Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation ...

NAMIBIA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology

Esther Nuuyoma Student Number: 201090759

Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Leadership and Change Management at the Harold Pupkewitz Graduate School of Business, Namibia University of Science and Technology

SUPERVISOR: Prof Samuel Mensah

October 2017


Declaration I, Esther Nuuyoma, declare that this thesis is my own unaided work. Any assistance that I have received has been duly acknowledged in the thesis.

It is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Leadership and Change Management at the Namibia University of Science and Technology through the Harold Pupkewitz Graduate Business School (HP-GBS), Windhoek, Namibia. It has not been submitted before for any degree or examination at this or any other Institution of Higher Learning.

Signature _____________________

Date______________________

ii


Retention & Use of Thesis I, Esther Nuuyoma, being a candidate for the degree of Master of Leadership and Change Management, accept the requirements by the Namibia University of Science and Technology relating to the retention and use of Masters theses deposited in the Library.

In terms of these conditions, I agree that my original thesis deposited in the Library will be accessible for purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of theses.

Signature _____________________

Date _____________________

iii


Acknowledgement I thank the Almighty God for giving me the strength and perseverance to successfully complete my studies. I would also like to acknowledge and thank my supervisor, Professor Samuel Mensah, whose efforts, immense knowledge, guidance and constructive criticism was invaluable during the various phases of this thesis. My sincere appreciation also go to Dr. Cynthia Murray and Dr. Archford Musodza for their advice and willingness to copyedit and proofread my work. I also want to extend my warmest thanks to Mr. Ndakolute Abraham for his valuable input, support and constant words of motivation throughout this study. A very special thanks go to my colleagues Mr. Ian Gicheru and Dr. Bertha Mudamburi who supported me greatly and were always willing to assist. I also want to extend my warmest thanks to my dear son Joshua Paulus for his understanding and patience throughout the tenure of my study. I am also thankful to Prophet Lukas M Mweshipooli whose unceasing and unfailing prayers enabled me to look at life from a different perspective. Finally, I will always remain indebted to the staff and students of the Namibia University of Science and Technology who graciously offered their time and knowledge to assist me in completing this study.

iv


Dedication To my late father, Johannes Iipinge Nuuyoma, thank you for seeing potential in me and making sure that my dreams were fulfilled. To my late mother, Roswitha Muulyothina Ndemugwedha, thank you for your hard work and unconditional love. You both contributed immensely to the person I turned out to be today and I wish you could have lived longer to share in this great achievement.

v


Abbreviations and Acronyms

EFQM

Excellence Model of the European Foundation for Quality Management

ETSIP

Education and Training Sector Improvement Programme

GRN

Government of the Republic of Namibia

HEIs

Higher Education Institutions

ISO

International Organisation for Standardisation

MBNQA

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

NCHE

National Council for Higher Education

NDP

National Development Plan

NQA

Namibia Qualifications Authority

NQF

National Qualifications Framework

NUST

Namibia University of Science and Technology

PoN

Polytechnic of Namibia

SPSS

Statistical Package for Social Sciences

QMP

Quality Management Practice

QMS

Quality Management System

TQM

Total Quality Management

UNAM

University of Namibia

vi


Table of Contents Declaration ................................................................................................................................................... ii Retention & Use of Thesis .......................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................................iv Dedication .....................................................................................................................................................v Abbreviations and Acronyms .......................................................................................................................vi List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................x List of Figures ..............................................................................................................................................xi Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................... xii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 1.1 Research Background ..............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Higher Education System in Namibia .....................................................................................................5 1.3 Brief History of the Namibia University of Science and Technology ....................................................8 1.4 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................................12 1.5 Research Questions ...............................................................................................................................13 1.6 Research Objectives ..............................................................................................................................14 1.7 Significance of the Study ......................................................................................................................15 1.8 Definitions of Key Concepts .................................................................................................................16 1.9 Outline of the Thesis .............................................................................................................................16 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................18 2.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................18 2.2 The Concept of Quality .........................................................................................................................18 2.3 Quality Management Models ................................................................................................................22 2.4 Quality Management Processes.............................................................................................................27 2.5 Quality Management Practices (QMPs) ................................................................................................30 2.6 Leadership and Management in Higher Education ...............................................................................33 2.7 Quality-Improvement Challenges facing Higher Education .................................................................37

vii

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology 2.8 Conceptual Framework .........................................................................................................................41 2.9 Summary ...............................................................................................................................................46 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................47 3.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................47 3.2 Research Approach and Design ............................................................................................................47 3.3 Population..............................................................................................................................................49 3.4 Sampling................................................................................................................................................49 3.5 Data Collection ......................................................................................................................................51 3.6 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................................52 3.7 Reliability and Validity .........................................................................................................................53 3.8 Scope and Limitations ...........................................................................................................................54 3.9 Ethical Considerations ...........................................................................................................................54 3.10 Summary .............................................................................................................................................55 CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF DATA AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS .........................56 4.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................56 4.2 Staff Members Response Rate ..............................................................................................................58 4.3 Effectiveness in the Application of Quality Management Objectives...................................................59 4.4. Effectiveness of the Institutions’ External and Internal Evaluation ..................................................66 4.5 Students’ Responses Rate......................................................................................................................71 4.6. Students’ Understanding of Quality Management ...............................................................................71 4.7. Institution’s Commitments to Quality Service .....................................................................................75 4.8. Perceptions on the Value of Qualifications ..........................................................................................78 4.9. Institution’s Quality Service .................................................................................................................81 4.10. Challenges faced in the Implementation of Quality Management .....................................................83 4.11. Role of Senior Faculty Members in dealing with Quality Management Challenges .........................89 4.12. Improving the Formulation and Implementation of Quality Management ........................................91 4.13. Summary ............................................................................................................................................94 viii

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................95 5.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................95 5.2 Objectives Revisited ..............................................................................................................................95 5.3 Summary of Key Findings ....................................................................................................................96 5.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................97 5.5 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................97 5.6 Areas for Future Research .....................................................................................................................98 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................99 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................112 Appendix 1: Letter of Introduction .......................................................................................................112 Appendix 2: Sample Request Letter to Conduct Research ...................................................................113 Appendix 3: Research Questionnaire for Staff ......................................................................................114 Appendix 4: Research Questionnaire for Students ................................................................................117

ix


List of Tables Table 2.1: Classifications of Quality .......................................................................................................... 20 Table 2.2: Categories of Quality Indicators ............................................................................................... 21 Table 2.3: 14 Points of Management .......................................................................................................... 27 Table 2.4: Stages of Quality Management ................................................................................................. 28 Table 2.5: Unique and Common Characteristics for Nigeria and Finland concerning Leadership Roles in the University ............................................................................................................................................. 36 Table 3.1: Schema for Data Collection ...................................................................................................... 50 Table 4.1: Faculty*Occupation*Gender Cross Tabulation ........................................................................ 58 Table 4.2: Reliability Statistics on Quality Management Objectives ......................................................... 60 Table 4.3: Quality Management Objectives: Item-Total Statistics ............................................................ 62 Table 4.4: Association between the Institution's Quality Management Objectives ................................... 64 Table 4.5: Reliability Statistics for the Institutions' External and Internal Evaluation .............................. 67 Table 4.6: Institutions' External and Internal Evaluation: Item-Total Statistics......................................... 68 Table 4.7: Association between Institutions' External and Internal Evaluation ......................................... 69 Table 4.8: Arguments in the Literature: External versus Internal Review ................................................. 70 Table 4.9: Students' Faculty and Gender - Cross Tabulation ..................................................................... 71 Table 4.10: Understanding of Quality Management .................................................................................. 72 Table 4.11: Reliability Statistics of the Institution's Commitment ............................................................. 76 Table 4.12: Institution's Commitment: Item - Total Statistics ................................................................... 77 Table 4.13: Association between the Institution's Commitment Variables ................................................ 78 Table 4.14: Reliability Statistics of the Value of Qualifications ................................................................ 79 Table 4.15: Value of Qualifications: Item Total Statistics ......................................................................... 80 Table 4.16: Association between Value of Qualifications Variables ......................................................... 81

x


List of Figures Figure 2.1: Approaches to Quality ............................................................................................................. 19 Figure 2.2: Conceptual Framework for Quality Management in Higher Education .................................. 42 Figure 4.1: Quality Service for Producing Quality Students ...................................................................... 81 Figure 4.2: Quality Management Implementation Challenges faced by Students ..................................... 83 Figure 4.3: Quality Management Implementation Challenges faced by Staff ........................................... 84 Figure 4.4: Role of Senior Faculty Members in Quality Management ...................................................... 89 Figure 4.5: Views on Improving Quality Management at NUST .............................................................. 92

xi


Abstract In today’s world, it is evident that higher education is being driven by commercial rivalry; hence, quality has become a fundamental part of the daily activities of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), which are mainly research, teaching and learning, and community service or engagement. HEIs, the world over, have a greater and more specific focus on addressing quality in service delivery as well as anticipating client needs and meeting them. Previous studies reveal that these concerns have led many HEIs to implement quality management to sustain quality and be ahead of their competitors; and Namibia is no exception. In an effort to maintain quality and provide better service to their stakeholders, many HEIs in Namibia have started to introduce quality management systems or quality assurance systems. Although previous studies have identified critical issues and concerns pertaining to quality management within academic organisations around the globe, not much research has been conducted on the Quality Management Practices (QMPs) of HEIs in Namibia at the time this study was conceived. This study was, therefore, designed to determine whether quality management processes at the Namibia University of Science and Technology (NUST) were implemented effectively - that is, in line with international best practices. The study further intended to find out what activities were missing and what could be done to enhance the quality of graduates in Namibia. A quantitative research design was adopted, although open-ended questions on the questionnaire were analysed using the qualitative data analysis method. Data for this study was collected from a sample of 23 staff members and 74 final year students from NUST. Findings from this study revealed that, although quality management is being practiced at this institution, there is need to strengthen the awareness among all the stakeholders, as well as maintain the active involvement of top management in quality management-related interventions. It was also established that serious attention should be given to monitoring and evaluation of implementation processes. The study also identified potential challenges that hinder effective implementation of quality management at the institution. Some of those challenges include inadequate human and financial resources, lack of awareness, lack of communication, lack of cooperation amongst various departments, lack of decision-making, lack of training and overlapping of regulations in quality management. The study recommends that the authorities at NUST should see to it that quality management practices are implemented at all levels and that all stakeholders are aware of the policies and procedures in place and are fully involved in their implementation. The study further recommends that the institution should strengthen communication with all stakeholders regarding the importance of and benefits of quality management.

xii

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology |1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background In the past, many organisations failed to maintain and continuously improve their quality in order to stay ahead of their competitors. Consequently, Total Quality Management (TQM), and benchmarking were adopted (Jaafreh & Al-abedallat, 2012), a practice designed for the manufacturing and service industries to improve performance (Talib & Rahman, 2012). The origins of TQM can be traced back as far as 1949, when Japanese Scientists and Engineers formed a committee whose sole purpose was improving productivity, and enhancing the quality of life after World War 11. Influenced by Deming and Juran, the committee developed a course on statistical quality control for Japanese engineers, followed by extensive statistical training and the widespread dissemination of the Deming philosophy among Japanese manufacturers (Walton, 1986 in Powell, 1995). Deming and Juran saw the importance of pursuing perfection by applying quality principles and techniques to processes and management of organisations. Based on the above philosophy, academics begun to experiment with the application of TQM principles and practices to service organisations following its success in the manufacturing industry (Prajogo, 2005). The researcher continues by explaining that, although the applicability of TQM to the service industry has been proposed, “fundamental differences in the nature of their business” (p. 175) could impede its implementation. Authors such as Michael, Sower and Motwani (1997) argue that a modified TQM model that recognises unique aspects of education can be applied to higher education. Meanwhile, In'airat and Al-Kassemn (2014) emphasised that TQM in higher education is entrenched on three generic approaches. The first approach focuses on customer where the ideas of service to students is supported through staff coaching and development, which encourage students’ preference for the institution. The second approach focuses on appraising and raising the involvement of all members of staff to make an institution’s quality procedures, rules and priorities powerful. The third approach focuses on service agreement positions and attempts to guarantee


compliance with quality management procedures. In'airat and Al-Kassemn (2014) cites Harris (1994) as providing an example of this approach, which evaluates tasks by supervisors within a given period. The applicability of TQM in the education sector is well documented, but most institutions have found it difficult to implement it, as alluded to earlier by Prajogo (2005). Among the reasons for the unsuccessful implementation of TQM in HEIs, Seymour (1991) mentions that resistance to change, insufficient administrative commitment, difficulty of application of TQM tools to the HEIs’ environment, little experience of team leaders and staff in working as a team and the concern of the institutions about insufficient the results. Equally, in their study, Magutu, Mbeche, Nyaoga, Nyaanga, Ombato (2010) claim that “TQM has not succeeded in higher education because it has not been made to focus on the bigger questions”. They point out that TQM has had very little consequence on issues related to the curriculum and what should be taught, the viability of faculty tenure, the use of faculty time, and the propriety of technological innovations in instruction. In addition, other issues include the impact and validity of distance learning, whether students actually learn in just any situation, the division of resources and attention between undergraduate and graduate education, the extent to which institutions should become involved in economic development ventures, tuition and fee levels, campus diversity, alcohol and drug abuse, etc. Despite the popularity of TQM, extant literature reveal that there is no consensus on what it actually means, as a result many organisations have to deal with implementation challenges. Despite the fact that many HEIs have embraced and support the philosophy of quality management, extant literature reveal that even promoters of TQM confess that organisations have not found it easy to implement QMPs and to achieve the expected benefits (Kirk, 2000). It is in this context that Magutu et al. (2010) are of the opinion that although higher education is able to adopt many of the principles of quality management, it is reasonable to expect some problems when applying them to a different organisational structure such as those from the commercial sector.


Congruently, due to negative reviews which suggest that the QMS focuses mainly on administrative and service processes, while neglecting the student learning experience, concerns have been raised among academics regarding the effective implementation of quality management (Becket & Brookes, 2008). In a different study by Brookes and Becket (2007), which focused on a review of literature on quality management in higher education, it was revealed that the testing or implementation of quality management models developed by industry have greater application in measuring administrative or service functions within HEIs than the quality of research or instruction and knowledge transfer. Thus, its effectiveness and appropriateness in satisfying the needs of higher education are arguable (Mizikaci, 2006). Indeed, a number of factors are driving HEIs to implement quality management. These factors include increased competition, need for cost-efficiency, accountability, and service orientations. Thus, higher education is gradually focusing on a value-added or performance approach of excellence, where quality is determined by its outcomes, such as producing highly satisfied and employable graduates (Koslowski, 2006). In support of this, Anderson (2006) concurs that the quality revolution in higher education has underscored the expectation that universities must demonstrate that they are providing quality education and producing quality research and constantly striving to improve both. This is the reason why quality management issues have drawn the interest of academics and education practitioners alike in an effort to build sustainable competitive advantage in the face of economic recession (Altbach, Reisberg & Rumbley, 2009). In pursuit of that objective, there have been major changes in policy, governance, structure and status of HEIs all over the world in recent years as postulated by Nicolescu (2009). This study expands on previous research in Quality Management Practices (QMPs) and processes used within the Namibian HEIs and probes what quality enhancing activities are missing and the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the implementation of quality management and the quality of graduates.


1.2 Higher Education System in Namibia Namibia recognises quality higher education as one of the key aspects in moving towards the realisation of Vision 2030 (Government of the Republic of Namibia [GRN], 2004). The first higher education institutions in Namibia opened in the 1980s according as stated by Lewis and Ndaruhutse (2011). These included an Academy for Tertiary Education (with teacher education and secretarial skills courses) and later another Academy for Post-Secondary Training and Technical Skills. Just after independence in 1990, Dr. Sam Nujoma, the first constitutionally elected president of Namibia, established a special Presidential Commission on higher education with the following terms of reference as stated by Brannelly et al., (2011): 

To determine the organisation and structure of the higher education system, including the nature and location of HEIs.



To analyse the funding of higher education, both recurrent and capital, and to determine the qualifications for admission to, and the duration of the various higher education courses.



To define the control of higher education and its relationship with the government.



To determine the range and level of programmes in the higher education systems.



To determine the extent of the higher education system in both the medium and the long term in relation to national human resource needs.



To consider the financial support of students at Namibian and foreign educational institutions.



To analyse the promotion, conduct, management and financing of the country’s research.



To report to the President on its findings and advise the government on the cost, management, organisation and administration of higher education.



To make comprehensive recommendations to the President on the matters referred to in the terms of reference. The Academy for Tertiary Education was later dissolved, following the recommendations

of this Commission, and its three components were transformed into two independent HEIs, namely, the University of Namibia (UNAM) and the Polytechnic of Namibia (PoN) – recently


transformed into the Namibia University of Science and Technology (NUST). Currently, NUST and UNAM, both state-owned, and the privately owned International University of Management (IUM) are the only universities in Namibia.

Extant literature reveals that governments play an important role in HEIs in many countries through funding while playing or acting in the role of principal regulator. As a result the governments’ role in HEIs and the implementation of QMPs are inseparable. The Namibian government spends a substantial amount of money on higher education, however the education system is still poor and subsequently the graduates trained at these institutions are said to lack competencies and contribute less to the country’s economic growth. This can be confirmed by the Analysis of the Namibian Millennium Development Goals Progress Report (2013) which showed that Namibia has increased access to education; but the country falls short in terms of the quality of education and its subsequent responsiveness to labour expectations. The report further emphasised the adverse effects posed by the shortage of a skilled and adequately trained workforce on investment in general and on manufacturing in particular in the country. This study also looked at the QMPs at NUST, their implementation and room for improvement. The adoption of quality management in Namibian HEIs has prompted scholars into conducting researches in an effort to establish the effectiveness of quality systems in place. In their review of literature and legislative and policy instruments in Namibia, Matengu, Likando and Kangumu (2014) confirmed that the Namibian HEIs have put in place both internal and external mechanisms for quality assurance, which are in line with the institutions’ mandates. They indicated that PoN has engaged the Higher Education Quality Committee of South Africa on Education in addition to joining the International Network of Quality Assurance. UNAM on the other hand has solicited quality assessment support from the South Africa Rectors’ Conference, the Association of African Universities, the Association of European Universities and the Association of Canadian Universities; in addition to peer review at disciplinary levels by Professionals Councils in medicine and engineering fields, to vet its programmes and systems. The review also emphasised that while this is good practice and should be encouraged, it also points to some level of doubt in the Namibian policy system, which in itself is in its infancy.


The Namibian government has remained steadfast in its attempts to improve HEIs in the country. This can be witnessed in its decision to set up two statutory organisations, namely, the Namibia Council for Higher Education (NCHE) and the Namibian Qualifications Authority (NQA), both of which were established by Acts of Parliament, No.29 of 1996 and 26 of 2003 respectively. In support of this initiative, Simataa (2010) states that the ‘ability’ of HEIs to contribute to competitiveness is determined by a set of factors, policies, and external governance institutions such as the NQA and NCHE which determine the level of productivity, quality skill attainment and student throughput. Likewise, Kadhila (2012) points out that in Namibia, as in many countries around the world, there has been an increased recognition of the importance of quality higher education in national development. He further emphasises that this relationship is premised on the assumption that higher education will provide the necessary quality inputs and the expected quality outputs, which is quality graduates. In addition to the studies conducted on the effectiveness of quality systems in place in Namibian HEIs, several surveys have also been conducted in an effort to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of quality higher education in the country following the establishment of the two statutory bodies. Simataa (2010) looked at the context of education in Namibia and its policy articulations in terms of national objectives, such as those articulated in NDP3 and Vision 2030. His study reviewed relevant Namibian documents and conducted consultations with various stakeholders. The study utilised both qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques using questionnaires as the research instrument. His findings indicate that the legislation outlining the functions and powers of the NQA’s do not make it compulsory for all HEIs to be assessed in all aspects of quality management and it does not prescribe what needs to be done regarding quality in higher education. The study further reveal that its legal authority makes its responsibility of accreditation and quality assurance optional and without consequences for those who do not comply. As such, in its enforcement, it is limited to those HEIs who wish to have their academic programmes evaluated and accredited. Moreover, the study found that there is a significant overlap of functions between the NCHE and the NQA, particularly on accreditation. The NCHE is expected to solve the quandary of higher education funding while at the same time instituting a monitoring and evaluation scheme


of higher education institution, establishing quality assurance mechanisms, advising HEIs and regulating their operations regarding who offers what? The NCHE is expected to oversee the academic performance of both students and their lecturers. Last, but not least, the NCHE is tasked with managing performance, and coordinating the higher education system to ensure that HEIs offer what is within national priorities and demands. However, the NCHE Secretariat currently does not have the capacity to meet most of these expectations. This is mainly because of the fact that it is grossly understaffed and it would need the appropriate financial support that would enable it to recruit senior experts to realise its broad and ambitious mandate fully (NCHE, 2003). Given this background, this study intended to identify the quality enhancing activities that were missing in the quality management processes at NUST and determine the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the implementation of quality management and the quality of graduates in the country.

1.3 Brief History of the Namibia University of Science and Technology An Act of Parliament (Act No. 33 of 1994) established NUST. Its mission is to contribute to national competitiveness, innovative entrepreneurship and environmental sustainability through the provision of excellent qualifications informed by research and community services. The aims of the Namibia University of Science and Technology as stipulated in this Act are: 

To provide post-secondary career education with due regard for the human resource requirements of Namibia and with an emphasis on excellence in teaching within a climate conducive to the intellectual, social, aesthetic, and emotional development of students;



To provide continuing education at a post-secondary school level in order to expand the educational horizons of the adult community;



To conduct applied research;



To develop equal opportunities in respect of its educational programmes as well as admission to, and employment at, the Polytechnic; and



To provide effective collegial governance structure that encourages the active participation of all its constituents and which reflects the collective input of all interested parties (Polytechnic of Namibia Act No. 33 of 1994:2).


On the 14th of September 2015 the Namibia University of Science and Technology Act was promulgated, thereby transforming the Polytechnic into a new university. However, from January 2015 the Namibia University of Science and Technology started offering 23 Certificates (21 Undergraduate and 2 Postgraduate), 22 Diplomas, 43 Bachelor degrees, 11 Professional Bachelor degrees and 27 Bachelor Honours degrees. In addition, at the postgraduate level, it offered 15 Master degrees and 3 Doctoral degrees in 90 programmes. The fields of study for these programmes range from Computer Science and Informatics, Engineering (Civil, Electrical Power, Electronics & Telecoms, Mining & Metallurgy, Industrial) and Architecture, through Biomedical Sciences, Environmental Health Sciences, Mathematics and Statistics, to Communication, English, Criminal Justice, Economics, Accounting, Agriculture, Geomatics, Spatial Science, Land Administration and Property Studies. As part of its transformation into a University, in line with Cabinet directives, the University will phase out certificate and diploma courses over a five-year period. The phased out qualifications were to be inherited by Technical Colleges, to be established in order to ensure that market demands are catered for.

