REPUTATION AND WORD-OF-MOUTH PERCEPTION: CASE STUDIES IN INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT

The purpose of this research is to analyze the perception differences of reputation and word of mouth between educational and non-educational program students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study. Using quantitative approach with the survey method, we sample 172 educational program students and 164 noneducational program students. The data is processed using multiple regression by first going through validity, instrument reliability and classical assumption tests. Analysis showed that there are significant differences between educational and noneducational program students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study seen from the word of mouth perception, but no significant differences seen from the reputation perspective.

Institutions require the correct strategies to be able to survive and win the competition to earn their achievements. This strategy must also be implemented systematically and in the long term. University promotions are a priority component due to it being the main way for the institution to inform, persuade and remind the society about the product. (P. Kotler, 2012) stated that promotion is a set of means used by a company to inform, persuade and remind the comsumer bot directly or indirectly about the product being sold. Promoting requires communication to help the consumer decide before buying. Usually, the consumer will first research about their desired products, usually from family, friends, or close associates. This type of communication is called word of mouth communication.
Word of mouth is a private communication process between the customer and their surroundings about the product (P. Kotler, 2012), while (Eka, 2015) stated that word of mouth is an informal information exchange between a noncommercial messenger to the receiver about a particular product, service, brand or company that the messenger has experienced. This information model is very effective in affecting the final purchase decision, as stated by (Hasan, 2010), where word of mouth information were one of the strongest source for a customer to finalize their purchase decision. (P.&K.L.K. Kotler, 2009) defined marketing as the science or art of building active and profitable communication between customers or between the customer and the seller. (Sernovitz, 2009), defined word of mouth marketing as an action taken by the company to expand word of mouth information capabilities using good ads, correct promotions, and publications in media and event such as that the customers will keep talking about the product or service.
This condition is also felt by UNIPA Surabaya, one of the Top 100 best universities in Indonesia, such that it always tries to innovate to compete with other universities. As a university known for its output of teachers, itself starting as an institute by teachers, UNIPA Surabaya always promotes itself as not just for educational students, but also for non-educational program students.
Through promotions, the university informs the populace that non-educational graduates can also be teachers (Islamic Education General Directorate, 2017, https://kemenag.go.id/berita/read/505736, asserted by (Pemerintah RI, 2005) Articles 1 and 2 states that Teachers are professional educators, proven by an educator's license.
These conditions allow the people to lots of choices on how to continue to a university of their choice, adjusting to their own conditions. These choises ultimately shape the final decisions of the students themselves.

Literature Review 2.1 University Reputation
Conceptually, reputation is interpreted differently (Rindova et.al in (Wibowo, 2014)) Many researchers classify reputation as a process of evaluating the entensity of a company or organization. Reputation is defined as an assessment of the relationship of attitudes, emotions, financial, social and cultural of an organization. Likewise Post & Griffin (Harahap, Hurriyati, Gaffar, Wibowo, & Amanah, 2017) reputation is a combination of opinion, perception and behavior of the stakeholders of an organization.
In choosing a tertiary institution, the reputation of the tertiary institution and the suitability of the study program are separate considerations. The community knows the reputation of tertiary institutions from the BAN-PT accreditation status owned by such tertiary institutions, therefore the manager is trying to get the best value for the institution or study program (Gunarto & Gaffar, 2016) Related to tertiary institutions, the corporate reputation of the tertiary institution defined as subjective and collective recognition, perceptions, attitudes and evaluations of institutions established among all internal and external stakeholder groups over a period of time. (Mehboob, Shah, & Bhutto, 2012) found that the university's reputation was important for a graduate who would find a job to understand, because the university institution where he studied created his own image and carried his reputation among the industry. Universities are becoming more competitive in markets that try to attract the best students and then provide the best job opportunities for students who have been accepted.
Such conditions can lead universities to create competitive advantage in order to get the best prospective students. The college reputation of a graduate who works in a company will be known for his performance. Dismping the students feel that study at one particular university can show the level of success in getting a job and the perception of salary to be earned, company preferences in the job market, a sense of pride and worthiness of students in the job market (Sultan and Wong in (Wibowo, 2014)).
Choosing the right university for higher education is a crucial issue. There are several factors that play a role and are appropriate for higher studies, these factors are reputation, school fees, permanent location of campus, quality of teaching staff, online services and information technology facilities, advertising and environment (Saif, Nipa, & Iddique, 2016) Factors The foregoing agrees with the results of the study (Hagel & Shaw, 2007), (Agrey & Lampadan, 2014), (Rudhumbu, Tirumalai, & Kumari, 2017). The explanation above, it can be stated that reputation is the result of collective assessment by outsiders of an organization on the performance and quality of the organization that is long-term in nature. According to Larkin in (Suta, 2006) reputation is expressed as a perception of the characteristics, performance and behavior of the organization, it can be constructed the factors forming reputation as follows 1) CEO, 2) University governance, 3) Social responsibilities, 4) Accounting measures.

