Improving Quality Management in Higher Education ... - EOQ

Improving Quality Management in
Higher Education Institution (HEI):
a case study of using EFQM
Excellence Model in Estonian Higher
Education Institution
Anneli Lorenz
Project Manager 2008-2012

GOLAS OF THE QUALITY PROCESS
Internal quality management system;
strengths and areas for improvement;
best practices;
accreditation process;
increase the competitiveness of Estonian
institutions of higher education and support their
success in the European Union and worldwide.

MORE ABOUT PROCESS
• From 2009 to 2012 (three processes – 2009/10,
2010/11, 2011/12);
• 17 universities and Federation of Estonian
Students Unions (EÜL)
• more than 300 people are trained in quality.

QUALITY MODEL THAT WAS USED
European excellence award model and
scoring matrix (EFQM Excellence
Award, EFQM-European Foundation for
Quality Management).

The EFQM Excellence Model

STEPS OF PROCESS
Selection of organisations
Training of representatives of organisations
Submission of organisations' self-analysis documents
Training of assessors
Visit of organisations by assessors
Compiling and submission of feedback documents to organisations
Feedback training for organisations
Assessors' follow-up visits to organisations
Conducting a feedback survey and analysis of results
Final seminar/conference

Where were we 2009-2012
RESULTS

MAIN OBSERVATION
(based on the assessment criteria):
LEADERSHIP
• Responsibility at all levels of management are not
clearly defined;
•how to motivate managers to deal with the quality

POLICY AND STRATEGY
Development plans and strategies require
clearer objective of adopting, reviewing,
measuring and making of the improvements.

EMPLOYEES
• Development discussion - planned, but
implementation depends on the middle managers;
• participation in the training/courses - there are no
links between training/courses and organizational
choices;
•career opportunities - opportunities exist in all
institutions of higher education;
•employee motivation process - works if the
employees also participate in the process.

PARTNERSHIPS AND RESOURCES
• A choice of partners based on historical
tradition and personal relationships;
• searching for partners but their finding is not
determined by clear targets;
• analysis and assessment of cooperation with
external partners;
• the need to increase the focus on
internationalisation and to set relevant
targets.

PROCESSES
• Question about systematic management;
• importance of support processes.

STAKEHOLDER RESULTS
• Stakeholder specification;
• students feedback doesn`t have targets, trends
and comparisons;
• student mobility;
• the results are not comparable.

EMPLOYEE RESULTS
• satisfaction of employees;
• indicators - participation in research
conferences, the number of publications,
the distribution of qualifications, offices
and ages, the length of employment.

SOCIETY RESULTS
• Area of improvement is the weakness in
measuring the effectiveness of goals.

HEI’s PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
• Results are, but goals should be more
accurate;
• risk management – impotant;

VALUES OF THE PROCESS
• The top management in quality;
• development of quality systems in HEI;
• quality awareness and systems in HEI;
• the ability to show and analyse the aspects
that ensure quality in the HEI;
• ensuring the compliance of indicators with the
priorities of the HEI;
• higher investment in employees.

Thank you!
Questions
anneli.lorenz@emu.ee