paper2 quality management magutu

8/3/2019 Paper2 Quality Management Magutu

1/15

March 24, 2010 [African Journal of Business & Management (AJBUMA)]

14

AIBUMA Publishing

African Journal of Business & Management (AJBUMA)

http://www.aibuma.org/journal/index.htm

Vol. 1 (2010), 15 pages

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN KENYAN

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS:

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

Peterson Obara Magutu, [email protected]: Prof. Isaac Meroka Mbeche,

Richard Bitange Nyaoga, Onserio Nyamwange, Richard Nyaanga Onger and Thomas Ogoro

Ombati

(University of Nairobi, School of Business, Department of Management Science, Nairobi Kenya)

AbstractQuality management practices have been investigated extensively (Kaynak, 2003). Although a number of studieshad been done on the concept and context of quality management and higher education respectively, none hadbeen done within the context of public universities in Kenya, the case of the University of Nairobi. There wasneed therefore for a study to be carried out focusing on the University of Nairobis academic services inconjunction with the main QM features. From the findings one can conclude the following, based on theobjectives of the study; Firstly, the University of Nairobi has applied quality management and to a very greatextent has ensured that the Quality Management Policy is appropriate to its purpose. Public universities shouldremove the status quo to be supportive to any formulation of new ideas in order to respond to an ever-changingenvironment in H.E. Crucially further research should be done to determine how Quality management cancontribute to organizational financial performance and customer satisfaction.

Keywords: Quality Management Practices, Continuous Improvement, Quality and Higher education.

1. Introduction

1.1 General BackgroundQuality authorities like Joseph Juran (1950s);Edward Deming (1950s) and Philip Crosby(1980s) have put forth several approaches toimprove company performance. Theseapproaches are embodied in a set of qualitymanagement practices, known as Total QualityManagement (TQM). On account of thesepolicies, different approaches have beenadopted for the introduction of quality

management in universities, such as self-assessment and external assessment of theinstitutions, accreditation and certificationsystems, and different models of TQM(Wiklund et al., 2003). Quality Management(QM) presents a strategic option and anintegrated management philosophy fororganizations, which allows them to reach theirobjectives effectively and efficiently, and toachieve sustainable competitive advantage(Goldberg and Cole, 2002).

Even TQMs promoters confess that organizations havenot found it so easy to implement the qualityManagement Practices and to achieve the expectedbenefits (Kirk, 2000, pg. 14). More critically, Brown(2000) concluded that there are still organizations where,despite this criticism, the quality management philosophycontinues to be a central focus of the business and amechanism for contributing to better performances. Thisstudy extends previous research on the QM Practices

by establishing the most critical QM practices and toolsused in the University of Nairobis education services;and the challenges facing QM implementation.

QM is generally described as a collective, interlinkedsystem of quality management practices that is associatedwith organizational performance (Cua et al. (2001), andKaynak (2003), underlined the importance of causalrelations between quality management practices. There isa prevailing belief that higher education has entered anew environment in which quality plays an increasingly


2/15


15

important role (Bergman, 1995). Feigenbaum(1994) believed that quality of education isthe key factor in invisible competitionbetween countries since the quality of productsand services is determined by the way thatmanagers, teachers, workers, engineers, andeconomists think, act, and make decisionsabout quality. Higher education is being

driven towards commercial competitionimposed by economic forces (Seymour, 1992).Cost sharing in Kenyan higher education wasintroduced in 1991 as a response to the ever-declining state budget, which did not keep pacewith high student intake when the first cohortof the 8-4-4 of students entered the university(Sanyal and Martin, 1998). The University ofNairobi is the pioneer admitting almost half ofthe students who qualify for higher education,with the highest capacity of internationallyrecognized degree courses (www.unobi.ac.ke).

1.2 The Concept of Quality Management(QM)The word quality has been derived from theLatin word qualis, meaning, what kind of.With a wide variety of meanings andconnotations attached to it, quality is a difficultand elusive term to define, having thus beenreferred to as a slippery concept (Pfeffer andCoote, 1991). It is slippery because it has awide variety of meanings. The word impliesdifferent things to different people. It has, thus,been defined with different perspectives andorientations, according to the person, themeasures applied and the context within whichit is considered. Amid the wide gamut of suchdefinitions, there seems to be no consensus

definition, but they all deal either with theproduct or the services producing theseproducts/services. From the perspective of theconsumers or users, the product or service-based definition is more useful. From theperspective of the organization providinggoods/services, the process-perspective is moreuseful (Sangeeta and Banwe, 2004).

From a managerial philosophy viewpoint, theelements of QM are varied and this is veryapparent in higher education. The differentterms like strategic quality management, totalquality improvement, and total qualityleadership are actually examples showing the

different emphasis placed on particular aspectsof what is generally called quality management(Sangeeta and Banwe, 2004. Seymour (1992)identified four philosophical principles forwhat he called strategic quality management:meeting or exceeding customer needs,everyones job, Continuous improvementand leadership. He believed that thedomination of customers is a reality thatdisplays itself, for example with the free

selection of university, course of study, or occasionallylecturer by students.

Relating to continuous improvement, Seymour (1992)highlighted the importance of processes and the necessityfor a never-ending improvement strategy using the plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle. Tribus (1993) expressed theprocess over the product principle for the classroom

stating that for improving students achievements, theteaching process and not the examinations should beaddressed. Harris (1992) defined the stages in a PDCAcycle developed for course improvement as designingcourses to actually meet students needs (plan), teachingcourses (do), assessing how Fstudents use learning andsurveying students opinions (check), and modifyingaccording to assessment findings (act).

1.2.1 Total Quality Management (TQM)Quality management is a method for ensuring that all theactivities necessary to design, develop and implement aproduct or service are effective and efficient with respectto the system and its performance (Deming, 1986).Quality management (QM), also called total qualitymanagement, evolved from many different managementpractices and improvement processes. QM is not specificto managing people, but rather is related to improving thequality of goods and services that are produced in orderto satisfy customer demands. QM permeates the entireorganization as it is being implemented. TQM has itsroots in the quality movement that has made Japan such astrong force in the world economy. The Japanesephilosophy of quality initially emphasized product andperformance and only later shifted concern to customersatisfaction (Sergesketter, 1993).

Youngless (2000), argued that rather than trying toinspect the quality of products and services after they

have been completed, TQM instills a philosophy of doingthe job correctly the first time. It all sounds simple, butimplementing the process requires an organizationalculture and climate that are often alien and intimidating.Changes that must occur in the organization are sosignificant that it takes time and patience to complete theprocess. Just as the process does not occur overnight, theresults may not be seen for a long period of time. Someexperts say that it takes up to ten years to fully realize theresults of implementing quality management. Accordingto Bank, (1992), Total Quality Management (TQM)refers to management methods used to enhance qualityand productivity in organizations, particularly businesses.TQM is a comprehensive system approach that workshorizontally across an organization, involving all

departments and employees and extending backward andforward to include both suppliers and clients/customers(Barnard, 1999).

TQM is only one of many acronyms used to labelmanagement systems that focus on quality. Otheracronyms that have been used to describe similar qualitymanagement philosophies and programs include CQI(continuous quality improvement), SQC (statisticalquality control), QFD (quality function deployment),QIDW (quality in daily work) and TQC (total quality


3/15


16

control). TQM provides a framework forimplementing effective quality andproductivity initiatives that can increase theprofitability and competitiveness oforganizations (Deming, 1992).

Quality management practices have beeninvestigated extensively (Saraph et al., 1989;

Flynn et al., 1994; Waldman, 1994; Powell,1995; Ahire et al., 1996; Anderson and Sohal,1999; Najmi and Kehoe, 2000; Zhang et al.,2000; Sun, 2001; Sila and Ebrahimpour, 2002;Kaynak, 2003). Although a plethora ofpractices have been described, similaritiesamong practices can be discerned. The distinctgeneric practices proposed in a large set ofarticles are: top management commitment andsupport, organization for quality, employeetraining, employee participation, supplierquality management, customer focus,continuous support, improvement of qualitysystem, information and analysis, andstatistical quality techniques use.

The above generic practices were furthergrouped into three main categories followingthe classification of Flynn et al. (1995a),Pannirselvam and Ferguson (2001) and Sousaand Voss (2002), namely: managementpractice: issued from the top management;infrastructure practices: intended to supportcore practices; and core practices: based ontools and techniques specifically related toquality.

Issues of educational quality, rather than massproduction, need to move to the forefront of

the educational agenda of policy makers at thislevel of education. Considering this hugepublic and private investment in universityeducation, there is an urgent need to evaluatehow effectively this investment is beingutilized by examining the quality of theeducational infrastructure, the cadre ofqualified tutors and other resources in place,and the quality of teaching and learning(Unesco, 2003).

1.2.2 Origins of TQMAlthough TQM techniques were adopted priorto World War II by a number of organizations,the creation of the Total Quality Management

philosophy is generally attributed to Dr. W.Edwards Deming. In the late 1920s, whileworking as a summer employee at WesternElectric Company in Chicago, he found workermotivation systems to be degrading andeconomically unproductive; incentives weretied directly to quantity of output, andinefficient post-production inspection systemswere used to find flawed goods (Hunt, 1992).

Deming teamed up in the 1930s with Walter A.Shewhart, a Bell Telephone Company statistician whosework convinced Deming that statistical controltechniques could be used to supplant traditionalmanagement methods. Using Shewhart's theories,Deming devised a statistically controlled managementprocess that provided managers with a means ofdetermining when to intervene in an industrial process

and when to leave it alone. Deming got a chance to putShewhart's statistical-quality-control techniques, as wellas his own management philosophies, to the test duringWorld War II. Government managers found that histechniques could be easily taught to engineers andworkers, and then quickly implemented in over-burdenedwar production plants (Weiss, and Gershon, 1989). Oneof Deming's clients, the U.S. State Department, sent himto Japan in 1947 as part of a national effort to revitalizethe war-devastated Japanese economy. It was in Japanthat Deming found an enthusiastic reception for hismanagement ideas. Deming introduced his statisticalprocess control, or statistical quality control, programsinto Japan's ailing manufacturing sector. Thosetechniques are credited with instilling a dedication toquality and productivity in the Japanese industrial andservice sectors that allowed the country to become adominant force in the global economy by the 1980s(Harry and Sergesketter, 1993).

While Japan's industrial sector embarked on a qualityinitiative during the middle 1900s, most Americancompanies continued to produce mass quantities of goodsusing traditional management techniques. Americaprospered as war-ravaged European countries looked tothe United States for manufactured goods. In addition, adomestic population boom resulted in surging U.S.markets. But by the 1970s some American industries hadcome to be regarded as inferior to their Asian and

European competitors. As a result of increasing economicglobalization during the 1980s, made possible in part byadvanced information technologies, the U.S.manufacturing sector fell prey to more competitiveproducers, particularly in Japan (Svenson, et al 1994).

In response to massive market share gains achieved byJapanese companies during the late 1970s and 1980s,U.S. producers scrambled to adopt quality andproductivity techniques that might restore theircompetitiveness. Indeed, Deming's philosophies andsystems were finally recognized in the United States, andDeming himself became a highly sought after lecturerand author. The "Deming Management Method" becamethe model for many American corporations eager to

improve. And Total Quality Management, the phraseapplied to quality initiatives proffered by Deming andother management authorities, became a staple ofAmerican enterprise by the late 1980s. By the early1990s, the U.S. manufacturing sector had achievedmarked gains in quality and productivity (Saylor, 1992).

1.3 Quality Management and Higher EducationDefining quality in higher education has proved to be achallenging task. Cheng and Tam (1997, p. 23) suggestthat education quality is a rather vague and controversial


4/15


17

concept and Pounder (1999, p. 156) arguesthat quality is a notoriously ambiguous term.As a result of the difficulty in defining quality,the measurement of quality has also proved tobe contentious. There have been variousattempts to draw on industry models such asthe quality dimensions of Gronroos, Garvinand Parasuraman (Owlia and Aspinwall, 1996),

SERVQUAL (Oldfield and Baron, 1998;Aldridge and Rowley, 1998), importance-performance analysis (Ford et al., 1999) andthe balanced scorecard (Cullen et al., 2003) todevelop quality assessment models for highereducation. Internationally, the tool mostfrequently drawn upon (Cruickshank, 2003)however is that of total quality management(TQM), defined as: a management approachof an organization, centered on quality, basedon the participation of all its members andaiming at long run success through customersatisfaction and benefits to all members of theorganization and to society (ISO 8402 inWiklund et al., 2003, p. 99).

The rationale for adoption is that TQM has thepotential to encompass the quality perspectivesof both external and internal stakeholders in anintegrated manner and thereby enable acomprehensive approach to qualitymanagement that will assure quality as well asfacilitate change and innovation. However,there have been a number of limitationsidentified in the wholesale adoption of TQM inhigher education. Roffe (1998) suggested thatwhile there are a small number of qualityindicators in industry, these are more numerousand complex in higher education and are

therefore more difficult to assess.

It has even been purported that the practice ofTQM in higher education is deteriorating intomanagerialism because of the disparitybetween TQM techniques and educationalprocesses, as well as the lack of shared visionwithin institutions or educational fields(Srikanthan and Dalrymple, 2003). As a resultof this debate, Hewitt and Clayton (1999, p.838) recommend that a model of educationalquality that is different from, but capable ofbeing related to commercial models, isbeginning to emerge. However, it is not yetcomplete.

Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2003, p. 134)suggested that a fresh view is necessary ofquality in higher education. A starting pointfor this process is arguably a comprehensiveassessment of current practices to determinethe extent to which different meanings ofquality and different stakeholder perspectivesare taken into account. Drawing on relevantliterature from both education and industry, anew framework for a quality audit tool has

therefore been developed in order to assess currentquality management approaches within higher education.

According to Lewis and Smith (1994) the perception ofquality of education by many academics is increasinglybecoming a problem for many outside the system.Unhappy customers and low employee morale are alsomentioned as major challenges in universities (Coate,

1993). Engelkemeyer (1993) categorized theshortcomings of present higher education systems as poorteaching, anachronistic programmes, incoherentcurricula, excessive price, and growing and inefficientadministrative bureaucracies. QM is seen by many ashaving enormous potential to respond to the challenges(Hansen, 1993). It can be applied as a means forimproving student/ staff morale, increasing productivity,and delivering higher quality services to both internal andexternal customers (Cowles, 1993).

Difficulties in defining customer requirements, whilethere is a variety of stakeholders (e.g. students, parents,employers, faculty members, government, and generalsociety) having different interests, adds to thecomplexity. This characteristic of a higher educationsystem, however, cannot overshadow the need for anoperational definition of quality, one that provides a wayfor improvement. An important point which can beobserved is the presence of a strong link between qualityand market issues; higher quality can be gained throughattracting more capable students and hiring higher qualitystaff, as well as absorbing more industrial grants whichare all market related. This proposes the possibleadoption of commercially based approaches such as QMin a public sector like higher education (Stensaasen,1995).

Although higher education is able to adopt many of the

principles of QM, it is reasonable to expect someproblems when applying them to a differentorganizational structure to that of the commercialenvironment. The concern is that there will be a directrelationship between the conception of higher educationbeing taken, the definition of quality being used and theperformance indicators chosen to measure quality (Tam,2001).