Word of Mouth
Word of mouth communication (WOM) or communication from mouth to mouth is a communication process in the form of giving recommendations individually or in groups of a product or service (Kotler & Keller, 2016). Whereas (Sernovitz, 2009) word of mouth marketing is a communication process to give a reason for someone to talk about a product or service in order to facilitate the conversation. The American Communication Institute (AMA) defines word of mouth communication as the exchange of information between consumers about products and promotions (Association American Marketing, n.d.). WOM is considered as one of the most influential factors on consumer behavior (Huete-Alcocer, 2017).
Word of mouth is not engineered because consumers provide information voluntarily and do not get rewarded Prasetyo (2018). The information submitted can be good but can also be made up or not in accordance with reality so that it can be bad for the company, can damage the company's brand and reputation itself. If this happens in the determination of the choice to continue their studies to college, it is a decision that will have an impact on the future concerned. Prospective students will always look for information to the stage of stability to determine the choice of admission to the university which according to him is the best university among others. To minimize the risk that will be borne in the future, prospective students often share word of mouth.
The power of word of mouth face to face or online cannot be underestimated. WOM plays an important role in the decision making of a consumer in the process of selecting or determining an object (Harahap, Hurriyati, Gaffar, Wibowo, & Amanah, 2017). Every college needs prospective students to need various effective marketing methods to attract prospective students. (Özdemir, Tozlu, Şen, & Ateşoğlu, 2016) state that when choosing a university, word of mouth information is most influential. (Sernovitz, 2009) states word of mouth is communication that produces good conversation. Someone will ask others about the quality of an item or service before deciding to buy, so he divides the five dimensions or basic elements of word of mouth known as 5T, namely: Talkers, Topics, Tools, Talking part and Tracking

Decision to Choose Higher Education
The process of a person's decision making starts from the need to be fulfilled. To be able to meet the needs associated with various alternatives so that evaluation is needed to obtain the best alternative according to the perception of someone as a consumer. So that the comparison process can run smoothly, information is needed according to the amount and level of importance, which is adapted to the needs of a person in the conditions and situations encountered (Sudaryono, 2014). The purchasing decision process as stated (Kotler & Keller, 2016) includes 1) Recognition of Problems 2) Information Search 3) Alternative Evaluation 4) Purchasing Decisions 5) Post-purchase Behavior. While Schiffman and Kanuk in (Wulandini & Saputra, 2017) the decision making process is an important process that is influenced by the external environment such as the marketing mix (4P) and the sociocultural environment such as family, information sources, non-commercial sources, social classes, culture and sub-culture, while the internal environment in the form of psychological factors such as motivation, personality, learning, perception, and attitude.
Deciding to choose a college as a place of study is a crucial problem. Many factors play a role in choosing the right university for higher studies (Saif, Nipa, & Siddique, 2016), Ming in (Mahendra Fakhri, Alini Gilang, 2017 states that the decision of students to choose higher education is influenced by no factor 1) Student characteristics include interests or talents 2) External influences such as parents, friends and other individuals 3) Attributes of the college itself such as location, study programs, reputation, facilities, costs, job opportunities and marketing carried out. Students in making decisions on choosing tertiary institutions get advice from their closest people, the family. This is consistent with the phrase (Sumarwan, 2011) that the family is the closest environment to consumers. Family is an environment where most consumers live and interact with other family members.

Research Methods
To answer the problem with a causal research, the population for this research is drawn from UNIPA Surabaya students from the 2018-2019 academic year, differentiated between educational and noneducational program. The samples are counted using the Slovin algorithm (Arikunto, 2010) = 1+ 2 , with accuracy rates of 95%, with 164 taken from non-educational students and 172 taken from educational students. Data is taken using a questionnaire, to which instrument test and classical assumption test is applied, then analyzed using the multiple regression quantitative method. The research variable indicators are as follows.

Reliability Test
The reliability coefficient is obtained from the Cronbach's alpha based on standardized items, where if it is bigger than R table (0,7) then the variable is said to be reliable. The analysis results are as follows.  Table 5 shows that the Cronbach's alpha is larger than R table of 0,7, thus the data is fit to continue to analysis. Table 6 shows that asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) 0,491 > 0,05, thus showing that the residues have a normal distribution.

