Middlehurst -- Quality Enhancement for Accountability and Transformation

7/28/2019 Middlehurst -- Quality Enhancement for Accountability and Transformation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/middlehurst-quality-enhancement-for-accountability-and-transformation 1/10

Ter t ia ry E duca t ion and Manageraen t, VoL3,N o . I , 1997 , 1 5 - 2 4

Q u a lity E n h a n c e m e n tfor A ccou ntabi l ity and T ransform ationA F ram ework for the Future

Rob in M idd lehu rst

Higher educat ion is no s t ranger to ' the market

place'. O ver centuries, the products and processes

of h igher educa t ion -knowledge c rea t ion andtransmission; professional practice and develop-

ment; techn ological innovation, transfer and ex -

change; social and political critique - have

shaped and responded to d i f fe ren t marke t s .

However, in the las t quarter of the twent ieth

century, the relat ionship between markets is

changing as the balance o f power and au thori ty

in transactions betw een highe r educ ation and its

clients and sponsors shifts.

In the UK, as in the U SA, the concepts and

practices of 'th e m arke t ' have becom e politically

popular a nd e cono mic ally pervasive, as the y havebeen form ally applied to public as well as private

sectors of the econom y. In high er education, th e

quality ag enda has provide d an imp ortant vehicle

for promoting and responding to the market

place. For institutional researchers, the ag end a

has also served to hig hligh t the tensions betw een

the econom ic values of the m arket and th e social

values of high er education.

This paper argues for the developm ent of a ne w

set of relat ionships between higher educat ion

and 'the ma rket place', o ne in wh ich the balance

of power and au thor i ty i s more even ly sp readbetw een sponsors, clients and pro vide m A qual-

i ty framework is used to i l lus t rate how these

relationships can be developed and expressed,

using some, but not al l , of the rhetoric o f the

market to reframe high er educ at ion act ivi t ies

The paper is in four parts. I t begins w ith a briefdescript ion of m arket concepts and their appl i-

cation to UK higher educat ion. The n a series o f

tensions in the market rhetoric as applied to

high er education are discussed. Th e third section

introduces the quality framework, i l lustrating

how these tensions migh t be al layed. The wo rk

o f t h e H i g h e r E d u c a t io n Q ~ a l i t y C o u n c i l

(HEQ_C) offers examples of ho w the frame work

can be applied in practice. The paper concludes

by drawing at tent ion to some of the s t ructures

and activities wh ich need to be established with in

and across institutions if a new set of transac-tional relationships with clients and sponsors is

to develop successfully.

Ma rke t Pr inc ip les and the i r App l i ca t ion to

H i g h e r E d u c a t io n

The applicat ion of m arket concepts and princi-

ples in UK high er educat ion has been so mew hat

crude and imperfect s ince ma ny o f the c ondi t ions

necessary for the operat ion o f a t rue marke t are

absent. For example, a marke t involves th e trad-

ing o f goods and services based o n laws of supply

(an adequacy and availabi li ty o f such goods and

services) and dem and (a requirem ent or nee d for

such goo ds and services). Ideally, supp ly an d

M s Robin Middleburst is Director of the (~¢liey Enbwacemrnt Group at the Higher Education ( ~ J i 9 Council, 344 -35 4 Grays

lnn Roa~ London WC IX 8BP. Td:0171 837 2223. Fax:0171 278 1676.

Tlx ~iem exp,esed in thispaper are those o f ~ ~ bo r and no t ne cz ~ ty those o f the co .o i l .

1 5



16 R O B I N M I D D L E H U R S T

dem and are in balance, b ut wh en th ey are not,

such as in condit ions ofscarci ty , com peti t ion wil l

occur. Unde r any conditions, the conc ept of amarket assumes an abi l i ty to engage in the t rading

of good s and services throu gh buy ing and sel ling

fo r economic ga in , o r th rough o ther fo rms o f

exchange. The concept also tends to assume a

direct transactional relationship b etw een buy er

and sel ler based on an understanding or agree-

men t abou t the p r ice and va lue o f the goods and

services.

As mentioned earl ier , h igher educat ion is in-

volved in several 'markets ': for research, for

teaching, for tech no log y transfer, for the creation

and p reserva t ion o f cu l tu re. Few o f them opera teas perfe ct markets since transactions are no t di-

rected solely towards economic gains , nor do

each o f these m arke ts opera te in the same way .

For example, the creation o f kno wle dge through

research is 'bought ' through research contracts

and grants an d 'sold ' by researchers , bu t the

con t rac to rs a re o f ten buy ing on beha l f o f o thers

(the research comm unity; society) wh ile research

i t se lf t ends to be so ld th rough the agen cy o f an

institution. W ith teaching, th e buy er is ofte n the

state, and the sales agent, the institution. In

nei ther case is the supply and demand relat ion-ship balanced, constant, direct or readily quanti-

f iable in eco nom ic terms, no r is there an obvio us

and pub l ic unders tand ing and ag reemen t abou t

the appropriate price and value of research or

teaching between those engaged in the t ransac-

t ions. Wh ile there is perhaps a clearer market in

relat ion to te chn olog y transfer, the task of creat-

ing and preserving culture is still more difficult

to translate into market terms than is that of

teaching and research.

