Quality management
About what we should do because they say so and what
we do because we want to
And a little bit about James Bond
Everard van Kemenade
Senior consultant Quality Management
Fontys International Projects

QUALITY
MANAGEMENT
What we should do, because “they say so”:
accreditation.

Accreditation = a licence to kill
A licence to kill

Different accreditation
systems
– Q Definition
– Objective (improvement or
accountability)
– Methods (audits, peer review)
– Responsible agency (government
funded or not, employers)
– Voluntary or mandatory
– Object (education/research,
existing/new, programs or institutes)
– Public or confidential reports
– Follow up (financial consequences?)
Van Damme (2000), Scheele (2004)

Conformities
Increasing autonomy
Not only top down implementation
Method:
– Self evaluation incl.
performance indicators
– Peer review
– Public report

What we have to do in the
Dutch situation
External quality assurance
– Accreditation organised by the
Accreditation Agency (NVAO)
– Compulsory, severe consequences,
– Accountability > improvement

cheps
Quality Spiral in Dutch Higher Education
Accreditation
Agency (NVAO)
s t u d e n t le a r n i n g
ac
cre
Lega
H i gher Ed .
dit t e a c h in g
I nstitution s
l con
in te rn a l Q
sequ
m an ag e m e nt s e lf -e v a lu a t i o n
“ m
Study
internal
et
Programmei t y im p r o v e m e n t
a-
q u al
ence
e
va
lu
self-study
at
s
io
report of
n”
repor t
external
visiting
In spectorate comm ittee
H igher Ed. s i t e v is i t s
ac an
tr
co sp
M inistry, V isi ti ng
u n ar
pr o gr a m m e Committee
t a en c
press, Buffer
bi y
ju d g e m e n t s
lit
p ublic, etc. body
y
© CHEPS, University of Twente | Don F. Westerheijden | 1998 2

QUALITY:
External Quality
Assurance
Self evaluation
Visitation by “customers”
Every six years
The course is the object
Emphasis on primary (educational) process
Change foreseen 2010: more institutional issues

Different
views
on
its
effectiveness
Van Kemenade
(2009)

Some results Ph.D study
1. Seperate accountability from
improvement
2. Do not use self evaluation for
accountability, only for improvement
3. Do not model the internal system (just)
to the external demands

Quality is not a thing
It is an event
R. Pirsig.
“Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance”
(1972)
The seventies cult book on quality and values

Deming cycle
plan
act do
check

QUALITY:
The Fontys case
What we want is:
Continuous improvement
Commitment from all employees

How we organize it at Fontys
Concern auditors
Quality Service Centre
Program Quality Managers:
– Management contracts and
reports (Macon and Marep)
Teams
– Team contracts
Individual
– Personal development plan

Concern Auditor
Top senior staff-function
Advisor Board of Directors
Internal
X audit X+6

Quality Service Centre
Quality system advise
Assist self-study
Documentary system
Research stakeholders:
evaluations
* students
* staff
* alumni
* world of work
* government

Evaluations
Students
– Every period (course)
– Every year (program)
– Every two year Fontys
Staff
– Every two year Fontys
World of work
– Council
– Alumni/employers yearly
Government
– Accreditation

Tomorrow?

How to get the p-d-c-a cycle
working on program level
Evaluations Summary Improvements Results
MT: Macon
Activity plan
Marep

Marep=management
report
90
80
Quality
70 Study-results
60
50 Marketing-results
40
30 Educational Development
20
10
Financial
0
1e kwrt 2e kwrt 3e kwrt 4e kwrt
Co-operation

How to get the p-d-c-a cycle
working: teamplan
MT Activity-plan Marap
Team Team plan MT
Reports on evaluations
Quality Manager

Quality improvement is
a daily
personal priority
obligation

W. Edwards Deming:
We have to bring back the individual.

How to get the p-d-c-a
cycle working on
individual level
Competence management
Personal development plan
Yearly appraisal meeting with the manager

Shaken not stirred
Thanks for
your
attention

Questions