IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i5p1881-d327272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Key Quality Attributes for Computational and Sustainable Higher Education Strategy Implementation in Saudi Arabia

Author

Listed:
  • Saleh Alkhodhair

    (Research Chair of Artificial Intelligence (RCAI), Department of Information Systems, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ahmed Alsanad

    (Research Chair of Artificial Intelligence (RCAI), Department of Information Systems, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia)

  • Khaled Alghathbar

    (Information Systems Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia)

  • Abdu Gumaei

    (Research Chair of Artificial Intelligence (RCAI), Department of Information Systems, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11543, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

Higher education institutions (HEIs) in many developed and developing countries are facing big challenges in terms of quality in the face of growing global demand. Ensuring quality education is necessary to secure future prosperity and promote sustainable development. Hence; to ensure the success and sustainability of higher strategy; it is necessary for HEIs to improve the quality of strategy implementation processes and address the dynamic complexities of their attributes to identify areas for improvement. However; there are obvious issues associated with strategy implementation related to process modeling; automation; dynamic complexity; and cognitive limitations. This research is a step toward bridging the gap in adopting computational models in the higher education strategy implementation process to foster its automation and promote its sustainability. The aim of this research is to study the phenomenon of computational strategy implementation in the higher education domain using grounded theory to understand the criteria and quality attributes of the strategy implementation process and to generate a descriptive and explanatory model for strategy quality attributes (SQAs) of higher education; which entails the implementation of automated technology and computational models for more effective and sustainable strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Saleh Alkhodhair & Ahmed Alsanad & Khaled Alghathbar & Abdu Gumaei, 2020. "Key Quality Attributes for Computational and Sustainable Higher Education Strategy Implementation in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:1881-:d:327272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1881/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1881/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. Stefan Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    3. Ngai-Ling Sum & Bob Jessop, 2013. "Competitiveness, the Knowledge-Based Economy and Higher Education," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(1), pages 24-44, March.
    4. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    5. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 243-270, March.
    6. Henry Mintzberg, 1978. "Patterns in Strategy Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(9), pages 934-948, May.
    7. Gerry Johnson & Leif Melin & Richard Whittington, 2003. "Micro Strategy and Strategizing: Towards an Activity‐Based View," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 3-22, January.
    8. Ron Sanchez, 1995. "Strategic flexibility in product competition," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 135-159.
    9. Noble, Charles H., 1999. "Building the strategy implementation network," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 19-28.
    10. Kevin Zheng Zhou & Fang Wu, 2010. "Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 547-561, May.
    11. Richard J. Boland & Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi, 1995. "Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 350-372, August.
    12. Sillanpää, Antti & Laamanen, Tomi, 2009. "Positive and negative feedback effects in competition for dominance of network business systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 871-884, June.
    13. Charmaz, Kathy, 1990. "'Discovering' chronic illness: Using grounded theory," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 1161-1172, January.
    14. Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 2011. "Computational Modeling for What-Is, What-Might-Be, and What-Should-Be Studies---And Triangulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1195-1202, October.
    15. T.K. Das & Bing‐Sheng Teng, 1999. "Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes: An Integrative Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 757-778, November.
    16. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    17. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    18. Stefan N. Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    19. Waissi, Gary R. & Demir, Mustafa & Humble, Jane E. & Lev, Benjamin, 2015. "Automation of strategy using IDEF0 — A proof of concept," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 106-113.
    20. Colin Eden & Fran Ackermann & Steve Cropper, 1992. "The Analysis Of Cause Maps," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 309-324, May.
    21. Helmy H. Baligh & Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 1996. "Organizational Consultant: Creating a Useable Theory for Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1648-1662, December.
    22. Sterman, John., 1994. "Learning in and about complex systems," Working papers 3660-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arunachalam, S. & Ramaswami, Sridhar N. & Patel, Pankaj C. & Chai, Linlin, 2022. "Innovation-based strategic flexibility (ISF): Role of CEO ties with marketing and R&D," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 927-946.
    2. Philipp Nitzsche & Bernd W. Wirtz & Vincent Göttel, 2016. "Innovation Success In The Context Of Inbound Open Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-38, February.
    3. Gelhard, Carsten & von Delft, Stephan, 2016. "The role of organizational capabilities in achieving superior sustainability performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4632-4642.
    4. Jin Li & Lulu Zhou & Xufan Zhang & Zhihong Chen & Feng Tian, 2018. "Technological Configuration Capability, Strategic Flexibility, and Organizational Performance in Chinese High-Tech Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    5. Haarhaus, Tim & Liening, Andreas, 2020. "Building dynamic capabilities to cope with environmental uncertainty: The role of strategic foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    6. Lin, Yini & Wu, Lei-Yu, 2014. "Exploring the role of dynamic capabilities in firm performance under the resource-based view framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 407-413.
    7. Thorsten Grohsjean & Tobias Kretschmer & Nils Stieglitz, 2011. "Performance Feedback, Firm Resources, and Strategic Change," DRUID Working Papers 11-02, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    8. Liu, Yi & Liao, Yonghai & Li, Yuan, 2018. "Capability configuration, ambidexterity and performance: Evidence from service outsourcing sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 343-352.
    9. Sebastian Junge & Johannes Luger & Jan Mammen, 2023. "The Role of Organizational Structure in Senior Managers' Selective Information Processing," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1178-1204, July.
    10. Yaqun Yi & Yuan Li & Michael A. Hitt & Yi Liu & Zelong Wei, 2016. "The influence of resource bundling on the speed of strategic change: Moderating effects of relational capital," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 435-467, June.
    11. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    12. Pettus, Michael L. & Kor, Yasemin Y. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2007. "A Theory of Change in Turbulent Environments: The Sequencing of Dynamic Capabilities Following Industry Deregulation," Working Papers 07-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    13. Zhang-Zhang, YingYing & Rohlfer, Sylvia & Varma, Arup, 2022. "Strategic people management in contemporary highly dynamic VUCA contexts: A knowledge worker perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 587-598.
    14. Iman Seoudi & Matthias Huehn & Bo Carlsson, 2008. "Penrose Revisited: A Re-Appraisal of the Resource Perspective," Working Papers 14, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.
    15. Nay Chi Khin Khin Oo & Sirisuhk Rakthin, 2022. "Integrative Review of Absorptive Capacity’s Role in Fostering Organizational Resilience and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, October.
    16. Peters, Matt D. & Wieder, Bernhard & Sutton, Steve G. & Wakefield, James, 2016. "Business intelligence systems use in performance measurement capabilities: Implications for enhanced competitive advantage," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 1-17.
    17. Jörg Claussen & Christian Essling & Christian Peukert, 2018. "Demand variation, strategic flexibility and market entry: Evidence from the U.S. airline industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(11), pages 2877-2898, November.
    18. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    19. Pantic-Dragisic, Svjetlana & Söderlund, Jonas, 2020. "Swift transition and knowledge cycling: Key capabilities for successful technical and engineering consulting?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    20. Langley, Paul & Rieple, Alison, 2021. "Incumbents’ capabilities to win in a digitised world: The case of the fashion industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:1881-:d:327272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.