An Analysis of Factors Affecting University Reputation: A Case Study of Mongolian Universities

Abstract

A university’s reputation is a key indicator of the quality of its education, the competitiveness of its alumni, its institutional influence in society, and its degree of global recognition, including its ranking and rating among higher education institutions (HEIs) around the world. This not only enhances institutional standing and secures positions in international rankings but also promotes sustainable education practices. In addition, students, their parents, and their partners select universities due to their trust in the reliability of a university’s public reputation and ranking. This study proposes a model to assess a university’s reputation based on specific factors. In this research, the dependent variable is university reputation, the mediating variable is university social responsibility, and the independent variables include the teacher reputation, alumni reputation, research and innovation, and cooperation. A survey of 5902 respondents—including alumni, employers, and parents—offers diverse perspectives on university reputation. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling tools (Smart PLS 4.1 and SPSS 25.0). The findings confirm that social responsibility has a strong and positive influence on university reputation. Furthermore, faculty and alumni reputation, research and innovation, and external collaboration directly enhance universities’ social responsibility. This suggests that social responsibility serves as a key mediating variable in the relationship between institutional capacity and reputation. This study represents the first empirical assessment of university reputation in Mongolia, addressing a notable gap in the literature. By incorporating context-specific insights and stakeholder perspectives, the research offers both theoretical contributions and practical implications. The results provide a foundation for developing regionally responsive strategies to improve the quality of higher education and advance sustainable development goals.

1. Introduction

A critical aspect of ensuring the sustainable growth of a higher education institution (HEI) is its reputation. Reputation is a reflection of quality, and at the same time, the quality of education is one of the key goals of sustainable development. In recent years, educational institutions have been placing greater emphasis on strengthening their reputation at both the national and international levels. HEIs must carefully manage their reputation by focusing on the quality of their education, research, and community engagement while also responding to challenges that could undermine their public image. A strong reputation enables universities to thrive, attract top talent, and contribute positively to society [1]; it also allows them to recruit top research and teaching staff, improves financial and competitive performance, and increases media visibility and investment opportunities.

Recently, the Government of Mongolia has been actively implementing projects and programs aimed at aligning educational and training standards with international benchmarks [2]. For instance, the long-term strategic plan for sustainable development of the country includes the goal of improving the quality of universities by establishing their rankings and promoting their recognition internationally. As a part of this goal, it has become important to assess the reputation of universities via the participation of their external stakeholders, such as alumni, parents, and employers. In other words, alumni can determine the reputation of their own universities, parents can assess the institutions where their children study, and employers can evaluate the universities where their employees graduated from based on an institution’s professional behavior, career advantages, and overall competence. Additionally, under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Mongolia has set an objective to support at least four universities in achieving international rankings. University rankings are influenced not only by direct collaboration between the institution and ranking organizations but also by the assessments of other stakeholders [3].

Every university strives to improve its competitive standing in the education market, making it important to examine theories surrounding university reputation and the factors that affect it [4,5].

However, currently, there is a lack of clear policies or strategic frameworks on how to ensure sustainable development at the planning and operational level of universities, and there are no established indicators or criteria to evaluate it. This study aims to address that gap by identifying university reputation as a critical indicator of sustainable development, exploring the factors that influence it, and creating an evaluation model grounded in stakeholder input and participation.

Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify an important indicator of sustainable development, namely, university reputation, identify the factors affecting it, and develop an evaluation model based on stakeholder evaluation and participation. In order to achieve this goal, we addressed the following research questions (RQs):

• How can HEIs contribute to sustainable development through social responsibility?
• What factors influence the increase in university social responsibility?
• How does the social responsibility of an HEI affect a university’s reputation based on external stakeholder perspectives?

Organizational learning theory suggests that universities are perceived more favorably when they contribute to sustainable development and social welfare through effective knowledge transfer, which in turn boosts their reputation [6]. Furthermore, the achievements of university faculty and alumni directly enhance the reputation of the university [7,8]. Universities collaborate with various organizations and individuals to generate, share, and apply knowledge as well as to foster innovation—efforts that directly strengthen their reputation [9]. Evaluation factors for UR may encompass social responsibility, teacher and alumni reputation, research and innovation outcomes, and collaborative reputation [10,11]. This approach recognizes that HEIs engage in numerous socially oriented activities centered on knowledge creation and distribution. To accurately and comprehensively assess a UR, the involvement of multiple different stakeholders is essential [12,13]. In this study, we believe that employers, alumni, and parents can offer valuable perspectives on the university’s reputation. Alumni, for instance, can provide insightful feedback on the quality of education, acquired knowledge and skills, campus environment, faculty, and program content. Employers have firsthand knowledge of graduates’ workplace readiness. Parents, meanwhile, often have a strong understanding of the university’s societal impact, its community involvement, and their children’s capabilities and attitudes [14]. The research results suggest that universities should enhance their social responsibility, promote faculty achievements in teaching and research, and strengthen their activities in education, research, and community outreach to secure a stronger societal standing. HEIs, specifically, can foster numerous partnerships with faculty, staff, and students to further their social responsibility initiatives [15,16].

