{"id":62,"date":"2018-07-17T14:01:56","date_gmt":"2018-07-17T12:01:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.les.univr.it\/eisic\/?p=62"},"modified":"2018-07-23T13:52:25","modified_gmt":"2018-07-23T11:52:25","slug":"landmark-papers-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.les.univr.it\/eisic\/archives\/62","title":{"rendered":"Landmark Papers"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n

T.Q.M. FOR UNIVERSITIES:\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>
\nCAN WE PRACTICE WHAT WE PREACH?<\/strong> <\/span><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n

Joseph Raanan<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

Dean, Business School, College of Management – Academic Studies, Tel-Aviv<\/span>
\nE-mail: yraanan@colman.ac.il <\/em><\/span><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n

ABSTRACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The issue of T.Q.M. for an institution of higher education is, supposedly, a simple one. For what could be simpler than implementing the very ideas, which we find so redeeming and worthwhile – and preach them to our students as gospel? A superficial observation of the university scene would have us believe that nothing could be simpler than that, that the academic world is the perfect example of an institution – guided by such values as truth and freedom – where TQM can most readily be implemented, with glowing results. It turns out to be not quite so simple.<\/span><\/p>\n

The issue of TQM in higher education is hampered by a number of separate – although related – problems:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  • Definition of quality in a university setting<\/span><\/li>\n
  • Academic freedom<\/span><\/li>\n
  • Dual control<\/span><\/li>\n
  • Tenure<\/span><\/li>\n
  • The prima ballerina effect<\/span><\/li>\n
  • Management rotation<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    In this presentation we look into these factors and examine their affects on the goal of achieving TQM in institutions of higher education. Each factor is analyzed, and its affect on the TQM goal is illuminated. It is unfortunate that the conclusion is that TQM in our institutions is invariably extremely difficult if not totally unattainable.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    1. INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    Total Quality Management is a popular term among many management theoreticians and practitioners. In this paper, we will show the difficulties encountered by people that straddle both sides of the issues – the managers in academia. We will take the term ‘Total Quality Management’ and examine closely each word, separately, to see if their combination is a concept which, in a university setting, can be applied successfully.<\/span><\/p>\n

    We will start with a short description of quality in academia, continue to explore the special aspects of management in the academic world, and then take the last word of the three which make up TQM – the very first word, total – and see if it can be applied to those settings. We offer some conclusions in the end.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    2. QUALITY IN ACADEMIA<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    In this chapter, we’ll briefly look at the salient features of quality in the academic world and the difficulties created, at the start, by the various definitions of this term, when applied to institutions of higher education. We will see that the issue of quality, while far from being simple in general, is even more complicated in a university setting.<\/span><\/p>\n

    2.1. DEFINITION OF QUALITY IN A UNIVERSITY SETTING<\/span><\/p>\n

    Quality in a university setting is an elusive concept. Whereas other fields of endeavor may lend themselves more readily to definitions of quantifiable and measurable goals, purposes and missions, those of universities are less obvious and definitely less easily calculable. Is the goal the creation of new knowledge, the training of the next generation of scientists, the education of the future generation? Another mission currently considered by many of the universities prospective ‘customers’ (not necessarily shared by the institutions) is that of providing them with employable – and readily marketable – skills. Obviously, the institution’s mission must be defined and measurable before any lower-level goals can be set (Peratec, 1994).<\/span><\/p>\n

    2.2. MEASUREMENT ISSUES<\/span><\/p>\n

    Even if goals are agreed upon, there are still many insurmountable obstacles, not the least of which is that of measurements. For one, how is creation of new knowledge measured? How are new scientists appraised, compared and ranked, and within a reasonable time frame? What is the proper procedure for assessing such variables as the level of education provided to a group of students? How are marketable and employable skills computed – does a general, liberal arts degree count or do we consider only ‘hard’ professional degrees such as medicine, engineering and accounting?<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    The measurement problem is further complicated by the very long time it takes for some of the results to be manifested (as in knowledge creation or in the emergence of new scientists); by the difficulty in attributing specific activities to those goals (does teaching really matter, or would those young scientists still be created, motivated by their own curiosity and ambition); the uncertainty of the results obtained by the introduction of various techniques, etc.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    3. MANAGEMENT IN ACADEMIA<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    In this chapter, we will discuss another of the two words that make up TQM, namely management. We’ll see that management of institutions of higher education is curbed by a number of constraints. These include academic freedom, tenure, the prima ballerina effect and management rotation. All of these will be discussed.<\/span><\/p>\n