1.4 Characteristics of Education Services

Lovelock (1983) offered a useful conceptual foundationthat involved five criteria, each of which can beexamined on four dimensions. Using Lovelocksframework, education services can be described ashaving the following characteristics: The nature of the

service act the education service act is directed atpeople (their minds rather than their bodies), it isprimarily people based rather than equipment based(Thomas, 1978), and involves largely intangible actions(Shostack, 1977). The relationship with the customer education involves a lengthy and formal relationship withthe client and a continuous delivery of the service.Students have what Lovelock (1983) refers to as amembership relationship with the service provider,offering an opportunity to develop strong client loyaltyand enhanced client services.


5/15


18

The level of customization and judgement inservice delivery some services require greatercustomization and judgement on the part ofservice providers than others. The extent towhich education services are customized isvariable. Small tutorials or individualsupervision are more customized than mass

lectures. In most cases, the extent to which aservice provider exercises judgement inmeeting the needs of individual students ishigh. This is particularly the case with teachingstaff. A problem arising from this is thepossibility that quality can be affected by thevariability of service delivery (Nicholls, 1987).The nature of demand relative to supply aservice can involve a widespread demand (e.g.electricity) or a narrow demand (e.g.insurance). At the same time, the ability to altersupply quickly, to meet demand fluctuations,varies. In education, demand is subject torelatively narrow fluctuations over time.However, supply can be difficult to manage,with limitations on the availability of staff andplaces in courses (Lovelock, 1983).

The method of service delivery the deliveryof services may be classified into thoserequiring single or multiple site outlets and thenature of the customer interaction with theservice. Customers may move to a serviceprovider, or a service provider may move tomeet them. International education servicestraditionally required the student to come to theinstitution to complete their courses. However,this is changing, with the establishment ofoffshore teaching programs and distance

education and modern technologies (Soutarand Mazzarol, 1995).

1.5 The Kenyan Public Universities and theUniversity of NairobiUniversity education in Kenya began in 1963with just 571 students enrolled in NairobiUniversity College (Weidman, 1995). Sincethen, the system has undergone somecommendable expansion, and by 1998 therewere a total of six public universities and 18private universities with varying degrees ofrecognition in the country. With theestablishment of the 8-4-4-system, universityeducation takes a period of four years to

complete, however there are schools such asmedicine and law that take an additional yearor two. In addition to the universities and theirconstituent campuses, higher education inKenya also includes polytechnics, institutes ofscience and technology and diploma levelteacher training colleges (Encyclopedia ofHigher Education, 1992).

Notwithstanding the expansion in the pastseveral years, the capacity of the higher

education sector in Kenya is still limited andaccommodates only 7.5 percent of students graduatingfrom secondary schools, and 2 percent of the expectedage cohort (Weidman, 1995). Between 1990 and 2000, itwas reported that 180,000 of the students who attainedthe minimum entry qualification failed to gain admissionto public universities (Kigotho, 2000). Therefore, accessto higher education in Kenya is extremely competitive

and students must earn a grade point average on theKenya Certificate of Secondary Education significantlyover and beyond the minimum eligibility requirement.

Formal education in Kenya dates back to the colonialtimes. At independence, the government took over theeducation sector. Kenya has since attached education toeconomic and social development (Sifuna, 1998). TheUniversity of Nairobi, a body corporate established by anAct of Parliament Cap 210 of the Laws of Kenya is thepioneer institution of University education in Kenya.Being the only institution of higher learning in Kenya fora long time, the University of Nairobi responded to thenational, regional and Africa's high level manpowertraining needs by developing and evolving strong,diversified academic programmes and specializations insciences, applied sciences, technology, humanities, socialsciences and the arts. To date, the range of programmesoffered number approximately two hundred. TheUniversity has benefited from its location, in thecountrys capital, Nairobi, as well as, from the efforts ofthe nations diverse population. (www.unobi.ac.ke).

The University of Nairobi owes its origin to severaldevelopments in higher education within the country andthe region. The inception of the University of Nairobi istraced back to 1956 when the Royal Technical Collegeadmitted its first lot of A-level graduates for technicalcourses in April the same year. Soon after the arrival of

students at the college, the pattern of education in EastAfrica came under security. Through therecommendation of a working party formed in 1958chaired by the vice chancellor of the University ofLondon, Sir John Lockwood, the Royal TechnicalCollege of East Africa was transformed. On 25th June1961, the College became the second University Collegeof East Africa; under the name Royal College Nairobi on20th May 1964. On the attainment of University Collegestatus, the institution prepared students for bachelorsdegrees awarded by the University of London, while alsocontinuing to offer college diploma programmes(www.unobi.ac.ke).

The University College Nairobi provided educational

opportunities in this capacity until 1966 when it beganpreparing students exclusively for degrees of theUniversity of East Africa and not London, as was thecase before. In 1970, the University College Nairobitransformed into the first national University in Kenyaand was renamed the University of Nairobi. In view ofthe rapid expansion, The University underwent a majorreconstruction in 1983 resulting in decentralization of theadministration, by creation of six campus colleges headedby principals of colleges being: College of Agriculture &Veterinary Sciences situated at Upper Kabete Campus;


6/15


19

College of Architecture & Engineering situatedat the Main Campus; College of Biological &Physical Sciences situated at ChiromoCampus; College of Education & ExternalStudies situated at Kikuyu Campus; College ofHealth Sciences situated at the KenyattaNational Hospital; College of Humanities andSocial sciences situated at the Main Campus -

Faculty of Arts; Parklands-Faculty of Law andLower Kabete Campus -Faculty of Commerce.Since then, there are seven Universities andseventeen private Universities competing withUniversity of Nairobi (www.unobi.ac.ke).

Superior skills can be defined in terms of staffcapability, systems, or marketing savvy notpossessed by a competitor. A superior resourceis defined in terms of physical resources thatare available to help strategic implementation,such as operating scale, location,comprehensiveness of a distribution system,brand equity, or processing assets. Thesuccessful conversion of skills and resourcesinto a unified set of competencies is the basisfor a cost or differentiation strategy thatsucceeds in the marketplace. The bundle ofcompetencies that a firm takes to themarketplace may be available to competitors(Barney, 1991; Mahoney and Pandian, 1992;Bharadwaj et al., 1993). The University ofNairobi, school of business like most higherlearning institutions in Kenya is faced with theneed to control an ever large and rapidlychanging strategic environment(www.unobi.ac.ke). Performance is a functionof competitive advantage achieved by turning asource advantage resulting from superior skills

and resources into a competitive advantage(Day and Wensley, 1988).

The University of Nairobi records the largestnumber of student admissions for degreecourses per annum. Quality infrastructure hasbeen regarded as critical operational issue forthe University of Nairobi to achieve its desiredgoal of becoming an international centre ofexcellence. The University of Nairobi hascontinued to rehabilitate the existinginfrastructure, and complete many of thestalled projects. For example the CentralExaminations Center situated at Chiromo is inprogress, which when completed, it is expected

to strengthen further the examination processin the University of Nairobi. The Universityhas also continued to expand and strengthen itsInformation and Communication Technologies(ICT) infrastructure by establishing andequipping computer laboratories for studentsand staff. This, no doubt, has contributed to theimprovement its ranking that is the 21st inAfrica from position 26 in the previous year.The University is also grateful to its donorsand partners who have contributed towards the

acquisition of the critically needed ICT(www.unobi.ac.ke).

1.6 Statement of the ProblemIssues of Quality of Education, rather than massproduction, need to move to the forefront of theeducational agenda of policy makers at higher educationlevel. Considering the huge public and private investment

in university education, there is an urgent need toevaluate how effectively the investment is being utilizedby examining the quality of the educationalinfrastructure, the cadre of qualified tutors and otherresources in place, and the quality of teaching andlearning (UNESCO, 2003).

