More Porter Vice Chancellor - Final post

In my final exploration of Michael Porter's 5 forces model as it applies to competition in the UK HE marketplace I turn to industry rivalry.  Typically this relates to the features of the competitors such as their size and number (the more Universities there are the greater the competition).  So no fears there then for the status quo - new providers are thin on the ground.  The model also considers features such as:

Differentiation / Switching costs - try as they might, governments cannot make Universities uniform.  Each institution is unique and strengthens its own particular brand, ironically helped by government metrics and league tables designed for making comparison easier but actually enabling all institutions to be in the "top 5" for something.   University groupings such as the Russell Group do aid differentiation for those who do not fully understand the entry criteria.
If it is easy to switch, however, there might be more competition.  The fact is, however, that students typically stick with one instiution and find it difficult to switch mid way through a programme due to the unique nature of each offering.  Maintaining Universities as their own examining bodies is a clear barrier to switching.

Industry growth / life cycle - have we yet reached capacity in HE? probably NOT as the brand is strong internationally and on-line provision is not well embedded in many places.  However, the increased capacity of the traditional student body of the last 15 years has probably peaked.  So the areas of contestability are in innovative teaching and appeal to new audiences such as degree apprentices in the short-run.

Fixed costs / Perishablity - Universities are burdened with high fixed costs and extreme perishability of  the service provided.  This ensures constant renewal and a drive to liquidity as salaries form a large part of the fixed costs.  The logic here is that Universities will fight tooth and nail to maintain independence.

Units of incremental capacity change -is an inteersting feature.  Research teams, departments and Faculties can move from one institution to another.  On a unit scale top Researchers can also do this and so capacity change can be at the level oof the individual.  This makes individual institution growth easier and the need to compete "head on" with rivals very distant.

Exit barriers (ease and costs of exit) - these are pretty high as decommissioning of the workforce and repurposing of buildings and land would be a huge feat.  HE institutions would also have the burden of continuing students who did not want to transfer to one of the vulture institutions hovering over the sickly University

Corporate stake - just how much financial and intellectual capital is tied up in the provision of HE? - virtually 100% in most cases unless we count the odd catering or conference facility provision or the huge endowments enjoyed by a small number of HE institutions.

So, to summarise.

Higher Education is not a "market" where retail style competition can flourish.  How short-sighted and ill informed are those who think that everything is a profit making business,,,