I. Best Practices of Managing QA in Indonesian HEIs

Managing QA in Higher
Best practice in Indonesia
Delivered: Tuesday, May 6, 2014 at the Regional Conference: Enhancing Quality Assurance in Higher
Education Institutions: towards the ASEAN Free Trade Policy 2015. Main Hall 2nd Floor, Yogyakarta State
Adil Basuki Ahza
Office: Dept ITP, Fateta IPB
Jln Kamper 1. Kampus IPB Darmaga
Bogor 16680. Indonesia
Tel& Fax: +622518626725.
email: <adil@uwalumni.com> , <ahzaadil@gmail.com >
Residence: 6 Lengkeng Str,
IPB Campus Darmaga
Bogor 16680. Indonesia
Tel&Fax: +622518621532
Presentation agenda
I . Brief Historical Perspectives and Logical Framework of
QA management
II. BP1. Ingraining value(s) within HE quality
management system.
III. BP2. Use of Documented QA Methodology
IV. BP3. Soundness of Audit/assessments
V. BP4. Plan Development Test and Reviews
VI. BP5. Conduct Root Cause Analysis on Serious Issues
VII. BP6. Continuous Improvement
VIII. Conluding remarks
I. Best Practices of Managing QA in Indonesian
HEIs: Brief Historical perspectives
Developments of QA best practices have been initiated and nurtured by the
DGHE Board of HE since the early 1980s through various incentive programs
and developed further since the establishment of BAN-PT in 1994 and boosted
up lately by the enactment of HE Act #12, 2012.
QA development, and hence its best practices in managing the QA, in most
Indonesian HEIs are driven by the government.
BAN-PT has set Institutional and programs accreditation standards and
guidelines provided as the reference for the development of HEIs and
Programs QA best practices. BAN-PT has also set various services of training,
socializations, and nurturing programs to facilitate the QA development
inIndonesian HEIs and study programs.
Currently most of the accredited A, and majority of the accredited B, HEIs and
programs have been establishing their own best practices of managing QA in
HE at various level of development.
Just like the diversity of the quality approaches, the advancement ndoesian
HEIs best practices are also diversed in accord to their perspectives of quality
such as their synthesis of conformance, adaptability, innovation and
continuous improvement.
Logical Framework of Managing QA in HE
Basic M = f{P,O,S,L,C)
Quality is leader’s driven. Leader’s commitment is
absolutely required
Managing QA = Effectiveness in Managing “the critical
control” of the whole QMS.
QACCP = f{I(E,KRA )}
Where : . E = f{L, P, Pp, Rc, PM}
. KRA= f{P, C, Is,Br}
Development of Best practices: The Indonesian
EQA (BAN-PT standards, criteria and guidelines)
• Quality =
C=1 M=1
{compliance, conformances,
 where C = National context, M = mandate
C & M:
Compliances to the legal infrastructure of Indonesian
Higher Education (incl. PR# 8,2012, accred .& future SNPT)
Conformances to the HEI’s Standards (SPT)
Additional context: Organizational life cycle/time, maturity
of the institution, level of quality culture development
Development of Best practices -- cont..(2 of 2)
Quality =
C=1 M=1
{compliance, conformances,
Anticipate the 2015 policy development :
mindful the progression of new regulation
development due to the enactment of Act#12,2012 &
PR# 8,2012, SNPT, and new accreditation standards
BAN-PT commmitment toward international EQAA
networks: AQAN, APQN and INQAAHE memberships
ASEAN Qualification Reference Framework (AQRF) that
involved the ASEAN secretariat
II. BP1. Ingraining values into HEI’s quality
management system
(1 of 2)
• HE Quality = V x S [ p=1 Q p ]
where :
 V = Value is the core of integrity;
Note: Core values is HEIs autonomy, but generic TQM is always
helpful with total participation is the key in managing QA.
 S = Security and/or safety
 Qp= proportional or additive function of Inputs, process,
outputs, outcomes, and impacts, reversal to the tuition
and access.
