ALLIANCE BUSINESS ACADEMY, BANGALORE, INDIA TQM I MPLEMENTATI ON I N MANAGEMENT EDUCATI ON Submitted to The American Society for Quality 1
Executive Summary • Business School founded in 1996 • Programs offered: MBA and BBA • VISION crafted in 1996: Be among the Top 10 Private B- Schools in India by 2006 • Mission of Alliance: Impart education leading to an enriched holistic and wholesome personality of the key stakeholders – the students • Aspiration: Be a catalyst in transformational change among key stakeholders 2
Project Outline Use TQM Principles and Techniques to achieve Institutional Mission and Vision 3
Team Composition • Prof. KRISHNA K HAVALDAR – Professor Of Marketing • Dr. ANUBHA SINGH – Professor of Human Resources Management • Dr. V RAJESH KUMAR – Professor of Finance • Prof. M V NARASIMHAN – Professor of Operations Management • Dr. MIHIR DASH – Professor of Statistics and Quantitative Methods • Prof. M A RAJASEKHAR – Academic Coordinator • Ms. SUREKHA SHETTY – Admissions Coordinator • Ms. USHA RANI – Placements Coordinator • B V KRISHNAMURTHY – Director and Executive Vice-President, ASI Distinguished Professor, and Team Leader 4
1A. Explain How Team Selected the Project • The 2002 Ranking of B-Schools placed ALLIANCE in the 51st Position – a far cry from the Vision • Board of Trustees and Founder President asked the Director to take steps to realize the vision, and pledged total commitment and support to the effort • Director constituted the team from a pool of volunteers • The Team analyzed the B-School ranking process adopted by five different agencies and concluded that the only way the vision could be realized was by adopting a holistic concept – TQM was the answer 5
1A. Project Selection Why was the Vision so important? • Analysis over 5 years showed that the top 10 private B-Schools accounted for the top 5% of students appearing for the Common Aptitude Test (similar to GMAT) • The analysis also showed that the top 75 recruiters in the country preferred students from the top 10 private B-Schools (besides the Government run IIMS) • Conclusion: Unless Alliance reached the top 10 among private B-Schools, it would remain as just another institution 6
1A. Project Selection – Understanding B-School Ranking Parameters Tool Used – Bechmarking (Year 2002) SL.No. Parameter No. 1 Ranked School ALLI ANCE 1 I nfrastructure 200,000 Sq. Ft. 15,000 Sq. Ft. 2 Admission Criteria CAT Score 95% 65% 3 I ntellectual Capital 80% Faculty academically qualified 30% 4 I nternational Research Publications > 100 / Year 3 / Year 5 Management Development Programs > 50 / Year 5 / Year 6 Practitioners’ interaction with students > 100 / Year < 10 / Year 7 Placement Performance 100% 70% 8 Mean Salary n 0.27n 9 ROI 400% 68% 10 I nternational Linkages 5 0 11 Student Satisfaction 91% 64% 12 Recruiter Satisfaction 82% 59% 7
1B. Project Selection – Project Alignment with Organization’s Goals Organizational Goal: Be among the top 10 private B-Schools by 2006 Project Alignment: A TQM approach would address all the key variables used in B-school ranking by all the market research agencies Key Strategies: Raise acceptable CAT Score to 80% or better over 4 years; 1. I ncrease rigor of admissions Introduce value adding courses; Go beyond the Curriculum 2. Recruit academically Pay-for Performance; Incentives for Consulting and Training, qualified faculty Recognition of Research, Improved Knowledge Delivery Bring in industry practitioners to interact with students every 3. I ndustry I nterface week; Students understand recruiters’ expectations and vice- versa 4. Research & Mentoring Improve Faculty to Student ratios Target and attract top recruiters, negotiate for better 5. Placement Performance compensation Enter into collaborative arrangements with institutions with 6. I nternational Liaison similar value systems 8
