Framework indicators for European quality ... - ScienceDirect.com

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

Procediaonline Manufacturing00 (2018) 997–1004 Available Available onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Manufacturing00 (2018) 997–1004

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 990–997 Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering, INTER-ENG 2017, 5-6 October 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering, 2017, Tirgu-Mures, Romania INTER-ENG 2017, 5-6 October 2017, Tirgu-Mures, Romania

Framework indicators for European quality assurance in VET

Framework indicators for European quality2017, assurance in 28-30 VETJune Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference MESIC 2017, towards environmentally sustainable economy 2017, Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain towards environmentally sustainable economy ,a

Liviu Moldovan *,a in Industry 4.0: Trade-off Costing models for capacity optimization Liviu Moldovan * ”Petru Maior” University of Tirgu Mures, 1 Nicolae Iorga street, Tirgu Mures 540088, Romania between and Iorga operational ”Petru Maior” used University capacity of Tirgu Mures, 1 Nicolae street, Tirgu Mures efficiency 540088, Romania 0F

P

0F

P

a a

Abstract Abstract

P

P

P

P

A. Santanaa, P. Afonsoa,*, A. Zaninb, R. Wernkeb a

University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal

b This paper details the new eQvet-us framework list of indicators which isSC, based on the principle that training contributes to Unochapecó, 89809-000 Chapecó, Brazil This paper details the new eQvet-us framework of indicators based on thepursuit principle that training contributesand to the development of human capital, enhanceslistsocial cohesionwhich and isshould also financial sustainability the development of human capital, enhances social cohesion and should also pursuit financial sustainability and environmental responsibility. The framework is settled based on the 3 pillars of sustainable development: social, economic and environmental responsibility. The7framework is settled based the 3 pillars of sustainable development: economic and environmental, embedded in the social responsibility core on subjects referenced in ISO26000, adapted social, to training delivery environmental, embedded in the socialphases: responsibility subjects referenced in ISO26000, adapted to training delivery AbstractIt has been context. structured in 47 main design ofcore training provision, training delivery, training evaluation, continuous context. It has each been of structured in 4 main phases: of of training training delivery, training evaluation, continuous improvement, them corresponding to the design 4 phases qualityprovision, cycle. For each correspondence with the core subjects of improvement, each of them corresponding to the 4 phases of quality cycle. For each correspondence with the core subjects of Under the concept of "Industry 4.0", production processes will be pushed to be increasingly interconnected, social responsibility, eQvet-us framework establishes a specific indicator, to support the self-evaluation process of VET providers social responsibility, eQvet-us establishes a specific indicator, to support theIn self-evaluation process of VET providers information based on a realframework time and, necessarily, much more efficient. context, capacity optimization in regards to the implementation of a basis sustainable model to continuously improve quality inthis VET. The implementation results of in regards to the ofof aorganization sustainable modelRomania to continuously improve quality infurther VET. The implementation results of the eQvet-us framework in a aim VET from is presented. It provides suggestions on enhancing the goes beyond theimplementation traditional capacity maximization, contributing also for organization’s profitability and value. the eQvet-us framework in a VET organization from Romania is presented. It provides further suggestions on enhancing the eQvet-us transferability other countries and VET institutions. Indeed, framework lean management andtocontinuous improvement approaches suggest capacity optimization instead of eQvet-us framework transferability to other countries and VET institutions. © 2018 The Authors. Elsevier B.V. maximization. The Published study of by capacity optimization and costing models is an important research topic that deserves © 2018 The under Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.committee of the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Peer-review responsibility ofthe scientific contributions from both the practical and theoretical This paper presents Interdisciplinarity and discusses a mathematical © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility ofthe scientific committeeperspectives. of the 11th International Conference in Engineering. Peer-review under responsibility of thebased scientific committee of the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity Engineering. model for capacity management on different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A genericinmodel has been Engineering.

developed and it was used to analyze idle capacity and to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s it is shown that capacity optimization might hide operational inefficiency.