In the U K, the application of m arket principles

to higher educat ion has been fel t mos t keenly inrelat ion to the prime act iv it ies o f teaching and

research. The driving forces behind the applica-

t ion o f these principles, to ma ny parts o f the

public, professional and volun tary sectors in the

UK (Po ll it t 1990 ; H andy 1990 ; Midd lehurs t and

Kennie 1997, in press) have been a com binat ion

of nat ional econ om ic pressures and pol i t ical ide-

ology. Market principles have bee n playe d out in

a var ie ty o f ways , perhaps m os t obv ious ly in the

treatment o f inst itu tions as 'businesses ' which are

accountable to their customers/cl ients for the

qual ity o f the ' p roduct ' they p rov ide .

Te n s i o n s b e t w e e n M a rk e t R h e t o r i c ,

A c c o u n t a b i l i t y a n d In s t i tu t i o n a l

D e v e l o p m e n t

There i s an inheren t t ension be tw een the opera-

t ion of the insti tu t ion as a business , obe yin g the

laws o f supp ly and dema nd in re lat ion to i t s d irec t

customers , and the part icular not io n o f account-

abi l i ty that has come to dominate inst i tu t ional

affairs. Althoug h th e rhetoric o f accoun tabi l i ty is

focused on customers and cl ients , in pract ice, th e

accountabi l i ty is d irected towards ' sponsors ' or

principal funders, that is, in relation to teaching

and research, the s tate. At the he art o f th is con-

cep t o f accoun tabi l ity is the t ask o f ' re nde r ing an

acc oun t' o f institutional activities in term s of

the ir ' va lue- fo r -money ' . However , as men t ione d

earlier, nei ther price nor value have b een publicly

defined and agreed; indeed, there m ay be s ignifi -

cant d ifferences in the prices and values at tached

to t each ing p rogrammes o r k inds o f research by

direct customers and by sponsors . The issues of

price, value, cost , who is accountable to whom

and fo r what , l ie a t the cen t re o f qu a l i ty deba tes

in higher educat ion across many parts o f the

world (Trow 1996; Kells 1992). Thus, they are

also central to the actual task o f qual i ty man age-

ment.

The part icular not ion o f acco untabi l i ty that is

so pervasive in the U IL while aris ing from marke t

rhetoric, in practice conflicts with market princi-

ples; i t is also potent ial ly threatening to inst i tu-

t iona l deve lopmen t , au tonomy and to o ther

tradi tional values of h igher educat ion. T he abi l i ty

to operate in a market requires fre edom to de ter-

mine price, pro duct or service an d o bject ives , as

well as the abi l i ty to acquire and de plo y resources

according to business needs. Accountabi l i ty as

practised in UK higher educat ion, on the o ther

hand, is bui l t around the d is tr ibut ion o f f in i te and

diminishing state resources, w hic h are passe d to

inst itu tions by the funding counci ls on th e basis

ei ther o f specific formulae or as con tracts f or

specified services. Detailed external evaluation



Q U A L IT Y E N H A N C E M E N T F O R A C C O U N T A BI LI T Y A N D T R A N S F O R M A T I O N 1 7

s y s t e m s a r e t h e n u s e d t o m a k e j u d g e m e n t s a b o u t

i n s t it u t i o n a l p r o c e s s e s a n d o u t c o m e s i n t e a c h in g ,

a n d t h e q u a n t i t y a n d q u a l i t y o f o u t p u t i n r e -s e a r c h . W h i le in s t / tu t io n s t e c h n ic a l ly h a v e to s e t

o b j e c t i v e s , t h e t w i n l e v e rs o f c o n t r o l t h r o u g h

f u n d i n g a n d t h r o u g h e v a l u a t i o n , w h i c h f o r m t h e

a r m o u r y o f a c c o u n t a b il i ty , p l a c e s t r o n g l i m i t s o n

i n d e p e n d e n c e , n o t l e a s t b e c a u s e o f t h e e n e r g y

e x p e n d e d i n c o m p l y i n g w i t h t h e r u le s o f th e

g a m e a n d p r e s e n t i n g a s a t i s f a c t o r y c a s e t o t h e

e v a l u a t o r g A s T r o w ( 1 9 9 6 ) h a s r e p o r t e d a b o u t

t h e U K :

S o m e o f t h e b e s t u n i v e r s it y a d m i n i s tr a t o rs i n

t h e c o u n t r y d e v o t e a v e r y la r ge a m o u n t o f

t i m e a n d e n e r g y t o t h e c r e a t i o n a n d m a n i p u -l a t io n o f i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t g o i n t o t h e i r a ss e ss -

m e n t o r d i r e c t l y t o [ t h e f u n d i n g c o u n c i l ],

i n f o r m a t i o n o n w h i c h t h e i r f u n d i n g a n d r a n k -i n g d e p e n d s , ( F 7 )

T r o w g o e s o n t o m a k e a c a u st i c o b s e r v a t i o n a b o u t

t h i s f o r m o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y a n d i ts r e la t i o n s h ip t o

a f r e e - m a r k e t e c o n o m y :

W h a t e v e r w e m i g h t c a l l t h i s , i t i s a c c o u n t -

a b i l i t y i n n a m e o n l y . It m u c h m o r e r e s em b l e s

th e r e p o r t s b y a c iv i l s e r v ic e in a d e f e a te dc o u n t r y t o a n o c c u p y i n g p o w e r , o r b y s t a t e -o w n e d i n d u s t r i a l p l a n t s a n d f a r m s t o c e n t r a l

g o v e r n m e n t i n a c o m m a n d e c o n o m y ( IX 7)

