The Notion of Branding in the Higher Education Sector: The Case of Hong Kong

  • Queenie K. H. Lam
  • Hayes H. H. Tang


This chapter observes that branding is a stated strategic priority of four out of seven public universities in Hong Kong. However, the branding activities they propose miss the essence—the alignment of their various identities. By adapting the concept of corporate branding to the analysis of their self-representations in four distinctive types of communication materials (strategic plans, vision and mission statements, student recruitment materials, and press releases), we introduce a new approach to university branding study by examining the content alignment in addition to the content itself. Findings show that while all Hong Kong universities have balanced their self-representations between excellence and uniqueness, new technical universities that openly state branding as a priority show more signs of alignment in the communication materials.


Branding Strategic Priority Higher Education Hong Kong Identity Brand Alignment Technical University Communication Materials (Strategic Plans, Vision and Mission Statements, Student Recruitment Materials and Press Releases) 


  1. Balmer, J. M. (2001). Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate marketing-seeing through the fog. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 248–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blei, D. (2012). Probabilistic Topic Modeling. Communications of the ACM, 55(4), 77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, R. M., & Mazzarol, T. W. (2009). The importance of institutional image to student satisfaction and loyalty within higher education. Higher Education, 58(1), 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapleo, C. (2007). Barriers to brand building in UK universities. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Management, 12(1), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chapleo, C. (2011). Exploring rationales for branding a university: Should we be seeking to measure branding in UK universities? Journal of Brand Management, 18(6), 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. City University of Hong Kong. (2015). Making a difference through excellence in research and professional education. Strategic plan 2015–2020. Retrieved from
  7. City University of Hong Kong. (2016). A strong brand, a strong CityU. Retrieved from
  8. Deephouse, D. L. (1999). To be different, or to be the same? It’s a question (and theory) of strategic balance. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Drori, G., Delmestri, G., & Oberg, A. (2013). Branding the university: Relational strategy of identity construction in a competitive field. In L. Engwall & P. Scott (Eds.), Trust in higher education institutions (pp. 134–147). London: Portland Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hasse, R., & Krücken, G. (2013). Competition and actorhood. An expansion of the institutional agenda. Sociologia Internationalis, 51(2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heiden, S. (2010). The TXM Platform: Building Open-Source Textual Analysis Software Compatible with the TEI Encoding Scheme: Proceedings of the 24th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (pp. 389–398). Sendai: Institute for Digital Enhancement of Cognitive Development, Waseda University. Retrieved from
  12. Hong Kong Baptist University. (2014). Vision 2020. Quality teaching and learning. Retrieved from
  13. Hong Kong SAR Government. (2004). The 2004 Policy Address. Seizing opportunities for development. Promoting people-based governance. Retrieved from
  14. Hong Kong SAR Government. (2009). The 2009–10 Policy Address. Breaking new ground together. Retrieved from
  15. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. (n.d.). HKUST Towards our next miracle. Strategic plan 2011–2016. Retrieved from
  16. Information Services Unit of HKSAR Government. (n.d.). Evolution of brand Hong Kong. Retrieved from
  17. Kosmützky, A., & Krücken, G. (2015). Sameness and difference. International Studies of Management & Organization, 45(2), 137–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lingnan University. (2009). Strategic plan for 2009–2016. Retrieved from
  19. Litten, L. H. (1980). Marketing higher education: Benefits and risk for the American academic system. Journal of Higher Education, 51(1), 40–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lo, W. Y. W., & Tang, H. H. H. (2017). Dancing with global trends: Higher education policy and university governance in Hong Kong, 1997–2012. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 49(1), 53–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mampaey, J., Huisman, J., & Seeber, M. (2015). Branding of Flemish higher education institutions: A strategic balance perspective. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(6), 1178–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Stensaker, B. (2007). The relationship between branding and organisational change. Higher Education Management and Policy, 19(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sung, J. Y. (2011, June 28). University ranking or quality education: Where should our priority lie? [Blog post]. Retrieved from
  25. Tang, H. H. H. (2015). Democratizing higher education in Hong Kong: Between rhetoric and reality. In P. Blessinger (Ed.), Democratizing higher education: International comparative perspectives (pp. 155–168). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. The Chinese University of Hong Kong. (2013). The First Fifty Years of the Chinese University. Speech at the CUHK 50th Anniversary Banquet. Retrieved from
  27. The Chinese University of Hong Kong. (2016). CUHK strategic plan 2016-2020. Retrieved from
  28. Temple, P. (2006). Branding higher education: Illusion or reality. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 10(1), 15–19.Google Scholar
  29. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. (2012). Soaring with a vision. Strategic plan 2012/13-2017/18. Retrieved from
  30. The University of Hong Kong. (2016). Asia’s global university. The next decade. Our vision for 2016–2025. Retrieved from
  31. University Grants Committee. (2004a, January). Hong Kong higher education: To make a difference, To move with the times. Retrieved from
  32. University Grants Committee. (2004b, March). Hong Kong higher education: Integration matters. Retrieved from
  33. University Grants Committee. (2007, April). UGC policy. Retrieved from
  34. University Grants Committee. (2010, December). Aspirations for the higher education system in Hong Kong. Retrieved from
  35. University Grants Committee. (2016). Quality audit reports. Retrieved from
  36. Wæraas, A., & Solbakk, M. N. (2009). Defining the essence of a university: Lessons from higher education branding. Higher Education, 57(4), 449–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Weerts, D. J., Freed, G. H., & Morphew, C. C. (2014). Organizational identity in higher education: Conceptual and empirical perspectives. In M. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 29, pp. 229–278). Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zemsky, R., Wegner, G. R., & Massy, W. F. (2005). Remaking the American university: Market-smart and mission-centered. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Queenie K. H. Lam
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hayes H. H. Tang
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre for Higher Education Governance GhentGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.University of KasselKasselGermany
  3. 3.The Education University of Hong KongTai PoHong Kong

Personalised recommendations