Keywords: quality framework; sustainability evaluation; vocational education and training; social responsibility. value. The trade-off capacity maximization vs operational efficiency highlighted and Keywords: quality framework; sustainability evaluation; vocational education and training;issocial responsibility.

© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017. Keywords: Cost Models; ABC; TDABC; Capacity Management; Idle Capacity; Operational Efficiency

1. Introduction

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +40-740-498-427; fax: +40-265-211-838. * E-mail Corresponding Tel.: +40-740-498-427; fax: +40-265-211-838. address:author. [email protected] The cost of idle capacity is a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance E-mail address: [email protected]

in modern 2018 production systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured 2351-9789© The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. 2351-9789© 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.of in severalunder ways: tons of production, available hours of International manufacturing, etc. Interdisciplinarity The management of the idle capacity Peer-review responsibility ofthe scientific committee the 11th Conference in Engineering. Peer-review under Tel.: responsibility scientific committee of the * Paulo Afonso. +351 253ofthe 510 761; fax: +351 253 604 74111th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering. E-mail address: [email protected] 2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017. 2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering. 10.1016/j.promfg.2018.03.141

998

Liviu Moldovan / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 990–997 Liviu Moldovan / Procedia Manufacturing00 (2018) 997–1004

991

1. Introduction Along with environmental education, in whatever form, which actually supports and promotes more sustainable development in practice [1, 2], since 2009 a lot of developments in Quality in Vocational Education and Training (VET) have been made and currently the European Quality Assurance in VET (EQAVET) framework [3, 4] is being widely applied in the European Union VET systems and by VET providers. Being now more than a reference framework, EQAVET is a community of practice bringing together member states, social partners and the European commission that delivers indicative descriptors & quality indicators and provide guidelines, tools and online support to quality assurance development and monitoring of VET systems and VET providers including the alignment between EQAVET and other quality assurance approaches such as EFQM excellence model and the ISO 9001 standard. In paper [5] a new framework for sustainability evaluation was developed which was supported by the project “European Quality Assurance in VET towards new Eco Skills and Environmentally Sustainable Economy” (acronym eQvet-us) [6], promoted by “Petru Maior” University of Tîrgu-Mureș in Romania plus 6 VET providers from Austria, Bulgaria, France, Germany and Portugal. 2. The eQvet-us framework indicators The methodology of research for eQvet-us framework development started with the literature review in relevant scientific journals on sustainability [7], quality, and VET themes [8, 9] and mapping the state of the art similar initiatives at European level, the EQAVET projects [10]. With this support, in the next step of the research methodology a qualitative study of the partners as VET providers from 6 different European countries was undertaken, which allowed us to identify the areas and performance indicators of a framework for sustainability evaluation of VET organizations. Than the eQvet-us framework has been developed based on the principle that training contributes to the development of human capital, enhances social cohesion and should also pursuit financial sustainability and environmental responsibility. EQvet-us framework is settled based on the 3 pillars of sustainable development: social, economic and environmental, embedded in the 7 social responsibility (SR) core subjects referenced in ISO26000 [11, 12], adapted to training delivery context: Organizational governance, Human rights, Labor practices, Environment, Fair operating practices, Consumer issues, Community involvement and development (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. 3 pillars of sustainable development and ISO 26000 social responsibility core subjects.

992

Liviu Moldovan / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 990–997 Liviu Moldovan / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 997–1004

999

In order to establish the list of indicators of eQvet-us framework, each core activity has been related with the main core subjects of Social Responsibility, and for each correspondence, the eQvet-us quality framework establishes a specific indicator and a set of guiding questions to support the self-evaluation process of VET providers in regards to the implementation of a sustainable model to continuously improve quality in VET. The list of the 61 indicators is developed according to each phase of the training delivery: Design of training provision (Tables 1, 2), Training delivery (Tables 3, 4), Training evaluation (Tables 5, 6), Continuous improvement (Tables 7, 8). Table 1. P. Design of training provision | P.A. Training pathways planning design. Indicator

Description

P.A.1 Decision making processes and structures

Definition of key roles among staff and schemes used to elaborate the training provision design (surveys, plan for calendar implementation, financial plan, etc.) containing scope & coverage.

