0% found this document useful (0 votes)

20 views25 pages

Bus Strat Dev - 2025 - Sultana - Bridging Business Strategy and Educational Development Private Sector Engagement and

This research article explores the intersection of business strategy and educational development, focusing on private sector engagement in e-learning within Bangladesh's higher education sector. The study identifies six critical success factors for effective e-learning implementation and highlights the importance of public-private partnerships in achieving both commercial viability and developmental impact. The findings contribute to business model innovation frameworks and provide insights for businesses and policymakers aiming to enhance sustainable educational technology initiatives in emerging markets.

Uploaded by

foenem

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

20 views25 pages

Bus Strat Dev - 2025 - Sultana - Bridging Business Strategy and Educational Development Private Sector Engagement and

Uploaded by

foenem

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 25

Business Strategy & Development

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Bridging Business Strategy and Educational Development:

1Department of Business Administration, Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology, Cumilla, Bangladesh | 2University of
Liberal Arts Bangladesh (ULAB), Dhaka, Bangladesh | 3Department of English, Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology,
Cumilla, Bangladesh | 4Department of Economics, Tejgaon College, Dhaka, Bangladesh | 5Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Rajshahi
University of Engineering and Technology, Rajshahi, Bangladesh

Correspondence: Tawhid Ahmed Chowdhury ([email protected]; [email protected])

Received: 27 December 2024 | Revised: 9 March 2025 | Accepted: 10 March 2025

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

ABSTRACT
As developing economies embrace digital transformation to bridge educational gaps, the intersection of business strategy and
educational development offers significant opportunities. This study explores how private sector engagement in e-learning can
drive business growth and achieve development outcomes in Bangladesh's higher education sector. Through mixed-methods
analysis of 780 stakeholders across institutions, we examine how educational technology strategies create shared value while
addressing accessibility challenges in developing markets. Our findings show that well-structured e-learning implementations
simultaneously achieve commercial viability and development impact. Six critical success factors were identified: adminis-
trative infrastructure, technological architecture, content development, instructor capabilities, learner characteristics, and so-
cial support. Infrastructure partnerships with balanced public–private investment sharing achieved 75% success rates, while
content development collaborations enhanced learning outcomes by 35%. The study highlights three mechanisms supporting
Sustainable Development Goals: innovative business models balancing viability with impact, public–private partnerships lever-
aging corporate expertise, and inclusive stakeholder engagement frameworks. Theoretically, we extend stakeholder value theory
by demonstrating how complementary value creation can be optimized across multiple stakeholder groups in educational tech-
nology implementations. We contribute to business model innovation frameworks by identifying specific mechanisms through
which sustainable value is created, delivered, and captured in developing market contexts. These insights are valuable for busi-
nesses entering emerging e-learning markets and for policymakers creating enabling environments for sustainable educational
technology initiatives.

1   |   Introduction delivery method but a strategic intersection of commercial

opportunity and development potential, with the global ed-
The global education sector is undergoing a fundamental ucational technology market projected to reach $342.9 bil-
transformation driven by digitalization and evolving market lion by 2025 (Basheer et al. 2024; Samala et al. 2024; Yildiz
demands. E-learning represents not merely an alternative et al. 2020). In developing economies, this transformation

© 2025 ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Business Strategy & Development, 2025; 8:e70098 1 of 25

https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.70098
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
has significant implications for multiple stakeholders: for (Jones 2017). Previous studies have primarily focused on either
businesses, it presents substantial market growth potential business optimization or educational outcomes, with limited
with a 32.8% Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) from integration of these perspectives (Deng et al. 2020; Khanna
2020 to 2023; for policymakers, it offers accelerated prog- et al. 2015). In business strategy and development, it high-
ress toward educational access goals; for educational institu- lighted the need for frameworks that assess both commercial
tions, it enables resource optimization and expanded reach; success and developmental impact, particularly in resource-
and for learners, it provides unprecedented access to qual- constrained environments (Cornejo- Velazquez et al. 2020;
ity educational resources (Ansong et al. 2017; Chipere 2017; Giannakos et al. 2022; Habib et al. 2024; Khanna et al. 2015).
Labun 2023). The intersection of business strategy and edu- Our study addresses this research gap by providing an inte-
cational development has gained particular significance in grated analysis that connects business strategy elements with
the post-COVID era (Murphy 2020). While e-learning evolved measurable development outcomes.
from an alternative delivery method to a strategic necessity,
the transformation has been more nuanced than initially pre- Current research reveals several critical gaps in understand-
dicted. Market analysis suggests that global ed-tech invest- ing how business strategies can effectively support educational
ments reached approximately $16 billion in 2020 (Jayalath and development through e- learning. These gaps include limited
Esichaikul 2022; Zubairi et al. 2021), creating opportunities analysis of business models that balance commercial viability
for innovative business models that balance commercial in- with development impact in emerging markets (Obisesan and
terests with development objectives. In Bangladesh, the ed- Olayide 2021; Redman 2018), insufficient understanding of how
tech sector shows promise for private sector engagement, with private sector involvement affects e-learning sustainability and
market projections suggesting growth to roughly $2 billion by scalability (Alam et al. 2021; Alyoussef 2021), lack of compre-
2025 (Hasan 2024; Zubairi et al. 2021). Educational institu- hensive frameworks for assessing return on investment (ROI) in
tions must now operate within a competitive digital ecosys- educational technology initiatives that contribute to development
tem, balancing educational quality with market sustainability. goals (Yildiz et al. 2020), and a gap in knowledge about effective
Research indicates that successful e-learning implementation public–private partnership models in educational technology de-
requires significant private-sector involvement in infrastruc- ployment (Ahmad et al. 2018). E-learning's success in educational
ture development, content creation, and service delivery institutions stems from its market adaptability and resource op-
(Noesgaard and Ørngreen 2015; Smyrnova-T rybulska 2019). timization capabilities (Fawaz and Samaha 2021; Kulikowski
The quality of education remains paramount, as it directly im- et al. 2022). Market research indicates that e-learning solutions
pacts human capital development and economic competitive- succeed due to their accessibility, flexibility, and resource-
ness (Economics 2019; Escueta et al. 2020). Both developing sharing capabilities, creating opportunities for scalable business
and developed nations must ensure educational quality while models (Alhabeeb and Rowley 2017). The World Bank estimates
creating viable business models to sustain and scale digital that effective e-learning implementation can reduce educational
learning initiatives (Hong and Kim 2018; Trevisan et al. 2024). delivery costs by 30%–40% while increasing access by 50%–60%
(Aaradhi and Chakraborty 2024; Smyrnova-Trybulska 2019).
The business landscape of educational technology encom-
passes multiple stakeholder interests. Private sector entities This study addresses these research gaps by examining critical
are increasingly viewing education as a strategic market, success factors for e-learning implementation from business
with opportunities in platform development, content cre- strategy and development perspectives. The research objec-
ation, and support services (Alagaraja and Dooley 2005; tives are to identify viable business models for private sector
Kintu et al. 2017). However, successful market entry requires involvement in e-learning deployment in developing markets,
understanding both commercial viability and development analyze the relationship between commercial success factors
impact. Recent studies indicate that sustainable e-learning and development outcomes in e-learning initiatives, develop
business models in developing countries must address three a framework for assessing and enhancing e-learning sustain-
key areas: technology infrastructure (Walker et al. 2016), ability through strategic private sector engagement, and eval-
market accessibility (Alam et al. 2021; Stepanyan et al. 2013), uate market opportunities and challenges in implementing
and stakeholder engagement (Aaradhi and Chakraborty 2024; e-learning solutions in developing economies. Based on these
Zawacki-R ichter et al. 2019). The COVID-19 pandemic ac- objectives, our study addresses the following specific research
celerated transformation in the education sector, though questions: (a) What business models enable sustainable pri-
with varying degrees of success across different contexts. vate sector involvement in e-learning deployment in develop-
Following the CDC's March 2020 guidelines on alternative ing markets while maintaining development impact? (b) How
teaching methods, private sector investment in educational do critical success factors in e-learning implementation con-
technology increased substantially. Companies providing vir- tribute differently to commercial viability and development
tual classroom solutions experienced significant growth, with outcomes? (c) What frameworks can effectively assess and
market valuations typically increasing by 200%–300% during enhance e- learning sustainability through strategic private
2020–2022 (FitzPatrick 2012; Noesgaard and Ørngreen 2015). sector engagement? (d) How do market opportunities and im-
This market expansion created opportunities particularly plementation challenges vary across different regional and ed-
relevant to developing markets, though implementation chal- ucational contexts in developing economies?
lenges remained significant. Despite growing interest in e-
learning business models, significant knowledge gaps persist We examine six key business drivers: administrative infra-
in understanding how commercial viability and development structure, technological architecture, content development,
impact can be simultaneously achieved in emerging markets instructor capabilities, learner characteristics, and social

2 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
support. These factors have been identified through market 2.1   |   Business Models and Market Dynamics in
analysis, stakeholder interviews, and an extensive literature E-Learning
review. The significance of this research lies in its contribu-
tion to understanding how business strategies can drive edu- The e-learning market has evolved from basic digital con-
cational development while creating sustainable commercial tent delivery to sophisticated platform economies. Current
value. The findings will help policymakers, investors, and edu- market research identifies several dominant business models
cational technology companies develop effective market entry that have emerged in response to both commercial opportu-
and scaling strategies for emerging economies. Additionally, nities and development needs. Platform-a s-a-S ervice (PaaS)
the research provides insights into creating sustainable busi- in educational technology refers to cloud-based learning en-
ness models that align private sector interests with develop- vironments where providers deliver the complete technol-
ment goals. ogy stack—hardware, operating systems, and preconfigured
software—allowing educational institutions to develop, run,
and manage e- learning applications without the complex-
2   |   Literature Review, Theoretical Framework, ity of building and maintaining the infrastructure (Ancillai
and Hypotheses Development et al. 2023; Baig and Yadegaridehkordi 2025; Salama and
Hinton 2023; Thavi et al. 2024). Unlike traditional learning
The convergence of education technology and sustainable de- management systems that require on-premises installation
velopment has created a dynamic market landscape with sig- and maintenance, PaaS solutions offer scalable, subscription-
nificant business opportunities. Recent analyses indicate that based access with reduced technical overhead. PaaS has a
global edtech investments have surged from $18.7 billion in 2019 market penetration of 45% in developing economies, an an-
to $342 billion in 2023, with particular growth in developing nual growth rate of 28%, and a subscription-based revenue
economies (Alam et al. 2021). This review systematically exam- model, significantly improving educational accessibility
ines the interconnected dimensions of business models, market (Ahmad et al. 2018). Content-a s-a- S ervice (CaaS) provides
dynamics, development impact, and critical success factors in modular, reusable educational content through API- based
e-learning implementations. delivery systems, enabling dynamic content assembly across
multiple channels and devices. This differs from traditional
For theoretical framework development, this study employs content publishing by separating content creation from pre-
stakeholder value theory as its primary theoretical lens, in- sentation, allowing for personalized learning experiences and
tegrated with elements from the business model innovation continuous updates without disrupting the user experience
framework and sustainable development theory (Briones (Allman et al. 2024). CaaS holds 35% of global edtech reve-
et al. 2023; Langrafe et al. 2020). Stakeholder value theory pro- nue, growing at 32% annually, with a revenue model based
vides a conceptual foundation for understanding how multiple on content licensing and customization, providing localized
stakeholders derive different forms of value from e-learning im- learning resources (Walker et al. 2016). Infrastructure-a s-a-
plementations, moving beyond shareholder-centric approaches Service (IaaS) delivers virtualized computing resources over
to consider broader value creation and distribution mechanisms the internet, providing educational institutions with flexible
(Bashir and Lapshun 2025; Briones et al. 2023). access to servers, storage, and networking without capital
expenditure on physical infrastructure. This contrasts with
The business model innovation framework offers analytical tools traditional educational technology deployments that require
for examining how organizations create, deliver, and capture significant upfront investment in hardware and technical per-
value in changing market environments (Ramdani et al. 2019). sonnel (Thavi et al. 2024; Timotheou et al. 2023). IaaS has a
This perspective is particularly relevant to educational tech- global market size of $12.8 billion, growing at 25% annually,
nology in developing markets, where traditional educational with usage-based pricing that reduces implementation barri-
business models are being disrupted by digital transformation ers (Alhabeeb and Rowley 2017). Hybrid solutions, adopted
(Rahiman and Kodikal 2024; Singer-Brodowski 2023; Vaska by 40% of institutions, grow at 35% annually, offering mixed
et al. 2021). Business model innovation in educational con- revenue streams and enhanced flexibility and accessibility
texts requires balancing efficiency gains with quality consider- (Stepanyan et al. 2013; Strike 2018).
ations, a tension our study explicitly addresses (Neumeyer and
Santos 2018).
2.2   |   Success Factors and Development Outcomes
Sustainable development theory provides the third component
of our theoretical framework, offering a lens for examining Research across emerging markets has identified critical factors
how business activities contribute to broader societal goals that influence both business success and development impact
(Singer-Brodowski 2023). Specifically, we employ the concept in e-learning implementations. These factors can be understood
of “shared value” to analyze how e-learning business strate- through stakeholder value theory, which suggests that sustain-
gies can simultaneously create commercial value and address able e-learning models must create value for multiple stakehold-
social challenges (Briones et al. 2023; Çelik and Baturay 2024; ers simultaneously.
Otto and Becker 2019). This integrated theoretical approach
allows us to examine the complex interplay between business Administrative infrastructure and support systems form the
strategy, stakeholder value creation, and sustainable devel- foundational elements of successful e- learning implementa-
opment outcomes in e-learning implementations (Otto and tions. Technology infrastructure requires an investment of
Becker 2019). $2–$5 million per institution, with cost reduction potential of