2. Literature Review and Hypothesis

Higher education institutions (HEIs) build their reputation and demonstrate social responsibility through actions that reflect their value and quality. This approach can be explained through multiple theoretical lenses, including signaling theory, institutional theory, stakeholder theory, and corporate social responsibility (CSR). According to signaling theory [17], universities engage in actions that send credible signals to the external environment regarding their academic and social value. These signals include accreditation, international rankings, high-profile research output, and global partnerships, all of which shape stakeholder perceptions and institutional reputation. Institutional theory suggests that universities must align with socially accepted norms, values, and expectations to maintain legitimacy and survive in a competitive environment [18]. From this perspective, universities enhance their reputation not only through academic performance but also by conforming to institutionalized structures and behaviors, such as ethical conduct, environmental responsibility, and community engagement. Stakeholder theory [19] emphasizes that institutions must create value for multiple stakeholders beyond shareholders, such as students, parents, employers, policymakers, and society at large. Universities that meet the expectations of these diverse groups by offering inclusive education, employable graduates, and societal contributions tend to build strong reputational capital. CSR theory further posits that organizations, including universities, are responsible for contributing to the welfare of society through ethical, environmental, and social actions [20,21]. In this context, the level of university social responsibility (USR) is determined by how effectively the institution fulfills its commitments to its stakeholders, including teaching excellence, research relevance, sustainable practices, and community partnerships. Together, these theoretical perspectives frame the university reputation (UR) as a multifaceted construct influenced by performance, legitimacy, stakeholder trust, and perceived social value. HEIs have three core functions: teaching, research, and social service [22]. While international studies have explored these areas in various contexts, there remains a research gap in understanding how university reputation and social responsibility intersect in Mongolia. It appeared in the research that Mongolian higher education, perhaps focusing only on teaching and research, does not take sufficient action to fulfill the social responsibility obligations of universities and to assess and improve their social reputation [23].

2.1. University Reputation (UR)

Reputation is widely regarded as a long-term, external evaluation of an organization by third parties, which influences both strategic behavior and organizational identity [24]. In the context of HEIs, reputation serves as a critical indicator of educational quality and institutional effectiveness. University reputation (UR) is a fundamental indicator of a university’s quality and effectiveness. Therefore, it is more appropriate to base our research on institutional and stakeholder theories because these emphasize not only organizational performance but also the degree to which institutions gain acceptance from society. In HE, such prominence is often shaped by sustained performance, stakeholder trust, innovation output, and alignment with societal expectations. Stakeholders assess reputation based on multiple factors, such as the quality of graduates [25], faculty prestige [26], and the university’s contribution to innovation and technology transfer [27]. The reputation of a university can impacts student selection of the university [28], the knowledge held by stakeholders [29], the evaluation and rating of the university [9], and its research experience and teaching quality [30]. Consequently, it is important to understand the variables that contribute to reputation management of HEIs [31] because a reputation management framework grounded in institutional and stakeholder theories provides a comprehensive lens to explore how universities build and maintain legitimacy, visibility, and societal value.

2.2. University Social Responsibility (USR)

The role of the university social responsibility (USR) is the main strategic component in shaping institutional reputation. USR as a university’s commitment to recognizing the interests of society and performing in a way that improves the well-being of its members through the provision of quality educational services [32]. Universities that actively engage in social responsibility initiatives positively influence students’ perceptions of their reputation, highlighting the importance of USR in reputation management [33]. Institutional theory suggests that universities must align with socially accepted norms, values, and expectations to maintain legitimacy and survive in a competitive environment [18]. From this perspective, universities enhance their reputation not only through academic performance but also by conforming to institutionalized structures and behaviors, such as ethical conduct, environmental responsibility, and community engagement. Stakeholder theory [19] emphasizes that institutions must create value for multiple stakeholders beyond shareholders, such as students, parents, employers, policymakers, and society at large. Vasilescu [20] emphasizes that USR activities contribute to the overall performance and reputation of higher education institutions by fostering trust and credibility among stakeholders. In this context, the level of USR is determined by how effectively the institution fulfills its commitments to its stakeholders, including teaching excellence, research relevance, sustainable practices, and community partnerships. Together, these theoretical perspectives frame the UR as a multifaceted construct influenced by performance, legitimacy, stakeholder trust, and perceived social value. According to Bat-Erdene J. & Otgonbaatar B., Mongolian higher education institutions, perhaps focusing only on teaching and research, do not take sufficient action to fulfill the social responsibility obligations of universities and to assess and improve their social reputation [23]. Universities can make a meaningful contribution to the SDGs through the implementation of socially responsible initiatives.

