Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.801194
Title: Business excellence models in UK Universities : two contrasting case studies
Author: Sandouk, Mohammad W.
Awarding Body: University of Warwick
Current Institution: University of Warwick
Date of Award: 2019
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
The overall aim of the research was to explore the reason(s) for the apparent disparity in acceptance and adoption of Business Excellence Models (BEMs) in UK universities and to identify ways to help quality assurance staff make the best use of these models. BEMs provide organisations with management frameworks based around quality and are praised for allegedly improving global competitiveness and performance. BEMs are also criticised for allegedly being fads, over-promising and contradicting the nature of HE. This study also investigated whether BEMs were seen as fads and what makes them sustainable. Two contrasting case studies in London were examined: a research-intensive Russell Group university and a teaching-focused newer (Post 92s) university. 18 semi-structured interviews were conducted with Vice Chancellors/Pro-Vice Chancellors; senior managers; heads of department and professional services/quality assurance staff. In contrast to previous literature, only one interviewee thought BEMs were fads. All the Russell Group interviewees thought BEMs were applicable to the HE sector whereas some interviewees from the newer university were more sceptical. Advocates of BEMs cited their intrinsic value as well as operational benefits. Critics said BEMs were too complicated and conflicted with academic freedom. Although all the participants agreed that effective leadership was vital for successful implementation, they disagreed on what this meant. Some emphasised motivation and inspiration but others highlighted the need to occasionally force change. Participants generated six criteria for evaluating BEMs. Four of these ((a) improved student experience; (b) adequately trained and mentored staff; (c) increased community engagement and (d) compatibility with league table requirements) are found in previous literature. Two ((a) strong personal tutoring and (b) students informing resource allocation and report generation) are not. Participants also identified seven Critical Success Factors (CSFs) that influenced their institution’s choice of BEM. Three of these (team, process and collaboration) are found in previous literature. Four (location, brand, personal tutoring and transparency) are not. Finally, a conceptual framework was developed to explain how BEMs can be sustained. Three elements of the framework match previous literature (human resource management, institutionalisation and feedback). Four (leadership, resource allocation, monitoring and collaboration with the Student Union) are new.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.801194  DOI: Not available
Keywords: H Social Sciences (General) ; L Education (General)
Share: