Search results

Examines the ISO 9001/2 requirement that the capability of a supplier to supply a product or service should be assessed. In practice the development of a preferred supplier list is driven by qualitative rather than quantitative factors of supplier capability. In the field of software considerable progress has been made towards developing models which when applied yield quantitative measures of supplier capability. The emerging ISO/IEC 15504 Standard for software process assessment is examined as a framework for application in application domains other than software. Examines an automated tool, created in the Software Engineering Applications Laboratory to support ISO/IEC 15504 compliant software process assessments, for suitability for application in process assessment in areas other than software.

Evaluation literature often emphasises the involvement and interest of local academic leaders as vital conditions for organisational improvement and change during and after assessment processes. Careful planning, organising, staffing and decision‐making in relation to the assessments are in particular highlighted as basic and important responsibilities for academic leaders. By studying a series of external quality assessments of educational programmes at universities and colleges in Norway, and analysing to what extent local department heads influenced the assessment processes, this article suggests that even if such basic leadership responsibilities are taken, a successful outcome of the assessment process is very much related to academic leaders’ ability to translate, interpret and give meaning to the assessment process. This result points to the significance of the cultural and symbolic sides of academic leadership during assessment processes.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss a self‐assessment scheme and processes that are developed for and applied to a R&D organization based on ISO 9004:2000. The presented self‐assessment has been performed during internal audits based on quality management system in Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) in Korea.

In order to enhance the reliability of the self‐assessment, the preliminary works such as training, workshop, case study and pre‐assessment rating are performed in advance before self‐assessment. Furthermore, this paper evaluates the reliability of self‐assessment results using Cohen's Kappa coefficient and the observed agreement index.

The results of this paper present that an organization's performance maturity level evolves sustainably through self‐assessment scheme and processes.

These results and lessons learned will be very useful to the organization that intends to enhance the performance of its R&D projects and processes and improve its processes continuously.

ISO 9004:2000 presents the guidelines of self‐assessment for the organization that intend to continually improve its performance considering the effectiveness and efficiency of a quality management system. According to ISO 9004, the range and depth of self‐assessment should be planned in relation to the organization's objectives and priorities. This paper discusses a self‐assessment scheme and processes that are developed for and applied to a R&D organization based on ISO 9004:2000.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and illustrate an application of a structured approach to assess and improve an organization's performance measurement review process.

This approach was implemented within an ongoing action research project in a large telecommunications organization. Assessment elements were defined based on literature review, and the assessment approach was designed based on performance excellence frameworks such as Baldrige and EFQM. Data collection included interviews, observations, and document review, and an external assessment team was used.

The approach can be used to generate useful and actionable feedback for leadership to increase the effectiveness of the performance measurement review process and can also be used as a reference framework for establishing an effective performance review process initially.

This paper provides a comprehensive yet detailed methodology for assessing the performance review process. This methodology is more targeted in scope than measurement system assessment tools emerging in the literature. Practitioners can gain specific feedback to improve the performance review process. Researchers benefit by having a more standard, structured approach for collecting and codifying detailed observations and artifacts when studying the performance review process.

The purpose of this study is to share quality process experience from a US comprehensive university to use both direct (participation rate and assessment quality) and indirect assessment measures (assessment survey) to evaluate the quality process.

A mixed method design was used to evaluate the quality process. The qualitative design used thematic analysis to find the common themes from the assessment survey. The quantitative design included reliability and internal consistency for the survey and inter-rater reliability for the peer review.

Findings indicated that participation rate and assessment quality improved over the years. Faculty provided positive feedback about assessment website, the peer review process and feedback but negative perspectives on the assessment management software and heavy workload on assessment activities. The researcher shared the actions made based on three-year assessment results, especially how leaders have used it to align with planning and budgeting to close the institutional effectiveness loop.

This research had two limitations. The inter-rater reliability of the peer review was not high and the number of peer review reports in two years were so different, so the results could not be checked for statistical significance.

The meta-assessment results could have important implications for other universities to improve the quality process.

There have been limited studies on using both direct and indirect assessment measures to evaluate the quality process. This study uses multiple measures to provide accurate results for administrators’ decision-making in resource allocation.

Today, industrial firms need to cope with competitive challenges related to innovation, dynamic responses, knowledge sharing, etc. by means of effective and dynamic strategy formulation. In light of these challenges, the purpose of the paper is to present and evaluate an assessment tool for strategy formulation processes that ensures high quality in process and outcome.

A literature review was conducted to identify success criteria for strategy formulation processes. Then, a simple questionnaire and assessment tool was developed and used to test the validity of the success criteria through face‐to‐face interviews with 46 managers, workshops involving 40 managers, and two in‐depth case studies. The success criteria have been slightly modified due to the empirical results, to yield the assessment tool.

The resulting assessment tool integrates three generic approaches to strategy assessment, namely the goal‐centred, comparative and improvement approaches, as found in the literature. Furthermore, it encompasses three phases of strategy formulation processes: strategic thinking, strategic planning and embedding of strategy. The tool reflects that the different approaches to assessment are relevant in all phases of strategy formulation, but weighted differently. Managerial perceptions expressed in particular that learning from experience should be accommodated in strategic thinking. The strategic planning stage is mainly assessed based on the goal‐centred approach, but cases and managerial perceptions indicate that the need for accurate and detailed plans might be overrated in the literature, as implementation relies heavily on continuous improvement and empowerment. Concerning embedding, key aspects relate both to the goal‐centred and improvement approaches, while the comparative approach appears to play a more modest role, related to monitoring external changes and enabling the organization to respond adaptively.

The proposed assessment tool is general in the sense that it does not take into account relationships between the strategic context and the assessment of strategy formulation processes. The investigated cases indicate that contingencies matter, and call for further investigation of particular applications. The present research maintained a focus on formal and relatively top‐down‐oriented strategy formulation processes.

The integration of three different strategy assessment approaches has been made to obtain a holistic, multi‐perspective reflection on strategy formulation. Such reflection is assumed to enable managers to proactively evaluate the potential outcome and performance of their chosen strategy.

The originality of the paper lies in the combination and compilation of multiple approaches to strategy assessment, which draws on a wide range of literature, and in the proactive perspective on strategy assessment. Furthermore, the validity of the proposed assessment tool or checklist is based on multiple sources of empirical evidence.

For most software companies, the pressure for process improvement arises from the direction of a recently released standard in the domain of process assessment and determination of capability (ISO 15504). In the case of ISO 9001 a valuable framework for evaluation of the degree of compliance to this standard is provided by SABS ARP 042: 1997, while ISO 15504 Part 5 offers a detailed assessment model for a suite of processes important to software development and maintenance. There will be obvious benefits to a company if the data collected during assessments conducted using either the ISO 9001 or ISO 15504 models can be applied with minimal additional effort to provide capability achievement profiles associated with either model. It is shown that the work products produced in the development and maintenance processes represent the link between the two models. The paper illustrates how the process assessment tool developed by the Software Engineering Applications Laboratory provides the facilities for conducting assessments using these models and mapping the results to the application model of either model.

The purpose of this paper is to describe this new evaluation experience with portfolio in economics, not only from the teacher’s point of view but from the student perspective, and all the learning from its implementation; to provide ideas of evaluation practices in virtual and face-to-face modality in international business education; to motivate the rethinking of assessment practices in higher education to combine the best of each modality in the future.

The present work is a case study based on a qualitative description of the implementation of a portfolio as an assessment practice, supported by a reflection questionnaire with students’ perceptions and some elements of metacognition. The first section summarizes the literature used as a theoretical framework of this work. The second section describes the portfolio implementation by analyzing teachers and students reflections with a qualitative approach. The third section presents the findings. The fourth section is a discussion of findings, practical implications, limitations and future research directions. Finally, the conclusions of the work are shared.

Because the portfolio has had overwhelming results to assess what students have learned during the pandemic, it has become the learning and assessment tool after the pandemic, as it transforms the classes experience by shifting the focus from traditional examinations to more comprehensive, personalized and reflective ones. It also empowers students to take ownership of their learning, develop essential skills and cultivate a deeper understanding. Among other benefits, the portfolio means the creation of a safe and supportive environment for honest reflection, the development and design of strategic directions to improve learning and lead students toward metacognitive autonomy. Reflection pieces, a critical component of the portfolio, are a vital tool in the proactive learning process, as through reflection students learn to examine their own performance and discuss strategies to enhance their success in future work.

This work began as an educational experience per se, not for research purposes, which caused it to be systematized and reconstructed in a descriptive way, not to measure quantitative results. In this way, the present work describes that the portfolio helps to achieve better results on students’ learning than traditional examinations but, as another limitation, it does not measure them nor the process. One more limitation of this work is that it was written in a postpandemic context but was implemented during the pandemic; therefore, the circumstances of writing are not the same as those of implementation, and this could also entail a certain margin of decontextualization. At the same time, this is an experience that is still in process and continually being adapted to this changed and changing educational postpandemic context.

One of the main implications of the portfolio experience, transferable to all educational contexts, is that it transforms the final exam into a metacognitive one, letting students be aware of their own process of learning and results – objectives and competences – acquired. In this way, it lets teachers witness a part of the learning process that is not so evident in the traditional assessment practices – focused on some aspect of the learning – as it makes visible the way in which students receive, process and apply content, that is to say, how they make it their own.

The portfolio promotes reflective learning and metacognition, vital skills that benefit students beyond the classroom. This can have a positive impact on societal attitudes toward education and the quality of learning. Of the students, 82% felt the portfolio creation was helpful in their personal and professional lives, suggesting a broader societal impact. The paper’s findings contribute to the body of knowledge about the effectiveness of portfolio-based assessment in higher education, especially in the worldwide transition from online education to postpandemic education. This could guide future studies in similar educational contexts or with different pedagogical innovative tools.

In light of the 2020 pandemic lockdown, this work delves into the pressing need for educators to adapt and modify their teaching approaches. The relevance of this study is accentuated by the worldwide transition from online education to postpandemic education. This paper bridges the gap between theory and practice because the research can be applied to the educational practice of any international business education context, as well as lay the foundations for future research in the field that contributes to increasing evidence of the effectiveness of the use of the portfolio to achieve significant and deep learning in higher education.

The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic approach to conduct a diagnosis of the current status of a company’s quality management systems (QMS) and business processes.

The approach proposed is based upon the assessment of the maturity level of a company’s QMS, for which a “maturity diagnostic instrument” is also proposed, a self-assessment exercise using a business excellence model and a first-party quality audit.

The integration of a QMS’ maturity assessment, a self-assessment exercise and a quality audit may provide a more thorough evaluation of various company’s systems and operations. This paper provides organisations, and their managers, with a systematic approach to help them understand better the current performance of their QMSs and business processes.

This paper’s main contribution consists in the proposal of a novel approach for organisation to measure and understand the status of their QMS and business processes. Subsequently, better management decisions to improve a company’s operations can be taken.