Pedagogics

S.U.Trapitsyn (Russia, St.-Petersburg)

A.S.Satyvaldyeva (Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty)

Change to new management models

based on the process approach

Annotation

In recent years there is an active search of new effective management models by educational institutions. Many researchers and experts believe that one of the most promising ways to improve educational activity is process management by this activity. At the same time, introduction of the process approach to management by educational institution faces a lot of problems and barriers. What is “process management”? Why doesn’t it always lead to success? What is it necessary to know the head of educational institution about the process approach to management? Authors of the article try to answer these and many other questions.

Keywords: the process approach, education, educational institutions, management model, efficiency, standard.

I. Introduction. By the concept of education development of the Republic of Kazakhstan till 2015 as well as the Concept on modernization of Russian education, is defined the basic purpose of higher education - qualitative higher education through further democratization of education management, updating of the education contents and improvement of training quality for specialists. Achievement of this goal demands change to new principles and models of university management, staticizes the task “managerial improvement of the university according to the requirements of the open civil society” [1].

II. Goal setting. Now in system of higher education of Russia and Kazakhstan there is an active search of new, effective management models. The attention of researchers, university heads and paraprofessionals involve goals for development and introduction Quality Management Systems (QMS), well-reputed both in industrial production and in sphere of services. Today many heads of the universities look for tools to increase efficiency. It is possible to confirm that an epoch of management “on knee” when it was possible to supervise successfully over the university, relying only on the intuition and experience, has passed. There comes epoch of “intellectual” management. One of the tools of such management is so-called “process approach”. The idea to increase management efficiency of the university and to provide quality assurances of higher education on the basis of QMS introduction and process approach became so widespread and axiomatical, that today in consciousness of many heads this idea has strongly affirmed, that in itself the fact of presence icertificated quality management system is a guarantee of its competitiveness and steady development, panacea from chronic high school diseases, reliable way out from crisis situation in which there was an education system as a whole, and higher education, in particular.

III. Results. At the same time, the analysis of practice of many universities which have introduced quality management system, at all does not confirm indisputability of this thesis as does not contain also incontestable certificates of advantages got by these universities and benefits, not so obviously shows their amazing success and achievements. Such state of things has led to that recently in increasing frequency in the publications, devoted to problems of education quality management, there are ideas that requirements of the standard 150 9001:2008 (as, however, and its earlier edition) are of little use for activity improvement of educational institutions and improvement of education quality and that these requirements act not as methodological basis of management system modernization of the universities, and are only one of the administrative means directed on the decision of single tasks, though and in wide enough spectrum of organizational problems. The question is about widespread and rather dangerous error of university heads when quality management system is considered only as a part of the general university management, though it is necessary, but only supplementing it, and not as new model of this general management, a conceptual framework of management system transformation of the university.

The reason of such position, in our opinion, is partially covered in incorrect reading and interpretation stated in standard 150 9001:2008 requirements. There are many university heads who did not read the standard at all, but somewhere, once and from someone heard, that it “is not for educational organizations”, have believed in it and now are assuring others. At the same time, all over the world implementation of the process approach to management is considered the indicator of introduction in the organization modern management methods. It is one of the major factors for success of any organization. For this reason, the given approach has laid down in a basis of quality management standards. However, and it does not convince the sceptics, many authors, giving reason for the conclusions on insufficient suitability of the standard in educational sphere, pay attention that in the standard there are no precise and apgorythmical methodical instructions for the methods and implemention technology of the process approach in educational institutions.

“Implementation in processes organization system alongside with their identification and interaction, and also the management processes directed on achievement of the desirable result, can be defined as “process approach” (GOST Р ISO 9001:2008. Quality Management Systems. Requirements). However, which processes are necessary to identify at universities, how to operate by them, how and which interrelations to develop - on these questions the standard does not give any answers. But in fact it must not! It also defines its universality and applicability in any sphere of human activity, including educational. However, instead of finding answers to these questions, deeply investigating and understanding specificity of educational sphere and the educational processes, from education many experts and heads want to get ready recipes or simply copy of technologies of process management fulfilled in industrial production. Of course, they do not get any effect expected from such implemention. And it is natural, they accuse not themselves, but “deliquescence and illegibility” definitions of ISO standards. Amazingly, but the flexibility of the standard providing its generality and simultaneously enabling process decision for each organization in view of its specificity, turns that at practical application in universities of the process approach is strained its meaning itself. And this from effective means for improvement of educational quality activity turns to its “grave-digger”.

More often problems in understanding of the process approach to universities management are shown in interest to describe and improve existing processes in universities, i.e. in management aim to increase operational efficiency. The mistake consists that there are identified not those processes which university should realize and improve according to the chosen strategy but those which have developed in it traditionally. The basic logic of management quality is broken: “From strategy - to process ", and vice versa. For passing to process management, the university should study to distinguish strategic and operational efficiency. Strategic management task is to provide fast university reorganization that is measured by figures of consumers satisfaction, introduction rate to the market of new educational programs (Igle *о glagkeC, the level of their demand and so forth). The university introduced strategic management by processes becomes capable to operative realization of the accepted strategies, and it, in its turn, demands from management ability to search and find new opportunities inside and within university, to reconstruct processes, to improve existing, to form new.