T h e r e a r e o t h e r r e a s o n s w h y a c c o u n t a b i l i ty i n i ts

p r e s e n t f o r ms i s p r o b le ma t ic f o r in s t i tu t io n s . A

m a j o r r e a s o n i s t h e a m o u n t o f c h a n g e t h at h a s

b e e n o c c u r r i n g a n d s t il l n e e d s t o o c c u r a s a r es u l t

o f t h e e x p a n s i o n o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , a d v a n c es

i n t e c h n o l o g y , a n d c h a n g e s i n t h e n a t u re o f th e

d e m a n d f o r h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n s e r v i c e s . T h e U K

h a s m o v e d f r o m a n ~ l i t e t o a m a s s s y s t e m o f

h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n ( f o r e x a m p l e , u n d e r g r a d u a t e

n u m b e r s h a v e g r o w n f r o m 5 6 0 , 0 0 0 i n 1 9 7 0 / 7 1

t o 1 , 4 1 9 , 0 0 0 i n 1 9 9 3 / 9 4 ) ; t h e re h as b e e n si g -

n i f i c a n t i n v e s t m e n t i n n e w t e c h n o l o g i e s f o r

t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n in g ( f o r e x a m p l e , t h e f o u r U K

H E f u n d i n g b o d i e s h a v e in v e s t e d £ 3 3 m i l l io n i n

7 6 T L T P ( T e a c h i n g , L e a r n i n g a n d T e c h n o l o g y

P r o g r a mme ) p r o je c t s o v e r f o u r y e a r s ) , b u t f a r

f r o m s u f f i c i e n t in v e s tm e n t in r e l a t e d s t a f f d e v e l -

o p me n t ; a n d th e r e i s in c r e a s in g p r e s s u r e f o r b o th

h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n c u r r i c u l a a n d r e s e a r c h t o b e

r e l e v an t a n d i m m e d i a t e l y a p p l i ca b l e t o t h e n e e d s

o f i n d u s t r y a n d b u s i n e s s e n te r p ri s e s. T h e q u e s -

t i on s b e i n g a d d r e s se d b y S i r g o n D e a r i n g 's c o m -

p r e h e n s i v e r e v i e w o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n r e f le c t

s o m e o f t b e s e m a j o r c o n c er n s.T h e d i f f ic u l t y w i t h t h e p r e s e n t i n t e r p r e ta t i o n s

o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s t h a t t h e y p o t e n t i a l l y l i m i t

i n s t it u t i o n s ' c a p a c i t y t o r e s p o n d a n d d e v e l o p ,

b o t h b e c a u s e o f t h e r e s o u rc e s t ie d u p i n t h e f o r m s

o f a c c o u n ta b i l i ty u s e d ( i .e . i n t e r p r e t in g th e m ,

p r e p a r i n g f o r t h e m , e n g a g i n g i n p r e s e n t a t i o n s

a n d v i s i t s , r e s p o n d i n g t o o r e x p l o i t i n g t h e o u t -

c o m e s ) a n d b e c a u s e o f t h e f o c u s o f i n t e re s t o f t h e

p r o c e s s e s w h i c h c a n s k e w i n s t i t u t io n a l a t t e n t i o n

in in a p p r o p r ia t e d i r e c t io n s . F ig u r e s 1 a n d 2 ,

b e lo w, i l lu s t r a t e th e p o in t .

Accountability Development

external requirements

ex trins ic m otivadon

static/retrospective

inspection

information

internal interests

intr insic motivation

d y n a mic /p r o s p e c t iv e

evaluation

da ta

Source: M iddlehurst (1997, in press)

Figure ! Con trasts between accou ntabi l i ly an d

deve lopment

I n F i g u re I s o m e c o n t r a s ts b e t w e e n a c c o u n t -

a b i l it y a n d d e v e l o p m e n t a r e h i g h l i g h t e d . A s i ts u g g e s t s , r e n d e r i n g a n a c c o u n t t o s p o n s o r s i s

d r i v en b y e x t e r n a l r e q u i re m e n t s a n d t e n d s t o r e l y

o n t h e e x t r i n s ic m o t i v a t i o n o f r e w a r d ( e. g. e x t r a

f u n d e d s t u d e n t n u m b e r s ) o r p u n i s h m e n t ( e . g .

d i r e c t r e m o v a l o f r es o u r ce s , o r i n d i r e c t r e m o v a l

v ia d a ma g e , to in s t i tu t io n a l r e p u ta t io n ) . T h e f o c u s

i s e s s e n t i a l ly s t a t i c a n d r e t r o s p e c t iv e , in v o lv in g

a n a c c o u n t o f w h a t h a s b e e n d o n e r a t h e r t h a n

w h a t s h o u l d o r w i l l b e d o n e t o m o v e t h e i n st i tu -

t i o n / p r o g r a m m e f o r w a r d . T h e p r o c e s s i n v o l v e s

i n s p e c t i o n l e a d i n g t o n o n - n e g o t i a b l e j u d g e m e n t s

a n d t h e o u t c o m e s a r e i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e i n f o r -m a t i o n t o g u i d e c h o i c e fo r t h o s e n e e d i n g t o b e

s e le c t iv e (i . e . f u n d e r s a n d c o n t r a c to r s , o r s tu -

d e n t s) . D e v e l o p m e n t , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i s d r i v e n

b y i n t e rn a l i n t e r e st s w h i c h a r e i n f o r m e d b y t h e

p a r t i c u l a r m a r k e t s w i t h w h i c h t h e i n s t i t u -

t i o n / s u b j e c t e n g a g e s , a n d b y t h e i n t r i n s i c m o t i -

v a t o r s o f a c h ie v e m e n t , p r o f e s s io n a l i s m , p r i d e ,

s t a tu s a n d r e p u t a t i o n . T h e p r o c e s s i s m o r e d y -

n a m i c a n d f o r w a r d - l o o k i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y w h e n



1 8 R O B I N M I D D L E H U R S T

b u i l t a r o u n d a n e v a l u a t i o n o f S t r e n g th s , w e a k -

n e s s e s , th r e a t s a n d o p p o r tu n i t i e s , u s in g d a ta a s a

m e a n s o f ri g o r o u s a n a l y s i s t o g u i d e d e c i s i o n -m a k i n g .

