A COMPARISON OF PRIORITIES A COMPARISON OF PRIORITIES IN AMERICAN AND RUSSIAN IN AMERICAN AND RUSSIAN ACADEMIC DEPARTMENTSACADEMIC DEPARTMENTS

By Stuart Umpleby, Irina By Stuart Umpleby, Irina Naoumova and Saadia KhiljiNaoumova and Saadia Khilji

Alliance of Universities for Democracy Alliance of Universities for Democracy Vilnius, Lithuania, 2003Vilnius, Lithuania, 2003

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PRIORITY MATRIXQUALITY IMPROVEMENT PRIORITY MATRIX

- A useful method for achieving data-driven decision-makingA useful method for achieving data-driven decision-making- Easy to useEasy to use- Helps to improve employee and customer satisfactionHelps to improve employee and customer satisfaction

Participants:Participants:- Department of Management Science, George Washington - Department of Management Science, George Washington

University, Washington DC (May 2001)University, Washington DC (May 2001)- Department of Management, Kazan State University, Russia Department of Management, Kazan State University, Russia

(May 2002)(May 2002)

RESEARCH METHODRESEARCH METHOD- At both GWU and KSU faculty members were given a list of At both GWU and KSU faculty members were given a list of

features of the department. They were asked to evaluate features of the department. They were asked to evaluate the importance and performance of each feature on a scale the importance and performance of each feature on a scale from 0 to 10. On the importance scale 0 means no from 0 to 10. On the importance scale 0 means no importance at all and 10 means very high importance. On importance at all and 10 means very high importance. On the performance scale 0 means that the Department’s the performance scale 0 means that the Department’s performance was very poor whereas 10 means that the performance was very poor whereas 10 means that the Department’s performance was excellent. Department’s performance was excellent.

- A Quality Improvement Priority Matrix seeks to identify - A Quality Improvement Priority Matrix seeks to identify those features of an organization or a product or service those features of an organization or a product or service that are high on importance but low on performance. that are high on importance but low on performance.

RESEARCH METHODRESEARCH METHOD

- The research is based on subjective assessments. The research is based on subjective assessments. No effort has been made to compare office space No effort has been made to compare office space at the two universities, or computer resources, or at the two universities, or computer resources, or salaries, etc. The faculty are evaluating salaries, etc. The faculty are evaluating performance based on their expectations, not on performance based on their expectations, not on a quantitative measure. a quantitative measure.

- The purpose of the surveys is not to compare The purpose of the surveys is not to compare resources in the two departments but rather to resources in the two departments but rather to observe where the two groups of faculty observe where the two groups of faculty members believe improvement is most needed. members believe improvement is most needed.

The fundamental theory behind the Quality Improvement The fundamental theory behind the Quality Improvement Priority Matrix is to place each item of interest in Priority Matrix is to place each item of interest in quadrants based on their average composite score, quadrants based on their average composite score, ranked by those answering questionnaires. ranked by those answering questionnaires.

    Quality Quality Improvement Improvement Matrix Matrix

  LOW PERFORMANCELOW PERFORMANCE   HIGH PERFORMANCEHIGH PERFORMANCE

LOW IMPORTANCE LOW IMPORTANCE LOW PRIORITY LOW PRIORITY

ACTION ACTION INADEQUATE ACTIONINADEQUATE ACTION

Management problems: Management problems: autocratic pressures; low autocratic pressures; low level of professionalism; level of professionalism; low level of analytical low level of analytical skills; etc. skills; etc.

HIGH IMPORTANCE HIGH IMPORTANCE MANAGEMENT SHOULD MANAGEMENT SHOULD UNDERTAKE HIGH-UNDERTAKE HIGH-PRIORITY ACTION PRIORITY ACTION FIRST FIRST

MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT UNDERTAKES AN UNDERTAKES AN ADEQUATE ACTION ADEQUATE ACTION

FEATURES USED FOR THE ANALYSISFEATURES USED FOR THE ANALYSIS

1.1. Computer hardwareComputer hardware2.2. Computer softwareComputer software3.3. Office space for faculty Office space for faculty 4.4. Conference roomsConference rooms5.5. Computer LabsComputer Labs6.6. Copiers Copiers 7.7. Fax MachinesFax Machines8.8. Office SecurityOffice Security9.9. Secretarial SupportSecretarial Support10.10. Teaching AssistantsTeaching Assistants11.11. Annual RetreatAnnual Retreat12.12. Social ActivitiesSocial Activities13.13. Recreational ActivitiesRecreational Activities14.14. Building physical environmentBuilding physical environment15.15. Accounts PayableAccounts Payable

FEATURES USED FOR THE ANALYSIS (CONT.)FEATURES USED FOR THE ANALYSIS (CONT.)

