Transcript Deploying Lean Thinking to Improve Graduate Quality and Service
Deploying Lean Thinking to Improve Graduate Quality and Service Delivery in Higher Education
Rodger L. NKUMBWA Copperbelt University 2010 Paper Presented at the National Symposium on Research & Innovation in Education, University of Zambia - 2010
Introduction
2
Governments in general and higher education sector in particular face a
productivity imperative
. Growth in
new national priorities
and
citizens’ demand for improved higher education service delivery
requires government to
do more
and
do it better
. The
need to increase productivity in higher education sector
is obvious to all and critical.
3
Introduction
If
higher education service delivery
is to
improve
, valuable insights could be gained by looking at
what is driving the corporate sector
and
global world class organizations
.
This is mainly
innovative management practices Thinking
such as
Quality Management, Lean
and
Six-Sigma Strategies
.
Introduction
4
While
significant progress has been made addressed
today including; in
quest to make higher education better
, the
motivation to change
the current model lies in the
number of challenges that need to be
–
Education financial deficit in most countries i.e. Zambia
– – – – –
Capacity Constraints Political Concerns about Operational Costs Less Motivated Workface Staff Shortages and Low Quality of Graduates
5
Examples of Lean Thinking Deployment in Higher Education Environments
Lean Thinking has been deployed at various institutions around the world including;
– – – – – – – – Cardiff University, Wales Coventry University, England Park University, US Michigan State University, US University of New Orleans, US University of Iowa, US Colorado Public Schools and Malaysian Schools
S ource
: Reed and Berry [2], Inozu et al. [3], Cermak [4].
Globalized Competitive Market Environment 6
The
needs of the customers
are
constantly
and
rapidly changing
, The
choice ever increasing
The
need of higher quality graduates services ever rising
, and Strategic higher learning organizations can no longer afford the
lost profit opportunities
,
less customer satisfaction
and
delayed graduates
.
Regional and International Competition Pressure 7
The
driving force for improved graduate quality
and
service delivery international competition
is the pressure
regional
and Gish [5] of
Delloitte Consulting
suggests that,
"By applying Lean principles, routine business operations could be simplified, more rational procedures established, and repetition reduced (if not eliminated), thereby accelerating core business processes and responding more quickly to customer needs."
8
Exploring Lean Thinking for Higher Education Quality Improvement
Lean Thinking Impression –
Lean is a way of thinking
that was introduced by Toyota in the 1960’s as a systematic approach to
identifying
and
eliminating institution process waste
or
non-value-adding operations
through
continuous improvement
with the
goal of creating value for all the stakeholders
.
Exploring Lean Thinking for Higher Education Quality Improvement
According to research at
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management
and
Lean Enterprise Initiave
is reported that
Lean Business
uses
less of everything
it compared to
traditional production or operations system
.
MIT Lean Research
following: further outlines that
, lean operations
– – It
optimizes human resources effort Space is optimized
leading to savings – – – does the
Need
for
capital investment
is
minimized Decreases the amount of supplies consumed
and
Uses less time to produce and deliver the required services
products or
9
It can be seen that, the
key principles of lean
“
wastes
” from the
customer perspective
and are based on identifying
eliminating them .
Lean Thinking in Education
10
Lean Thinking focuses on: –
Eliminating waste
in organization processes, – – – Lean is
not about eliminating people
them as
team associates
but considering and educating them as
value creators for the stakeholders
. Lean is about
expanding organization capacity reducing costs
and
shortening production or service delivery cycle times
. by It is also about
understanding what is important to the customer experience
and
delivering it on the right time in the right amount all the time
.
11
Quality Strategy for Higher Education Business
The business of higher education today has received
greater competition changes
in the past
decades
. owing to
rapid
The
focus
now is on the
bottom-line need to get the competitive edge
and the for all its clients throughout the value chain.
Quality Strategy for Higher Education Business
12
Now is the better time for
institution of higher education
to
demonstrate that they can offer what other can not
. As Rozsnyai [7] puts it that,
"…the quality of the University is similarly to love: intangible, but existent; perceptible, but not quantifiable, transient, so that one has to endeavour to it."
