider eco-friendliness as a university choice factor and the performance of Linköping University (LiU) in this domain is largely appreciated. Therefore, LiU benefits from a positive public image through its eco-friendly profile. It thus enables and favors attractiveness among Swedish students, even if the latter is seen as improvable, notably through its advertisement since it is thought to be a possible competitive advantage.
Keywords: Linköping University, University Social Responsibility, USR, Eco-friendliness, Corporate Social Responsibility, CSR, Public Sector, Attractiveness, Higher Education, Sweden, University choice, Impact.
Table of Contents
1. BACKGROUND ... 1
1.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT ... 7
1.2. AIM OF RESEARCH ... 7
1.3. RESEARCH QUESTION ... 8
1.4. CONTRIBUTION ... 9
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 10
2.1. THE STUDENT-‐CUSTOMER MODEL ... 10
2.2. CSR AS A STRATEGY THROUGH BRAND IMAGE ... 12
2.3. CUSTOMERS ATTRACTIONS TOWARDS CSR AND ITS ENVIRONMENTAL DIMENSIONS ... 14
2.4. DEFINING ECO-‐FRIENDLINESS ... 15
2.5. ATTITUDE AND BEHAVIOR TOWARDS ECO-‐FRIENDLINESS ... 16
2.6. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ITS ATTRACTING SIGNALS ... 17
2.7. SUMMARY OF THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 20
3. METHODOLOGY ... 23
3.1. PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH ... 23
3.2. RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY ... 23 3.3. RESEARCH STRATEGY ... 25 3.4. RESEARCH APPROACH ... 25 3.5. RESEARCH METHOD ... 26 3.5.1. QUANTITATIVE METHOD ... 26 3.6. DATA COLLECTION ... 27
3.6.1. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW (KII) ... 27
3.7. SAMPLING ... 29
3.8. HYPOTHESES ... 30
3.9. DATA ANALYSIS ... 32
3.10. CRITERIA FOR QUALITY ... 34
3.11. RESEARCH ETHICS ... 36
3.12. LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ... 37
4. EMPIRICAL STUDY ... 38
4.5. THE CASE STUDY OF LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY (LIU) ... 38
4.6. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW ... 39
4.7. EMPIRICAL RESULTS: PRESENTATION OF SURVEY DATA ... 42
5. DATA ANALYSIS ... 59
5.1. CORRELATION RESULTS ... 60
5.2. HYPOTHESIS TESTING ... 82
5.3. HYPOTHESIS TESTING SUMMARY ... 84
5.4. SUMMARY OF THE DATA ANALYSIS ... 86
6. DISCUSSION ... 88
7. CONCLUSION ... 94
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 97
APPENDIX A ... 102
APPENDIX C ... 105
APPENDIX D ... 107
APPENDIX E ... 116
TABLE OF FIGURES: Figure 1: Pyramid ... 2
Figure 2: Intersecting Circles ... 2
Figure 3: Concentric Circles ... 3
Figure 4: Effects of CSP-‐Environment on Organizational Attractiveness ... 19
Figure 5: Theoretical Framework Overview ... 22
TABLE OF GRAPHS: ... Graphs 1: GENDER ... 42
Graphs 2: AGE ... 43
Graphs 3: FACULTY ... 44
Graphs 4: MAIN AREA OF STUDY ... 45
Graphs 5: START OF STUDIES ... 46
Graphs 6: DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF OR HABITS AS ECO-‐FRIENLDY ... 47
Graphs 7: RANKING “ECO-‐FRIENDLINESS” AS UNIVERSITY CHOICE FACTOR ... 48
Graphs 8: AWARENESS OF LIU’S ECO-‐FRIENDLINESS ... 49
Graphs 9: SATISFACTION OF LIU’S ECO-‐FRIENDLY ATTITUDE ... 50
Graphs 10: AWARENESS OF LIU’S ISB RANKING ... 51
Graphs 11: IF YOU WERE AWARE: DID IT HAVE ANY INFLUENCE ... 52
Graphs 12: RATE HOW MUCH FROM 1 TO 5 ... 52
Graphs 13: IF YOU WERE NOT AWARE: WOULD IT HAVE INFLUENCED YOU? ... 53
Graphs 14: RATE HOW MUCH FROM 1 TO 5 ... 54
Graphs 15: INCREASING LIU’S ADVERTISING ... 55
Graphs 16: IS AN ECO-‐FRIENDLY UNIVERSITY ATTRACTIVE ... 55
Graphs 17: RANKING OF THE ATTRACTIVENESS LEVEL ... 56
Graphs 18: MISSING DATA ... 58
Graphs 19: GENDER & ATTRACTIVENESS ... 60
Graphs 20: AGE & ATTRACTIVENESS ... 61
Graphs 21: GENDER & HABIT ... 62
Graphs 22: GENDER & IMPORTANCE ... 64
Graphs 23: AGE & HABIT ... 65
Graphs 24: AGE & IMPORTANCE ... 67
Graphs 25: FACULTY & HABIT ... 67
Graphs 26: FACULTY & IMPORTANCE ... 68
Graphs 27: STUDY & HABIT ... 71
Graphs 28: STUDY & IMPORTANCE ... 73
Graphs 29: ATTRACTIVENESS & ADVERTISING ... 74
Graphs 30: ADVERTISING & IF YOU WERE NOT AWARE ... 75
Graphs 31: ATTRACTIVENESS & IF YOU WERE NOT AWARE ... 76
Graphs 32: ADVERTISING & HABIT ... 77
Graphs 33: SATISFACTION & AWARENESS ... 79
Graphs 34: HABIT & AWARENESS ... 80
Graphs 35: ATTRACTIVENESS & HABIT ... 81
LIST OF TABLES: ...
