Profit Versus Purpose, Oman’s Private Higher Education Expansion, the Vision 2040 Challenge, and the Imperative of Purpose-Driven Regulation
Over the past two decades, Oman’s higher education landscape has been transformed. Private universities and colleges have emerged as central pillars in meeting rising demand, and today, private institutions constitute the majority of higher education providers in the Sultanate. This development reflects a deliberate and forward-looking national strategy. In a rapidly diversifying economy, the state cannot and should not remain the sole provider of tertiary education.
The accompanying analysis, written from an Omani perspective, situates this expansion within the framework of Oman Vision 2040, which prioritises human capital development, skills readiness, innovation, and the transition towards a knowledge-based economy. Private higher education institutions are not peripheral participants in this vision; they are essential partners in advancing national ambitions. The critical question, the analysis argues, is not whether private providers should exist, but whether the operational models guiding some of them fully reflect the broader educational and societal purpose they are meant to serve.
Universities are not ordinary commercial enterprises. They are entrusted with multiple, complex responsibilities: developing skilled graduates, advancing research and innovation, strengthening ethical and civic values, and contributing to national development priorities. When profit maximisation becomes the sole driving force, these responsibilities risk being reduced to secondary concerns. The analysis is careful to note that not all private institutions follow a profit-first mindset. Many demonstrate genuine commitment to academic quality, faculty development, student learning, and national goals. But the structural pressures of the market create incentives that can undermine these commitments.
The problem is compounded by the framing of students as customers who are always right. This framing prioritises short-term satisfaction over long-term learning outcomes. Students may remain quiet about declining academic standards because their immediate interestsâgrades, workload, progressionâappear protected. Faculty who speak up about quality concerns risk being seen as obstacles to student satisfaction and, by extension, to institutional profitability.
Regulation alone cannot fully solve this problem. Even with robust oversight mechanisms, government bodies cannot conduct microscopic, day-to-day monitoring of teaching quality, assessment integrity, or academic culture inside every institution. The solution must therefore go beyond regulation to structural reform that aligns institutional incentives with educational purpose.
The Vision 2040 Context: Human Capital as National Priority
Oman Vision 2040 is not a vague aspiration; it is a detailed roadmap for the Sultanate’s development over the next decade and a half. It identifies human capital development as a core priority, recognising that Oman’s future prosperity depends on the skills, knowledge, and creativity of its people. The transition to a knowledge-based economy requires a workforce that is not only technically competent but also capable of critical thinking, innovation, and adaptation.
Private higher education institutions are essential to achieving this vision. They expand access, bring diverse perspectives, and can respond more flexibly to changing labour market demands than state-run institutions. But they can only fulfil this role if they prioritise educational quality over short-term financial returns. An institution that churns out graduates with weak skills, that fails to invest in faculty development, that neglects research capacity, is not contributing to Vision 2040; it is undermining it.
The analysis’s call for a cap on profit withdrawal from private higher education institutions must be understood in this context. The proposal is not anti-profit; it is pro-purpose. It recognises that investors deserve a return on their capital, but it insists that the primary purpose of an educational institution is education, not profit. By requiring that surplus beyond a certain threshold be reinvested in academic prioritiesâfaculty development, learning resources, research capacity, student support servicesâthe cap aligns financial success with institutional quality.
The Student-as-Customer Problem: Short-Term Satisfaction vs Long-Term Learning
The framing of students as customers is one of the most corrosive trends in contemporary higher education. It shifts the power dynamic in ways that undermine academic standards. If the student is always right, then faculty who assign challenging work, who give low grades, who insist on rigorous standards, are seen as failing to meet customer expectations. The pressure to keep customers happy can lead to grade inflation, reduced workload, and a general decline in academic rigour.
The analysis notes that students themselves may not object to this dynamic because their immediate interests appear protected. They get good grades with less effort. They progress smoothly through their programmes. They may not realise until after graduation that their degree is worth less than it should be, that they have not acquired the skills they need, that they have been short-changed by an institution that prioritised their satisfaction over their education.
This is not a problem that can be solved by blaming students. They are acting rationally within the incentives created by the system. The solution must come from the institutions themselves, from faculty who are willing to uphold standards, and from regulators who ensure that quality is not sacrificed on the altar of customer satisfaction.
The Faculty Question: Pay, Conditions, and Academic Freedom
The analysis’s call for a national minimum pay scale for academic and administrative staff, issued and monitored by the Ministry of Education, is a recognition that quality requires investment in people. Faculty are the heart of any educational institution. If they are underpaid, overworked, and insecure, they cannot deliver the quality that students deserve and that Vision 2040 requires.
The proposal includes not only minimum pay but also a clearly defined set of basic facilities and working conditions: transparent workload norms, access to professional development, minimum research support for research-active faculty, and clear due-process protections in contract renewal. These measures would not only improve quality but also give faculty the confidence to speak up in defence of academic standards. A faculty member who fears non-renewal for raising concerns about quality is not free to fulfil their professional responsibilities. Due-process protections are essential for academic freedom.
Regional Lessons: The Gulf Context
The analysis notes that other Gulf countries offer cautious lessons rather than models to copy. Across the region, the rapid expansion of private higher education has often been followed by stronger regulation to protect quality and graduate outcomes. Oman can adopt this principle without importing unsuitable frameworks by focusing on what is measurable and enforceable: reinvestment in quality, learning outcomes, and institutional transparency.