Quality Strategy for Higher Education Business
13
Emilian [8] President of
Centre for Lean Business
suggests that, among the challenges
to be faced by higher education institutions administrators in few years to come
will include: – – – – – Oversupply of capable higher education institutions, Study programs (degrees) that are not differentiated from the competitors, Growth of for-profit education institutions and Competition based on the pricing. In addition,
education standards
will become standardised around the globe because of the
ever rising quality assurance
and
monitoring bodies within regions and international
.
14
What is Quality in Higher Education?
Quality is a
relative subject
related to the extent of the
business processes results desired outcomes
. and the It may be stated as,
'exceptional
or
'perfection
or
consistence excellence
' (zero defect), ',
'fitness for purpose
',
'value for money
' and '
transformational
'.
15
What is Quality in Higher Education?
The
focus of education quality
should be on: – What students have learnt, – – What they know, What they can do and – What their attitudes are, as a consequence of their interactions with their teachers, departments and higher education institutions.
16
What is Quality in Higher Education?
Emilian [8], President of
Centre for Lean Business
, a Management Consulting firm clearly puts it that,
"…the time is right for higher education administrators, faculty and staff to begin applying Lean Management to their business. The consequences of not doing so could be fatal.“
What is the difference between Traditional Education and Lean Education?
17
Lean Education believes that degree programmes delivered curriculum adopted
and
education
should be based on the concept that production, which is
training of graduates
, must be
driven by customer or national demand chain
in the
upstream of the value
and not just naïve forecasts.
Lets look at the
comparison
of Traditional Education to Lean Education Approach
Argument Theme Traditional Higher Education Lean Thinking Higher Education Organization Culture Institution Operations Culture of royalty, favor, obedience and labour friction Division of labour and no problem solving skills for the workforce Harmonious culture of involvement based on long-term development of human resource Smart tools that assume standardized work and procedures, strength in problem identification and experimentation Customer Relations Management Education Business Strategy University Management Graduate Inventory Levels Educator or Teacher 18 Produces Graduates needed by employers in large quantities at acceptable quality locally Graduate-focused strategy on exploiting economies of scale Hierarchical structures that encourage orders and discourage the flow of information that unveils errors and deficiencies Large number of part time and/or repeater students Produces Graduates according to employers requirements with zero defects or to world class standards. Continuously get feedback on graduates performance Customer/Employer-focused strategy on identifying and exploiting shifting competitive edge and sustainability Flat structure that encourage initiative and flow of information that highlights defects, errors and deficiencies as well as promote innovation and continuous improvement in all activities Small number or no repeater students. Right first time all the time Little input into University Operations High responsibility for identifying and implementing quality
What is the Higher Education Product?
19
It should be noted that,
the student is not really the product
; instead, – – The
product
is the
education of the student
. Students need to be considered as a
co-workers who are actively participating
in the
design, execution
and
creation
of the
product.
Therefore, the
student should be involved in the continuous improvement
of the
institution processes
in
quest for quality
creation of the
product
, namely the
Graduate
. The
student
is the
host
of the
education product
.
Who are the Customers for Higher Education Product?
20
The
customers for Higher Education Product
as follows: may be segmented –
Student
– this is the
primary customer
who is the
host of the education product
and hence, the co-manager of the education production line and should always be considered first when defining quality in education.
–
Student Sponsors
– parents, family members, governments and organisations who pays for the students costs.
–
Potential Employers
– these are the achieve their organization goals.
secondary customers
and are organisations relying on the education of the student upon graduating to –
Society at Large
–
pays substantial costs of education through taxes and requires future participation of the student as an educated citizen and expects them to contribute positively to the general welfare of society.
What are the Customers Expectations from Higher Education Product?
