• editor.aipublications@gmail.com
  • Track Your Paper
  • Contact Us
  • ISSN: 2456-7817

International Journal Of Engineering, Business And Management(IJEBM)

Return on Investment in Public and Private Higher Education Institutions in Vietnam: A Comparative Analysis

Chau Doan Bao


International Journal of Engineering, Business And Management(IJEBM), Vol-9,Issue-4, October - December 2025, Pages 1-7 , 10.22161/ijebm.9.4.1

Download | Downloads : 8 | Total View : 1010

Article Info: Received: 29 Aug 2025; Received in revised form: 30 Sep 2025; Accepted: 04 Oct 2025; Available online: 08 Oct 2025

Cite this Article: APA | ACM | Chicago | Harvard | IEEE | MLA | Vancouver | Bibtex

Share

Return on Investment (ROI) in higher education reflects the balance between the costs of obtaining a degree and the economic, professional, and social benefits it generates. In Vietnam, where both public and private higher education institutions play critical roles in workforce development, ROI assessment provides insight into the efficiency and long-term value of educational investment. The aim of this research is to evaluate and compare the ROI associated with public and private universities, considering financial returns, employability outcomes, and career progression of graduates. Data were gathered from 420 participants, including recent graduatestudents, through structured questionnaires and institutional reports. The analysis model incorporates variables such as tuition fees, duration of study, post-graduation salary levels, employment stability, and perceived career growth. ROI was assessed using cost-benefit frameworks, regression analysis, and comparative testing through independent sample t-tests, with implementation carried out using IBM SPSS statistics (version 26). The procedure highlights how investment in tuition and opportunity costs translates into measurable economic gains, with variations observed across public and private institutions. Results indicate that public institutions demonstrate stronger cost-effectiveness due to lower tuition burdens, while private institutions provide higher immediate salary outcomes in selected disciplines. The conclusion emphasizes that ROI differs by institutional type, field of study, and labour market alignment, offering policymakers and stakeholders evidence to refine resource allocation and strategic planning in Vietnamese higher education.

Return on Investment (ROI), Higher Education, Public Universities, Private Universities, Graduate Employability.

[1] Edeji, O. C. (2024). Neo-liberalism, human capital theory and the right to education: Economic interpretation of the purpose of education. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, 100734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100734
[2] Reddick, C. G., & Ponomariov, B. (2024). The effects of institutional factors on the return on investment of a university education in the United States of America. Quality in Higher Education, 30(2), 185-199.https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2022.2158518
[3] Cox, J. (2021). The higher education environment driving academic library strategy: A political, economic, social, and technological (PEST) analysis. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(1), 102219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102219
[4] Jayabalan, J., Dorasamy, M., & Raman, M. (2021). Reshaping higher educational institutions through frugal open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(2), 145. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7020145
[5] Purcell, W. M., & Lumbreras, J. (2021). Higher education and the COVID-19 pandemic: navigating disruption using the sustainable development goals. Discover Sustainability, 2(1), 6.https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1737556
[6] Callender, C., & Melis, G. (2022). The privilege of choice: How prospective college students’ financial concerns influence choice of higher education institution and subject of study in England. The Journal of Higher Education, 93(3), 477-501.https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2021.1996169
[7] Al-Ali, M., & Marks, A. (2022). A digital maturity model for the education enterprise. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 26(2), 47-58.https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2021.1978578
[8] Veidemane, A. (2022). Education for sustainable development in higher education rankings: Challenges and opportunities for developing internationally comparable indicators. Sustainability, 14(9), 5102. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095102
[9] Velkoska, C. (2024). SUSTAINABILITY AND QUALITY COSTS IN THE HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS. International Scientific Journal Vision, 9. 10.55843/ivisum242067v
[10] Roosa, T., &Mischen, P. (2022). Measuring the impact of organizational characteristics on the sustainability performance of US institutions of higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(7), 1543-1559. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-08-2021-0355
[11] Li, I. W., Jackson, D., & Carroll, D. R. (2023). Influence of equity group status and entry pathway on academic outcomes in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 45(2), 140-159.https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2023.2180163
[12] Camilleri, M. A. (2021). Using the balanced scorecard as a performance management tool in higher education. Management in Education, 35(1), 10-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020620921412