Table 1: GENDER ... 42
Table 2: AGE ... 43
Table 3: FACULTY ... 44
Table 4: MAIN AREA OF STUDY ... 45
Table 5: START OF STUDIES ... 46
Table 6: HABIT ... 47
Table 7: IMPORTANCE ... 47
Table 8: AWARENESS ... 49
Table 9: SATISFACTION ... 50
Table 10: LIU ISB RANKING ... 50
Table 11: IF YOU WERE AWARE ... 51
Table 12: HOW MUCH DID IT INFLUENCE YOU? ... 52
Table 13: IF YOU WERE NOT AWARE ... 53
Table 14: HOW MUCH WOULD IT HAVE INFLUENCED YOU? ... 54
Table 15: ADVERTISING ... 54
Table 16: ATTRACTIVENESS ... 55
Table 17: ATTRACTIVENESS LEVEL ... 56
Table 18: MISSING DATA ... 57
Table 19: GENDER & ATTRACTIVENESS ... 60
Table 20: AGE & ATTRACTIVENESS ... 61
Table 21: GENDER & HABIT ... 62
Table 22: GENDER & IMPORTANCE ... 63
Table 23: AGE & HABIT ... 65
Table 24: AGE & IMPORTANCE ... 66
Table 25: FACULTY & HABIT ... 68
Table 26: FACULTY & IMPORTANCE ... 69
Table 27: MAIN AREA OF STUDY & HABIT ... 70
Table 28: MAIN AREA OF STUDY & IMPORTANCE ... 72
Table 29: ATTRACTIVENESS & ADVERTISING ... 73
Table 30: ADVERTISING & IF YOU WERE NOT AWARE ... 75
Table 31: ATTRACTIVENESS & IF YOU WERE NOT AWARE ... 76
Table 32: ADVERTISING & HABIT ... 77
Table 33: SATISFACTION & AWARENESS ... 78
Table 34: HABIT & AWARENESS ... 80
Table 35: ATTRACTIVENESS & HABIT ... 81
1. BACKGROUND
Over the past few years, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been increasingly studied, considered, and adopted through the implementation of various activities in the business sector (Chepkoech et al. 2013). According to CSR Europe (2003) “Corporate Social Responsibility is the way in which a company manages and improves its social and environmental impact to generate value for both its shareholders and its stakeholders by innovating its strategy, organization and operations” (Kakabadse et al., 2005, p.282).
However, even if it is understood that CSR is a concept linked with the companies’ work towards social improvements, since the beginning of the CSR era in the 1950s, its proper nature, and therefore definition, has always been alimenting a debate among researchers and theoreticians because of both its complexity and evolution over time with our societies (Geva, 2008; Carroll, 1999).
Indeed, CSR “means something, but not always the same thing to everybody” (Votaw, 1972, p.25). Those discrepancies mostly depend on the different kinds of relationships organizations enjoy with their stakeholders. The latter represents “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” (Freeman, 1984 cited in Bernardis et al., 2010, p.3). They are the pillars of the Stakeholders Theory (Freeman, 1984 cited in Littau, 2010), having become a reference when discussing CSR (Pedersen 2006 cited in ibid), which is opposed to the Shareholders Theory stating that business is about economic and not social goals (Bernardis et al., 2010).
It is critical to know that CSR is developed around three models: (1) The Pyramid (Carroll, 1991 cited in Geva, 2008) which founded the basic CSR theory: a hierarchy of separate responsibilities in which the economic one is the base (Geva, 2008); (2) The Intersecting Circles (Schwarz & Carroll, 2003 cited in Geva, 2008) highlighting the interrelationships within the CSR dimensions and (3) The Concentric Circles emphasizing how every economic responsibility also have a legal and ethical dimension (Committee for Economic Development, 1971 cited in Geva, 2008).
Figure 1: Pyramid (Geva, 2008) Philantropic Responsability
Ethic
Responsability
Legal
Responsability
Economic
Responsability
Philantropic Legal Economic EthicalFigure 3: Concentric Circles (Geva, 2008)
Indeed, each CSR model is based on three dimensions (a) the categories of social responsibility which consist of the economic (making profit), legal (obeying the law), ethical and philanthropic (being a good corporate citizen) responsibilities; (b) the categories of social responsiveness including reaction, defense, accommodation and pro-action; (c) the categories of social issues, in which the environment is found.
Finally, despite these CSR models, four groups of CSR theories have been distinguished (Garringa et al., 2004): (1) the instrumental theory seeing firms as welfare creators implementing strategies aiming at developing competitive advantages; (2) the political theory emphasizing the firms’ power and their responsibility towards the society; (3) the integrative theory in which businesses are seen as depending on the society and therefore incline to consider social demands; (4) the ethical theory interpreting CSR as a tool helping to incorporate ethics within firms’ values, notably regarding the sustainable development (Bernardis et al., 2010; Garringa et al., 2004).
In order to deepen the understanding of CSR, studies have been conducted in order to explore the benefits organizations obtained by implementing it. Jones et al. (2014) focused on the attraction companies gained. One emphasized dimension dealt with pro-environmental practices (ibid) since sustainability is an
Philantropic Ethical Legal Economi c
unquestionably fast-growing trend in both the business field and our societies (Geva, 2008).
Green Marketing
According to McDaniel & Rylander (1993) “Green Marketing”, which is environmentally oriented, is increasing together with the environmental consciousness; and will be one of the key businesses in the future. As a matter of fact, Wanninayake & Randiwela (2008, p.3) observed that the “Whole World is identifying the need of Green Marketing, Environmental Marketing and Ecological marketing […]”. Elkington (1994) and Porter & van der Linde (1995), cited in Baker (2003), stated that the eco-performance could be seen as a competitive advantage. This is illustrated by the example of The Co-operative Bank, which gained more than 200 000 customers as a result of its green marketing approach (Hedstrom et al., 2000). UK researchers also found out that the decision of a purchase is sometimes based on environmental aspects (Baker, 2003). This can be the result of the growing social and regulatory concerns for the environment (Wanninayake & Randiwela, 2008).
Some authors highlighted that implementing such socially responsible measures was about an integration within the society in order to improve a social, and more generally, public image (Chepkoech et al. 2013). It implies a strategic reflection on getting more attractive, and according to Bernardis et al. (2010) the CSR tools are, regarding public organizations, to be associated with the strategic tools of the public sector. Moreover, modern research is getting increasingly interested in how CSR applies to the public sector (Scholl, 2001). Thus, establishing a link between CSR, its environmental dimension, the attraction it represents and the public sector appears innovator as well as from current preoccupation.