3 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
30%, improving student satisfaction by 45% and correlating with competence, communication skills, and ability to build online
market growth (Alyoussef 2021). Technology adoption patterns learning communities directly impact student engagement and
in educational settings follow distinct trajectories influenced by achievement. This leads to our fourth hypothesis:
both individual acceptance factors and institutional dynamics.
The Extended Technology Acceptance Model provides a theo- H4. Instructor characteristics enhance e-learners' performance
retical foundation for understanding how perceived usefulness and sustainability in e-learning.
and ease of use influence adoption behaviors among educational
stakeholders (Wang et al. 2024). This model explains the ob- Learner characteristics and engagement patterns strongly in-
served variations in technology uptake across different market fluence e- learning outcomes. Students' technological readi-
segments in our study. Additionally, active learning frameworks ness, self-regulation abilities, and motivation levels determine
demonstrate how technology integration enhances engagement how effectively they engage with online learning environments
and knowledge retention when properly aligned with pedagog- (Maatuk et al. 2022). Stakeholder engagement, accounting for
ical approaches (Wang and Sun 2025). Our findings on learner 15%–20% of total investment, improves user retention by 40%,
characteristics (β = 3.650, p < 0.001) align with these theoretical satisfaction rates by 35%, and has a development impact score
foundations, demonstrating how technology acceptance fac- of 0.75 (Queiros and de Villiers 2016). This understanding forms
tors significantly impact sustainable implementation outcomes. the basis for our fifth hypothesis:
Strong administrative backing ensures appropriate resource al-
location, policy alignment, and organizational integration nec- H5. Learner characteristics enhance e-learners' performance
essary for sustainable implementation (Shah et al. 2021). When and sustainability in e-learning.
properly structured, administrative systems create reinforcing
cycles that enhance both operational efficiency and educational Social support and community engagement have been identi-
effectiveness. This theoretical understanding leads to our first fied as crucial elements for e-learning sustainability. Learning
hypothesis: communities, peer interaction, and social networks enhance en-
gagement, reduce isolation, and improve knowledge retention in
H1. Administrative support enhances e-learners' performance online environments (Hussain et al. 2018; Saxena et al. 2021).
and sustainability in e-learning. The social dimension of e-learning contributes significantly to
both educational effectiveness and implementation sustainabil-
Technological infrastructure and support systems constitute ity, supporting our final hypothesis:
the technical backbone of e-learning delivery. Technology in-
frastructure represents a shared value platform that enables H6. Social support enhances e-learners' performance and sus-
multiple stakeholders to derive different forms of value from tainability in e-learning.
the same underlying systems. The quality and reliability of
technological support directly impact user experience, system
usability, and learning effectiveness (Ali et al. 2018). Content 2.3   |   Partnership Models and Sustainability
quality and localization incur development costs of $50,000– Factors
$200,000 per course but improve market adoption by 35%, en-
hance learning outcomes by 40%, and offer ROI timeframes of Recent studies have highlighted the effectiveness of various
18–24 months (Makokha and Mutisya 2016). This leads to our partnership models in creating sustainable e- learning eco-
second hypothesis: systems. Infrastructure partnerships with 60% private and
40% public investment sharing achieve success rates of 75%
H2. System and technological support enhance e-learners' per- and improve access by 40% (Epstein and Yuthas 2017; Jakub
formance and sustainability in e-learning. Labun 2023). Content development collaborations with 70% pri-
vate and 30% public cost sharing have market success rates of
Course design and content quality significantly influence learn- 65% and improve learning by 35% (Basheer et al. 2024). Service
ing outcomes and user engagement. The quality and design of delivery alliances with 55% private and 45% public revenue shar-
educational content determines how effectively knowledge ing maintain sustainability rates of 80% and improve commu-
is transferred and skills are developed (Debattista 2018; Oh nity impact by 45% (Walker et al. 2016).
et al. 2020). Well-designed courses with appropriate pedagogical
approaches, interactive elements, and assessment methods en- Research increasingly demonstrates a strong correlation be-
hance learning effectiveness while increasing user satisfaction tween commercial viability and development outcomes in
and retention. This understanding informs our third hypothesis: e-
learning implementations. Financial sustainability, with
break-even timelines of 24–36 months and profit margins
H3. Course design and contents enhance e-learners' perfor- of 15%–25%, ensures 85% development impact sustainabil-
mance and sustainability in e-learning. ity (Alyoussef 2021; Basheer et al. 2024; Trevisan et al. 2024).
Social impact includes access improvement of 40%–60%, cost
Instructor capabilities represent a critical human factor in e- reduction of 30%–40%, and quality enhancement of 35%–45%
learning success. Instructors who effectively facilitate online (Economics 2019; Munich 2014). Economic benefits include
learning, provide timely feedback, and adapt teaching strategies GDP contribution of 0.3%–0.5%, employment generation of
to digital environments significantly influence learning out- 2%–3% annually, and a 45% improvement in skill development
comes (Lee et al. 2021; Shahzad et al. 2021) Their technological (Economics 2019; Escueta et al. 2020).

4 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

Our market analysis component employed multiple analytical

3.1   |   Research Design and Market Context tools to assess business opportunities and market dynamics.
This included Porter's Five Forces analysis of the educational
Our investigation framework was structured as a three-phase technology sector, PESTLE analysis of market conditions, and
study, combining quantitative market analysis with qualitative a detailed evaluation of revenue models and cost structures. We
stakeholder assessment. In the first phase, we focused on market incorporated data from multiple sources, including institutional
analysis, employing industry-standard methodologies to evalu- financial reports, market research databases, and industry an-
ate market size, growth potential, and competitive dynamics. alytics platforms. Our market sizing calculations used both
This included analyzing existing e-learning providers, market top-down and bottom-up approaches to ensure accuracy, while
penetration rates, and revenue models. The second phase con- growth projections employed regression analysis of historical
centrated on stakeholder assessment, where we gathered data data combined with forward-looking indicators.
from institutional decision-makers, private sector partners, and
end users. In the third phase, we measured impact through a
combination of business performance indicators and develop- 3.4   |   Stakeholder Assessment Methodology
ment outcomes.
We utilized a multi-layered approach for stakeholder assess-
ment, combining surveys, semi- structured interviews, and
3.2   |   Data Collection and Sampling Strategy focus group discussions. The questionnaire items for each
construct were designed based on established scales in tech-
We employed a stratified sampling approach for primary data nology adoption and educational assessment literature, tai-
collection, ensuring representation across market segments lored for the e-learning context. The questionnaire included
and stakeholder groups. Institutional selection employed 25 items categorized into six key dimensions: administrative
a multi-stage stratified sampling approach based on three support, technological infrastructure, course design, instruc-
primary criteria: institutional size (small: < 5000 students; tor capabilities, learner characteristics, and social support
medium: 5000–15,000 students; large: > 15,000 students), geo- (Table 3). Each dimension was evaluated for both business
graphical location (urban, suburban, rural), and program di- impact and development outcomes. For Administrative
versity (specialized vs. comprehensive). Within each stratum, Support (AS), items included statements like AS1: “The in-
random selection was employed to ensure representativeness. stitution provides adequate resources for e-learning imple-
We mitigated selection bias through: (1) oversampling in un- mentation,” AS2: “Policies and procedures support effective
derrepresented categories with subsequent weighting adjust- e-
learning delivery,” and AS3: “Administrative leadership
ments, (2) employing response rate analysis to identify and actively promotes e-learning initiatives.” Course Design and
address non-response patterns, and (3) conducting sensitivity Contents (CDC) items focused on aspects such as CDC1: “E-
analysis to assess the impact of potential selection biases on learning materials are well-organized and structured,” CDC2:
our findings. Our study gathered data from 780 respondents “Course content is relevant to learning objectives,” CDC3:
across both public (35.38%) and private (64.62%) institutions, “Interactive elements enhance engagement with content,”
with a gender distribution of 36.92% male and 63.08% female and CDC4: “Content is accessible across different devices and
participants. The educational level distribution included first- platforms.” System and Technological Support (STS) items
year undergraduates (28.33%), second-year students (14.62%), addressed STS1: “Technical support is readily available when
third and fourth-year students (32.82%), and postgraduate stu- needed,” STS2: “The e- learning platform operates reliably
dents (24.23%). This distribution allowed us to analyze market without disruptions,” and STS3: “The system provides neces-
opportunities across different educational segments while en- sary tools for effective learning.” Learner Characteristics (LC)
suring statistical validity. items included LC1: “I am comfortable using technology for
learning,” LC2: “I can manage my time effectively for online
We acknowledge several methodological challenges specific learning,” and LC3: “I actively participate in online learning
to data collection in emerging markets like Bangladesh. First, activities.” Instructor Characteristics (IC) items assessed IC1:
digital access disparities created potential sampling bias, partic- “Instructors demonstrate competence in using e- learning
ularly among rural populations with limited connectivity. We tools,” IC2: “Instructors provide timely feedback on online
addressed this through mixed collection methods, including activities,” and IC3: “Instructors effectively facilitate online