P.A.2.1 Accessibility of training programs and projects

Training program adapted to target groups profile. Training programs and projects accessible for disadvantaged groups.

P.A.2.2 Training programs addresses to disadvantaged groups

Training programs addressed to vulnerable/ disadvantaged groups.

P.A.3 Health and safety risk matrix

Identification of associated risks and corresponding mitigation actions.

P.A.4 Environmental impact plan

Schemes to reduce the environmental impact containing scope and coverage.

P.A.5 Fair operational practices

Fair operational practices based on the factors of price, quality and service, as well as training provided in view of the interests of those competing and not involving practices condemned by law as inimical to the public interest.

P.A.6 Fair marketing & advertising practices

Clear and accessible information about prices, objectives, terms and conditions of the training.

P.A.7 Community engagement actions

Direct engagement of the local community in the design of training provision/programs.

Table 2. P. Design of training provision | P.B. Curriculum design. Indicator

Description

P.B.1 Existence of multicultural dimension P.B.2 Training contents accessible and understandable

Design of curricula taking into account multicultural dimension.

P.B.3 Definition of practical training materials P.B.4 Environmental criteria to select the training materials P.B.5 Commitment with property rights P.B.6 Curriculums design for people with special educational needs P.B.7 Training contents adapted to the community and company’s needs.

Training contents are adapted to learners’ level in terms of language, vocabulary, cultural reference, use of images, etc. Training contents can be accessible at distance (ODL). Training partly organized from distance in formal or informal learning places in order to reduce travels and commutation. List with criteria for training materials and technical aspects. Selection of training materials according to the environmental impact. Clear information about creation of training materials and the author. Providing training opportunities for vulnerable persons (e.g., those with physical or mental disabilities, including limited vision or hearing, reading disability). Training contents that take into account jobs evolution and new competences required.

Table 3. I. Training Delivery | I.A. Implementation of the training path. Indicator I.A.1 Attribution of training grants

Description Provide grants or financial discounts to people with none or poor economic conditions or by recognized merit.

1000


993

I.A.2 Specific pedagogic approaches

Pedagogical approach appropriate and relevant for the target group. Adaptation to participants’ constraints and situations, provision of a common place for lunch, adaptation of training hours, provision of documents information resources. To promote informal learning and exercises avoiding school situations.

I.A.3 Existence of health and safety conditions

Ergonomic conditions in the training facilities/rooms. Delivery of personal protective equipment (PPE) to trainers and learners during practical workshops.

I.A.4.1 Use of recycled materials

Kind of reused resources /materials.

I.A.4.2 Waste recycling

Information about waste recycling in the organization facilities.

I.A.5 Ethical behaviour practices

Insurance that the highest legal and moral standards are observed in the organization’s relationships with the customers/trainees/. Short term profit at the cost of losing a customer is long term death for the organization.

I.A.6 Use of stereotyped materials

Selection of materials that address labour market requirements, social cohesion and economic competitiveness at a national, geographical, sectoral, organisational and individual level. In addition, these materials shall be adapted to the culture of participants, level of understanding, etc.

I.A.7.1 Partnership and networking

Collaboration of companies for training delivery (work placement periods, tutoring, recruitment, common actions and events, communication events, companies managers running some training sessions, etc.). Using municipalities and local institutions as field for experimentation and learning support. To use municipalities facilities and patrimony as a training support in order to develop concrete training actions and achievements. To associate and involve enterprises in all training steps.

I.A.7.2 Work placements in community organizations

Regular work with professional networks.

Table 4. I. Training Delivery | I.B. Learning assessment. Description I.B.1 Assessment mechanisms I.B.2.1 Tools for the assessment of the learning outcomes I.B.2.2 Learning recovery mechanisms I.B.3 Verification criteria of the working process I.B.4 Environmental friend evaluation tools I.B.5 Transparency and anticorruption practices I.B.6 Non-discriminatory assessment I.B.7 Involvement and participation of companies and partners

Description Assessment mechanisms adapted to the participants culture, level of understanding, etc. Clear and equitable learning assessment tools. The learning assessment must be done in terms of respect for human dignity, taking account of social, national, ethnic and racial origin of the examined individuals and keeping confidentiality of personal information. Existence of alternative routes to assess learning outcomes. Results of inspection and examination of the labour practice criteria. Existence of evaluation tools that is environmentally more efficient. Sharing evidence in terms of trainees’ learning outcomes and the assessment activities. The scope and content of legal instruments used to address corruption vary from country to country. Emerging good practice in this area includes prohibiting both active and passive forms of corruption in the training process. Prevention of bias due to personal attitude in the process of assessing the knowledge and skills that trainees show. Involvement of companies and partners in assessment and evaluation process. Organization of a “professional board” for assessment and accreditation of competences and evaluation of learning. Participation of companies in final evaluation of the training course.

Table 5. E. Training evaluation | E.A. Evaluation of satisfaction. Indicator

Description

E.A.1 Assignment of monitoring mechanisms

Definition of responsible persons and periodic timings to conduct evaluation of satisfaction.

994


1001

E.A.2 Degree of learners satisfaction

Measuring of trainees’ satisfaction in regards to the achieved learning outcomes.

E.A.3.1 Degree of staff satisfaction

Evaluation of staff satisfactions in regards to the achieved results after the training implementation.

E.A.3.2 Degree of trainers satisfaction

Level of satisfaction according to the given conditions by the VET organization.

E.A.6 Degree of clients satisfaction

Evaluation of participants’ satisfaction after the end of the training, in regards to their initial expectations.

E.A.7 Degree of satisfaction among enterprises, partners, stakeholders

Measure of satisfaction among participants regarding involvement and participation of companies (work placement, training course run by managers or technicians, forums, etc.). Evaluation of pedagogical approach and contents provided from trainees, trainers and companies point of view.

Table 6. E. Training evaluation | E.B. Evaluation of training impact. Indicator

Description

E.B.1 Evaluation monitoring mechanisms E.B.2.1 Percentage of identified positive results E.B.2.2 Improvement of access to work E.B.3 Improvement of the working conditions E.B.4 Improvement of the environmental consumption E.B.5 Long-term training partnerships E.B.6 Training impact on trainees’ job performance

Definition of periodic timings to conduct evaluation of efficiency. Measure if the decision of taking in consideration specificity of learners had an impact on results. Measure the impact of the training in regards to the access to work. List of detected aspects of the improvement of the working conditions and changed working execution, and behaviour of trainers and trainees. List of detected aspect of the improvement of the environmental situation and strengthen considerations of environmental aspects. Measuring long-term relationships with VET companies. Measuring trainees’ satisfaction with the training path provided is a useful diagnostic instrument to evaluate teaching effectiveness and quality. Determining the link between training and its impact on the quality of job performance. Measuring new employments in the community as direct result of the implementation of the training pathways.

E.B.7 Employability within the community

Table 7. R. Continuous improvement | R.A. Self-evaluation. Indicator R.A.1 Self-evaluation tools

Description

R.A.2 Assurance of freedom of expression

Registration of the collected feedback (participants’ remarks and suggestions) for the training delivery continuous improvement.

R.A.3.1 Consultation with all the staff

Tools to collect evaluation feedback from all staff.

List of qualitative and quantitative existing self-evaluation tools.

R.A.3.2 Life balance mechanisms

Initiatives to promote a life balance among all staff.

R.A.4 Mechanisms to monitor energy consumption and waste R.A.5 Feedback to VET provider staff

Measuring energy consumption and waste.

R.A.6 Handling complaints

Mechanisms/tools to identify and resolve complaints.

R.A.7 Initiatives with the community

To measure number of initiatives taken with the engagement of the community.

Communicating the evaluation results with all employees ensures accountability, transparency and honesty in the organization that are a key to achieving fair institutional practices.

Table 8. R. Continuous improvement | R.B. Training pathways reengineering. Indicator R.B.1 Modifications made to the training pathways R.B.3.1 Modifications of working processes relating to health and safety conditions R.B.3.2 Logistic changes

Description Modifications made based on staff, trainers, learners, clients and stakeholders reviews. Inspection protocol of safety at work. Changes based on staff, trainers and learners reviews concerning the facilities conditions.

1002

R.B.4 Environmental measures R.B.5 Recognition and reputation strengthening R.B.6 Pricing strategy re-evaluation R.B.7 Good practices and transfer of experiences


995

Existence of environmental improvement measures. Analysis of learners, clients and stakeholders reviews. Assessments of whether a seller’s price is reasonable, acceptable or justifiable taking in consideration the current economical context. Involvement of professionals and stakeholders in training programs and curricula redesigning, taking into account needs and opportunities of the territory. Promotion of excellence for further European transfer.

In order to implement the framework the eQvet-us practice set consisting in an implementation guide and a self diagnostic tool were developed [13]. 3. Pilot implementation A pilot test of the framework for sustainable development and the self assessment tool have been performed at “Petru Maior” University (UPM), over one week by a group of four staff members with different jobs: training coordinator in charge of relations with companies, trainer, quality assurance, and administrative assistant. The pilot implementation of the new eQvet-us framework for sustainable development was aimed to validate the methodological approach in action and to give a good example for interested users. At the end of the self-assessment and diagnosis, the information was used in a common meeting for an internal improvement action plan proposal. It was appreciated that the enforcement of sustainability already exists in many different forms and diverse levels at UPM in particular and throughout Romanian VET providers in general [14]. The overall appreciation of the pilot implementation at UPM is positive and revealed some results. The key elements for the success of the self-assessment process are represented by a strong personal commitment and a sense of shared responsibility between management and staff of the organization. Experience shows that for a clear commitment and responsibility to a decision of the direction taken after effective consultation with stakeholders is needed. The overall results of the self-evaluation activities at UPM are positive. In some cases there were intensive discussions and debates for some indicators, but the framework for sustainable development was able to create a positive atmosphere for sustainability discussions within the institution. In particular, whether indicators in some cases were put too generally was discussed. All participants have been satisfied with: the mix of jobs, positions, and workplaces of participants to the group; the analysis achieved from different angles of perception and representation, a crossed view due different types of jobs and status within the organization; the opportunity given to take time and put a “distance” from everyday work and to wonder and ask questions about the organization as a whole. The discovery of some working aspects of the organization that have never been approached before is one of the positive results. Furthermore, the decision to involve representatives of different jobs that can be found in the organization had a positive effect. Sustainability assessment experience has been an opportunity “to change glasses”, at different levels of responsibility, from one monocular lens to a three-dimensional one: not just economic but environmental and social lenses. In all cases, it was clear that in order to improve sustainability assessment approach we need a strong commitment from the director/manager of the institution and a “project manager” who lead the process in a working group. In response to the question “Why do you like this experience?”, the answer was because of the interest demonstrated by all participants due to their individual concern for sustainable development as citizens and for the added value brought by sustainable development issues to the quality process and also in terms of external communication towards the clients [15]. This demonstrates that an integral development can be carried out, by considering strengths and weaknesses, and offering more space and time. The experience was an opportunity to improve: sustainability culture inside the organization, giving information, to have a better approach reducing energy in the building, managing paper/waste/recycling: it was a great opportunity to have a guide to face this problems and to have a practical approach for these; the culture of process; the culture of planning, in terms of defining/redefining resources and time; the culture of prevention, working

996


1003

adapting actions and scheduling prevention programs; the culture of working together and making decisions; the ability to invent new ways to do old or traditional duties/facilities according to the three-dimensional perspective of a sustainability assessment framework. 4. Conclusion EQvet-us framework is different from others by its objective, which consists in impact determining and improvement on environmental, economic, social and quality of training system. The assessment tool [6] supports training providers in order to: check the level of performance for each area within the framework; identify improvement possibilities for all categories; and make decisions and set priorities in relation to the three pillars, activities and business projects. With this support, an innovative aspect of framework is that it promotes the development of a strategy based on performance indicators that integrates sustainable development [16]. In regards to the methodological approach of the new framework for sustainable development, the multitude of indicators employed requires an assessment group of committed experts to accomplish the assessment. The quality of the assessment depends on the availability of data at the assessed institution. In optimal conditions, the results of the assessment have to be objective and precision may be an issue that facilitates the progress of evaluations [17]. The results of self-evaluation are adequate to be used for establishing a sustainability baseline, to identify possibilities for improvement, and to prioritize the implementation. Furthermore, the results can be used to develop sustainability policies and action plans, establish performance guidelines and improve internal sustainability performance of institutions. This will have direct relevance to improved economic and social performance, institutional effectiveness and an enhanced image of the organization. Graduates of such institutions that implement the framework for sustainable development will naturally be sustainability driven. Acknowledgements Supported by the eQvet-us grant financed by the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use, which may be made of the information contained therein. References [1] U.M. Azeiteiro, P. Bacelar-Nicolau, F. Caetano, S. Caeiro, Education for Sustainable Development Through E-Learning in Higher Education: Experiences from Portugal, Journal of Cleaner Production, 106 (2015) 308-319. [2] M. Biasutti, An Intensive Programme on Education for Sustainable Development: the Participants' Experience, Environmental Education Research, 21-5 (2015) 734-752. [3] *** EQAVET, Indicators. On line available: http://www.eqavet.eu/gns/policy-context/european-quality-assurance-referenceframework/indicators.aspx [4] *** EQAVET, Quality cycle poster. http://www.eqavet.eu/gns/library/promotional-materials/quality-cycle-poster.aspx [5] L. Moldovan, Framework Development for European Quality Assurance in VET Towards Environmentally Sustainable Economy, Procedia Engineering, 181 (2017), 1064–1071. [6] *** Project eQvet-us. Online available: http://eQvet-us.upm.ro [7] L. Moldovan, Sustainability Assessment Framework for VET Organizations, Sustainability, 7-6 (2015) 7156-7174. [8] C. Almeida, L. Moldovan, Mobile Learning Methodology for European Trainers and VET Systems Quality Improvement, Procedia Technology, 12 (2014) 646-653. [9] L. Moldovan, Training Outcome Evaluation Model, Procedia Technology, 22 (2016). 1184-1190. [10] L. Moldovan, Innovative Method of Peer Assisted Learning by Technology and Assessment of Practical Skills, Procedia Technology, 12 (2014) 667-674. [11] ***ISO, Guidance on Social Responsibility; ISO26000:2010; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland. [12] I. Frolova, I. Lapina, Corporate Social Responsibility in the Framework of Quality Management, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 156 (2014) 178–182. [13] L. Moldovan, Practical Implementation of a Framework for European Quality Assurance in VET towards Environmentally Sustainable Economy, Procedia Engineering, 181 (2017)1072–1079.

1004


[14] L. Moldovan, A-M. Moldovan, Green Methodology for Learning Assessment, Procedia Technology, 22 (2016) 1176-1183. [15] L. Moldovan, New Evaluation Model by Means of Mobile Technology, Procedia Technology, 19 (2015) 1094 – 1101. [16] A. Kocmanova, I. Simberova, Determination of Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance Indicators: Framework in the Measurement of Sustainable Performance, Journal of Business Economics and Management, 15-5 (2014) 1017-1033. [17] L. Moldovan, Design of a New Learning Environment for Training in Quality Assurance, Procedia Technology, 12 (2014) 483-488.

997