CSR in Public sector
As a matter of fact, CSR have a different meaning in the public sector and in the private sector (Bernardis et al., 2010). The main differences lie in (1) their different concept of value creation; (2) their different financial perspectives: the final goal of a private company is a financial improvement while public industries need financial
funds to keep on achieving their institutional mission, which is their final goal; (3) the public sector has wider boundaries of CSR tools. While private firms aim at satisfying their shareholders through profits improvements with social responsibility as a constraint, public organizations aim at satisfying their stakeholders through the production of public value with an economic balance as a constraint.
University Social Responsibility (USR)
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries the social responsibility of the higher
education system has increasingly been highlighted and considered an intrinsic aspect (Vasilescu et al., 2009). Up until recently, the focus has mostly been on private sectors and corporates in general, even if some studies can be found dealing with public sector actions empowering CSR, without clearly naming it (Fox et al., 2002). As for the social responsibility of higher education, the corporate point of view has been shifted to a framework fitting public universities, since they are considered having a special type of organization. By implementing a “University Social Responsibility” point of view, not only do they meet the expectations of the stakeholders, which in this case would be the students, but they would also position themselves clearly within society (Vasilescu et al., 2009; Von Hauff, Nguyen, 2014). University Social Responsibility (USR) is defined in Reiser (2008) cited in Vasilescu et al. (2009, p. 4178) as “a policy of ethical quality of the performance of the university community (students, faculty and administrative employees) via the responsible management of the educational, cognitive, labor and environmental impacts produced by the university, in an interactive dialogue with society to promote a sustainable human development.”
According to Sanford (2011) and Jimena (2011), cited in Aamir et al. (2013), it is important for organizations to earn trust, be trusted and function in the highest ethical standards. By incorporating social responsibility in their strategy, they will be more competitive and attract more stakeholders (students) to their services (education). It is also considered that it enhances the alumni’s satisfaction, which in return, would attract more students. Many researchers argue that firms ability to attract and retain workforce increases with the adoption of social responsibility (Martinez, 2014). However, there has not been much research on whether universities, that are adopting social responsibility, are attractive for students. There
has been adequate research on the misplaced wisdom in regards to social responsibility and the additional costs that comes with it (Ambec & Lanoie, 2008), yet few research has been made on the attractiveness that comes along with social responsibility, and even fewer within the public sector, such as in the higher education. Could the higher education also benefit, in terms of attractiveness, from the implementation of environmentally oriented measures?
In the International Student Barometer (ISB), which is one of the largest online benchmarking surveys for students, the international students answer a question regarding the eco-friendliness of their exchange-university. The answers reflect the students attention and acknowledgement towards the efforts made. The results are then compared to other universities.
The world has opened its eyes on eco-friendliness. The society, consumers and businesses, are worried about the environmental pollution, unethical business practices and the natural environment. As a result, societies are in the process of changing their behavior. The customers’ environmental needs are flourishing and the organizations are benefiting from it. The business organizations have recognized the competitive advantage and opportunities gained by being eco-friendly (Wanninayake & Randiwela, 2008). So did the universities around the world (Lang, 2009). Nonetheless, there is a gap in the literature concerning the attraction of eco-friendliness, especially regarding its aspect as a factor for students’ University choice.
1.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT
Much research has been conducted in an attempt to understand the attraction of Corporate Social Responsibility on employees within private sectors (Greening & Turban, 2000; Jones et al., 2014). However, research lacks to inquire about the attraction of social responsibilities on students within public universities. Not only is there a lack of research, but the little research available is also from a Corporate Social Responsibility point of view, which does not fit the public universities. Along with the different expectations of the stakeholders, in this case the students, the universities need to implement a “University Social Responsibility” (USR) framework that fits their public organization.
Universities take measures to achieve certain social responsibility goals, and therefore act in an eco-friendly way on a daily basis. However, the students’ reaction, knowing the eco-friendliness of universities, is unknown. With measures taken towards eco-friendliness, a university could expect to impact students on their choice of university and therefore, attract them. If more studies were conducted looking at how students were interested in the eco-friendly profile of a university, not only would the understanding of students’ behavior towards eco-friendliness be improved, but universities would also be able to attract students more strategically. Nonetheless, there is a real gap concerning the eco-friendliness of universities, which would be a USR focus, and its attractiveness on students. Does the eco-friendly profile of a university appeal students?
1.2. AIM OF RESEARCH
The current study aims to understand the correlation between eco-friendliness and the attraction students have towards a university. It includes a focus on the importance of eco-friendliness as a factor for Swedish students in terms of university choice in the context of a Swedish university. The study only focuses on one public university, namely Linköping University.
1.3. RESEARCH QUESTION
The research will explore the following question:
• Does the eco-friendly profile of Linköping University have a positive impact on its perceived attractiveness among Swedish students?
Such a question led us to set up hypotheses:
H0: Less than 33.33% of the Swedish LiU students are attracted to LiU’s eco-friendliness
H1: At least 33.33% of the Swedish LiU students are attracted to LiU’s eco-friendliness.
H0: Less than 33.33% of the Swedish LiU students consider eco-friendliness as a university choice factor
H1: At least 33.33% of the Swedish LiU students consider eco-friendliness as a university choice factor
H0: Less than 33.33% of the Swedish LiU students consider the eco-friendly profile of LiU would have an impact, in terms of university choice
H1: At least 33.33% of the Swedish LiU students consider the eco-friendly profile of LiU would have an impact, in terms of university choice
1.4. CONTRIBUTION
This research is useful, not only for readers who would like to gain a general understanding within the field of eco-friendliness and its impact on public universities; it can also help universities, such as Linköping University, to gain further knowledge on whether its focus on eco-friendliness represents any positive effects on students, which could, later on, be considered as a competitive advantage. The authors consider this subject important because it links the attractiveness of a university with its environmental measures and whether it is worth developing. It also links topics that had not been adequately researched on so far. As a consequence of the increasing environmental consciousness, the need for a deeper and specific understanding of this area is growing.