2.3. Teacher Reputation (TR) and University Social Responsibility (USR)

Teacher reputation (TR) is a key indicator of the quality of an educational institution. The knowledge and expertise of teachers often influence parents and students in selecting a specific profession or school. The ability of teachers to support students in reaching their goals, combined with their accomplishments in teaching and research, is instrumental in shaping a university’s reputation [34]. Students’ perceptions of TR are measured in three main dimensions: teachers’ teaching methods and classroom management; teachers’ attitudes and personalities; and teachers’ performance and status in society [35]. From the perspective of reputation theory, a university’s reputation is not solely shaped by its institutional brand but is also strongly influenced by the professional image and recognition of its faculty members [36]. According to stakeholder theory, faculty members are considered the primary interface between the university and its key stakeholders. Students, parents, and alumni tend to interact more frequently with faculty than with institutional leadership, making teachers the most visible and influential representatives of the university [19,37]. Through this lens, the reputation of an institution is often shaped by the conduct, competence, and academic presence of its educators. Moreover, students are more inclined to enroll in institutions with reputable and high-performing faculty. Teachers’ professional achievements and research outputs often contribute substantially to societal development and innovation. Based on prior research, faculty reputation is not only crucial for academic excellence but also plays an integral role in strengthening the USR. By serving as role models and actively engaging in community-related activities, respected faculty members enhance the university’s social legitimacy and commitment to societal well-being [35,38].

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

Teacher reputation has a positive effect on university social responsibility.

2.4. Alumni Reputation (AR) and University Social Responsibility (USR)

An important measure of a university’s educational efficacy is the knowledge and skills acquired by its graduates. In recent years, universities’ quality assurance criteria and ranking assessments have increasingly emphasized the achievements and contributions of their graduates, particularly in terms of academic excellence and research impact [39]. Within the ranking system, universities proactively manage their reputation by highlighting the accomplishments of their alumni. In higher education, the ranking and reputation of universities are determined by multiple factors, and the success of their graduates and students is an essential aspect. The time it takes for graduates to find employment after completing their studies and their career achievements serves as indicators of the quality of education offered by the university. Successful graduates enhance the reputation of their educational institutions [40,41]. In addition, parents choose a university for their children’s future education not only based on quality, location, and tuition fees but also on the success and career growth of its graduates. This is related to their children’s future professional success, and they believe that if a university’s graduates work at an advanced level and have an impact on society, the university will provide the same opportunities for future graduates. Fostering ongoing relationships with alumni and implementing collaborative programs that enable current students to learn from the success of their predecessors is a robust strategy for enhancing a university’s reputation [42,43]. This strategy improves the institution’s rankings and attracts top-tier students and faculty while expanding partnerships with industry.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

Alumni reputation has a positive effect on university social responsibility.

2.5. Research and Innovation (R&I) and University Social Responsibility (USR)

Universities contribute to a nation’s social, economic, and technological advancement, ultimately strengthening its global standing [34]. The scope of the USR is multifaceted, including concepts such as providing equal and accessible higher education, supporting regional development, ensuring sustainable development, and enlightening the public. USR should be a fundamental strategic objective of the university rather than a routine activity organized for the good of society [44]. Thus, research output, innovative activities, and university social responsibility play a vital role in building a strong UR. According to the stakeholder theory [19], university R&I can create impact and value not only for students but also for professionals, industries, businesses, and partner organizations. In particular, R&I by academics and faculty fosters collaboration with social stakeholders.

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

The research and innovation of an HEI has a positive effect on its social responsibility.

2.6. Cooperation (CO) and University Social Responsibility (USR)

The joint initiatives of leading universities and their departments are essential in facilitating knowledge exchange and advancing research while also boosting the reputation of HEIs through innovation [45,46]. By strengthening partnerships with both domestic and international educational institutions, research organizations, and industries, universities can greatly elevate their reputation and contribute to creating tangible economic benefits. Moreover, cooperation between universities and industries establishes a framework for learning by offering workforce education and skills training. Involving learners in future workplace scenarios [47], with support from both academic faculty and business professionals [48], can enhance knowledge retention and foster skill development [49]. To enhance research and development activities and attract highly skilled professionals at the regional level, HEIs must strengthen their collaborative efforts with industry, government, and society. This involves establishing and co-creating collaborative laboratories that unite academia and enterprises to drive knowledge and technology transfer toward practical solutions. These efforts should target areas critical to enhancing the region’s or country’s innovative capacity [50]. Over the past few decades, fostering collaboration among leading universities has remained a considerable challenge. Researchers have focused on identifying the key factors for success, including attracting international students, preparing them for academic integration, and promoting interactions with foreign universities and educators [51].