The University of Nairobi is within the new globalmarket, which is characterized by rapid informationchange, intense information flows and increasingcompetition through the reduction of barriers to trade andexchange, the University is forced to slowly emerge as anorganization driven by the commercial imperative ofmarket led forces. Yet the University of Nairobisstrategies for resource utilization are embedded in modelsof higher education. This had been coupled with othermajor challenges such as: inadequate funding especiallyfor research and development, quality and relevance,inadequate use of ICT, lack of a unified accreditationsystem, un-harmonized legal frameworks, inadequatemanagement capacity, drug and substance abuse. Hencethere was need to document the most critical qualitymanagement practices used in its education services;while determining the challenges facing the University ofNairobi in the implementation of the continuousimprovement principle of QM (www.unobi.ac.ke).

A number of researches had been done in the area ofQuality and Quality Management. McCulloch (1993) in

his study found out that the language of QM needs to becarefully adopted; he concluded that terms like customer,product, input, output, indicators, and efficiency are allproblematic in higher education. This is because of theever-changing demand of the customers and challengesposed by lack of enough resources. In accepting this idea,however, it seems that QM is inappropriate, sincecustomer orientation, measurement, and cost reductionare among its main principles. For this, Coate (1993)concluded that experience shows arguments aboutlanguage to be time-consuming and non-productive.

Other studies carried out by Cua et al. (2001) and Kaynak(2003), found that there is an underlined importance andcausal relations between quality management practices

and competitive advantage. Furthermore, many authors(Cua et al., 2001; Kaynak, 2003) suggested a positiveassociation between QM practices and organizationalperformance. The conclusions from both the surveys andcase studies found out that the different background ofeach institution and differences originate from fivecritical factors: degree of comprehensiveness of QMpractices throughout the campus; inclusion or otherwiseof academic sections; degree of employee involvement;time span of QM programmes; and lastly the degree ofcompletion of the programmes when reporting.


7/15


20

Although a number of studies had been doneon the concept and context of qualitymanagement and higher educationrespectively, none had been done within thecontext of public universities in Kenya, thecase of the University of Nairobi. There wasneed therefore for a study to be carried out

focusing on the University of Nairobisacademic services in conjunction with the mainQM features. The following three researchquestions were focused in this study: What wasthe extent to which Quality Management wasapplied in the University of Nairobi? Second,what were the quality management practicesused in the University of Nairobi? Third, whatwere the challenges faced in QualityManagement implementation in the Universityof Nairobi

2.0 Research StrategyThis was a case study on the qualitymanagement practices in Kenyan educationalinstitutions, particularly at the University ofNairobi. The research relied on records ofevents that had already taken place; hence, theresearcher did not manipulate any casualfactors or challenges that the academicmanagers/management posed to qualitymanagement in Universities.

The target population include all managers thatconstituted the University of Nairobismanagement board. This did not include theother subsidiaries operating under theUniversitys umbrella/name. RandomSampling was appropriate to obtain a sample

from the population. The Sample was basedon the following members of the UniversitysManagement Board drawn from respectiveschools/faculties/institutes/boards (seeappendix 1).Management Board Total

Population(N)

Vice chancellor 1

Deputy vice chancellor ()-Administration & Finance

1

Deputy vice chancellor-AcademicAffairs

1

Deputy vice chancellor-StudentAffairs

1

Principals of each UniversityCollege 6

Deputy principal-CHSS 1

Academic Registrar 1

Administration Registrar 1

Planning Registrar 1

Finance Officer 1

Deans of faculties/schools 13

Directors of Schools /boards

/institutes

18

Departmental Heads 95

Total 140

Simple random sampling assisted to minimize bias whendealing with the population sample. The sampleconsisted of the Senior Managers, Supervisors and juniorstaff. In Simple Random Sampling, the respondents fromvarious cadres were selected randomly. Based on theabove, a Sample of Seventy-Five (75) respondents wasconsidered. This conformed to the widely held rule of

thumb that to be representative, a sample should have 30or more test units (Wayne and Terrell, 1995).

The following data collection instruments were used:questionnaires (both structured and unstructured);interviews (personal interviews which consisted ofstructured questions; secondary data such as files,pamphlets, office manuals circulars, policy papers and;observations (was done in a structural way).

The main instruments for data collection werequestionnaires and document analysis. Questionnaireswere used to obtain information from the UniversitysManagement board. The questionnaire was divided intothree sub questionnaires: Questionnaire One: Extent towhich Quality Management is applied; QuestionnaireTwo: The quality management practices andQuestionnaire Three: Challenges in the Implementationof Quality Management Systems. Respondents wereallowed fair latitude in their answering of interviewquestions

On the validity of Instruments, the researcher also carriedout a pilot study to appraise the questionnaire soundnessof the items and to estimate time required to answer theitems. The pilot study covered some of the some 20members of the management team in the University ofNairobi not covered in the sampled population. Theresults of the pilot study were discussed with the

respondents and adjustments were made accordingly. Thevalidity of instruments measures the consistency ofinstruments. Best and Kahn (2000) considers thereliability of the instruments to be the degree ofconsistency that the instruments or proceduredemonstrates. What it measures it does so consistently.The reliability of a standardized test is usually expressedas a correlation coefficient, which measures the strengthof association between variables. Such coefficient varybetween 0.00 and 1.00 with the former showing that thereis no reliability and the later showing there is perfectreliability which is an ideal situation. Reliability wasascertained by splitting the instruments into two; byplacing all odd numbered in one sub-set and all evennumbered items in another subset and then finding the

coefficient of internal consistency. The reliability wasestimated to be 0.89 meaning that the instruments will bereliable.

Data analysis was based on the research questionsdesigned at the beginning of the research. Frequencytables, percentages and means were used to analyse thedata. Responses in the questionnaires were tabulated,coded and processed by use of a computer. Once theresponses were received, the questionnaires were editedfor completeness and consistency before processing. Data


8/15


21

was coded to facilitate categorization. The datacollected on the strategic responses wasanalysed quantitatively on the basis of thevariables to be highlighted. Descriptivestatistics was used especially the mode todetermine the most frequent response on thefactor under study. The mean was also used todetermine the average response of the

relationships between the variables understudy. The presentation of the data utilized theuse of tables and charts. These tools wereselected for their clarity, preciseness, ease ofunderstanding and interpretation.

The Statistical Package for Social Science(SPSS) programme was used to analyse thedata, make conclusions and recommendationsfrom the study. The responses on open-endedquestions were reported by descriptivenarrative. The results of the study werecompared with literature review to establish thequality management practices in the Universityof Nairobis education services.

3.0 Data Analysis, Findings and DiscussionsThis section covers data analysis and findingsof the research. The data is summarized andpresented in the form of proportions, means,and tables. Data was collected from Forty-Five(45) members of the Management Board of theUniversity of Nairobi. The collected data hasbeen analyzed and interpreted in line with theaims of the study namely, to determine theextent to which Quality Management wasapplied in the University of Nairobi; toestablish the quality management practicesused in the University of Nairobi; and lastly to

determine the challenges faced in QualityManagement implementation in the Universityof Nairobi. The respondents were: the Vicechancellor, the Deputy vice chancellors,Principals of each University College and theirDeputies, Registrars, Deans offaculties/schools, Directors of Schools /boards

/institutes and the Departmental Heads. Out ofthe Seventy-Five (75) members of theUniversity of Nairobis management boardwho were sampled and the questionnaires wereadministered, only Forty-Five (45) responded.This gave a response rate of 60% percent.

3.1 The Application of Quality Management

in the University Academic ServicesThe respondents (Top management: DVCs,Registrar Dean of students and Financemanager) were asked to indicate the extent towhich Quality Management is applied in theUniversity of Nairobis academic Services.There are very many quality certifications. TheQuality Management System standards createdby ISO are meant to certify the processes andthe system of an organization and not theproduct or service itself. ISO 9000 standards

do not certify the quality of the product or service. Fromthe research data, the university of Nairobis qualitysystem is derived from ISO 9000, which is actually inline with the International Organization forStandardization that created the Quality ManagementSystem (QMS) standards in 1987 comprising of a seriesof standards that comprise ISO 9001:1987, ISO9002:1987 and ISO 9003:1987; which were applicable in

different types of industries, based on the type of activity:designing, production or service delivery. Thus theUniversity of Nairobi has applied quality management toa great extent which is 100% in most of its academicprocess.