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1. THE STUDENT-CUSTOMER MODEL
College education has increasingly been seen as a private good purchased by a customer (Bloom et al., 2006; Chaffee, 1998; Swagler, 1978; Wellen, 2005 cited in Saunders 2014).
This point of view regarding students’ identity seems to have emerged with the development of neoliberalism in the beginning of the 1970s, since such a vision promotes the commodification of education by defining the relationship between students and educational institutions as an economic exchange in which students become customers (Swagler, 1978; Biesta, 2004 cited in Saunders, 2014). This concept became the primary definition of college students in the mid-1970s (Franks, 1982 cited in Saunders, 2014).
Saunders (2014) furthers this educational orientation of students being customers of their college or university by emphasizing the fact that the latter is no longer only aiming at meeting curricular needs, but that it also aims at satisfying both educational and non educational desires. Educational institutions largely use this idea of “satisfaction” in order to tacitly refer to the “students as customers” concept. This customer orientation vision of students has been verified by many scholars and concerned professionals, to the point of coming up with the definition of the relationship between students and educational institutions as one of a service provider and its customers (Saunders, 2014).
However, in most cases, students do not pay for their entire education (Eagle & Brennan, 2007 cited in Saunders, 2014). Scholarships and subsidies, family support or any other possible financial support lower the price of education for students, making it lower, and in some cases much lower, than the costs required to produce it (Winston, 1999 cited in Saunders, 2014). Such a consideration is to be associated with the proper definition of a customer. The latter being characterized by its role as a purchaser, the different financiers involved in the payment of a student’s education would have to be considered customers as well (Brennan & Bennington, 1999; Schwartzman, 1995 cited in Saunders, 2014). Following the same approach,
the students whose education is fully financed by a third party would not be considered customers at all (Saunders, 2014).
Furthermore, education is not an actual product that can be purchased. It is more of a complex process involving creativity and therefore, which cannot be conceptualized as a “simple exchange” (Brule, 2004; Delucchi & Korgen, 2002; Newson 2004 cited in Saunders, 2014). The main reluctance towards the student-customer model lies in the vision of higher education as “completely separate and distinct from the business world”, especially concerning the notions of success and failure (Mark, 2013, p. 3). Finally, if we do consider education as a service, and not as a product, the relationship between a student as a customer and an educational institution presents a real lack of balance in terms of knowledge. Emphasizing the existing balance noticeable between any other customer and a service provider (Winston, 1999 cited in Saunders, 2014). Nonetheless, according to Hill (1995) and Lengnick-Hall (1996) cited in Mark (2013), customers are no longer considered as “passive recipients”, especially within the tertiary sector. In service delivery, customers are now viewed as active participants being “co-producers” of the service they receive. The idea is reinforced by Wilson et al. (2008, p. 273) who talk about “the unique roles played by customers in service delivery situations”. An illustration of this vision is made within the educational sector.
The presence in the factory is a determinant of a service customer, as well as the interaction with both employees and other customers. Thus, the classroom is considered as the “factory”, the place where the service is produced and consumed. In the classroom, students are interacting with an instructor, which has the role of employee from the educational entity, and other students, which represent the other customers. All the requirements are fulfilled to consider students as service customers: they are present in the factory, interacting with employees and other customers. They are present during the service production and can therefore contribute to it by asking questions or participating. In this way, students can control or contribute to their own satisfaction since they are participants in the service production and delivery. Students are thus customers, co-creating and consuming a service, in this case, an educational one. Additionally, Saunders (2014, p. 208) came up with the conclusion that “students cannot be anything but customers in a
world defined by a free-market logic”, a system in which the population is currently evolving, through the capitalist model characterizing most of our societies.
Since the present study is focusing on Swedish students in order to determine whether eco-friendliness is a university choice factor, it will be possible to consider them as customers, consuming the educational services provided by Linköping University.
2.2. CSR AS A STRATEGY THROUGH BRAND IMAGE
CSR has been included into different strategic performance models (Kolodinsky et al., 2010 cited in Liu et al., 2014). Porter & Kramer (2006) reveal that Corporate Social Responsibility can be more than just costs, constraints or charitable deeds. It can be an enabler of opportunities, innovations and competitive advantages.
CSR regroups various factors proved to influence brand building (Chomvilailuk & Butcher, 2010; Hoeffler & Keller, 2002; Roll, 2006 cited in Liu et al., 2014). Thus, an increasing number of companies incorporate CSR measures into their strategy in order to get branding benefits (Hoeffler & Keller, 2002 cited in Liu et al., 2014). These benefits are mostly defined by the brand equity, building a strong brand, which can be developed using Corporate Societal Marketing (CSM), when a “firm publicly claims its commitment to a cause” (Liu et al., 2014; Hoeffler & Keller, 2002, p. 87).
Overall, Kolodinsky et al. (2010) discovered that consumers’ positive attitudes toward companies’ social activities could affect their perceptions and therefore, behaviors accordingly. Thus, while recent studies linked CSR and marketing results, those dealing with CSR, brand quality and brand preference are rare, as well as the ones referring to the role of CSR influence in the service industry (Liu et al., 2014). The question concerning the fact that brand equity could lead to brand preference and therefore, to the customers choosing a specific brand rather than another similar one, is important to be considered. It has been years, since brand preference has been proved to be similar to purchase intention since the preference for a brand has been recognized as a good predictor of purchase and choice, which is still relevant (Banks, 1950; Taylor, 2001; Corte et al., 2010; Yoo et al., 2000 cited
in Liu et al., 2014). Once the importance of brand equity had been emphasized, many businesses decided to implement CSR programs in order to develop it as part of their strategy (Singh et al., 2008 cited in Liu et al., 2014). In fact, the performance in some CSR dimensions has been found to have positive impacts on a company’s brand image (Singh et al., 2008). According to the study of Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) cited in Liu et al., 2014, there is a positive relationship between a firm’s CSR activities and how consumers evaluate it. Another study from Luo and Bhattacharya (2006) cited in Liu et al., 2014, revealed how the implementation of CSR, for a company, contributed to the satisfaction of its customers and therefore, to financial success. Liu et al. (2014) end their reasoning by concluding, “it is generally suggested that customers respond positively towards positive CSR practices” (Brown & Dacin, 1997; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Ricks, 2005 cited by Liu et al., 2014, p. 182).