NUST recognises the importance of quality assurance and standards in all its operations, manifested in a dedicated Quality Assurance Unit. The institution introduced its quality management in 2009 (Quality Assurance Policy, 2009). NUST has been associated with quality and quality assurance practices since its inception in 1996. During the mid-1990s, NUST was affiliated to the Certification Council for Technikon Education (SERTEC) in South Africa. With the establishment of the Council for Higher Education (CHE) and the merging of universities and Technikons in post-independence South Africa, SERTEC was dissolved and its functions absorbed by the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) of the CHE. In spite of all the changes, the relationship previously established through SERTEC continued and in March 2007, the then Polytechnic became the only institution outside South Africa to be audited by the HEQC. This was an indication of the importance that the Polytechnic assigned to quality assurance and quality enhancement (Council on Higher Education, 2007). In September 2010, the Polytechnic joined the South African Technology Network (SATN). Founded in 2007, SATN is a network of Universities of Technology, which enables cooperation,

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 10

collaboration, support and joint activities in areas that include curriculum development, applied research, quality assurance and cooperative education. NUST has introduced two units to ensure quality management. The Programme Development and Registration Unit has the overall responsibility for coordinating and managing programme (curriculum) development activities in the institution and ensuring the registration of qualifications on the National Qualifications Framework (NQF). As from January 2015, all higher education institutions in Namibia were required to register their existing qualifications on the NQF and in compliance with this requirement, NUST submitted 25 qualifications to the NQA during that year. This brings the total number of qualifications submitted for NQF registration to 100, seventy-five of which are currently registered on the NQF. NUST has 118 qualifications in total. The Unit continues to assist academic departments in their endeavour to develop new programmes and/ or re-examine existing programmes. Additionally, assistance is provided in a number of ways, including the facilitation of training sessions for the faculty on the NUST Curriculum Framework and the NQF, as well as rigorous review of draft programme documents. Above all, guidance to the faculty is aimed at ensuring compliance with relevant institutional policies and national imperatives. The Quality Assurance Unit on the other hand ensures that the quality of education and services offered by the institution are of high standard and that the students receive the best possible education available. The evaluation of newly developed academic programmes before they are submitted to Senate for approval is one of the key services provided by the Quality Assurance Unit. The Polytechnic [now NUST] Quality Assurance Policy (2009) stipulates that the “quality management function of the Polytechnic shall be carried out through the line management route, by all management and other staff with the support of a formally resourced Quality Assurance Unit under the direction of a Quality Assurance Committee (QAC)”. The following rules and procedures are to be followed for implementation of quality assurance: 

Each School/Directorate, across all functions in the NUST, establishes and maintains a quality manual, which will eventually form the basis of the institutional Quality Assurance Handbook/Manual. The Quality Assurance Handbook/Manual will clearly document the


structures, mechanisms, policies, procedures and instruments and quality plan for managing quality in that environment. Schools and Units could also establish their own quality manuals at departmental level; 

Each line manager is responsible for quality management, monitoring, evaluation and ensuring that staff members are familiar with the agreed policy, systems and approaches regarding quality management;



Each staff member must have in his/her possession, the policies, procedures and work instructions relevant to their function readily available;



Each individual staff member of the NUST must familiarise themselves with the policies and procedures relevant to their function, and understand how each person’s function contributes to the mission, strategic goals and quality of the service and products of the University;



Each Head of Department assumes responsibility for the continuous improvement of processes, inputs and outputs, the identification of problem areas, the formulation of corrective actions and the improvement of procedures within specific departments;



All amendments to processes and procedures are submitted to the Quality Assurance Unit to be entered into the electronically documented quality system;



Departments report on improvements and corrective actions in their annual reports;



Each department regularly assesses itself according to the documented procedure for selfassessment and the agreed institutional schedule. The self-assessment serves as a mechanism for accountability and improvement;



The self-assessment report of each department is submitted to the Quality Assurance Unit, and the outcomes of such assessments are included in the Annual Quality Reports of NUST; and



The Quality Assurance Unit will monitor and evaluate the implementation of policy through self-evaluation reports, audit reports and feedback meetings with institutional management, as well as through comments received in departmental meetings and other mechanisms to be developed by the Unit.


1.4 Problem Statement In industrialised countries as well as in some developing countries, HEIs are known to play a fundamental role in training and equipping individuals with relevant skills for the labour market (UNESCO, 2009). This puts pressure on HEIs in other developing countries such as Namibia, to strive and gain such recognition. This is so because in many developing countries, such as Namibia, it looks like standards in HEIs are falling (UNESCO, 2009). For example, a survey conducted in 2012 found that even though Namibia’s HEIs could assist the government to achieve its national developmental goals, the higher education system was not succeeding in churning out graduates who are able to cope in the demanding job market without further training. That survey should be taken seriously because it was carried out by the Engineering Professions Association of Namibia (EPA), the German International Development Cooperation (GIZ), the Engineering Council of Namibia (ECN), the University of Namibia (UNAM), the then Polytechnic of Namibia (PoN), and the Association of Consulting Engineers (ASCEN). The study also found that in the recent past, graduates from HEIs have not been progressing as fast as they did in the past to become well-trained and registered professionals. The study indicated that one of the reasons for this observed decline in standards is that tertiary institutions were struggling to retain quality teaching and research staff in disciplines that compete directly with the private sector. Five years earlier, the Education and Training Sector Improvement Programme (ETSIP) had reported that there was a severe shortage of personnel in the professional and technical fields in the labour market for deployment in those areas that were regarded as critical to national development. Examples of such fields include the agriculture, fisheries, information technology, science, engineering, geology, medicine, accountancy, business management, etc. (GRN, 2007:43). That report and the findings of the survey mentioned earlier bring out the need for attention to be given to the challenges that the HEIs have to deal with in the country. This report and its findings also helps the country to respond adequately to its developmental needs (Kadhila, 2012).

The challenges that HEIs in Namibia have to deal with may be addressed in many ways. Kadhila (2012) stresses establishing first-rate faculties and institutions without indicating how


these could be achieved in the short term. He goes on to suggest receiving proficient learners from the school system. Furthermore, without indicating how the school system could be made to produce these proficient learners. There are some problems with Kadhila’s (2012) suggestions for addressing the challenges facing HEIs in the country. These include the time learners would take and the funds they would require. An alternative route that may be pursued to improve the output of HEIs in Namibia in a much shorter time and with relatively less resources, is the adoption of QMPs, which Kadhila (2012) mentioned, but brushed past quickly. QMPs involve oversight of all activities of an organisation in the areas of quality planning, formulation of quality policies, performing quality assurance, and quality control, with the aim of improving organisational performance (Sohail et al., 2003). This will require changes in procedures, continuous training of staff, regular management reviews, ISO certification, and review of the quality system after ISO certification (Sohail et al., 2003). Despite the promise they hold, the extent to which adoption of QMPs could contribute to improving the quality of graduates from HEIs in Namibia has not been studied. This study is an attempt to investigate the implementation of QMPs at the Namibia University of Science and Technology and to determine changes to the processes that may be required for production of high – quality, market – ready graduates.

1.5 Research Questions Research questions give direction to any research and act as the guiding plan for the investigation (Mertler & Vannatta, 2001). According to De Vos et al. (2005), a research question may be described as a formulation of vague thoughts about a subject into a specific question for which the research will seek an answer. Maxwell (2005) suggests that a good research question is one that will point the researcher to the information that will lead him/her to understand what he/she is set forth to investigate. Based on the explanation above, the following is the main research question guiding this study: How has quality management been implemented at the Namibia University of Science and Technology and how may the implementation processes be improved for the institution to produce better – quality graduates?


The following sub-questions are addressed: 

In comparison with international best practices, how effective are the Quality Management Practices (QMPs) currently in place at the Namibia University of Science and Technology (NUST)?



What perceptions of quality education do students at NUST hold, and how do these influence quality of delivery?



What challenges are faced in the implementation of quality management at NUST?



To what extent would improvements in the formulation and implementation of QMPs make graduates from NUST market-ready in terms of their quality?

1.6 Research Objectives De Vos et al., (2011, p. 108) state that objectives refer to the specific issues the researcher proposes to examine and that they should be clearly stated and specific in nature. In line with the research problem stipulated above, the main aim of this study is: To identify the quality – enhancing activities that are missing in the implementation of quality management processes at NUST and to determine the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the quality of graduates from NUST. The study focused on the following specific objectives: 

To determine the effectiveness of QMPs currently in place at NUST in comparison with international best practices.



To establish the perceptions of quality education that students at NUST hold and how these influence the quality of delivery.



To identify the challenges faced in implementing quality management at NUST.



To determine the extent to which improvements in the formulation and implementation of QMPs would make graduates from NUST market ready in terms of quality.


1.7 Significance of the Study This study adds value to the academic world through addressing issues that pertain to the implementation of quality management at NUST. The study has relevance to the broader tertiary education sector and contributes significantly to the body of knowledge, especially in the field of higher education with limited literature on Namibia. It also helps to raise awareness amongst key stakeholders on the shortcomings in the development and implementation of quality management, and the focus of NUST has identified areas that may need improvement in other HEIs in Namibia. The findings of the study can assist researchers and academicians in broadening their curriculum on the continuous improvement principle of quality management. HEIs in Namibia can also benefit from the insights on quality management in the provision of both educational and noneducational services. Other universities and academic institutions may also use the findings in policy formulation and implementation with respect to the continuous improvement principle of quality management. This study hopes to provide expositions intended to deter possible future complaints on the ineffectiveness levelled against HEIs graduates in Namibia.


1.8 Definitions of Key Concepts Higher Education

Any institution that provides higher education and that is

Institutions

established by, or under any law, or is registered as a private higher education institution.

Graduate

A person who successfully completes a course or qualification at tertiary level.

Quality

“Generally accepted standards, defined by an institution, quality assurance bodies and appropriate academic and professional communities that must be met for recognition or accreditation.” (Harvey, 2004).

Quality Management

“The complete process which is set up in order to ensure that the quality process actually takes place and is an aggregate of measures taken regularly at system or institutional level so as to assure the quality of higher education with the emphasis on improving the quality of higher education” (Kadhila, 2012, p. 26).

Quality Assurance

The means by which an institution can guarantee with confidence and certainty, that the standards and quality of its educational provision are being maintained and enhanced (Schindler, Puls-Elvidge, Welzant & Crawford, 2015).

1.9 Outline of the Thesis This study comprises of five chapters. Chapter One provides a background of the study by looking at similar studies conducted by researchers in the same field across the globe. The chapter reflects on the higher education system in Namibia, providing a basis and justification of quality management at the Namibia University of Science and Technology (NUST). In addition, a brief history of NUST is given.


Additionally, the problem statement, research questions and objectives that guided the study are stated. The last portion of this chapter presents the significance of the study, definitions of key concepts, and the outline of the thesis. Chapter Two reviews the literature perceived to be pertinent to this study. It provides a brief discussion on the concept of quality as well as Total Quality Management in higher education. The chapter further presents the following aspects: quality management models, quality management processes, quality management practices, leadership and management in higher education and quality-improvement challenges facing higher education. The conceptual framework of the study is presented and discussed at the end of the chapter. Chapter Three gives an overview of the research methodology. A quantitative research design was adopted, though the open-ended questions in the questionnaire were analysed in the qualitative tradition. The chapter covers the following major areas: research approach and design, population, sampling, data collection, data analysis, reliability and validity, scope and limitations and finally and ethical considerations. Chapter Four presents the results gathered for the study from the questionnaires. The chapter further presents the discussion of the results in line with the objectives of the study, the literature reviewed, and the conceptual framework guiding this study. Chapter Five covers the following major areas: objectives revisited, summary of key findings, recommendations for improving the quality of graduates from NUST, and possible areas for further research.


CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction The central question for this study is: How has quality management been implemented at the Namibia University of Science and Technology and how may the implementation processes be improved for the institution to produce better-quality graduates? This chapter therefore reviews the literature perceived to be pertinent to this study and presents the following aspects: concept of quality, quality management models, quality management processes, quality management practices, leadership and management in higher education and quality-improvement challenges facing higher education. The conceptual framework of the study is presented and discussed at the end of the chapter.

2.2 The Concept of Quality Everyone defines quality based on his or her own perspective of it. According to Kalusi (2001), quality is a complex concept about which there is hardly any consensus. This reinforces the view of Pounder (1999) that quality is a ‘notoriously ambiguous term’ since it has different meanings to different stakeholders. These views support Harvey and Burrow’s (1992) position that the concept of quality becomes inherently very complex since higher education has a variety of stakeholders, which include students, teaching and non-teaching staff, employers, government and its funding agencies, creditors and auditors among others. Dochy et al. (1990) and Moodie (1986) assert that because of the difficulties in defining quality in higher education, some have opted out of trying to find an underlying theory or definition. Regardless of resultant ambiguity created by these definitions, Reynolds (1990) offers several definitions of “quality” from which different stakeholders would select what seems suitable according to their own interests. Reynolds points out that a student would define “quality” in higher education as the ability to provide proper facilities to continue the process of advancement of knowledge. However, for government, it is the production of highly trained engineers, doctors, architects, scientists, etc. Industrialists, on the other hand, may view “quality” in higher education


as a means of turning out graduates with flexible minds ready to acquire skills and adapt to new methods. For Avram and Avram (2011), quality in academia is a mirror of acceptable academic performance, which in the knowledge-based society, means compatibility with the educational standards worldwide and is gauged by transferability of credits – an indicator of international recognition of quality. Most HEIs strive to become globally recognised on the basis of the perceived quality of education they offer, which is dependent on the quality of faculties, administrative structure, and quality of graduates; and this can only be achieved if the processes of teaching, learning and research are properly managed (Ebiringa, 2012). In addition, Harvey and Green (1993) proposed one of the most widely used definitions of “quality” in higher education, which is categorised into five interrelated dimensions. Harvey and Green’s (1993) definition, which embraces quality as “the exceptional”, quality as “perfection”, quality as “fitness for purpose”, quality as “value for money”, and quality as “transformation” is summarised in Figure 2.1 below.

The exceptional view of quality sees quality as something special.

Quality as perfection sees quality as a consistent of flawless outcome.

Quality as value for money sees quality in terms of return on investment.

Quality as fitness for purpose sees quality in terms of fulfilling customer's requirements, needs or desires.

Quality as transformation is a classic notion of quality that sees it in terms of change from one state to another.

Figure 2.1: Approaches to Quality Source: Harvey and Green (1993)

Schindler, et.al. (2015) proposed the latest conceptualisation of higher education quality that is identical to that of Harvey and Green (1993). The authors examined the definitions in totality and several themes emerged. Table 2.1 illustrates the four broad conceptualisations of quality as revealed by literature.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 20 Table 2.1: Classifications of Quality Classifications Definitions Purposeful Institutional products and services conform to a stated mission/vision or a set of specifications, requirements, or standards, including those defined by accrediting and/or regulatory bodies (Cheng & Tam, 1997; Commonwealth of Learning, 2009; Green, 1994; Harvey & Green, 1993; Harvey & Knight, 1996; Peterson, 1999). Exceptional Institutional products and services achieve distinction and exclusivity through the fulfilment of high standards (Bogue, 1998; Cheng & Tam, 1997; Green, 1994; Harvey & Green, 1993; Harvey & Knight, 1996; Peterson, 1999). Transformative Institutional products and services effect positive change in student learning (affective, cognitive, and psychomotor domains) and personal and professional potential (Biggs, 2001; Bobby, 2014; Bogue, 1998; Green, 1994; Harvey & Green, 1993; Harvey & Knight, 1996; Haworth & Conrad, 1997; Pond, 2002; Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2012; Srikanthan & Dalrymple, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007). Accountable Institutions are accountable to stakeholders for the optimal use of resources and the delivery of accurate educational products and services with zero defects (American Society for Quality, n.d.; Cheng & Tam, 1997; Green, 1994; Harvey, 2005; Harvey & Green, 1993; Harvey & Knight, 1996; Nicholson, 2011). Source: Schindler et al. (2015)

Schindler et al. emphasised that the second strategy for defining quality is to identify specific indicators that reflect desired inputs (e.g., responsive faculty and staff) and outputs (e.g., employment of graduates). After reviewing the literature, the authors found 50 specific quality indicators and identified four distinct categories: administrative, student support, instructional, and student performance indicators illustrated in Table 2.2. According to Tam (2014) cited in Schindler, et al. (2015), the first three categories primarily address the desired inputs, such as educational resources available to students and the last category, student performance, focuses more on outputs, such as gains in learning, which reflects the trends in assessing student outcomes to assure quality.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 21 Table 2.2: Categories of Quality Indicators Categories Definitions A set of quality indicators that pertain to the administrative functions of an institution, including developing a relevant mission and vision, establishing Administrative institutional legitimacy, achieving internal/external standards and goals, and Indicators procuring resources for optimal institutional functioning (Cheng & Tam, 1997; Commonwealth of Learning, 2009; Hill, Lomas, & MacGregor, 2003; Iacovidou, Gibbs, & Zopiatis, 2009; Mishra, 2007; Online Learning Consortium, 2014; Owlia & Aspinwall, 1996; Zineldin, Akdag, & Vasicheva, 2011). A set of quality indicators that pertain to the availability and responsiveness of student support services, such as the degree to which student complaints are adequately Student Support addressed (Garvin, 1987; Hill et al., 2003; Iacovidou et al., 2009; International Indicators Organization for Standardization, n.d.; Lagrosen et al., 2004; Mishra, 2007; National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2015; Oldfield & Baron, 2000; Online Learning Consortium, 2014; Owlia & Aspinwall, 1996; Quality Matters, 2014; Wong, 2012; Zineldin et al., 2011) A set of quality indicators that pertain to the relevancy of educational content and the Instructional competence of instructors (e.g., programs and courses that prepare students for Indicators employment; Biggs, 2001; Commonwealth of Learning, 2009; Harvey & Green, 1993; Hill et al., 2003; Iacovidou et al., 2009; Online Learning Consortium, 2014; Quality Matters, 2014; Tam, 2014; Wong, 2012). A set of quality indicators that pertain to student engagement with curriculum, faculty, Student and staff, and increases in knowledge, skills, and abilities that lead to gainful Performance employment (e.g., increased critical thinking skills; Bogue, 1998; Cheng & Tam, Indicators 1997; Harvey & Green, 1993; Harvey & Knight, 1996; Haworth & Conrad, 1997; Iacovidou et al., 2009; Scott,2008). Source: Schindler et al. (2015)

Given the above prominent definitions of quality in higher education, this study found it necessary to inherit a definition that sought to have relevance to the Namibian higher education context. This definition is derived from Kadhila (2012, p.51) who defined quality in higher education as: A set of elements in the input, process, and output of the higher education system that provides services that completely satisfy both internal and external stakeholders, by meeting their explicit and implicit expectations. Quality is, thus, the degree to which value is added to the total range of a student’s experience of the higher education and services provided in order to meet the standards as perceived by all stakeholders. Kadhila’s definition looks at the following key relationships: a) the relationship between quality output and stakeholder satisfaction; and b) the relationship between quality and the expectations of stakeholders.


This study consequently tried to establish whether: a) the intended academic objectives set by higher education institution were achieved because of, or as a result of the implementation of, Quality Management Practices (QMPs); b) whether such QMPs contributed towards producing students who are ready for the job market; and c) whether the students were confident and aware of the existing QMPs and how such practices contributed towards making their exit qualifications internationally relevant.

2.3 Quality Management Models In recent years, public interest in institutional quality management has increased. This has necessitated critical evaluation of the various quality management models adopted with the primary aim of contributing to quality improvement within HEIs. According to Brookes and Becket (2008), a range of quality management models developed for industry have been adopted or tested within HEIs on a global basis. Some of these internationally recognised quality management models widely used by educational institutions include amongst others:

2.3.1 European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) Many European organisations have used the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model as a framework for their organisational development. EFQM has been developed to structure and review the quality management of the organisation. This model was introduced in 1991, with the European Quality Award being awarded for the first time in 1992. Although EFQM represents different organisational areas, it has, over the years, been mainly implemented by industrial organisations that have currently built up a great deal of experience in the issues to be addressed when aiming for successful implementation of the model. The model is regarded as one of the approaches to meet the challenges in creating a high performance organisation. According to Nabitz, Klazinga and Walburg (2000) the EFQM is a generic model for quality management, regardless of sector, size, structure or maturity.


This model has been tested and applied within higher education, with the main benefit of using the model stemming from its customer-focused approach. The benefits associated with EFQM Excellence Model in HEIs include understanding and anticipating students’ needs and expectations; demonstrating visionary and inspirational leadership; involving staff and developing beneficial relationships. Even though there are many success stories about the implementation of an EFQM based model, not all researchers support the idea of the adaptation of an excellence model based on TQM/EFQM for higher education (Arjomandi, Kestel, & Grimshaw, 2009). A case study on the use of EFQM model, as a basis for self-assessment in six schools within the same higher education institution, by Ernest Osseo-Asare and Longbottom (2002) cited in Cullen, Joyce, Hassall and Broadbent (2003), revealed the following major limitations when applying EFQM model in higher education context: 

the EFQM model is too prescriptive, albeit in philosophy but not in the methods or techniques used;



the process is too time consuming and requires adequate resources;



prior knowledge and deliberate strategy is required for successful implementation; and



there is high degree of “subjectivity” in scoring the EFQM criteria, particularly because evidence provided could not always be rigorously verified.

2.3.2 Balanced Scorecard (BSC) The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a management tool and was introduced by Kaplan and Norton in 1992. BSC is used to measure the financial and non-financial goals in public organisations as well as to clarify organisations’ strategies (Kaplan and Norton, 1992). The BSC did this by providing three different perspectives of the business namely: Financial, Customer, Internal and Innovation and Learning. Each perspective should contain a range of measures that indicate aspects of organisational performance. BSC has been tested in some HEIs to promote efficiency and effectiveness. It is alluded to by Cullen (2003) that, in order to be successful with the implementation of BSC in higher education, the scorecard needs to be rooted in the employees’ internal commitment (Norreklit, 2000) and this requires the involvement of staff (Simons, 1995) in the development of performance management decisions.


2.3.3 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) Like other models, various sectors such as manufacturing industries, healthcare, companies, government agencies, education organisations, etc. have used the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award (MBNQA).

President Reagan established the Malcolm Baldridge

National Quality Award (MBNQA) in 1987 with the signing of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Improvement Act of 1987 – with the aim of promoting quality awareness and innovation and publicising these successful strategies to U.S. companies. This model focused on the seven key areas namely: leadership, strategic planning, customer and market focus, measurement, analysis, and knowledge management, work force focus, process management, and results (Prybutok, Zhang & Peak, 2011). The Baldrige Criteria provide a systems perspective for managing the organisation and its key processes to achieve performance excellence. In an effort to establish the most effective quality management approach, various studies have been conducted in various businesses. A study conducted by Wilson and Collier (2000) concluded that: the underlying theory of the MBNQA is supported that “leadership driven system that causes results”; leadership is the most important driver of system performance; leadership has no direct effect on financial results but must influence overall performance “through the system”; information and analysis is statistically the second most important Baldrige category; the Baldrige category, process management, is twice as important when predicting customer satisfaction as when predicting financial results; and a modified “within system” set of five Baldrige causal relationships is a good predictor of organisational performance.

2.3.4 ISO 9000 Series The ISO 9000 series is a set of standards developed by the International Organisation for Standardisation (Löfgren, 2012). The first family of standards was issued in 1987 according to Sousa-Poza et al. (2009). Even though the ISO 1987 standards were intended for quality assurance, it did not work for many organisations as it lacked the overall process of management. In addition, these standards were criticised for not encouraging business improvement, and for saying little


about customer services (Mead, 2011). As a result, a new series of ISO 9000 were issued in 1994, which contained five standards; three of which are more relevant to education quality. These include ISO 9000:2000, which covers quality management and quality assurance standards; ISO 9001:2000, which is the actual specification for a quality management system; and ISO 9004:2000, which is designed as a guide for those organisations that want further improvement of their quality system. Just like the numerous organisations that have realised the benefits of international quality standards and embraced them in the drive for competitiveness, there are more and more colleges and universities in the process of seeking ISO 9000 registration in order to improve the quality of their education through a better quality management system (Cheng, Lyu & Lin, 2004). Qualitymanagement system standards created by ISO are meant to certify the processes and the systems of an organisation and not the quality of the product or service. According to Cheng et al. (2004), the implementation of ISO 9000 quality systems has a positive impact on the quality of education.