21
The
education customers’ expectations
be segmented as follows: and society at large may –
Knowledge
– this is what enables students to
continuously learn
graduating in relation to what they already know after –
Know-how
– this is what enables students to
apply knowledge to work environments
and this should be from different areas of learning covered –
Wisdom
not vital
– this is the
ability to distinguish what is vital
and
set priority to resource
management.
from
what is a
–
Character
know-how
– this may be said to be a and
wisdom coupled
the
stakeholders
.
with
combination of knowledge motivation
to ,
deliver value
for
22
Ten Wastes in Higher Education Environment
Learning to see
what is wrong in higher education environment is the beginning of change.
Waste
in Quality Management is defined as, –
Any institution activity or operation performed that does not add any value to the customer satisfaction or experience,
( i.e. student, employer and society).
Ten Wastes in Higher Education Environment
23
Motion
– this involves movement of people (educators, students, technicians, administrators, etc) and/or teaching equipments that does not add value to the student learning experience.
– Examples are looking for information, forms, materials, educators and equipments located far from the point of operation.
Waiting Time
when people, information, equipments or materials are not at hand for use. – this is the idle time created in the University processes
– Examples is when students are waiting for appointments, procedures and expert guidance. Others are invasion of teaching time, class interruptions, poorly scheduled meetings and late arrivals by parties involved. – Causes of all these may include poor understanding of the standard time required to do a task and lack of accountability for delivering on time.
Uncertainty
– this is when educators doing the work are not confident about the best way “best-practice” to perform the tasks
. – – Examples, unclear teaching methodology, unclear course curriculum, unclear laboratory procedures. Causes include lack of standardized specifications of procedures of work.
Ten Wastes in Higher Education Environment
Defects
–
include University activities that contain errors or lack something of value
.
– – Examples include; teaching errors, presentation errors such as at seminars, graduation ceremonies, lectures, etc., documents errors, data entry errors, variation of same task outcomes, service delivery errors, product (graduate) errors and lost records. Causes of these may include lack of understanding of what 'defect-free' University processes are and lack of standardization in work processes and quality management.
24
Processing
–
this include the activities in the processes of service delivery that do not add value from the customer perspective.
– – – Examples include extra unnecessary steps, too many approvals, requirements confusion, charting during working hours, missing procedure requirement and too much regulatory paper work. Causes of these may include poor work area design that does not promote smooth value flow, complex and multiple data forms, as well as use of obsolete procedures and forms. Others include creating reports no one reads unclear roles and responsibilities and repeated manual entry of student data or results.
25
Ten Wastes in Higher Education Environment
–
Over-Production
–
includes redundant work such as duplicate work
Examples are multiple forms with same information, re-creating already existing knowledge, teaching previously taught curriculum, creating a new report when the data exist in the different department, creating departmental silos as well as protectionism. – Causes include poor communication between departments and staff.
High Inventory
–
this is when there is more material at hand than is required to do the work.
– – Examples include overstocked outdated books, poor understanding of supply and demand, obsolete equipments not discarded, unread emails, unfinished projects, files not worked on, unresolved challenges. Others are unnecessary work-in-progress (repeating or part-time students) and finished products beyond what is needed on the normal basis (
producing more graduates in degree with less or no demand
).
Ten Wastes in Higher Education Environment
26
Underutilized Resources
–
this includes organization workforce, time, facilities and equipments available, which are not used to get the optimum benefit.
– – Examples include
minimal hours of operation for the library
,
computer facilities
and
laboratory
students. Note that, this is not referring to resource stressing, but just maximizing on the benefits that can be offered by the available resources. for the
Closed University culture to innovation and change
, untapped areas of passion for staff and choosing short term cost reductions that do not motivate staff are among other critical factors in higher learning institutions.
Ten Wastes in Higher Education Environment
27
–
Poor Communication
–
this involves information and data waste.
All institutions experience problems nearly every day, which need to be solved by different people in the organization. – – To solve most of these problems,
information is required
and now when the information, which is useful to solving the problem at hand, is not available or is difficult to retrieve, inefficiency in problem solving cannot be avoided.
