The study examines modern approaches to assessing the competitiveness of universities and identifies areas for their further methodological improvement in the context of the transformation of the higher education system. The relevance of the research is due to the growing competition among universities, the digitalization of the educational environment, changes in labor market requirements, and the increasing role of universities as actors in socio economic development. Despite the widespread use of various methods for assessing competitiveness, existing approaches are often focused on a limited set of indicators and do not allow for a comprehensive understanding of the structure of an educational organization’s competitive advantages and limitations. The approaches to assessing the competitiveness of universities are examined, their methodological limitations are identified, and the directions for improving the assessment tools are substantiated. The methodological basis consists of the analysis and generalization of scientific literature, comparative analysis, a logical structural approach, and the grouping method. The main approaches to assessing the competitiveness of universities are identified: rating, indicator, integral, expert, and comparative. It has been established that each of them has certain analytical advantages, but does not provide a holistic view of a university’s competitive position due to the fragmented nature of the indicators, insufficient consideration of qualitative characteristics, and limited suitability for managerial analysis. The need to switch to a block structured approach based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative assessment parameters is substantiated. A logical model for assessing the competitiveness of universities has been proposed, including educational, scientific, personnel, management, infrastructure, and reputational components. The practical significance of the study lies in the possibility of using the proposed model when developing comprehensive assessment systems and making management decisions aimed at increasing the competitiveness of universities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David Nabiev (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: