Van Kemenade ACT

Recently I got into contact with Eltjo Bazen. He is Chief Product Owner Quality Assurance at HU UAS Utrecht. He calls himself a self-appointed ambassador of the European Standards and Guidelines. At the moment, he is working on his master thesis for the Schouten Nelissen University of Applied Sciences (SUAS) on quality management.  The initial question for his research is: “What vision(s) of quality appear(s) from the additions to the ESG, made by QAAs in their External Quality Assurance (EQA) activities of higher education, how widely is/are this/these vision(s) spread and how well do they fit to the ESG and its underlying vision of quality?”

Subquestions are:

• • What standards are added on top of the obligatory ESG-standards by QAAs in their frameworks?
  • How could the added standards be categorized?
  • Are there patterns visible in added standards, such as thematic or regional?
  • What do the patterns in the added standards indicate about differences in vision of quality?
  • How can the standards of the ESG be categorized?
  • Is there a relationship between the patterns in the added standards and its underlying vision(s) of quality on the one hand, and the patterns and the underlying vision of quality of the ESG themselves on the other hand? If so, how do these relate?

As a theoretical framework he uses the four different paradigms in the thinking of quality by Van Kemenade & Hardjono (2018). In their research this grouping of ways to understand the concept of quality is taken as the lens to look at how quality is comprehended. Eltjo’s idea is to categorise the additional standards into one or more of the paradigms. The goal is to determine if added standards are indicators of a difference in vision of quality and quality assurance in higher education between the ESG and the QAA that added these extra standards, what the other vision of quality is, and which paradigm this vision aligns with.

The ESG date from 2015 and will be revised in the near future. As an external result, the outcomes of Eltjo’s research may be used to advise the relevant stakeholders and ministers in their process towards a new revision of the ESG. If and when it turns out that certain aspects are considered crucial for a high quality of higher education by several QAAs, but those aspects are now not part of the ESG, these might be considered for being integrated in the new ESG. Moreover, this research is hoped to stimulate the conversation around the ESG revision process towards including a fundamental consideration of visions of quality.

Eltjo asked me to support his scientific endeavours for his thesis. I gladly accepted and will keep you up to date.

Van Kemenade, E.A. and Hardjono T.W. (2018) “Twenty-first century Total Quality Management: the Emergence Paradigm”, The TQM Journal, 31(2): 150-166  (135 citations,  impact factor 3.25) https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-4.04-2018-004.

 

People that know me, will be surprised about the content of this post: it is about statistics. I have a feature that counts visits and views of my website. And yes, of course that interests me.

My website had this year up until now 27.539 visitors and 61.682 views. Most views are from the US (20.891). Second is Germany 4811; third China with 4567 views. The Netherlands are sixth with 2064 and Vietnam was tenth with 1346 views.

Most visited were the homepage and for one reason or another post #44….

I need to keep track of this.

In April I conducted twice for SUAS (formerly Schouten Nelissen University)  a one day workshop on the topic of Quality in dynamic and complex environments. Last group was extremely interesting. Eleven people from different sectors in society came together to discuss, experience and study quality and quality paradigms.

At the end I did a oral evaluation.  They scored the day 8 (out of ten). I used the puppet questions.

Some of the reactions were:

“I will listen more to critical staff in stead of sort of ignoring them”;

“I will mirror the paradigms to certain people”.

“I want to create more open space for people to innovate”.

“I am going to stand more in the shoes of people with another paradigm”.

“I will try to create change more by small, incremental steps”.

“I have to learn to let go of control”.

What else can you as a trainer wish for???

 

From 9  till  20 March I gave training at White and Yellow Cross Care Foundation (WYCCF) on several topics like communication, feedback and client centred care. Thereafter, I trained the Quality Assurance Committee of the National Institute for Professional Advancement (NIPA). And I gave coaching to two quality leaders on the island.

The evaluations showed that the participants were very pleased with the trainings and learned a lot, that they can use in their daily practice.  The participants of NIPA gave me scores I never experienced before. All seven mentioned that my teaching competences and subject knowledge were excellent. It makes me proud.

Work hard, but also play hard. I took my friend Chandler from WYCCF to the French side and he kept saying I made his day. He made mine.

 

On December 22nd I provided a workshop for Schouten Nelissen University, now called SUAS, in the master program on Systematic Improvement and Innovation. It was the last lecture in the row and I was able to challenge the students about what they learned. I tried first to create some confusion about what quality is and what works in quality management and what might not.

Then I presented the four quality paradigms (van Kemenade & Hardjono, 2018). With, of course, special attention to the emergence paradigm, so important in current times of unorder. The base was formed by the two booklets I wrote on emergent innovation.

An important part was dedicated to systems theory, system archetypes and systemic transition management.

The nine students were very involved in the matter.  They claim to have learned how important it is to deal with wild or wicked problems and that they received some tools to do so. One student states to have more understanding about the different stages staff might experience in change. Six students scored their satisfaction with an eight (out of ten), three with a seven.