One of key ideas which makes the meaning of the process approach consists in modelling, transforming, optimizing, improving processes of the university for the best result on educational system exit, i.e. improvement of training quality for specialists. Certainly, efficiency growth of single processes, costs reduction, processes productivity rise due to the best labor organization always were and are the most important goal for the university management. The process approach also brings in its decision essential and notable contribution: having described processes we better begin to see the real organization of all university activity, we can precisely define cost and profit centres, to find out discrepancies in the activity of separate divisions and disbalance in their development. But having been limited only by this we shall never get system vision of the university, the whole realized processes in their interaction and interrelation. Having headed for local processes optimization (in the special literature for this purpose there is special term – “segmented process management”), we shall never get rid of functional dissociation, shall not receive system effects on exit. It is possible to begin, certainly, with optimization of educational process, but also this task will inevitably change in related concepts (entering the university, material and technial, staff and information support and etc.). The problem here consists that each of these functional areas has own interests and own criteria for efficiency estimation. Supernormal “labor division” leads to skews in organizational structures, “departmentalization functions”. The greatest harm of such “segmented process management” brings to transformation functional divisions into unapproachable fortresses, separates departments of the university from each other with insuperable wall. At such approach the risk, that get interested in “continuous perfection” of own processes functional heads (methodical, financial, personnel services, divisions material, information support and so forth) will forget that their activity should be directed on providing key process of the university - educational, having transformed just it in the providing process supplying administrative and managerial and support personnel necessary information for improvement of their processes (reports, inquiries, applications and so forth), and receiving instead of necessary resources never-ending streams of rules and instructions. So at the university there is new “process bureaucracy”, and lion’s share of time of its employees leaves on manufacture of the “information stuff”.

Only considering all set of the interconnected and cooperating processes gives optimum for educational system, instead of its separate part. It concerns and costs decrease, and to providing quality on system exit, possessing value for the consumer of results of the university activity. The meaning for applying process approach at the university is reduced not to division, but to joining work, to change from joint-individual to coordinated work, to forming cross-functional processes, to development of intersubject, interdepartment and interfaculty communication, considering processes in their interrelation, to understanding of the place of each of them in common university activity and realization of its strategic goals.

IV. Conclusions. Therefore allocation as objects of management of “through interfunctional processes”, focused on the consumer and formation of institute of their owners reflects the menaing of the process approach. Such allocation allows university to react flexibly to the information received from the external and internal environment, and to react so, that the signal which has arrived in any division shall be perceived and processed by all system.

However, even emphasizing through processes and authorize their owners itself does not give any effect, it is necessary to go further - to change all management system. And it already demands change both principles and management facilities and heads, their attitude to management. It is necessary to make changes for high-grade construction of the new process-focused control system in three directions:

1. Organizational: from functional-hierarchical to the process-focused structure.

2. Structural: from functional division to team of interfunctional process.

3. Personal: from the manager and the employee answering only for result of the activity and activity of the Department, to the active participant of changes dividing responsibility for end results of work of all the university.

One more important condition of process approach introduction in practice is to reorganize thinking of the heads and the staff. For transition to new, process management model it is necessary to start to think originally. Not interests of separate divisions, but interests of the system, and, certainly, the consumer also, owing to which this system exists. Change of the heads thinking, and first of all, the first person of the university underlies success of the implementation of the process approach. It demands refusal of stereotypes which have taken roots in consciousness not one generation of high school managers.

The role of the head in process-focused high school cardinally varies. If before the head was positioned as the chief who has powers, traces work performance and punishes for mistakes, in new paradigm the head is the leader, system designer, cooperated with the staff.

Total wish to improvement and quality is accepted as basis of new philosophy of the university which is formed by its leaders. Namely, turn in consciousness is necessary not only for the first persons. To improve all levels, so people made offers on changes, their thinking should be changed.

Even after brief review of the theory and practice of management process, there can be a question: “If all is so uneasy, and if really many even succeeding universities only wrongly think that they really successfully passed to process management, what for in general to make revolution, introducing the process approach?” The answer is simple enough: look a world rating of the universities. How many Russian or Kazakhstan universities do you see here? No one? Here is the solution - while the overwhelming majority of Russian and Kazakhstan universities are on one - equally low level of the development their quality management systems and do not have any qualitative differences from each other. But sooner or later many of them at last will understand, that time to simulate adherence to quality philosophy has passed, that it is time to accept, accept unconditionally, and to start really reconstruct their management systems, doing their more effective. What then is it necessary to do? To make revolution in management, hoping on success? But, as shows practice, revolution not always comes to an end with what their inspirers would like... It is better to begin evolution today than to try to make revolution tomorrow!

Literature

1. The concept of educational development of the Republic of Kazakhstan till 2015.