5 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
discussions.” Social Support (SS) items highlighted SS1: “Peer comparative fit index (CFI), standardized root mean square
interaction enhances my online learning experience,” SS2: residual (SRMR), and root mean square error of approximation
“Community support encourages continued participation,” (RMSEA). Our model achieved excellent fit with CMIN/DF of
and SS3: “Collaborative activities are effectively integrated.” 1.352, CFI of 0.962, SRMR of 0.058, and RMSEA of 0.046, all
E-learners' Performance and Sustainability (EPS) items evalu- meeting or exceeding standard thresholds for SEM.
ated EPS1: “E-learning improves my academic performance,”
EPS2: “I intend to continue using e-learning in the future,”
EPS3: “E-learning helps me achieve my educational goals,” 3.7   |   Financial, Economic, and Sustainability
EPS4: “E-learning improves my learning efficiency,” EPS5: Analysis
“E-learning provides sustainable educational benefits,” and
EPS6: “E- learning enhances my overall educational expe- Our methodology included a detailed financial analysis of e-
rience.” All items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, learning implementations, incorporating both direct costs
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). (infrastructure, content development, training) and indirect
costs (administrative overhead, maintenance). Revenue mod-
eling considered multiple streams, including subscription fees,
3.5   |   Statistical Analysis and Business Metrics content licensing, and service charges. Our economic impact
analysis examined broader effects, including job creation, skill
We employed advanced statistical techniques, including struc- development, and contribution to GDP. Our stakeholder value
tural equation modeling (SEM) and confirmatory factor anal- assessment employed a three-dimensional framework mea-
ysis (CFA), to identify relationships between business success suring value creation across financial, social, and educational
factors and development outcomes. SEM is an advanced mul- dimensions. Financial value was measured through direct
tivariate method that combines factor analysis and multiple revenue generation, cost savings, productivity improvements,
regression to simultaneously examine relationships among and long-term earning potential increases (Alam et al. 2021;
measured variables and latent constructs (Al Kafy et al. 2024; Alyoussef 2021). We employed discounted cash flow analy-
Kwok et al. 2018). This approach allowed us to test the complex sis using a 12% discount rate, aligned with educational sector
relationships proposed in our hypotheses while accounting for benchmarks established by Elumalai et al. (2020), to calcu-
measurement error—a significant advantage over traditional late the net present value of different value streams. Social
regression analysis (Tarka 2018). CFA specifically examines value was quantified using the Social Return on Investment
how well measured variables represent the constructs they are (SROI) methodology as recommended by Alhabeeb and
intended to measure. For instance, we used CFA to determine Rowley (2017), incorporating measures of educational access
whether our survey questions about “administrative support” improvement, community engagement, social mobility en-
accurately captured this concept based on respondent answers hancement, and social capital development. Following Walker
(Amit et al. 2024; Rogers 2024). Our reliability testing through et al. (2016), this approach allowed us to monetize social
Cronbach's alpha—which measures internal consistency on a benefits using established proxies validated in educational
scale from 0 to 1—showed values ranging from 0.803 to 0.935, contexts. Educational value was assessed through a compos-
well above the 0.70 threshold generally considered accept- ite index combining learning outcome improvements, educa-
able in social science research (Bonett and Wright 2015). The tional quality enhancements, knowledge retention metrics,
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) test assesses sampling adequacy and skill development indicators, building on frameworks de-
by measuring the proportion of variance that might be common veloped by Economics (2019) and Escueta et al. (2020). This
variance. Our KMO values (0.677 to 0.776) exceeded the recom- multi-faceted approach captured educational benefits beyond
mended minimum of 0.6, indicating our sample was adequate traditional financial metrics, allowing for comprehensive val-
for factor analysis (Amit and Al Kafy 2024; Elsaman et al. 2022). uation across stakeholder groups. Additionally, our research
Using SPSS and AMOS software, our reliability testing through framework included specific metrics for assessing business
Cronbach's alpha showed values ranging from 0.803 to 0.935. sustainability and long- term development impact. This in-
volved evaluating financial sustainability indicators, market
resilience measures, and long-term viability factors as out-
3.6   |   Performance, Impact Measurement, lined by Basheer et al. (2024) and Trevisan et al. (2024). Our
and Model Fitness sustainability assessment also considered environmental im-
pacts, resource efficiency, and social inclusion metrics, align-
We developed a comprehensive framework for measuring both ing with broader sustainable development goals emphasized
business performance and development impact. Our busi- by Jakub Labun (2023) and Chipere (2017). A summary of our
ness metrics included market penetration rates, revenue gen- methodological workflow is illustrated in Figure 1.
eration potential, cost efficiency ratios, and ROI calculations.
Development impact indicators encompassed educational ac-
cessibility measures, learning outcome assessments, and socio- 4   |   Results
economic benefit evaluations. This dual measurement approach
enabled us to analyze how business success factors correlate 4.1   |   Model Validation and Statistical Analysis
with development outcomes.
The demographic profile shows balanced representation, with
We also assessed model fitness using multiple criteria, includ- about two-thirds of respondents from private universities
ing Chi-
square fit statistics/degree of freedom (CMIN/DF), (64.6%) and one-third from public institutions (35.4%). The

6 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

TABLE 1    |    Demographic characteristics of survey respondents (n = 780) across gender, education level, and institution type.

Demographic factors Respondents Percentage Cumulative percentage

Gender
Male 288 36.92 36.92
Female 492 63.08 100.0
Education
Graduate level (bachelor's 1st year) 221 28.33 28.33
Graduate level (bachelor's 2nd year) 114 14.62 42.95
Graduate level (bachelor's 3rd and 4th year) 256 32.82 75.77
Postgraduate level (masters 1st and 2nd year) 189 24.23 100.0
Institution
Public 276 35.38 35.38
Private 504 64.62 100.0

TABLE 2    |    Model fit indices for the structural equation model of e- The SEM demonstrated strong model fit, with indices meet-
learning success factors. ing or exceeding standard thresholds: CMIN/DF = 1.35,
CFI = 0.96, SRMR = 0.06, and RMSEA = 0.05 (Table 2).
Fit criteria Value Threshold Interpretation Measurement model analysis confirmed construct validity
CMIN/DF 1.352 Between 1 and 3 Excellent and reliability, with factor loadings typically ranging from
0.72 to 0.96 (Table 3).
CFI 0.962 > 0.95 Excellent
SRMR 0.058 < 0.08 Excellent The SEM results (Figure 2) and hypothesis testing (Table 4)
validated all proposed relationships at significant levels: H1
RMSEA 0.046 < 0.06 Excellent
(administrative support): β = 3.430, p < 0.003; H2 (system/
technological support): β = 3.224, p < 0.001; H3 (course design/
gender distribution indicated a higher proportion of female contents): β = 3.342, p < 0.002; H4 (instructor characteristics):
participants (63.1%), providing a diverse sample for analysis β = 3.103, p < 0.001; H5 (learner characteristics): β = 3.650,
(Table 1). p < 0.001; and H6 (social support): β = 3.242, p < 0.001.

7 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
TABLE 3    |    Measurement model results: Factor loadings, construct reliability, and convergent validity metrics.

Factor loading Average variance

Construct Items (construct validity) Construct reliability KMO extracted (AVE)
AS AS1 0.866 0.852 0.722 0.914
AS2 0.840
AS3 0.795
CDC CDC1 0.887 0.873 0.690 0.827
CDC2 0.856
CDC3 0.842
CDC4 0.744
STS STS1 0.903 0.881 0.756 0.964
STS2 0.898
STS3 0.777
LC LC1 0.783 0.877 0.691 0.736
LC2 0.727
LC3 0.722
IC IC1 0.848 0.803 0.687 0.948
IC2 0.843
IC3 0.899
SS SS1 0.958 0.927 0.776 0.820
SS2 0.952
SS3 0.860
EPS EPS1 0.918 0.935 0.677 0.837
EPS2 0.814
EPS3 0.811
EPS4 0.904
EPS5 0.903
EPS6 0.858

4.2   |   Market Growth and Development Trajectory coinciding with peak development impact improvements. Several
interconnected factors drove this substantial market expansion.
Our longitudinal analysis from 2020 to 2024 demonstrates ro- Government policy initiatives, particularly the Digital Bangladesh
bust market expansion coupled with steady improvements in Vision 2021 program, created an enabling regulatory environment
development impact (Figure 3). Market size exhibited consistent with tax incentives for educational technology investments and sub-
growth from $106.15 million in Q1 2020 to $504.46 million in sidized data access for educational purposes (Chowdhury 2021).
Q4 2024, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) According to the Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory
of 47.8%. This growth trajectory was particularly pronounced Commission, these policies contributed approximately 18% to
during the post-pandemic recovery period, with quarterly overall market growth (Research and Markets 2024). Concurrent
growth rates averaging 8.3%. Notably, our development impact private sector investment in digital infrastructure expanded in-
scores showed steady improvement, rising from 42.39 to 82.78 ternet penetration from the 38% baseline in 2020 to 67% by 2024
over the same period, indicating that market expansion did not (Kemp 2024), significantly expanding the addressable market.
compromise developmental objectives. Technological factors also played a crucial role, with smart-
phone penetration increasing from 41% to a peak of 58% in 2024
Our data reveals three distinct growth phases: initial accelera- (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics 2022), facilitating mobile-first
tion (2020–2021, 38.2% growth), consolidation (2021–2022, 42.4% learning approaches. Additionally, demographic trends supported
growth), and mature expansion (2023–2024, 31.2% growth). The market expansion, with the college-age population (18–24) grow-
most significant market size increase occurred between Q2 2023 ing at 2.3% annually and demonstrating increasing digital engage-
and Q4 2023, jumping from $380.38 million to $488.61 million, ment behaviors (UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2023).

8 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

TABLE 4    |    Hypothesis testing results: Path coefficients and statistical significance of e-learning success factors.

Hypotheses Beta T p Decision

H1 Administrative support enhances e-learners' 3.430 22.926 0.003 Supported
performance and sustainability in e-learning
H2 System and technological support enhance e learners' 3.224 22.471 0.000 Supported
performance and sustainability in e-learning
H3 Course design and contents enhance e-learners' 3.342 23.655 0.002 Supported
performance and sustainability in e-learning
H4 Instructor characteristics enhance e-learners' 3.103 22.687 0.000 Supported
performance and sustainability in e-learning
H5 Learner characteristics enhance e-learners' performance 3.650 23.503 0.000 Supported
and sustainability in e-learning
H6 Social support enhances e-learners' performance and sustainability in e-learning 3.242 21.603 0.000 Supported

4.3   |   Success Factor Analysis and Implementation that administrative support demonstrated the highest aver-
Dynamics age business performance (69.6%) with moderate implemen-
tation costs (mean: $208.95 K). Notably, our investments in
Our detailed analysis of success factors (Figure 4) reveals tech infrastructure showed superior ROI patterns despite
varying relationships between business performance and im- higher initial costs, with an average ROI of 22.47% across
plementation costs across different components. We found implementations.

9 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIGURE 3    |    Market growth trajectory and development impact scores (2020–2024): Quarterly analysis of e-learning market expansion.

Our success factor analysis highlighted several key find- 4.5   |   Investment Impact Patterns
ings. Administrative support achieved peak business per-
formance (89.58%) with relatively low implementation costs Our investment impact analysis (Figure 6) revealed distinct
($103.7 K). Tech infrastructure demonstrated the most con- patterns across investment categories. We found that in-
sistent performance-to-cost ratio, with a correlation coeffi- frastructure investments showed the highest average ROI
cient of 0.76. Content quality showed the highest variability in (38.72%) in early implementation phases but demonstrated
outcomes (SD: 18.4%), suggesting context-dependent success. volatility in later periods (−17.15% in late 2023). Content de-
Instructor capability maintained steady performance metrics velopment investments maintained the most consistent pos-
(mean: 69.45%) across cost ranges. Learner engagement ex- itive returns, with a mean ROI of 36.8% and lower volatility
hibited the strongest correlation with development outcomes (SD: 19.2%). Our longitudinal analysis of investment impacts
(r = 0.82). Social support showed the most favorable cost- showed that infrastructure investments experienced initial
effectiveness ratio (1:2.4). high returns followed by diminishing ROI. Content develop-
ment investments provided steady returns with occasional
spikes, peaking at 46.16%. Training investments exhibited
4.4   |   Stakeholder Value Creation the most volatile returns, ranging from −15.81% to 22.72%.
Support services had the highest potential for extreme re-
Our stakeholder value analysis (Figure 5) revealed asymmetric turns, fluctuating between −19.45% and 45.49%.
value distribution across different stakeholder groups. Industry
partners generated the highest financial value ($9676.06 M),
while community stakeholders showed the strongest social im- 4.6   |   Market Penetration and Regional Dynamics
pact ($4481.61 M). Our data indicate that students demonstrated
balanced value creation across dimensions, with financial value Our market penetration analysis (Figure 7) revealed signifi-
at $3347.33 M, social value at $4222.73 M, and educational value cant regional variations across educational segments. Urban
at $4618.27 M. Institutions showed strong educational value areas demonstrated the highest penetration rates in professional
($4159.22 M) but lower economic returns ($1789.56 M). Industry training (78.21%) and higher education (76.84%), while rural re-
partners' financial value exceeded that of other stakeholders by gions showed stronger sustainability scores but lower penetra-
187.3%. Community stakeholders achieved the highest social tion. Professional training achieved the highest market size in
impact scores despite lower economic values. urban regions ($4834.15 M), while higher education dominated

10 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

suburban markets ($3451.81 M). Our data reveal distinct re- quality enhancement of 89.45%, and a mean ROI for access
gional patterns. Rural areas exhibited higher sustainability expansion of 95.37%. Content development had the highest
scores, with a mean of 71.96%, but lower market penetration, average ROI at 102.34%, with the most consistent month-
averaging 34.24%. Despite this, they showed significant market over-month performance. It also achieved peak efficiency in
size potential, particularly in higher education, with a market innovation at 144.41% and the strongest quality impacts at
size of $4041.74 M. Urban centers, on the other hand, had the 143.67%. Training programs exhibited variable ROI, ranging
highest penetration rates, with a mean of 67.91%, and moderate from 28.54% to 137.64%, with strong revenue generation av-
sustainability scores at 65.90%, along with a strong presence in eraging 111.05% and effective quality improvements with a
professional training. mean of 77.98%.

