esmu benchmarking programme on university management nadine nadine burquel, secretary general, esmu
TRANSCRIPT
ESMU Benchmarking programme on university management
Nadine Nadine Burquel, Secretary General, ESMU
www.esmu.be
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Presentation
About Benchmarking The ESMU Benchmarking Programme and its characteristics Topics benchmarked How the programme works Work at institutional level Examples of good practices Implementation Use of the final report respecting confidentiality
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Benchmarking
• The search for best practices
To lead to superior performance
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Benchmarking – Improvement
Benchmarking - Method of improving operations Looking and learning from others Comparing yourself with them
Performance and behaviour are not static
Benchmarking is a long-term process Involves the whole organization in searching for the best practice:
not just for what is done best, but how it is done.
Brussels, 27 November 2007
ESMU Benchmarking – Definition
Self-development tool – good practices of university management Systematic comparison of HEIs to identify :
Strengths/weaknesses Areas for improvement
Tool combining quality assurance and quality enhancement through Self-evaluation Exchange of experiences Learning from others
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Characteristics – Approach
Goes beyond comparison of data and performance indicators Looks at processes Not a one-off procedure Non-prescriptive Confidentiality
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Benefits/added value
A cost effective method Access to progressive universities Opportunity to harvest the experience and expertise of fellow peers
and experts Participation in a network Involvement in a constructive and progressive review of your own
university’s working practices
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Topics benchmarked
Year 2000 Human Resources & Staff Development Managing Information and Communications Technology Research Management Commercialisation of Academic Activities
Year 2001 Strategic Planning Financial Management Management of Teaching & Learning Marketing the University
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Topics benchmarked
Year 2002 Management Information Systems Internal Quality Assurance Students’ services Estate Management
Year 2003 E-learning External funding Institutional research The European ”dynamics” in Higher Education
The Bologna Process The European Research Area
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Topics benchmarked
Year 2004 Human Resource Management (R) Research Management (R) Change Management The University creating a Regional base
Year 2005 Internationalisation Strategic Partnerships (University-Enterprise Cooperation) Governance & structures Designing new Masters & Doctorates
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Topics benchmarked
Year 2006/07 Internal quality assurance in a context of external quality (R) Marketing HEIs – Positioning your institution in a growing
competitive higher education market (R) Students’ services (R) Supporting innovation in Teaching & Learning
Brussels, 27 November 2007
The ESMU Benchmarking ‘Club’
Less frequent participants
Frequent participantsFrequent participants
Less frequent participants
Participating institutions of that particular year
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Benchmarking – Annual cycle :The various stages (1)
Selection of 4 topics Selection of experts Marketing for participating universities Questionnaires for the four topics
Mission/strategy Operation/management/staffing Monitoring
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Example : Key conclusions(Expert: Strategic partnerships)
1. European Universities should seriously consider taking an active role in the innovation process
2. Most of the benefits of knowledge transfer will come from the exploitation of the immersed portion through collaborative research. Principles of Responsible Partnering
3. There is a direct correlation between knowledge transfer and excellence4. The new paradigm of « Open Innovation » applied by Industry is a unique
opportunity for universities to develop long term collaborative research partnerships with Industry
5. For collaboration to be sustainable = compensated at full costs. Full costs accounting as the basic principle for compensation
6. Knowledge transfer should become « core business » or an integral part of the objectives of excellent research departments.
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Benchmarking – Annual cycle :The various stages (2)
Handbook (questionnaires) – 3 months responses Comparison, analysis and identification of good pratices presented
in a preliminary report with scores on the overall level and the sub levels mentioned before on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 highest). The assessment criteria are made public in beforehand in the handbook
Annual workshop (2½ days) Institutional self-assessment on a scale from 1 to 5 based on further
identified good practices Final report to all participating institutions
Brussels, 27 November 2007
The workshop
Presentation of the result of each subject made by the expert in question
Presentations of good practices chosen by the experts and made by the participating institutions
In-depth group discussions in smaller groups Wrap-up by the expert in question
Steps:
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Work at institutional level for the ESMU Benchmarking Programme
Compose working groups with key person for each subject + context
Introduction to the handbook + questionnaires The responses (10-15 pages) sent to ESMU before deadline Participation in a workshop with presentations and group
discussions Self-assessment based on a set of good practice statements Dissemination of the results in the final report and follow-up at the
institution
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Contextual Information and Data
Mission and goals Autonomy Student numbers Staff numbers Awards Financial data Academic programmes Property and facilities
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Example Good practices: New Masters and Doctorates (final self-assessment- based on the level of identification) Doctoral training
The university is setting up a Research school to promote and develop structured doctoral courses within the departments, so that doctoral candidates are provided with academic training and advice specifically tailored to this phase of qualification.
(Enthusiastic) application of national rules by a university led to well-structured PhD-trajectories, although the fixed course component was not emphasized strongly in the documentation. More stress was on individual study plans, which may not be a bad balance at the advanced level and small-number ‘cohorts’ involved in doctoral training.
5 3 1 X 4
4 1 2 4 X
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Example Good practices: New Masters and Doctorates (final self-assessment based on the level of identification) International programmes/joint degrees/ Erasmus Mundus
“In the case of recent international co-operative PhD- degrees there was sufficient expertise in the faculty and international office to resolve legal, academic or procedural difficulties”.
“Where a PhD- degree has an international aspect, there are a series of specific requirements which must be met, relating among other things to:
No. of Centres of Higher Learning and Member States Integrated mechanisms Joint degree regulations Administration policies Quality requirements
3 X 2 4 5
3 1 3 5 5
Brussels, 27 November 2007
Implementation/How to use your learning?
ESMU Final Report (documentation: The ESMU Handbook, the comparison, analysis and the scores given by the experts, all contributions from the workshop and the final institutional self-assesment with scores
Internal discussion of the report at the institutions Personal contact to HEIs with ”best practices” Set-up of an action plan for improvement at institutional level
Brussels, 27 November 2007
The Learning feature Benchmarking
The analysis is based on the following six characteristics:
1. Learning organisations have mechanisms that enable them, as
organic entities, to learn: from their own experiences; from the experience of others.
i)to enable them to contend with external factors or adapt to their environment
ii)to be more efficient at producing outputs
iii)to be more effective in producing other or better outputs
2. Learning organisations learn for a purpose, including:
Brussels, 27 November 2007
The Learning feature Benchmarking (2)3. Organisational learning is a continuous process of systematic
proactive continuous improvement, involving a cycle of enquiry, action, feedback and organisational memory.
4. Organisational learning involves a culture of facilitating/enabling the
capacity of employees to increase their learning.
5. A learning organisation develops radical ideas, thinks the unthinkable, experiments and takes risks.
6. There are processes in learning organisations to enable reflection
on, or evaluation of, the learning.
[1] Kristensen , B: ”Benchmarking in the perspective of a ”learning institution” and as a means to search for best practices”. ENQA Workshop Reports 2: Benchmarking in the Improvement of Higher Education”, Helsinki 2003.
www.enqa.net
Brussels, 27 November 2007
ESMU Benchmarking – Key issues
Different national contexts Different size of universities Different cultures within universities The strategic approach Quality assurance and quality enhancement Capacity for change