Information should be availed to all people in the organization
published to all employees for review and improvement.
at the earliest possible time, whether positive or negative. Good information practice include; annual audited financial reports which can be posted on websites, annual key performance indicators (KPI's) such as profit margins or losses –
Misused Resources
–
this is when alocated resources ior a particular project are diverted owing to some special or personal interests.
This in most cases cannot be recovered and is not replaced at all. – Best practice is to stick to the annual budget and adopt the long-term philosophy over short-term or personal gains.
Deploying “Lean Thinking Initiative” for Higher Education Excellence
28
–
University/College Business Transformation Council
This will involve institution wise deployment of the quality improvement strategies that will focus on core University/College business processes. – Strategic quality projects should be identified and problem solving teams established including the Project Charter and Quality Leader. –
Establish “Quality Improvement Charter”
Universities should establish a
Quality Improvement Charter
(QIC) which will act or work as a
'Quality Improvement Centre'
. This is where clients like
students, staff
and
employees
can report quality issues and
make suggestions for improvements
. Must be headed by a
Quality Professional
who will look into the quality issues all round the University/College including training.
–
Establish “Quality Problem Solving Teams”
This involves creation of teams for strategic opportunity or operational weakness determination and analysis with focus on the key customers and analysis of the critical business process through the various faculties or departments. – Problem solving projects should be established which will be linked to the strategic “Lean Thinking Initiative”. Critical few projects will be identified to highlight the current state of the University performance and establish priority areas where resources may be focused.
Conclusion…
29
This paper has presented the
quality view of service delivery
and
graduate quality in higher education
environment. The author believes that,
better understanding of society expectations
from
institutions
and
higher education academic processes
is
vital
for performance re-engineering of most today's higher education institutions,
if excellence
is to be
achieved
. It is hoped that, with the areas covered,
most education stakeholders
are
edified
about the
need for change
of the
current practice today
and and the
new meaning of quality tomorrow higher education
institutions. in
…Conclusion
30
Among the
expected benefits
of
deploying lean thinking in higher education environment
include: – – – – – – – – – Simplification of both the academic and administrative processes, Elimination of waste activities or operations Creation of value flow in the institution Reduction of activity cycle time and graduate lead time Reduction of error rates and delays Increased institution bottom-line due to massive savings Improved productivity and efficiency in the value delivery Corporate image and Sustainability are enhanced. All these things with
no massive monetary investment
but
willingness
to
adapt
and
change
especially by
management
, who are
vision carriers
.
required
References
31 7) 8) 9) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Womack, J.P. & Jones, T.D.
2003.
Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporations,
Simon and Schutter, UK. http://www.lean.org
and www.leanuk.org
Reed, L. & Berry, A.K.
Effectiveness, USA.
n.d. Academia Going Lean, University of Iowa Organization
Inozu, B., Galle, W., Patti, A., Lannes, W. & Trahan, R.
2005.
Pioneering Lean Six Sigma Implementation at a Public University
, National Consortium for Continous Improvement in Higher Education, University of New Orleans, USA.
Cermak, M.
Illianos, USA.
n.d.
When Education Goes Lean
, Career Education – Rockford Public Schools,
Gish, D.
2005.
Making it Lean: The Road to Enterprise Productivity
, Delloitte Consulting and Oracle Corporation, USA.
Murman, E., Allen, T., Bozdogan, K., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., McManus, H., Nightingale, D., et al.
2002
Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT Lean Aerospace Initiative
, Palgave New-York USA. http://www.leaneducation.com
and http://leanmit.edu
Rozsnyai, C.
2001.
The Quality Issues: Challenges and Opprtunity Hungary Higher Education
, Sixth Quality in Higher Education Seminar, Birmigham, UK
Emilian, M.
L. 2005. Using Kaizen to Improve Graduate Bussiness School Degree Programmes,
Quality Assurance in Education
13(1), 37 – 52
Liker, J.K. & Meier, D.
2006.
The Toyota Way Field Book: A practical guide to implementing Toyota 4Ps
, McGraw Hill, USA.