Thus, implementing CSR for any organization is recognized to engender positive impacts on customers. In such way, applying CSR measures within a university (University Social Responsibility) would generate positive impacts on customers, in other words, on students. Therefore, regarding the present study and research subject, it seems critical to consider the link between the specific dimension related to eco-friendliness, that is the environmental CSR, and these observed positive impacts on customers.
2.3. CUSTOMERS ATTRACTIONS TOWARDS CSR AND ITS ENVIRONMENTAL DIMENSIONS
Rankings dealing with companies’ CSR performances, such as Myriad’s, are proved to attract “considerable publicity” directly benefiting the ranked companies in spite of their sometimes-dubious methodologies (Porter & Kramer, 2006). The study of Singh et al. (2008) among British and Spanish customers revealed the environmental activities of a company were the second CSR dimension attracting the greatest degree of interest, especially among the British customers.
Moreover, implementing environmental CSR is not only benefiting manufacturers, but also service providers with both internal and external drivers e.g. meeting environmental policies and communicating a “green” image to improve a service provider’s reputation (Cheung et al., 2009; Marin & Ruiz, 2007 cited in Liu et al., 2014). In fact, environmental CSR is accessible as well as highly recognized by customers (Rahbar & Wahid, 2011 cited in Liu et al., 2014). In this way, “the influence of environmental CSR on consumer perceptions and intentions is widely recognized” (Liu et al., 2014, p. 183). Those words are illustrated by the work of Mohr and Webb (2005), which highlighted how manufacturers who put environmental CSR into effect benefited from a considerable positive effect on consumers’ purchase intentions, in addition to their company evaluation (Mohr & Webb 2005 cited in Liu et al. 2014). The same analyses were made within the tertiary sector establishing a direct correlation between a customer’s attraction to a bank and its reputation for its CSR involvement involving the environmental protection (Marin & Ruiz, 2007 cited in Liu et al., 2014). Thus, a firm’s eco-friendly brand image has been declared positively linked with customers’ satisfaction (Chen, 2010 cited in Liu et al., 2014). “With supportive evidence from the literature, implementing environmentally focused CSR programs should yield more favorable brand preference by customers” (Liu et al., 2014, p. 183).
However, very little research has been conducted in order to specifically study the relation between eco-friendliness and consumption habits of students (Zsóka et al., 2013).
2.4. DEFINING ECO-FRIENDLINESS
Wolfe & Shanklin (2001, p. 209) define the concept of being “green” as an action to “reduce the impact on the environment, such as eco purchasing or recycling”. By being “environmentally responsible”, organizations are improving their operational efficiency by “conserving resources and reusing them as much as possible” (Wu & Dunn, 1995, p. 22). However, the term “green” has different aspects and is called differently depending on the context it is used in (Brown et al., 1987). According to Han et al. (2009), the term “green” is not only being called “environmentally responsible” or “environmentally friendly”, but can also be labelled as “eco-friendly”.
The term “eco-friendly” is frequently used in a relative sense. The term can be used for products, services or even for organizations. When the products or services life-cycle analysis imposes a “reduction of negative externalities” of the production-consumption cycle, it is treated as eco-friendly. The evaluation of a product, service or organization eco-friendliness would consist of comparing them to similar products, services or organizations in order to define reference points in terms of eco-friendliness (Pastakia, 1998).
Having an eco-friendly product, service, organization or even process, which might seem easy, is hard in practice, since the absolute sense of “eco-friendliness” points out the “positive externalities for the environment”. However, since the term is used relatively, eco-friendliness specifies that there are no negative externalities for the environment (Pastakia, 1998). The term “eco-friendly”, within all industries, does not only just describe the actions towards being “green”, but also portrays a concealed desire (Pastakia, 1998). Whether it is to increase profits, boost image or attract more stakeholders. Eco-friendliness, in the case of a university, could boost the image, as well as attract more students. However, the behavior and decisions made could differ from person to person and from situation to situation.
2.5. ATTITUDE AND BEHAVIOR TOWARDS ECO-FRIENDLINESS
In a research conducted by Dahm et al., (2009) the question on whether “friendly attitudes predict “friendly behavior” is answered. It states that the eco-friendly behavior could, in addition to the indication of an environmental consciousness, indicate a green consumption. The eco-friendly attitude leads to an eco-friendly behavior such as, “recycling, energy conservation, water conservations, driving hybrid cars, carpooling, ozone protection” (Dahm et al., 2009, p. 197) and so on.
There are a few dimensions, which the researchers agree on, regarding the eco-friendly attitude. These dimensions consist of:
(1) Perceived severity of environmental problems (2) Inconvenience of being environmentally friendly (3) Importance of being environmentally friendly
(4) Perceived level of corporate responsibility to be eco-friendly
The first dimension deals with the observed severity of the environmental problems such as the limitation of resources. The second dimension recognizes that the inconvenience of being environmentally friendly is resisted, since “Recycling is not much trouble”. The third dimension emphasizes how important it is to be environmental friendly, e.g. that an electric car reduces the pollution. The fourth dimension points out that the business firms are and should aim at being environmentally responsible. All these attitude dimensions have different degrees of seriousness towards ecological problems (Han et al., 2011).
According to Roberts (1999, p. 559), environmentally conscious people are likely to “engage in eco-friendly consumer behaviors” and according to the research of Han et al. (2009) there is also a favorable attitude in the eco-friendly decision making process. However, a few researchers, such as Malback (1993) and Roberts (1996), mention that only a small fraction of those that are environmentally conscious actually act favorably towards eco-friendliness. Nonetheless, the more concerns a person has regarding the environment, the more that person’s decision-process
would be based on the eco-friendliness (Han et al., 2009). With the development of societal trends towards environmental concerns amongst students, there can be more decision-process made, based on eco-friendliness (Shetzer et al., 1991 cited in Hodgkinson & Innes, 2001). These decision-processes could simplify the understanding if students act favorably towards eco-friendly universities. However, these decision-processes can also easily be influenced by CSR.