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n, d

'challenging the process' /alternative approaches

/ncremental improvement

explanat /on o f ob jec t ives

a c c o u n t a b i l i t y

Source: Middlehurst (1997, in press)

Figure 2 S tages in approaches to qua l i ty

I n F i g u r e 2 a s l i g h d y d i f f e r e n t p o i n t i s m a d e , b u t

o n e w h i c h f o l l o w s a s i m i l a r t h e m e . I t il l u st r a te s

d i f f e r e n t s tages i n a p r o c e s s w h i c h c o u l d l e a d

f r o m a c c o u n t a b i l it y , a s a m e a n s o f e x p l a i n i n g

o b j e c t i v e s t o t h i rd p a r ti e s , t o w a r d s a p r o c e s s o f

' c o n t i n u o u s q u a l i t y i m p r o v e m e n t ' o r t r a n s f o r m a -

t i o n . H o w e v e r , i t m a y a l s o b e t h e c a s e t h a t a f o c u s

o n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y w i l l l i m i t c h a n g e t o t h e l o w e r

l e v el s o f e x p l a i n i n g o b j e c t i v e s a n d o u t c o m e s t o

e x t e r n a l a u d i e n c e s , r e c e i v i n g t h e i r j u d g e m e n t s ,

a n d m a k i n g i n c r e m e n t a l i m p r o v e m e n t s i n r e -

s p o n s e . G i v e n t h e p a c e a n d n a t u r e o f c h a n g e s

a f f e c t i n g U K h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a n d i t s m a r k e t s ,

i n c l u d i n g t h e s t r o n g e l e m e n t o f n a t i o n a l a n d

i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m p e t i t i o n , t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l

p r o c e s s d e p i c t e d i n F i g u r e 2 i s t o o s l o w a n d

u n c e r t a i n t o b e o f s i g n i fi c a n t b e n e f i t t o a l l i n s t i -

t u t io n s . H o w e v e r , it m a y h a v e b e e n o f b e n e f i t t o

s o m e i n h i g h l i g h t i n g a n e e d f o r c h a n g e , a s re c e n t

e v a l u a t i o n s o f e x t e r n a l q u a l i t y p r o c e s s e s h a v e

s u g ge s te d ( H E Q C 1 9 9 4 b ; H E F C E 1 9 9 5 ).

U n t i l n o w , i t h a s b e e n a r g u e d t h a t p r e s e n t

f o r m s o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y a r e p r o b l e m a t i c i n r e la -

t i on t o t h e o p e r a t io n o f a t ru e m a r k e t f o r h i g h e r

e d u c a t i o n s e r v ic e s , a s w e l l a s f o r th e d e v e l o p m e n t

o f i n st i t u ti o n s . I t i s a l so t h e c a s e t h a t t h e u n c o n -

t r o l le d a p p l i c a t i o n o f m a r k e t p r i n c i p l e s a n d p r a c -

t i ce s c a n b e p r o b l e m a t i c i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . F o r

e x a m p l e , i n t h e c a s e o f r e s ea r c h , i t m a y b e d i f fi -

c u l t t o m a i n t a i n s u f f i c i e n t ' b l u e - s k y ' o r s t ra t e g i c

r e s ea r c h i n t h e f a c e o f m a r k e t d e m a n d f o r a p p l i e d

a n d c o mme r c ia l ly - d r iv e n r e s e a r c h . S imi la r ly , in

t e ac h i ng , t h e e c o n o m i c n e e d t o g a i n m o r e s t u -

d e n t s , t o t e a c h p o p u l a r s u b j e c t s , o r t o m a i n t a i ng o o d d e g r e e r es u lt s , m a y b e d e t r i m e n t a l t o q u a l -

i t y a n d s t a n d a rd s . G i v e n t h e s e s c e n a ri o s , a c c o u n t -

a b i l i t y p r o c e s s e s c a n a c t a s a b r a k e o n m a r k e t

d r i v e r s i n o r d e r t o p r o t e c t l o n g e r - t e r m n a t i o n a l

i n te r e st s , s o c ia l v a lu e o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l n e e d s o f

s t u d e n t s . W h a t i s n e e d e d i s a b e t t e r b a l a n c e

b e t w e e n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , m a r k e t p r i n c i p l e s a n d

i n s t it u t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t ( s e e F i g u r e 3 ) , a s w e l l

a s a d i f fe r e n t a p p r o a c h t o e a c h o f th e s e t h r o u g h

t h e p r o c e s s o f q u a l i t y m a n a g e m e n t a t n a t i o n a l,

in s t i tu t io n a l a n d s u b - in s t i tu t io n a l l e v e l s .

d e v e lo p me n t

accountab i li ty marke t p r inc ip le ,

Source: M iddlehurst (1997, in press)