The key is to learn from others’ mistakes without replicating them. The Gulf region has seen both successes and failures in private higher education. The successful institutions are those that have maintained a focus on quality, that have invested in faculty and facilities, that have resisted the temptation to prioritise profit over purpose. The failures are those that have done the opposite. Oman’s regulatory framework should be designed to encourage the former and discourage the latter.
Conclusion: Purpose-Driven Profit
The analysis’s concluding statement is worth quoting: “Private higher education is indispensable to Oman’s future. Profit itself is not the problem. The problem arises when profit replaces purpose rather than resulting from it.” This captures the essence of the argument. Profit is not inherently evil; it is a necessary condition for sustainability and growth. But profit must be the result of fulfilling one’s purpose, not the purpose itself. A university that delivers excellent education, that produces skilled graduates, that advances research and innovation, will be profitable because it is valued. A university that pursues profit directly, by cutting corners, by reducing quality, by treating students as customers to be satisfied rather than as learners to be challenged, may achieve short-term financial success but will ultimately fail in its mission.
Oman has the opportunity to build a private higher education sector that is both financially sustainable and educationally excellent. The regulatory framework must be designed to encourage this outcome. The proposals in the analysisâa cap on profit withdrawal, a national minimum pay scale, clear standards for faculty conditions, and a focus on measurable outcomesâare steps in the right direction. They recognise that universities are not ordinary commercial enterprises and that they must be governed by different rules. They align private incentives with public purpose. And they offer a path toward a future in which private higher education fulfils its promise as an essential partner in Oman’s development.
Q&A Section
Q1: What is the significance of private higher education in Oman’s national development strategy, according to the analysis?
A1: Private higher education is described as essential to achieving Oman Vision 2040, which prioritises human capital development, skills readiness, innovation, and the transition to a knowledge-based economy. Private institutions now constitute the majority of higher education providers, reflecting a deliberate national strategy to expand access and diversify educational options. They are not peripheral participants but essential partners in advancing national ambitions. However, the analysis argues that this partnership can only be effective if private institutions align their operational models with educational purpose rather than prioritising profit maximisation. The critical question is whether these institutions are fulfilling their broader societal role or whether short-term financial considerations are undermining educational quality.
Q2: What specific regulatory reforms does the analysis propose to ensure that private higher education institutions serve their educational purpose?
A2: The analysis proposes several concrete reforms. First, a cap on profit withdrawal, with remaining surplus mandatorily reinvested in academic priorities such as faculty development, learning resources, research capacity, and student support services. Second, a national minimum pay scale for academic and administrative staff, issued and monitored by the Ministry of Education. Third, clearly defined basic facilities and working conditions, including transparent workload norms, access to professional development, minimum research support for research-active faculty, and clear due-process protections in contract renewal. These reforms are designed to align institutional incentives with educational quality, ensuring that financial success strengthens rather than undermines institutional purpose. The analysis emphasises that regulation alone cannot solve all problems, but structural reforms can create the right incentives.
Q3: Why does the analysis identify the “student-as-customer” framing as problematic, and what consequences does it have for academic quality?
A3: The framing of students as customers is problematic because it shifts the power dynamic in ways that undermine academic standards. If the student is always right, faculty who assign challenging work, give low grades, or insist on rigorous standards are seen as failing to meet customer expectations. This can lead to grade inflation, reduced workload, and a general decline in academic rigour. Students may not object because their immediate interestsâgood grades, easy progressionâappear protected. They may not realise until after graduation that their degree is worth less than it should be. The analysis argues that this framing prioritises short-term satisfaction over long-term learning outcomes and that the solution must come from institutions willing to uphold standards and from regulators who ensure that quality is not sacrificed.
Q4: What lessons does the analysis draw from other Gulf countries’ experiences with private higher education expansion?
A4: The analysis notes that other Gulf countries offer cautious lessons rather than models to copy. Across the region, rapid expansion of private higher education has often been followed by stronger regulation to protect quality and graduate outcomes. Oman can adopt this principle without importing unsuitable frameworks by focusing on what is measurable and enforceable: reinvestment in quality, learning outcomes, and institutional transparency. The key is to learn from others’ successes and failuresâto encourage institutions that maintain a focus on quality and investment in faculty, and to discourage those that prioritise profit over purpose. The Gulf context is relevant, but Oman must develop its own regulatory framework tailored to its specific circumstances and Vision 2040 goals.
Q5: What is the distinction the analysis makes between “profit as purpose” and “profit resulting from purpose,” and why is this distinction central to its argument?
A5: The distinction is central to the analysis’s entire argument. Profit as purpose occurs when an institution’s primary goal is maximising financial returns, with educational quality becoming a secondary concern or even a casualty of cost-cutting. Profit resulting from purpose occurs when an institution focuses on delivering excellent education, producing skilled graduates, advancing research and innovation, and, as a result of fulfilling that mission successfully, achieves financial sustainability. The analysis argues that profit itself is not the problem; the problem arises when profit replaces purpose as the driving force. A university that pursues profit directly, by cutting corners and reducing quality, may achieve short-term financial success but will ultimately fail in its mission. A university that focuses on purpose will, if well-managed, achieve profit as a natural consequence. The regulatory reforms proposed are designed to encourage this second model and discourage the first.