2.6. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ITS ATTRACTING SIGNALS
According to Greening & Turban (2000) organizations can attract job applicants by empowering their Corporate Social Performance (CSP) progressively, since they differentiate themselves from other organizations (Rynes, 1991). While Corporate Social Responsibility is about the continuous improvement of both social and environmental actions, Corporate Social Performance is about the measurement of those improvements compared to the competitors (Luo & Bhattacharya, 2009).
Studies suggest that, by using the Signaling theory, the cause leading job applicants to be attracted by CSP can be better understood (Rynes et al., 1991; Jones et al., 2014). Jones et al. (2014, p. 385) argue that there are three signal-based mechanisms that explain the link between CSP and organizational attractiveness. They address it is through these signals that “job-seekers […] inform their perceptions and expectations about the organization”, and impact the job-seekers to feel attracted towards the organization.
According to Jones et al. (2014) the three mechanisms are:
(1) Anticipated pride from being affiliated with a prestigious organization (2) Perceived value fit
(3) Expected treatment
As stated in Celani & Singh (2010) the signal-based mechanism has been rarely tested. The relationship between the mechanism and the outcome or the assumption drawn from those outcomes has also rarely been proven. However, it is a good starting point as it gives a basic explanation of how the job-seekers react to CSP.
(1) Anticipated pride from being affiliated with a prestigious organization
The job-seekers’ attraction towards an employer gets influenced by the signals, which are sent out by the organization's’ reputation. Corporate Social Performance sends out the signal that the organization could be prestigious and valued by others, which in return convinces the pride of the job-seeker into wanting to be associated with the organization (Behrend et al., 2009; Jones et al., 2014). Jones et al. (2014) base their assumptions on the social identity theory, which states that people acquire some of their identity by the feeling of being a part of something, such as a part of an organization, mostly when it is an organization that could make that person feel more worthy. Being a part of an organization highly valued by others would be seen as affecting the job-seekers’ social approval. Behrend et al. (2009), cited in Jones et al., (2014, p. 386), found out that “a company’s environmental message on a website increased its organizational prestige and, in turn, participants’ job pursuit intentions”.
(2) Perceived value fit
According to Jones et al., (2014) some researchers observed that CSP enhances the attractiveness of an organization, since the signals can be interpreted as an organizational value. If this value fitted the value of the job-seekers, the attractiveness would be intensified, and the job-seekers would, in return, perceive it as “value fit”. Such perceived value fit is proved to be more attractive than other factors, e.g. pay or promotion. It also states that organizations with environmentally friendly practices are more attractive to job-seekers having pro-environmental values, such as preserving the natural environment.
(3) Expected treatment
Aguilera et al. (2007), cited in Jones et al. (2014), states that when CSP is directed externally, employees would see that as an indication of organizational concern for others within the organization as well. An externally directed CSP would be the practices done outside the organizations, such as pro-environmental practices. The
“prosocial orientation” of an organization sends out a signal to job-seekers, demonstrating that the organization cares about the welfare of the employees. The job-seekers would receive the “expected treatment” signal, and expect to be treated in a positive way (Jones et al., 2014).
The signals of an organization's prestige, values and expected treatment would enhance the attractiveness towards job-seekers, since people are prone to “pursue favorable outcomes” (Jones et al., 2014). Therefore, university social responsibility could send out the same signals as corporate social responsibility, attracting students with signals of perceived prestige, values and expected treatment.
Corporate Social Performance
Organizational Attractiveness Perceived Value Fit Anticipated Pride / Prestige Expected Treatment
Figure 4: A Model of the Effects of CSP-Environment on Organizational Attractiveness (Authors own creation, 2015)
2.7. SUMMARY OF THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
According to the literature (Bloom et al., 2006; Chaffee, 1998; Swagler, 1978; Wellen, 2005 cited in Saunders, 2014), the higher education has increasingly been seen as a good purchased by students from the 1970s and the development of the neoliberalism, making the latter customers. This point of view has, from its introduction, been dividing the theoreticians.
On one hand, some disagree stating that, regarding the proper definition of customer being a purchaser, the financiers of the educational service are the only ones to be considered customers, which excludes most of the actual students since only few of them finance their studies by themselves and pay the total amount of the tuition (Saunders, 2014). Moreover, the definition of education as a product and therefore, its association to the business world bothered more than one (Brule, 2004; Delucchi & Korgen, 2002; Newson, 2004 cited in Saunders, 2014). However, the vision evolved with the development of our societies as well as the tertiary sector until reaching the idea of “service customer”, no longer defining education as a product but still part of the business field. Finally, even when considered a service, some researchers still disapproved this student's identity model because of the discrepancy in terms of knowledge between students and educational institutions, a nonexistent gap in the business world between customers and their service providers (Winston, 1999 cited in Saunders, 2014).
Thus, on another hand, authors like Saunders (2014) approve this student-customer model by invoking how higher education institutions target satisfaction, tacitly referring to students as customers. In addition, Wilson (2008) defines a service customer as a person present in the factory and interacting with both employees and other customers, and illustrates it with the example of higher education students. Finally, a general remark of Saunders (2014) helps this model to be seen positively. He states that in a world defined by a free-market logic, as the one the population is living in through capitalism, students cannot be anything but customers. As a result, the authors can state that students can be considered as service customers and therefore, associated with customers’ behaviors and other characteristics.
CSR has been more and more included within strategic performance model because its role of innovation and competitive advantage has been highlighted, especially regarding the notion of brand image (Kolodinsky et al., 2010 cited in Liu et al., 2014; Porter & Kramer, 2006). Indeed, it has been proved to influence the latter. Having a good brand image implied customers interest and good evaluations regarding the organization implementing the CSR measures, and the positive attitude of the customers implies positive behavior like purchase intentions, which echoes brand preference, which is a goal for most of the organizations in the world. The environmental dimension of CSR has been specifically proved to attract customers, it has been observed second most attractive CSR dimension in the study of Singh et al. in 2008.