A quality management policy is important for anorganization which is committed to quality servicedelivery. To test the extent onto which the university hasapplied quality management in its academic services, therespondents (Top Management) were asked to indicateextent to which they have used some basic aspects withrespect to the University of Nairobis Quality policy in itsacademic function. From the results in table 4.2 below,and based on the measures on the likert-scale (where 1 =Very Great Extent and 5 = Very Small Extent), theUniversity of Nairobi to a very great extent (Mean = 1)has ensured that the Quality Management Policy isappropriate to the purpose of the University of Nairobi;and it provides the framework for establishing andreviewing quality objectives. This is in line with EFQM,(2003) documentation that excellent organization design,with a sound quality management can improve processesin order to fully satisfy, and generate increasing value forcustomers and other stakeholders.

Based on the measures on the likert-scale , the universityof Nairobi has to a very great extent (Mean = 1) done thefollowing: provided evidence of its commitment to the

development and implementation of the University ofNairobi's QMS; defined its processes to ensure itsacademic/educational products meet the Commission ofHigher Education regulatory requirements; implementedactions necessary to achieve planned results andcontinual improvement of their educational processes;and lastly communicated the importance of meetingcustomer as well as statutory and regulatoryrequirements. And to some great extent defined itsprocesses to ensure its academic/educational productsmeet customer requirements.

3.2 The Quality Objectives in the University ofNairobis Academic FunctionThe respondents (Top Management) were asked to

indicate the extent based on the measures on the likert-scale 1-5 (where 1 = Very Great Extent and 5 = VerySmall Extent), to which they agreed with some aspectsthat were touching on the University of Nairobis Qualityobjectives in its academic function. From the researchdata, the university of Nairobi has to a very great extent(Mean = 1) established quality objectives including thoseneeded to meet requirements for product at each(relevant) function and level; documented its objectivesincluding those requirements needed for products withmeasurable quality objectives; and lastly the QMS


9/15


22

planning is performed to meet the qualityobjectives and requirements. Every institutionneeds to have quality objectives which can beused to guard against any erroneous outputsfrom its services and activities. University ofNairobi is not an exception.

3.3 The Documentation Requirements in the

University of Nairobis QualityManagement SystemsThe respondents (Principals and Directors)were asked with reference to theDocumentation Requirements in the Universityof Nairobis quality management systemsbased on the measures on the likert-scale 1-5(where 1 = Very Great Extent and 5 = VerySmall Extent), to indicate the extent to whichthe quality management system documentssome basic aspects relating to quality. Fromthe research data, the university of Nairobi hasto a very great extent (Mean = 1) made use of aquality manual which is well documented;documented all the documents needed by theUniversity of Nairobi to ensure the effectiveplanning, operation and control of its processesand lastly documented all the proceduresrequired by this international standards. Aproper documentation of every process aspectan entity is very important. This is because itacts as a centre of reference and correctionscan easily be made in case of any diversionfrom norms.

3.4 The Establishment of a Written QualityManual in the University of NairobiFrom the results above, it has been establishedthat the university of Nairobi has to a very

great extent (Mean = 1) made use of a qualitymanual which is well documented. Therespondents (Principals and Directors) wereasked with reference to the Quality Manual inthe University of Nairobis qualitymanagement systems to indicate the extent towhich the Universitys quality manual thatincludes its critical aspects and elements. Theresults are as in table 4.6.

Table 4.6 Quality Manual Aspects of theUniversity of Nairobi

DescriptiveStatisticsQuality Manual Aspects of

the University of Nairobi Mean Std.

DeviationThe University of Nairobiensures the documentsremain legible and readilyidentifiable

1.5098.50488

The University has definedthe scope of qualitymanagement system,including details of andustification for any

exclusion

1.9804.14003

The University has adescription of the interactionbetween the processes ofquality management system

2.0000.00000

The University of Nairobireviews and updates asnecessary and re-approvesdocuments

2.00001.00000

The University of Nairobievaluates the need forchanges to the University ofNairobi's QMS

2.0196.14003

The University of Nairobi'smanagement review includean evaluation of the QMS toensure its continuingsuitability, adequacy, andeffectiveness

2.5098.50488

Source: Research Data

From the results in table 4.6 above, the university ofNairobi has to a very great extent (Mean = 1) ensured that

the documents remain legible and readily identifiable;and with a defined the scope of quality managementsystem, including details of and justification for anyexclusion. The University has also to a high extent (Mean= 2) described the interaction between the processes ofquality management system; reviewed and updated asnecessary and re-approved documents to evaluate theneed for changes to the University of Nairobi's QMS toensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, andeffectiveness.

3.3.5 The University of Nairobis Internal Audit inQuality Management in its Academic FunctionThe respondents (Principals and Directors) were asked toindicate the information they need most when they

analyze data in the University of Nairobis Internal Auditin Quality Management based on the measures on thelikert-scale 1-5 (where 1 = Very Great Extent and 5 =Very Small Extent). From the research data, 51 % of therespondents felt that the analysis provides informationrelating to customer satisfaction (dissatisfaction);conformance to customer requirements; and suppliers:but very little information on the characteristics andtrends of processes and products including preventiveaction.The respondents (Principals and Directors) were furtherqueried on how the Universitys Internal Audit in QualityManagement is carried out, by indicating the extent towhich they agreed with some of the key aspects ofInternal Audit in Quality Management, and from the

research data, the university of Nairobi has to a very greatextent (Mean = 1 and 2, with a significant standarddeviation) taken a corrective action to ensure conformityof the product, when planned results are not achieved; theUniversity of Nairobi measures and monitors processes todemonstrate the processes ability to achieve plannedresults; it also conducts internal audits at plannedintervals to determine whether the QMS conforms to therequirements of the ISO 9001:2000.


10/15


23

The University of Nairobi applies suitablemethods to monitor and, where applicable,measure the quality management's systemprocesses. It has also managed to monitorinformation relating to customer perception asto whether the University of Nairobi hasfulfilled customer requirements. Therespondents were uncertain about how the

University of Nairobi determines, collects andanalyzes data to asses the suitability of theQMS.3.5 The Challenges Faced in QualityManagement Implementation in theUniversity of Nairobi

3.5.1 The University of NairobisResponsibility, Authority andCommunication & Review in QualityManagement

The biggest challenge in quality systemimplementation is the ability of an institutionto carry responsibility the quality system,channelling authority, communication andReview in Quality Management in their corefunction. The respondents (DepartmentalHeads) were asked to indicate the extent towhich they conquered with some aspects thatrelate to the University of NairobisResponsibility, authority and communicationin Quality Management & Review in QualityManagement in its academic function. Fromthe research data, the respondents wereuncertain about how the University ofNairobi's management review evaluates theneed for changes to the University of Nairobi'sQMS; how the Management representativesprovide input to University of Nairobi top

management on the performance of the QMSand needs for improvement; how theManagement representatives promoteawareness of customer requirementsthroughout the University of Nairobi; how theUniversity of Nairobi's Management OutputReview in Quality Management includesactions to improve the effectiveness of thequality management system and its processesImprovement of product related to customerrequirements. Lastly, how the University ofNairobi's Management Output Review inQuality Management includes actions toresource needs.

Also from the research data, with respect to theUniversity of Nairobis Management InputReview the respondents were uncertain abouthow the University of Nairobi's processperformance and product conformity; the statusof preventive and corrective actions; thefollow-up actions from previous managementreviews; the planned changes that could affectthe quality management system; and lastly onthe recommendations for improvement.

