Developing a quality assurance identity in a university: a grounded theory approach

Author:

Tetteh Godson A.,Amoako-Gyampah Kwasi,Twumasi Juliet

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to demonstrate in the context of quality assurance (QA), how stakeholders define quality education and its connections to maximize value for the stakeholder using a grounded theory approach. Design/methodology/approach A four-stage research design using grounded theory methodology was used to develop and elicit a theory, after which a single-case study design with embedded coding and analysis was used to examine the QA – Maximize Value for stakeholder’s relationships. The sample consisted of 16 participants who had visibility over the entire QA – Maximize Value relationship, were knowledgeable, willing to participate and had between 4 and 12 years’ higher education experience. The data was collected through focus, elite groups and in-depth interviews based on the participants’ perspectives of their experiences. The collected data was subjected to content analysis. The following research questions focused on: definition of QA, the definition of quality education and stakeholders’ expectations for the education setting. Findings The study identified 10 categories that drive the QA – Maximize Value for stakeholder relationships in higher education settings. The categories are, namely, the definition of QA; definition of quality management; value for governing council; value for lecturers and staff; value for students; value for employers; value for government; definition of quality education; continuous improvement; and QA in universities. The main findings of the research related to “how” and “why” QA create value for stakeholders. The results of the study indicate that the governing council representatives’ (key stakeholders) expected value creation through improved management and proper education policy. The expected value creation for lecturers and university staff included career advancement, good working conditions of service, remuneration and the excellent performance of students. The paper finds that QA in higher education is contingent on senior management commitment to the strategic decision on overall objectives, management of the facility, financial and human resources, which are geared toward ensuring effective teaching, student learning and value maximization for all stakeholders. Research limitations/implications The limitation of the study is that the major stakeholders considered were all from universities. Other stakeholders such as employers from the industry and other sectors should be included in a future study. Practical implications Based on the study findings, two major implications for training of senior management, deans and heads of departments in the concepts of QA to maximize value for all stakeholders; and the QA system selected for the university must be “fit for purpose” were drawn, leading to recommendations for future practice. These findings can help universities to develop strategies that improve educational quality and maximize value for all stakeholders. The authors suggested some propositions that can be examined in-depth in future research endeavors so as to enhance the understanding of the predictors of QA in education and the expectations of different stakeholders. Originality/value The originality of the study lies in the perspective of experienced participants who had visibility over the entire QA –Maximize Value relationship and were knowledgeable. Based on the use of the grounded theory approach and the view of major stakeholders used in this research, the findings emphasize the stakeholders’ – driven definition of quality education that focuses on value maximization for all stakeholders. This is different from the majority of the existing definitions in the quality literature that are primarily standard-driven, focusing on meeting a pre-defined set of standards, specifications, requirements and are set internally or externally. The approach provides an opportunity to increase the credibility and rigor of grounded theory research.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Education

Reference111 articles.

1. Six sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future research;International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management,2010

2. The mediator role of learning capability and business innovativeness between total quality management and financial performance;International Journal of Production Research,2014

3. Employers’ perception of employability skills among built-environment graduates;Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology,2019

4. What does the future hold for quality professionals in organisations of the twenty-first century?;The TQM Journal,2013

5. Readiness factors for the lean six sigma journey in the higher education sector;International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,2014

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3