Managerialism and the risky business of quality assurance in universities
| Pages | 317-328 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06-2016-0027 |
| Published date | 03 July 2017 |
| Date | 03 July 2017 |
| Author | Annemarie Davis |
| Subject Matter | Education,Curriculum, instruction & assessment,Educational evaluation/assessment |
Managerialism and the risky
business of quality assurance in
universities
Annemarie Davis
Business Management, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to identify what is needed to enhance academic quality assurance in a
university, with specic efforts to reduce the risks associated with ritualised quality assurance practices.
Design/methodology/approach –The aspects to enhance academic quality assurance efforts in
managerial universities are identied through a thematic analysis of the literature.
Findings –It was found that the very nature of managerialism caused quality assurance effort to lose
its meaning and become a ritual for compliance only. Subsequently, ve aspects were identied to
enhance academic quality assurance in a university: establishing quality assurance in the unique context
of the institution; ensuring that the efforts of policy makers are aligned with those of policy users; quality
assurance based on sound auditing principles without excessively monitoring performance; building a
quality culture where quality assurance is practiced in an enabling environment; and allowing quality
assurance practices to be adaptable.
Practical implications –The aspects identied are particularly important for quality assurance
practitioners, developers of quality assurance processes and academics at universities to enable enhancement
of academic quality assurance practices.
Originality/value –This paper argued that the nature of managerialism caused quality assurance to lose
its meaning. The abundance of quality assurance tasks, forms and processes do not protect the institution
against reputational risks, and quality assurance, as practiced presently, was found to be intrinsically risky.
This paper offered an integrated view on how quality assurance efforts can be enhanced.
Keywords Universities, Quality assurance, Risk management, Managerialism,
Academic management
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
Prospective students, employers, faculty members and governments rely on university
rankings to make important decisions. A number of university ranking methodologies exist.
These methodologies include a number of measures, such as citations of published
university research, teaching quality, student employability and staff–student ratio.
Common to these university ranking indicators is the measurement of quality, whether
quality of teaching, quality of research or quality of programs offered. Given the increasing
repute of these university rankings, one can accept that the survival of universities is largely
dependent on the quality of their offerings. Quality assurance is offered as central to
achieving success as a university. Despite the clearly articulated quality assurance and
management strategies, universities have been exposed to, and suffered as a result of, risks
associated with their offerings, research outputs and position in society. Unfortunately, there
is no shortage of stories about universities where “the risk cat has escaped the management
bag” (McWilliam, 2007, p. 312).
The interest in writing this article arose out of the author’s interest in the exposure to
institutional reputational risk despite a legion of quality assurance tasks, processes and
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
Quality
assurance in
universities
317
Received 9 June 2016
Revised 30 August 2016
Accepted 1 May 2017
QualityAssurance in Education
Vol.25 No. 3, 2017
pp.317-328
©Emerald Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/QAE-06-2016-0027
To continue reading
Request your trial