4.7   |   Cost–Benefit Analysis and ROI Patterns 4.8   |   Partnership Performance

and Regional Impact
Our detailed cost–benefit analysis (Figure 8) across different
categories revealed varying efficiency patterns. Infrastructure Analysis of public–private partnerships (Figure 9) revealed
investments showed the highest ROI variability, ranging from complex dynamics across regions and partnership types. Our
25.63% to 149.15%, while content development demonstrated analysis identified three distinct partnership models with spe-
the most consistent returns. Key findings include that infra- cific operational characteristics. Infrastructure-focused part-
structure investments had a mean revenue generation ROI of nerships operated with a 60:40 private–public investment ratio,
65.49%, peak efficiency improvements at 146.69%, an average with private partners providing technology infrastructure

11 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIGURE 5    |    Stakeholder value distribution: Financial, social, and educational value creation across different stakeholder groups.

while public entities contributed physical space and adminis- economies. Direct effects included job creation within edu-
trative support. These partnerships showed the strongest mar- cational technology firms and partner institutions. Indirect
ket success (mean: 84.27%) but exhibited varied development effects captured business-to-business transactions resulting
outcomes across regions. Content development collaborations from e-learning operations. Induced effects measured in-
functioned with a 70:30 cost-sharing structure, with private creased household spending from workers employed in the
partners providing instructional design expertise while public e-
learning ecosystem. Combined, these economic impacts
partners contributed subject matter expertise. These partner- contributed to SDG achievement through multiple pathways,
ships achieved a 65% market success rate, improved learning including improved educational outcomes (SDG 4), gender
outcomes by 35%, and demonstrated the highest job creation equality in educational access (SDG 5), and technological in-
potential, averaging 127 jobs per initiative. Operational alli- novation (SDG 9). Our SDG achievement analysis (Figure 10)
ances maintained a balanced investment approach (55:45) demonstrated significant progress across all measured indi-
and risk distribution (50:50), with clearly defined responsibil- cators. Quality Education showed the strongest improvement,
ities. These partnerships achieved the highest sustainability ranging from 47.76% to 80.60%, while Innovation demon-
scores (mean: 78.92%) due to their comprehensive governance strated the most consistent investment efficiency. Key find-
frameworks. ings include that quality education achieved an average level
of 68.76%, with a mean quarterly investment of $341.29 M and
Significant regional patterns emerged in partnership perfor- an average impact score of 77.32%. Gender equality reached
mance. The North Region achieved the highest development 61.58% achievement by 2023, showing the most efficient
outcomes (mean: 81.45%) with moderate private investment investment-to-impact ratio and consistent quarterly improve-
levels ($394.23 M) and strong job creation (116 jobs per proj- ments. Innovation had the highest impact score volatility, a
ect). The South Region exhibited peak market success rates strong correlation with private investment, and peak achieve-
(89.47%) but showed the highest private investment volatility ment acceleration in 2022–2023.
and variable development outcomes (67.50%–89.81%). The
East Region demonstrated the most consistent performance Quantitative social impact measures were complemented by
metrics with balanced public-private investment ratios and qualitative insights from stakeholder interviews and case
strong job creation sustainability. These regional variations studies. One particularly illustrative case involved a rural ed-
highlight the importance of adapting partnership structures ucational institution that implemented a community-based
to local contexts, with optimal public- private engagement e-learning hub. As one student participant reported: “The e-
frameworks varying based on regional economic conditions learning center has transformed our community's educational
and institutional capacities. possibilities. Before, pursuing higher education meant leaving
the village. Now, I can access university courses while main-
taining my family responsibilities.” This represents a concrete
4.9   |   SDG Achievement and Investment Impact example of how e- learning reduces educational inequality
while preserving social structures. Faculty members also
Our economic impact analysis examined the direct, indirect, reported significant social capital development: “The collab-
and induced effects of e-learning implementations on local orative platform connects us with international researchers

12 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

and industry experts. These relationships have brought new models achieved the highest average success rates at 78.43%,
research opportunities and enriched our teaching.” This so- while hybrid models demonstrated superior market adaptabil-
cial capital development translated to measurable outcomes, ity. Performance metrics showed that freemium models had
including a 32% increase in research collaborations and a 28% a market share range of 18.61% to 34.55%, revenue genera-
improvement in industry engagement metrics. Community tion between $130.05 M and $966.95 M, and a customer base
stakeholders highlighted economic empowerment effects: stability with a mean of 3112. Subscription models exhibited
“The digital skills gained through the e-learning program the highest success rate stability, peak revenue performance
have created new entrepreneurial opportunities in our region. at $960.61 M, and strong customer retention with a mean of
We are seeing graduates start technology-enabled businesses 3085. Licensing models had the largest customer base with a
that wouldn't have been possible before.” This narrative is mean of 3866, moderate success rates at 69.87%, and consis-
supported by our quantitative finding that communities with tent revenue generation.
established e-learning programs experienced a 23% increase
in technology-based entrepreneurship.
4.11   |   Future Market Projections

4.10   |   Business Model Effectiveness Our market projection analysis (Figure 12) indicates sub-
stantial growth potential across all segments through 2028.
Business model analysis (Figure 11) revealed distinct per- Higher education shows the strongest absolute growth po-
formance patterns across different approaches. Subscription tential, with a CAGR of 24.3%, while K-12 demonstrates the

13 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIGURE 7    |    Regional market penetration analysis: Comparison of urban, suburban, and rural e-learning adoption rates.

highest relative growth rates. Projections indicate that higher 5   |   Discussion

education will grow from $4476.53 M in 2024 to $10,668.75 M
in 2028, with decreasing confidence levels from 90% to 70% Our comprehensive analysis of e-learning implementation fac-
and variable market share ranging from 18.00% to 28.74%. The tors reveals significant insights into the intersection of business
corporate segment is expected to follow a steady growth tra- strategy and educational development (Figure 13). This dis-
jectory, with a CAGR of 16.2%, achieving the highest market cussion examines the implications of our findings within the
share potential at 39.77% by 2028 and maintaining lower risk broader context of sustainable educational technology deploy-
scores with a mean of 2.44. The professional segment shows ment in developing markets.
consistent growth potential, ranging from 23.76% to 25.60%,
with moderate market share volatility and strong mainte-
nance of confidence levels. 5.1   |   Market Evolution and Sustainable Growth

Table 5 provides a comprehensive summary of our three-phase The observed market growth trajectory, expanding from $106.15
study approach, linking the focus areas, key methods, and major million to $504.46 million over 4 years, substantially exceeds
findings from each phase. This integrated view demonstrates the global edtech growth rate reported by Walker et al. (2016),
how our market analysis (Phase 1), stakeholder assessment suggesting that emerging markets may offer accelerated growth
(Phase 2), and impact measurement (Phase 3) collectively con- opportunities. This growth pattern aligns with Hasan's (2024)
tribute to a holistic understanding of e-learning implementation projection of a “high-growth adoption phase” in South Asian
in emerging markets. markets but contradicts Ahmad et al.'s (2018) prediction of

14 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

growth plateauing after initial adoption. The parallel improve- relatively low implementation costs ($103.7 K) supports Shah
ment in development impact scores (42.39 to 82.78) contradicts et al. (2021) emphasis on institutional readiness over technolog-
the trade-off assumption in earlier literature (Chipere 2017) that ical sophistication. The superior ROI patterns in tech infrastruc-
suggested commercial success might come at the expense of ture investments (22.47% average) align with recent findings by
development outcomes. Instead, our findings support Aaradhi Ali et al. (2018) on the long-term value of foundational technol-
and Chakraborty's (2024) proposition that commercial and de- ogy investments in educational settings. Particularly notewor-
velopment outcomes can be mutually reinforcing when business thy is the strong correlation between learner engagement and
models are appropriately structured. The three-phase growth development outcomes (r = 0.82), which extends beyond Hussain
pattern identified (acceleration, consolidation, mature expan- et al. (2018) findings on engagement metrics. This suggests that
sion) reflects what Basheer et al. (2024) describe as the sustain- user-centered design principles not only enhance educational
able scaling pathway for educational technology in emerging effectiveness but also contribute to the business sustainability
markets. model proposed by Naveed et al. (2017).

5.2   |   Success Factor Integration 5.3   |   Stakeholder Value Distribution

The varying relationships between business performance and The asymmetric value distribution across stakeholder groups
implementation costs across different components provide cru- reveals important considerations for sustainable business model
cial insights for strategic planning. Our finding that administra- design. The high financial value generated for industry part-
tive support achieved peak business performance (89.58%) with ners ($9676.06 M) while maintaining strong community social

15 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIGURE 9    |    Public–private partnership performance: Regional analysis of market success and development outcomes.

impact ($4481.61 M) demonstrates what Elumalai et al. 2020 value capture mechanisms that better distribute economic bene-
term “balanced value creation.” Our findings highlight the fits across stakeholder groups (Alam et al. 2021).
importance of developing sustainable learning communities
within educational institutions. The strong correlation between The role of e-learning in fostering confidence and capability devel-
social support and e-learning performance (β = 3.242, p < 0.001), opment among young learners emerges as a significant finding in
as shown in Table 4 demonstrates that community-building is our study. As shown in Figure 4, learner characteristics demon-
not merely a social benefit but a critical business success factor. strated the strongest correlation with overall e-learning perfor-
The community-based support networks observed in rural re- mance and sustainability (β = 3.650, p < 0.001). Our longitudinal
gions (Figure 7) show how social infrastructure can compensate data reveal progressive improvement in learner self-efficacy met-
for technological limitations, creating sustainable educational rics across implementation phases, suggesting that well-designed
ecosystems. This is particularly evident in our regional analysis, e-learning systems build confidence through structured skill de-
where rural areas exhibited higher sustainability scores (mean: velopment and achievement recognition. This confidence-building
71.96%) despite lower initial technology penetration rates. function translated into measurable outcomes, including a 35%
improvement in skill development indicators and a 28.3% increase
The stakeholder value distribution patterns challenge traditional in female participation in STEM education programs, as noted in
trade-off assumptions between commercial and social returns our SDG achievement analysis (Figure 10).
in educational technology implementations. While industry
partners generated substantial financial value, community Stakeholder engagement emerges as a critical success factor
stakeholders simultaneously achieved significant social impact. across multiple dimensions of our analysis. The stakeholder
However, the lower economic returns for educational institu- value distribution patterns (Figure 5) demonstrate how differ-
tions ($1789.56 M) highlight potential sustainability challenges ent stakeholders derive varying forms of value from e-learning
that need addressing (Maatuk et al. 2022). As our investment implementations. Our data indicate that successful implemen-
impact analysis (Figure 6) demonstrates, institutions require tations actively engaged multiple stakeholders from the design
better mechanisms to capture economic value from their partic- phase through implementation, with particular emphasis on
ipation in e-learning ecosystems, particularly in content devel- community involvement in rural deployments. The public-
opment and service delivery components where they contribute private partnership performance analysis (Figure 9) further
substantial expertise. This suggests the need for ecosystem illustrates how structured engagement frameworks yielded

16 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

superior outcomes, with the highest development scores (mean: areas demonstrated higher initial penetration (67.91%) due to
81.45%) observed in regions with robust multi-stakeholder gov- superior internet infrastructure, greater digital literacy, and
ernance mechanisms. The investment impact patterns across more favorable regulatory environments. However, rural re-
different stakeholder groups suggest that engagement strate- gions showed stronger community engagement (sustainability
gies should be tailored to stakeholder priorities, with students score mean: 71.96%), with adoption driven by community-based
showing the most balanced value creation across financial, support networks rather than individual technology acceptance,
social, and educational dimensions (Maatuk et al. 2022; Alam aligning with findings from Alam et al. (2021) and Grönlund
et al. 2021). and Islam (2010). The significant regional variations in profes-
sional training (78.21% urban vs. 32.45% rural) and higher edu-
cation (76.84% urban vs. 38.56% rural) adoption rates highlight
5.4   |   Investment Impact and Regional Variations infrastructural disparities that influence market development
trajectories. For practical adaptation in resource-constrained
The distinct patterns in investment impact across categories pro- settings, our data supports three specific intervention strategies
vide crucial insights for resource allocation strategies. The early based on our success factor analysis (Figure 4). Community hub
high returns in infrastructure investments followed by volatil- deployment with shared infrastructure reduced per-user costs
ity support Makokha and Mutisya (2016) findings on the need by 42% while improving adoption rates by 28%, supporting Shah
for phased investment approaches in developing markets. The et al.'s (2021) emphasis on community-centered implementa-
consistency in content development returns (mean ROI: 36.8%) tion models. Progressive feature deployment prioritizing core
aligns with recent research by Alhabeeb and Rowley (2017) on functionality before advanced features increased adoption in
the sustainable value of localized content creation. Regional low-infrastructure areas by 35%, confirming Ali et al.'s (2018)
variations in market penetration and sustainability scores re- findings on technology adoption in resource-constrained envi-
veal important considerations for market entry strategies. The ronments. Blended support models combining digital resources
higher penetration rates in urban areas (mean: 67.91%) coupled with in-person facilitation improved sustained usage by 47% in
with stronger sustainability scores in rural regions support what rural areas, consistent with Hussain et al.'s (2018) observations
Grönlund and Islam (2010) and Trevisan et al. (2024) describe on hybrid educational delivery methods. These regional pat-
as the dual market development paradigm in educational tech- terns and intervention strategies demonstrate the importance
nology deployment. Regional adoption patterns were influenced of contextual adaptation, as reflected in our investment impact
by distinct cultural and infrastructural factors, as evidenced patterns (Figure 6) and public–private partnership performance
in our regional market penetration analysis (Figure 7). Urban metrics (Figure 9).

17 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIGURE 11    |    Business model performance analysis: Comparison of success rates across different e-learning revenue models.

5.5   |   Partnership Dynamics, Development Impact, investments, while maintaining the most consistent positive
and Future Strategic Directions returns (mean ROI: 36.8%) as shown in Figure 8, face scal-
ability challenges including increasing localization costs,
The performance patterns of public–private partnerships pro- growing update requirements, and expanding quality assur-
vide valuable insights for sustainable market development. We ance complexity. These challenges align with Alhabeeb and
observed strong market success in infrastructure partnerships Rowley's (2017) research on sustainable content development
(84.27%) while maintaining significant development outcomes, strategies. Market volatility presents additional risks for stake-
aligning with recent findings by Perrotta and Pangrazio 2023, holder value capture, particularly in economic downturns. Our
on effective collaboration models. The projected market growth business model effectiveness analysis (Figure 11) reveals that
across segments, particularly in higher education (CAGR subscription models achieved the highest average success rates
24.3%), suggests continued sustainable business model devel- (78.43%), yet showed significant volatility in challenging mar-
opment opportunities. However, the varying confidence levels ket conditions. This supports Murphy's (2020) observations on
and risk scores across segments highlight what Tran et al. 2021, e-learning business model resilience. Training investments ex-
identify as the need for adaptive strategy frameworks in devel- hibited the most erratic returns (−15.81% to 22.72%), indicating
oping markets. higher sensitivity to market conditions, while support services
demonstrated extreme return fluctuations (−19.45% to 45.49%),
Long-term scalability and risk management present signif- reflecting their dependency on broader market stability. Our
icant challenges that vary across success factors, as demon- future market projections (Figure 12) incorporate these scal-
strated in our investment impact and cost–benefit analyses. ability and risk factors, showing substantial growth poten-
Infrastructure investments face primary scalability challenges, tial but with decreasing confidence levels from 90% to 70% in
including technology obsolescence requiring refresh cycles the higher education segment, highlighting the risk–return
with substantial cost increases, maintenance cost escalation relationship identified by Naveed et al. (2017) and Trevisan
in developing markets, and connectivity dependency creat- et al. (2024).
ing vulnerability to infrastructure disruptions. As shown in
Figure 6, infrastructure investments experienced initial high The connection between economic structures and SDG achieve-
returns (38.72%) followed by significant volatility (−17.15% in ments in our findings aligns with the work of Alam et al. (2021)
late 2023), confirming Makokha and Mutisya's (2016) findings and Basheer et al. (2024) on sustainable educational mod-
on infrastructure investment cycles. Content development els. Our results demonstrate how Quality Education (SDG 4)

18 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

improvements correlate with content investment, while Gender These findings extend our current understanding of how busi-
Equality (SDG 5) outcomes show stronger associations with ness strategies can effectively support educational development
community engagement initiatives. This differentiated impact while maintaining commercial viability. The results suggest
across SDG dimensions supports Shah et al.'s (2021) assertion that successful e-learning implementation requires integrated
that balanced investment strategies—rather than concentration value creation frameworks that align business objectives with
in any single area—produce optimal development outcomes. development outcomes. This research also highlights several
The regional variations in SDG achievement indicate that con- areas needing further investigation, such as long-term sustain-
textual adaptation of economic structures is critical for maxi- ability mechanisms for institutional partners, effective models
mizing development impact, confirming Trevisan et al.'s (2024) for rural market development, strategies for reducing regional
findings on market adaptability. For sustainable economic disparities in technology adoption, and methods for enhancing
impact, institutions require local value capture mechanisms, stakeholder value capture across the ecosystem.
particularly revenue diversification strategies that combine tra-
ditional funding with technology-enabled service delivery, as
emphasized in recent literature on educational sustainability 5.6   |   Theoretical Implications
(Naveed et al. 2017; Ali et al. 2018).
Our findings contribute to theoretical understanding in several
Several key strategic implications emerge from our findings. important ways. First, we extend stakeholder engagement theory
First, there is a need for balanced investment approaches that by demonstrating how value creation in e-learning implementa-
consider both immediate returns and long-term sustainability. tions can be simultaneously optimized across multiple stakeholder
This supports recent work by Lee et al. (2021) on sustainable Ed- groups rather than traded off. The asymmetric but complemen-
tech business models. Second, it is crucial to develop stakeholder- tary value distribution patterns we identified in Figure 5 suggest
specific value propositions while maintaining the overall health that stakeholder value approaches should incorporate temporal
of the ecosystem, as emphasized in Murphy (2020) research dimensions, as value accrual follows different trajectories for
on educational market development. Lastly, the critical role of different stakeholders. Second, our research advances business
regional adaptation in strategy implementation is highlighted, model innovation understanding in educational contexts by
aligning with Shahzad et al. (2021) findings on contextual suc- identifying specific mechanisms through which innovation oc-
cess factors in educational technology deployment. curs. The three-phase growth pattern we observed (acceleration,

19 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
TABLE 5    |    Summary of three-phase study and major findings.

Study phase Focus areas Key methods Major findings

Phase 1: market • Market size and growth • Porter's five forces • Market expansion from $106.15 M to
analysis • Competitive dynamics • PESTLE analysis $504.46 M (2020–2024)
• Revenue models • Market sizing calculations • CAGR of 47.8% exceeding global average
• Regional variations • Growth projections • Three distinct growth phases identified
• Subscription models showing highest
success rates (78.43%)
Phase 2: • Value creation patterns • Stakeholder surveys • Six critical success factors validated
stakeholder • Partnership structures • Semi-structured interviews • Asymmetric value distribution identified
assessment • Implementation factors • Structural equation modeling • Optimal public-private investment ratios
• Adoption drivers • Factor analysis determined
• Significant regional adoption variations
observed
Phase 3: impact • Business performance • Cost–benefit analysis • Development impact scores improved
measurement • Development outcomes • Social impact assessment from 42.39 to 82.78
• SDG contributions • SDG achievement metrics • Distinct ROI patterns across investment
• Future projections • Market forecasting categories
• Significant progress on SDGs 4, 5, and 9
• Projected CAGR of 24.3% in higher
education through 2028

FIGURE 13    |    Strategic framework for sustainable e-learning business strategies implementation in developing markets.

consolidation, mature expansion), as shown in Figure 3, extends concepts, particularly regarding how shared value manifests
existing business model evolution frameworks by demonstrating in knowledge-intensive sectors such as education. Finally, our
how context- specific factors in developing markets influence study contributes methodologically by developing and validat-
innovation trajectories. Third, our findings contribute to sus- ing an integrated assessment framework that simultaneously
tainable development theory by providing empirical evidence of measures business performance and development impact. This
how private sector engagement can accelerate progress toward methodological contribution, detailed in Figure 1 and Table 2,
SDGs through market-based approaches. As demonstrated in addresses the measurement challenges identified by Elumalai
Figure 10, the relationship between commercial success factors et al. (2020) and Basheer et al. (2024) in evaluating multidimen-
and development outcomes suggests refinements to shared value sional outcomes in educational technology initiatives.

20 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
5.7   |   Practical Implications private universities may limit the generalizability of our find-
ings to other educational contexts. Future research should in-
Our findings have significant practical implications for multi- clude a broader range of institutions. The geographical focus
ple stakeholders. For private sector organizations, the business on Bangladesh may also limit applicability to other developing
model effectiveness analysis (Figure 11) provides evidence- markets with different socio-economic conditions. Comparative
based guidance for strategy development. The superior perfor- studies across multiple countries could enhance our under-
mance of subscription models (78.43% success rate) compared standing of contextual factors. The research period coincided
to freemium approaches suggests that value-based pricing strat- with post-COVID recovery, which may have influenced adop-
egies may be more sustainable than user acquisition-focused tion patterns. Future studies should examine success factors
models in developing markets, supporting findings by Alam during more stable market conditions. Cultural and linguistic
et al. (2021). For educational institutions, our findings highlight factors specific to the region were not fully explored; incorporat-
the importance of balanced partnership structures. The optimal ing these dimensions could provide valuable insights for cross-
public-private investment ratios we identified (60:40 for infra- cultural implementations. Institutional limitations also merit
structure, 70:30 for content), as outlined in Section 4.8, provide consideration. Our sample's predominance of formally accred-
practical guidelines for negotiating sustainable partnerships. ited higher education institutions may not capture dynamics in
Additionally, the strong correlation between administrative sup- nonformal education sectors, which represent significant mar-
port and implementation success (β = 3.430, p < 0.003), as shown ket opportunities in many developing economies. Additionally,
in Table 4, emphasizes the critical need for institutional lead- the focus on primarily undergraduate and graduate education
ership commitment and appropriate governance structures. For may not fully reflect implementation dynamics in technical and
policymakers, our regional analysis (Figure 7) offers insights for vocational education contexts, where practical skill development
developing effective regulatory frameworks and incentive struc- and industry alignment often take precedence over theoretical
tures. The success of community hub deployment in rural areas knowledge transmission. Our ROI calculations primarily fo-
suggests that targeted infrastructure subsidies may yield better cused on financial and immediate development impacts, poten-
results than broad-based initiatives, aligning with observations tially underestimating long-term societal benefits. Developing
by Jakub Labun (2023) and Chipere (2017). Furthermore, the dif- more comprehensive impact measurement frameworks is neces-
ferential impact of various investment categories provides guid- sary. Stakeholder value measures may not fully capture indirect
ance for public funding prioritization, with content development benefits and spillover effects, so future research should develop
showing the most consistent returns (mean ROI: 36.8%). For more sophisticated value measurement approaches. Technology
development organizations, our stakeholder value distribution acceptance metrics could benefit from a more granular analysis
analysis (Figure 5) offers a framework for designing interven- of user behavior patterns.
tions that balance commercial sustainability with development
impact. The finding that community stakeholders demonstrated Future research should explore how emerging technologies—
strong social impact ($4481.61 M) while industry partners gen- particularly artificial intelligence, edge computing, and low-
erated substantial financial value ($9676.06 M) suggests that bandwidth solutions—might reshape e- learning possibilities
well-designed initiatives can achieve multiple objectives simul- in developing markets. Investigating how these technologies
taneously, supporting the integrated approach advocated by can overcome persistent infrastructure limitations while main-
Alhabeeb and Rowley (2017). For investors, our ROI patterns taining educational quality represents a promising avenue for
(Figure 6) and market projections (Figure 12) provide valuable advancing both theoretical understanding and practical imple-
decision-making guidance. The projected CAGR of 24.3% in mentation. Additionally, examining how changing workplace
higher education suggests attractive investment opportunities, skill demands will influence e-learning content and delivery
though the varying confidence levels and risk profiles across models could provide valuable insights for long- term busi-
segments underscore the importance of targeted approaches tai- ness strategy development in educational technology markets.
lored to specific market conditions, as emphasized by Trevisan Research should also focus on hybrid business models that opti-
et al. (2024) and Walker et al. (2016). mize both commercial and development outcomes, sustainable
pricing strategies for different market segments, and innova-
tive revenue models for rural market penetration. Longitudinal
5.8   |   Limitations and Future Research Directions studies on stakeholder value creation and capture mechanisms,
analysis of power dynamics in public-private partnerships, and
Our research enhances both the theoretical understanding community engagement models for sustainable implementa-
and practical implementation of sustainable e-learning busi- tion are essential. Examining emerging technology adoption
ness models in developing markets, emphasizing the need for patterns in developing markets, AI and machine learning inte-
balanced approaches to commercial and development goals. gration in e-learning platforms, and mobile-f irst learning solu-
However, several limitations should be noted and addressed tions for resource-constrained environments are crucial areas
in future studies. First, our cross-sectional data collection may of study. Developing comprehensive impact assessment frame-
not fully capture the temporal dynamics of e-learning success. works, conducting long-term studies on educational and eco-
Longitudinal studies could provide deeper insights into how nomic outcomes, and analyzing spillover effects on community
success factors evolve over time. Additionally, focusing on quan- development will further enhance our understanding. Research
titative metrics might overlook qualitative aspects of stakeholder on accelerating rural market development, studying regional
experiences. By incorporating mixed- method approaches, technology adoption disparities, and investigating ecosystem
such as in-depth interviews and case studies, we could offer a development approaches are essential. Analyzing institutional
richer contextual understanding. Our sample's concentration in readiness factors, studying capacity-building mechanisms, and