 Qp
Ip , Pp , Op , Op , Isp; 1/P and 1/A
II. BP1. Ingraining values into HEI’s quality
management system (cont.... 2 of 2)
• Varies with the nature of quality assurance
development of HEIs
• BP: Ingraining the values into essential parts of QA
– In depth understanding of the HE’s highest policies and goals
– Wellness of (accuracy and appropriateness) HEP’s
translation into standards and criteria
– Valid data and information
– Reveal the good practices (incl. qualitative statements)
• HEI’s Integrity and mission (std 1) must be well reflected
in all enablers and key results areas with clear data and
indicators in the evaluative frameworks and QA decision
All relevant parties must understood well
the purpose and usage of the (macro and micro)
indicators, i.e
For guiding peers/reviewers
For guiding HEIs towards quality improvement
For quality assurance decision-making
Others (please specify)
Notes: indicators can be developed/derived from:
• Given by the government
• International /professional certification or accreditor
• Developed by the (external) agency staff
• Identified in consultation with the HEIs
• Others ...
III. BP2. Use of a Documented QA Methodology
Generally: Adoption of any standard methods and its QA
Documentation is a part of HEI autonomy and may become
Indonesian HEI’s own good practices/uniqueness.
Adoption of BAN-PT ‘s QA Documentation-based is strongly
recommended for Indonesian HEIs. Additional QA system
and methodology will make it better, e.g institutional and
program level international certification, accreditation,
and/or quality recognition.
Comprehensiveness of the QA documentation is imperative:
Standard Manual and Guidlines
Supporting documents
•Research and collaboration
•Community Services
Use of ICT-assisted programs is very beneficial
IV. BP3. QA Audit/assessments
(1 of 2)
For Indonesian autonomous HEIs, audit is carried out by Board
of Audit responsible to the Board of trutees.
For the other types of HEIs follow the government law &
BP to improve effectiveness of Internal audit/assessment
system is pivotal as the basis of Indonesian HEI’s CQI :
Nature: Leaders driven and leader’s commitment is number one.
Internal audit: Formal audit intruments/tools of assessment of
Financial audit are developed by either the QM-Office or Internal
Audit Office (must be tested , standardized and well understood )
Academic assessment good practices:
Peer reviewer/assessors: Regular Internal training for peer review (internal
pool of assessors)
Cross diciplines review or assessment practice of HEI’s internal assessment is
helpful at Institutional level up to within one study program for both
program and specific/course learning outcomes
BP3. QA Audit/assessments
(Cont.. 2 of 2)
Schedule of all kinds of audit and assessment are set, in place and
disseminated through the HEIs website.
Audit and assessment cover all tridarma activities (the academic,
research and community services), and financial/administration.
Feedback of reviews/assessment/audit are disseminated to all
stakeholders and stakeholders comments and followup actions are
nurtured at all pertinent levels (through various types of fora)
Research and Community services: peer assessment is carried out
by the LPPM (Research and Services Institute) with tested and
Government research grants (decentralization and other national
competition grants) there are two modes of audits:
Internal (special) scheme of research progress peer reviewer audits
External schemes of audits (for financial accountability and research
outcomes peer review/assessment system)
V. BP4. Plan Development Test and Reviews (1 of 2)
It is a Leader’s driven activity.
The key success factor is total participation, and
make this test and review as quality habits.
Need “willingness to let go attitude” to stimulate
creativity, passion, active involvement and building
commitment in all aspects of CQI of HEI’s Tridarma.
BP: Annual workshop, FGD and, at least triennial
workshop for plan-replanning development were
regularly reviewed involving various stakeholders.
Consider vast development of external
environmental changes and challenges.
BP4. Plan Development Test and Reviews ( Cont..2 of 2)
Involvement of all stakeholders is imperative to explore
personal mastery of each participant reflection and
Prepared all paperworks and worksheets for all participants
in all stages of development (take full span of involvement:
system thinking, knowledge, psychomotoric and oral
Follow up action ot the test and reviews for the sake of CQI
requires good teamworks and teamlearning (PIC of the
pertinent activities and the quality manager at subsequent
Keeping all contributors/participants well informed about
the follow-up actions
VI. BP5. Root Cause Analysis (RCA) on Serious Issues (1 of 2)
Generic TOWS analyses were in general practiced in accordance to the
BAN-PT Guidelines of self evaluation report with various level of
implementation quality
RCA on serious issues are practiced in well developed Indonesian HEIs
as a part or inseparable evaluation techniques of the TOWS.