On the contrary, the literature reveals that many educational institutions that began with the implementation of ISO 9000 standards encountered enormous problems because these standards were designed mainly for manufacturing. Becket and Brookes (2008), support this argument by stating that previous studies pointed out gaps specific to the field of higher education within ISO 9001:2000. According to Dickenson, Campbell and Azarov (2000), the limitations put forward for the current ISO 9000 quality system can be summarised as follows: 

it is too focused on production and a limited number of support processes;



it does not deal with human aspects of quality, defining training needs is insufficient;



the concept of quality is much too limited to the quality products and services, corporate goals and policy are not considered; and



quality systems tend to emphasise control and conformism and thus prevent flexibility and innovation.

To fill the gaps, ISO took a step in 2000 to revise and combine ISO standards 9001, 9002, and 9003 into one standard, ISO 9001. Irrespective of all the efforts to make ISO standards


applicable to any type of organisation, regardless of activity, size or if it is public or private, Karapetrovic (2001) confirmed that difficulties remained in applying and interpreting these standards in the education field despite the revisions in the 2000 version. Karapetrovic asserts that this was probably because the ISO 9001 requirements were more generic in the 2000 version when compared to the 1994 set of standards.

2.3.5 Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) According to a recent study conducted by Educause (Kvavik, Goldstein & Voloudakis, 2005), HEIs have invested heavily in the business process re-engineering, leveraging information technology to improve services and reduce costs. This interest in rethinking processes and procedures is driven mainly by budget shortfalls, information technology infusion, and external pressures for greater accountability and responsiveness. Ahmad, Francis and Zairi (2007) conducted empirical case studies collected from three private higher education institutions in Malaysia with the aim of examining the critical success factors of Business Process Reengineering (BPR) in higher education. Seven factors were found to be critical to BPR implementation success. These factors are teamwork and quality culture, quality management system and satisfactory rewards, effective change management, less bureaucratic and participative, information technology/information system, effective project management and adequate financial resources.

2.3.6 SERVQUAL Since its launch in 1985, the SERVQUAL has become a widely adopted technique for measuring and managing service quality (Buttle, 1996). SERVQUAL is the most widely used method for measuring customer satisfaction and determines an index calculated through the difference between perception rates expressed for five generic dimensions or service factors (tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy). During the more than three decades of its inception, the SERVQUAL has been widely used across different service industries (Abdullah, 2006).


Despite the introduction of these various quality models, there are still arguments on the challenges higher education is facing. According to Brookes and Becket (2007), these models emulate TQM and concentrate on developing systematic business processes that are required to achieve measurable quality outputs. For example, the balanced scorecard requires the identification of appropriate performance indicators and the European Framework for Quality Model (EFQM), performance enablers and results. The one exception is SERVQUAL, a model that focuses on the assessment of quality from a consumer’s perspective.

2.4 Quality Management Processes Quality management involves oversight of all activities of the organisation that determine quality policies, quality planning, performing quality assurance and quality control (Sohail et al., 2003). It is on the basis of this understanding that Deming (2000) suggests that his theory, based on a set of management practices, gives adequate guidelines to help companies implement TQM and increase their quality and productivity. Deming’s (2000) theory of management is based on the 14 Points of Management as shown in Table 2.3 below.

Table 2.3: 14 Points of Management 1 Create constancy of purpose for improving products and services. 2 3 4

Adopt the new philosophy.

Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality. End the practice of awarding business on price alone; instead, minimise total cost by working with a single supplier. 5 Improve constantly and forever every process for planning, production and service. 6 Institute training on the job. 7 Adopt and institute leadership. 8 Drive out fear. 9 Break down barriers between staff areas. 10 Eliminate slogans, exhortations and targets for the workforce. 11 Eliminate numerical quotas for the workforce and numerical goals for management. 12 Remove barriers that rob people of pride of workmanship, and eliminate the annual rating or merit system. 13 Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement for everyone. 14 Put everybody in the company to work accomplishing the transformation. Source: Deming (2000)


Deming’s theory has however been criticised for lack of clarity on the implementation process. According to Hellsten and Klefsjo (2000), practising managers are faced with the difficulty of not knowing the “how, when and where” to start implementing his 14 points. In the same vein, Juran (1993) argues that Deming (2000) is wrong in telling management to drive out fear because “fear” can bring out the best in people as postulated by Kruger (2001). Similarly, Hassan (2010) also emphasised that organisations introducing and practising quality management continuously pass through different stages. This is illustrated and described in Table 2.4 below.

Table 1.4: Stages of Quality Management

Stage 1: Inspection

It begins with establishing evidence of quality control through an investigation of the current systems.

Stage 2: Statistical quality Control

Special quality initiatives and programmes are established.

Stage 3: Quality Assurance

Quality is integrated into the organisation through specific systems such as ISO 9000 or TQM. This includes developing quality manuals and the education and training of employees on quality assurance systems and procedures.

Stage 4: Strategic Quality management

Quality becomes part of the organisational culture. This results in: open, active commitment to quality at all levels willingness to engage in self-evaluation clarity and consistency of procedures and regulations specific responsibility for quality control and quality assurance on all levels within the organisation prompt managerial action to address and resolve problems.

Source: Hassan (2010)

Table 2.4 above, shows that the initial step in implementing an effective quality management is to investigate the organisation’s current reality. This includes assessing the organisation’s history, its current needs, accelerating events leading to quality management, and the existing employee quality of working life. The next step is ensuring that quality initiatives and programmes are established. These should be well understood by everyone in the organisation and their roles must be clearly stipulated. When this is done, then quality manuals should be developed


with a common understanding of what quality management entails and continuous training of all employees should be enforced to ensure that the implementation would be carried out effectively. The last stage is an outcome of what the process has been able to evolve and this develops in a quality culture with full participation from everyone. Despite all challenges facing the implementation of TQM in the manufacturing industries, many HEIs have committed themselves to implementing quality management to ensure institutions are providing good quality education and services to their customers. In support of this view, Sohail, et al. (2003) asserts that implementing quality management system helps organisations to control, manage and improve the quality of the organisation’s products and processes. Several authors have proposed various steps and phases that can be taken into account when implementing quality management. According to Ebiringa (2012), some experts are of the opinion that it can take up to ten years to realise the results of implementing quality management fully. Ho and Wearn (1995) in Quinn, et al. (2009) proposed the following strategic process to implement TQM in higher education: 

obtain top management commitment;



establish a quality steering committee and implementation teams;



assess the current quality system situation to identify all the existing good practices;



create a documented implementation plan;



provide training so that staff are fully aware of the changes;



create and update quality management documentation; and



monitor progress as part of the Deming cycle of Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA).

Even though these quality management steps are developed for industrial organisations and not for educational organisations, they can be adapted to suit the needs and purpose of any kind of institution working towards improving quality. As a case in point, Maluleke (2008) evaluated the implementation of quality management system in a public sector organisation in terms of how the system was developed, implemented and maintained. His choice of organisation was one of the South African Government departments and the evaluation was conducted by analysing documents and conducting questionnaire surveys and individual interviews with employees. One


of the findings was that quality management system can be used to improve the level of service delivery in the public sector, but it should be planned, developed and implemented over a period of time in the following five phases: Phase 1: determination of the scope of quality-management system implementation; Phase 2: training; Phase 3: development of procedures; Phase 4: pilot implementation of procedures; and Phase 5: evaluation of quality management systems and rollout. Maluleke goes on to maintain that to establish an organisation-wide quality management system, it usually takes three or more years, although technical improvement to the workflow can be made as quickly as within six to eight months. He further suggests that, for a qualitymanagement system to be developed, implemented and maintained successfully, the following fundamental concepts or principles should be considered: maximisation of performance objectives, good leadership, motivation of staff, implementation of change management, employee involvement, long-term commitment by top management, provision of training, introduction of quality improvement projects, measuring quality management system progress and rewarding accomplishments. Maluleke’s fundamental principles of quality management are widely recognised as generic practices, which Ebiringa (2012) grouped into three main categories, namely: management practice, issued by senior management; infrastructure practices, intended to support core practices; and core practices based on tools and techniques specifically related to quality.

2.5 Quality Management Practices (QMPs) QMPs have been widely implemented, and while some organisations have had great success through them, other initiatives have failed (Jinhui, et al., 2011). These practices were proposed to improve organisational performance and have received substantial attention in recent studies (Jaafreh & Al-abedallat, 2012). From their study of a private college in Malaysia which had implemented a quality system for which it became the first private college in Malaysia to be awarded the ISO 9002 certification, Sohail, et al. (2003) argued that taking TQM seriously can


hold immediate and long-term benefits for HEIs and their stakeholders. They noted that the most critical QMPs were changes in procedures, continuous training, regular management review meetings (MRM), certification, and review of the quality system after ISO certification. The study showed that the implementation of quality measures was largely the contributing factor for the continuous high pass rate of students. Moreover, information collected on the level of teaching staff, showed that the majority of the staff were satisfied with the system in existence. A review of information obtained from internal records revealed that the college had been able to forge partnerships and maintain strategic relationships with a number of universities and institutions after obtaining their ISO certification. International certification of an institution's programs and the quality thereof brings not only higher professional recognition but also promotes confidence in the institution within the broader student populace. Students are able to register with other internationally recognised higher institutions; and conversely the institution attracts prospective students because of its international certification status. The benefits also extend to academics who are able to engage in partnership to carry out research activities with other internationally recognised universities globally. Overall, their study proved the effectiveness of efforts towards quality certification in improving interdepartmental working relationships, students’ throughput rates, student enrolment, staff and supplier satisfaction. The study also emphasised that, given the competitive business environment and tougher controls in higher education, HEIs must explore the possibility of gaining competitive advantage through quality enhancements. Another important observation of the study was that the data collected for implementing quality programmes enables HEIs to measure progress in key areas and establish benchmarks.

Similarly, Kleijnen, Dolmans, Willems and van Hout, (2011) explored the perceptions of quality management activities of faculty members within 18 departments at Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS) in the Netherlands. Using questionnaires containing items with Likerttype answer scales as the research instrument, this study revealed that faculty were undecided on the degree to which sufficient quality management activities were conducted within their departments, especially with regard to the systematic application of the Plan-Do-Check-Act


(PDCA) cycle. The study further revealed that there was poor internal communication about quality management activities within the department and that, generally, faculty were positive about the attention paid to the relevant quality aspects within their departments: “teaching and learning”, “information and facilities” and “results”. Finally, the findings also demonstrated that the “perceived improvement” effect of quality management was positively associated with the perceived amount of quality management activities conducted within the department and the attention that was paid to quality aspects, which may indicate a strong culture of quality in some departments and the absence of it in others. Confirming the views expressed by Svenson et al. (1994) and Nyaoga, et al. (2010) the study concluded that continuous monitoring is a necessity to maintain quality in all departments. Many HEIs around the globe use benchmarking as a tool for both improving performance and ensuring continuous improvement. NUST being one of the recognised higher education institutions in the country could also adapt some of the important features of international best practices for benchmarking. According to McKinnon, Walker and Davis (2000), because of good benchmarking, university leaders would know how their institution rates in certain areas in comparison with others, ascertain their competitive position relative to others, and know how their institution can be improved. Alstete (1996) identifies the following four categories based on the voluntary and proactive participation of institutions: 1. Internal benchmarking in which comparisons are made of the performance of different departments, campuses or sites within a university in order to identify best practice in the institution, without necessarily having an external standard against which to compare the results. This type may be particularly appropriate to universities where a high degree of devolvement exists in the constituent parts of the institution, where a multi-campus environment exists, or where extensive franchise arrangements exist whereby a number of partner colleges in different locations teaches standard programmes. 2. External competitive benchmarking where a comparison of performance in key areas is based on information from institutions, which are seen as competitors. Although initiatives of this kind may be potentially very valuable, and have a high level of ‘face’ validity


amongst decision makers, the process may be fraught with difficulty and is usually mediated by neutral facilitators in order to ensure that confidentiality of data is maintained. 3. External collaborative benchmarking usually involves comparisons with a larger group of institutions who are not immediate competitors. Such schemes may be run by the institutions themselves on a collective basis, although in other cases a central agency or consultant may administer the scheme in order to ensure continuity and sufficient momentum. 4. External trans-industry (best-in-class) benchmarking seeks to look across multiple industries in search of new and innovative practices, no matter their source. Amongst some practitioners, this is perceived to be the most desirable form of benchmarking because it can lead to major improvements in performance. In practice, it may be extremely difficult to operationalise the results of such cross-industry comparisons, and it may require a very high level of institutional commitment to cope with the inevitable ambiguities that will result. In its endeavours to achieve continuous improvement, it is evident that NUST currently gives emphasis on benchmarking strategies for assessing and improving efficiency and productivity of administrative processes and instructional models. However, to ensure that benchmarking is a permanent part of the organisation’s culture, much of this will need to be evaluated carefully in relation to the institution’s competitors and re-instituting the benchmarking process when necessary.

2.6 Leadership and Management in Higher Education Extant literature proves that leadership and the role of top-management are often listed as some of the crucial aspects deemed to affect quality in higher education and consequent quality service delivery. There are almost as many definitions of leadership and management as there are researchers attempting to define these concepts. In bringing management leadership into a common framework, Stephen P. Robinsons observes that leadership and management are terms


often confused. Bennis and others have clearly delineated the difference between leadership and management behaviour (Northouse, 2010). There is still no agreement on how to define, assess or measure leadership. Gardner (1990, p.1) defines leadership as “the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or leadership team) induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or her followers.” Another notion well supported by research and literature is the fact that effective leadership is not about possessing and exercising a concise set of capabilities but rather employing different combinations of leadership practices depending on and appropriate to a particular situation (Parrish, 2010). Rowitz (2001) suggested that 21st century leaders should be knowledge synthesisers and creativity. They should also have the ability to create a vision, to demonstrate a commitment to the vision, and get others to share the vision and the mission it represents. Further, they should possess entrepreneurial ability and be able to foster and facilitate collaboration, be systems thinkers, set priorities, form coalitions and build teams, put innovative ideas into practice, become masters of the latest management techniques, and act as a colleague, a friend, and a humanitarian to everyone in the organisation.

To be able to carry out the aforementioned abilities and practices, there is need to consider effective types of leadership styles as postulated by various researchers. Some of those researchers include Burns (1978) who identified two types of leadership styles, transformational and transactional leadership. Middlehurst, Goreham and Woodfield (2009) identify the relevance and need for transformational leadership in higher education. In support of this, Martin et al. (2003) attest that transformational leadership in a higher education context is linked to high quality student learning processes and outcomes. According to Burns’ transformational leadership is where leaders focus on the beliefs, needs and values of their followers, leaders who transform their followers and engage with them to achieve set goals. Transformational leaders offer a purpose that transcends short-term goals and focuses on higher order intrinsic needs, and transactional leaders, in contrast, focus on the proper exchange of resources (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).

Additionally, transactional (ordinary leaders) leaders focus on the relationship between the leader and follower by adopting a punishment and reward style of leadership. Stordeur et al. (2000)


and Murphy (2005) assert that effective leadership requires a balance between transactional and transformative leadership; both are needed depending upon the situation. Howell and Avolio (1993), in Judge and Piccolo (2004), Support this viewpoint. They state that transformational leadership complements transactional leadership and that effective leaders often supplement transactional leadership with transformational leadership.

The importance of leadership in the management of institutions is becoming crucial, according to Anyemele (2004). Anyemele believes that developing effective leadership in a university as an academic organisation can provide benefits such as achieving excellence and inspiring employees to work together, They further argues that it is the management that lays down the infrastructure, policies and guidelines for the different functions of the organisation to perform its best. Dahlgaard et al. (1995), Lakshman (2006) and Spanbauer (1995) also support this opinion, arguing that without leadership, it would be impossible to implement a quality system successfully within education. TQM implementation in higher education is one crucial element that requires strong and effective leadership, which ultimately has a positive effect on all the systems of organisational governance. The success or failure of higher education initiative is seen to be the responsibility of the leader despite the fact that others may have a role in the realisation of the project goals and outcomes (Parrish, 2010). The actions and behaviours of leaders are influenced by organisational values and systems developed by them for sustainable success. Leaders develop organisational values and systems required for sustainable success and implement these via their actions and behaviour (EFQM, 2003 in Nyaoga, et al., 2010). More recently, studies exploring the premise of effective leadership in a higher education context have identified specific behaviours practices and indicators of effective leaders such as providing a clear sense of direction, establishing credibility and trust and bringing innovative policies and practices into action (Bryman, 2009; Gibbs, Knapper & Picinnin, 2009). However, despite the identification of these practices, many organisations are still dissatisfied with the way their leaders portray their leadership skills and try to get people to be part of the planning and implementation processes within their organisations.


Anyamele (2004) supports this observation. His study looked at the university leadership approaches to quality improvement at HEIs in all public universities in Finland and six universities in four states of the federation in Nigeria. The study was also an attempt to analyse theoretically the essential role of university leadership in an attempt to demonstrate what actually happens in the real world of university management. Guided by survey interviews, observations and document analysis, his findings showed that there is no one-way approach to managing a university institution, and that Nigeria and Finnish university leaders view quality from different perspectives. The results revealed the following similarities and differences between the two countries in quality improvement in the two universities:

Table 2.5: Unique and Common Characteristics for Nigeria and Finland concerning Leadership Roles in the University Characteristics for Nigeria  Implementing regulations governing academic programmes.  Encourage institutional development.  Adapt to educational change.  Attract students, staff and money.  Assist university achieve set goals.  Take care of employee needs.  Improve employee commitment.  Orientation of new student and staff.

Common Characteristics  Focus on customer/people.  Encouragement of collaboration.  Staff education/ training.  Service provision to stakeholders.  Ensuring quality performance in teaching, research and other services.  Dissemination of information and feedback.  Collaboration with enterprises and interest groups.

Characteristics for Finland           

Facility management. Research initiation. Developing systems for quality. Persuasion for quality. Role model for quality. Quality assessment. Quality improvement. Quality assurance, developing national benchmarking for generating new knowledge. Setting up university own company. Research development and Resource development.

Source: Anyemele (2004)

Table 2.5 above, shows that despite the difference on how different people perceive leadership, there are common characteristics that cannot be overlooked such as shared focus on customer/people, encouragement of collaboration, staff education/training, service provision to stakeholders, ensuring quality performance in teaching, research and other services, dissemination of information and feedback and collaboration with enterprises and interest groups.


Researchers such as Njie, Fon and Awomodu (2008) revealed that there is a correlation between top management in terms of leadership role and employee empowerment in delegation of decision-making authority and involvement in decision-making process shows a strong and significant relationship. This implies that top management gives sufficient power to the employees in the decision-making authority and process. Senior management in higher education performs a critical role, apart from providing strategic leadership; management is also responsible for ensuring that there is effective coordination of activities between different administrative units, academic units and external stakeholders. Oakland (2003) maintains that each of the components of an organisation must work properly in order to maintain quality as each part, each activity, each person related to the organisation affects others and is affected by them.

2.7 Quality-Improvement Challenges facing Higher Education The quality dilemma in the higher education sector is something that affects the industry globally. In India, for instance, many new institutions have been set up in response to the huge demand for higher education. However, the quality of graduates coming from some of these institutions of higher education, especially the recently established ones, is being carefully assessed in terms of their employability by the corporate and business sector (Jagadeesh, 2000). Similarly, the findings of a survey conducted by the Inter-University Council for East Africa (IUCEA) regarding the quality of graduates in Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda revealed that, according to employers, between 51% and 63% of graduates from institutions in these countries were not fully prepared for the job market. The IUCEA report also revealed that in South Africa many law firms have found that the Bachelor of Laws (LLB) graduates were unable ‘to draw up affidavits and pleadings, as they lack both numeracy and literacy skills. Challenges of declining quality of graduates, increasing competition and growing demand for accountability by accreditation associations, legislature and funding bodies have “forced” HEIs to focus on quality (Ariff, Zaidin & Sulong, 2007). Despite the best efforts of HEIs to incorporate quality management in higher education in a continuous effort to enhance performance, there are several factors impeding the effective functioning of such systems. According to the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education (WCHE), which was held in 2009 in Paris, there are eight


new challenges in higher education and they are: rising demand and mystification, diversification of providers and methods, private provisions, distance education, cross-border higher education, quality assurance, teacher education and academic profession (Commonwealth of Learning, 2011 in Soomro & Ahmad, 2012). Asiyai (2013) conducted a study on challenges of quality in higher education in Nigeria and the findings revealed several factors, which pose as challenges against quality of higher education in Nigeria. These factors include inadequate funding, inadequate teaching staff, poor quality of teaching staff, poor policy implementation, lack of resources, lack of information communication technology facilities, frequent labour disputes and closures of universities, lack of vibrant staff development programmes, cultism and other vices, brain drain and poor leadership. Various researches were conducted in an attempt to find justifications given the voluminous challenges experienced particularly in the implementation and maintenance of the quality systems. A study by Csizmadia et al. (2008) on quality management in Hungarian higher education focused on the question of how HEIs respond to governmental reform, and specifically, which organisational characteristics influence quality management implementation within them, and whether it is possible to characterise and explain this relation. The primary aim for this study was to develop a comprehensive quality management framework that includes higher education characteristics namely: complexity, disciplinary differences and organisational reputation. Data was collected through content analysis of documents, questionnaires, interviews and observations. The multiple data collection techniques applied in this study help to provide a thick description of quality management implementation and provide a comprehensive view of the research setting. The most significant findings of Csizmadia’s study were that a majority of the HEIs had started the implementation of quality management, especially for their education systems, by 2004. Almost half of the HEIs had involved external consultants in at least some part of their implementation process. The lack of a national education quality policy and the lack of a stable, well-developed long-term strategic plan on the part of the Ministry of Education created uncertainty for the HEIs, negatively influencing quality management implementation at four of the six universities in the case studies. The remaining two institutions reacted quickly to the same ambiguity, which may be explained by the fact that only they had support from external consultants


throughout the entire implementation process. Secondly, data on four cases supported the idea that symbolic compliance, combined with internal resistance to change (i.e. de ‐ coupling), was sustainable for HEIs confronted with vague governmental policy. The cases also showed that next to continuous external support, the commitment of institutional leaders was crucial in implementing quality management genuinely, not only symbolically. In an era of global economic recession, HEIs are experiencing severe pressure from budget reduction. Thus, quality management issues have drawn the interest of academics and practitioners in order to build a sustainable competitive advantage battling against economic recession. Supportive evidence has been gathered in studies conducted on quality management implementation and its’ ineffectiveness in HEIs. For example, Altbach et al. (2009), in Zabadi (2013), argued that quality management is not a management approach easily applied to HEIs, especially because the academic culture of these organisations is quite strong, and there is resistance to its concepts, principles and practices. Matthews (1993), cited in Nyaoga, et al. (2010), also argue that many factors cause the barriers to application of quality management practices in higher education. These factors include the highly generic and idealistic mission of the institutions, the lack of agreement on the meaning or implications of quality, and the academic freedom and tenure, which have resulted in an administration having relatively limited control over key personnel. A study carried out by Engelkemeyer (1993) in Redmond (2008) identified the shortcomings of HEIs as poor teaching, anachronistic programmes, incoherent curricula, excessive price, and increasingly inefficient administrative bureaucracies. Engelkemeyer also stressed that many HEIs depend on the government financially; however, with a growing number of students, competition has become tough, and current QMPs appear to focus on the need for economic efficiency, given resource constraints. Pratasavitskaya and Stensaker (2010) in Zabadi (2013) state the following concerns as reasons for the unsuccessful application of TQM to higher education:     

resistance to change; insufficient administration commitment; high time investment due to personal training; difficulty in applying TQM tools to the HEIs environment; little experience of team leaders and staff in team-work; and




the concerns of HEIs have with their own results not being sufficient enough.

The increasing competition amongst HEIs prompts the need to develop, implement and monitor quality systems to improve and maintain quality and thus attract the best students. Now that students are aware of quality education, they are becoming extremely critical and analytical when choosing their educational institutions (Binsardi & Ekwulugo, 2003). According to Pycraft (2000), the rationale for the implementation of quality management system should be to maximise the performance objectives of the organisation, which will in turn enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness. Quality management system, according to Almeida et al. (2014), is based on the standards that look for common elements, such as continuous improvement, alignment of the process goals with the customer goals and the process management. It is evident that quality management in higher education in developing countries is still in its early stages, and various factors impede its successful implementation. World Bank (2004) maintains that higher education is fundamental to all developing countries if they are to prosper in a world economy where knowledge has become a vital area of advantage. Bunoti (2011) conducted a study on the quality of higher education in developing countries. The study was based on one public university in Uganda. Data was collected through focus group discussions with students in the various faculties, in-depth interviews with officials in the Uganda National Council for Higher Education (NCHE), lecturers, counsellors, management and administrative staff, and document analysis of conference papers and journal articles. The findings of the study revealed that the quality of higher education in developing countries is influenced by socio-cultural, academic, economic, policy, political and administrative factors, all of which are inextricably interwoven. The paper concluded that the quality of higher education in developing countries is influenced by complex factors that have their roots in commercialisation, general funding, and human population growth. Appropriate policies and homebred professionals (both academic and administrative) are necessary for improving the quality of higher education in developing countries. On a similar note, Nguyen (2012) maintains that most universities in developing countries are still inexperienced in carrying out the activities of quality assurance, and face many problems. Some of the obstacles mentioned in DAAD (2010) in Westerheijden (2012) were as follows: lack of quality innovations; staff resistance to quality assurance because of a lack of awareness and


change culture; resistance to a perceived threat; not enough knowledge available in the university; etc. Since it is difficult to define what quality is, the purpose and added value are not always clear, and communication between staff and management is not always good. Despite the setting up of quality measures in most HEIs, there have been pitfalls especially in the implementation and maintenance of the processes. A study carried out by Mokhtar, Abdullah, Kardi and Yacob (2013) focused on issues and challenges faced by an institution in the process of maintaining and going beyond the minimum requirements of quality management system. Findings from another survey on the challenges to successful quality management implementation in HEIs, as identified by 160 colleges and universities at various stages of implementing QMPs, suggest that there are five key challenges that affect the successful implementation of these practices in colleges and universities: organisation culture, senior leadership commitment, faculty support, implementation time and training (Horine & Hailey, 1995). Yizengaw’s (2008) study on challenges facing HEIs and systems in Africa produced similar results. The challenges for African higher education development that he identified consisted of: 

Leadership and management are generally weak and inefficient, as evidenced by underutilised facilities, duplication of programs, a high dropout rate, and uneconomical procurement and inefficient allocation of scarce finance to non ‐ instructional expenditures. Academic leaders tend to have inadequate preparation, orientation and training in skills required for the positions.



In the face of increasing enrollment ‐ more than fourfold between 1985 and 2005 in sub‐ Saharan Africa ‐ quality of education and research is declining, relevance of teaching and research is not maintained, and institutional quality assurance and enhancement mechanisms are either not in place or are very weak and inefficient.

2.8 Conceptual Framework One of the aims of the literature review was to identify quality management conceptual frameworks, which may be suitable for analysing HEIs in Namibia. The following conceptual framework identifies QMPs, which could be effective to investigate the phenomenon understudy.


The concepts which have been identified as deserving consideration in quality management in higher education are internal and external monitoring of teaching and learning, quality programmes, continuous monitoring of the quality improvement process and better quality graduates. The schematic diagrammatic presentation of the conceptual framework of the study is shown in Figure 2.2 below. The figure gives an illustration of a quality management model in higher education institutions, which covers all five sub-questions, and subsequently, the main research question. Quality Management Practices

Internal and External Monitoring of Teaching and Learning

Quality Programmes

Continuous Monitoring

Better Quality Students Figure 2.2: Conceptual Framework for Quality Management in Higher Education Source: Author’s conceptualisation (2016)

In this study, the implementation of quality management in relation to quality management processes was analysed. QMPs were also compared with the best practices in managing quality in higher education and the gap between intention and actual implementation was identified. The main objective of this study was to identify the quality enhancing activities that are missing in the quality management processes at NUST and to determine the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the quality of graduates. The four dimensions of the conceptual framework are elaborated hereunder.


2.8.1 Internal and External Monitoring of Teaching and Learning Quality in the administration of higher education institutions is one of the vital tasks, which cannot be overlooked. According to Parnell (1990), quality standards in academic administration, teaching, and research are essential to higher education and of prime importance in satisfying goals. Lomas (2004) also emphasises that effective teaching and learning is essential if we are to promote excellence and opportunity in higher education. Lomas continues by stressing that high quality teaching must be recognised and rewarded, and best practice shared. Most institutional evaluations focus on procedures and rely on internal quality assurance mechanisms, yet they fail to appraise the effectiveness of quality teaching support and the impact on the quality of learning (Costes, et al., 2008), leaving this to the institution. Internal monitoring of QMPs ensures that institutional goals are met at the departmental and institutional levels. It also makes monitoring and adherence easier if monitoring is compartmentalised and then unified with institutional performance. Continuous monitoring cannot be stressed enough, and for any QMPs to function effectively the units responsible for ensuring adherence to QMPs need to ensure that there is a weekly or daily monitoring of all activities covered in the institution’s policy. This way, deviations are easily detected in time to ensure that there is enough time to take remedial action. It has to be stressed that constant internal monitoring ensures that problems are detected early and thus solved before external stakeholders pick them up and inadvertently develop a negative perception of the institution because of that. The following guiding principles should apply: daily monitoring of academic and non-academic activities; immediate remedial action where there are deviations from the QMPs; and clear course of action in case of deviations.

2.8.2 Quality Programmes The main intention of traditional HEIs is quality education. As such, the academic processes that underlie educational activities must ensure that these activities meet the quality management expectations of existing policies. Asiyai (2013) argues that high quality delivery is a prerequisite for achieving high productivity in the education industry – a requirement for high quality graduates. This is what makes quality education an instrument for achieving national


development. Activities such as developing qualifications, the setting up of assessments, the internal quality management of such assessments, the delivery of assessments, the marking of assessments, re-marking of assessments, dealing with assessment-related grievances, and the overall handling of assessments, need to be guided by comprehensive institutional QMPs. The higher education institution’s QMPs must also guide academic activities such as teaching and preparations and delivery of lessons. When teaching and assessment activities are aligned with the QMPs of the institution, then the chances that one academic unit would handle issues concerning assessment or teaching differently from another unit or department are minimised. Alignment to QMPs across departments/units creates a level playing field where all departments/units play on the same field with the same goals in mind and, hopefully, with similar outputs.

2.8.3 Continuous Monitoring Monitoring on its own will not be effective unless it is done on a regular basis. Monitoring at institutional level needs to be a continuous process, only then can deviations from set policies be detected and corrected in time for the benefit of the institutions stakeholders. Ebiringa (2012) states that quality is rarely achieved spontaneously but needs to be managed into the organisation and should be based on continuous improvement. Monitoring needs to be guided officially, with findings and action recorded and shared with stakeholders. These form part of quality programmes which can be created by the institution for better monitoring process. Implementing quality programmes encourages HEIs to collect data, which will enable them to measure progress in key arears and establish benchmarks (Sohail, et al., 2003). Every document concerning quality management needs to be stored to allow for future reference to the actions taken to remedy deviations from existing policies. The following are some guiding principles: documenting monitoring exercises; sharing monitoring results with stakeholders; documenting interventions; and following up to ensure that interventions have achieved the necessary results (i.e. evaluation).


2.8.4 Better Quality Students Asiyai (2013) argues that when quality education is adequately delivered to meet set standards, the products of education should be able to perform well in the world of work in real life situation. Student satisfaction plays a very important role in the success of HEIs, and it is guided by the ‘sense’ that students get from several factors - some of which are listed below in no particular order: 

The sense that learning is meaningful;



The sense that their qualifications are relevant and recognised;



The sense that the institution is aware of and cares for their wellbeing;



The sense that the institution will do what is needed to ensure their wellbeing; and



The sense that they are part of a community that is concerned with their wellbeing and future success.

Authors like Ginsberg (1991) and Lawson (1992) cited in Abdullah (2006) are of the opinion that tertiary institutions have to be concerned with not only what the society values in the skills and abilities of their graduates, but also how their students feel about their educational experience, Bemowski (1991). Existing literature proved that students are the most important stakeholders in HEIs and their participation in the institutional planning should be valued. An experiment conducted by Izadi, Kashef and Stadt (1996) at Carnegie Mellon University in the United States, showed that students are considered customers and that they participate in the planning of courses, determining what is taught, designing syllabi and assigning grades. He further goes on to explain that the TQM motto in education is to learn what the students need and constantly improve the educational processes to deliver it consistently. Sutcliffe and Pollock (1992) as in Izadi, Kashef and Stadt (1996), concluded that student perceptions of an institute should be sought actively by all levels to ensure that as much as possible is being done to enhance educational experiences within available resources.


Effective QMPs will invoke a positive frame of mind in the student population and generate a sense of satisfaction with HEIs. However it has to be noted that the above can only be true if the students are involved in discussions on issues dealing with their wellbeing. Students, like all stakeholders, need to be consulted in drafting effective QMPs. Additionally, students need to understand the procedures that are in place to manage quality and how their inputs assist in maintaining such quality. They also need to know that they can contribute to making the learning environment better by raising issues of poor service delivery and engaging educators and managers in instances where they feel short-changed.

2.9 Summary This chapter reviewed the literature on international trends in terms of QMPs in HEIs, as well as more specifically within the Southern African Development Community (SADC). As part of this study, theories underpinning quality management were discussed in detail. The review looked at the following aspects: concept of quality, quality management models, quality management processes, quality management practices, leadership and management in higher education and quality-improvement challenges facing higher education. The conceptual framework of the study is presented and discussed at the end of the chapter.


CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter, an overview of the research methodology for this study is presented. Babbie and Mouton (2001) refer to research methodology as methods, techniques and procedures that are employed in the process of implementing the research design or research plan, as well as the underlying principles and assumptions that underlie their use. Polit and Hungler (2004) used the term methodology loosely to refer to ways of obtaining, organising and analysing data, which actually is the research method.

The main aim of this study is to identify quality-enhancing activities that are missing in the implementation of quality management processes at NUST and to determine the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the quality of graduates from NUST. This part, therefore, describes the methodology used in the study, and covers the following major areas: research approach and design, population, sampling, data collection, data analysis, reliability and validity, scope and limitations, and, finally, ethical considerations of the study.

3.2 Research Approach and Design The positivist and interpretivist research approaches or paradigms imply three common designs for conducting research: the quantitative, the qualitative, and the mixed designs (De Vos et al., 2011). According Denzin and Lincoln (2005, p.2), “Qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them.” Similarly, Marshall and Rossman (1999) add that qualitative research takes place in a natural setting and focuses on the individual’s lived experiences. Quantitative research involves the collection of data that can be quantified and subjected to statistical processing in order to support or refute “alternate knowledge claims” (Creswell, 2003, p. 153).


The mixed methods approach to research is an extension, rather than a replacement of the quantitative and qualitative approaches to research, which draws on one to reinforce the other. Thus, the qualitative and quantitative research designs will continue to be useful and important to researchers using the mixed design (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Johnson, Onwuegbuzie and Turner (2007) suggest that the mixed method in research is an approach to knowledge (theory and practice) that attempts to consider multiple viewpoints, perspectives, positions, and standpoints (always including the standpoints of both qualitative and quantitative research). A mixed methods design, involving both quantitative and qualitative components, is preferred for this research to gain deep insight into the phenomenon under study1. This is in line with the aim of the study, which is to identify the quality-enhancing activities that are missing in quality management processes at NUST and to determine the extent to which the inclusion of these activities would contribute to improving the quality of graduates coming out of the institution. In support of the mixed method design, Patton (2002) asserts that both qualitative and quantitative research designs are complementary and may be combined effectively, although each is designed to accomplish different goals. The mixed research design provides a heuristic way of exploring QMPs and the implementation process at NUST in the effort to identify areas where changes could be made for graduates to be ready for the market in terms of their quality. The mixed research design would also facilitate exploring the social world of stakeholders of NUST for their social and material circumstances, their experiences and their perspectives in the higher education environment to be included in the effort at finding ways of improving the quality of graduates from the HEIs in the country. However, as explained in the footnote, problems with scheduling interviews forced the study into a quasi-mixed design that de-emphasises the qualitative and projects the quantitative aspects.

1

Though the mixed design was preferred, difficulty with appointments for interviews forced the researcher to use questionnaires which included some open-ended questions only instead of interview guides. This de-emphasised the qualitative aspect of the study made it more quantitative, and thus a quasi-mixed research design.


3.3 Population In the context of research, a population may be defined as the set of individuals, items or data from which a sample is taken. According to Best and Kahn (2006) population is a group of individuals who have one or more characteristics in common that are of interest to the researcher. Ahmed (2009) also defines a population as a group of individuals, cases or items that conform to specific criteria, which the researcher intends to use to generalise the results of the research. This study confined itself to one state-owned higher education institution in Namibia, namely, the Namibia University of Science and Technology, and so the population comprises students, academic staff, and administrative staff of this institution.

3.4 Sampling According to Bless, Higson-Smith and Kagee (2006), during the process of selecting or sampling the aim is to get a smaller group that is as representative as possible of the target population. Sampling is defined by Tejero (2006, p. 43) as “a strategy which enable the researcher to pick a sub-group (sample) from a larger group (population) and then use this subgroup as a basis for making judgement about the larger group.” Similarly, some researchers refer to a sample as a subset of the population in which a researcher is interested and from which measurements are drawn for analysis (De Vos et al., 2011; Welman, Kruger & Mitchell, 2005). The quasi-mixed design used for this study adopts a combination of cluster, purposive and random sampling. Cluster sampling was necessary because respondents had to be drawn from all the six faculties in the University. Using the purposive sampling procedure, the researcher chose the sample based on whom she thought would have information appropriate for the study. This is meant to enable the researcher to determine the factors that adversely affect the quality of graduates from NUST. Purposive sampling therefore provided the researcher access to specialised insights of the respondents.

Random sampling gave each final-year student in a cluster (faculty) equal

opportunity to be included in the study – it was planned that approximately one out of every eight final-year students will be included in the sample. It was also planned that one out of three


academic staff members and all the administrative staff members in each faculty will be included in the sample. The schema in Figure 3.1 summarises the sample used for the study.

Table 2.1: Schema for Data Collection Questionnaires

Questionnaires Returned

Students

Staff

Administrative

Academic Staff

Students

Staff

Administrative

Academic Staff

Distributed

Faculty of Computing & Informatics

7

2

40

3

2

5

Faculty of Engineering

12

1

40

1

0

19

Faculty of Health & Applied Sciences

8

1

40

0

1

3

Faculty of Human Sciences

10

2

40

5

3

10

Faculty of Management Science

10

8

40

0

6

31

Faculty of Natural Resources & Spatial

9

1

40

2

0

6

56

15

240

11

12

74

Sciences Total

The table above is the schema used for data collection, and it also indicates the response rates. Final year students were purposively sampled on the grounds that they were “informationrich” about the implementation of QMPs at NUST, since the implementation of QMPs is the phenomenon under study (Best & Khan, 2006). The assumption here was that final-year students have had more exposure to the institution and so their perceptions of the institution’s efforts at quality management would provide rich material for consideration in this research. However, each of the two hundred and forty (240) students was randomly selected, as explained above. Class lists of final-year students, with their e-mail addresses, were obtained from lecturers. The researcher selected every eighth student in the list and a questionnaire was e-mailed to all selected students through Google Docs. The questionnaire also included an introductory letter on the reason for the research.


Also, 56 academic and 15 administrative staff members were included in the study. The researcher obtained a list of all academic and administrative staff members in all the faculties and questionnaires were emailed to staff members selected – also through Google Docs.

3.5 Data Collection De Vos et al. (2011) indicate that data analysis starts with data collection, which is essentially an accumulation of information with a view to getting answers to the research question. The emphasis on scientific data collection methods is to ensure gathering of research evidence systematically, searching for a broad array of evidence, which will be used to answer important questions, or to confirm or disconfirm propositions (Hartley, 2004). Questionnaires were used for data collection for this study – one for staff members and another one for students. The questionnaires required mainly Likert-scale-type answers for quantitative analysis, though each had a few open-ended questions that provided answers for some qualitative analysis. The open-ended questions touched on some of the issues that would have been explored to greater depth in the interviews that could not be scheduled. For the quantitative section, each of the items was anchored on a five-point Likert scale to measure the extent of the respondent’s agreement with the item posted, ranging from 1 – very small extent, 2 – small extent, 3 – uncertain, 4 – great extent, to 5 - very great extent.

Open-ended questions allow respondents opportunity to express their views thoroughly and therefore have fuller participation in the conversation (Cooper & Schindler, 2006; Saunders et al., 2009). In addition, open-ended questions allow time and space for participants to share their understanding, experiences, opinions and interpretations of, as well as their reactions to, the quality issue in Namibia’s HEIs (McGuirk & O’Neill, 2005). The open-ended questions in this study sought opinions of and suggestions from participants. There was a questionnaire administered to administrative and academic staff members and a questionnaire for final-year students. The questionnaire administered to administrative and academic staff members collected information on the challenges faced at the point of


implementation of quality management at NUST. The questionnaire for final-year students collected data on their perceptions of quality management and its effects on the quality of students produced from NUST.

3.6 Data Analysis Data analysis may be defined as “the systematic study of data so that its meaning, structure, relationships, origins, etc., are understood” (Van der Merwe, 2005:39). The fundamental task of any analysis is to make sense out of, or to bring some comprehension and illuminating order to, the complex set of practices and interrelationships that are usually the object of inquiry or research (Addison, 1999). The collected quantitative and qualitative data was analysed and interpreted in line with the objectives of the study. This study used the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) to analyse the quantitative data, whereas the following eight steps approach of Tesch (1990), reproduced in Creswell (2003), was adopted for analysing the qualitative data: 

The researcher should get a sense of the main ideas by reading all of the transcripts carefully and jotting ideas down along the margin as they are encountered.



The researcher should next select one transcript at a time, read it through while asking him/herself what it is that he/she is reading and how any ideas expressed relate to the main ideas noted earlier. This step involves reflections on the underlying meaning and thoughts that have been noted in the margin.



This process will be repeated with all the transcripts until a list of all the topics mentioned by respondents is compiled. These topics should then be labelled as ‘major topics’, unique topics’ and others.



Abbreviation will then be assigned to each of the topics as a code, and the codes will be written next to the appropriate segments of the text. This preliminary organising scheme is used to see if new topics and codes emerge.



The researcher should then reduce the topics into categories or themes. Appropriate words that bring out the meaning of each specific category should be used in grouping the topics. This will make it possible for interrelationships between the categories to be identified.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 53 

The researcher then makes a final decision about the topics, codes and categories – whether there is need for further re-categorisation or recoding.



The data material belonging to each category will then be assembled for a logical flow of the themes. This is a preliminary analysis.



The preliminary analysis above will allow the researcher to see the need, if any, for recoding existing data.

This approach was adopted to allow the discussion of the results in the context of the literature for conclusions to be drawn and recommendations made for improving quality management at NUST.

3.7 Reliability and Validity The measuring instruments used for any research must be both reliable and valid for the findings of the study to be credible. Reliability is the degree to which an instrument measures a construct the same way each time it is used under similar conditions with similar respondents. According to Flynn, Schroeder and Sakakibara (1994), reliability is broadly defined as the degree to which scales are free from error and, therefore, consistent. The two questionnaires, which were answered by both groups, staff members and students showed consistency in responses. The Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was used to determine the internal reliability of the instruments and the results indicated how well the items are correlated with each other. Validity, on the other hand, involves the degree to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure. This may indicate the extent to which the researcher and the respondents understand questions asked during a study in the same way. To ensure that questions were relevant and easily understood by respondents, a pilot study was conducted with 10 staff members and 20 students randomly selected from the Namibia University of Science and Technology. Even though the sample identified for this study was picked in the hope that the respondents had extensive knowledge in the area of QMPs, the pilot showed that this assumption was not correct; that some of the questions were difficult for respondents to comprehend. As a result, terminologies were simplified into a nonprofessional’s language, which made it easier for respondents to understand the questions in the same way as the researcher.


3.8 Scope and Limitations This study focused on identifying the quality enhancing activities that are missing in quality management processes at the NUST and on determining the extent to which the inclusion of these activities would contribute to improving the quality of graduates produced by the NUST. The scope of this study was therefore limited to one public university, namely, the Namibia University of Science and Technology. The study was initially planned to include the University of Namibia, but permission for data collection was taking so long that Namibia’s first university had to be eliminated from the study. Leedy and Ormrod (2005) observe that every study has a set of limitations. This study too has its limitations, which need to be acknowledged. Firstly, because of limited literature in the Namibian context, literature from other studies conducted from other countries has been extensively applied in this study. Secondly, the busy work schedules made it difficult for some respondents to complete questionnaires and/or make time for interviews, which eliminated some respondents who would have given useful responses. This denied the study some of the richness it could have had. Thirdly, some of the students in the sample had no clue on the research topic at hand and so made very little contribution. The findings, however, present an overall, general understanding of QMPs at NUST and what can be done to improve the quality of students the institution produces.

3.9 Ethical Considerations Fallis (2007) explains that the concept of ethics means distinguishing right from wrong actions based on the premise that [right actions] have better consequences. To ensure that this research was conducted following ethically acceptable procedure, the researcher wrote a letter to the institution(s) seeking permission to conduct this research (see Appendices 1 and 2). The letter explained the purpose of the study and how it would be conducted. Permission was obtained to conduct the research at NUST, but UNAM was taking so long to give the required approval that


the researcher decided to focus on the NUST. After informing them about the purpose of the research and that they have the right to agree or refuse to participate, the researcher requested participants to sign consent forms indicating voluntary participation in the research. In addition participants were assured that all the information they provided would remain confidential and would be used anonymously only for the purpose of this research.

3.10 Summary In this chapter an overview of the research methodology was given. This part, therefore, described the research approach and design, the population, sampling, and the method used in data collection and data analysis. Issues of the reliability and validity of this research were also discussed. Finally, the scope of the study was discussed and the limitations external factors imposed on the study were pointed out. The steps taken to ensure compliance of the study with ethical requirements of research are also discussed.


CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF DATA AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction The data collected from academic and administrative staff members and from final year students from different faculties at NUST are analysed and the results are presented and discussed in this chapter. The discussion of the results is guided by the four research objectives, the conceptual framework as well as the literature reviewed for the study. The responses in the questionnaires were analysed using both the SPSS software and the eight steps of analysing qualitative data as proposed by Tesch (1990). Data was collected and analysed for this study to answer four research questions, which are: 

In comparison with international best practices, how effective are the Quality Management Practices (QMPs) currently in place at the Namibia University of Science and Technology (NUST)?



What perceptions of quality education do students hold and how do these influence quality of delivery?



What challenges are faced in the implementation of quality management at the NUST?



To what extent would improvements in the formulation and implementation of QMPs make graduates from NUST market ready in terms of their quality?

The answers to these sub-questions subsequently provided the answer to the main research question: “How has quality management been implemented at the Namibia University of Science and Technology and how may the implementation processes be improved for the institution to produce better-quality graduates?”

The analysis here is based on responses from 23 staff members purposively sampled because they are considered to have information that will be useful to the study, and 74 randomly selected final-year students from all six faculties at the University. The questionnaires for both groups had two sections: quantitative and qualitative (see Appendices 3 and 4).


Respondents’ views are presented and discussed according to the sections in the questionnaires. The six sections of the questionnaire for staff members were: A. Staff Members’ Faculty and Occupations and Gender; B. Effectiveness in the Application of Quality Management Objectives; C. Effectiveness of the Institutions’ External and Internal Evaluation; D. Challenges in the implementation of quality management; E. Role of senior faculty leadership in dealing with these challenges; and F. Improving the formulation and implementation of quality management. The students’ questionnaire consisted of the following seven sections: A. Students characteristics; B. Students’ understanding of quality management; C. Institution’s commitments to quality service; D. Perceptions on the value of qualifications; E. Institution’s quality service; F. Challenges in the implementation of quality management; and G. Improving the formulation and implementation of quality management. Section D in the staff questionnaire and section C in the students’ questionnaire both dealt with challenges facing the implementation of quality management whilst section F in the staff questionnaire and section G in the students’ questionnaire dealt with improvements in the formulation and implementation of quality management. Given this similarity, the two questions are presented and discussed together at the end of the chapter.


4.2 Staff Members Response Rate Staff members were asked to indicate the faculties in which they work and their occupations. The results are shown in Table 4.1. Table 3.1: Faculty*Occupation*Gender Cross Tabulation

Gender Female

Male

Total

Occupation Academic Administrative Staff Staff Faculty of Computing & Informatics Faculty of Human Sciences Faculty of Management Sciences Total Faculty of Computing & Informatics Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Health & Applied Sciences Faculty of Human Sciences Faculty of Management Sciences Faculty of Natural Resources & Spatial Sciences Total Faculty of Computing & Informatics Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Health & Applied Sciences Faculty of Human Sciences Faculty of Management Sciences Faculty of Natural Resources & Spatial Sciences Total

Total

Percentage

2 0 0

1 1 5

3 1 5

2

7

9

13% 4% 22% 39%

1 1

1 0

2 1

9% 4%

0 5 0

1 2 1

1 7 1

4% 31% 4%

2 9

0 5

2 14

9% 61%

3 1

2 0

5 1

22% 4%

0 5 0

1 3 6

1 8 6

4% 35% 26%

2 11 (48%)

0 12 (52%)

2 23

9% 100%

Table 4.1above, presents the gender of the staff members who completed and returned the questionnaire. As the Table shows, more males among the staff completed the questionnaire (61%) than females (39%) and so the information discussed is dominated by male voices. The findings also revealed that majority of the staff members who completed and returned the questionnaires were from the Faculty of Human Sciences (8 respondents, 35%). The Faculty of Engineering and


the Faculty of Health and Applied Sciences had the least number of respondents (1 each or 4%). The majority of the respondents were administrative staff, with a 52% share compared to the 48% share of the academic staff in the sample. 4.3 Effectiveness in the Application of Quality Management Objectives The first question intended to find out the extent to which quality management objectives are integrated within the academic and administrative functions. This question aimed at exploring the effectiveness in the application of the institution’s quality management objectives. The following constructs were identified: awareness of policies and procedures, quality improvement, institution’s commitment and best practices. The SPSS software was used to perform a series of tests for all the identified constructs. The specific tests included reliability, Item-Total Statistics and correlation coefficient. The reliability was used to test the degree to which the questions in the questionnaire jointly measure the constructs that were identified for different variables. The TotalItem Statistics was used to measure the relationship of individual variables to the overall constructs scores. The correlation coefficient was used to measure and analyse the degree of relationship between various variables. The values of each of the identified construct range from 1(very small extent) to 5 (very great extent). 4.3.1 Reliability Statistics on the Institution’s Quality Management Objectives The Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test the degree to which the items on a test jointly measure the identified constructs. Table 4.2 below, provides the Cronbach’s Alpha test based on awareness of policies and procedures subscale which consisted of 3 items (α =.849), revealing that staff members are informed and are aware of quality management policies and procedures in place. It also implies that they are included and in the review and drafting of quality management interventions. The continuous improvement subscale consisted of 4 items (α = .764), revealing that staff members observe that there are improvements of quality standards of research, academic and community engagement activities within the institution. The institution’s commitment subscale consisted of 6 items (α = .857), revealing that management demonstrate commitment to the institution’s quality policy by insisting on continual


improvement and that top management provides information to staff members on performance in relation to the quality management policy. The findings also reveal that the institution encourages mutual trust, confidence and understanding of the quality it provides and also provides the resources needed to enhance the effectiveness of quality management. The Cronbach's alpha for the best practices was .872 revealing that transparency, accountability and integrity regarding quality management practices are observed. Staff members also believe that the institution implements quality standards that are benchmarked with local, regional and international best practices. In addition, staff members believe that there is a link between adoption and implementation of effective quality management procedures and that the quality of graduates produced by the institution. The institution ensures the provision of a high quality education and training to all concerned so that they gain the skills and knowledge required to further their personal aims and career aspiration and the educational and other services being provided to students are of high quality. The reliability statistics on quality management objectives shows that the four constructs are closely related. The Cronbach’s alpha for the 20 items inventory was .856, suggesting that the items have relatively high internal consistency. This implies that, in terms of reliable variance, 86% of the respondents are considered to be internally consistent. In summary, the scales show that the four constructs positively correlated to one another. Table 4.2: Reliability Statistics on Quality Management Objectives Cronbach's Alpha Awareness of Policies and Procedures Continuous Improvement Institution’s Commitment Best Practices

.849 .764 .857 .872

Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .850 .776 .864 .870

No of Items 3 4 6 7


4.3.1. Quality Management Objectives: Item-Total Statistics The Item-Total Statistics presents the "Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted" in the final column, as shown in Table 4.3 below. The results indicate that there are no items with negative item-total correlations. However, there are two items, which seem not to fit in well with other items grouped in the same constructs. Item 8 in the institution’s commitment construct does not seem to fit in well with the other items grouped in the same construct. It has a weak correlation with the sum of the other 5 items (r= .337), and Cronbach’s alpha for the scale improves markedly to .889 when item 8 is ignored. Item 14 in the best practices construct also has a weak correlation with the sum of the other 6 items (r=398), and Cronbach’s alpha for the scale improves to .885 when item 14 is ignored. This might lead us to consider whether we should remove this item.


Awareness of Policies and Procedures 1. I am informed about the institution's Quality Management policies and procedures.

5.26

5.838

.693

.511

.815

2. I am included in the review of the institution's Quality Management policies and procedures.

5.70

4.858

.785

.618

.721

3. I am involved in the drafting of Quality Management interventions at the institution.

6.17

5.059

.685

.488

.823

4. I see there are improvements of Quality standards of research activities within the institution.

9.96

4.498

.706

.543

.622

5. I see there are improvements of Quality standards of academic activities within the institution.

9.91

5.083

.547

.479

.721

10.57

5.893

.433

.342

.776

10.13

6.119

.632

.426

.697

Continuous Improvement

6. I see there are improvements of Quality standards of community engagement activities within the institution. 7. I see there are improvements of Quality standards of support service activities within the institution. Institution’s Commitment 8. Management demonstrate commitment to the institution's quality policy by insisting on continual 17.30

17.04

.337

.206

.889

17.48

12.72

.759

.634

.813

10. The institution encourages mutual trust of the quality it provides.

17.57

15.89

.713

.689

.828

11. The institution encourages confidence of the quality it provides.

17.48

14.90

.757

.750

.816

12. The institution encourages understanding of the quality it provides.

17.43

14.08

.744

.648

.815

17.52

15.17

.664

.521

.831

improvement. 9. The institution's top management provides information to staff members on performance in relation to the quality Management policy and needs improvement

13. I observe that institution's management determines and provides the resources needed to enhance the effectiveness of Quality Management. Best Practices 14. I observe improved transparency and accountability with regards to the institution’s quality management

21.04

21.23

.398

.385

.885

20.52

17.81

.736

.606

.842

20.74

20.57

.555

.378

.866

21.04

19.23

.662

.657

.852

20.78

17.27

.792

.857

.833

20.78

17.45

.810

.846

.831

20.39

20.61

.612

.544

.860

systems and practices. 15. The institution implements quality standards that are bench marked with local, regional and international best practices. 16. Changes in processes and activities are carried out in ways that maintain the integrity of Quality Management. 17. There is a link between adoption and implementation of effective Quality Management procedures and the quality of graduates produced by the institution. 18. I believe that the institution ensures the provision of a high quality education and training to all concerned so that they gain the skills and knowledge required to further their personal aims and career aspiration. 19. I believe that the institution ensures the provision of a high quality education and training to all concerned so that they gain competencies and experience required to further their personal aims and career aspiration. 20. I see the educational and other services being provided to students as being of high quality.

Item Deleted

Cronbach's Alpha if

Correlation

Squared Multiple

Correlation

Corrected Item-Total

Deleted

Scale Variance if Item

Variables

Deleted

Scale Mean if Item

Table 4.3: Quality Management Objectives: Item-Total Statistics


4.3.3 Association between the Institution’s Quality Management Objectives Table 4.4 below, shows that there is strong association between awareness of policies and procedures and institution’s commitment (r = .765). Since the significance value (sig.) is equal to .000, which is lesser than alpha (α) of 5%, this means that the relationship was highly significant. Therefore, there is a significant positive association between awareness of policies and procedures and commitment. Overall, there is positive correlation between all the four variables and it can be concluded that when one of the variable increases in value, the other variable, which correlates with it also increases in value. The Sig. (2-tailed) in the first column of the table shows the value .001, .000 and .002 respectively. Given that these values are less than .05, it can be concluded that there is a statistically very significant association between awareness of policies and procedures, and the other components of quality management: continuous improvement, institution’s commitment, and best practices. In contrast, the Sig. (2-tailed) value for best practices and continuous improvement is .068, which is greater than .05 and so indicates that there is no statistically significant association between the two variables. This means the decreases or increases in one variable do significantly relate to decreases or increases in the other variable. In summary, Table 4.4 shows awareness of policies and procedures, continuous improvement, institution’s commitment and best practices have a positive impact on the institution’s quality management.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 64 Table 4.4: Association between the Institution's Quality Management Objectives Awareness of Continuous Institution’s Policies and Improvement Commitment Procedures Awareness of Pearson 1 Policies and Correlation Procedures Sig. (2tailed) N 23 Continuous Pearson .655** 1 Improvement Correlation Sig. (2.001 tailed) N 23 23 Institution’s Pearson .765** .550** 1 Commitment Correlation Sig. (2.000 .006 tailed) N 23 23 23 Best Practices Pearson .615** .387 .666** Correlation Sig. (2.002 .068 .001 tailed) N 23 23 23 **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Best Practices

1

23

The results of this study reveal that the views of many in the sample is that the institution is committed to quality service delivery through the implementation of quality management policies and procedures availed to staff members. The results show that all the correlations between the constructs are above .50, which is acceptable because they are large enough to indicate the strength of the association between the construct (Cohen, 1988; cited in Pallant, 2010). As can be seen in Table 4.4, there is a strong positive association between awareness of policies and procedures and institution’s commitment – r = .765. This implies that staff members are well informed about the policies and procedures, which makes them and the institution to be committed towards providing quality education. In addition, this also gives credence to the suggestion that, in the absences of awareness of policies and procedures pertaining to quality management, the staff members and the institution at large would be less commitment to improving quality. Moreover, the correlation result shows that all the constructs are closely related, and that satisfied the convergent validity requirement for the model (Churchill Jr, 1979).


According to Nyaoga (2010), a quality management policy is important for an organisation, which is committed to quality service. The results also show that there is a positive correlation of .655 between awareness of policies and procedures and continuous improvement. Continuous improvement according to Fuentes-Fuentes et al. (2004) means a commitment to constant examination of the technical and administrative process in search of better methods. This implies that if staff members are aware of policies and procedures they can seek for better methods with the ultimate aim of improving what is in place. Generally, quality management is practiced at the Namibia University of Science and Technology. However, the institution needs to identify quality management interventions that are missing and how their inclusion will contribute to producing better-quality graduates in Namibia. It is important to ensure that all employees and other stakeholders are aware of the QMPs within the organiSation and make them a central part of their work. A result from the analysis of the data collected for this study is that QMPs are currently in place at the University of Science and Technology and that staff members are aware of the quality management policies and procedures in place. This meets the requirement that staff members at least have to be aware of policies and procedures on quality management in the institution for the institution to be seen as committed to improving quality and as encouraging conformity of staff members to quality management. In addition, the results also revealed that staff members are included in the formulation and review of the institution’s quality management policies and procedures and are as well involved in the drafting of quality management interventions at the institution. Most academic and administrative staff members are therefore satisfied with the current practices in place. This agrees with Nyaoga et al.’s (2010) findings in his study on QMPs at the University of Nairobi that the university has not only applied quality management, but also that, by involving staff members at every stage of the process, has ensured largely that the quality management policy is appropriate to its purpose. Also Sohail, et al. (2003) argue that one of the reasons why a private college in Malaysia was awarded the ISO 9002 certification for implementation of a quality system was because of the extent of involvement of staff members in the process. The findings of this study on NUST show that the majority of the staff members are satisfied with the quality


management system in place because they have been involved. This should ensure high quality delivery at the institution – a requirement for high quality graduates. It takes a lot of determination and effort to maintain quality within an institution, including continuous improvements in quality standards for the whole operation of the organisation. This study found that because of how the quality management process has been handled, there are continuous improvements in quality of teaching and learning, research output, and community engagement activities within the institution. This is what Fuentes-Fuentes et al. (2004) recommend for continuous improvement in standards – a commitment to regular examination of the technical and administrative process by all in search of better methods.

4.4. Effectiveness of the Institutions’ External and Internal Evaluation The second question intended on finding out the effectiveness of external and internal evaluation processes in place. Two constructs – evaluation of quality management and effective feedback – were identified. The SPSS software was used to perform a series of tests for all the identified constructs. The specific tests included reliability, Item-Total Statistics and correlation coefficient. The reliability was used to test the degree to which the questions in the questionnaire jointly measure the constructs that were identified for different variables. The Total-Item Statistics was used to measure the relationship of individual variables to the overall constructs scores. The correlation coefficient was used to measure and analyse the degree of relationship between various variables. The values of each of the identified construct range from 1(very small extent) to 5 (very great extent). 4.4.1. Reliability Statistics on the Effectiveness of the Institutions’ External and Internal Evaluation The subscales of the institution’s commitment consisted of evaluation of quality management and effective feedback, each of which has 4 items. The Cronbach’s alpha for the institution’s commitment was (α=.829) showing that the goals set by the institution to ensure better service are evaluated annually, the institution conducts external evaluation to assess the


effectiveness and achievements of the quality management practices annually, the quality management unit conduct regular self-evaluations to analyse the effectiveness and achievements of institutional quality management and that the institution conducts regular surveys among the members of the staff and students for feedback on the quality management procedures and their implementation at grass-root levels. The Cronbach’s alpha of (α=.624) for the effective feedback did not fall too far off the acceptable reliability rule of thumb of at least 0.7. This shows that the members of staff are informed about the findings from surveys on quality management and the implementation plan for improvement and planned results are not achieved, corrective action is taken, as required, to ensure that all units put in the desired effort and to ensure desired quality is restored. Staff members also believe that the institution determines what data should be collected and analysed to assess the suitability of the quality management policy and procedures. The 8 items inventory was found to be reliable (α = .785), implying that 79% of the respondents are considered to be internally consistent in terms of reliable variance. The reliability statistics table 4.5 below provides the Cronbach’s Alpha. Table 4.5: Reliability Statistics for the Institutions' External and Internal Evaluation Cronbach's Alpha Based Cronbach's on Alpha Standardized Items Evaluation of Quality Management .829 .837 Effective Feedback .624 .671

No of Items 4 4

4.2.2. Institutions’ External and Internal Evaluation: Item-Total Statistics

The results for the Item-Total Statistics with respect to the institutions’ external and internal evaluation indicate that there are no items with negative item-total correlations as indicated in Table 4.6 below. However, there are two items, which seem not to fit in well with the other items grouped in the effective feedback construct. Item 5 and 8 have a weak correlation with the sum of


the other 3 items (r=.264 and .285 respectively), and Cronbach’s alpha for the scale improves markedly to .707 and .634, respectively, when the two items are ignored.

Deleted

Cronbach's Alpha if Item

Squared Multiple Correlation

Correlation

Corrected Item-Total

Variables

Scale Variance if Item Deleted

Scale Mean if Item Deleted

Table 4.6: Institutions' External and Internal Evaluation: Item-Total Statistics

Evaluation of Quality Management 1. The progress made in terms of achieving the goals set by the institution to ensure better service is

9.39

5.704

.692

.570

.768

9.30

5.858

.783

.631

.731

9.52

6.352

.688

.506

.775

9.48

6.261

.504

.287

.861

9.52

3.079

.264

.122

.707

9.57

3.075

.683

.659

.380

9.52

3.352

.517

.605

.486

.130

.634

evaluated annually. 2. The institution conducts external evaluation to assess the effectiveness and achievements of the Quality Management practices annually. 3. The quality management unit conduct regular self-evaluations to analyse the effectiveness and achievements of institutional quality management. 4. The institution conducts regular surveys among the members of the staff and students for feedback on the Quality Management procedures and their implementation at grass-root levels. Effective Feedback 5. The members of staff are informed about the findings from surveys on Quality Management and the implementation plan for improvement. 6. When planned results are not achieved, corrective action is taken, as required, to ensure that all units put in the desired effort. 7. When planned results are not achieved, corrective action is taken, as required, to ensure desired quality is restored. 8. The institution determines what data should be collected and analysed to assess the suitability of the Quality Management policy and procedures.

9.48

3.715

.285

4.4.3. Association between Institution’s External and Internal Evaluation Correlations The Pearson’s correlation coefficient between evaluation of quality management and effective feedback is .656, showing that there is a positive association between the two variables. The Sig. (2-tailed) shows the value .001, and since this value is less than .05, it can be concluded that there is a statistically very significant association between the evaluation of quality management and positive feedback. It is imperative that employees get timely feedback given that it is one of the critical components of a successful quality management process. Employees are likely to improve their performance if effective feedback is given to them on their progress towards


their goals. Table 4.7 below presents the association between the institution’s external and internal evaluation. Table 4.7: Association between Institutions' External and Internal Evaluation Evaluation of Quality Management Evaluation of Quality Management

Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Effective Feedback Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Effective Feedback

1 23 .656**

1

.001 23

23

Many good universities provide timely feedback to all the stakeholders as a way of getting the desired outcomes from quality management successfully. The results of the study showed a positive association between evaluation of quality management and provision of positive feedback. Additionally, a close examination of Tables 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 show that NUST conducts annual evaluations, external evaluation, regular self-evaluations, regular surveys among the staff members and students. This is in line with the internal monitoring of quality management practices included in the conceptual framework guiding this study. These multi-tier evaluations for quality ensure that institutional goals are met from the level of departments. It also makes adherence and monitoring easier because though monitoring is compartmentalised, it is unified with institutional quality goals. This practice prepares the sections of the university for monitoring by external agencies. In addition, the conceptual framework guiding this study indicated that constant internal monitoring ensures that problems are detected early and addressed. That way, external stakeholders would not pick them up inadvertently and develop a negative perception of the institution.


There is, however, a debate in the literature on whether quality is better addressed by external or internal mechanisms. Kis (2005) summarised the debate, listing the arguments advanced on both approaches, as shown in Table 4.8 below. Table 4.8: Arguments in the Literature: External versus Internal Review

Pro external review Essential for accountability External Quality Assurance ensures the integrity of higher education Catalyst role for internal improvement within HEI

Provides information to various stakeholders

Pro internal review Essential for improvement: sustainable improvement relies on internal engagement External Quality Assurance inhibits innovation (conservative, rigid evaluation criteria, inflexibility) Inefficiency of External Quality Assurance in improvement: high costs (time, resources, little return). Bureaucracy, risk of excessive workload for HEI External Quality Assurance: game playing, impression management

Source: Kis (2005)

In addition to the summary in Table 4.8 above, Kis (2005) goes on to explain that

addressing accountability requires the involvement of an external body and that external quality monitoring ensures the integrity of higher education, especially international integrity, through something similar to an accreditation procedure. Kis further explains that external quality assurance acts as catalyst for internal improvement within higher education institutions. In fact, while internally initiated quality monitoring can be problem-driven and is useful as a mean of addressing important problems, externally initiated processes tend to be more accountability-driven. Kis (2005) also cites Harvey’s (2002) view that external quality monitoring should provide information to various stakeholders, including prospective students, employers and funders. It is therefore obvious that both external and internal quality monitoring complement each other.


4.5 Students’ Responses Rate All the students who took part in the study were in their final year of studies. This restriction to final year students was based on the hunch that they are more likely to be well informed on the subject at hand – quality issues at the university – given their experience over some three or more years in the institution. The respondents were asked to indicate their faculties and gender; and the results are presented in Table 4.9. The majority of the students who completed and returned the questionnaires were from the Faculty of Management Sciences (31 respondents, 42%), followed by students in the Faculty of Engineering (19 respondents, 26%). The Faculty of Health and Applied Sciences had the least respondents (3 responses, 4%). In general, more females completed and returned the questionnaires (40 responses, 54 %) than males (34 responses, 46%). Table 4.9: Students' Faculty and Gender - Cross Tabulation Name of Faculty Female Computing & Informatics 2 Engineering 9 Health & Applied Sciences 2 Human Sciences 3 Management Sciences 20 Natural Resources & Spatial Sciences 4 Total 40

Male 3 10 1 7 11 2 34

Total 5 19 3 10 31 6 74

Percentage 7% 26% 4% 14% 42% 8% 100%

4.6. Students’ Understanding of Quality Management On the issue of perceptions of quality that students have towards the quality of the institution, the first question tried to determine their understanding of the term “Quality Management”. However, 36% of the students who took part in this study admitted that they have little knowledge on the subject as shown in Table 4.10 below. However, there are many significant challenges in defining the term and the literature presents a wide variety of interpretations, depending on the views of different stakeholders, this is not the reason for the ignorance of many of the students in the sample – they have just not been exposed to the term. Other students, though, who could not define the term, have an idea of what quality management is about, as indicated by the views of 64% of the respondents. So they are in a position to express opinions on issues of


quality management and to demand that they be provided with quality education. Table 4.10 summarizes various definitions as provided by respondents. Table 4.10: Understanding of Quality Management No 1

2

3 4 5 6 7

Definitions Not familiar with what quality management entails. Assuring that higher education is standardised and benchmarked to international quality practices and that the curriculum and policies and procedures guiding education are globally accepted, comparable and responsive to best practices, that graduates are competitive and measurable to all levels of education set standards. It is a part of management that ensures that there is quality service which ultimately leads to quality graduates. The measures higher education institutions take to oversee all the activities and tasks needed to maintain a desired level of excellence. A department in higher education institutions that is responsible for the overall quality. Effort at improving the services of the institution thereby satisfying the customers and stakeholders. Providing the best quality education to students given all the resources available.