3.5.2 The University of Nairobis ResourceManagement in Quality Management in its AcademicFunctionThe respondents (Departmental Heads) were asked to

indicate the extent to which they agreed with some of thebasic aspects underlying the University of NairobisResource Management in Quality Management in itsacademic function; and how the Universitys

Management has identified and implemented effectivearrangements for communication with its customers inrelation to some customer focus issues.

From the research results and data, the respondents wereuncertain about how the University provides training ortake other actions to satisfy competence needs; how theUniversity ensures personnel are informed about therelevance and importance of their activities and how theycontribute to the achievement of the quality objectives;how the University has planned (defined the sequence)the processes and sub-processes it needs for productrealization (to have in place to produce its product orprovide it's academic services); how the University ofNairobi identifies; how they determine and providecompetent personnel to perform work affecting quality;and lastly how the university of Nairobi's managementdetermines and provides resources needed to enhancecustomer satisfaction by meeting customer requirements.On the issue of communication, the respondents werealso uncertain how the following information relating toits customers is communicated; Product/degreeinformation; enquiries, contracts or order hauling,including amendments; and lastly how customerfeedbacks, including customer complaints are handled atthe moment.

3.5.3 Design, Development and the ChallengesAffected the University of Nairobis Implementation

of a Quality Management SystemThe respondents were asked to indicate the extent towhich some challenges have/are affected/affecting theUniversity of Nairobis implementation of a qualitymanagement system, with respect to the University ofNairobis Design and development in QualityManagement in its academic function. From the researchdata, the respondents were uncertain (Mean = 3) abouthow the University of Nairobi's change process thatinclude an evaluation of the effects of changes onconstituent parts, which are the campuses. They werealso uncertain on how the University of Nairobi hasestablished criteria for selection, evaluation, and re-evaluation of its suppliers; how validation for productionand service provision processes is done i.e. Re-validation;

how the University monitors information relating tocustomer perception as to whether the University ofNairobi has fulfilled customer requirements.

Also from the research data and based on the measureson the likert-scale 1-5 (where 1 = Very Great Extent and5 = Very Small Extent), the university of Nairobi has to avery great extent (Mean = 1 and 2, with a significantstandard deviation) faced with following majorchallenges in the implementation of its qualitymanagement system: failure to define the TQM


11/15


24

Challenge in University of Nairobi Academicfunction; the impact and validity of distancelearning; and lastly there is poor utilization offaculty time. The university of Nairobi isuncertain (Mean = 3, with a significantstandard deviation) on the extent to which it isfaced with following major challenges in theimplementation of its quality management

system: the University of Nairobi AcademicCulture is not Receptive to TQM; it is hard toestablish whether students actually learn in anysituation; there is inappropriate use oftechnological innovations in instruction andlastly, there is no viability of faculty tenure.

4.0 Summary and ConclusionsBased on the three specific objectives of thisstudy on the extent to which QualityManagement was applied in the University ofNairobi; the quality management practicesused in the University of Nairobi; and lastlythe challenges faced in Quality Management

implementation in the University of Nairobisacademic function.

4.1 SummaryThe university of Nairobis quality system isderived from ISO 9000, which is actually inline with the International Organization forStandardization created the QualityManagement System (QMS) standards in 1987comprising of a series of standards comprisingISO 9001:1987, ISO 9002:1987 and ISO9003:1987; which were applicable in differenttypes of industries, based on the type ofactivity: designing, production or servicedelivery. Thus the University of Nairobi has

applied quality management to a great extentwhich is 100% in most of this academicprocess.

The university of Nairobi has to a very greatextent (Mean = 1) done the following:provided evidence of its commitment to thedevelopment and implementation of theUniversity of Nairobi's QMS; defined itsprocesses to ensure its academic/educationalproducts meet the Commission of HigherEducation regulatory requirements;implemented actions necessary to achieveplanned results and continual improvement oftheir educational processes; and lastly

communicated the importance of meetingcustomer as well as statutory and regulatoryrequirements. Also it has been established thatthe University of Nairobi has to a great extent(Mean = 1) made use of a quality manualwhich is well documented; documented all thedocuments needed by the University of Nairobito ensure the effective planning, operation andcontrol of its processes and lastly documentedall the procedures required by this internationalstandards. The university of Nairobi has to a

very great extent (Mean = 1) made use of a qualitymanual which is well documented. The respondents(Principals and Directors) were asked with reference tothe Quality Manual in the University of Nairobis qualitymanagement systems to indicate the extent to which theUniversitys quality manual that includes its criticalaspects and elements

The university of Nairobi has to a very great extent(Mean = 1) ensured that the documents remain legibleand readily identifiable; and with a defined the scope ofquality management system, including details of and

justification for any exclusion. The University has also toa high extent (Mean = 2) described the interactionbetween the processes of quality management system;reviewed and updated as necessary and re-approveddocuments to evaluate the need for changes to theUniversity of Nairobi's QMS to ensure its continuingsuitability, adequacy, and effectiveness.

The university of Nairobi has to a very great extent(Mean = 1 and 2, with a significant standard deviation)takes a corrective action to ensure conformity of theproduct, when planned results are not achieved; theUniversity of Nairobi measures and monitors processes todemonstrate the processes ability to achieve plannedresults; it also conducts internal audits at plannedintervals to determine whether the QMS conforms to therequirements of the ISO 9001:2000. Also the Universityof Nairobi applies suitable methods to monitor and,where applicable, measure the quality management'ssystem processes. It has also managed to monitorinformation relating to customer perception as to whetherthe University of Nairobi has fulfilled customerrequirements.

The university of Nairobi has to a very great extent

(Mean = 1 and 2, with a significant standard deviation)faced with following major challenges in theimplementation of its quality management system: failureto define the TQM Challenge in University of NairobiAcademic function; the impact and validity of distancelearning; and lastly there is poor utilization of facultytime. This is in line with an observation that unhappycustomers and low employee morale are major challengesin universities (Coate, 1993). Engelkemeyer (1993)categorized the shortcomings of present higher educationsystems as poor teaching, anachronistic programmes,incoherent curricula, excessive price, and growing andinefficient administrative bureaucracies.

4.2 Conclusions

Based on the results from data analysis and findings ofthe research, one can safely conclude the following,based on the objectives of the study; Firstly, theUniversity of Nairobi records the largest number ofstudent admissions for degree courses per annum.Quality infrastructure has been regarded as criticaloperational issue for the University of Nairobi to achieveits desired goal of becoming an international centre ofexcellence. There are very many quality certifications.Thus the University of Nairobi has applied qualitymanagement to a great extent which is 100% in most of


12/15


25

this academic process. Secondly, a qualitymanagement policy is important for anorganization which is committed to qualityservice delivery. The University of Nairobi to avery great extent has ensured that the QualityManagement Policy is appropriate to itspurpose; and it provides the framework forestablishing and reviewing quality objectives.

Thirdly, the university of Nairobi has to a verygreat extent done the following: providedevidence of its commitment to thedevelopment and implementation of theUniversity of Nairobi's QMS; defined itsprocesses to ensure its academic/educationalproducts meet the Commission of HigherEducation regulatory requirements;implemented actions necessary to achieveplanned results and continual improvement oftheir educational processes; and lastlycommunicated the importance of meetingcustomer as well as statutory and regulatoryrequirements. And to some great extent definedits processes to ensure its academic/educationalproducts meet customer requirements.

Fourthly, the university of Nairobi has to avery great extent established quality objectivesincluding those needed to meet requirementsfor product at each (relevant) function andlevel; documented its objectives includingthose requirements needed for products withmeasurable quality objectives; and lastly theQMS planning is performed to meet the qualityobjectives and requirements. Fifthly, a properdocumentation of every process aspect of anentity is very important. This is because it acts

as a centre of reference and corrections can beeasily made in case of any diversion fromnorms. The University of Nairobi has to a verygreat extent made use of a quality manualwhich is well documented; documented all thedocuments needed by the University of Nairobito ensure the effective planning, operation andcontrol of its processes and lastly documentedall the procedures required by theseinternational standards.