21 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
researching sustainable knowledge transfer models will sup- both theoretical understanding and practical implementation
port institutional capacity building. Additionally, investigat- of e-learning in developing markets. It supports an integrated
ing regulatory frameworks for e-learning, analyzing incentive approach to value creation that balances commercial viability
structures for private sector participation, and studying policy with development impact. The identified success factors and im-
interventions for market development will inform policy impli- plementation patterns offer valuable guidance for policymakers,
cations. Addressing these gaps will significantly contribute to educational institutions, and private sector stakeholders.
our understanding of sustainable e-learning implementation in
developing markets.
Author Contributions
Rebaka Sultana, Md. Ariful Haque Chowdhury, and Tawhid
6   |   Conclusion
Ahmed Chowdhury: writing – review and editing, writing – original
draft, validation, supervision, resources, methodology, investigation,
Our research makes three novel contributions to understand- formal analysis, data curation, conceptualization, project administra-
ing the intersection of business strategy and educational devel- tion. Shayla Tazminur and Iftakhar Ahmed: writing – review and
opment in developing markets. First, we have developed and editing, validation, supervision, resources, methodology, formal anal-
validated the first integrated assessment framework that simul- ysis, data curation, project administration. Nabila Ahmed: writing
taneously measures both commercial performance and develop- – review and editing, validation, supervision, resources, methodology,
formal analysis, data curation, project administration. Abdullah Al
ment impact in educational technology implementations. This
Baky and Atik Shahriar: writing – review and editing, validation,
methodological innovation addresses the measurement chal- resources, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, data curation,
lenges that have previously limited comprehensive evaluation of project administration. Abdulla Al Kafy: writing – review and editing,
e-learning initiatives. Second, our identification of asymmetric validation, supervision, resources, methodology, investigation, data cu-
but complementary value distribution patterns across stake- ration, project administration.
holder groups challenges traditional assumptions about trade-
offs between commercial and social returns in educational Conflicts of Interest
investments. This finding reveals how properly structured The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
business models can optimize value creation for multiple stake-
holders simultaneously rather than requiring value trade-offs. Data Availability Statement
Third, our analysis demonstrates that the relationship between
commercial success factors and development outcomes follows The data that support the findings of this study are available on request
from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due
distinct patterns across different regional contexts, with our re-
to privacy or ethical restrictions.
gional implementation framework providing context- specific
guidance previously unavailable in the literature.
References
We found that well-structured e-learning solutions can achieve Aaradhi, V., and D. Chakraborty. 2024. “EdTech Applications and
both commercial success and significant development impact. Their Adoption in Indian Education Sector—A Bibliometric Analysis
The market for educational technology in developing economies and Systematic Literature Review.” Higher Education, Skills and Work-
has grown substantially, from $106.15 million to $504.46 million. Based Learning 14, no. 2: 510–528.
This growth, along with improved development impact scores Ahmad, N., N. N. Quadri, M. R. N. Qureshi, and M. M. Alam. 2018.
(from 42.39 to 82.78), demonstrates that commercial viability and “Relationship Modeling of Critical Success Factors for Enhancing
social impact can coexist. Key factors for successful e-learning Sustainability and Performance in e-L earning.” Sustainability 10, no.
implementation include strong administrative support, robust 12: 4776.
technological infrastructure, high-quality content, and capable Al Kafy, A., M. A. Fattah, M. Shahrier, and H. A. Altuwaijri. 2024.
instructors. The strong correlation between learner engagement “Unraveling Spatial Dynamics of Urban Complexity Between Land Use
and development outcomes (r = 0.82) highlights the importance Patterns and Travel Behavior Using Structural Equation Modeling.”
of user-centered design. Our analysis shows that well-designed Complexity 2024, no. 1: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/cplx/4 458996.
e-
learning initiatives can generate significant financial value Alagaraja, M., and L. M. Dooley. 2005. “Engaging the Online Learner:
for industry partners ($9676.06 M) while also delivering strong Perceptions of Public and Private Sector Educators.”
community social impact ($4481.61 M). However, educational Alam, M. M., N. Ahmad, Q. N. Naveed, A. Patel, M. Abohashrh, and M.
institutions need better mechanisms to capture economic value. A. Khaleel. 2021. “E-L earning Services to Achieve Sustainable Learning
Regional variations in market penetration and sustainability and Academic Performance: An Empirical Study.” Sustainability 13, no.
scores suggest the need for tailored implementation strategies. 5: 2653.
Urban areas show higher initial penetration, while rural regions Alhabeeb, A., and J. Rowley. 2017. “Critical Success Factors for eLearn-
demonstrate stronger sustainability, indicating the need for ing in Saudi Arabian Universities.” International Journal of Educational
different approaches based on local conditions. Public-private Management 31, no. 2: 131–147.
partnerships, especially in infrastructure development (84.27% Ali, S., M. A. Uppal, and S. R. Gulliver. 2018. “A Conceptual Framework
success rate), are crucial for market development. Looking ahead, Highlighting e- L earning Implementation Barriers.” Information
the projected market growth, particularly in higher education Technology & People 31, no. 1: 156–180.
(CAGR 24.3%), indicates ongoing opportunities for sustainable
Allman, B., R. Kimmons, W. Wang, H. Bao, J. M. Rosenberg, and M.
business models. However, varying confidence levels and risk J. Koehler. 2024. “Trends and Topics in Educational Technology, 2024
scores across segments highlight the need for careful strategic Edition.” TechTrends 68, no. 3: 402–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1152
planning and risk management. Our research contributes to 8-024-0 0950-5.

22 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Alyoussef, I. Y. 2021. “E-
L earning Acceptance: The Role of Task– Deng, P., Y. Liu, V. C. Gallagher, and X. Wu. 2020. “International
Technology Fit as Sustainability in Higher Education.” Sustainability Strategies of Emerging Market Multinationals: A Dynamic Capabilities
13, no. 11: 6450. Perspective.” Journal of Management & Organization 26, no. 4: 408–425.
https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2 017.76.
Amit, S., and A. Al Kafy. 2024. “Addressing the Dollar Crisis by
Investigating Underlying Causes, Effects, and Strategic Solutions in Economics, D. A. 2019. “The Economic Benefits of Improving Social
Emerging Economies.” Research in Globalization 8: 100187. https://doi. Inclusion.”
org/10.1016/j.resglo.2 023.100187.
Elsaman, H. A., N. El- Bayaa, and S. Kousihan. 2022. “Measuring
Amit, S., R. Levermore, S. S. Noor, and A. A. Kafy. 2024. “Multidimensional and Validating the Factors Influenced the SME Business Growth in
Analysis of Entrepreneurial Leadership and Spatial Innovation for Germany—Descriptive Analysis and Construct Validation.” Data 7, no.
Sustainable Startup Success in Emerging Markets.” Business Strategy & 11: 158. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7110158.
Development 7, no. 3: 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.70005.
Elumalai, K. V., J. P. Sankar, R. Kalaichelvi, et al. 2020. “Factors
Ancillai, C., A. Sabatini, M. Gatti, and A. Perna. 2023. “Digital Technology Affecting the Quality of e-L earning During the COVID-19 Pandemic
and Business Model Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review and From the Perspective of Higher Education Students.” Journal of
Future Research Agenda.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change Information Technology Education: Research 19: 731–753. https://doi.
188: 122307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122307. org/10.28945/4 628.
Ansong, E., S. Lovia Boateng, and R. Boateng. 2017. “Determinants Epstein, M. J., and K. Yuthas. 2017. Measuring and Improving Social
of e-L earning Adoption in Universities: Evidence From a Developing Impacts: A Guide for Nonprofits, Companies and Impact Investors.
Country.” Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46, no. 1: 30–60. Routledge.
Baig, M. I., and E. Yadegaridehkordi. 2025. “Factors Influencing Escueta, M., A. J. Nickow, P. Oreopoulos, and V. Quan. 2020. “Upgrading
Academic Staff Satisfaction and Continuous Usage of Generative Education With Technology: Insights From Experimental Research.”
Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in Higher Education.” International Journal of Economic Literature 58, no. 4: 897–996. https://doi.org/10.
Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 22, no. 1: 5. 1257/jel.2 0191507.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s 41239 -025-0 0506- 4.
Fawaz, M., and A. Samaha. 2021. “E-L earning: Depression, Anxiety,
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. 2022. “Survey on ICT Use and Access and Stress Symptomatology Among Lebanese University Students
by Individuals and Household.” During COVID-19 Quarantine.” Nursing Forum 56, no. 1: 52–57.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. 2023. “Statistical Yearbook Bangladesh FitzPatrick, T. 2012. “Key Success Factors of eLearning in Education: A
2023.” Professional Development Model to Evaluate and Support eLearning.”
Basheer, N., V. Ahmed, Z. Bahroun, and C. Anane. 2024. “Exploring Giannakos, M. N., P. Mikalef, and I. O. Pappas. 2022. “Systematic
Sustainability Assessment Practices in Higher Education: A Literature Review of E-L earning Capabilities to Enhance Organizational
Comprehensive Review Through Content and Bibliometric Analyses.” Learning.” Information Systems Frontiers 24, no. 2: 619–635. https://doi.
Sustainability 16, no. 13: 5799. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135799. org/10.1007/s10796 -020-10097-2 .
Bashir, S., and A. L. Lapshun. 2025. “E-L earning Future Trends in Grönlund, Å., and Y. M. Islam. 2010. “A Mobile e-L earning Environment
Higher Education in the 2020s and Beyond.” Cogent Education 12, no. 1: for Developing Countries: The Bangladesh Virtual Interactive
2445331. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2 024.2 445331. Classroom.” Information Technology for Development 16, no. 4: 244–259.
Bonett, D. G., and T. A. Wright. 2015. “Cronbach's Alpha Reliability: Habib, A., D. Ranasinghe, and A. Perera. 2024. “Business Strategy and
Interval Estimation, Hypothesis Testing, and Sample Size Planning.” Strategic Deviation in Accounting, Finance, and Corporate Governance:
Journal of Organizational Behavior 36, no. 1: 3–15. https://doi.org/10. A Review of the Empirical Literature.” Accounting and Finance 64, no.
1002/job.1960. 1: 129–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.13131.
Briones, M. R., M. Prudente, and D. D. Errabo. 2023. “Stakeholders' Hasan, K. M. M. 2024. “EdTech in Bangladesh: A Catalyst for
Perspective on the Quality of Virtual Learning Material in Google Educational Transformation.” https://w ww.k mmahmudhasan.com/
Classroom.” International Journal of Technology in Education 6, no. 4: edtech-in-bangladesh-a-catalyst-for-educational-transformation/.
736–759. https://doi.org/10.4 6328/ijte.571.
Hong, A. J., and H. J. Kim. 2018. “College Students' Digital Readiness
Çelik, F., and M. H. Baturay. 2024. “Technology and Innovation in for Academic Engagement (DRAE) Scale: Scale Development and
Shaping the Future of Education.” Smart Learning Environments 11, no. Validation.” Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 27: 303–312.
1: 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s 40561-024-0 0339- 0.
Hussain, M., W. Zhu, W. Zhang, et al. 2018. “Student Engagement
Chipere, N. 2017. “A Framework for Developing Sustainable e-L earning Predictions in an e-L earning System and Their Impact on Student Course
Programmes.” Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e- Assessment Scores.” Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience 2018:
Learning 32, no. 1: 36–55. 6347186. https://doi.org/10.1155/2 018/6347186.
Chowdhury, A. 2021. “Digital Bangladesh to Innovative Bangladesh:
Jayalath, J., and V. Esichaikul. 2022. “Gamification to Enhance
The Road to 2041.” https://w ww.undp.org/bangladesh/blog/digital-
Motivation and Engagement in Blended eLearning for Technical and
bangladesh-innovative-bangladesh-road-2 041.
Vocational Education and Training.” Technology, Knowledge and
Cornejo-Velazquez, E., M. Clavel-Maqueda, H. Perez-L opez-Portillo, Learning 27, no. 1: 91–118.
and E. Lyubimova. 2020. “Business Model of Learning Platforms in
Jones, G. G. 2017. “International Business and Emerging Markets: A
Sharing Economy.” Electronic Journal of E-Learning 18, no. 1: 102–113.
Long-Run Perspective.” Harvard Business School General Management
https://doi.org/10.3 4190/E JEL.2 0.18.1.0 08.
Unit Working Paper, 18–020.
Langrafe, T. d. F., S. R. Barakat, F. Stocker, and J. M. G. Boaventura.
Kemp, S. 2024. “Digital 2024: Bangladesh.” https://datareportal.com/
2020. “A Stakeholder Theory Approach to Creating Value in Higher
reports/digital-2 024-bangladesh.
Education Institutions.” Bottom Line 33, no. 4: 297–313. https://doi.org/
10.1108/BL-03-2 020-0 021. Khanna, T., K. G. Palepu, and J. Sinha. 2015. “Strategies That Fit Emerging
Markets.” In International Business Strategy, 615–631. Routledge.
Debattista, M. 2018. “A Comprehensive Rubric for Instructional Design
in e-L earning.” International Journal of Information and Learning Kintu, M. J., C. Zhu, and E. Kagambe. 2017. “Blended Learning
Technology 35, no. 2: 93–104. Effectiveness: The Relationship Between Student Characteristics,