Figure 5 Ba lancing qua l i ty dr ivers

A O ~ a l i ty M a n a g e m e n t F r a m e w o r k

A n i m p o r t a n t i n i t i a l t a s k f o r t h o s e e n g a g e d i n

d e s i g n in g a q u a li t y m a n a g e m e n t f r a m e w o r k i s t o

c o n s i d e r t h e a p p r o a c h t o q u a l i t y t h a t s h o u l d

u n d e r p i n i t (f o r e x a m p l e , ' f i tn e s s f o r p u r p o s e ' a s

in in d u s t r i a l n o t io n s o f q u a l i ty , c o n n o i s s e u r ' s

' e x c e ll e n c e ' w h i c h c a n a p p l y in p r o f e s s i o n a l c o n -

t e x t s , o r s o m e o t h e r a p p r o a c h ) , a n d t h e r a n g e o f

a c t i v i t i e s t h a t q u a l i t y m a n a g e m e n t s h o u l d e m -b r a c e , i .e . th e s c o p e o f t h e f r a m e w o r k . I n F i g u r e

4 a n e x a m p l e i s p r e s e n t e d o f h o w a n i n s t i t u t i o n

m i g h t i d e n t i f y th e s c o p e o f it s q u a l i t y m a n a g e -

m e n t f r a m e w o r k . A t t h e t o p l e v e l , i t i s a s s u m e d

t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n s w i l l o p e r a t e w i t h i n s o m e p u b -

l i c ly d e f i n e d a n d n e g o t i a t e d p u r p o s e s w h i c h

m i g h t b e e n s h r i n e d b y s ta t u t e , o r c h a r te r , o r i n

c o n t r a c t s w i t h s p o n s o r s . I n d i v i d u a l i n s t i t u t i o n a l

m i s s i o n s o r c o n t r a c t s w i t h c l i e n t s / c u s t o m e r s a r e



~ g F <

p

v

o

a

r

dn

'

c

u

a

,h

a

7 I

r

a

in

o

-d

y

-a

c

o

-

ne

o

-p

o

o

-

n

e

p

a

o

c

mmu

c

o

- d

min

o

P

p

o

HE

I

h

min

mid

o

me

v

~

]~~

wo

~m'v

~

~

'

"

a

md

a

o

v

Ie

n

a

le

n

n

[

-p

o

d

g

-d

v

y

meh

-

o

o

-me

a

-

e

nn

- mae

a

-

e

p

o

-su

s

-ormatv

a

smml

cnslanc

-p

c~

vc

-a

c

w

in

-me

a

a

o

-te

n

-p

o

a

po

d

o

me

- -

e

o

oe

n

]

-mmtmi~

-ineno

-

nn

-

n

y

c

mme

-Po

o

a

sauoyb

e

-

empo

s

-sooblFE

-govmmenta

e

-swardsqualctons]

-a

mi

o

-AP

-p

o

o

-c

-Ca~

-

~Hng

-

sum

m

at

ve

assessr

m

~t

-r

ig

ai

met

Di

p

n

S

a

S

u

M

a

m

e

P

a

a

in

u

u

f

e

F

I1

._

.~

tn

m

> o

Z t~

,"1 z I0 Z

Fig

4

~a

y

in

UK HE:

n

u

o

p

~

~ ~



t~

0

h

mlnK

(STRUCTURES and ACTIVITIES)

acuntabiy

I t

enJancmenl

r

a

n a

repo tn8

an'ang,men~

-s

ck

-in Ommlo

mquiM

.daghn

.v

co

.

~blctom/

re

nI

Kud

a

c

M

o

p

c

-e

panels

-e

e3

-epom

le

minS

om QA

-outcmes

amlys

-learning e

p~

-

css

-b

moniorng sandards

cdiyng sandards

bespracc benc-

maring

-d

o

mewo

k

-dentya

mo

o

innovton

-dentyexernal

models

•Batherdata/sats

-

e

co

rd

e

xp

e

r

se

/

vryexers

r

a

d

o

me

po

v

a

v

-d

y

-

a

a

e

-e

me

e

b

8

-e

u

o

-p

c

d

o

me

-mo

n

id

yn

a

d

t

o

ma

o

t

f

mlnSa

impeme

nS

e

-v

o

r

mln

d

o

n

f

mewo

k

&

po

-

a

wlh

n

wo

k

•

a

d

me

-d

o

memo

o

m

F"

f martn 8

-xpl~

-~pr~

-promotng

-

n

;o

0 ~ 3

:C .

Syem and ornislJn devlopment

¥i~re

~l

~

o

o

5

rg~iz

tond

o

me



QUALITY ENHANCEMENT FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRA NSFO RM ATION 21

likely to address these purposes selectively in a

variety of ways.

The second level attempts to recast highereducat ion processes us ing the market terminol-

ogy of 'services'. Traditional institutional activi-

ties are then related, in the third level o f Figure

4, to d ifferen t services, loosely described as learn-

ing a nd d evelopment , networking and accredita-

t ion services . The bot tom level of the f igure

indicates the re source and in fras truc ture elements

needed to undertake the institutional activities

and to del iver the range o f services to d i fferent

cl ients . A cont inuing f low o f data and informa-

t ion to and from these cl ients /audiences (de-

picted by the arrows on the r ight) is necessary toensure that services of an appropriate quality and

standard can be delivered.

Superficially, the figure does not appear to

represent a radical departure from current prac-

t ice in high er educat ion. However, the process o f

refraining institutional activities in this wa y can

lead to significant cha nges in practice as attention

is given to the di fferent types ofvalue and benefi t

sought or accrued from the services , the kinds o f

infrastructure and resources required, and the

levels and processes of accountability that a re

appropriate. In the longer term, a new set oftransactional relationships can em erge in whic h

th e qu ality of institutional activities is effectively

negotiated between providers, sponsors and cli-

ents.

Figure 5 develops the argum ent stil l furth er by

providing examples of som e o f the s tructures and

activities that are needed in a quality manage-

me nt framework.