9

It entails supervision of processes and activities carried out by higher education institutions to ensure that the institution creates and perhaps maintain a certain level of quality service delivery. Given that we are referring to management, it would include proper planning, organizing and controlling and even evaluating these processes to ensure excellent service delivery. It has to do with enhancing management strategies to enable the institution to improve the quality of higher education.

10

Making sure that there is quality teaching and all other areas of the institution are performing at the highest possible level.

8

11 12 13

14

15 16 17 18 Total

Management that analyses, controls and evaluates all activities in the institution that will lead to successful performance of students in the job market. Providing inclusive support to students and to all staff members (academic and nonacademic) and all other stakeholders. A high form of service learning that links the transmission of scientific information to the labour market needs, while generating maximum student (customer) satisfaction. Ensuring that Namibian institutions of higher learning provide quality education to the students for them to compete at both national and international levels. How higher education institutions conduct their business in terms service delivery to students, researchers and other stakeholders. It is also how fast and reliable their service is perceived by the end users. That there is planning, assurance and control in a higher education institution. It is the process of ensuring that the products delivered are consistent with the desired quality, and are evaluated regularly for improvement. The degree or extent to which the leaders of the institution meet all managerial functions, including the use of organizational resources, to achieve the overall goal of producing quality graduates.

Frequency 27

Percent 36%

11

15%

7

9%

6

8%

4

5%

3

4%

3

4%

3

4%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

1

1%

74

100%


Respondents who provided some explanations of the concept did not differ significantly from the definitions and explanations of some prominent quality gurus, as summarised in Table 4.10 above. One of the definition that came out strongly from 15% of the respondents is “Assuring that higher education is standardised and benchmarked to international quality practices and that the curriculum and policies and procedures guiding education are globally accepted, comparable and responsive to best practices, so that graduates are competitive and measurable to all levels of education standards.” This is in line with what the HEQC (1995) indicated about what quality management in higher education encompasses, and those processes by which an institution discharges its corporate responsibility for articulating, maintaining and enhancing academic standards of those activities for which it is responsible and ensure that these processes are performed efficiently and effectively. Unlike the staff members who are well informed about the policies and procedures on quality management at the institution, the results of the study show that most of the students are not; the students have not been exposed to information on efforts at provision of quality education in the institution. Students are supposed to be the primary consumers of higher education service since they receive and use the training offered by the universities, which makes them the priority customers of educational activities. Therefore, as Marzo-Navarro et al. (2005) suggest, they should not be left out on issues on quality management in HEIs. Most of the students admitted a lack of understanding of what quality management is all about, and this may have accounted for the moderate association between awareness of policies and procedures and quality service in the institution.

Improved awareness of quality policies and procedures among students would

motivate them for the exertion required to produce quality graduates. Lomas (2004) argues that to regularly monitor and review progress towards the goal of embedding quality, there is a merit in asking the students what they think of the academic service that is provided and whether they consider it to be of high quality. For this study, on the subject of quality service, students were asked to express opinion on the quality of the service they receive. The students were happy with the quality of service delivered by the academic staff members. This result indicates that students value their lecturers because of the effort that they put into the teaching-learning process and the motivation students receive to take their studies seriously and


produce the best they are able to. This result corroborates those of Ardi et al. (2012) who found that students’ satisfaction was positively influenced by commitment of faculty, the quality of course delivery, and the ease of giving feedback for quality improvement. Venkatraman (2007) suggests that, in addition to the perception of students, a rigorous course evaluation process, with appropriate follow-up actions, must be pursued to pave the way for continuous improvements in teaching and learning, which will ultimately improve the satisfaction of students. This is also the view of Andreson (2000), cited in Gruber (2006), who argued that students desire lecturers who are caring, enthusiastic and organised and who, therefore, motivate them to exert themselves. To improve students’ satisfaction with the quality of education services, Beaver (1994), cited in Venkatraman (2007), highlighted the different modes of delivery that should be used in the classroom to take care of the different learning styles of students. These include active studentcentred learning to enhance student involvement; effect communication of content, which requires mastery; group work; prompt feedback on assessment tasks; and concern for students’ learning and progress. Since students are the most important stakeholders in higher education, how they perceive the quality of the education provided by the institution they are studying with should be of vital importance in formulation of quality policies and procedures. Therefore, for institutions to be able to deliver the quality service that students expect, the institutions should be aware of students’ expectations and aspirations. This is important because, as Douglas et al. (2008), cited in Ardi, Hidayatno and Teuku (2012), observed, students’ satisfaction has become an extremely important issue for universities and their management. It is for this reason that HEIs now try to capture students’ opinion about all aspects of higher education in order to package higher education programmes in a way that will meet students’ requirements and measure students’ satisfaction (Douglas et al., 2006; cited in Ardi et al., 2012). In an era of limited funding for HEIs and intense competition for students, students’ perceptions of an institution should be actively sought by all to ensure that whatever is possible is done to assure students of enhanced educational experiences and attract students (Izadi, Kashef & Stadt, 1996).


4.7. Institution’s Commitments to Quality Service This issue explored the extent to which students perceived the institution to be committed to ensuring quality service to the students. Awareness of the following constructs was identified as relevant to the discussion: policies and procedures and of quality service. The SPSS software was used to perform a series of reliability tests. The specific tests included reliability, Item-Total Statistics and correlation coefficient. The reliability statistic was used to test the degree to which the questions in the questionnaire jointly measure the constructs that were identified for different variables. The Total-Item Statistics was used to measure the relationship of individual variables to the overall constructs scores. The correlation coefficient was used to measure and analyse the degree of relationship between various variables. The values of each of the identified construct range from 1(very small extent) to 5 (very great extent). 4.7.1. Reliability Statistics on the Institution’s Commitments The Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test the degree to which the questions in the questionnaire jointly measure the institution’s commitment to quality service. The two identified constructs – awareness of policies and procedures and quality service – are aimed at finding out whether the students’ awareness of quality management policies and procedures and quality service measure the institution’s commitment to quality service. That is, the extent to which availability of information on quality management on the intranet for benefit of students is an indicator of the institution’s commitment to quality. In addition, the study wanted to find out the students’ view on whether the service provided by the institution’s quality management department indicates commitment to quality service. This will determine whether students are exposed enough to policies and procedures on quality and whether the quality management department is providing enough services to demonstrate commitment to quality service. George and Mallery (2003) suggest the following rules of thumb for interpreting Cronbach’s alpha: “α > 0.9 – excellent, α > 0.8 – Good, α > 0.7 – Acceptable, α > 0.6 – Questionable, α > 0.5 – Poor, and α < 0.5 – Unacceptable” (p. 231). However, for exploratory studies, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.7 is usually an acceptable level of reliability. So the Cronbach’s alpha for awareness of policies and procedures given as α = 0.574 in Table 4.11 is quite low and


so questionable. That low Cronbach alpha suggests that students’ awareness of policies and procedures does not strongly correlate with the institution’s commitment to quality service. This result may also be taken as showing that because students do not get information on efforts at provision of quality education by the institution (because they may not be reading information posted on the Intranet), they do not respond in ways that bring out the institution’s commitment to service quality. Since students are the primary beneficiaries of quality higher education service, their awareness of and response to policies and procedures on quality should demonstrate the institution’s commitment to service quality. In line with this view, Marzo-Navarro et al. (2005), cited in Voss and Gruber (2006), observed that since students receive and use the training offered by the universities, which makes them the priority customers of educational activities, they should not be let out on issues on quality management; effective methods of communicating these should be found and used. Table 4.11: Reliability Statistics of the Institution's Commitment

Awareness of Policies and Procedures Quality Service

Cronbach's Alpha

Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items

No of Items

.574

.577

3

.778

.778

8

The awareness of policies and procedures consisted of 3 items (α =.574), this is an indication the internal reliability for this was found to be very poor and it can be concluded the items within this variable are inappropriate. The quality services subscale was found to be highly reliable (8 items; α = .778), indicating that it correlates well with the institution’s commitment to quality. 4.7.2. Institution’s Commitment: Item-Total Statistics

The results in Table 4.12 below, on the item total statistics of the institution’s commitment reveal that all the items except items 2 and 3 increase the Cronbach’s alpha “if Item” is ignored. On the contrary, the results further shows that the students seem to be positive when it comes at the quality service offered by academic staff given that the Cronbach’s alphas under the quality


service construct remain above 0.4 except for items 3, 4 and 7. This implies that students believe that lecturers and top management have students’ best interests at heart, they motivate them, there are functioning channels for expressing their complaints, service is delivered on time and the institution conducts evaluation on students’ achievements on the programmes in order to improve where necessary. At the same time, they also believe that administrative staff do not have students’ interest at heart and that lectures are not always willing to give students individual attention. The item total statistics for institution’s commitment is given in Table 4.12 below.

Quality Service 4. Administrative staff members have student’s best interest at heart. 5. Lecturers have student’s best interest at heart. 6. Institutional top management have student’s best interest at heart. 7. Lecturers are willing to give students individual attention. 8. Lecturers encourage and motivate students to do their best. 9. The institution has functioning channels for expressing students’ complaints. 10. The institution provides its service at a time it promises to do so. 11. The institution conducts evaluation on student achievements on their programmes, their learning experience or their learning environment.


Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted

Awareness of Policies and Procedures 1. I am aware of the institution’s quality management 4.77 4.73 policies and procedures. 2. Quality management Policies and procedures are 4.76 4.30 available to all students on intranet. 3. The institution has a functioning quality management 4.31 4.80 department.

.417

.20

.82

.437

.21

.39

.303

.09

.60

Corrected ItemTotal Correlation


Variables


Table 4.12: Institution's Commitment: Item - Total Statistics

20.2

45.9

.299

.19

.78

19.8

39.7

.643

.45

.73

20.4

42.7

.459

.32

.76

20.2

43.4

.366

.30

.77

19.9

40.7

.556

.44

.74

20.2

42.1

.509

.32

.75

20.3

40.5

.563

.40

.74

19.9

43.1

.456

.34

.76


4.7.3. Association between Institution’s Commitment Correlations The results in Table 4.13 below, also show that there is weak correlation between ‘awareness of policies and procedures’ and ‘quality service’ (r = .498). Since the p-value given is 0.000, which is lesser than 5%, the association is very significant. This implies that lack of awareness of quality management policies and procedures correlates with quality service. This further implies that if students were not aware of policies and procedures pertaining to quality management, they would not work in line with the quality programmes and so may not produce the quality required by the institution and the market. Table 4.13: Association between the Institution's Commitment Variables Awareness of Policies and Procedures Awareness of Policies and Pearson 1 Procedures Correlation Sig. (2tailed) N 74 Quality Service Pearson .498** Correlation Sig. (2000 tailed) N 74

Quality Service

1

74

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

4.8. Perceptions on the Value of Qualifications The question on this tried to find out how students perceive the value of qualifications offered by the institution. The following constructs were identified: quality qualifications, teaching, and learning support. The SPSS software was used to perform a number of tests for the two identified constructs. The following tests were run: reliability, Item-Total Statistics and correlation coefficient. The reliability was used to test the degree to which the questions in the questionnaire jointly measure the constructs that were identified for different variables. The TotalItem Statistics was used to determine the relationship of individual variables to the overall constructs scores. The correlation coefficient was used to measure and analyse the degree of


association between various variables. The values of each of the identified construct range from 1(very small extent) to 5 (very great extent).

4.8.1. Reliability Statistics of the Value of Qualifications The Cronbach’s alpha in Table 4.14 below, for the six-item quality qualifications is α= 0.847, showing that the questions are internally consistent. Therefore, the responses show that the students strongly agreed with each other that the institution offers excellent quality qualifications and that students believe that they are studying for internationally benchmarked qualifications. Students also believed that the educational services provided to them were of high quality and their qualifications were registered on the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) and were accredited by the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE). This gave them hope that they will be gainfully self-employed or gain meaningful employment anywhere in the world. The teaching and learning support of four items has α = 0.745, which is also above the acceptable level of 0.7. As Hair et al. (2010) noted, this value shows that the level of reliability is good. So the students believe that there is sufficient support in the teaching and learning environment, e.g. library resources, ICT facilities, qualified and committed lecturers, and that examination scripts that they write are moderated for accuracy. Students are therefore satisfied with the choice they made to study at the institution. Table 4.14: Reliability Statistics of the Value of Qualifications

Quality Qualifications Teaching and Learning Support

Cronbach's Alpha

Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items

No of Items

.847 .745

.850 .746

6 4

4.8.2. Value of Qualifications: Item Total Statistics The item total statistics in Table 4.15 below, for value of qualifications shows that all items correlate very well with the overall scale and none of the items would substantially affect reliability of quality qualification if they were deleted. However, items 8 and 9 substantially reduce reliability


of teaching and learning support when they are deleted, indicating their importance. Table 4.15 also shows that there is moderate positive correlation between the six items, which aimed at finding out from students whether the institution offered excellent quality qualifications, whether these qualifications were internationally benchmarked, whether they saw the educational services provided to them to be of high quality, whether those qualifications were registered with the NQF and accredited by the NCHE, and whether they believed that those qualifications would help them to be gainfully self-employed or to gain meaningful employment anywhere in the world.

Corrected Item-Total Correlation


Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted

Quality Qualifications 1. The institution offers excellent quality qualifications. 2. I believe that I am studying for an internationally benchmarked qualification. 3. I see the educational services provided to me as being of high quality. 4. The qualification I am doing is registered on the National Qualifications Framework. 5. The qualification I am doing is accredited by the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE). 6. I believe that my qualification will help me to be gainfully selfemployed or to gain meaningful employment anywhere in the world. Teaching and Learning Support 7. There is sufficient support in the teaching and learning environment e.g. library, ICT facilities. 8. The institution has adequate and competent lecturers. 9. I do not have regrets for choosing to study at this institution. 10. Examination scripts that students write are moderated for accuracy.


Variables


Table 4.15: Value of Qualifications: Item Total Statistics

19.2

21.1

.589

.38

.83

19.3

19.5

.644

.45

.82

19.2

21.1

.646

.53

.82

18.7

20.6

.686

.51

.81

19.0

20.1

.596

.48

.83

19.1

18.7

.639

.54

.82

10.5

10.3

.487

.31

.72

10.4 10.4 10.3

9.07 8.94 11.2

.671 .555 .459

.47 .31 .31

.61 .68 .73

4.8.3. Association between the Value of Qualifications Correlations Table 4.16 below, shows a reasonably high and positive Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r = 0.699) between quality qualifications and support in the teaching and learning process, showing a reasonably strong positive linear relationship between the two variables. Since the


significance value (sig.) is 0.000, which is less than 1%, this means that the association is very significant. Table 4.16: Association between Value of Qualifications Variables Quality Qualifications Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

Quality Qualifications

Teaching and Learning Support

Teaching and Learning Support

1 74 .699** .000 74

1 74

4.9. Institution’s Quality Service Respondents were asked whether in their view the institution was doing enough to enhance quality service to the students with the ultimate goal of producing quality graduates. Figure 4.1 below indicates that 65% of the respondents believed that the institution was doing enough to provide quality services, but 35% held a contrary opinion.

35% 65%

No

Yes

Figure 4.1: Quality Service for Producing Quality Students

So, from Figure 4.1 above, the majority of the students who participated in the study (65%) believed that the institution was doing its best in providing the best quality services – with the


resources available. Their view was based on the following important quality-related developments:  major dynamic technological advancements;  excellent organisational culture and senior leadership commitment;  constant evaluation of the courses through students’ surveys;  encouragement to lecturers to pursue PhDs studies;  changing the status of the institution from a polytechnic to a university;  development of curriculum in line with international standards;  recruitment of lecturers from different countries; and  inclusion of work experience components in many modules, etc.

The majority of the students at NUST (65% of students) are satisfied with the teaching and learning taking place, as discussed above, implying that the institution employed qualified lecturers to promote quality teaching and learning. However, a small portion of students (35%) did not agree that they were receiving good quality from the institution on the ground that they were not involved in the formulation of quality-related policies and procedures; and that these policies took so long in formulation that they were out-of-date by the time of implementation and so did not do much good. Some of these students also indicated that some lecturers were not always willing to give individual attention to them, and that some administrative staff members sometimes did not show any interest in their welfare, delayed in the release of examination results, insufficient books in the library, etc. These results should be noted for the institution to bring students on board the quality management bandwagon – as is practiced in other universities. Izadi, Kashef and Stadt (1996) found that at Mellon University in the United States students are considered as customers and so provision is made for them to participate in the planning of courses, determination of content, designing syllabi, and method of grading assignments. The management of NUST could adopt this model to improve students’ satisfaction with the quality of service.

The views of the 35% of the respondents who felt that the institution was not doing its best to provide quality service deserve attention for improvements to take place. Another crucial issue


in managing quality is to ensure that the institution’s performance was on par with other wellrecognised institutions around the globe, hence the need for benchmarking with reputable universities. For this study, the students in the sample strongly believed that their qualifications were of good quality because they were internationally benchmarked, and locals trained in various countries and experts from many different countries presented the modules. They, therefore, saw the qualifications they were pursuing as able to provide entry into labour markets around the globe or opportunities for self-employment.

4.10. Challenges faced in the Implementation of Quality Management Students identified four major challenges faced in the implementation of quality management at NUST as shown in figure 4.2.

Delay in the Implementation of Policies and Procedures Inability to attract and Retain Experienced Lecturers Lack of Effective Communication Inadequate Resources

2% 3% 4% 26%

No idea

65%

Figure 4.2: Quality Management Implementation Challenges faced by Students

The responses of the 65% of the students surveyed, as show in Figure 4.2 above, could not identify challenges faced in the implementation of quality institution at the institution because they were not quite familiar with the QMPs in place. Yet a small percentage of students were able to list a number of challenges hindering the effective implementation of quality management at the institution. From Figure 4.2 above, 26% of the students identified lack of inadequate resources – both human and financial resources – as an obstacle to implementation of quality management at the institution. Secondly, lack of effective communication with students on issues of quality management is mentioned by 4% of the respondents as a challenge; and this may explain why


most of the students are not aware of what quality management entails – hence their difficulty in explaining the concept and identifying challenges. Thirdly, the institution’s inability to attract and retain experienced lecturers is mentioned by 3% of the respondents. Lastly, 2% of the respondents mentioned that new policies and procedures unusually take long time to implement and when they are finally implemented, they have lost relevance and do not benefit students as was envisaged. The above challenges corelate with the views of staff members that lack of funds and understaffing were challenges to implementation of quality management practices. In this study, staff members were also asked to identify challenges faced in the implementation of quality management at NUST. The views expressed by staff members are illustrated in Figure 4.3. Because a staff member could identify more than one challenge, the percentages in Figure 4.3 do not add up to 100%. 26% 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

22% 17%

13%

9%

9% 13%

Figure 4.3: Quality Management Implementation Challenges faced by Staff

The seven challenges faced by staff members in the implementation of quality management are elaborated herein under.


a) Lack of Effective Communication The third most cited challenge by staff members in the implementation of quality management is lack of communication – 17% of the respondents mentioned this. Respondents pointed out that there was lack of communication within various faculties, between management and staff members, and between the institution and the students. Even though communication is considered to be of great importance in quality management, respondents, both staff members and students, were of the opinion that it was not being done effectively, as they were not given important information regarding quality management. In their study on the role of effective communication in TQM, Choudhary and Rathore (2013) found a strong relationship between good communication and successful implementation of quality management practices. They also state that although communication has always been a key requirement of good management, it is even more important in the implementation of total quality management. Similarly, Saraiva, Novas and Gomes (2015), who examined whether organisational communication and quality management are related, found that in various sectors communication among employees of was satisfactory in organisations that organisations that performance well – that is, delivered quality service.

b) Inadequate Resources The first challenge identified by majority of staff members (26%) in the implementation of quality management was inadequate resources – both human and financial resources. In this context, the constraining human resources was academic staff. This result of this situation was that departments dealing with quality management for the institution were not fully able to carry out their responsibilities and enhance quality management activities and expand it to include all the stakeholders for them to be aware of the quality objectives that are to be achieved – when, how and by whom. Ariff, Zaidin and Sulong (2007) draw attention to the fact that for HEIs, academic staff members are critical human resources, without whom academic programmes could not run, and thus are of utmost importance to faculties and university as whole. Shortage of academic staff members should therefore be avoided is quality is to be maintained.


c) Lack of Awareness The second challenge identified by staff members is lack of awareness of the quality management practices in place, which was mentioned by 22% of the respondents. This includes staff members not sure of the role they were required to play to contribute towards the quality of the institution. Even though the analysis produced a high Cronbach’s alpha (a = .849) for the components of this construct of awareness of policies and procedures in relation to staff members, which gives an impression that staff members were well informed, both staff members and students indicated that the policies and procedures were not given the necessary circulation. The literature on TQM suggests that employees at all levels need to become very familiar with the TQM policies and procedures of the organisation for them to use TQM to improve their institution’s processes and functions (McMillan, 1998; cited in Altahayneh, 2014). This lack of awareness is, as shown by the responses, because of lack of communication on quality issues within the institution, in spite of the importance of communication in all organisation.

d) Lack of Co-operation The challenge that ranked fourth in terms of the percentage of the respondents that cited it (13%) is lack of co-operation between various departments. The results of the study indicated that Departments did not cooperate on quality management practices; each Department tended to have its own arrangement, and, therefore, seemingly unaware of the fact that the ultimate goal of providing quality service to every student of the institution required cooperation among Departments and Faculties. This is the point made by Choudhary and Rathore (2013) that TQM is a principle, which requires the mutual cooperation of everyone that is involved in the operations of an organisation and all the stakeholders. In fact, the conceptual framework for this study indicated that the alignment of QPMs with all departments creates a level playing field for all the departments to generate synergy in achieving quality.


e) Lack of Training

Another 9% of the respondents indicated that lack of training is a challenge in the implementation of quality management. It is difficult for employees to achieve the goals set for them if their knowledge base and level of understanding of the situations they are to deal with are shallow. Training is necessary for improving performance and for helping employees discover innovative ways to contribute to the organisation. Employees are able to identify opportunities for improvement when trained on a regular basis, which empower them to contribute to ongoing quality improvement processes of the organisation. Stahl (1995) had also argued that training and development programmes should not be seen as a once-off event, but as a lifelong process. Total quality training material and support (whether internal from a quality director and team or from external consultants) will be of real value only if the employees are motivated to respond positively to them (Choudhary & Rathore, 2013). So motivation for training to improve quality should be on-going. Because NUST has evolved from the former Polytechnic of Namibia, which did not put much emphasis on higher qualifications for staff member, many members of both the academic and administrative staff need to obtain higher degrees, especially PhDs for academic staff. It would be difficult for employees to achieve the quality goals of the institution if they do not have the qualifications required under the new work arrangements. Opportunities for training are, therefore, necessary for improving teaching and learning processes and helping staff members discover innovative ways to improve the institution. This argument is supported by Osseo-Asare and Longbottom (2002) who emphasised that effective implementation of any quality-oriented change programme involves proper education and training of those who would be involved on the implementation process.

f) Lack of Decision-Making The slow pace of decision-making was listed by 9% of the staff respondents as a challenge in the implementation of quality management. This is a particularly important area of TQM. Visionary leaders in higher education bear the responsibility of setting up quality management


units. However, for such units to function effectively, they should be allowed to function independently yet under the supervision and with the support of senior management and be able to make informative decisions. Individual Departments will, in some instances, only comply with the recommendations of a quality management unit if that unit not only receives the full and uncompromising support of senior management, but also the independence and uncompromising guidance given by senior managers. Top management can only make informed decision when they are aware of and understand that quality management activities are of vital to the operation of the organisation. However, the results of this study show that even though top management is aware of the problems that hinder the smooth implementation of quality management, they have not been keen on seeing them solved. This is because there is little or no communication from senior management on efforts to strengthen quality management practices at the institution. Hamidi and Zamanparvar (2008), cited in Altahayneh (2014), observe that lack of top management involvement in and commitment to TQM change are common reasons for TQM failure. Vora (2002), cited in O’Mahony and Gravan (2012), argues that the successful implementation of quality management in higher education is difficult without the involvement, commitment and sponsorship of senior higher education leaders. This commitment needs to be communicated to the staff members and the students.

g) Overlapping of Regulations on Quality Management Another challenge that ranked joint fourth (13% of staff respondents) is ‘overlapping of regulations on quality management’. This challenge is not common to NUST; the report of the external audit conducted in 2011 at the University of Namibia also identified this overlapping of regulations on quality management. The report revealed that there was too much overlap between departments and suggests that the university considers bringing the office of the Director of Academic Affairs, the Quality Unit, and the TLI Unit together into one overarching entity. This entity will provide a more cohesive and less fragmented focal point for strategy and management in academic affairs, quality assurance, and learning and teaching enhancement. As explained above, the Namibia University of Science and Technology has two divisions responsible for quality assurance.

These divisions are the Programme Development and Registration Unit


responsible for organizing and managing programme (curriculum) development activities in the institution and ensuring the registration of qualifications on the NQF and the Quality Assurance Unit which ensures that the quality of education and services offered by the institution are of high standard and that the students receive the best possible education available. Similar overlaps have been observed in the implementation of quality management systems in other sectors and they have been identified as a challenge that needs to be addressed. Subrata and Anindwa (2009) identify some challenges with implementation of quality management systems in the textile industry in India. These challenges include lack of top management commitment, lack of understanding the system, overlaps in responsibilities of certain sections, constraints on resources, lack of education and training of employees, excessive documentation and control, and lack of understanding of the effort and resources needed in certification. These challenges had to be addressed for the goals of quality management to be achieved.

4.11. Role of Senior Faculty Members in dealing with Quality Management Challenges The study further intended to find out the role of senior faculty members in dealing with the challenges encountered in managing quality. The fourth question in the staff questionnaire tried to determine their views on how senior faculty leaders deal with quality management challenges of the institution. The views of the respondents are presented in Figure 4.4 below:

17% 22%

No Communication

Divisional Meetings

61%

Provide Guidance and Support

Figure 4.4: Role of Senior Faculty Members in Quality Management


From Figure 4.4, the majority of respondents (61%) indicated that in as much as they wanted to tackle quality management issues in the institution, there was no communication from top management that addresseed quality management issues. This helps to identify an important role that top management of NUST could play in dealing with the challenges in implementing quality management – making sure that quality management objectives are clearly communicated for all staff members to see their role in achieving those objectives. The results of this study show that there is little or no communication from senior staff members on effort to strengthen quality management practices at the institution. The study identified several challenges, yet there is no evidence that whatever is being done to address these challenges is being communicated to staff members. Vora (2002) argues that though the successful implementation of quality management in higher education institutions is difficult without the involvement, commitment and sponsorship of senior management, success comes only when this commitment is communicated to the staff members and the students. In support of this view, Osseo-Asare et al. (2007) also found that the role of leadership in TQM include the communication of a clear statement of mission, successful implementation of quality processes, and utilising an empowerment approach. The discussion above shows that the leaders of NUST must begin to communicate issues related to quality to both staff and students, as non-communication has the potential to derail the process of managing quality. According to Trivellas et al., (2012), the lack of a participative culture, stimulating discussions, and analyses of existing and impending quality improvement actions may all be the consequence of lack of communication, which could lead to disappointment and alienation of staff member or even to resistance to quality-inducing change. Successful leadership that contributes to the effective implementation of quality management systems should, therefore, embrace regular communication of quality issues. Quality management practices such as top management commitment, communication of such commitment, teamwork, continuous improvement through benchmarking, etc., have a positive influence on academic results (Nderitu & Nyaoga, 2013) The view of 22% of the respondents was that Divisions hold meetings to address issues of quality, whilst 17% indicated that top management did not provide guidance and support to uplift


the institution’s performance in terms of adhering to quality standards set for the institution. This is an indication that not all senior faculty staff members ignore making sure that the institution works towards the successful implementation of quality management. This is important for, as Choudhary and Rathore (2013) have observed, when senior management ensures that each team sees TQM as useful to the organisation, synergy is built up to improve quality of delivery Effective leadership contributes to effective implementation of a quality management system. Quality management practices which involves top management commitment, teamwork, continuous improvement, and benchmarking have a positive influence on academic results (Nderitu & Nyaoga, 2013). Csizmadia et al. (2008) emphasised that the higher the commitment of higher education leaders in an institution, the faster the pace of quality management implementation and the wider its scope. Osseo-Asare et al. (2007), cited in O’Mahony and Gravan (2012), investigated the role of leadership in TQM and identified three important leadership characteristics: the communication of a clear statement of mission, successful implementation of quality processes, utilising an empowerment approach and the use of timely data, information and knowledge of best practices. These findings are also in line with Horine and Hailey (1995) who emphasise that there are five key challenges that affect the successful implementation of QMPs and these are: organization culture, senior leadership commitment, faculty support, implementation time and training.

4.12. Improving the Formulation and Implementation of Quality Management The fifth question was to elicit from both academic and administrative staff members ways in which improvements in the formulation and implementation of QMPs would make graduates from NUST market ready in terms of quality. Respondents proposed the following to be in place regarding the success of the implementation of quality management within the institution as presented in figure 4.5 below.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 92 No Suggestions, 13% Adoption of International Best Practices, 9% Engage Staff in the Formulation and Implementation of Quality Management, 17%

Provision of Quality Management Guidelines, 17%

Communicate the importance of Quality Management, 43%

Figure 4.5: Views on Improving Quality Management at NUST

Figure 4.5 above, shows that the majority of respondents (43%) suggested that there should be effective communication from the institution to all the institution’s stakeholders regarding information on quality management. This will make everyone feel included in decision-making on quality management practices in the institution. Seventeen percent (17%) of the respondents suggested that all staff members be engaged in the formulation and implementation of quality management as this will encourage ownership and commitment. They further stressed that it is of vital importance to inform staff about the approach to implementing quality management and its benefits; and also to assign responsibilities to as many as possible for broader involvement. Another 17% of the respondents proposed that the institution should provide information to all stakeholders so that they are informed of what is expected from them. Quality guidelines can be distributed to students annually. This will also give students assurance that the institution strives towards quality and have students’ interest at heart. The view that the institution should benchmark and adopt international best practices by learning from the quality standards that other reputable universities have adopted is expressed by 9% of the respondents. Many researchers consider benchmarking to be a key tool for effective


implementation of quality management (Sinclair and Zairi, 2001). This suggestion assumes that since industrialised countries have more advanced educational institutions, collaboration through benchmarking would provide solutions to some of the quality management problems being experienced by HEIs in developing countries, including Namibia. Jagadeesh (2000) has, however, drawn attention to the fact that opinions regarding collaborative programmes seem to be divided. Jagadeesh explains that programmes modelled after foreign degree programmes may not be able to satisfy the needs of local business or industry. On the other hand, it could be argued that since such ‘borrowed’ programmes include more advanced materials and cover the latest developments, students trained in them can adapt and meet the challenges of the local industry, both at present and in the future, more effectively. In the discussion on concerns about communication in connection with quality management above, some 13% had no suggestions, as they indicated that they were not familiar with the quality management practises in place in the institution. A culture of regular communication on quality issues may have prevented this. Also, when students were asked to suggest improvements that could be made in the formulation and implementation of quality management practices in the institution to enhance the quality of its graduates, most of the respondents (47%) indicated that they had no suggestions since they were not aware of the current quality management practices in place. As though offering a suggestion on how to deal with this situation, 23% indicated that there should be effective communication from the institution to the students on the policies and procedures that are in place. This will put all the institution’s stakeholders on the same page on quality; and suggestions for improvements should be welcome from all, which will make students feel included in decision-making on quality management practices in the institution. On measures to improve quality, a small proportion of the respondents (9%) indicated that, as a priority, the institution should consider increasing facilities and resources for studying, such as the numbers and quality of books in the library and internet facilities at the institution. This may be difficulty to implement because at the moment budget cuts have reduced government subvention to HEIs in Namibia. Another 8% indicated that the institution should consider benchmarking with other reputable institutions for best practices in the formulation and


implementation of quality management practices with the ultimate aim of producing quality, market-ready graduates. A further 4% each suggested that the institution educates students on issues pertaining to quality management practices and that the leadership of the institution should be seen to be driving the quality management movement. Finally, another 4% of the respondents indicated that once policies and procedures are developed, all stakeholders in the institution should be urged to be involved in the implementation.

4.13. Summary This chapter presented and discussed the results from the data that was collected. The first part of the chapter presented information on the staff response rate in the sample for this study. The second part presented the reliability statistics, item total statistics, and correlation coefficients for the data collected from the staff on NUST on quality management objectives of the institution’s academic and administrative functions, as well as the evaluation of external and internal processes. The chapter further presented students’ responses then looked at how students understood the term quality management. This was followed by presentations of reliability statistics, item total statistics, and correlation coefficients on students’ views of the institutions’ commitments to quality service. This was followed by an analysis of students’ views on whether the institution was doing enough to provide quality services. Then the views of the students on the challenges faced in the implementation of quality management practices within the institution and how senior members of faculty dealt with these challenges were presented and discussed. The last part of the chapter presented suggestions on how the institution can better formulate and implement quality management practices.


CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction The previous chapter presented and discussed the results from the data collected for this study. This chapter summarises the work done and presents the conclusions arrived at and the recommendations drawn from the findings. For this research, the researcher used a questionnaire to collect data from a purposive sample of 23 staff members and a cluster and random sample of 74 students of NUST. Questionnaires were sent to the respondents through Google Docs. The presentation of the findings and discussions were in line with the literature review.

5.2 Objectives Revisited The findings, together with the literature review and the conceptual framework, which guided this study led to several conclusions and recommendations. The main objective of this study was: To identify the quality-enhancing activities that are missing in implementation of quality management processes at the NUST and to determine the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the quality of graduates from NUST. The specific objectives of the study are presented below and linked to the findings of the study. 

To determine the effectiveness of QMPs currently in place at NUST in comparison with international best practices.



To establish the perceptions of quality education that students hold and how these influence the quality of delivery.



To identify the challenges faced in implementing quality management at NUST.



To determine the extent to which improvements in the formulation and implementation of QMPs would make graduates from NUST market ready in terms of quality.


5.3 Summary of Key Findings The key findings of this study are summarised as follow: 

Staff members are informed and are aware of quality management policies and procedures in place and are included and in the review and drafting of quality management interventions.



The institution implements quality standards that are benchmarked with local, regional and international best practices and that the institution produces quality of graduates.



The goals set by the institution to ensure better service are evaluated annually. The institution conducts external evaluation to assess the effectiveness and achievements of the quality management practices annually, the quality management unit conduct regular selfevaluations to analyse the effectiveness and achievements of institutional quality management and that the institution conducts regular surveys among the members of the staff and students for feedback on the quality management procedures and their implementation at grass-root levels.



The institution face the following challenges in the effectiveness implementation of QMPs: inadequate resources, lack of awareness, lack of communication, lack of co-operation amongst various departments, lack of decision-making, lack of training and overlapping of regulation of quality management.



As much as staff members wanted to tackle quality management issues in the institution, there was little or no communication from senior staff members on effort to strengthen quality management practices at the institution.



Students believe that lecturers and top management have students’ best interest at heart, they motivate them, there are functioning channels for expressing their complaints, service is delivered on time and the institution conducts evaluation on students’ achievements on the programmes in order to improve where necessary.



The institution offers excellent quality qualifications and that students believe that they are studying for internationally benchmarked qualifications. Students also believe that there is sufficient support in the teaching and learning environment e.g. library, ICT facilities and that the institution has adequate and competent lecturers.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 97 

Most of the students believed that the institution was doing enough to provide quality services. Their views were based on their feeling that the institution communicated important quality-related information to them.

5.4 Conclusion Given the above research findings one can conclude that there is some awareness of quality management practices at NUST. However, the implementation needs to be strengthened and continuous improvement should be maintained. The findings of the study showed that quality management is practised at the institution and its awareness is very high for the staff members but very low among the students. It also emerged that there is a need for effective communication between the institution and staff members (both academic and administrative), students, and all other stakeholders and top management. Respondents also indicated that there is need for simplifying quality management policies and procedures to improve implementation.

5.5 Recommendations 

The institution needs to communicate the importance of quality management to all stakeholders, mainly students and staff members.



Strengthen communication between various departments, management and staff and with students.



Provision of clear quality management guidelines.



Engage all staff members in the formulation and implementation of quality management.



Provision of continuous and effective feedback on implementation efforts.



The institution should communicate to all stakeholders, mainly students and staff members, regarding the importance and benefits of quality management, and also assign responsibilities to get everyone involved in the implementation of quality management.



Top management should demonstrate that they are fully committed to effective leadership and ensure that appropriate quality management policies are in place, implemented and sustained to improve quality within the institution.




The institution should find ways to deal with challenges identified in this study which hinders the effective implementation of quality management.

5.6 Areas for Future Research 

Research should be undertaken to determine the effect of an effective implementation of quality management policies and procedures once all stakeholders are included.



This study also recommends that further research be conducted on evaluating the quality of teaching and learning through quality management processes.


REFERENCES

Abdullah, F. (2006). The Development of HEdPERF: A New Measuring Instrument of Service Quality for the Higher Education Sector. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(6), 569-581. Addison R. B. (1999). A Grounded Hermeneutic Editing Approach. In Doing Qualitative Research. (2nd. Ed.). (Crabtree B.T. & Miller W.L., (eds.), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 145 -163. Ahmad, H., Francis, A., & Zairi, M. (2007). Business Process Re-engineering: Critical Success Factors in Higher Education. Business Process Management Journal, 13(3), 451-469. Ahmed, S. (2009). Methods in Sample Surveys. Stratified sampling. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Altahayneh, Z. L. (2014). Implementation of Total Quality Management in Colleges of Physical Education in Jordan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(3). Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2009). Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution. Alstete, J. W. (1995). Benchmarking in Higher Education: Adapting Best Practices to Improve Quality. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 5. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, One Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 630, Washington, DC 20036-1183. Almeida, D., Junior, J. M., & Costa, A. F. B. (2014). Critical Factors to Quality Management System Implementation: Relevant Literature Review 1992-2012. In IIE Annual Conference. Proceedings (p. 1113). Institute of Industrial Engineers-Publisher. Anderson, G. (2006). Assuring Quality/Resisting Quality Assurance: Academics’ Responses to ‘Quality’ in Some Australian Universities. Quality in Higher Education, 12(2), 161-173. Arcaro, J.S. (2006). Quality in Education, (1st ed.). New Delhi: Pentagon press. Ardi, R., Hidayatno, A., & Yuri M. Zagloel, T. (2012). Investigating Relationships among Quality Dimensions in Higher Education. Quality Assurance in Education, 20(4), 408-428. Ariff, M. S. M., Zaidin, N., & Sulong, N. (2007). Total Quality Management Implementation in Higher Education; Concerns and Challenges Faced by the Faculty. In: 12th International Conference on ISO 9000 & TQM (12-ICIT)s, Republic of China. Arjomandi, M., Kestel, C. & Grimshaw, P. (2009). An EFQM Excellence Model for Higher Education Quality Assessment. 20th Conference University of Adelaide, Australasian Association for Engineering Education.


Asiyai, R. I. (2013). Challenges of Quality Higher Education in Nigeria in the 21st Century. International Journal of Educational Planning and Administration. 3 (2), 159-172. Aminuzzaman, S. (2007). Overview of Quality Assurance in the Context of Bangladesh. Paper Presented in a Workshop Organised by American International University Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Anyamele, S. C. (2004). Institutional Management in Higher Education. A Study of Leadership Approaches to Quality Improvement in University Management - Nigerian and Finnish Cases. Finland: Helsinki University Press. Avram, E. M., & Avram, R. M. (2011). Quality Management in Higher Education Institutions. Holistic Marketing Management Journal, 1(2), 41-47. Babbie, E. & Mouton, J. (2004). The Practice of Social Research. Belmont: Cape Town. Wardsworth / Thomson learning. Becket, N., & Brookes, M. (2005). Analysing Quality Audits in Higher Education. Brookes ejournal of learning and teaching, 1(2), 1-12. Becket, N., & Brookes, M. (2008). Quality Management Practice in Higher Education-What Quality Are We Actually Enhancing? Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education (Pre-2012), 7(1), 40-54. Best, J.W., & Kahn, J.V. (2006). Research in Education (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Binsardi, A., & Ekwulugo, F. (2003). International Marketing of British Education: Research on the Students' Perception and the UK Market Penetration. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21(5), 318-327. Bless, C., Higson-Smith, C., & Kagee, A. (2006). Fundamentals of Social Research Methods: An African Perspective. Juta and Company Ltd. Boulton, G., & Lucas, C. (2008). What are Universities for? League of European Research Universities. LERU, 1-17. Brannelly, L., Lewis, L., & Ndaruhutse, S. (2011). Higher Education and the Formation of Developmental Elites. A literature Review and Preliminary Data Analysis. CfBT Education Trust, February 2011. www.dlprog.org. Brookes, M., & Becket, N. (2007). Quality Management in Higher Education: A Review of International Issues and Practice. International Journal of Quality Standards, 1(1), 85-121.


Bryman, A. (2009). Effective Leadership in Higher Education: Final Report. Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, Research and Development Series, 14. Bunoti, S. (2011). The Quality of Higher Education in Developing Countries Needs Professional Support. In 22nd International Conference on Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.intconfhighered.org/FINAL%20Sarah%20Bunoti.pdf. Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: Review, Critique, Research Agenda. European Journal of Marketing, 30(1), 8-32. Cardoso, R. A. (2010). Implementing Quality Management Systems in Higher Education Institutions. Journal of Total Quality Management, (5), 13-17. Cheng, Y. Y., Lyu, J., & Lin, Y. C. (2004). Education Improvement through ISO 9000 Implementation: Experiences in Taiwan. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20(1), 91-95. Choudhary, M., & Rathore, N. (2013). Role of Effective Communication in Total Quality Management. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 4(7), 20832090. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education (5th ed.). London: Routledge Falmer. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. Routledge. Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2006). Business Research Methods. (9th ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill. Council on Higher Education (2007). Audit Report on the Polytechnic of Namibia, Pretoria. Costes, N., et al. (2008). Quality Procedures in the European Higher Education Area and Beyond-Second ENQA Survey. European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, (14)36-38. Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative. New Jersey: Upper Saddle River. Creswell, J. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Csizmadia, T., Enders, J., & Westerheijden, D. F. (2008). Quality Management in Hungarian Higher Education: Organisational Responses to Governmental Policy. Higher Education, 56(4), 439-455.


Cullen, J., Joyce, J., Hassall, T., & Broadbent, M. (2003). Quality in Higher Education: from Monitoring to Management. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(1), 5-14. Dahlgaard, J. J., Kristensen, K., & Kanji, G. K. (1995). Total Quality Management and Education. Total Quality Management, 6(5), 445-456. De Vos, A. S., Delport, C. S. L., Fouché, C. B., & Strydom, H. (2011). Research at Grass Roots: A primer for the Social Science and Human Professions. Van Schaik Publishers. De Vos, A., Strydom, H., Fouche, C.B., & Delport, C.S.L. (2005). Research at Grass Roots for the Social Sciences and Human Service Professions (3rd ed.). Pretoria. Van Schaik. Deming, W. E. (2000). Out of the crisis (1st MIT Press ed.). Denzin, H.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage. Dickenson, R. P., Campbell, D. R., & Azarov, V. N. (2000). Quality Management Implementation in Russia: Strategies for Change. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17(1), 66-82. Dochy, F. J. R. C, et al. (1990). Preliminaries to the Implementation of a Quality Assurance System Based on Management Information and Performance Indicators’ in Dochy, F. J. R. C, et al. (Eds.). Management Information and Performance Indicators in Higher Education: an International Issue, Van Corcum, Assesn/Maastricht, 69-94. Ebiringa, O. T. (2012). Total Quality Management for Service Delivery by Commercial Banks: Analysis of Critical Success Factors. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, 1(3), 1-11. Europe-Africa Quality Connect / University of Namibia. (2012). Evaluation Report. University of Namibia. Windhoek. Namibia. Fallis, D. (2007). Information Ethics for Twenty-First Century Library Professionals. Library Hi Tech, 25(1), 23-36. Flynn, B. B., Schroeder, R. G., & Sakakibara, S. (1994). A Framework for Quality Management Research and an Associated Measurement Instrument. Journal of Operations Management, 11(4), 339-366. François, P., et al. (2003). Evaluating Implementation of Quality Management Systems in a Teaching Hospital’s Clinical Departments. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 15(1), 47-55. Fuentes-Fuentes, M., Albacete-Saez, A., & Llorens-Montes, J., (2004). The Impact of Environmental Characteristics on TQM Principles and Organisational performance. International Journal of Management Science Omeg, 32(6), 425-442.


Gardner, J.W. (1990). On Leadership. New York: The Free Press. Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill/ Pearson. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A simple guide and References. 11.0 Update. 4th Edition. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Gibbs, G., Knapper, C., & Picinnin S. (2009). Departmental Leadership of Teaching in Research Intensive Environments. Research and Development Series. Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. London. Government of the Republic of Namibia (2013). Millennium Development Goals Progress. National Planning Commission. Windhoek. Namibia. Government of Republic of Namibia (GRN). (2007). Education and Training Sector Improvement Programme (ETSIP). Planning for a Learning Nation. Phase I (2006 - 2011). Government of Republic of Namibia (GRN). (2004). Namibia Vision 2030: A Policy Framework for Long-term National Development (Summary Document). Office of the President. Windhoek: Namibia. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th / Joseph F. Hair ... et al. ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.; London: Pearson Education. Hartley, J. (2004). Case Study Research. Inc. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research (323 - 333). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Harvey, L. (2004). Analytic Quality Glossary, Quality Research International. Harvey, L. (2002). Evaluation for what? Teaching in Higher Education, 7(3), 245-263. Harvey, L. (2003). Student Feedback. Quality in Higher Education, 9(1), 3-20. Harvey, L. & Burrows, A. (1992). Empowering students. New Academic. 1 (3), 2. Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining Quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34. Hassan, A. (2010). Linking Quality Assurance to Human Resource Management: A Study of SMEs in Malaysia. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 27(6) 641-657.


Haug, G. (2003). Quality Assurance/Accreditation in the Emerging European Higher Education Area: A Possible Scenario for the Future. European Journal of Education, 38 (3). Hellsten, U., & Klesjo, B. (2000). TQM as a Management System Consisting of Values, Techniques and Tools. The TQM Magazine, 12(4), 238-244. HEQC (1995). Graduate Standards Programme: Interim Report. London: HEQC.