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

University cooperation has a positive effect on university social responsibility.

2.7. University Social Responsibility (USR) and University Reputation (UR)

Universities serve as major influencers in society, and their commitment to social responsibility is essential for promoting societal development [52]. Universities that actively participate in local community development, such as providing educational programs, health services, and economic support, build strong, positive relationships with the community. The role of social responsibility (SR) in HEIs is not only restricted to the provision of education but also to attain a certain standard of performance that satisfies the emerging needs of the social setup [53]. The integration of SR into a university’s operations significantly bolsters its reputation. By committing to community engagement, sustainability, ethical governance, impactful research, and philanthropy, universities not only fulfill their moral and civic duties but also attract talent, secure funding, enhance public perception, and achieve higher rankings [54]. Social responsibility refers to context-specific organizational actions and policies that respond to stakeholder expectations and aim to generate economic, social, and environmental value [55].

Hypothesis 5 (H5).

University social responsibility has a positive effect on university reputation.

Based on the hypotheses and theories proposed by prior researchers [17,18,19,20,21], we identified the main factors that influence university social responsibility: teacher reputation, alumni reputation, research and innovation, and internal/external cooperation. For university stakeholders, the activities and outcomes of teaching and research are seen as the services and responsibilities the university provides to society. For instance, the professional contributions of teachers and alumni play a vital role in shaping society, organizations, individuals, and governments. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that reputable teachers and alumni enhance a university’s overall social responsibility. Furthermore, internal and external cooperation, along with innovative initiatives, are viewed as key factors of a university’s responsibility to society. By engaging in partnerships with industry, government, other academic institutions, and the broader public, universities can play an active role in addressing social and economic challenges. Based on this theoretical perspective, we present the following hypothetical model for our study (Figure 1).

3. Materials and Methods

Social sciences have relied on complex models that examine the relationships between observed and latent variables through covariance analysis for decades. However, in recent years, there has been a growing shift toward the use of the PLS-SEM (partial least squares structural equation modeling) approach, as highlighted by Hair et al. [56], because PLS-SEM provides the ability to analyze complex causal models and conduct path analysis. In addition, PLS-SEM is very suitable for exploratory research with secondary data, as it offers the flexibility needed for interplay between theory and data [57]. Akter et al. noted that most prior research on sample size requirements in PLS-SEM overlooked the fact that the method also proves valuable for analyzing large quantities [58]. Indirect stakeholders’ evaluation is important in assessing the quality of education. We used external stakeholders in our research to determine the UR. UR is a representation of how stakeholders—such as alumni, employers, and parents—evaluate a university. In Mongolia, there is limited research on this topic, and studies have yet to explore UR and USR through the perspective of these three stakeholders.

3.1. Measures

Our survey questionnaire contains six scales to measure AR, TR, R&I, CO, USR, and UR that were modified based on previous studies [59], taking into account the specific characteristics of the educational system in Mongolia. According to the hypotheses of this study, four independent variables were considered to affect UR through the mediating variable of USR. The participants of the survey included alumni, employers, and parents who were asked for their opinions about the four factors that influence the UR and USR. The questions were measured using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

3.2. Data Collection

A total of 66 higher education institutions (HEIs) are currently engaged in providing higher education in Mongolia. As part of efforts to rank Mongolian universities in line with Sustainable Development Goal 4, a university reputation survey was conducted for the first time, with evaluations based exclusively on input from external stakeholders. To ensure accessibility, inclusiveness, and reliability, the survey employed a convenience sampling method and was administered online via the platform https://high.eec.mn (accessed on 14 September 2023). Respondents included alumni, parents, and employers who were registered at the participating universities. The representation of parents was extended to include not only the student’s mother and father but also older siblings or guardians who are responsible for the student. This adjustment was made in consideration of the fact that herder families in rural areas often face challenges in accessing and participating in system-based surveys.

4. Data Analysis and Results

4.1. Respondents

The objective of gathering initial factual data on UR is to aggregate information from three targeted segments. This includes analyzing information related to UR and considering the factors influencing it. In this study, we used a preliminary model to gather data from stakeholders such as employers, alumni, and parents.

We structured the collection of data on UR and its factors by considering organizational reputation based on fundamental principles. These include the general responsibility of the institution, the reputation of its graduates and teachers, international and domestic collaborations, and academic research and innovation.

In Mongolia, there is a demand to gather data from three specific stakeholders’ groups and conduct an analysis of university reputation, as there has been no previous extensive research or analysis of data regarding university reputation. The sample size for this study was determined using a double random sampling approach. The data were collected through the academic affairs offices of higher education institutions, targeting their key stakeholders.

