Search results

Reports a European study on the use of quality management self‐assessment. Data have been obtained from 117 organizations who, in general, have some experiences of self‐assessment methods. Among the main findings were the identification of the steps which are considered to be a key influence on the success of the self‐assessment process and what have been the main learning points. Points out that organizations are using self‐assessment mainly to identify strengths and weaknesses and also to facilitate internal and external learning in terms of transfer of best practice and ideas.

The growing importance and considerable prestige that quality awards hold have encouraged firms to adopt “excellence models” as evaluation frameworks for organisational self‐assessment. This has contributed to the spread of a specific form of self‐assessment logic: primarily, the search for conformity to a set of non‐prescriptive requirements that reflect validated, leading‐edge management practices; secondarily, the search of alignment of practices with organisational needs and business factors. But the adoption of this kind of self‐assessment is not necessarily the proper “choice”, particularly for small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs). This paper examines the nature of the diagnostic processes incorporated in award‐based self‐assessment and in other diagnostic models developed in the organisational literature. This analysis provides the foundation for the development of a classification matrix that enables us to differentiate five self‐assessment approaches (paradigmatic, normative, situational, normative‐situational, and open), which can be implemented either with a process‐based or a non‐process‐based analytical frame. On the basis of this matrix we outline a “conceptual map” that could help SMEs in questioning the meaning and substance of “organisational self‐assessment” so as to choose knowingly and rationally frameworks and diagnostics instruments.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the theoretical and practical need for research into the learning conditions that influence a student’s self-assessment of their competences in management education. By means of a theoretical review, the paper introduces a model that integrates various learning conditions related to a student’s affective learning ability and the role of the teacher that may have an influence on a student’s self-assessment of their competences in the field of management.

The authors describe the analysis of data from questionnaires on the experience of undergraduate students from business administration at the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.

The results reveal the importance of a student’s motivation for professional development, their self-efficacy as well as the important role of the teacher in a student’s self-assessment of their competences.

The paper fulfils an identified need to study the conditions that influence a student’s self-assessment of their learning.

The performance of self‐assessment and the various tools for conducting self‐assessment have been frequently debated in the literature. This paper discusses the complete process of self‐assessment and how organisations use the EFQM excellence model in real‐life situations. The research, reflected in this paper, comprises experiences from nine large organisations. There is no universal method for self‐assessment. On the contrary, findings indicate that several approaches to self‐assessment are successful as long as they fit the organisation, are used continuously, and foster participation. Organisations sometimes overlook the need to establish structured ways of prioritising actions for improvement, creating possibilities for sharing experiences, collecting feedback, and developing work procedures. It is also crucial to understand that self‐assessment has no end in itself as a separate activity. We claim that self‐assessment must be considered from a holistic perspective in order to realise its full potential.

In Germany Quality Management awards and thus self‐assessment are well known and popular‐at least amongst quality management professionals. About 2000 companies have carried out self‐assessment using the EFQM Model as a framework (DGQ, 2005). This is at least approximately the number of participants in German regional and national quality awards. Since 1992, with the first call for the national Ludwig‐Erhard‐Preis, about 1953 companies have taken part in a quality award, see figure (1). The number of participants varies from state to state. This difference may be caused by the application format: There are many applicants where the application is done by the means of a questionnaire, as it is the case of Bavaria (910), Thuringia (402), Northrhein‐Westphalia (267) and Saxony‐Anhalt (60). Fewer applications were received in Berlin‐Brandenburg (65), Saxony (84), Schleswig‐ Holstein (40), and with the national quality award (125), where a demanding application brochure is needed. Figure 1. Number of participants and type of application format in quality awards of different federal states of Germany. Information on number of participants was collected from quality award offices.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a self‐assessment project, the steps taken and the tools used, and above all, focus on the evaluation made after the decision to discontinue, learning and acquiring knowledge about self‐assessment as a methodology in educational organizations.

In order to investigate the experiences of the project, interviews were conducted with the Upper Secondary Education Officer and with ten School Principals and a questionnaire was administered to gather opinions among the other staff members. The analysis mainly consisted of searching for potential patterns among the respondents' answers studying their own words by use of three different criteria.