Good HEIs have a well prepared tools of analysis, risk-based analysis
principles and other required analysis instruments (Ishikawa, force
field, BSC etc) to enhance the fruitfullness/effectiveness of this
Serious issues: Forceful external environmental (Macro, National level,
and International levels) and strategic Internal Institutional policies
changes that affect and/or potentially change the core quality and the
way HEIs to do the businesses :
 Key to quality: Integrity and mission; Governance and management;
Human resources; Learning resources and infrastructure; Financial
management; Student profile and support services; Curricular aspects;
Teaching-learning and evaluation; Research, Collaboration/partnership,
Consultancy and Extension; and Quality assurance.
BP5. Conduct Root Cause Analysis on Serious Issues (Cont...1 of 2)
Nature of activities: It is a brain trust promoted activities:
Initiate core team to address (using risk assessment
principles: identification, assessment, manage and
communication) the serious issues.
Identification and involvement of key personnel and
resourceful persons (relevant to the issues) in a small
taskforce and FGD is more effective.
Must results in realistically effective problem solvings,
tactics or strategies, and efficient
Effective techniques of communcation and dissemination
of the solutions to all pertinent (affected) members of
Institution is absolutely required.
VII.BP6. Continuous Improvement
Majority of good (accredited A and B) Indonesian HEI and programs have
established their systems of tracer studies and institutional researches as an
integral parts of the CQI.
Indonesian HEIs, in general have familiar with and implemented their PDCA
cycles and some of them have relatively effective feedback system and
follow up actions of the CQI at diversed levels of HEIs and Programs.
Most of the A accredited HEIs have implemented various modes of best
practices of CQI such as carrying out regular FGD/stakeholders meeting:
Annual, semesterly at different levels as a part of Accountability and in
pursuit of CQI.
Some of the Indonesian HEIs have been carrying out various regular
benchmarkings (according to her perceptions of quality):
Internal benchmarks (comparisons of different units of HEIs)
External competitive benchmarks of their foreseen competitors
External collaborative benchmarks of their not immediate competitors
External trans-industry (best-in-class) benchmarks
Notes: INQAAHE Glossary defines benchmarking as “a process that enables comparison of inputs, processes or
outputs between institutions (or parts of institutions) or within a single institution over time”.
Concluding remarks
Development of best practices of Quality Assurance in
Indonesian HEIs have long been initiated and still
developing at diversed paces.
The key success factors of managing QA in Indonesian HEIs
(best practices ) covers the following critical aspects, i.e:
Leader’s commitment
Ingraining values into HEIs QMS and QA System
Adoption of QA documentation methodology/system
Internal and eksternal QA audit/assessment system
Use of TOWS analysis, RCA, and other techniques of riskassesment base analyses.
6. Effectiveness of the Continuous Quality Improvements
Thank You
Worldwide Quality Management
System of HEIs
ISO series (US HEIs hardly believe in this)
Malcolm Baldridge (NIST)
Six Sigma
Basic QMS Model of EFQM
(EFQM = European Foundation of Quality Management)
Key Results Areas
3. People
2. Policy &
7. People
Resources &
6. Customer
8. Impacts
on Society
Developed by European Foundation of Quality Management, 1992
Univ./HE/SP QA System (generic)
7M, 7A
Beyond control,
chaotic, risky
Decision making; PDCA:
Re-energizing the
System = The Blood of
Man, Machinery, Money, Methods, Materials, Market, Moment; Quality, types, price, amount, place, time, utility, legal
Desired OUTPUT:
•QUALITY Products:
Diploma, BS, MS, Dr,
Research (IPR,
Patent, Innovation,
etc), Services,
objectives/goals, dll
Undesirable outputs:
High DO rate
Grads: Lack of Attitude
Solid Waste
Liquid, vapor/gasses
Odor, Noise, etc.