    3.1. ACADEMIC FREEDOM<\/span><\/p>\n

    While academic freedom is a property of higher education that should be respected, honored and safeguarded, it is, regrettably, sometimes used as an almost indefatigable defense of very non-quality type of behavior.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Academicians are quite fond of teaching management, but at the same time they are usually quite opposed to letting such mundane considerations as efficiency, cost-savings, streamlining, etc. infringe on their time-honored (absolute) academic freedom. While critically important for safeguarding the basic freedom of research, teaching and uninhibited thought – all unquestioned ingredients of any higher education system – the academic freedom cover has, at times, served to hide some agendas that have nothing to do with the above principles.<\/span><\/p>\n

    3.2. TENURE<\/span><\/p>\n

    Tenure, while a desirable outcome of the academic freedom necessary for the proper functioning of universities, poses great difficulties when administrative controls need implementing. Flexibility is an unquestioned must in the process of instituting change, and the ability to change assignments, redefine job functions, changing job contents and – unavoidable at times – letting people go – is an indispensable tool that must reside in the organization’s arsenal. Tenure, as is well known, represents almost the precise opposite.<\/span><\/p>\n

    3.3. THE PRIMA BALLERINA EFFECT<\/span><\/p>\n

    By the prima ballerina effect (hereafter referred to as the primadonna effect), I mean the phenomenon of a multitude of stars (as in movie stars), of people with a true or perceived celebrity status – all part of the same institution. The primadonna phenomenon comes, of course, from the world of ballet. It is well known there that one treads lightly around those highly sensitive, overbearing, volatile personalities. In some ballet companies, they become the de-facto rulers, frequently quite tyrannical, of the group. However, in a ballet company the number of primadonnas is quite limited. Two to 4 is the number in most companies, usually with a pecking order among those as well. The very existence of primadonnas creates a fierce competitive environment, with strict rules – and a fairly well defined retirement criteria. The situation in the academic world is, to some extent, similar – and to a large measure decidedly worse. If we look at the collection of features defining the primadonna phenomenon, we’ll see that the academic world has adopted some and rejected others, resulting in a very difficult combination.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Table 1: Academia vs. Ballet Company<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    \n
    \n
    \n

    Feature<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576029344\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Ballet Company<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576031184\"<\/span><\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576033728\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Academia<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576035552\"<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    Number of primadonnas<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n
    \n
    \n

    2-4<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n
    \n
    \n

    Almost all faculty<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    Competition<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576053216\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Direct, focused<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576055040\"<\/span><\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576057760\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Subtle, diverse<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576059120\"<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    Skills required to attain status<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n
    \n
    \n

    Well defined, mostly identical<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n
    \n
    \n

    Loosely defined, different across departments<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    Length of service<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576080112\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Relatively short<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576082016\"<\/span><\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576084208\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Very long<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576085584\"<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    Retirement<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n
    \n
    \n

    After peak<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n
    \n
    \n

    65 – 70 and above<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    Termination<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    \"page2image3576097744\" \"page2image3576099168\"<\/span><\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576101424\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Possible<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

    		\"page2image3576105392\"<\/span><\/p>\n
    \n
    \n

    Almost impossible<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    \n
    \n

    The results of this comparison are quite obvious: management in academia has to contend with a large group of people, all of its members having a well developed ego, both professionally and personally, who can not be readily marched to a unified tune. Discipline is rarely a viable option, certainly once tenure has been attained. Thus, management by consensus is frequently the only method, but achieving a consensus across so many diverse groups is very difficult – and definitely very time consuming.<\/span><\/p>\n

    3.4. MANAGEMENT ROTATION<\/span><\/p>\n

    Management, in a university environment, is a problematic topic, for a number of reasons:<\/span><\/p>\n