It is important how an organization enters a self‐assessment project, or even any quality project. Many people do not seem to have thought very much about what is considered to be quality in the environment in which they operate, and even less have a shared view within the organization. Too often organizations tend to start working with self‐assessment without sufficiently thinking of “why” and “how” to accomplish the project. The work is performed without preparing all those who are to participate in the project and without discussing the core values that constitute the work. If the organization has not reached the necessary maturity level it is probably a waste of resources to start a comprehensive self‐assessment project.

As a synthesis form the analysis, a model for how an organization should start self‐assessment is presented, as well as a number of guiding points. Also, the new tool “Lärostegen” is described.

The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on self‐assessment processes and to identify the difficulties, benefits and success factors of the European Foundation for Quality Management self‐assessment model, analysing the importance of follow‐up.

First, the paper carries out a literature review on self‐assessment, and then it uses the case study methodology based on ten services provided by a public university in Spain to identify difficulties, benefits and success factors of self‐assessment.

The findings show, first, what the literature suggests on self‐assessment in general and for higher education, and second, the difficulties, benefits and success factors and the importance of follow‐up for successful self‐assessment.

The paper provides a literature review on self‐assessment and lessons for managers from other universities, or other public sector organisations, who wish to know the difficulties, benefits and success factors, and the characteristics of follow‐up.

This paper proposes a development methodology that uses the assessment criteria of the national quality award as the basis for creating a self‐assessment tool to measure quality performance in organizations. The Singapore Quality Award (SQA) assessment criteria were used as the framework for developing the self‐assessment tool. The SQA award criteria were translated into a multi‐item questionnaire. The self‐assessment tool is used to assess quality performance in various functions of the organization. The scores obtained using the assessment tool was tested against those of the recent SQA applicants. Results showed significant correlation between the assessment score bands and the actual score bands that they received on their SQA application. As of the end of 1998, about 200 business organizations in Singapore had used the self‐assessment tool. Self‐assessment tools using different national quality award criteria could also be developed based on the proposed development methodology described in this paper.

Self‐assessment based on TQM criteria frameworks has become a widespread management tool. Apart from the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in the USA, the European Model for Business Excellence has become the most important framework of this kind for Europe. This article first reflects on how self‐assessment basically fits into a total quality management context. It will be shown, that an integration with corporate planning is inevitable to guarantee the success of self‐assessment in the long run. Most emphasis is placed on different approaches to self‐assessment in a combination of case study evidence and literature review. The approaches include the assessment model of the European Foundation for Quality Management, a workshop approach, a pro forma approach and the so‐called peer involvement approach to self‐assessment. The presentation of these approaches is enhanced by the personal experiences of the authors from some 40 self‐assessments they have coached.

This paper aims to discuss an integrated paradigm that aligns the measures of knowledge management (KM) performance to attain corporate goals in organisations. It presents the main findings of an exploratory study on the use of the paradigm and the accompanied self-assessment scheme in industrial enterprises in Trinidad and Tobago (T&T).

An integrated knowledge management (IKM) model was derived, incorporating the guiding principles of the Total Quality Management/Business Excellence Models. A host of 20 elements was advocated under 5 assessment criteria, namely, Senior management leadership, KM processes, people development, continuous improvement and results orientation. A four-level self-assessment scheme was developed for facilitating users to determine the maturity status of IKM performance in organisations. An exploratory study was conducted with respondents of 18 companies in T&T. A results-oriented methodology with a self-assessment instrument (includes a set of questionnaire and facilitative tools) was used to acquire the industry practitioners’ views on the potential applicability of the IKM model. The study compared the current with the expected organisational performance and explored the relevance of integrating KM and PM practices in these participating organisations.

The findings provided some useful data sources and managerial insights in integrating KM/PM initiatives with reference to groups of large enterprises vs small- and medium-sized companies in T&T. Empirical evidence showed that the self-assessment analysis could help participating organisations utilise their resources and keep up with improvement progress. The objectives, emphasis and administrative context of the KM/PM integration could be changed with varying resources, constraints and maturity status of organisations.

Future research could validate the self-assessment paradigm of KM performance in enterprises across various industry sectors, with the emphasis on human–technology–organisation interactions.

It is anticipated that adapting the IKM model and using it for regular self-assessments could help industrial enterprises to enhance their KM and PM capabilities for attaining improvement goals. The results could facilitate information sharing of best practices and create conditions conducive to continuous performance improvement.