The focus here is at national level since the

f ramework d raws upon the work under t aken by

the UK's Highe r Educat ion Qual i ty Counci l wi th

and on b eh alf of institutions; however, i t couldreadily be adapted to the institutional o r sub-in-

stitutional level.

In the to p p art of the figure, arrows depict l inks

betw een accountabili ty, en han cem ent (or devel-

opm ent) and transformation, as necessary activi-

t ies wi thin a qual i ty management framework.

The positioning of these arrows also suggests a

s t ronger emphasis on and at tent ion to the en-

hancemen t / trans fo rmat ion end o f the scale than

is current ly the case.

The central boxes of the f igure indicate someo f the m ain processes and activit ies that e i ther do

or shou ld fo rm par t o f a qua l i ty management

framew ork. To ful fi l the requireme nts and func-

t ions ofaccountabi l i ty (whether to sponsors or

cl ients) , regulatory and report ing arrangem ents

need to be defined and agreed, supported by

guidelines an d codes o f practice. In th e expe ri-

ence of HEQ.C, the accountabi l i ty process of

institutional qua lity aud it involves a specification

of focus and categories of informat ion sought ,

data-gathering and the veri ficat ion of data, en d-

ing in the publ ication o f a re port and subseq uentinstitutional action follow ing the rep ort. Guide -

l ines and codes of practice have been d eveloped

as an aid to institutional accountability, building

on exis t ing good practice and dra wing upon the

knowledge and exper t i se o f ind iv idua l s and

groups, or on published repor ts of various kinds.

Within HEQ_C, enha ncem ent or d evelopm ent

activit ies begin w i th the product ion of guidel ines

to support institutional quality assurance and

accountabili ty. Closely linked to this activity is

the analysis of the col lect ive outcomes of the

accountabili ty process (HEQC 1994a), this is ameans of draw ing ou t those areas o f inst itu tional

quality assurance practice that are either worthy

o f wider disseminat ion, o r o f more focused at ten-

t ion , i f improveme nt s in qua l i ty a re to be

achieved. The third area of activity, sti l l in i ts

i n f a n c y , i s t h e s u p p o r t o f ' b e n c h ma r k i n g '

wh ereb y two or m ore inst itu tions or subject

groups systematically comp are their processes for

examining, admissions, managing research, or

supporting innovation in teaching and learning.

These th ree types o f ac t iv i ty - th e p roduct ion o f

guidelines, the analysis of qu ality assurance ou t-comes and benchm arking - are usual ly l inked to

an accountabili ty process. But th ey can also rep -

resent ways in which add ed value can be gained

from the process for the benefit of institutional

(and system-wide) development. By increasing

the enhanc eme nt elements, the accountabi l / ty

process can both be l ightened in term s of the

ex ten t o f ex te rna l ' accoun t ing ' requ i red and

strengthened as a m eans of sel f-regulation and




developm en t fo r in s t itu tions and the sec to r as a

whole. In short , e nhanc em ent is actual ly a means

o f clarifying a nd shar pen ing accountability.If reference is made again to Figure 2 , these

three activities fall into t he stages o f 'explanation

of object ives ' , ' incremental improvem ent ' , and

p o s s i b l y , d e v e l o p m e n t o f ' a l te r n a t i v e a p -

proaches ' . The next tw o categories in Figure 5 -

' research and development ' , and ' framing and

implem enting ch ange ' - are l ikely to fall in to the

two top s tages in Figure 2 , i .e . developing 'al ter-

nat ive appro ache s ' and 'cha l lenging the process' .

At th is t ransforma tive end of the scale, activ it ies

are geared towards changing existing practice.

There is a qual i tat ive difference between thoseact iv i t ies and processes which are designed to

produ ce incremental change to exis t ing pract ice,

and those wh ich a re des igned to cha llenge and

quest ion exis t ing pract ice in the l ight o f devel-

opments in the market p lace, in a discip l ine, o r

as required by advances in technology. An ac-

countabi l i ty process has l i t t le to offer in these

areas , unless the focu s of at tent ion is on seeking

an acco unt from inst i tu t ions (or subject areas) of

how they a re respond ing to and manag ing the

process of change. As was suggested earl ier , the

pressures for change are strong, and institutions

need to devo te the i r a t t en t ion to deve lop ing

appropriate responses. Resource s t ied up in ret-

rospect ive accou ntabi l i ty shou ld there fore be re-

leased to fuel ins t i tu t ional development and

change, i f ins t itu t ions are to co pe with the chal-

lenges they now face.

The central boxes in Figure 5 are l inked on the

lef t to fund ing and o n the r igh t to ' feedback , PR

and m arke t ing ' . A l though ne i ther o f these p roc-

esses is a d irect part of qual i ty assurance and

development (at least as h igher educat ion inst i -

tutions app ear to practice Q..A and development),

they a re an impor tan t par t o f fu l l qua li ty man-

agemen t and sho u ld therefo re be inc luded in the

framework. In the ' information era ' h igher edu-

cation as a wh ole, as we ll as institutions individu -

al ly , need to publicize their achievements and

benefi ts to cl ients as well as seeking feedback

about the qu al i ty of their servicer This public

relations activi ty , when combined wi th qua l i ty

assurance and en hance men t processes , is of cen-

tral imp ortance in at tracting fundin g from spon-

sors and cl ients . Recent examples of reports

which fall into this category, at system level,i n c l u d e ' U n i v e r s i t i e s a n d t h e c o m m u n i t y '

(CUR DS 1994) and 'The impact o f the Sco t t ish

h igher educa t ion sec to r on the ec onom y o f Sco t-

land ' (Mc Nicol1 1995). Various qual i ty assurance

reports, such as Learning rom Au dit ( H E Q C 1 9 94 ;

1996) o r the Fund ing Counci l s' sub jec t overv iew

reports (I-IEFCE 1995; SHEFE 1996), also pro-

vide useful information to cl ients and sponsors

abou t the overal l qua l i ty o f UK h igher educa t ion .