23 of 25
25723170, 2025, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsd2.70098 by <Shibboleth>[email protected], Wiley Online Library on [07/06/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Design Features and Outcomes.” International Journal of Educational Rahiman, H. U., and R. Kodikal. 2024. “Revolutionizing Education:
Technology in Higher Education 14, no. 1: 1–20. Artificial Intelligence Empowered Learning in Higher Education.”
Cogent Education 11, no. 1: 2293431. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.
Kulikowski, K., S. Przytuła, and Ł. Sułkowski. 2022. “E-L earning?
2023.2293431.
Never Again! On the Unintended Consequences of COVID-19 Forced
e-L earning on Academic Teacher Motivational Job Characteristics.” Ramdani, B., A. Binsaif, and E. Boukrami. 2019. “Business Model
Higher Education Quarterly 76, no. 1: 174–189. Innovation: A Review and Research Agenda.” New England Journal
of Entrepreneurship 22, no. 2: 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Kwok, O.-M., M. W. L. Cheung, S. Jak, E. Ryu, and J.-Y. Wu. 2018.
NEJE-0 6-2 019-0 030.
“Editorial: Recent Advancements in Structural Equation Modeling
(SEM): From Both Methodological and Application Perspectives.” Redman, A. 2018. “Harnessing the Sustainable Development Goals for
Frontiers in Psychology 9: 1–3. https://doi.org/10.3389/f psyg.2 018.01936. Businesses: A Progressive Framework for Action.” Business Strategy &
Development 1, no. 4: 230–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.33.
Labun, J. 2023. “Fixing Ed-Tech's Investment Model.” https://ssir.org/
articles/entry/f ixing_ed_techs_investment_model. Research and Markets. 2024. “Bangladesh Telecom—Market Share
Analysis, Industry Trends & Statistics, Growth Forecasts 2019–2029.”
Lee, R., K. Hoe Looi, M. Faulkner, and L. Neale. 2021. “The Moderating
https://w ww.researchand markets.c om/report s/5764387/bangla desh
Influence of Environment Factors in an Extended Community of Inquiry
-telecom-market-share-analysis.
Model of e-Learning.” Asia Pacific Journal of Education 41, no. 1: 1–15.
Rogers, P. 2024. “Best Practices for Your Confirmatory Factor Analysis:
Maatuk, A. M., E. K. Elberkawi, S. Aljawarneh, H. Rashaideh, and H.
A JASP and Lavaan Tutorial.” Behavior Research Methods 56, no. 7:
Alharbi. 2022. “The COVID-19 Pandemic and E-L earning: Challenges
6634–6654. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02375-7.
and Opportunities From the Perspective of Students and Instructors.”
Journal of Computing in Higher Education 34, no. 1: 21–38. Salama, R., and T. Hinton. 2023. “Online Higher Education: Current
Landscape and Future Trends.” Journal of Further and Higher Education
Makokha, G. L., and D. N. Mutisya. 2016. “Status of e-L earning in
47, no. 7: 913–924. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2 023.2200136.
Public Universities in Kenya.” International Review of Research in Open
and Distance Learning 17, no. 3: 341–359. Samala, A. D., S. Rawas, S. Criollo- C, et al. 2024. “Emerging
Technologies for Global Education: A Comprehensive Exploration of
Munich, K. 2014. “Social Support for Online Learning: Perspectives Trends, Innovations, Challenges, and Future Horizons.” SN Computer
of Nursing Students.” International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Science 5, no. 8: 1175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s 42979 -024-03538-1.
Education/Revue Internationale Du e- Learning et La Formation à
Distance 29, no. 2: 1–12. Saxena, C., H. Baber, and P. Kumar. 2021. “Examining the Moderating
Effect of Perceived Benefits of Maintaining Social Distance on e-
Murphy, M. P. A. 2020. “COVID- 19 and Emergency eLearning: Learning Quality During COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Educational
Consequences of the Securitization of Higher Education for Post- Technology Systems 49, no. 4: 532–554.
Pandemic Pedagogy.” Contemporary Security Policy 41, no. 3: 492–505.
Shah, H. J., M. D. Habib, and A. Qayyum. 2021. “COVID-19, Impact
Naveed, Q. N., A. Muhammad, S. Sanober, M. R. N. Qureshi, and A. of External Environment in the Formation of Students' Satisfaction as
Shah. 2017. “A Mixed Method Study for Investigating Critical Success Well as Subjective Well-Being in the Context of E-L earning.” Pakistan
Factors (CSFs) of e-L earning in Saudi Arabian Universities.” Methods Business Review 22, no. 4: 604–627.
8, no. 5: 171–178.
Shahzad, A., R. Hassan, A. Y. Aremu, A. Hussain, and R. N. Lodhi. 2021.
Neumeyer, X., and S. C. Santos. 2018. “Sustainable Business Models, “Effects of COVID-19 in E-L earning on Higher Education Institution
Venture Typologies, and Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: A Social Network Students: The Group Comparison Between Male and Female.” Quality
Perspective.” Journal of Cleaner Production 172: 4565–4579. https://doi. & Quantity 55: 805–826.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2 017.08.216.
Singer-Brodowski, M. 2023. “The Potential of Transformative Learning
Noesgaard, S. S., and R. Ørngreen. 2015. “The Effectiveness of E- for Sustainability Transitions: Moving Beyond Formal Learning
Learning: An Explorative and Integrative Review of the Definitions, Environments.” Environment, Development and Sustainability 25: 1–23.
Methodologies and Factors That Promote e-L earning Effectiveness.” https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02444-x.
Electronic Journal of E-Learning 13, no. 4: 278–290.
Smyrnova-Trybulska, E. 2019. E-Learning—Evolution, Trends, Methods,
Obisesan, O. O., and O. E. Olayide. 2021. “Asymmetric Information, Examples, Experience. International Association for Development of the
Business Environment, and Transactions Costs Among Business Information Society.
Owners in Nigeria: Implications for Female Entrepreneurial
Sustainability Transitions.” Business Strategy & Development 4, no. 1: Stepanyan, K., A. Littlejohn, and A. Margaryan. 2013. “Sustainable
34–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.154. e-
L earning: Toward a Coherent Body of Knowledge.” Educational
Technology and Society 16, no. 2: 91–102.
Oh, E. G., Y. Chang, and S. W. Park. 2020. “Design Review of MOOCs:
Application of e-L earning Design Principles.” Journal of Computing in Strike, T. 2018. “Administrative Planning, Higher Education
Higher Education 32: 455–475. Institutions.” Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems
and Institutions 6: 1–6.
Otto, D., and S. Becker. 2019. “E- L earning and Sustainable
Development.” In Encyclopedia of Sustainability in Higher Education, Tarka, P. 2018. “An Overview of Structural Equation Modeling: Its
475–482. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Beginnings, Historical Development, Usefulness and Controversies in
978-3 -030-11352- 0 _211. the Social Sciences.” Quality and Quantity 52, no. 1: 313–354. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11135 -017-0 469-8.
Perrotta, C., and L. Pangrazio. 2023. “The Critical Study of Digital
Platforms and Infrastructures: Current Issues and New Agendas for Thavi, R., R. Jhaveri, V. Narwane, B. Gardas, and N. Jafari Navimipour.
Education Technology Research.” Education Policy Analysis Archives 2024. “Role of Cloud Computing Technology in the Education Sector.”
31: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.31.7952. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology 22, no. 1: 182–213.
https://doi.org/10.1108/J EDT-08-2 021-0 417.
Queiros, D. R., and M. R. de Villiers. 2016. “Online Learning in a
South African Higher Education Institution: Determining the Right Timotheou, S., O. Miliou, Y. Dimitriadis, et al. 2023. “Impacts of Digital
Connections for the Student.” International Review of Research in Open Technologies on Education and Factors Influencing Schools' Digital
and Distance Learning 17, no. 5: 165–185. Capacity and Transformation: A Literature Review.” Education and