Multicollinearity Test
The multicollinearity test determines if there is a correlation between the independent variables in the regression model. Table 7 shows that each VIF value variable is less than 10 (1,006 < 10), with tolerance value greater than 0,1 (0,994 > 1), thus confirming no multicollinearity between the variables and thus no correlation between the variables. The results are as follows. 3. Heteroscedasticity Test Figure 1 showed that the scatterplot of ZPRED and SRESID concentrated above or below the origin value and does not form patterns, therefore fulfilling the heteroscedasticity assumption.

Autocorrelation test
The autocorrelation test determines if the observation members in the same free variable relates with each other. The test results are shown in Table 8. Table 8 showed a DW value of 2,12, between the 1,55 -2,46 range, thus proving that no autocorrelation occured in the research data. Table 9 shows the analysis of university reputation perception difference between educational and non-educational students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study as follows. Table 9. Perception difference test

Data Analysis 1. Perception Difference Analysis
The university reputation perception difference analysis between educational and noneducational students showed a sig value of 0,709 (0,709 > 0,05). It shows that educational and non-ecucational students does not have a significant difference in reputation perception in choosing UNIPA Surabaya. Table 10. Word-of-mouth perception The perception difference analysis test for word of mouth between educational and noneducational students showed a sifg value of 0,010 (0,010 < 0,5). It means that theres is a significant difference in word of mouth perception between educational and non-educational students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya. 2. Determining Analysis Table 11 shows the determining analysis between educational and non-educational students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study as follows.

Table 11. Determining analysis
The university reputation and word-of-mouth variables in educational and non-educational students give a 4,8% influence when deciding to choose UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study. Table 12 shows the multiple linear regression analysis to educational and non-educational students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study.

Tabel 12. Multiple linear regression analysis
From Table 12 we may derive a multiple linear equation as follows.
= 1,813 + 0,317 1 + 0,166 2 The constant 1,813 means that if the university reputation and word-of-mouth variables are zeroed then the decision variable in choosing UNIPA Surabaya is 1,813. The reputation variable coefficient of 0,317 means that reputation variable is directly proportional to the decision variable in choosing UNIPA Surabaya. If the reputation value increases by 1, then the decision value will rise by 0,317, and vice versa. The word-of-muth coefficient of 0,166 means that the WOM variable is directly proportional to the decision variable in choosing UNIPA Surabaya. If the WOM value increases by 1, then decision variable will increase by 0,166, and vice versa. From the regression analysis we found out that there are significant differences between educational and non-educational students in choosing UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study, shown from the reputation and word-of-mouth perspectives.

Discussion
The results of the study show that the decision of students to study at PGRI Adi Buana University in Surabaya is seen from the perception of the university's reputation, both students of educational and non-educational programs are no different. The reputation factor is one of the factors considered important for students in choosing tertiary institutions. Higher education that has a good reputation, must have good quality in producing output. This research supports (Harahap, Hurriyati, Gaffar, Wibowo, & Amanah, 2017) where the university's reputation has a positive and significant influence on students' decisions to study. (Saif, Nipa, & Siddique, 2016) the results of his research stated that choosing the right university for study is a crucial issue, where the reputation of universities as the most important thing is considered in choosing universities for higher education. The findings (Echchabi & Al-Hajri, 2018) in his research stated that reputation is a major factor in choosing universities.
Test results differ between the WOM perceptions of students of educational study programs and non-educational study programs have a sig value of 0.010 (0.010 <0.05). This means that the perception of WOM from students of educational study programs and non-educational study programs is different in terms of choosing PGRI Adi Buana University Surabaya as a place of study. Compared with educational study programs, non-education study program students consider factors to obtain deeper and more specific information related to the attributes offered, it is possible that students of educational study programs are more motivated by their interest in the chosen field of study. This condition is in line with (Ming, 2010) that characteristics in tertiary institutions involve broad matters such as student interests.

Conclusion
From our research to determine the difference in perception of university reputation and word-ofmouth to choose UNIPA Surabaya as their place of study between educational and non-educational students of academic year 2018-2019, we may conclude as follows : Reputation perception of educational and non-educational students has a sig value of 0,709 (0,709 > 0,05). This shows that both educational and non-educational students are in sync when considering reputation as the basis of deciding to choose UNIPA Surabaya. The word-of-mouth perception difference between educational and non-educational students has a sig value of 0,010 ( 0,010 < 0,05). This shows that there are significant differences between educational and non-educational students in valuing word-of-mouth to decide on choosing UNIPA Surabaya.