The benefits of CSR have also been proved beneficial for service providers (like universities), and therefore not only for manufacturers. Last year, Liu et al. (2014) recognized that the influence of environmental CSR on consumer perceptions and intentions is widely recognized, emphasizing the fact that implementing environmental CSR benefited the organization with increased purchase intentions and more favorable brand preference. In other terms, the environmental CSR is the dimension developing the eco-friendly profile of any organization implementing it. When there are no negative externalities for the environment, a product, service or organization can be considered as eco-friendly. However, the term “eco-friendly”, which is frequently used in a relative sense, can be labeled differently (Pastakia, 1998). The term “green”, “environmentally responsible” or “environmentally friendly” can, more or less, be characterized under the same category (Pastakia, 1998). It also implies a veiled motive, such as increasing profits, boosting image or attracting stakeholders, which in the case of a university would be the students (Han et al., 2009).
Different attitudes indicate different behavior outcomes (Dahm et al, 2009). People that are endowed with an environmental conscious are not only more likely to
“engage in eco-friendly consumer behaviors” but are also prone to eco-friendly decision-making processes (Roberts, 1999, p. 559; Han et al., 2009). The societal trend towards environmental concerns amongst student is indicating that more decision-processes are made based on eco-friendliness (Shetzer et al., 1991 cited in Hodgkinson & Innes, 2001). This trend towards environmental concerns is not
just increasing amongst student, but amongst organizations as well (Greening & Turban, 2000). These organizations implement CSR, which, as a consequence, sends out signals attracting job-seekers. The implementation of CSR benefits organizations by distinguishing themselves from other organizations. It also illustrates the organization as prestigious, enhances value perception and expected treatment (Rynes et al., 1991; Jones et al., 2014).
3. METHODOLOGY
There are a few important aspects to consider when conducting a research. This section is therefore, presenting the research strategy and design, as well as a deeper explanation of the reasons why this study has been conducted accordingly. The methods used to gather empirical data are being introduced as well as the sample and analysis method. Further, the limitations recognized and met while conducting this research are being addressed, together with issues of credibility, reliability and validity. One essential facet frequently forgotten in research studies is the importance of research ethics, which is highlighted in the finale section of this chapter.
3.1. PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH
The present study is based on an exploratory case study. It concerns initial research into a theoretical idea: students’ attraction towards eco-friendliness while in a situation of university choice. Thus, this research will, hopefully, lead to further future research.
3.2. RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY
In a matter of deeper understanding and in order to explicit the perspective with which the authors chose to lead this research and reflection, it has been decided to highlight the chosen philosophy.
To address the ontological question, a brief reminder of its proper meaning appears necessary. Ontology is to be associated with how we, as human beings, see the world. Bryman & Bell (2011) depict two possible ways under the terms of objectivism and constructionism (or constructivism). Being objectivist would be to assume that humans are confronted to external facts they cannot influence; social phenomena are independent from actors and minds, it is an objective reality. Being constructionist, on the contrary, is to be linked with a reality “constructed” by social actors’ perceptions and actions, and therefore a form and nature which is “in a constant state of revision” (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 22). The second notion that is to be cited while dealing with philosophy concerns the epistemology. The
epistemological question is to be related to how the knowledge is deducted and thus to the nature, origin and scope of the latter (Bryman & Bell, 2007). Two variations do exist within the epistemological position: the interpretive and positivist epistemology. Both refer to clarifying objectives in order to define what is to be possible to find out. In other words, how people think about facts. Even though its definition can vary according to different authors, positivism is a vision implying a connection between the world, such as objects or phenomena, and a human’s perception and thus understanding of it (Willig, 2004). Interpretivism is about interpreting a meaning of things with the idea of the no absolute truth; there is no statement of one reality. Mainly adopted in qualitative research, this view is when researchers want to provide causal explanations to an action and its effects.
These research philosophy choices have been strongly influenced by the following quote from Descartes (1968): “Those who are seeking the strict way of truth should not trouble themselves about any object concerning which they cannot have a certainty equal to arithmetical or geometrical demonstration”.
Thus, regarding the present study, the results expected and the overall vision the authors have of it, the ontological position has to be objectivist. Consequently, the epistemological consideration goes towards positivism, the heart of the subject dealing with students’ perception of eco-friendliness when choosing a university. Moreover, a positivist approach is allowing the authors to reach much more respondents. In the case of this research, such a parameter is critical since a quantitative research strategy is adopted. The accuracy of the survey conducted in order to collect the required data thoroughly depends on such a positivist point of view since it is about maximizing the representativeness of the sample (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
This adopted philosophy regroups every aspect of the present research: a theory developed in order to generate hypotheses that are tested in order to get a “scientific truth” (epistemology) through a survey based on the principle of deductivism (methodology) with science being conducted in a “value-free” way demonstrating objectivism (ontology) (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
3.3. RESEARCH STRATEGY
Kerliner (1986, p. 10) defines research as ”systematic, controlled, empirical, and critical investigation of natural phenomena guided by theory and hypotheses about the presumed relations among such phenomena.” Depoy & Gitlin (2010, p. 6) take that definition further by including “logical, understandable, confirmable and useful”.
To be able to conduct a research study in an academic context, it is fundamental to reflect and understand what kind of research approach to adopt. According to Bryman & Bell (2011) there are different ways to conduct an academic research: experimental design; cross-sectional or social survey design; longitudinal design; comparative design and case study design. Since the present study is based on a single organization, Linköping University, within a single geographical location, Campus Valla, it is conducted following a case study design.
As a result of the limited timeframe and resources met at a bachelor level, the authors are conducting a study entailing a detailed and intensive analysis of a single case study. This research also requires the usage of a formal sampling to accurately represent a population. Therefore, the case study approach appears to be the most beneficial.
3.4. RESEARCH APPROACH
Bryman & Bell (2011) emphasize the importance of linking the process of an academic research with a theoretical framework. The authors describe two contrasting approaches to link theory with research, namely deductive theory and inductive theory. An academic research, based on a deductive theory approach, starts the deduction process with a theoretical development, followed by the establishment of hypotheses deduced with theoretical considerations. From then on, the hypotheses are “subjected to empirical scrutiny” (Bryman & Bell, 2007, p. 17). On the contrary, while the inductive theory approach involves the same steps, the latter are developed in the opposite direction. The researcher comes up with a theory depending on the implication of the findings. According to Bryman & Bell
(2011, p. 14) “[…] deductive and inductive approaches are possibly better thought of as tendencies rather than as a hard-and-fast distinction.” Both approaches entail elements of one another. However, the authors define their academic research through an approach that has its tendencies found in the deductive reasoning, as they come up with hypotheses to be tested and do not aim to generate a new theory.