1C. Project Selection – Identification of key stakeholders Key Stakeholders identified through critical processes and how the project outcomes would impact them Process Key Stakeholders Prospective students seek information Admissions Office Students applying for admissions Admissions Office, Accounting I nvite Students for Selection Process Admissions Office, Students Admissions Selection Process Admissions Office, Faculty, Staff, Strategic Management Team & Parents Program Delivery Students, Faculty, Library, Computer Labs Soft Skills Training Students, Adjunct Faculty Evaluation Students, Faculty, Administrative Staff Compliance Regulators, Management Placement Facilitation Students, Placement Office, Director’s Office, Recruiters Satisfied Students, Parents & Recruiters Society, I nstitution 9
1D. Project Selection – Key Stakeholders and How the Project May Impact Them Stakeholders I mpact 1. Admissions Office Improving admissions criteria attracts better students leading to instituional goals Transparency in admissions ensures good students; good students tend to perform better; better 2. Students performance translates into improved placements; placement performance reinforces confidence and attracts even better students. Academic excellence and placement performance complement each other. Satisfied & Motivated faculty make a significant difference to the learning process. Students’ feedback on 3. Faculty faculty performance a valuable tool for continuous improvement and innovation. Recognition of Research & Training are powerful motivators. Satisfied & Motivated Staff render services that create value to students. Performance based incentives lead 4. Staff to even better performance. Top management commitment and support are vital to ensure success of process. Resource allocation is 5. Management the main tool for measurement. Since institution has shown enormous improvement year-on-year. Management support is assured. 6. Parents Value institutions that provide quality education and facilitate good placement. Recruiters have the luxury of choice; they expect the best and pay salary accordingly, satisfied recruiters 7. Recruiters become repeat recruiters 8. Regulators Respect compliance; encourage qualitative growth; pressure on system brought on by undue influences Expect growth, Self Sustenance and Constant Improvement. Encourage any new initiatives that ensure 9. Board of Trustees these outcomes. 10. Society Nurtures an institution that is responsible and responsive to expectations 10
2A. Identifying Potential Root Cause Knowledge Admission Evaluation Delivery Faculty International expertise Linkage Academics Faculty Exchange CAT Score Motivation Programs Fairness Student Communication Motivation Integrity Work Transparency Probity pressure Fees Quality of Academic Teaching Outcomes Placement Performance Location Communication Etiquette General Environment Success Library MDP & Interview Awareness Rate EDP Skills Computer Recreation Value added Lab Attitude Consulting Courses Counseling Food Upgradation of Curriculum Industry Interaction Learning Soft Skills Support Ambience 11
2B. Analysis of Potential Root Cause Cause evaluation matrix of top 10 causes Scoring : 1 Low 5: Moderate 9: High Most probable root cause Score Action Composite Measurable able Score Consistent Scholastic Record 9 9 81 Yes CAT Score 9 9 81 Yes Placement Performance 9 9 81 Yes Training and Consulting 9 9 81 Yes Exchange Programs 9 9 81 Yes Intellectual Capital 9 9 81 Yes Stakeholders Satisfaction 9 9 81 Yes Academic Outcome 9 9 81 Yes Faculty Interaction 9 5 45 Partially Research and Publication 9 5 45 Partially 12
2C. Key Data and Information used in Analysis Analysis of 5 year data regarding scholastic record, aptitude test scores, and communication scores. Admission Stage: Sample Size: 300 Analysis of 3 year data of faculty performance and academic outcomes. Courses analyzed: 27 Knowledge Delivery: Faculty analyzed: 14 Students analyzed: 180 Analysis of 3 year data relating to average, median, & minimum salaries; relationship between academic outcomes and placement performance; Comparison with compensation surveys; Benchmarking with top B-School. Placement Performance: Recruiters analyzed: 75 Students analyzed: 180 Cut off scores for Admissions, Placement Performance, Research & Publications, International Benchmarking: Linkages, Training & Consulting, Infrastructure and Industry Interaction with Top 5 private B- Schools B-School Ranking Analysis of 3 year data gathered by 5 different research agencies Parameters Sample size: Top 25 private B-Schools 13
Recommend
More recommend