Sixthly, the university of Nairobi has to a verygreat extent takes a corrective action to ensureconformity of the product, when plannedresults are not achieved; measures and

monitors processes to demonstrate theprocesses ability to achieve planned results; italso conducts internal audits at plannedintervals to determine whether the QMSconforms to the requirements of the ISO9001:2000. The University of Nairobi appliessuitable methods to monitor and, whereapplicable, measure the quality management'ssystem processes.

Seventh, the University of Nairobi's management reviewevaluates the need for changes to the University ofNairobi's QMS; how the Management representativesprovide input to University of Nairobi top managementon the performance of the QMS and needs forimprovement; how the Management representativespromote awareness of customer requirements throughoutthe University of Nairobi; how the University of

Nairobi's Management Output Review in QualityManagement includes actions to improve of theeffectiveness of the quality management system and itsprocesses Improvement of product related to customerrequirements. Lastly, how the University of Nairobi'sManagement Output Review in Quality Managementincludes actions to resource needs.

Eighth, the University provides training or take otheractions to satisfy competence needs; how the Universityensures personnel are informed about the relevance andimportance of their activities and how they contribute tothe achievement of the quality objectives; how theUniversity has planned (defined the sequence) theprocesses and sub-processes it needs for productrealization (to have in place to produce its product orprovide it's academic services); how the University ofNairobi identifies; how they determine and providecompetent personnel to perform work affecting quality;and lastly how the university of Nairobi's managementdetermines and provides resources needed to enhancecustomer satisfaction by meeting customer requirements.

Ninth, the University of Nairobi's change processincludes an evaluation of the effects of changes onconstituent parts, which are the campuses. They werealso uncertain on how the University of Nairobi hasestablished criteria for selection, evaluation, and re-evaluation of its suppliers; how validation for production

and service provision processes is done i.e. Re-validation;how the University monitors information relating tocustomer perception as to whether the University ofNairobi has fulfilled customer requirements.

The university of Nairobi has to a very great extent isfaced with following major challenges in theimplementation of its quality management system: failureto define the TQM Challenge in University of NairobiAcademic function; the impact and validity of distancelearning; and lastly there is poor utilization of facultytime.

5.0 Recommendations

5.1 Recommendations for Improvement

The findings of the study indicate that there are a numberof issues to be addressed. The following challenges needto be addressed within the University of Nairobi: skills,communication/management support and funding.

Since the three major challenges is the uncertainty abouthow the University of Nairobi's change process whichincludes an evaluation of the effects of changes onconstituent parts, which are the campuses; the University


13/15


26

of Nairobi has not established criteria forselection, evaluation, and re-evaluation of itssuppliers; and no validation for production andservice provision processes is done i.e. Re-validation without monitoring informationrelating to customer perception as to whetherthe University of Nairobi has fulfilledcustomer requirements. These have led to:

failure to define the TQM Challenge inUniversity of Nairobi Academic function; theimpact and validity of distance learning; andlastly there is poor utilization of faculty time.The university should not think that they aresuccessful since there is no change, which ispermanent. They should remove the status quoto be supportive to any formulation of newideas in order to respond to an ever-changingenvironment in Kenyan higher Education. Thiswill also curb the resistance from second levelmanagement.

5.3 Suggestion for Further ResearchEvery institution needs to have qualityobjectives which can be used t guard againstany erroneous outputs from its services andactivities. The University of Nairobi is not anexception. A quality management policy isimportant for an organisation which iscommitted to quality service delivery. To testthe extent to which the university has appliedquality management in its academic services, itis not an easy task due to various challenges.The respondents were very busy and as suchgetting time to fill the questionnaire was noteasy. This is because the respondents eitherwere attending academic seminars/Trips orthere were examinations which were going on

at that time. Also most of the respondents didnot understand the quality managementpractices in place in the University of Nairobithus making it difficult to give relevantinformation.

Areas of further research that were identifiedinclude a similar study to be carried out onother sectors of higher education, A study onthe quality management practices used in theother sectors of higher education; and lastly thechallenges faced in Quality Managementimplementation in the other sectors of highereducations academic function.. Cruciallyfurther research is should be done to determine

how Quality management can contribute to aorganizational financial performance andcustomer satisfaction and to what extent canthe benefits if any be quantified by theorganizations.

References

Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y., Waller, M.A.(1996), "Development and validation of TQM

implementations construct",Decision Sciences,

Vol. 27 No.1, pp.23-56.

Aldridge, S., Rowley, J. (1998), "Measuring customersatisfaction in higher education", Quality Assurance in

Education, Vol. 6 No.1/4, pp.197-204.

Bank, J. (1992), The Essence of Total QualityManagement, Prentice-Hall, Hemel Hempstead.

Barnard, J. (1999), "Using total quality principles in

business courses: the effect on student evaluations",

Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 62 No.June,pp.61-73.Barney, (1991) Journal of management studies, Vol.

17.No.1 pp.99-120Bergman, B. and Klefsjo, B. (2003), Quality from

Customer Needs to Customer Satisfaction, 2nd

ed.,

Studentlitteratur, Lund.Bergman, B., 1995, Quality in academic leadership: a

contribution to the discussion, Total QualityManagement, Vol. 6 No. 5 & 6, pp. 487-96.

Cheng, Y.C., Tam, W.M. (1997), "Multi-models ofquality in education", Quality Assurance in Education,

Vol. 5 No.1, pp.22-31.

Coate, E (1993), The introduction of total qualitymanagement at Oregon State University, community

college, in Sherr, L.A. and Teeter, D.J. (Eds), Total

Quality Management in Higher Education, Jossey-Bass,

San Francisco, CA, 1991 Education, Vol. 1 No. 1, , pp.21-8.

Cruickshank, M. (2003), "Total quality management inthe higher education sector: a literature review from aninternational and Australian perspective", TQM &

Business Excellence , Vol. 14 No.10, pp.1159-67.

Cua, K.O., Mc Kone, K.E., Schroeder, R.G. (2001),

"Relationships between implementation of TQM, JIT,and TPM and manufacturing performance", Journal of

Operations Management, Vol. 19 pp.675-94.

Cullen, J., Joyce, J., Hassall, T., Broadbent, M. (2003),"Quality in higher education: from monitoring to

management", Quality Assurance in Higher Education,Vol. 11 No.1, pp.30-4.

Deming, W. Edwards (1992), Out of the Crisis. MIT

Center for Advanced Engineering Study.Deming, W.E. (1982), Quality, Productivity andCompetitive Position, MIT Center for AdvancedEngineering Study, Cambridge, MA.

Detert, J.R., Jenni, R. (2000), "An instrument for

measuring quality practice in education", QualityManagement Journal, Vol. 7 No.3, pp.20-37.

Dow, D., Samson, D., Ford, S. (1999), "Exploding the

myth: do all quality management practices contribute to

superior quality performance?", Production and

Operations Management, Vol. 8 No.1, pp.1-27.

Engelkemeyer, S.W., (1993), TQM in highereducation, The Centre for Quality Management Journal,Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 28-33.

Eskildsen, J.K., Dahlgaard, J.J. (2000), "A causal model

for employee satisfaction", Total Quality Management,

Vol. 11 pp.1081-94.European Foundation for Quality Management (2003),

Modelo EFQM de Excelencia, European Foundation for

Quality Management, Brussels.


14/15


27

Feigenbaum, A.V., (1994) Quality educationand Americas competitiveness, QualityProgress,Vol. 27 No. 9, , pp. 83-4.

Flynn, B., Schroeder, R.G., Sakakibara, S.(1994), "A framework for quality management

research and an associated measurement

instrument", Journal of Operations

Management, Vol. 11 No.4, pp.339-66.Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., Sakakibara, S.(1995a), "The impact of quality management

practices on performance and competitiveadvantage", Decision Sciences, Vol. 26 No.5,

pp.659-91.