We collected the survey data in collaboration with the academic departments of higher education institutions, with their support in engaging key stakeholders. A stratified sampling method was employed, with sample sizes varying depending on the number of students, graduates, and employers at each institution. In total, 7240 responses were initially collected.

After filtering out incomplete and erroneous entries, 5902 valid responses were retained for the final analysis. These valid responses represented employers, graduates, and parents from 66 universities in Mongolia and included responses from 1903 graduates, 638 employers, and 3361 parents (

Table 1. Respondents’ characteristics.

Questions		All Samples		Groups
				Alumni		Parents		Employers
		Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent
Age	Under 25	88	1.5	88	4.6
	25–30	1854	31.4	72	3.8	1659	49.4	123	19.3
	31–40	1597	27.1	133	7.0	1238	36.8	226	35.4
	41–50	1440	24.4	914	48.0	368	10.9	158	24.8
	51–60	728	12.3	542	28.5	87	2.6	99	15.5
	61 over	195	3.3	154	3.3	9	0.3	32	5
Total		5902	100.0	1903	100.0	3361	100.0	638	100.0
Gender	Male	2207	37.4	617	32.4	1353	40.3	237	37.1
	Female	3695	62.6	1286	67.6	2008	59.7	401	62.9
Total		5902	100.0	1903	100.0	3361	100.0	638	100.0
Work Type	Public	2157	36.5	519	27.3	1334	39.7	304	47.6
	Private	3745	63.5	1384	72.7	2027	60.3	334	52.4
Total		5902	100.0	1903	100.0	3361	100.0	638	100.0

).

4.2. Measurement Model

For the hypotheses proposed in this study, we assessed the measurement model by establishing the construct’s reliability and validity. In the measurement model analysis, construct reliability was established through Cronbach’s Alpha, Composite Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). These two types of analysis were conducted using two main methods. First, a hypothetical model of university social responsibility and university reputation was estimated for all samples. Second, a comparative study was conducted for each group of alumni, employers, and parents using the hypothesized model.

Table 2. Construct reliability and validity by all samples.

Variables	Items	Outer Loading	VIF	Cronbach’s Alpha	CR (rho_c)	AVE
Teacher reputation (TR)	tr1	0.864	2.602	0.916	0.937	0.749
	tr2	0.858	2.534
	tr3	0.878	2.862
	tr4	0.863	2.603
	tr5	0.864	2.572
Alumni reputation (AR)	ar1	0.902	2.205	0.750	0.857	0.672
	ar2	0.903	2.223
	ar3	0.623	1.206
Research and innovation (R&I)	ri1	0.872	2.066	0.884	0.909	0.742
	ri2	0.889	2.237
	ri3	0.870	1.967
Cooperation (CO)	co1	0.851	2.145	0.884	0.920	0.741
	co2	0.862	2.299
	co3	0.863	2.345
	co4	0.867	2.267
University social responsibility (USR)	usr1	0.875	2.498	0.889	0.923	0.751
	usr2	0.873	2.481
	usr3	0.849	2.201
	usr4	0.868	2.375
University reputation (UR)	ur1	0.787	2.085	0.911	0.929	0.653
	ur2	0.838	2.547
	ur3	0.831	2.415
	ur4	0.834	2.422
	ur5	0.813	2.243
	ur6	0.779	2.010
	ur7	0.772	1.937

VIF: Variance Inflation Factor; CR: Composite Reliability, AVE: Average Variance Extracted.

presents a measurement analysis based on the raw data collected from 5902 study participants. Construct reliability and convergent validity for the complete sample are presented in

Table 3. Reliability and convergent validity.

Variables	Items	Alumni			Employers			Parents
		Alpha	CR	AVE	Alpha	CR	AVE	Alpha	CR	AVE
Teacher reputation (TR)	tr1	0.915	0.915	0.797	0.924	0.924	0.814	0.882	0.882	0.739
	tr2
	tr3
	tr4
	tr5
Alumni reputation (AR)	ar1	0.777	0.833	0.695	0.777	0.831	0.699	0.724	0.807	0.651
	ar2
	ar3
Research and innovation (R&I)	ri1	0913	0.913	0.793	0.914	0.915	0.796	0.859	0.859	0.702
	ri2
	ri3
Cooperation (CO)	co1	0.903	0.903	0.774	0.917	0.918	0.800	0.866	0.867	0.713
	co2
	co3
	co4
University social responsibility (USR)	usr1	0.896	0.897	0.763	0.921	0.921	0.808	0.878	0.878	0.732
	usr2
	usr3
	usr4
University reputation (UR)	ur1	0.934	0.935	0.718	0.932	0.932	0.710	0.891	0.892	0.606
	ur2
	ur3
	ur4
	ur5
	ur6
	ur7

CR: Composite Reliability, AVE: Average Variance Extracted.