3.5. RESEARCH METHOD
In order to be able to establish a relationship between theory and research, an appropriate research method needs to be established and presented. There are three different research methods: quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. The one the researchers decided to adopt regarding their subject and the nature of the research question is the quantitative method.
3.5.1. QUANTITATIVE METHOD
Conducting a quantitative study enable researchers to acquire primary data, which is argued to give uniqueness to a research study. Primary data is the data collected by the researchers themselves.
The present research needs to quantify its problem: whether eco-friendliness attracts students when choosing a university. Therefore, a sample out of the larger population needs to be taken into consideration. In this sense, the quantitative method provides both an overview and statistical information enabling reliable statements. This study is a survey-based research (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
Besides primary data, researchers need to acquire secondary data. This category corresponds to information that have already been collected by other researchers as part of previous studies, or which can be provided by a third party. Secondary data is particularly useful as the process to obtain it is not as time consuming or as expensive as the one to gather primary data. In addition, secondary data help improving the understanding of a problem as well as supporting the researchers’ study (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
3.6. DATA COLLECTION
3.6.1. KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW (KII)
Conducting a KII allows the researchers to acquire information that is not documented, in order to provide a survey-based research with enough material. Therefore, the key informant interview is a supportive one having the intent to collect data; there is no interest in the “interviewee’s own behavior or that of others, attitudes, norms, beliefs, and values” (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 201). It deals with collecting secondary data from a primary source. The conducted KII aims at aiding the authors into both constructing their survey questionnaire and gathering critical secondary data, which does not require any analysis, and is developed in the empiricism section (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
Thus, an important part of the secondary data is gathered through a “Key Informant Interview” or “KII”. The chosen approach allows the authors to set the focus of the interview since the area of discussion wanted with the interviewee is known: the International Student Barometer (ISB) survey and more particularly its environmental section, as part of general questions. The flexibility of the method is critical since the authors want to adapt their questions according to both the answers they get along the interview and the information they want to figure out.
An interview guide has been established on the model of one of an in-depth interview for effectiveness, credibility and organization purposes. It lists areas to be covered in order to make sure the specific topics the authors are interested in are approached and the answers to their questions are found. The aim is for a freely spoken discussion during which the data is gathered by taking notes (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
3.5.2. SURVEY
In this study the researchers chose to conduct a self-completed questionnaire with the Swedish students of Linköping University as respondents. The term self-completed questionnaire indicates that the respondents answer the questions by completing the questionnaire by them selves. The participants read the questions
and answer it on their own. Instead of sending the survey form to participants through mail or e-mail contact, it has been decided to walk around Campus Valla asking respondents to complete the established questionnaire (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
Since there is no interviewer involved in the process of self-completed questionnaires, it consists of only few open questions compared to the amount of closed ones and an easy-to-follow design for it to be rather short. Such measures aim at making it easier for the respondents to answer the questions and therefore, reduce the “risk of ‘respondent fatigue’” (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In addition, the questionnaire is not cramped with text but should have both a clear presentation and clear instructions on how to respond (Appendix B).
The researchers are aware of the existence of some risks associated with self-completion. The case of a participant not understanding a question can be cited, in that case, he or she might just choose a random answer and therefore falsify the answer which could negatively impact the final results, considering that “there will not be an interviewer present to clear up any confusion” (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 262). There is also no possibility to contact any participant afterwards for some further elaborations or collection of additional data. The authors are aware of the possible response bias, which can occur within self-completion questionnaires, as part of the “social desirability effect” (e.g. students claiming to be more eco-friendly than what they really are) (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
However, the authors’ awareness regarding such hazards is helping them to maximize their chances to avoid them. Thus, before handing out the self-completed questionnaires, they are making sure the design of the form is both easily understandable and not causing any distress, since it could harm the potential answers. The “social desirability effect” where the responses are in line with “their perceptions of […] desirability”, is being avoided by the anonymity of the survey (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 271). The anonymity presents the respondents the possibility of not having anything to prove socially. The authors have decided to conduct the survey in English, as one of them is not Swedish. They are convinced the English language does not represent any barrier for the Swedish students. It is
believed that it is not impacting the results in any way. In this sense, it has been decided to conduct a pilot study with a sample composed of both LiU students and a doctoral student in Marketing: Hugo Guyader, in order to assure the quality of the survey since “piloting [...] is not solely to do with trying to ensure that survey questions operate well; piloting also has a role in ensuring that the research instrument as a whole functions well” (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 262). This pre-testing phase is critical to perfect the final survey questions.
Moreover, the use of self-completed questionnaires presents, as well, numerous advantages and sizeable assets. Therefore, implementing self-completed questionnaires is not only cheaper but also much easier to administer. This makes it also more efficient and effective for the authors, as bachelor students, to gather a large sample size. Unlike interviews, the questions are not asked in different ways or different orders (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
3.7. SAMPLING
The researchers have chosen to conduct their business research on Linköping University (LiU) and more particularly on Campus Valla; the reasons for such a decision are numerous. First, LiU is a public university, which, in addition, happens to be among the most eco-friendly universities in the world (based on the International Student Barometer): two criteria at the heart of the present study and research question. Then comes a convenient dimension; they are both currently studying in this university and precise campus. Such a detail cannot be left out regarding the resources and time pressure they are confronted with.
There are around 27,000 students studying at Linköping University (LiU). Since LiU is a large university, the researchers do not have enough time or resources to conduct a survey or interview of all the present student population. Therefore, a sample of students from the total population of 27,000 students is being made. The one collected for the present study needs to be a representative sample of all the Swedish students located on Campus Valla. The total student population is divided as following: 25,500 Swedish students and 1,500 international students. From the 25,500 students, 18,000 are studying at Campus Valla.