Ford, J.B., Joseph, M., Joseph, B. (1999),"Importance-performance analysis as a

strategic tool for service marketers: the case ofservice quality perceptions of business students

in New Zealand and the USA", The Journal of

Services Marketing, Vol. 13 No.2, pp.171-86.

Goldberg, J.S., Cole, B.R. (2002), "Quality

management in education: building excellenceand equity in student performance", Quality

Management Journal , Vol. 9 No.4, pp.8-22.GRI (2002), Global Reporting Initiative

Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, GlobalReporting Initiative, Boston, available at:

www.globalreporting.orgKoch, J.V., Fisher, J.L. (1998), "Highereducation and total quality management", TotalQuality Management, Vol. 9 No.8, pp.659-68.

Landesberg, P. (1999), "In the beginning, there

were Deming and Juran", The Journal for

Quality & Participation, Vol. 22 No.4, pp.59-

62.

Lewis, R.G. and Smith, D.H., (1994). Total

Quality in Higher Education, St Lucie Press,

FL.Lindsay, A., Downs, D. and Lunn, K. (2003),

Business processes attempts to find a

definition, Information & SoftwareTechnology, Vol. 45 No. 15, pp. 1015-9.

Lovelock C. H., (1983) Consumer Promotionin Services Marketing, Business Horizon,

May-June, pp 66

McCulloch, M., (1993) Total qualitymanagement: its relevance for higher

education, QualityAssurance in Education,

Vol. 1 No. 2, , pp. 5-11.McGraw-Hill, New

York, NY.Mugenda O.M. and Mugenda A. G. (1999).

Research methods qualitative and quantitativeaproaches. Nairobi : Acts Press.Oldfield, B., Baron, S. (1998), "Is services

cape important to student perceptions of

service quality?", Research Paper, Manchester

Metropolitan University, .Osseo-Asare, A.E., Longbottom, D. (2002),

"The need for education & training in the

EFQM model for quality management in UKhigher education institutions", Quality

Assurance in Education, Vol. 10 No.1, pp.26-36.Owlia, M.S., Aspinwall (1996), "A framework for the

dimensions of quality in higher education", Quality

Assurance in Education, Vol. 4 No.2, pp.12-20.Owlia, M.S., Aspinwall, E.M. (1998), "A framework for

measuring quality in higher education", Total Quality

Management, Vol. 9 No.August, pp.501-18.

Pfeffer, J. (2003), "Teaching the wrong lesson: thehuman factor",Business 2.0, Vol. 4 No.10, pp.60.Pfeffer, N., Coote, A. (1991), Is Quality Good For You?

A Critical review of Quality Assurance in the Welfare

Services, Institute of Public Policy Research, London.

Pirandello, L. (1979), Six Characters in Search of an

Author, translated from the Italian by John Linstrum EyreMethuen, London.

Pires Da Rosa, M.J., Saraiva, P.M., Diz, H. (2003),"Excellence in Portuguese higher education institutions",Total Quality Management, Vol. 14 No.2, pp.189-204.Pounder, J. (1999), "Institutional performance in higher

education: is quality a relevant concept?", Quality

Assurance in Education, Vol. 7 No.1/3, pp.156-63.Rentzhog, O. (1996), Core process management,

Licentiate thesis, Linkoping University, Division ofQuality Technology, Linkoping.

Roberts, Harry V., and Bernard F. Sergesketter (1993),Quality Is Personal: A Foundation for Total Quality

Management. The Free Press,Roffe, I.M. (1998), "Conceptual problems of continuousquality improvement and innovation in higher

education", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 6 No.2,

pp.74-82.

Sangeeta Sahney and D.K. Banwe, (2004),Conceptualizing total quality management in higher

education The TQM Magazine, Volume 16 Number 2

pp. 145-159 Emerald Group Publishing Limited ISSN0954-478X

Sanyal , B., Martin M.(1998). Management of Higher

Education with Special Reference to Financial

Management in African Countries. Paris: IIEP

Saraph, J.V., Benson, P.G., Schroeder, R.G. (1989), "Aninstrument for measuring the critical factors of quality

management", Decision Sciences, Vol. 20 No.4, pp.810-29.

Saylor, James H. (1992). TQM Field Manual. New York:

McGraw-Hill.Seymour, D.T., (1992) On Q: Causing Quality in Higher

Education, Macmillan, New York, NY.

Shostack, G L (1977), Service Positioning through

Structural Change Journal of Marketing, 51,34-43Sifuna, D.N (1998) The Government of Kenyan Public

Universities in Research in Post-Secondary Education.Volume 3, number 2.Sila, I. and Ebrahimpour, M. (2003), Examination and

comparison of the critical factors of total quality

management (TQM) across countries, International

Journal of Productivity Research, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 235-68.

SIQ (2003), Swedish Institute for Quality, The Swedish

Quality Award, Gothenburg.


15/15


28

Srikanthan, G., Dalrymple, J. (2002),"Developing a holistic model for quality in

higher education", Quality in Higher

Education, Vol. 8 No.3, pp.215-24.Srikanthan, G., Dalrymple, J. (2003),

"Developing alternative perspectives for

quality in higher education", International

Journal of Education Management, Vol. 17No.3, pp.126-36.

Svenson, Ray, Wallace, K., Wexler, G., andWexler, Bruce. (1994). The Quality Roadmap:

How to Get Your Company on the Quality

Track And Keep it There. New York:AMACOM.

T., Brown, A. (2000), "Continuouslystruggling with TQM", Proceedings of the

Annual Quality Congress, American Societyfor Quality Control, Milwaukee, WI,

Tam, M. (2001), "Measuring quality and

performance in higher education", Quality in

Higher Education, Vol. 7 No.1, pp.47-54..

Tribus, M., (1993) Quality management ineducation, Journal of Quality andParticipation, Vol. 16 No. 1, , pp. 12-21.IJQRM 14,5

Unesco (2003), Measuring Education Quality,Ministerial Round table on the Quality ofEducation, Unesco Institute of Statistics, Paris,

Weidman , J.(1995). Diversifying Finance of

Higher Education systems in the Third World:

The Case of Kenya and Mongolia.Weiss, Howard J., and Mark E. Gershon.

(1989) Production and Operations

Management. Allyn and Bacon,.Wiklund, H., Klefsj, B., Wiklund, P.S.,

Edvardsson, B. (2003), "Innovation and TQMin Swedish higher education institutions

possibilities and pittfalls", The TQM Magazine,

Vol. 15 No.2, pp.99-107.Wiklund, H., Klefso, B., Wiklund, P.,

Edvardsson, B. (2003), "Innovation and TQMin Swedish higher education institutions

possibilities and pitfalls", The TQM Magazine,

Vol. 15 No.2, pp.97-107.www.unobi.ac.ke

Youngless, Jay. (2000)"Total Quality

Misconception." Quality in Manufacturing.

January.

Appendix I: List ofSchools/Faculties/Institutes/Boards

SchoolsMedicineComputing & InformaticsEconomicsJournalismPharmacyBuilt EnvironmentEducationMathematics

Physical SciencesLawBusinessDental SciencesEngineeringNursing SciencesThe Arts & Design

FacultiesSocial SciencesVeterinary MedicineArtsAgriculture

Institutes/BoardsPostgraduate StudiesAfrican StudiesDevelopment StudiesHousing and Building ResearchCommon Undergraduate StudiesSports and GamesNuclear Science

Institute for Tropical & Infectious DiseasesInstitute of Diplomacy and International StudiesPopulation Studies & ResearchCentre for International programmes and LinksUniversity of Nairobi Science and Technology

ParkDirector, Student Welfare AuthorityCo-ordinator, University of Nairobi Information &

Computing ServicesCo-ordinator, Centre for Advanced Studies of

Environmental Law & Policy (CASELAP)

paper2 quality management magutu

Documents