Student as stakeholder: “voice of customer” in higher education quality development

Abstract

STUDENT AS STAKEHOLDER: "VOICE OF CUSTOMER" IN HIGHER EDUCATION QUALITY DEVELOPMENTAccording to the continuous improvement principles, all Higher Education Institutions (hereafter -HEIs) focus on the requirement to improve organizational processes and achieve quality, create added value and achieve stakeholders' satisfaction. The aim of the research is to analyse the concept "quality in higher education", define the stakeholders within the system of higher education and to analyse students' opinion about the importance and performance of the factors of quality of higher education. The research methods are a literature overview, analysis and synthesis, logical and comparative analysis, as well as Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA). The results of analysis showed that there are two global strategies for defining quality of higher education. The first strategy is process-oriented, the second used the specific indicators (administrative, student support, instructional; procedural quality; student performance, employability etc.). The research results show that the concept of quality is very complicated and depends on different factors, objectives of the organisation and personal experience. It is clear that students are the most important stakeholders; quality of the academic staff and study programmes are the most important elements in ensuring quality of higher education; organisation of the study process and delivery of study programmes are the most important activities. The factors that should be considered in the future are Clear achievement assessment and feedback, Teaching methods, Student-centred learning, State subsidized studies according to quality criteria and Funding of higher education. As a perspective for investigation, it would also be helpful to find out why students consider extracurricular activities (sports, arts, etc.) and HEI reputation as factors with a low impact on quality of education, but so much attention is paid to them.

Sustainability of a university’s quality system: adaptation of the EFQM excellence model

“…The literature review indicated some of the activities a university may consider for organisational sustainability: identify quality and sustainability leaders at all university levels (Marshall et al , 2017); ensure higher management support (Tuominen, 2011a, 2011b; Ozoliņš et al , 2018); ensure personnel awareness about sustainability activities (Tuominen, 2011a, 2011b); focus on stakeholders needs (Zink, 2007; Lapiņa et al , 2015; Marshall et al , 2017; Degtjarjova et al , 2018); ensure comprehension of the main sustainability elements (Tuominen, 2011a, 2011b; Ņikitina and Lapiņa, 2017); integrate sustainability in the university’s strategy (Mežinska et al , 2015; Zeps and Ribickis, 2016; Cazeri et al , 2018); develop a CSR strategy (Cazeri et al , 2018); identify and measure sustainability KPIs (Radoslav and Jankalova, 2016; Medne and Lapiņa, 2019); analyse KPIs results and compile an improvement plan (Tuominen, 2011a, 2011b; Iljins et al , 2017); and benchmark sustainability best practices (Dupada et al , 2013). …”

“…ensure personnel awareness about sustainability activities (Tuominen, 2011a, 2011b); focus on stakeholders needs (Zink, 2007; Lapiņa et al , 2015; Marshall et al , 2017; Degtjarjova et al , 2018);…”

Process Approach in Managing the Quality of Education

“…The results of a study on the history of development in European and American countries published by (Du et al, 2017) have shown that improving the level of higher education can strengthen the capacity of talents to shape national economies, and can also promote prosperity and social progress. Degtjarjova et al (2018) indicate two main strategies for defining the quality of education in universities. The first one is process-oriented, the so-called IPO model, which includes elements of Input -Process -Output.…”

Personalidad de marca como área de investigación en Educación Superior/ Brand personality as a research area in Higher Education

“…http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/deed.es_ES y Fossatti, 2017; Choudhary y Paharia, 2018), que se caracterizan por un rápido crecimiento de las instituciones participantes y de la respectiva matrícula (Jain, Sahney y Sinha, 2013;Ganga-Contreras, et al, 2019), por la aparición de nuevos tipos de instituciones (Yilmaz, 2019), incrementos en las restricciones presupuestarias (Martínez-Argüelles, Blanco y Castán, 2013), cambios en las regulaciones (Sultan y Wong, 2014), los mayores niveles de demanda por control de calidad (Brunner y Uribe, 2007), el desarrollo de un mercado de educación global (Abdullah, 2006), y por la dificultad de las instituciones para mantener sus ventajas competitivas (Cubillo-Pinilla, et al, 2009). Dado lo anterior, las instituciones de educación superior tienen el desafío de adaptarse a los cambios del entorno (Thieme, Araya-Castillo y Olavarrieta, 2012;Ganga, et al, 2019;Tamutienė y Matkevičienė, 2019), reexaminar sus estructuras, estrategias y procesos (Araya-Castillo, et al, 2018), adoptar estrategias competitivas que permitan diferenciar sus ofertas (DeShields, Kara y Kaynak, 2005;Brunner y Ganga, 2016), enfocar sus esfuerzos en las actividades de comercialización (Ivy, 2008), y desarrollar una base sólida que les permita alcanzar altos niveles de calidad (Hota y Sarangi, 2019) a través de la creación de valor y la mejora continua de sus procesos organizacionales (Degtjarjova, Lapina y Freidenfelds, 2018).…”