At the bo t tom o f F igure 5 re fe rence i s made to

standards as an in tegral pa rt of a qual i ty manage-

men t f ramework . The t ask o f iden ti fy /r ig andarticulat ing s tandards (w hether academ ic or serv-

ice s tandards) should rout inely be part of bench -

marking a nd research a nd de velopm ent act/v /t ies

and, when s tandards are changing, wil l extend

into the act iv i ty o f 'framing change ' . Rec ent

w or k b y I-IEQ..C has be en se ekin g to assist insti-

tutions an d sub ject associations in particular, to

demons t ra te c lear ly what academic degree s tand-

ards are in highe r educat ion in different contexts

and h ow they are defined, art iculated, measured,

recorded and reviewe d (HEQ_C 1995). F igure 5

also illustrates the kind o f activities th at are

associated w ith codifyin g and mon itoring s tan d-

ards within a qual i ty management framework.

S u m m a r y

The pu rpose o f present ing th is conc eptual frame-

work fo r qua li tymanagem en t has been to sugges t

way s in whic h the three drivers o f insti tu t ional

act iv i ty - the m arket p lace, accountabi l i ty to

sponsors , and development and change - can be

balanced and interlinked more effect ively han at

present , us ing the UK's experience as an example.

The fram ewo rk also indicates h ow fun ding, qual-

i ty assurance and enha ncem ent (for improvem ent

and transformation), and systematic external

communica t ion ( in the fo rm o f PR, marke t ing

and fee dback) are linked. H owev er, wh ile the

framew ork m ay be useful as an analyt ical device,

it is no t par t ofm os t institutional practice. Within

inst itu tions, som e of the s t ructures and processes

ei ther do n ot exis t or are not closely conn ected



Q U A L I T Y E N H A N C E M E N T F O R A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y A N D T R A N S F O R M A T I O N 2 3

a t a s t r a t e g ic a n d o p e r a t io n a l l e v e l . F o r e x a mp le ,

s y s te ma t i c ' l e a r n in g f r o m q u a l i ty a s s u r a n c e ' , a n d

d i s s e m i n a t i n g g o o d p r a c t i c e i n t e a c h i n g a n dle a r n in g a c r o s s a n in s t i tu t io n , i s o f t e n p a tc h y , a s

H E Q . C ' s a u d i t r e p o r t s h a v e s u g g e s t e d . Q u a l i t y

a s s u r a n ce o f t h e r e s ea r c h p r o c es s a n d d i s s e m i n a t -

i n g g o o d p r a c t i c e i n r e s e a r c h m a n a g e m e n t a r e

a l s o u n d e r d e v e l o p e d i n s o m e i n s t i t u t i o n s , a l -

t h o u g h i n i t i a t i v e s s u c h a s t h e o n e d e v e l o p e d b y

D i r e c t o r s o f R e s e a r c h C e n t r e s i n t h e S o c i a l S ci -

e n c e s ( D O R C I S S ) t o i m p r o v e r e s e a r c h m a n a g e -

m e n t s e em p r o m i si n g ( E S R C / D O R C I S S 1 9 9 5) .

S y s t e m a t i c b e n c h m a r k i n g b e t w e e n i n s ti t u ti o n s i s

a l s o a t a n e a r l y s t a g e o f d e v e l o p m e n t , a l t h o u g h

t h e e x t e r n a l e x a m i n e r s y s t e m i n t h e U K o f f e r s ap a r t i c u l a r e x a m p l e , a s d o s o m e a p p r o a c h e s t o

d e p a r t m e n t a l r e v i e w .

Ar g u a b ly , th e g r e a te s t b a r r i e r s to ma k in g a

f r a m e w o r k o f t h i s k i n d o p e ra t i o n a l, i n t h e U K a t

l e a s t , l ie a t n a t io n a l l e v e l wh e r e a s y s te ma t i c a n d

c o h e r e n t a p p r o a c h t o t h e q u a l i ty m a n a g e m e n t o f

h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n h a s y e t t o b e d e v e l o p e d . S o m e

o f th e b a r r i e r s a r e s tr u ctu ra l : f o r e x a mp le , a

r e g u l a r j o i n t f o r u m t o d i s c u s s q u a l i t y m a t t e r s

b e t w e e n g o v e r n m e n t , f u n d i n g c o u n c i l s , i n s t i t u -

t i o n s , w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f r o m c l i e n t s / c u s t o m -

e r s , d o e s n o t e x i s t. O th e r b a r r i e rs a r e c u l tu r a l : f o re x a m p l e , a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s t ra t e g i c m a n a g e m e n t

o f q u a l i t y b y i n s t i t u t i o n s c o l l e c t i v e l y i s w e a k ,

s in c e a n y c o l l e c t iv e r e s p o n s ib i l i ty i s s e e n a s in -

h i b i t i n g i n s t it u t i o n a l a u t o n o m y , o r i s v i e w e d a s

p r o b l e m a t i c b e c a u s e o f i n te r - in s t it u t io n a l c o m p e -

t i t io n a n d r iv a lr y . Ho we v e r , a s in s t i tu t io n a l c o m -

p e t i t i o n g r o w s , su c h a p a r o c h i a l a n d

in d iv id u a l i s t i c p e r s p e c t iv e i s p o te n t i a l ly d a n g e r -