16.16. Classroom scheduling Classroom scheduling17.17. Classroom facilities Classroom facilities18.18. Projection equipment Projection equipment19.19. Course catalog Course catalog20.20. Faculty websites Faculty websites21.21. Department websites Department websites22.22. School websites School websites23.23. Campus grounds / gardens Campus grounds / gardens24.24. Parking for faculty and staff Parking for faculty and staff25.25. Parking for students Parking for students26.26. Library journal collection Library journal collection27.27. Library book collection Library book collection28.28. Interlibrary loan Interlibrary loan29.29. Coordination with other departments Coordination with other departments30.30. A supportive climate in the department A supportive climate in the department

FEATURES USED FOR THE ANALYSIS (CONT.)FEATURES USED FOR THE ANALYSIS (CONT.)

31.31. Department Head protects faculty from administrative interference Department Head protects faculty from administrative interference32.32. Transparency of promotion process Transparency of promotion process33.33. Travel support Travel support34.34. Funds to support research Funds to support research 35.35. Working paper series Working paper series36.36. Help with writing research proposals Help with writing research proposals37.37. English/Russian skills of students English/Russian skills of students38.38. General ability of students General ability of students39.39. Course evaluations Course evaluations40.40. Faculty annual reports Faculty annual reports41.41. Salaries Salaries 42.42. Health care benefits Health care benefits43.43. Retirement benefits Retirement benefits44.44. Opportunities for academic work with department faculty Opportunities for academic work with department faculty45.45. Opportunities for work with other university faculty Opportunities for work with other university faculty46.46. Knowledgeable teaching assistants Knowledgeable teaching assistants47. Department strategic planning47. Department strategic planning48. Dept. organization to implement its strategic plan48. Dept. organization to implement its strategic plan49. Use of continuous improvement methods in the Dept.49. Use of continuous improvement methods in the Dept.5050.. Consulting opportunities Consulting opportunities 51.51. Opportunities to meet local businessmen and govt. managers Opportunities to meet local businessmen and govt. managers

DISPLAYING THE DATADISPLAYING THE DATA

- The following figures present Pareto charts The following figures present Pareto charts showing importance and performance scores for showing importance and performance scores for the two departments. the two departments.

- The features are grouped into three categories – The features are grouped into three categories – support, office equipment, and activities. The support, office equipment, and activities. The features are rank ordered by difference (GWU – features are rank ordered by difference (GWU – KSU). Hence, features where the difference is KSU). Hence, features where the difference is greatest (GWU has a higher score than KSU) are greatest (GWU has a higher score than KSU) are at the top. Features with negative differences at the top. Features with negative differences (KSU has a higher score than GWU) are at the (KSU has a higher score than GWU) are at the bottom.bottom.

CORRELATION BETWEEN IMPORTANCE AND CORRELATION BETWEEN IMPORTANCE AND PERFORMANCE SCORES PERFORMANCE SCORES

- For GWU department: 0.353For GWU department: 0.353

- For KSU department: 0.387For KSU department: 0.387

- Correlation between the importance scores at Correlation between the importance scores at GWU and KSU: 0.464GWU and KSU: 0.464

- Correlation between the performance scores at Correlation between the performance scores at GWU and KSU: 0.124 GWU and KSU: 0.124

CORRELATION BETWEEN IMPORTANCE AND CORRELATION BETWEEN IMPORTANCE AND PERFORMANCE SCORES (CONT.)PERFORMANCE SCORES (CONT.)

- A correlation of 1.0 would mean that the two A correlation of 1.0 would mean that the two variables are perfectly correlated. A correlation of variables are perfectly correlated. A correlation of –1.0 would mean that the variables are inversely –1.0 would mean that the variables are inversely related. related.

- The positive correlations between importance and The positive correlations between importance and performance at both GWU and KSU indicate that performance at both GWU and KSU indicate that importance is associated with performance. This importance is associated with performance. This result suggests that faculty members on both result suggests that faculty members on both campuses campuses feel they are able to accomplish their feel they are able to accomplish their goals. goals.

GWU vs. KSU Graph of Importance: SupportGWU vs. KSU Graph of Importance: Support

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Consulting opportunities in local area

Social activities

Opportunities to meet local businessmen and govt managers

Published working papers

Accounts payable

Travel support

Library journal collection

Funds to support research

General ability of students

Salaries

Library book collection

Course catalogue

Teaching assistants

Secretarial support

Parking for students

Classroom scheduling

Assistance with learning IT

Office security

English skills of students

Health care benefits

Retirement benefits

Parking for faculty and staff

Campus grounds

Interlibrary loan

Su

pp

ort

Cha

rac

teri

stic

s

Importance

KSU

GWU

GWU vs. KSU Graph of Performance: SupportGWU vs. KSU Graph of Performance: Support

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

SBPM working papers series

Opportunities to meet local businessmen and govt managers

Library journal collection

Library book collection

Office security

Social activities

Health care benefits

Consulting opportunities in local area

English skills of students

Secretarial support

Teaching assistants

Classroom scheduling

Accounts payable

General ability of students

Course catalogue

Parking for students

Help with writing research proposals

Salaries

Parking for faculty and staff

Campus grounds

Retirement benefits

Funds to support research

Assistance with learning IT. e.g.. Prometheus

Interlibrary loan

Travel support

Su

pp

ort

Cha

rac

teri

stic

s

Performance

KSU

GWU

GWU vs. KSU Graph of Importance: GWU vs. KSU Graph of Importance:

Office EquipmentOffice Equipment

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Copiers

Office space for faculty

Building/ physical environment

Computer labs

C lassroom facilities

Projection equipment

Computer hardware

Computer software

Conference room and otherspace

Faculty websites

School websites

Dept. websites

Fax machines

Off

ice

Eq

uip

me

nt

Ch

ara

cte

ris

tic

s

Importance

KSU

GWU

GWU vs. KSU Graph of Performance: GWU vs. KSU Graph of Performance: Office EquipmentOffice Equipment

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Conference room and otherspace

Computer labs

Computer software

Building/ physical environment

C lassroom facilities

Dept . websites

Computer hardware

Office space for facu lty

Cop iers

Fax machines

School websites

Projection equipment

Faculty websites

Off

ice

Eq

uip

me

nt

Ch

ara

cte

ris

tic

s

Performance

KSU

GWU

GWU vs. KSU Graph of Importance: ActivitiesGWU vs. KSU Graph of Importance: Activities

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Recreational activities

Social activities

Dept. strategic plan

Coordination with other depts.

Dept. organization to implement its strategic plan

Opportunities for academic work with Dept. faculty

A supportive climate in the dept.

Opportunities for academic work with other Gwfaculty

Transparency of appointment and promotion process

Dept. head protects faculty from admin. interference

Course evaluations

Annual retreat

Use of continuous improvement methods in the Dept.

Faculty annual reports

Acti

vit

ies C

ha

rac

teri

stic

s

Importance

KSU

GWU

GWU vs. KSU Graph of Performance: ActivitiesGWU vs. KSU Graph of Performance: Activities

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Coordination with other depts.

Opportunities for academic work with Dept. faculty

Dept. strategic plan

Opportunities for academic work with other Gwfaculty

Dept. organization to implement its strategic plan

A supportive climate in the dept.

Recreational activities

Social activities

Use of continuous improvement methods in the Dept.

Transparency of appointment and promotion process

Annual retreat

Dept. head protects faculty from admin. interference

Course evaluations

Faculty annual reports

Act

viti

es C

ha

rac

teri

stic

s

Performance

KSU

GWU

DISCOVERIESDISCOVERIES

- The QIPM importance mean was 7.34 for KSU and The QIPM importance mean was 7.34 for KSU and the performance mean was 4.35. the performance mean was 4.35.

- Nine items are in the quadrant with low Nine items are in the quadrant with low performance and higher importance – performance and higher importance – transparency of the promotion process, travel transparency of the promotion process, travel support, office space for faculty, salaries, copiers, support, office space for faculty, salaries, copiers, classroom facilities, projection equipment, and classroom facilities, projection equipment, and computer hardware. computer hardware.

- Most of these items require additional Most of these items require additional fundsfunds, but , but the transparency of the promotion process the transparency of the promotion process requires only a change in procedures.requires only a change in procedures.

DISCOVERIES (CONT.)DISCOVERIES (CONT.)

- The QIPM importance mean was 7.85 for GWU The QIPM importance mean was 7.85 for GWU and the performance mean was 5.21. and the performance mean was 5.21.

- Nine items are in the quadrant with low Nine items are in the quadrant with low performance and high importance – performance and high importance – salaries, salaries, office space for faculty, building physical office space for faculty, building physical environment, accounts payable, computer labs, environment, accounts payable, computer labs, teaching assistants, funds to support research, teaching assistants, funds to support research, and English skills of students. and English skills of students.

- These are the items on which improvement is These are the items on which improvement is most likely to contribute to improving faculty most likely to contribute to improving faculty morale in the GWU department .morale in the GWU department .

DISCOVERIES (CONT.)DISCOVERIES (CONT.)

- Items that are important for GWU faculty members but less Items that are important for GWU faculty members but less important for KSU faculty members – important for KSU faculty members – health care and health care and retirement benefits, conference room space, English skills retirement benefits, conference room space, English skills of students, interlibrary loan, classroom scheduling, and of students, interlibrary loan, classroom scheduling, and parking for faculty and staff.parking for faculty and staff.

- Items that are important for KSU faculty members but less Items that are important for KSU faculty members but less important for GWU faculty members – important for GWU faculty members – consulting consulting opportunities, opportunities to meet local businessmen and opportunities, opportunities to meet local businessmen and government managers, department strategic planning, government managers, department strategic planning, department organization to implement the strategic plan, department organization to implement the strategic plan, and coordination with other departments.and coordination with other departments.

DISCOVERIES (CONT.)DISCOVERIES (CONT.)

- Features, on which GWU performance is rated higher than Features, on which GWU performance is rated higher than at KSU – at KSU – travel support, assistance with learning IT, travel support, assistance with learning IT, retirement benefits, computers, interlibrary loan, campus retirement benefits, computers, interlibrary loan, campus grounds, fax machines, projection equipment, faculty grounds, fax machines, projection equipment, faculty annual reports, copiers, and department and school annual reports, copiers, and department and school websites.websites.

- Features, on which KSU performance is rated higher than at Features, on which KSU performance is rated higher than at GWU –GWU – coordination with other departments, working coordination with other departments, working papers series, opportunities to meet local businessmen and papers series, opportunities to meet local businessmen and government managers, a department strategic plan, government managers, a department strategic plan, department organization to implement its strategic plan, department organization to implement its strategic plan, recreational activities, conference rooms, and an annual recreational activities, conference rooms, and an annual retreat. retreat.

DISCOVERIES (CONT.)DISCOVERIES (CONT.)

- Features with relatively high performance ratings on both Features with relatively high performance ratings on both campuses – campuses – a supportive climate in the department, a supportive climate in the department, department head protects faculty from administrative department head protects faculty from administrative interference, transparency of the appointment and interference, transparency of the appointment and promotion process, general ability of students, computer promotion process, general ability of students, computer software and the course catalogue. software and the course catalogue.

- Features with relatively low performance ratings on both Features with relatively low performance ratings on both campuses – campuses – parking, help with writing research proposals, parking, help with writing research proposals, office space for faculty, funds to support research, use of office space for faculty, funds to support research, use of quality improvement methods in the department, salaries, quality improvement methods in the department, salaries, building physical environment, classroom facilities, building physical environment, classroom facilities, accounts payable, and secretarial support.accounts payable, and secretarial support.

DISCOVERIES (CONT.)DISCOVERIES (CONT.)

- More important to the faculty at GWU : More important to the faculty at GWU : parking, parking, the appearance of the campus, retirement the appearance of the campus, retirement benefits and health care benefits.benefits and health care benefits.

- GWU performs well in GWU performs well in providing travel support, providing travel support, assistance with learning IT, and funds for assistance with learning IT, and funds for research. research.

- Opportunities to meet local businessmen and Opportunities to meet local businessmen and government officials and social activitiesgovernment officials and social activities are are more important at KSU. more important at KSU.

- KSU does well in KSU does well in providing a working papers providing a working papers series, opportunities to meet local managers and series, opportunities to meet local managers and the library collection.the library collection.

-   

SUMMARYSUMMARY

- The American system should not be taken as an icon for The American system should not be taken as an icon for educational reform in Russia.educational reform in Russia.

- American professors’ answers show a more American professors’ answers show a more individualistic approach to educational quality problem individualistic approach to educational quality problem solving (pay more attention to the needs of each solving (pay more attention to the needs of each student, for example by offering a wide range of elective student, for example by offering a wide range of elective courses and respecting the interests of individual courses and respecting the interests of individual professors and researchers).professors and researchers).

- American professors are supported with grants, American professors are supported with grants, research funds, travel money, etc. A high level of research funds, travel money, etc. A high level of research activity, publications and conference research activity, publications and conference presentations contributes to the quality of instruction.presentations contributes to the quality of instruction.

SUMMARY (CONT.)SUMMARY (CONT.)

- American professors indicated that they American professors indicated that they would like for their system to be more would like for their system to be more cooperative. cooperative.

- Russians would chose the opposite direction Russians would chose the opposite direction – more individualism in their system. – more individualism in their system. Russians say they need to give more Russians say they need to give more respect to each individual’s interests and respect to each individual’s interests and needs.needs.

SUMMARY (CONT.)SUMMARY (CONT.)

- Both The George Washington University Both The George Washington University (GWU) and Kazan State University (KSU) (GWU) and Kazan State University (KSU) departments are seeking to make changes departments are seeking to make changes in their strategies in order to make their in their strategies in order to make their organizational culture more balanced organizational culture more balanced between individualistic and cooperative between individualistic and cooperative elements. elements.

- The QIPM experiment indicated the The QIPM experiment indicated the directions in which changes in particular directions in which changes in particular departments are most needed.departments are most needed.