Fostering and Developing the Quality Culture at
the University of Prishtina
Stakeholder - related Quality Culture
June 2014, Croatia
Project consortium

The first project in grant holder’s role, many challenges: bureaucratic
financial system and capacity building. Learn by doing…
 Success indicators: specific partner roles and responsibilities, successful
partnership history on joint QA projects.
 Post- festum dilemmas: trade union and/or regional university in
consortium would facilitate external stakeholders involvement.
Overall objective of the project
The overall objective of the project was to foster and develop the Quality
Culture at all levels such as: teaching, learning, research, administrative
and student support services while taking into account perspectives of
internal and external university stakeholders
Quality Culture vs. Quality Assurance ?!
Are we training for the race or racing
for the train?
External stakeholders
 Active role
x Formal presence and
observation
Should university shape the society
or society the university?
Fitness for purpose
stakeholder-related quality
enhancement
In project ACTIVELY participated
Acting
Stakeholder’s
Role
In activity
UP academic staff
Internal
QC awareness raising campaign, Workshops, Research
evaluation standards, Study -visits, QA strategy, Selfevaluation process…
UP administrative staff
Internal
QC workshops, Career Fair, Quality day at UP …
UP Bachelor, Master and PhD
students
Internal
Week of student involvement on QA processes,,
Trainings for students ,Career Fair, research evaluation
Alumni's
External
Building up a network for internships, Career Fair…
International experts
External
European Quality Assurance Forum, Trainings…
Ministry of Education
External
Almost all activities
External
Ministry of Health
Ministry of Labour and Welfare
Guidance for students with disab. and spec. needs …
Public and private companies
External
Career Fair, Transition from university into the job
market, Building up a network for internships…
Media
External
Number of activities…
National and international
professional networks
External
Building up a network for internships, Career
Fair,Fedora…
Succeeded on getting on board the internal and external stakeholders
University of Prishtina
 > 55 000 students, >1500 teaching staff ( full-time + part-time), >450
administrative staff. Annual budget approx. 28 mio Euro.
 UP aim ( UP Statute, Article nr:6, university mission): Integration in to
the European Higher Education Area and European Research Area.
Implementing Bologna Process recommendations since 2001.
 The biggest and oldest university in country. Quality management and
metrics are the same for arts, engineering, medicine ?! Different subcultures to be considered. Comprehensive university.
 Students representation (voting positions): Senate 7, Study Commission
2, Faculty Councils 2, Quality Assurance Committee 1.
 Steering Committee: 4 (out of 9) external members, including the chair.
Industrial Advisory Board in one faculty.
Quality Culture broadcast towards stakeholders

Share of QA experiences with international peers/stakeholders.
Challenge : Mobilising senior staff to participate on QA activities
Let’s communicate about enhancement of ACTUAL quality culture.
Trigger a sense of ownership and responsibility towards QA processes
We are Stakes and we are Holders but are not the only!
 Not satisfactory number of students involved on QA activities
Shift to student-centred approach.
 Empower stakeholder-related Quality Culture: students, academic and
administrative staff, alumni, potential employers and professional bodies.
 Alumni engagement-a bridge between internal and external stakeholders.