o u s f o r s m a l l e r o r e c o n o m i c a l l y le s s c o m p e t i t i v e

n a t io n s . S t i l l o th e r b a r r i e r s a r e p o l i ti c a l a n d id e o -

l o g i ca l . F o r e x a m p l e , m u c h o f t h e c u r r e n t m a -

c h i n e r y o f e x t e r n a l q u a l i t y a s su r a n ce i n t h e U Ki n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , t h e p r o f e s s i o n s a n d o t h e r

p a r t s o f th e p u b l i c s e c to r , re f l e c ts a l a c k o f t r u s t

in th e v a lu e s a n d p r a c t i c e s o f p r o f e s s io n a l s , p a r -

t i c u l a r l y t h e i r a b i l i t y t o s e l f - r e g u l a t e ( T r o w

1 9 9 6 ) , a c c e n t u a t e d b y a b e l i e f i n t h e v a l u e s a n d

p r a c t ic e s o f p r i v a te s e c t o r b u s i n es s m a n a g e m e n t

a s a m e a n s o f o r g a n i z i n g f o r a n d a s s u ri n g q u a l i t y

( P o l l i t t 1 9 9 5 ) .

T h e s o l u t i o n t o t h i s a p p a r e n t i m p a s s e i s f o r

i n s t i t u t i o n s t h e m s e l v e s t o e n g a g e s e r i o u s l y a n d

s y s t e m a t i c a l l y w i t h t h e q u a l i t y d e b a t e , a s s o m ea r e a l r e a d y d o i n g , a n d c o l l e c t i v e ly t o i n t e r p r e t

a n d e x p lo i t , r a th e r th a n r e s e n t o r r e j e c t , t h e

r h e t o r i c o f t h e m a r k e t a n d o f a cc o u n t a b il i ty , f o r

t h e b e n e f i t o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a n d t h o s e i t

s e rv e s . A q u a l i t y m a n a g e m e n t f r a m e w o r k o f t h e

k i n d p r e s e n t e d h e r e o f f e rs a m e a n s t o g r a s p t h i s

o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c h a n g e . L e t u s h o p e t h a t i t w i l l

b e t a k e n .

R e f e r e n c e s

Centre for Urban and Reg ional Developm ent Studies

(CURD S) (1994) Unhcrn' t iesa n d t h e C o m m u n i ~ .London: CVCE

ESRC/DORCISS (1995) Docloping a R~earcb Centre

T r a in i n g S t ra t e ~ : A H a n d b o o k i r P r o f ~ ' o n a l

Developm~ Loughborough: Univers i ty ofLoughborough.

Handy , C. (1990) Urahrstandin$ , 'olunta~y

Organ/sat/ons. London : P engu in.

HEF C (1995) ~/, j~ct Ovo~iew~ o r u . Br is to l : H ig h e rEducation Funding Cou ncil for England.

HEFC E (1995) Repor ton Q~lityAsmtrment,

1992-1995. Bristol: Higher Education Fun dingCouncil for England.

HEQ_C (1994a) l . w ~ i n g f r o m A n d i t . London: HigherEducation O.uality Council.

HEQ.C (1994b) R e vi ew o f ~ a l i f f A u d i t London:Higher Educa t ion Quali ty Counci l

HEQ.C (1995) GraduateStandards Pragramme: nterim

Report. London: Higher Education Q u.ality Council.

H E QC ( 1 99 6 ) Learnin$ from Auch't 2. London: HigherEducation Quality Council.

Kells , H.IL (1992) S¢lf-resulation in Hig her Education: 4Mu lti-national Perspectiveon Collaborative Systems of

(~a lity Assurance and Control. Higher EducationPolicy S eries Nix 15. Londo n: Jessica KingsleyPublisher~

Kells , H. and S tenquist, E (1994) £~aluation Processesin Finnish Higher Educat ion. Helsinki: Ministry ofEducation.

McN icoll, I. (1995) The I m pac t o f t he Seo t t is b HigherEducat ion.Sector on the Economy o f Sco t land Glasgow:Com mittee of Scottish Higher Ed ucation Principalg

Middlehurst, R. (1997, in press) 'Quality assuranceand enh ancement in higher education: achieving abetter balance: ' In E Coffield (ed) Repositionin,

High er Educat ion. Bu c k in g h am: S RH E /Op e nUniversity Press.




M iddlehurst , IL and K ennie, T. (1997, in press)'Leadin g professiona ls towards ne w concepts o f

professionalism. ' In M . Dietrich, J . Broad ben t and J.Roberts (¢ds) 7"beTraa sform ~on o f the I~.o.fessiom:7beor j ~nd/~c t ic~ London: Rout ledge .

Poll i t t, C. (I 990 ) Maado, ri~lism and the Pub lic Servicrs:Tbe Anglo-Amm c,m Experieace. Oxford: BasU

Blackwell .

PoUitt , C. (1995) ' Just if ication by works or b y fai th?Evalua ting the n ew publ ic m anagement .' £ ~ l u m i o n

I 3 3 - 1 5 3 .

SHEFC (1996) Subject Onv'vieu,Reports. Edinburgh:

Scot ti sh H igher Educa t ion Fu nding Counci l .

Trow, M . (1996) 'Aspects o f accountabil i ty from a

comparative perspective. ' Paper presented to aSPJ- IE seminar , Ox ford .

Middlehurst -- Quality Enhancement for Accountability and Transformation

Documents

Transcript of Middlehurst -- Quality Enhancement for Accountability and Transformation