Benchmarking in European Higher Education

1. Benchmarking in European Higher Education Dr. Christiane Gaehtgens ESMU Senior Expert

2. ESMU: European Centre for Strategic Management of Universities • International non-profit organisation promoting Good Practice: • Networks: HUMANE, DEAN, MODERN, EDUPROF • Seminars and Training Programmes • Benchmarking • Past activity -Technical assistance to EC (management of major HE programmes : COMETT, 1987-1995 & SOCRATES, LEONARDO, YOUTH for Europe III, 1995-2006) • President: Professor Frans van Vught, University of Twente, NL • Secretary General: Nadine Burquel, Headoffice in Brussels

3. EBI-I:2006-2008 • Objectives: • understanding the concepts & practices of benchmarking • improving and increasing its use in higher education • Methodology • Desk research: analysis of 18 collaborative benchmarking projects in higher education • Three specialised practical workshops on benchmarking research, internationalisation and internal quality • Symposium, presenting preliminary project findings

4. Outputs First Phase: • An online tool with examples, advice and an online bibliography • A practical handbook with a review of the literature and a step by step approach to benchmarking • A report of extensive desk research carried out on benchmarking in higher education • Guidelines of good practices for effective benchmarking

5. EBI-II: 2008-2010 • Four benchmarking groups: • Governance • University-enterprise cooperation • Curriculum reforms • Lifelong learning • A broad online collaborative learning community • Benchmarking tools (questionnaires, reports, handbooks of GPs) • Conferences – Dissemination of results

6. 2. Recent Challenges for European HEIs • Internationalisation/Globalisation • Cost and specialisation of research (human resources) • Reputation Race • Size matters (increasingly) • Supranational European integration policy • Teaching and learning: EHEI • Research structures, funding mechanisms: ERA,EIT, FPs • Modernisation Agenda: • Acknowledgement for diversity of mission • Institutional autonomy (responsibility) • Accountability • Stakeholder involvement • Growing Diversity of Profile and Mission • Accountability to stakeholders

7. 4. What is Benchmarking? • Not invented here” : The Quality movement started in the private sector, namely in Japan after WW II. • Reluctantly, then enthusiastically excepted in the West. • Two major types: • Continuous monitoring (TQM) • Products and Processes (ISO 9000 etc.) • Benchmarking provides qualified, targeted information for strategic decisions through comparison of key performance indicators with strategically relevant partner institutions.

8. 4. What is Benchmarking (2) • Benchmarking provides standards for institutional quality management/enhancement. • Benchmarking is a means for inter-organisational learning. • Benchmarking can be carried out within a peer-group, on a one-to-one basis or against a database. • Benchmarking brings together the benefits of cooperation and competition. • Benchmarking is a internal governance tool, not an external assessment or ranking.

9. In other words: Benchmarking empowers HEIs to- • Measure and compare performance to the competition • Self-assess their performance in selected areas • Better understand processes • Support strategy formulation and implementation • Strengthen institutional identity • Set targets for improvement • Obtain data for decision making • Share good practice, learn from others how to improve • Respond to national and international performance standards • Be accountable to stakeholders • Set new standards for the sector.

10. Ranking Benchmarking recognises institutional diversity „Golden Delicious and Granny Smith“ university-owned flexible (customising) competition and cooperation governance tool • mono-dimensional, „one size fits all“ approach • comparing „apples and oranges“ • externally owned, public • rigid • competition • main impact on reputation

11. 5.1.Benchmarking Methodology: Approaches • Benchmarking approaches differ considerably: • Inter-/ Intra-organisational learning • Benchmarking Partnerships (several universities) • One-to-One Benchmarking • Benchmarking against database • Qualitative or quantitative

12. 5.2. Benchmarking Methodology: Cornerstones to start with • Ensure validity • Choose research based method • Subscribe to rigid standards • Agree on chiefly quantitative • Be flexible and realistic • Decide on method and modules for individualised approaches • Pragmatic step-by-step approach • Ensure autonomy and confidentiality • Data and outcomes university/partnership-owned

13. 6. Benchmarking Terminology • Priority (Domain):Strategically relevant area in which benchmarking takes place • e.g. the learning experience, research performance, administration, staff develoment • Indicators: Aspects/areas within the priority for which data can/should be gathered: • Input – processes – output – impact • Benchmark: level of performance per indicator • Standards can be categories (high/middle/low) or absolute numbers/percentages • to be defined by group during the benchmarking exercise

14. More Benchmarking Terminology… • Benchmark: measurablelevel of performance per indicator an institution aims to achieve, relates on targets • Will be envisaged before benchmarking starts • Intended wo be revised or confirmed after the benchmarking exercise has been completed • Criteria: relevant aspect of indicators in which data are to be gathered and compared • To be determined on the basis of expertise and good-practice exchange • External experts should be involved for maximum relevance • Availability of data is crucial • Action plan: operational strategy for implementation of performance level based on findings of benchmarking exercise

15. 7. Benchmarking Step-by-Step • First and foremost: • As Benchmarking is chiefly a governance tool, the choice of benchmarking approach should be determined by the overall strategic goals of each individual HEI. • Ownership of and responsibility for the benchmarking exercise lies solely with the management of participating university. • Be realistic for credibility: check feasibility, e.g. availability of data and resources, ensure stakeholder support.

16. Step I: Developing a Strategy • Take responsibility at Senior Management level • Identify purpose, goals  and perspectives for the benchmarking exercise, taking into account institutional mission • Clearly define area(s) of benchmarking (priorities, domains) • Identify benchmarking method / partners  (here: through ESMU) • Choose approach (based on strategic goals and feasibility, e.g. availability of data, timeframe) • Communicate to internal and external stakeholders, gain commitment • Provide resources (staff, funding) • Create benchmarking team, allocate responsibilities • Formal agreement with benchmarking partners

17. Step II: Gathering Information • Confirm availibility of data • Choose indicators (balance strategic goals and feasibility) • Define criteria (with help from external experts) • Set benchmarks (absolute or steps) • Gather data • Compare outcomes • Confirm/review targets

18. priorities  indicators

19. indicators  criteria  benchmarks

20. Step III: Introducing ChangeAction Plan: Role of Senior Management • Define goals and targets, based on benchmarks, immediate, mid- and long-term • Communicate, gain committment • Provide appropriate resources for the change process to take place effectively (Task Force, infrastructure) • Supervise process/set milestones • Ensure implementation of actions • Monitor change in performance

21. Step III Action Plan: Role of Task Force • Design framework and precise, step-by-step action plan to convert the results of benchmarking into institutional change • Design structured process with milestones and deadline • Report progress and obstacles to Senior Management • Improve database for future monioring

22. Step IV: Assessment • Optional: • Evaluation of benchmarking experience • Evaluation of action/change process • Good practice exchange with benchmarking partners • …start all over again!

23. … for Quality Enhancement is a never-ending challenge, and so is Benchmarking…

24. Save the Date(s): • Benchmarking Workshop Brussels 10 June, 2010 • EBI-II Dissemination Conference Brussels 11 June, 2010