Should we teach in hybrid mode or fully online? A theory and empirical investigation on the service–profit chain in MBAs
Should we teach in hybrid mode or fully online? We examine the teaching model’s role (hybrid versus fully online) in the service–profit chain in higher education institutions. We find that faculty members’ satisfaction and the MBA program expectations improve MBA word-of-mouth by enhancing the MBA quality, MBA value, class satisfaction, and MBA loyalty. Additionally, we discover that the hybrid teaching model more strongly reinforces this chain of effects than the fully online model.
The pandemic has dramatically impacted all aspects of our lives, both personal and professional. Suddenly, in March 2020, working from home became the new normal for many people as offices were forced to close. In education, lockdowns meant that faculty had to quickly switch to remote teaching.
In the years leading up to the Covid-19 pandemic, online learning had already been increasing anyway, but lockdown meant that it had now become a necessity. The pandemic also led to another mode of teaching being introduced: a hybrid model connecting a classroom both to on-site and online students during synchronous teaching.
As schools slowly return to normal, many are offering different teaching options: fully online, or hybrid (50% in-person, 50% online), or all in-person.
With the successive periods of lockdown, online models of learning and working have become ingrained in our lives, and a 100% online programme does not seem to deter students, particularly as they can be considerably less expensive. In the 2020-2021 academic year in the United States, online MBA students actually outnumbered full-time in-person MBA students (45,038 vs 43,740). Worldwide, however, full-time MBA students still outnumber those in online programmes (78,061 to 53,281).
For many, fully online learning lacks the human element that hybrid learning offers. Furthermore, how do online programmes fare in terms of faculty and students’ satisfaction, MBA quality, attractiveness, loyalty and ultimately growth, when compared with hybrid programmes which offer the online/in person option. In an era of digital economy and competition, should we teach in hybrid or fully online mode to maximize our programmes’ reputation and success?
Together with colleagues, we examined both hybrid and fully online MBA teaching models using the Service Profit Chain. Developed in the 1990s, the Service Profit Chain illustrates the relationships between profitability, customer loyalty, and employee satisfaction, productivity, and loyalty. It has since been widely used in sectors such as hospitality, healthcare, retail, banking – but never before in higher education.
Using survey data from 93 faculty members and 366 students from three American universities, our research study revealed a new picture in terms of faculty and students’ satisfaction.
First, in contrast with past studies suggesting that delivery methods didn’t matter, our data revealed that the Service Profit Chain model was stronger in face-to-face-hybrid delivery than in fully online delivery. We observed that fully online delivery methods might lead to a negative impact on satisfaction among students, whilst hybrid modes strengthen positive MBA word-of-mouth among students and alumni. Positive word-of-mouth is highly important to business schools since prospective students are highly influenced by friends and family recommendations. We also found that female students are much more positive than male students when it comes to MBA word-of-mouth, and so are also older students. So, this is definitely something that business schools’ marketing managers should keep in mind when engaging with specific target groups.
Second, we found that if students had high expectations of a MBA programme, they tended to rate it highly, meaning that students’ pre-existing beliefs about their course hugely matters. We also found students’ judgement to be more positive towards hybrid programmes than purely online ones. This leads us to conclude that as MBA programme expectation positively relates to MBA programme quality perception, business schools should raise the expectations of students coming to their schools, as a student with high expectations will then rate the MBA programme quality higher. This therefore strongly supports the principle of business schools massively investing in marketing to induce students to enter programmes with high expectations.
Finally, in contrast with past studies, we found that that faculty satisfaction does not significantly relate to MBA programme quality, probably because a lot of faculty members see their work as routine. So, business schools should not consider a MBA’s programme quality assessment as an accurate indicator of the satisfaction or the dissatisfaction of faculty members. Instead, schools need to develop alternative forms of measurement to assess faculty members’ job satisfaction. This is obviously hugely important for faculty retention.
In conclusion, during the COVID-19 pandemic, business schools were forced to shift to fully online teaching. Based on our research, we found that the Service Profit Chain is much weaker in fully online programmes than face-to-face and hybrid ones. It is therefore important that business schools keep at least a hybrid model, and technology investments should support this trend. Business schools can carefully select, use, and leverage disruptive digital technologies to develop unique digital capabilities that enhance the hybrid teaching model, and create business value that will benefit their programmes’ reputation.
Methodology
A pretest was performed in February and March 2012 and yielded 12 responses from faculty and 42 responses from students from different universities offering Master’s programs in business administration using three delivery methods (face-to-face, online, and hybrid). The results of the pilot study were satisfactory regarding the scale’s reliability.
We aimed to survey regionally accredited schools offering graduate programs using different delivery methods. We identified six schools that met our criteria. Of those, two schools refused. One school initially accepted and then could not proceed with the data collection. Consequently, three schools participated in the data collection. Each of the participating schools delivered its program through different methods: face-to-face (School A), hybrid (School B), and online (School C).
Data for School A were collected between February and April 2014, for School B, between July and October 2013, and School C, in September 2013. With the support of those three participating schools, the questionnaires were sent via email to faculty members and students: 105 e-mails were sent to faculty members and 1,156 e-mails were sent to students. Over the data collection period, three reminders were sent by the participating schools.
We used structural equation modeling for conducting the analysis.
Applications and beneficiaries
Our paper also holds three managerial implications. First, HEIs should not consider an MBA’s program quality assessment an indicator of the satisfaction or the dissatisfaction of faculty members. Instead, those institutions need to deploy other forms of measurement to assess faculty members’ job satisfaction. Second, our findings support that MBA program expectation positively relates with MBA program quality. Therefore, we encourage HEIs to raise the expectations of students coming to their universities. A student with high expectations will then rate the MBA program quality higher. Thus, HEIs should massively invest in marketing to induce students to enter programs with high expectations. Third, during the COVID-19 pandemic, HEIs were forced to shift to fully online teaching (Carugati et al., 2020). Based on our findings, we expose that SPC is much weaker in such conditions than face-to-face and hybrid delivery methods. We recommend that HEIs return to face-to-face delivery and that they consider keeping a part of the hybrid model to secure their SPC. HEIs’ IT investments should go in this direction. HEIs can carefully select, use, and leverage disruptive digital technologies to develop unique digital capabilities that enhance the hybrid teaching model, which will create business value regarding program reputation.
Reference to the research
Scaringella, L., Górska, A., Calderon, R.D. and Benitez, J. (2022) Should we teach in hybrid mode or fully online? A theory and empirical investigation on the service–profit chain in MBAs. Information and Management, 59, 103573
