Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do Industrial Approaches to Quality Management And Performance Indicators Work for Higher Education?

  • Chapter
Higher Education Management and Operational Research

Part of the book series: Educational Futures ((EDUFUT,volume 54))

Abstract

There is a considerable amount of energy and resources in UK higher education that are devoted to quality assurance, review and audit. This has resulted from a variety of initiatives, many of which started to emerge some thirty years ago. At the start of the 1980s a belief in the need to increase efficiency in higher education emerged, as a consequence of general Government policies to increase public accountability and performance through a more market-oriented approach to all public services. In this chapter we explore some of the issues and debates that this has raised within higher education as they have emerged in the literature over this period.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Barnetson, B., & Cutright, M. (2000). Performance indicators as conceptual technologies. Higher Education, 40(3), 277–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, R. (1989). Quality control and the development of teaching and learning. In M. McVicar (Ed). Performance indicators and quality control in higher education. Portsmouth: Portsmouth Polytechnic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becher, T. (1999). Quality in the professions. Studies in Higher Education, 24(2), 225–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, J., & Shah, T. (2000). Managing quality in higher education. An international perspective on institutional assessment and change. Buckingham: OECD/SRHE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, J. (1997). Authority, legitimacy and change. The rise of quality assessment in higher education. Higher Education Management, 9(1), 7–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (2004). Quality assurance in higher education: The UK experience since 1992. London: Routledge Falmer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cave, M., Hanney, S., Henkel, M., & Kogan, M. (1997). The use of performance indicators in higher education: The challenge of the quality movement. London: Kingsley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clare, C. (1994). Introducing a total quality approach at a UK university. International Conference on Assessing Quality in Higher Education, 19–21 July 1994, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clare, C. (1995). Introducing TQM in a new university: Practical lessons. In G. K. Kanji (Ed.). Total quality management. Proceedings of the first world congress. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clare, C. (2005). The application of performance indicators to quality assessment in HE. EdD Dissertation. Open University: Walton Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, P. (1997). Reflections on quality assessment in England 1993-1996. Quality Assurance in Education, 5(4), 218–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CVCP. (1985). Report of the steering committee for efficiency studies in universities (Jarratt Report). London: CVCP.

    Google Scholar 

  • CVCP/UGC. (1986). Performance indicators in universities: A first statement by the joint working group. London: CVCP.

    Google Scholar 

  • CVCP/UGC. (1987). University management statistics and performance indicators in the UK. London: CVCP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education and Science. (1985). The development of higher education into the 1990s. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education and Science (1987). Higher education: Meeting the challenge. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education and Science (1988). The Education Reform Act. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education and Science. (1992). The Further and Higher Education Act. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dill, D. (1998). Evaluating the “evaluative state“: Implications for research in higher education. European Journal of Education, 33(3), 361–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, L., & Knight, P. (1996). Transforming higher education. Milton Keynes: SRHE/OU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haspeslagh, P., Noda, T., & Boulos, F. (2001). Managing for value; it’s not just about numbers. Harvard Business Review, 79(7), 64–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayashi, A.M. (2001). When to trust your gut. Harvard Business Review, 79(2), 58–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • HEFCE. (1993). Assessment of the quality of higher education. (Ref. 93/3). Bristol: HEFCE.

    Google Scholar 

  • HEFCE. (1994). The quality assessment method from April 1995. (Ref.94/39). Bristol: HEFCE.

    Google Scholar 

  • HEFCE. (1999a). Performance indicators in higher education: First report of the PISG. (Ref. 99/11). Bristol: HEFCE.

    Google Scholar 

  • HEFCE. (1999b). Performance indicators in higher education in the UK. (Ref. 99/66). Bristol: HEFCE.

    Google Scholar 

  • HEQC. (1995). Notes for guidance of auditors. London: HEQC.

    Google Scholar 

  • HEQC. (1996). Guidelines on quality assurance. London: HEQC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higher Education Statistics Agency. (1999). Higher education management statistics — Sector level. Cheltenham: HESA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, T. (1991). Production/operations management: Text and cases. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, B., & Cotterell, M. (1999). Software project management. London: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kekale, J. (2000). Quality assessment in diverse settings. Higher Education, 40(4), 465–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kells, H. R. (1992). Self regulation in higher education: A multinational perspective on collaborative systems of quality assurance and control. London: Jessica Kingsley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kells, H. R. (1999). National higher education evaluation systems: methods for analysis and some propositions for the research and policy void. Higher Education, 38(1), 209–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M., & Clare, C.P. (2003). A comparison of the application of performance indicators, system dynamics models and the holon framework to quality assessment in higher education. 21st International conference in system dynamics, 20–24 July 2003, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J. J., & McCollough, M.A. (2001). A conceptual framework for guaranteeing higher education. Quality in Education, 9(3), 139–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maclure, S. (1989). Education re-reformed: A guide to the education reform Act. London: Hodder and Staunton.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, K., & Tett, L. (1996). Performance indicators as quality assurance: the Scottish community PI scheme. Quality Assurance in Education, 4(3), 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NAB. (1987). Management for a purpose: The report of the good management practice group. London: NAB.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. (1997). Final Report. Norwich: HMSO. Owlia, S., & Aspinwall, E.M. (1996). A framework for the dimensions of quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 4(2), 12–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • PCFC. (1990a). Teaching quality. Report of the committee of enquiry approved by the Council. London: PCFC.

    Google Scholar 

  • PCFC. (1990b). Performance indicators. Report of a committee of enquiry chaired by Mr. Alfred Morris. London: PCFC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C.K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting customer competence. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 79-87.

    Google Scholar 

  • QAA. (2000a). Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education. Gloucester: QAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • QAA. (2000b). A handbook for academic review. Gloucester: QAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • QAA. (2000c). Subject benchmarking: brief for benchmarking groups. Gloucester: QAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • QAA. (2005). Operational description for the revised institutional audit process for higher education in England and Northern Ireland. Gloucester: QAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • QAA. (2009). Handbook for Institutional audit: England and Northern Ireland. Gloucester: QAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • QAA. (2011). Summary of institutional review in England and Northern Ireland. Gloucester: QAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B., Nwankwo, S., Rotherham, D., & Straker, C. (1995). The quality question: does quality organisation create or destroy quality life. In G. K. Kanji (Ed). Total quality management. Proceedings of the first world congress. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherwood, A. (2002). Seeing the forest for the trees. London: Nicholas Brearly.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sizer, J. (1992). Performance indicators in Government institutional relationships: lessons from Government. Higher Education Management, 4(1), 156–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sizer, J., Spee, A., & Bormans, R. (1992). The role of performance indicators in higher education. Higher Education, 24(2), 133–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trow, M. (1994). Managerialism and the academic profession, higher education report 2. London: QSC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D. (1995). Quality assessment and self regulation: The English experience, 1992–94. Higher Education Quarterly, 49(4), 326–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, J. F., & Dey, S. (2002). Quality measurement and quality assurance in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 10(1), 17–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yorke, M. (1997). A good league table guide? Quality Assurance in Education, 5(2), 61-72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ifs School of Finance, United Kingdom

    Christopher Clare

Authors
  1. Christopher Clare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. London South Bank University, United Kingdom

    Gary Bell

  2. London South Bank University, United Kingdom

    Jon Warwick

  3. University of Queensland, Australio

    Peter Galbraith

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clare, C. (2012). Do Industrial Approaches to Quality Management And Performance Indicators Work for Higher Education?. In: Bell, G., Warwick, J., Galbraith, P. (eds) Higher Education Management and Operational Research. Educational Futures, vol 54. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-976-3_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation