exploration of the application of lean continuous improvement in higher education

Abstract

The purpose of this single instrumental case study was to understand the conditions and environments that prove successful in the application of Lean Continuous Improvement to an entire university. The perspectives of twelve staff and faculty from a public university in Maine were explored. The findings produced four themes. The Leadership theme revealed three things: the importance of campus leadership demonstrating a strategic vision and commitment to campus, the need to communicate clearly, and the need to exhibit clear value for students and employees through training and support opportunities. The Campus Involvement theme showed the campus members' engagement on campus and with the broader community; there was an emphasis on employee engagement and working toward shared goals. The Perseverance theme illustrated the resolve of faculty and staff; despite policy and process barriers and reduced staffing levels, respondents revealed stories about hope and belief things were getting better. The fourth and final theme, Trust, indicated trust was required to build relationships, communicate with honesty, and act empowered in their work. The findings of this study suggest that administrators who want to implement LCI across an entire university could benefit from a) understanding the culture, b) applying LCI where there is a culture of committed and visionary leadership, communication, value for students and employees, perseverance, and trust, and c) if necessary, seeking to change the culture before applying LCI.

A preliminary framework for assessing lean implementation in higher education

“…Sources cited in previous literature reviews, such as Balzer et al (2016) and Raval and Kant (2017), were also evaluated to find lean assessment frameworks pertaining to higher education. Success factors, readiness indicators, challenges and barriers were discussed in the research, as was "value added" assessment (Liu, 2016), "lean continuous improvement" (Jenkins, 2018), "Comprehensive Quality Assessment" (Stepanova, 2016), "lean sustainability" (Comm and Mathaisel, 2005;Klein et al, 2021aKlein et al, , 2022, "conceptual lean framework for quality excellence" (Sunder and Antony, 2018) "quality management models" (Basari et al, 2016), "outcome-based quality assessment" (Tam, 2014), "evaluability assessment" (Walser and Trevisan, 2016), "accountability/value assessment" (Schmidt, 2014), and others. The vast majority of assessment research in higher education is skewed toward learning assessment, not lean maturity.…”