. Cronbach’s Alpha values ranged from 0.750 to 0.916, AVE values ranged from 0.653 to 0.751, and CR values were from 0.857 to 0.929 by the constructs.

Table 3 shows that the measurement model analysis results for the study participant groups are within acceptable ranges.

4.3. Validating Formative Construct

The validating formative construct is an important step in structural equation modeling (SEM) when constructs are formative. In this study, partial least squares structural equation modeling (Smart PLS, version 4.1) was used to analyze data [60]. To validate the constructs, first, multicollinearity was assessed using the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). If VIF values are less than or equal to 10, that indicates no multicollinearity [61]. There is no multicollinearity issue (Table 2 and

Table 4. Construct validation (university reputation).

Relationships	VIF All Sample	Stakeholders (VIF)
		Alumni	Employers	Parents
TR→USR	3.101	3.742	3.497	2.760
AR→USR	2.350	2.819	2.440	2.133
R&I→USR	3.363	4.266	4.328	2.848
CO→USR	3.457	4.246	4.325	3.022
USR→UR	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000

AR: alumni reputation; R&I: research and innovation; USR: university social reputation; TR: teacher reputation; CO: cooperation; UR: university reputation.

).

4.4. Structural Model

After the analysis of the measurement model, a structural model analysis was performed through which we determined the direct relationships between the latent variables. In addition, the proposed hypotheses were tested. The results of this study show that all hypotheses are supported and statistically significant (

Table 5. Path coefficients by complete data.

Constructs	Original Sample (O)	Sample Mean (M)	Standard Deviation (STDEV)	T Statistics (|O/STDEV|)	p Values	Results
TR→USR(H1)	0.275	0.276	0.017	16.197	0.001	Supported
AR→USR (H2)	0.167	0.167	0.014	12.044	0.001	Supported
R&I→USR(H3)	0.244	0.244	0.017	14.669	0.001	Supported
CO→USR (H4)	0.277	0.277	0.017	16.473	0.001	Supported
USR→UR(H5)	0.763	0.763	0.008	100.418	0.001	Supported
University Social Responsibility
R-square						0.747
R-square adjusted (Social Responsibility)						0.746
University Reputation
R-square						0.582
R-square adjusted						0.582

AR: alumni reputation; R&I: research and innovation; USR: university social reputation; TR: teacher reputation; CO: cooperation; UR: university reputation.

and

Table 6. Direct relationships by groups.

Relationships	Alumni				Employers				Parents
	ß	T	p	Results	ß	T	p	Results	ß	T	p	Results
TR→USR(H1)	0.297	10.25	0.000	Supported	0.159	2.53	0.000	Supported	0.339	10.08	0.000	Supported
AR→USR(H2)	0.152	6.56	0.000	Supported	0.196	4.20	0.000	Supported	0.147	8.28	0.000	Supported
R&I→USR(H3)	0.192	5.88	0.000	Supported	0.272	5.09	0.000	Supported	0.242	12.02	0.000	Supported
CO→USR(H4)	0.330	10.86	0.000	Supported	0.330	5.93	0.000	Supported	0.229	10.83	0.000	Supported
USR→UR(H5)	0.827	82.86	0.000	Supported	0.797	39.3	0.000	Supported	0.716	62.45	0.000	Supported
University Social Responsibility
R-square				0.800				0.750				0.716
University Reputation
R-square				0.684				0.635				0.512
Complete				0.747
University social responsibility												0.747
University reputation												0.582

AR: alumni reputation; R&I: research and innovation; USR: university social reputation; TR: teacher reputation; CO: cooperation; UR: university reputation.

). As can be concluded from Table 5, the results of the data for each group are consistent with the results of the total data. The results of each group from all samples are essentially consistent for the total sample.

The analysis of the structural model estimated an R2 value of 0.75 for the university social reputation construct, indicating that 75% of the variance was university social responsibility. This indicates that the model fits well (Figure 2).

