Managing Regulative Community Relationships

The introduction of the new technology has created a massive change in the global educational system. As of the present time, the proprietary educational industry is the trend in the academic arena. As clearly mentioned, the Internet is most commonly utilized for this reason. Academic companies who opt to provide educational services and gain amiable profit at the same time take advantage of this opportunity that is provided by technological revolution. In fact, “proprietary colleges are considered a cost efficient mode of course delivery” (NEA, Internet).

To be able to have a fine share in the educational industry, which brings the proprietary educational companies with the profit that they ought to have, the regulations for the said system are strongly imposed by the government and some organizations that control them. This is to be able to ensure that the education provided by such companies is considerably of high level, amidst the profit-centered motives that they have towards the services that they provide the students who are enrolled in their curriculum offerings.

In this regard, it could be noted that the regulations created for this type or proprietary companies tend to allow the developmental measures that could be taken into consideration. By being able to further develop their systems of employment as well as their class offerings that are open to the public, they are allowed to balance both their services and their profit share in the market. In comparison with the less stringently regulated industries such as the ones found in the internet (e.g. Amazon.com), proprietary education industry is able to attract an ample amount of market share in the educational industry which in a way, helps them attain the profitable goal that they have aimed upon creating the virtual educational institutions.

Among the regulations that controls the proprietary educational companies’ activities is the corporate citizenship. This is a regulation that indicates that companies that provide public service, such as education, should have “a shift from a paradigm of doing no harm as one of adopting a role for a positive good (Tuck, Internet). This means that an educational company found in the virtual world must not only see to it that they are doing no harm to their clients but they are also able to provide their ‘stakeholders’ with the ample service that they give, which refers to the positive good of the corporate missions.

As a result, many students are further attracted to the system of education that virtual universities or colleges offer. Certainly, the convenience that it brings the students is highly motivational for young students or even professionals who would like to learn more to take advantage of the course offerings provided by the said type of educational provisions. However, the profit-oriented goals of the company at times redefine the service that these educational companies are providing their clients.

Wanting to actually earn an amiably high amount of returns from the effort that the administrations put forward for organizing such types of institutions over the net, they are usually grabbed away from the excellent educational service that they are expected to provide their students. Hence, as a result, the financial stability that could ensure the company’s future existence in the proprietary educational industry is dimmed and less given attention.

As known to many, the risks in any kind of industry changes over the years. This is why Lucy Benholz has pointed out in one of her articles that “foundations from different regions and sizes have found that building strong relationship with the policy makers when times are good will afford them some access to the resources that are further stretched on all sides”(Internet). This mainly points out the fact that as the policies and regulatory systems of the industry changes over time, it would be helpful for the companies to develop close relationships with the policy makers.

This way they are able to earn for themselves an access to the provisions and resources given by the regulatory board creators to help them readjust their systems and still be able to attain the profit-centered missions of the company. If this is not considered by the administration, it could be well expected that the company would have a hard time dealing with the adjustments that has to be done and in later times, it would not be impossible for the virtual company to loose its track and be eliminated in the proprietary educational industry.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Tuck, Jackie. (2005). Managing community relationships, reputation and sustaining competitive advantage. School of Business University of Ballarat. http://www.latrobe.edu.au/csrc/fact2/refereed/tuck_lowe_mccrae.pdf. (January 3, 2007).

NEA Research Update. (2004). Proprietary Education: Threat, or Not? http://www2.nea.org/he/heupdate/images/vol10no4.pdf.  (January 3, 2007).

Bernholz, Lucy. Managing up in down times. http://www.blueprintrd.com/text/managingup.pdf. (January 3, 2007).