Dr. Diane Nauffal - Director of Institutional Research and ... - CMI

Benchmarking and Implications for
Universities: In depth Look Inside
Universities

What does benchmarking involve?
Why use benchmarking?
The purpose of benchmarking
The benchmarking cycle
Challenges of benchmarking
A successful benchmarking environment
Lebanese American University (LAU) – Overview
Benchmarking Activities at LAU

Benchmarking involves first examining and understanding an institutions
internal work procedures, then searching for best practices in other
institutions that match those identified, and finally, adapting those
practices within the institution to improve performance.
Benchmarking requires that an institution go through a thorough selfanalysis:
• to develop an in depth understanding of its own processes,
• to recognize its strengths and its weaknesses,
• to identify internal and external reference points,
• to look at other institutions for examples of how to do things more
efficiently and effectively to better overcome its weaknesses and to
ensure the sustainability of its strengths at even higher levels of
performance.

Benchmarking is being used to improve administrative processes as
well as instructional models of institutions of higher education
(Chaffee & Sherr 1992; Alstete 1997).
The importance of benchmarking as an improvement strategy lies
in that it provides an external focus on internal activities,
functions and processes (Kempner 1993).
By integrating benchmarking into the fundamental operations of
an institution it transforms an institution into a true learning
organization.
Benchmarking will be most useful to those organizations that have
made a commitment to redesign their processes.

Benchmarking is an ongoing systematic process that involves finding,
adapting and implementing outstanding practices for the purpose of
achieving higher standards of excellence and continuous improvement.
Benchmarking
• contributes to accountability,
• contributes to quality management,
• focuses on demonstrated best practices,
• provides a tool for learning,
• provides a basis for research for improving practices,
• allows for better understanding of operational practices,
• stimulates the need for change,
• provides a roadmap for action, and
• provides opportunities of networking through collaborative efforts
(Epper, 1999).

Adaptation of
enablers for
improvement
Determine
process
enablers of
high
performance
Plan the
study
Determine
gaps in
performance
Collect
data
Analyze data

Defining best practices and core competences.
Readily applicable to administrative processes, less so to processes
related to teaching and learning.
Institutional readiness for benchmarking. Level of awareness of
internal processes.
Level of incentive to commit to the benchmarking exercise or to
the implementation of results.
Is the institution and its leadership ready to act on results and
commit to implement change for the purpose of improvement or
does the institution see benchmarking as an exploratory study?
Benchmarking requires sufficient resources. It can be time
consuming and costly.

Leadership
with Vision
Competitive
Environment
Innovation
and Quality
Improvement
Stakeholder
Buy In
Guided by Knowledge and Information
Strategic and
Operational
Planning
Excellence
and
Sustainability

Founded as a women’s college in 1924, the Lebanese American University is a
not-for-profit private institution of higher education in Lebanon rooted in the
tradition of exemplary education.
LAU has a campus in Beirut, Lebanon’s capital and largest population hub, and
another about 35 kilometers to the north, in Byblos.
The two campuses together house seven schools. The schools common to both
campuses are: Architecture and Design, Arts and Sciences and Business. The
Byblos campus is home to the School of Engineering, Medicine, Nursing and
Pharmacy.
Student enrollments were 8,138 in 2012 with 7,457 undergraduates, 509
graduates and 172 doctoral degree-professional practice.
There are 299 full-time faculty, 123 are dual nationals while 49 are non-
Lebanese. There are 557 full-time staff.
LAU was granted accreditation by the Commission on Institutions of Higher
Education of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (CIHE–
NEASC).

The Doctor of Pharmacy program is fully accredited by the Accreditation Council
for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). This status allows LAU Pharm.D. graduates to sit
for the North American Pharmacy Licensure Examination (NAPLEX), and practice in
most U.S. states. ACPE first accredited the program in 2002. LAU’s Pharm.D. is the
only ACPE-accredited program outside the United States.
On October 1, 2011 the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)
granted accreditation to all five undergraduate degree programs in the School of
Engineering - Civil, Computer, Electrical, Industrial, and Mechanical. This
accreditation action extends retroactively from October 1, 2009.
On October 1, 2011 the Bachelor of Science degree program in computer science
was formally accredited by the Computing Accreditation Commission of the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). This accreditation
action extends retroactively from October 1, 2010.
Accreditation may be considered a form of benchmarking activity.

The National Survey for Student Engagement (NSSE) probes the level
of engagement of first year and senior students in several university
activities. These activities include academic and intellectual
experiences, mental activities, reading and writing, problem sets,
examinations, enriching educational experiences, quality
relationships, time usage, institutional environment, educational
and personal growth, and others (NSSE, 2011).
The NSSE also provides benchmark scores based on effective
educational best practices in five areas: (1) level of academic
Challenge – LAC; (2) active and collaborative learning – ACL; (3)
student-faculty interaction – SFI; (4) enriching educational
experiences – EEE; and (5) supportive campus environment – SCE.
Students’ perceptions of the level of their engagement at LAU are
benchmarked against three peer groups.

Level of Academic Challenge (LAC)
Academic
Year
First Year Students Senior Students
LAU Carnegie Peers All NSSE Peers
Mean Mean Sig Effect size Mean Sig Effect size
2006 51.4 52.4 53.6 *** -­‐0.17
2007 50.5 55.1 *** -­‐0.37 52.8 ** -­‐0.18
2008 53.8 52.5 0.09 53.9 -­‐0.01
2009 54.7 54.3 0.03 54.3 0.03
2010 53.6 54.3 -­‐0.05 54.6 -­‐0.07
2011 53.4 54 -­‐0.05 53.8 -­‐0.03
Academic
Year
LAU Carnegie Peers All NSSE Peers
Mean Mean Sig Effect size Mean Sig Effect size
2006 57.0 56.4 57.4
2007 56.5 57.3 -­‐0.06 56.4 0.01
2008 59.3 57.3 0.15 57.5 0.13
2009 59.5 56.1 ** 0.24 57.8 0.12
2010 59.5 58.3 0.09 58.1 0.10
2011 57.7 58.2 -­‐0.04 57.6 0.00
Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

A benchmark study on human resources in three institutions in the
region; AUB, AUC and LAU. This project was spearheaded by LAU.
Reasons for the Benchmarking project
• Leadership committed to make LAU a world class employer and
an employer of choice. This was translated into action steps in
the institutional strategic plan.
• Competition among institutions to attract and retain good
faculty. Indicators considered were salary, benefits, workloads
and others.
• Comparison of productivity and efficient use of resources.
• Benchmarking with the US seemed futile in this case.

• Kempner, D.E. (1993). The Pilot Years: The growth of the NACUBO
Benchmarking Project. NACUBO Business Officer, 27(6), 21-31.
• Chaffee, E.E. and Sherr, L.A. (1992). Quality: Transforming
Postsecondary Education, George Washington University: Washington.
• Alstete, J. (1997). Benchmarking in Higher Education: Adapting Best
Practices To Improve Quality. Eric Digest.
• Epper, R.M. (1999). Applying Benchmarking to Higher Education: Some
Lessons from Experience, Change, 31(6), 24-31.
• National Survey of Student Engagement .(2011). Institutional Report.
Indiana University Research, Postsecondary Research: Bloomington.