Based on the study results, we were able to answer the second research question as follows. For the total sample, the following factors showed a positive and statistically significant influence on university social responsibility (USR): teacher reputation (TR: β = 0.307), alumni reputation (AR: β = 0.153), research and innovation (R&I: β = 0.235), and cooperation (CO: β = 0.267). This finding was consistent across stakeholder groups: TR→USR (H1): alumni (β = 0.297), employers (β = 0.159), parents (β = 0.339). This suggests that graduates and parents have a closer relationship with teachers than employers and therefore perceive a stronger influence from teacher-related factors. AR→USR (H2): alumni (β = 0.152), employers (β = 0.196), parents (β = 0.147). The results show that administrative responsibility has a relatively similar level of influence across all stakeholder groups. R&I→USR (H3): alumni (β = 0.192), employers (β = 0.272), parents (β = 0.242). This indicates that research, development, and innovation activities have a stronger impact on employers and parents. It highlights the importance for universities to collaborate with industries and government bodies in order to boost their reputation and contribute more effectively to sustainable development. CO→USR (H4): alumni (β = 0.330), employers (β = 0.330), parents (β = 0.229). Internal and external collaboration is shown to be a significant factor for all stakeholders (Figure 3 a, b, c). Strengthening partnerships with domestic and international institutions, research centers, and industry players presents a valuable opportunity for universities to enhance their reputation and impact. In addition, the R-square values for each group (alumni, employers, and parents) are between 0.716 and 0.800 (Table 6). In addition, this study carried out a robustness check of the PLS-SEM model [62]. To evaluate the model’s predictive accuracy, we used the method introduced by Shmueli et al. [63], which applies PLS path modeling. Based on this approach, a PLS predict/CVAT analysis was conducted (

Table 7. PLS predict cross-validated predictive ability test (CVPAT) and coefficient of determination (R²).

Endogenous Latent Variables	R2 Value	Q2 Predict	RSME	MAE
University social responsibility	0.747	0.746	0.505	0.334
University reputation	0.582	0.686	0.560	0.435

). The results showed that both the coefficient of determination (R²) and the cross-validated predictive ability (Q²) were significantly greater than zero, suggesting that the proposed model demonstrates strong predictive capability.

4.5. Mediation Analysis

Mediation analysis was performed to assess the mediating role of USR in the relationship between independent variables and UR. The analysis confirmed the significant mediating role of USR between key factors (TR, AR, R&I, and CO) and UR across all stakeholder groups. All four hypotheses (H1–H4) were supported, with USR partially mediating the relationships significantly VAF (42–50%, p < 0.000), (

Table 8. Mediation analysis results.

Alumni					Employers				Parents
Hypothesis	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	Total Effect	VAF	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	Total Effect	VAF	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	Total Effect	VAF
H1: AR→USR→UR	0.227	0.229	0.456	50%	0.120	0.095	0.215	44%	0.303	0.216	0.519	42%
H2: CO→USR→UR	0.159	0.131	0.290	45%	0.212	0.169	0.381	44%	0.164	0.117	0.281	42%
H3: R&I→USR→UR	0.200	0.165	0.365	45%	0.285	0.227	0.512	44%	0.251	0.179	0.430	42%
H4: TR→USR→UR	0.337	0.278	0.625	45%	0.340	0.270	0.610	44%	0.241	0.172	0.413	42%

AR: alumni reputation; R&I: research and innovation; USR: university social reputation; TR: teacher reputation; CO: cooperation; UR: university reputation. VAF: <0–20%, no mediation; 20–80%, partial mediation; above 80%, full mediation. [57]. The model fit indices from SmartPLS, including SRMR (0.040), NFI (0.926), and R² (0.747, 0.582), all fall within acceptable thresholds, indicating that the model exhibits a satisfactory fit to the data.

).

5. Discussion

This study investigated the UR, which is an important factor in the sustainable development of HE. This study proposed two theoretical models. The first model proposed four hypotheses, H1–H4, which state that USR is influenced by the following factors: teacher reputation (H1), alumni reputation (H2), university research and innovation contributions to society (H3), and cooperation (H4). The second model was based on the hypothesis that the USR would increase the UR (H5). The results of this research showed that the above hypotheses were significantly supported by the structural measurement and structural models. This supports the research findings of Diana Escandon-Barbosa et al. [30,64] that the research experience, pedagogy, and quality of teachers affect the academic reputation of universities. In particular, USR is not measured solely by one-sided perceptions but rather by the participation of stakeholders in the institution. For example, research has been conducted on USR based on the perceptions of students and faculty [65,66,67]. This study highlights that universities that engage more in social responsibility initiatives tend to have better reputations. This is supported by the data showing that universities with higher USR scores also have a higher rank in reputation.

The structural model testing supported all five proposed hypotheses (H1–H5), demonstrating the significant role of university social responsibility (USR) both as a dependent and as a mediating construct. This effect was consistently strong across employers, alumni, and parents. This study concluded that both employers and alumni play a more substantial role in influencing USR. Overall, the R-squared value for the first model ranged from 0.716 to 0.800, indicating that AR, TR, CO, and R&I are all critical factors in enhancing social responsibility at universities.

