Country boundaries no longer tie us down or limit us to a restricted range of choices for jobs or schools. Companies now work inside a worldwide spider web where Asian organizations have European firms as competitors. The same principle applies to schools as well. No longer are students restricted to national choices when it comes to universities. Today, more than ever, the borders that once kept all of us apart are becoming what they were in the first place: just lines on a map with little significance. But how does this translate for educational institutions, such as universities? What does having an international target public imply?
While activating in a company, employees attend several training programs, which can be general or specific in nature. Even if a training is general, specific, technical or targets soft skills development, it can be either truly helpful or insignificant for the same employees, all this depending on the future actions taken.
Due to an ever increasing competition at an international level, demographic changes and people’s migration from different countries, both within and outside Europe, universities nowadays are confronted with a two pronged risk: either being over flooded by students, or barely managing to attract a decent amount of students each year.
The presentation “Evidence for the Performance Prism in Higher Education” was offered, in the third day of the PMA 2014 Conference, by Stacy Smulowitz, from The University of Scranton.
All three concepts are nowadays generally known and used within organizations. In this context the question that arises most often refers to which one of them is the most effective. A relevant aspect to take into consideration is that there currently is no best choice between these processes. Each one can be the most suitable choice for an employee, depending on the organizational strategy, departmental goals and individual targets.