Horine, J. E., & Hailey, A. H. (1995). Challenges to Successful Quality Management Implementation in Higher Education, 20 (1). Human Sciences Press, Inc. In'airat, M. H., & Al-Kassem, A. H. (2014). Total Quality Management in Higher Education: A Review. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 4(3), 294. Izadi, M., Kashef, A. E., & Stadt, R. W. (1996). Quality in higher education: Lessons learned from the Baldrige award, Deming prize, and ISO 9000 registration. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 33(2), 60-76. Jaafreh, A. B., & Al-abedallat, A. Z. (2012). The Effect of Quality Management Practices on Organizational Performance in Jordan: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Financial Research, 4(1), 93. Jagadeesh, R. (2000). Assuring Quality in Management Education: The Indian context. Quality Assurance in Education, 8 (3), 110 -119. Jain, R., Sinha, G., & de, S.K. (2010). Service Quality in Higher Education: An Exploratory Study. Asian Journal of Marketing, (4) 144-154. Jinhui Wu, S., Zhang, D., & Schroeder, R. G. (2011). Customization of Quality Practices: The Impact of Quality culture. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 28(3), 263-279. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time has Come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14-26. Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Turner, L.A. (2007). Journal of Mixed Methods Research: Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research, 1 (2), 112-133. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A MetaAnalytic Test of Their Relative Validity. Journal of Applied Psychology. American Psychological Association, 89 (5), 755-768. Kadhila, N. (2012). Quality Assurance Mechanisms in Higher Education Institutions in Namibia (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Free State).


Kalusi J.I. (2001). Teacher Quality for Quality Education. Nigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy, 8 (2), 62-72. Kaplan, R.S., & Norton, D.P. (1992). Balanced Scorecard – measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70 (1), pp. 71-79. Karapetrovic, S. (2001). ISO 9000 Quality System Development for Engineering Schools: Why and How Should We Do It? Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education, Oslo. Norway. Kirk, J. (2000). “Implementing TQM”, Management Services, Vol. 44, September, 14‐17. Kis, V. (2005). Quality assurance in tertiary education: Current Practices in OECD Countries and Literature Review on Potential Effects. Tertiary Review: A contribution to the OECD Thematic Review of Tertiary Education, 14(9). Kleijnen, J., Dolmans, D., Willems. J., & Van Hout, J. (2011). Does internal Quality Management Contribute to More Control or to Improvement of Higher Education? A Survey on Faculty’s Perceptions. Quality Assurance in Education, 19(2), 141 - 155. Koslowski, F. A. (2006). Quality and Assessment in Context: A Brief Review. Quality Assurance in Education, 14 (3), 277-288. Kruger, V. (2001). Main schools of TQM: The Big Five. The TQM Magazine, 13 (3), 146-155. Kvavik, R.B., Goldstein, P.J., & Voloudakis, J. (2005). Good Enough!: IT Investment and Business Process Performance in Higher Education. EDUCAUSE. Lakshman, C. (2006). A Theory of Leadership for Quality: Lessons from TQM for Leadership Theory. Total Quality Management, 17 (1), 41- 60. Leedy, P.D., & Ormrod, J.E. (2005). Practical Research. Planning and Design. (8th ed.). Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River. New Jersey. Löfgren, V. (2012). Developing and Implementing a Quality Management System in a Start up Company. Chalmers University of Technology. Goteborg. Sweden. Lomas, L. (2004). Embedding quality: The Challenges for Higher Education. Quality Assurance in Education, 12 (4), 157-165. Magutu, P. O., Mbeche, I. M., Nyaoga, R. B., Nyaanga, R., & Ombato, T. O. (2010). Quality Management Practices in Kenyan Educational Institutions: The Case of the University of Nairobi. African Journal of Business & Management (AJBUMA), 1, 14-28.


Maluleke, Y.L. (2008). Evaluation of an Implemented Quality Management System (QMS) at one of the South African Government Departments: Employee Perceptions of the Effect of the QMS Intervention. Rhodes University. South Africa. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (1999). Designing Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). USA: SAGE Publications Inc. Martin, E., Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Ramsden, P. (2003). Variation in the Experience of Leadership of Teaching in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 28 (3), 247259. Matengu, K., Likando, G., & Kangumu, B. (2014). Governance and Coordination of the Higher Education System in Namibia: Challenges and Prospects. FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education, 1(2), 4. Materu, P. N. (2007). Higher Education Quality Assurance in Sub-Saharan Africa: Status, Challenges, Opportunities and Promising Practices (No. 124). World Bank Publications. Maxwell, J.A. (2005). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication. McGuirk, P.M., & O’Neill, P. (2005). Using Questionnaires in Qualitative Human Geography in Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography. Oxford University Press, Australia, 147 - 162. McKinnon, K. R., Walker, S. H., & Davis, D. (2000). A manual for Australian Universities. Australian Higher Education Division, Australia. Mead, B. (2011). ISO 9001-A Brief History and Overview. Business Improvement Services. Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons. Mertler, C.A & Vannatta, R.A. (2001). Advanced and Multivariate Statistical Methods: Practical Application and Interpretation. Los Angeles, CA: Pyrezak Publishing. Michael, R.K., Sower, V.E., & Motwani, J. (1997). A Comprehensive Model for Implementing Total Quality Management in Higher Education. Benchmarking for Quality Management and Technology, 4 (2), 104-120. Middlehurst, R., Goreham, H., & Woodfield, S. (2009). Why Research Leadership in Higher Education? Exploring Contributions from the UK's Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. Leadership, 5(3), 311-329. Mizikaci, F. (2006). A Systems Approach to Programme Evaluation Model for Quality in Higher Education. Quality Assurance in Education, 14 (1), 37 - 53.


Mokhtar, S.S.M., Abdullah, N.A.H., Kardi, N., & Yacob, M.I. (2013). Sustaining a Quality Management System: Process, Issues and Challenges. Business Strategy Series, 14 (4), 23 - 130. Moodie, G. C. (1986). Standards and Criteria in Higher Education. Guildford, SRHE & NFER/Nelson. Mouton, J. (2001). How to Succeed in your Master’s and Doctoral Studies. Pretoria. RSA: Van Schaik Publishers. Murphy, L. (2005). Transformational Leadership: A Cascading Chain Reaction. Journal of Nursing Management, 13(2), 128-136. Nabitz, U., Klazinga, N., & Walburg, J. A. N. (2000). The EFQM Excellence Model: European and Dutch Experiences with the EFQM Approach in Health Care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 12 (3), 191-202. Namibia Qualifications Authority Act, 29 (1996). National Council for Higher Education of Namibia Act, 26 (2003). Nderitu, N. M., & Nyaoga, R. B. (2013). An investigation on the Effect of Quality Management Practices on the Performance of Public Primary Schools in Nakuru Municipality, Kenya. International Journal of Education and Research, (1) 1-14. Nicolescu, L. (2009). Applying Marketing to Higher education: Scope and Limits, Management and Marketing, 4 (2), 35 - 44. Njie, T.L., Fon, L.T., & Awomodu, G. (2008). Top Management Commitment and Empowerment of Employees in TQM Implementation. Theoretical Thesis, School of Engineering. University college of Borås. Northouse, P.G. (2010). Leadership: Theory & Practice. (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Oakland, J. S. (2003). Total Quality Management: Text and Cases, Oxford: ButterworthHeinemann. O'Mahony, K., & Garavan, T. N. (2012). Implementing a Quality Management Framework in a Higher Education Organisation: A Case Study. Quality Assurance in Education, 20(2), 184-200. Otaala, B. (2003). African Higher Education: An International Reference Book. Indian University. Press, 476 - 486.


Owlia, M. S., & Aspinwall, E. M. (1997). TQM in Higher Education-A Review. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 14(5), 527-543. Parnell, D. (1990). Dateline 2000, the New Higher Education Agenda. Washington. DC: Community College.

Parrish, D. (2010, August). Effective Leadership in Higher Education: A Circle of Influence. Association for Research in Education (AARE). International Education Research Conference-Melbourne. Polit, D., & Hungler, B. (2004). Nursing Research, Principles and Methods. Philadephia. Lippincourt. Polytechnic of Namibia. (2009). Quality Assurance Policy. Namibia. Windhoek. Polytechnic of Namibia. (2010). Third-Five Year Strategic Plan (2009 - 2013). Windhoek. Namibia. Pounder, J. (1999). Institutional Performance in Higher Education: Is Quality a Relevant Concept? Quality Assurance in Education, 7(3), 56-163. Powell, T. C. (1995). Total Quality Management as Competitive Advantage: A Review and Empirical Study. Strategic Management Journal, 16(1), 15-37. Prajogo, D. I. (2005). The Comparative Analysis of TQM Practices and Quality Performance between Manufacturing and Service Firms. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16(3), 217-228. Prybutok, V., Zhang, X., & Peak, D. (2011). Assessing the Effectiveness of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Model with Municipal Government. Socio Economic Planning Sciences, (45), 118-129. Pycraft, M. (2000). Operations Management. Pearson South Africa. Quinn, A., Lemay, G., Larsen, P., & Johnson, D.M. (2009). Service Quality in Higher Education. Total Quality Management Vol. 20, No. 2, 139-152. Redmond, R., Curtis, E., Noone, T., & Keenan, P. (2008). Quality in Higher Education: The Contribution of Edward Deming's Principles. International Journal of Educational Management, 22(5), 432-441. Reynolds, P. A. (1990). Is an External Examiner System an Adequate Guarantee of Academic Standards? Quality Assurance and Accountability in Higher Education, 22-31. Rowitz, L. (2001). Public Health Leadership: Putting Principles into Practice. Aspen Publishers Inc., Gaithersburg, MD.


Sadeh, E., & Garkaz, M. (2014). Explaining the Mediating Role of Service Quality between Quality Management Enablers and Students' Satisfaction in Higher Education Institutes: The Perception of Managers. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 26(11-12), 1335-1356. Sahney, S., Banwet, D. K., & Karunes, S. (2004). Conceptualizing Total Quality Management in Higher Education. The TQM Magazine, 16(2), 145-159. Saraiva, M., Novas, J. C., & Gomes, P. G. (2015). How Communication and Control Processes Improve Quality. In Achieving Competitive Advantage through Quality Management, 219231. Saunders, M., Lewis P., & Thornhill A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (5th ed..). Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited. Sawani, Y., Joseph, C., Madi, N., & Saban, G. (2014). Adoption of Quality Management System (QMS) in Public Academic Institution: A Reaction towards Isomorphism. Best Practices in Higher Education. Universiti Teknologi MARA. Sarawak. Malaysia. Schindler, L., Puls-Elvidge, S., Welzant, H., & Crawford, L. (2015). Definitions of quality in higher education: A synthesis of the literature. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(3), 3. Seymour, D. T. (1991). TQM on Campus: What the Pioneers are Finding. AAHE Bulletin, 44(3), 10. Simataa, S.M. (2010). The Quest for Coordination of the Higher Education System in Namibia. National Council for Higher Education. Namibia. Windhoek. Sinclair, D., & Zairi, M. (2001). An Empirical Study of Key Elements of Total Quality-Based Performance Measurement Systems: A Case Study Approach in the Service Industry Sector. Total Quality Management, 12(4), 535-550. Singh, V., Grover, S., & Kumar. A. (2008). Evaluation of Quality in an Educational Institute: A Quality Function Deployment Approach. Educational Research Review, 3(4), 162. Sohail, M. S., Rajadurai, J., & Abdul-Rahman, N. A. (2003). Managing Quality in Higher Education: A Malaysian Case Study. The International Journal of Educational Management, 17(4), 141-146. Soomro, T. R., & Ahmad, R. (2012). Quality in Higher Education: United Arab Emirates Perspective. Higher Education Studies, 2(4), 148. Sousa-Poza, A., Altinkilinc, M., & Searcy, C. (2009). Implementing a functional ISO 9001 Quality Management System in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. International Journal of Engineering, 3(3), 220-228.


Spanbauer, S. J. (1995). Reactivating Higher Education with Total Quality Management: Using Quality and Productivity Concepts, Techniques and Tools to Improve Higher Education. Total Quality Management, 6(5), 519-538. Srikanthan, G., & Dalrymple, J. (2003). Developing Alternative Perspectives for Quality in Higher Education. International Journal of Educational Management, 17(3), 126-136. Stahl, J. (1995). Management: Total Quality in a Global Environment. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers Limited. Stordeur, S., Vandenberghe, C., & D'hoore, W. (2000). Leadership Styles Across Hierarchical Levels in Nursing Departments. Nursing Research, 49(1), 37-43. Sudha, T. (2013). Total Quality Management in Higher Education Institutions. International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary Research, 2(6), 121. Svenson, R., Wallace, K., Wallace, G., & Wexler, B. (1994). The Quality Roadmap: How to Get Your Company on the Quality Track-And Keep It There. Journal for Healthcare Quality, 16(5), 40. Talib, F., & Rahman, Z. (2012). Total quality Management Practices in Manufacturing and Service Industries: A Comparative Study. International Journal of Advanced Operations Management, 4(3), 155-176. Tejero, E. G. (2006). Thesis and Dissertation Writing: A Modular Approach. Mandaluyong City: National Book Store. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative Analysis: Analysis Types and Software Tools. Falmer Press, London. Trivellas, P., Kantas, D., Papadopoulos, I., & Ipsilantis, P. (2012). Challenges for Quality Management in Higher Education-Investigating Institutional Leadership, Culture and Performance. INTECH Open Access Publisher. UNESCO. (2003). Measuring Education Quality, Ministerial Round Table on the Quality of Education. UNESCO Institute of Statistics, Paris. UNICEF (2002). Defining Quality in Education. A Paper Presented by UNICEF at the Meeting of International Working Group on Education. Florence, Italy. Programme Division Education. NY.P4. University of Namibia. (2010). Quality Assurance and Management Policy. Windhoek, Namibia.


Van der Merwe, A. J. (2005). Towards a Reusable Process Model Structure for Higher Education Institutions (Doctoral Dissertation, University of South Africa). Van der Wiele, T., & Brown, A. (2000, January). Continuously struggling with TQM. In ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement Proceedings (p. 777). American Society for Quality. Venkatraman, S. (2007). A framework for Implementing TQM in Higher Education Programs. Quality Assurance in Education, 15(1), 92-112. Voss, R., & Gruber, T. (2006). The Desired Teaching Qualities of Lecturers in Higher Education: A Means end Analysis. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(3), 217-242. Yizengaw, T. (2008). Challenges Facing Higher Education in Africa & Lessons from Experience: A Synthesis Report for the Africa-US Higher Education Collaboration Initiative. A Synthesis Report, based on Consultations between March-April. Youngless, J. (2000). Total Quality Misconception, Quality in Manufacturing.URL: http://www.manufacturingcenter.com/qm/archives/0200/0200tqm.asp. Welman, C., Kruger, F., & Mitchell, B. (2011). Research Methodology (3rd ed., 10th impression). Oxford University Press Southern Africa, Goodwood, South Africa. Westerheijden, D. (2012). By: TRAM NGUYEN (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Educational Organization and Management, University of Twente). Wiklund, H., Klefsjö, B., Sandvik Wiklund, P., & Edvardsson, B. (2003). Innovation and TQM in Swedish Higher Education Institutions - Possibilities and Pitfalls. The TQM magazine, 15(2), 99-107. Wilson, D. D., & Collier, D. A. (2000). An Empirical Investigation of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Causal Model. Decision Sciences, 31(2), 361-383. Zabadi, A. M. (2013). Implementing Total Quality Management (TQM) on the Higher Education Institutions: A Conceptual Model. Finance. Econ, 1(1), 42-60.


APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Letter of Introduction

Dear Sir/Madam

Invitation to Participate in a Research I am pursuing a Masters in Leadership and Change Management (MLCM) degree at the Namibia University of Science and Technology and in my final year of studies. The title of my research is: Perceptions on Implementation of Quality Management Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology. The main objective for this study is to identify the quality – enhancing activities that are missing in the implementation of quality management processes at NUST and to determine the extent to which their inclusion would contribute to improving the quality of graduates from NUST. It is against this background, that I hereby kindly request your assistance in providing relevant information on quality management practices in your institution. If you are willing to assist, please complete the attached questionnaire. The responses given in this questionnaire will remain anonymous as such I wish to request that you be as frank as possible in your responses. Please note that all information provided by you will be strictly confidential and will be used for academic purposes only.

If you would like to have a copy of the final report of the study, please contact me using the details below.

Sincerely, Esther Nuuyoma (Ms) Mobile: +264-812865766 E-mail:[email protected]


Appendix 2: Sample Request Letter to Conduct Research


Appendix 3: Research Questionnaire for Staff Please indicate with a tick () the name of your faculty. Faculty of Computing & Informatics Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Health & Applied Sciences Faculty of Human Sciences Faculty of Management Sciences Faculty of Natural Resources & Spatial Sciences

Please indicate with a tick () your occupation at the institution. Academic Staff Administrative Staff Please indicate with a tick () your gender. M F 1. To what extent do you agree with the following statements with respect to the institution‘s Quality Management objectives in its academic and administrative functions? Please tick () one box per statement showing the extent to which you agree with the statement. [1] = Very Small Extent [2] = Small Extent [3] = Uncertain [4] = Great Extent [5] = Very Great Extent

Statement

Extent [1]

1.1 I am informed about the institution’s quality management policies and procedures. 1.2 I am included in the review of the institution‘s Quality Management policies and procedures. 1.3 Management demonstrates commitment to the institution‘s quality policy by insisting on continual improvement. 1.4 The Institution’s top management provides information to staff members on performance in relation to the quality management policy and needs for improvement. 1.5 I see there are improvements of Quality standards of research activities within the institution.

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 115 1.6 I see there are improvements of Quality standards of academic activities within the institution. 1.7 I see there are improvements of Quality standards of community engagement activities within the institution. 1.8 I see there are improvements of Quality standards of support service activities within the institution. 1.9 The institution encourages mutual trust of the quality it provides. 1.10 The institution encourages confidence of the quality it provides. 1.11 The institution encourages understanding of the quality it provides. 1.12 I observe improved transparency and accountability with regards to the institution’s quality management systems and practices. 1.13 The institution implements quality standards that are benchmarked with local, regional and international best practices. 1.14 Changes in processes and activities are carried out in ways that maintain the integrity of quality management. 1.15 There is a link between adoption and implementation of effective quality management procedures and the quality of graduates produced by the institution. 1.16 I believe that the institution ensures the provision of a high quality education and training to all concerned so that they gain the skills and knowledge required to further their personal aims and career aspiration. 1.17 I believe that the institution ensures the provision of a high quality education and training to all concerned so that they gain competencies and experience required to further their personal aims and career aspiration. 1.18 I am involved in the drafting of quality management interventions at the institution. 1.19 I see the educational and other services being provided to students as being of high quality. 1.20 I observe that institution‘s management determines and provides the resources needed to enhance the effectiveness of quality management.

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation Practices at the Namibia University of Science and Technology | 116 2. To what extent do you agree with the following statements with respect to the quality institution‘s external and internal evaluation process in place? Please tick () one box per statement showing the extent to which you agree with the statement. [1] = Very Small Extent [2] = Small Extent [3] = Uncertain [4] = Great Extent [5] = Very Great Extent Statement

Extent [1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

2.1 The progress made in terms of achieving the goals set by the institution to ensure better service is evaluated annually. 2.2 The institution conducts external evaluation to assess the effectiveness and achievements of the quality management practices annually. 2.3 The quality management unit conduct regular self-evaluations to analyse the effectiveness and achievements of institutional quality management. 2.4 The institution conducts regular surveys among the members of the staff and students for feedback on the quality management procedures and their implementation at grass-root levels. 2.5 The members of staff are informed about the findings from surveys on quality management and the implementation plan for improvement. 2.6 When planned results are not achieved, corrective action is taken, as required, to ensure that all units put in the desired effort. 2.7 When planned results are not achieved, corrective action is taken, as required, to ensure desired quality is restored. 2.8 The institute on determines what data should be collected and analysed to assess the suitability of the quality management policy and procedures. 3. What challenges are you facing in the implementation of quality management at your institution? ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4. What role does senior faculty leadership play in dealing with these challenges? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 5. In what ways could improvements in the formulation and implementation of quality management in your institution enhance the quality of its graduates? _____________________________________________________________________________________ THANKS FOR YOUR TIME!


Appendix 4: Research Questionnaire for Students Please indicate with a tick () the name of your faculty. Faculty of Computing & Informatics Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Health & Applied Sciences Faculty of Human Sciences Faculty of Management Sciences Faculty of Natural Resources & Spatial Sciences Please indicate with a () your gender. M F 1. What do you understand by quality management in Higher Education Institution? _____________________________________________________________________________________ 2. To what extent do you agree with the following statements with respect to the institution‘s commitments towards ensuring quality service? Please tick () one box per statement showing the extent to which you agree with the statement. [1] = Very Small Extent [2] = Small Extent [3] = Uncertain [4] = Great Extent [5] = Very Great Extent Statement [1] 2.1 I am aware of the institution’s quality management policies and procedures. 2.2. Quality management Policies and procedures are available to all students on intranet. 2.3 The institution has a functioning quality management department. 2.4 Administrative staff members have student’s best interest at heart. 2.5 Lecturers have student’s best interest at heart. 2.6 Institutional top management have student’s best interest at heart. 2.7 Lecturers are willing to give students individual attention. 2.8 Lecturers encourage and motivate students to do their best. 2.9 The institution has functioning channels for expressing students’ complaints. 2.10 The institution provides its service at a time it promises to do so. 2.11 The institution conducts evaluation on student achievements on their programmes, their learning experience or their learning environment.

[2]

Extent [3] [4]

[5]


3. To what extent do you agree with the following statements with respect to the Value of Qualifications offered by your institution? Please tick () one box per statement showing the extent to which you agree with the statement. [1] = Very Small Extent [2] = Small Extent [3] = Uncertain [4] = Great Extent [5] = Very Great Extent Statement

Extent [1] [2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

3.1 The institution offers excellent quality qualifications. 3.2 There is sufficient support in the teaching and learning environment e.g. library, ICT facilities. 3.3 The institution has adequate and competent lecturers. 3.4 I do not have regrets for choosing to study at this institution. 3.5 I believe that I am studying for an internationally benchmarked qualification. 3.6 I see the educational services provided to me as being of high quality. 3.7 The qualification I am doing is registered on the National Qualifications Framework. 3.8 The qualification I am doing is accredited by the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE). 3.9 Examination scripts that students write are moderated for accuracy 3.10 I believe that my qualification will help me to be gainfully selfemployed or to gain meaningful employment anywhere in the world. 4. Is the institution doing enough to enhance quality service to the students with the ultimate aim of producing quality graduates? Yes No Explain______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Please indicate challenges affecting your institution‘s implementation of quality management practices (QMPs)? _____________________________________________________________________________________ 6. In what ways could improvements in the formulation and implementation of quality management in your institution enhance the quality of its graduates? _____________________________________________________________________________________ THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME!

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation ...

Perceptions of Quality Management Implementation ...

Suggest Documents

quality management implementation - Core

IMPACT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT ...

Determinants of quality management systems implementation in ...

Implementation of Quality Management System ISO ... - ScienceDirect

Implementation of environmental management system into quality ...

Evaluating implementation of quality management ... - Oxford Academic

Determinants of quality management systems implementation in ...

IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT PRACTICE IN E ...

Implementation of Total Quality Management in ...

Total quality management: aspects of implementation and ...

IMPLEMENTATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND ...

Implementation of the quality management system improves ...

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT ...

Implementation of Total Quality Management in

improving quality management system implementation ... - QUT ePrints

Total quality management implementation frameworks: comparison ...

improving quality management system implementation ... - QUT ePrints

Risks related to quality management systems implementation ...

Perceptions of ISO 9004 Quality Service Management Standards for ...

perceptions of time, cost and quality management on building projects

perceptions of time, cost and quality management on ... - CiteSeerX

Implementation of Integral System of Quality Management in Tourism

impact of total quality management implementation on effectiveness of ...

A feasibility study of the implementation of total quality management ...