1st AUN Actual Quality Assessment

The first AUN Actual Quality Assessment at programme level was carried out at the University of Malaya on 12 - 14 December 2007. The actual assessment at programme level was held at the Faculty of Engineering for two undergraduate programmes, namely Biomedical Engineering and Computer Aided Design/ Manufacturing Engineering. I was a member of a three-member assessment team to assess the Computer Aided Design/ Manufacturing Engineering programme. The other CQOs’ assessment team was from the Universiti Sains Malaysia and the University of the Philippines.

The developed templates and assessment process were put to test and the assessment process was fine-tuned after the assessment. The assessment process was evaluated by a peer from Europe. 

Initiation and Trial Implementation of AUN-QA Models

The initiation and trial implementation of AUN-QA models was carried out through a pilot on-site quality assessment at Burapha University in May 2007. The aim of the exercise was to put into practice the “Manual for the Implementation of the Guidelines” by assessing the implementation of AUN-QA model at IQA system, institutional and programme level.    

An assessment team composed of Chief Quality Officers (CQOs) and myself from the five leading ASEAN universities with experience in quality assurance conducted the on-site quality assessment first at the institutional and IQA system level before proceeding to conduct the programme level assessment at the Faculty of Engineering. The assessment was carried out with the participation of CQOs and officials from other member universities, followed by a workshop to review the process and results of the assessment. The pilot assessment provided valuable insights into the interpretation of the AUN-QA criteria, assessment process and interviews, format and content of self-assessment reports, visit itinerary, and pre-assessment and post-assessment activities.  

Arising from the pilot assessment, the following challenges were identified:

·        Language is acknowledged as a barrier to assessment;

·        Time is a key factor if a complete and effective assessment is to be carried out;

·        Subjectivity of the assessment ratings and ambiguity of some AUN-QA criteria; and

·       Lack of a structured assessment process and assessment templates to capture assessment findings for continuous learning and improvement.

In overcoming the above challenges, I developed the followings to facilitate the implementation of the AUN-QA framework:

• a set of planning and reporting templates was designed and standardised for use in the actual quality assessment at institutional, IQA system and programme level;
• a systemic approach to quality assessment using the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) approach;
• a set of guidelines on assessment itinerary and interviews with staff, students, alumni and employers; and
• a set of requirements for Self-Assessment Report (SAR) and key evidences including the use of English as a language for assessments, interviews and reports.

Productivity Trap

The 'Productivity Trap' in Services

The evolution of a developed service-centred economy has significant implications on a country economic growth, investment and capital formation, employment and productivity. Services tend to be more labour intensive and use less capital equipment than manufacturing. Productivity growth tends to be slower in services than in manufacturing - a 'productivity trap' of a developed service-centred economy.

The 'productivity trap' is neither an inescapable fact nor is it a Hobson's choice. The choice does not lie with the government, it lies with the organisations themselves. It is the task of every member in the organisation to help raise the productivity and quality of the services they provide.

Understanding Productivity and Quality in Services

Productivity and quality in services have many differences compared with their manufacturing siblings, which produces physical goods. Although these differences are varied and widely recognised, to the customers in buying a product or service, their main goals remain the same, that is, to maximise their utility or satisfaction. Productivity and quality in services is all about customer satisfaction.

The paradigm to manage productivity and quality in services can be conceptualised as an ongoing process of integrating the dynamic relationship of customer, organisation and environment to achieve continuous customer satisfaction.

Customer Happiness

In the experience-centric economy, businesses are aggressively seeking differentiated customer experience as a way to build customer loyalty and competitive advantage over their competitors.  The renaming of customer service awards to customer experience awards in leading economies such as the United States, United Kingdom and Singapore has helped to create and promote customer experience as a key differentiator in service. Customer experience is transactional, emotional and transformational. The core of customer experience is happiness, which comes from the “heart”:

Happiness,

Emotions,

Awareness,

Relation, and

Trust.

Articles by Johnson Ong Chee Bin

Articles by Johnson Ong Chee Bin:

• The Tipping Point of a Happy Economy (Jobscentral, July 2014)
• In Search of Happiness (Surwinette Associates, http://surwinette.com/, Oct 2013)
• The Happiness DNA (Today’s Manager, Jun-Jul 2012)
• Adding Emotional Value to Customer Experience (Today’s Manager, Feb – Mar 2011)
• The Heart of Customer Experience (Today’s Manager, Aug – Sep 2010)
• The How, What, Who and Why of Service Training (Today’s Manager, Dec 2009 – January 2010)
• The Great Service DNA (SQI Newsletter Apr – Sept 2009)
• The Great Service DNA in Singapore (Awarded the “Best Paper” at the 7^th ANQ Congress, Tokyo Sep 2009, and SQI Yearbook 2009/10)
• Treat Your Customer as Your Guest (Today’s Manager June/July 2009)
• The Art of Great Welcome (Today’s Manager December 2008/January 2009)
• Your Attitude Determines Your Destiny (Vaidurya August/September 2008)
• From Good to Great Service (Today’s Manager June/July 2008 and Human Capital March/April 2008)
• Delight Customers with the Magic Experience (Today’s Manager December 2007/January 2008)
• 7 Habits of Highly Effective Service Professionals (Human Capital September/October 2007)
• Keep Difficult Customers Happy (Today’s Manager, August/September 2007)
• The Face and Feel of Service (Human Capital Plus, June 2007)
• High Five to Great Service! (Human Capital, July/August 2006)
• Delighting Customers with RARE Service (Human Capital Plus, January/February 2006)
• Transforming and Managing Quality Circles in the Age of Innovation (International Convention on Quality Control Circles (ICQCC) 2005, Korea, November 2005)
• The “RAdiCAL” Approach to Innovation (Human Capital Plus, July 2005)
• The C.A.R.E. Approach to Service Excellence (Human Capital, March 2005)
• A Holistic Approach to Change Management (Human Capital, October 2004)
• An Integrated Competency-Based Performance Management System (Human Capital, May 2004)
• Holistic Approach to Human Capital Development and Management (Human Capital, February 2004)
• Framework for World-Class Business Excellence in the New Economy (Today’s Manager, August 2000)
• A Total Quality Management (TQM) Model for Service Organisation to Achieve World-Class Business Excellence (Productivity Digest, July 2000)
• Total Quality Management in Singapore: A Model for Service Organisations (QC Focus, August/September 1999)
• Paradigm for Managing Productivity and Quality in Services (QC Focus, July/August 1995 and September/October 1995)

TQM Model for Service Organisations

This research documents the ‘best-in-class’ TQM practices adopted by six leading service organisations in Singapore. The main objective of this research is to develop a TQM model to help organisations to achieve world-class business excellence.

Strategy-People-System-Culture (SPSC) Model

In today’s business world, no organisations can do business or survive in isolation. Organisations, therefore, need to respond to their customer, competitor and environment; and quickly integrate them into their business strategies and plans. TQM practices adopted by organisations, likewise, have to be adjusted or modified accordingly. There is no exception.

Strategy allows organisations to achieve a viable match between their external factors (customer, competitor and environment) and internal capabilities and resources (people, system and culture). The role of strategy should not be viewed as a passive response to the opportunities and threats presented by the external factors, but rather a process of continuously and actively adapting the organisation to meet the demands of a changing customer, competitor and environment. Given this perspective, the TQM SPSC model (see Figure below) encompasses four focus points:

·         The customer, which is the central focus of the organisation’s business

·         The competitor, which determines the key competitive factors and trends

·         The environment, which determines the key environmental factors and trends

·         The internal competencies, which defines the ways to compete