Stakeholders willing to participate on QA activities covered by media.
Mobilization of internal capacity for change
Internal evaluation with external evaluators ( Ireland model)
Accreditation ( Institutional and study program) obligatory by legislation.
Faculties: We are always under the review... QA fatigue.
 Project impact: Link of internal QA processes with external quality
evaluation-accreditation. University and Agency discussed and harmonized the
two sets of processes in order to avoid duplication of evaluations.
 From self-enhancement to change- hear various stakeholder’s voices.
Define roles and responsibilities.
 Succeeded on boosting a sense of ownership and responsibility towards
self-assessment.
Not always succeeded on closing the feedback loops.
Domino-effect. Project outcomes replicated at other HEI in country.
Quality commitment vs. excellence
Step ahead on motivating internal stakeholders commitment vs. excellence by
introducing the Quality Awards for Teaching; Research; Administrative Staff
and Students. Missed: Gratitude to external stakeholders.
Challenge: Which are university main stakeholders? Which stakeholder is
more powerful? Important? Stakeholder’s hierarchy.
Dilemmas: Quality Award for Teaching to best teacher derived from student
questionnaires or peer evaluation?
 Let external stakeholders DECIDE about internal QA issues as Awards.
Academics: Consultancy involvement ok, decision-making ?
Guidelines on evaluation procedures for Quality Awards have never been
approved by respective academic body. Quality Excellence not an embedded
part of institution Quality Culture?
“acknowledgement that even the best ideas cannot always be imported into one’s own
institution.” (Examining Quality Culture Part III, EUA Report 2012)
Stakeholder biased research agenda
Mission of UP- Research activities. Statute: “…publication on peer reviewed
journals” No specification on publication quality indicators.
Opportunity: Internal stakeholders awareness raising for research standards.
Embedding quality research in institution culture. Mission fulfillment.
Academic staff: Networking, recognition and support among disciplinary peers
International community seeks for high quality research Publish or perish!
Employers are seeking for applied research for benefits of industry.
Which stakeholder to listen?
Introduction of research standards reflecting perspectives of internal
and external stakeholders. QA tools for research. Build a research database
with publication. Comparative research potential of departments/faculties.
Research standards portfolio circulated to academic units of UP mobilizing
staff through peer workshops to reflect
Succeeded on
Triggering a debate on university research agenda
Self-reflection:
 What are the main quality metrics to measure the research? Ethics.
 Quantity vs. Quality. Citations, h-index, impact factor, ISI journals vs. Scopus
 Convergence of academic promotion criteria in different countries.
 Comparison to research productivity of regional and European peer
departments/universities. Discipline-oriented evaluation standards?
 Commercializing university research agenda
Obstacles identified:
 Divergence between university traditional research portfolio and industry
research requirements
 No entrepreneurial spirit. Reluctance to change.
 Promotion depends on publication but not on research grants. Incentives.
Failed: On gathering feedback from all departments and building the all
inclusive research database
Don’t expect immediate results you’re building a culture, not a machine. (Nygaard)
Stakeholders hands-on QA strategy
Involvement of
external stakeholders
in the process
• Committee
(student
member)
• Internal
consultation
process within
staff and
students
Gather inputs: external
stakeholder needs and
requirements.
Employers: The best
indicator of quality is the
employability and students’
performance on the job
market after graduation
Internal
consultation
• International
practices and
procedures on QA
strategy
development
European
practices
QA/QI
Strategy
• Public
discussions
• Approved by
UP Senate
External  Challenge: Consensus on main stakeholders list
stakeholders
Faculty vs. University stakeholders.
Internal
stakeholders
Balance!
 Stakeholders rank: Importance, Influence.
 Building a mutual beneficiary relationships
Our experience: Bank sector the most responsive
stakeholder
QA Strategy seeks external stakeholder involvement
 Participation in consultancy bodies such as Industrial Advisory Boards.
 Involvement in evaluation bodies such us Internships, on-job-trainings.
 Exchange of information for issues at stake such us joint research projects,
scholarships, joint events etc
 Periodic feedback via questionnaires as study program evaluation, evaluation
of university alumni on job performance, identification of study program gaps.
 Active involvement in university life: guest lectures, Career Fair, donations.
“The relationship between the labor market and the University is in need of development.
However due to the burgeoning nature of the labor market in Kosovo at the present time,
addressing its skill needs is the proverbial case of „chicken and egg‟. Developing a System of
Quality Enhancement in a Post-Conflict University Environment – the Kosovo Experience “ (Ahma &
Ibrani 2009) http://www.aic.lv/bolona/2010/Sem09-10/EUA_QUA_forum4/
Peer- to- peer interface internal stakeholders-external
stakeholders
Voicing internal stakeholders QA experiences to international forums
and vice versa. Moving from local level to international level.
Changing the roles of internal and external stakeholder- added value
New opportunity for senior academic staff acting as member of external reviewer
panel at international university. Obstacle: No experience-no interest!
Motivating staff to take advantage of this opportunity. Offer appropriate trainings.
 Nourish the Quality Culture at many levels!
Study visits to partner universities of management, academic and
administrative staff. Reflection on strategic planning and daily university life.
Reinvent the wheel again or spread good principles and knowledge
while respecting institution identities…
Students' role as 'participative' – as active and reflective –
rather than 'directive'
Most UP study programs equip students with specific study field competencies.
Labour market needs: + general competencies. How to survive after graduation?
Advance student support services.
Foster students aspiration on their field of studies, their career
development and their active participation in shaping university life.
 Organize student-attractive trainings
How to approach the labor market
How to present yourself in a job interview
The importance of internships during studies
Workshop on CV writing
>10 000 students attended
 Organize events with focus on students career-development
Prepare students on transition from university to labour market.
Equal opportunities for all internal stakeholders
Equal opportunities- Inclusive Quality Culture
Support services to all students and staff achieving their academic goals.
For the first time university gathered in the same discussing table all
relevant stakeholders Ministries: Education, Health , Labour and Welfare,
experts, students with disabilities and special needs
Obstacle: Lack of NECESSARY infrastructure for students to attend.
Event venue voiced essential student needs.
 Alumni database : job opportunities, trainings, life-long learning opportunities,
scholarships, networking for all regardless….
Student database@ Career Centre: Registered students are kept informed
about HE reforms, student’s role, trainings offered, job opportunities, volunteer
work. They agreed to transfer their data on alumni database after graduation.
Link students with potential employers
 Link internal stakeholders: students and staff with external stakeholders:
public institutions, private national and international companies.
 An opportunity: Career Fair
 Win-
win scenario.
University reputation in society.
Motivate students to volunteer on joint event organizations. Offer them
more responsibility. Issue volunteer certificates.
Motivate business community by offering them promotion to society.
Media coverage+ TV. Possibility of talking with best students. Internships.
Network with other national and international companies.
Academic staff motivation link with industry. A sponsor for your project?
Thank for your attention!