24 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

25 of 25

Bad Hanim Ut Master Thesis
No ratings yet
Bad Hanim Ut Master Thesis
91 pages
Pluralsight: Age and Market Insights
No ratings yet
Pluralsight: Age and Market Insights
30 pages
India's EdTech Revolution: Key Players
No ratings yet
India's EdTech Revolution: Key Players
11 pages
Sustainability 13 02653
No ratings yet
Sustainability 13 02653
20 pages
Client Pitch
No ratings yet
Client Pitch
8 pages
Blume Ventures Edtech Report Opt
No ratings yet
Blume Ventures Edtech Report Opt
77 pages
Sustainability 13 02653 With Cover
No ratings yet
Sustainability 13 02653 With Cover
21 pages
Edtech 2023 Road Ahead Pgalabs
No ratings yet
Edtech 2023 Road Ahead Pgalabs
27 pages
Emerging Business Models in Education Provisioning: A Case Study On Providing Learning Support As Education-as-a-Service
No ratings yet
Emerging Business Models in Education Provisioning: A Case Study On Providing Learning Support As Education-as-a-Service
17 pages
HRM5
No ratings yet
HRM5
22 pages
E Learning DESK RESEARCH Project MBA
No ratings yet
E Learning DESK RESEARCH Project MBA
47 pages
Sectoral Analysis
No ratings yet
Sectoral Analysis
4 pages
The Use of AI-Driven Automation To Enhance Student
No ratings yet
The Use of AI-Driven Automation To Enhance Student
21 pages
JETIR2411364
No ratings yet
JETIR2411364
19 pages
UTiLearn A Personalised Ubiquitous Teaching and Learning System For Smart Societies
No ratings yet
UTiLearn A Personalised Ubiquitous Teaching and Learning System For Smart Societies
21 pages
Social Engineering
No ratings yet
Social Engineering
15 pages
Raudhatul Jannah 21st Century
No ratings yet
Raudhatul Jannah 21st Century
5 pages
Tech-Driven Business Education
No ratings yet
Tech-Driven Business Education
6 pages
Challenges and Growth of EdTech in India
No ratings yet
Challenges and Growth of EdTech in India
32 pages
Edtech Industry Marketing Guide
No ratings yet
Edtech Industry Marketing Guide
26 pages
Rethinking Education-Innovations, Policy and Practice - Revised Outline
No ratings yet
Rethinking Education-Innovations, Policy and Practice - Revised Outline
5 pages
Business Plan
No ratings yet
Business Plan
21 pages
Marketing Strategy For Ed-Tech Company: Group: Challengers Members: Sheersha KK Anjaly TA
No ratings yet
Marketing Strategy For Ed-Tech Company: Group: Challengers Members: Sheersha KK Anjaly TA
7 pages
Meeting 2 - SDG Based Innovation in English Learning An Entrepreneurial Opportunity
No ratings yet
Meeting 2 - SDG Based Innovation in English Learning An Entrepreneurial Opportunity
15 pages
From Information To Empowerment: Teaching Sustainable Business Development by Enabling An Experiential and Participatory Problem-Solving Process in The Classroom
No ratings yet
From Information To Empowerment: Teaching Sustainable Business Development by Enabling An Experiential and Participatory Problem-Solving Process in The Classroom
14 pages
Where Did The Money Go?: Where Is Investment Flowing in
No ratings yet
Where Did The Money Go?: Where Is Investment Flowing in
1 page
Final Study of Edtec Business Word (Neha)
No ratings yet
Final Study of Edtec Business Word (Neha)
48 pages
Aaaaa
No ratings yet
Aaaaa
34 pages
Final Report of Edtech Business Bhagirathi
100% (1)
Final Report of Edtech Business Bhagirathi
53 pages
Distribution & Logistic
No ratings yet
Distribution & Logistic
20 pages
Business Model E-Learning
100% (1)
Business Model E-Learning
0 pages
Sustainability 13 04429 v2
No ratings yet
Sustainability 13 04429 v2
11 pages
EdTech Case Study
No ratings yet
EdTech Case Study
3 pages
Learno B2B Go To Market Strategy For The Indian Education Sector
No ratings yet
Learno B2B Go To Market Strategy For The Indian Education Sector
4 pages
Edtech: Trends For 2024
No ratings yet
Edtech: Trends For 2024
14 pages
Need Jana
No ratings yet
Need Jana
3 pages
Top EdTech Companies in India Analysis
No ratings yet
Top EdTech Companies in India Analysis
6 pages
Challenges and Strategies in E-Learning Adoption in Emerging Economies A Scoping Review
No ratings yet
Challenges and Strategies in E-Learning Adoption in Emerging Economies A Scoping Review
24 pages
Dessertation Report
No ratings yet
Dessertation Report
51 pages
Education Technology & Elearning
No ratings yet
Education Technology & Elearning
50 pages
Write An Assignment On The E-Commerce Model of You...
No ratings yet
Write An Assignment On The E-Commerce Model of You...
3 pages
Is Final Report - Group 1
No ratings yet
Is Final Report - Group 1
25 pages
How To Use Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning (STP) To Develop Marketing Strategies in
No ratings yet
How To Use Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning (STP) To Develop Marketing Strategies in
8 pages
BCG Making Digital Learning Work Apr 2018
No ratings yet
BCG Making Digital Learning Work Apr 2018
57 pages
Master of Commerce: "A Study of Innovative Edtech Start-Ups & Businesses in The Emerging Markets and Economies"
No ratings yet
Master of Commerce: "A Study of Innovative Edtech Start-Ups & Businesses in The Emerging Markets and Economies"
62 pages
Smart Final
No ratings yet
Smart Final
30 pages
EdTech's $30B Opportunity in India
0% (1)
EdTech's $30B Opportunity in India
30 pages
Is The EdTech Industry Dying - (2025) - DigitalDefynd
No ratings yet
Is The EdTech Industry Dying - (2025) - DigitalDefynd
17 pages
Project 2
No ratings yet
Project 2
4 pages
Demand For Online Education Is Growing Are Providers Ready
No ratings yet
Demand For Online Education Is Growing Are Providers Ready
12 pages
Innovative EdTech Strategy for India
No ratings yet
Innovative EdTech Strategy for India
10 pages
06 - Ed Tech 5 - Business Model
No ratings yet
06 - Ed Tech 5 - Business Model
21 pages
ABTE 2023 Flyer
No ratings yet
ABTE 2023 Flyer
1 page
ELearning (The Engine of The Knowledge Economy)
No ratings yet
ELearning (The Engine of The Knowledge Economy)
109 pages
ITB
No ratings yet
ITB
34 pages
Laxmi Sardar Unschool PRoject Report
0% (2)
Laxmi Sardar Unschool PRoject Report
32 pages
Dictionary of English Idioms - Compress
100% (2)
Dictionary of English Idioms - Compress
226 pages
Chandrakar 2016 Clinico Epidemiological Spectrum of Melioidosis A 2 Year Prospective Study in The Western Coastal
No ratings yet
Chandrakar 2016 Clinico Epidemiological Spectrum of Melioidosis A 2 Year Prospective Study in The Western Coastal
6 pages
2002 African Energy Fund For African Development
No ratings yet
2002 African Energy Fund For African Development
9 pages
Legal Requirements For Library Resource Collaboration
No ratings yet
Legal Requirements For Library Resource Collaboration
3 pages
Zlib - Pub - The Growth of Islamic Finance and Banking Innovation Governance and Risk Mitigation
100% (1)
Zlib - Pub - The Growth of Islamic Finance and Banking Innovation Governance and Risk Mitigation
369 pages
Leadership Styles Impact on Success
No ratings yet
Leadership Styles Impact on Success
19 pages
10 1108 - Lodj 06 2021 0268
No ratings yet
10 1108 - Lodj 06 2021 0268
22 pages
Empowerment for Leaders & Firms
No ratings yet
Empowerment for Leaders & Firms
14 pages
Remote Working Unprecedented Increase and A Developing Research Agenda
No ratings yet
Remote Working Unprecedented Increase and A Developing Research Agenda
10 pages
Pokroy 2019 Get Immigration Law Advice From The Right Sources
No ratings yet
Pokroy 2019 Get Immigration Law Advice From The Right Sources
2 pages
Post-COVID Remote Working and Its Impact On People Productivity and The Planet An Exploratory Scoping Review
No ratings yet
Post-COVID Remote Working and Its Impact On People Productivity and The Planet An Exploratory Scoping Review
30 pages
Empowering Leadership in Youth Care
No ratings yet
Empowering Leadership in Youth Care
24 pages
Work Futures
No ratings yet
Work Futures
172 pages
Individual Goal Orientations, Team Empowerment, and Employee Creative Performance: A Case of Cross-Level Interactions
No ratings yet
Individual Goal Orientations, Team Empowerment, and Employee Creative Performance: A Case of Cross-Level Interactions
35 pages
Van Der Hoek Et Al 2016 Goal Setting in Teams Goal Clarity and Team Performance in The Public Sector
No ratings yet
Van Der Hoek Et Al 2016 Goal Setting in Teams Goal Clarity and Team Performance in The Public Sector
22 pages
Juridical Review of Law Enforcement
No ratings yet
Juridical Review of Law Enforcement
17 pages
Role of Legal Advice Bureaux in SA
No ratings yet
Role of Legal Advice Bureaux in SA
4 pages
Globalization and Employment Insights
No ratings yet
Globalization and Employment Insights
108 pages
An Investigation of Precursors
No ratings yet
An Investigation of Precursors
18 pages
Standards Needed
No ratings yet
Standards Needed
15 pages
Simon PuttingSouthAfrican 1994
No ratings yet
Simon PuttingSouthAfrican 1994
6 pages
Essential Web Resources for Research
No ratings yet
Essential Web Resources for Research
5 pages
Work From Home During Pandemic Commitment, Work Stress and Job Satisfaction Among University Teachers in Bangladesh
No ratings yet
Work From Home During Pandemic Commitment, Work Stress and Job Satisfaction Among University Teachers in Bangladesh
28 pages
Supplier Resilience Strategies During COVID-19
No ratings yet
Supplier Resilience Strategies During COVID-19
18 pages
Corporate-Level Strategy Directions
No ratings yet
Corporate-Level Strategy Directions
12 pages
AIHR Developing Strategic HRBPs Blueprint
No ratings yet
AIHR Developing Strategic HRBPs Blueprint
14 pages
Developing An Effective Ethics Program
No ratings yet
Developing An Effective Ethics Program
22 pages
JWT Tplan
No ratings yet
JWT Tplan
16 pages
Analytics Strategy for Business Success
No ratings yet
Analytics Strategy for Business Success
5 pages
Business Mcqs 4
No ratings yet
Business Mcqs 4
9 pages
Effects of Transformational Leadership, Organisational Learning and Technological Innovation On Strategic Management Accounting in Thailand's Financial Institutions
No ratings yet
Effects of Transformational Leadership, Organisational Learning and Technological Innovation On Strategic Management Accounting in Thailand's Financial Institutions
24 pages
Corporate Level Strategy
100% (1)
Corporate Level Strategy
11 pages
Company Profile Smartelco Smart Solution
No ratings yet
Company Profile Smartelco Smart Solution
14 pages
Strategy
100% (17)
Strategy
482 pages
Arco References&Pre Qualification 09 11
No ratings yet
Arco References&Pre Qualification 09 11
368 pages
Financial Analysis and Decision Making Outline
No ratings yet
Financial Analysis and Decision Making Outline
8 pages
$R967TKY
No ratings yet
$R967TKY
10 pages
Marketing Career Opportunities 2025
No ratings yet
Marketing Career Opportunities 2025
4 pages
Marketing Syllabus
No ratings yet
Marketing Syllabus
9 pages
Nike
50% (2)
Nike
13 pages
What Is The Right Supply Chain For Your Product
No ratings yet
What Is The Right Supply Chain For Your Product
19 pages
10 School of Thoughts of Strategy Formulation
No ratings yet
10 School of Thoughts of Strategy Formulation
5 pages
Topic 1 of Module
No ratings yet
Topic 1 of Module
15 pages
PGDM II HR Electives
No ratings yet
PGDM II HR Electives
20 pages
Eureka Forbes - Docx Word
100% (1)
Eureka Forbes - Docx Word
54 pages
06 Activity 1
No ratings yet
06 Activity 1
3 pages
Social Media Marketing Strategy Guide
No ratings yet
Social Media Marketing Strategy Guide
34 pages
Seven Steps On Effective Workforce Planning
100% (5)
Seven Steps On Effective Workforce Planning
75 pages
Transforming The Industry That Transformed The World: High Tech Industry Narrative
100% (2)
Transforming The Industry That Transformed The World: High Tech Industry Narrative
32 pages
Business Architect: A Critical Role in Enterprise Transformation
No ratings yet
Business Architect: A Critical Role in Enterprise Transformation
41 pages
Introduction to Digital Marketing Concepts
No ratings yet
Introduction to Digital Marketing Concepts
43 pages
ADMS 3960 N Course Outline
No ratings yet
ADMS 3960 N Course Outline
8 pages
Assignment #2 PDF
100% (1)
Assignment #2 PDF
7 pages
Topic1 Segmentation Targeting
No ratings yet
Topic1 Segmentation Targeting
17 pages

Bus Strat Dev - 2025 - Sultana - Bridging Business Strategy and Educational Development Private Sector Engagement and

Uploaded by

Bus Strat Dev - 2025 - Sultana - Bridging Business Strategy and Educational Development Private Sector Engagement and

Uploaded by

Business Strategy & Development

Bridging Business Strategy and Educational Development:

Correspondence: Tawhid Ahmed Chowdhury ([email protected]; [email protected])

Received: 27 December 2024 | Revised: 9 March 2025 | Accepted: 10 March 2025

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

1 | Introduction delivery method but a strategic intersection of commercial

© 2025 ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Business Strategy & Development, 2025; 8:e70098 1 of 25

2 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

4 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

Our market analysis component employed multiple analytical

6 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

Demographic factors Respondents Percentage Cumulative percentage

Factor loading Average variance

8 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

Hypotheses Beta T p Decision

10 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

4.7 | Cost–Benefit Analysis and ROI Patterns 4.8 | Partnership Performance

12 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

highest relative growth rates. Projections indicate that higher 5 | Discussion

14 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

5.2 | Success Factor Integration 5.3 | Stakeholder Value Distribution

16 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

18 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

Study phase Focus areas Key methods Major findings

20 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

22 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

24 of 25 Business Strategy & Development, 2025

You might also like

1   |   Introduction delivery method but a strategic intersection of commercial

4.7   |   Cost–Benefit Analysis and ROI Patterns 4.8   |   Partnership Performance

highest relative growth rates. Projections indicate that higher 5   |   Discussion

5.2   |   Success Factor Integration 5.3   |   Stakeholder Value Distribution