This research shows that the main indicator of the sustainable development of higher education institutions is the reputation of the university, with SR serving as a critical factor in enhancing it. Parents prioritize the reputation of teachers and alumni, whereas employers focus on the university’s collaboration efforts and research innovation alongside alumni reputation. This analysis emphasizes that university administrators need to foster community-focused initiatives, promote faculty achievements, prioritize student learning outcomes and quality, and strengthen both internal and external cooperation and research innovation to address societal and organizational challenges. This study, grounded in institutional theory, signaling theory, and stakeholder theory, underscores the capacity of higher education institutions to actively contribute to sustainable development through the implementation of university social responsibility (RQ1). In particular, stakeholder and institutional theories are most compatible with university reputation research, as they demonstrate the need to focus on collaboratively implementing activities that meet the interests and needs of multiple stakeholders with whom universities are directly and indirectly involved.

The findings indicate that key drivers of USR include the scope and impact of research and innovation, the breadth of internal and external collaborations, and the social value created through faculty and alumni engagement (RQ2). These institutional factors shape how stakeholders assess a university’s social responsibility performance, which in turn significantly influences the university’s overall reputation (RQ3). Furthermore, it is crucial to highlight that this study goes beyond a single perspective by incorporating input from external stakeholders, including employers, alumni, and parents. This comprehensive approach results in more accurate and realistic conclusions.

The results of our research confirm that universities can increase their social standing and thereby enhance their reputation through the reputation of their teachers and alumni, the benefits of internal and external cooperation of the institution, and the research and innovation work of academics and researchers. Our study demonstrates that it is possible to systematically measure university reputation based on participatory evaluation of stakeholders and is characterized by the innovative use of PLS-SEM in the research methodology. Furthermore, it is important to establish basic evaluation indicators for assessing university reputation in order to determine the contribution of higher education institutions to the sustainable development of the country.

A limitation of this study is that it focuses solely on external stakeholders in examining UR. To address this, we suggest the following directions for future research: (1) Including both external and internal stakeholders of the university would offer a more comprehensive understanding of the UR and SR. (2) This study can be expanded by adding additional factors that influence USR, such as stakeholder satisfaction, relationship quality, university image, organizational culture, student reputation, values, and sustainable development indicators. (3) By considering the perspectives, evaluations, and feedback of stakeholders in HE, identifying and addressing their diverse needs, and applying these insights to university operations, the institution can enhance its contribution to sustainable development.

6. Conclusions

This study contributes to the theoretical understanding of how TR, AR, CO, R&I, USR, and UR value creation are perceived by external stakeholders, including employers, parents, and alumni. Although previous studies have examined UR and USR [30,64,68,69], few have employed structural equation modeling with active stakeholder involvement, highlighting a gap that this study addresses.

Structural equation modeling was employed in the UR study, with separate analyses conducted for both measurement and structural models. These analyses were performed for the overall survey results, encompassing employers, alumni, and parents, as well as for each group individually. Given the inclusion of USR as a mediating variable, a mediation analysis was conducted. The structural model analysis metrics, including Cronbach’s Alpha, CR, AVE, T-value, p-value, and R-square, demonstrated effectiveness.

Through education, academic training, and research, they contribute to social, economic, and environmental development, fulfilling their social responsibility [69,70]. This study highlights the importance of universities engaging with stakeholder perspectives and collaborating to effectively implement sustainable development policies and strategies. Additionally, it was stressed that administrators should prioritize enhancing social responsibility as well as fostering research, innovation, and collaboration in order to strengthen the position of their universities in society and enhance their reputation.

Based on these findings, several strategic recommendations are proposed to strengthen institutional engagement in reputation: first, universities should promote the application of academic research outcomes in industrial and societal contexts. Expanding international and domestic collaborations and engaging proactively in addressing social challenges can serve as key mechanisms to reinforce institutional legitimacy and social value. Second, building faculty research capacity and visibility is critical. Supporting academic leadership through continuous professional development and effective public communication may enhance the reputation of faculty members and increase the attractiveness of academic careers among students. Third, the adoption of key influencing factors as criteria for evaluating university reputation is recommended. These may include the following: teacher reputation (e.g., number of research publications, faculty with a high H-index, total citations), alumni reputation (e.g., employment rate, salary levels, job positions, career longevity), national and international collaboration (e.g., joint training and research projects, student exchanges, external funding), and socially driven innovations (e.g., solutions addressing social challenges, educational innovations, technological contributions, measurable social impact). Fourth, universities are encouraged to establish an institutional infrastructure such as a Sustainable Development Policy Unit that is dedicated to promoting quality education, stakeholder engagement, and long-term development strategies. Such a unit can facilitate alumni career support, improve graduate tracking systems, enhance community partnerships, and increase national and international collaboration.

As a long-term outcome, this center can serve as a strategic hub, aligning institutional policies with the SDGs, fostering citizen empowerment through knowledge dissemination, and advancing inclusive participation in societal development. As such, universities should be positioned not only as centers of knowledge production but also as active agents of social transformation and civic advancement through science, innovation, and public engagement.