Total Quality Management in Secondary Education

tqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducatqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationtqmineducationeducationtqmineducationtqmineducationwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiop

Total Quality Management in Secondary Education

Kunskapsskolan’s approach to school management

MA MANAGEMENT

Carina BalboStudent ID No.10029671

May 2012

To my family who have supported me during the journey of these studies, and

To my father who has inspired me to undertake them.

iTotal Quality Management in Secondary Education

Contents

Figures................................................................................................................................... ii

Tables.................................................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................... ii

Abstract................................................................................................................................. ii

1. Introduction..................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of the study........................................................................................1

1.2 Purpose and organisation of the study..................................................................3

2. Literature Review..........................................................................................................5

2.1 What is Total Quality Management?....................................................................5

2.2 Quality, product and service in education.............................................................6

2.2.1 Quality in education......................................................................................6

2.2.2 Product and service in education..................................................................7

2.3 Strategic planning for quality................................................................................8

2.3.1 Mission, vision, values and goals...................................................................9

2.3.2 Stakeholder analysis and CSR......................................................................11

2.3.3 SWOT, CSFs and Benchmarking...................................................................18

2.3.4 Corporate and Strategic Plan.......................................................................22

2.3.5 Quality policy, Quality plan and Quality costs.............................................26

2.3.6 Feedback and evaluation.............................................................................29

2.4 Organisational considerations.............................................................................30

2.4.1 Organisational structure and design............................................................31

2.4.2 Centralisation vs. decentralisation..............................................................34

2.4.3 An effective TQM structure.........................................................................36

2.5 Educational leadership and TQM.........................................................................39

2.5.1 Communicating the vision...........................................................................40

2.5.2 Developing a quality culture........................................................................40

2.5.3 Empowering teachers..................................................................................41

2.6 Teamwork for quality..........................................................................................42

3. The Research Study.....................................................................................................46

3.1 The research philosophy......................................................................................46

3.2 The method of research and data collection.......................................................47

iiTotal Quality Management in Secondary Education

3.3 Sample selection..................................................................................................50

3.4 Ethical issues.......................................................................................................51

4. Findings and Analysis..................................................................................................54

4.1 Kunskapsskolan’s strategic planning...................................................................54

4.1.1 Mission, vision, values and goals.................................................................55

4.1.2 Stakeholder analysis and CSR......................................................................57

4.1.3 Kunskapsskolan’s CSF’s and Benchmarking.................................................62

4.1.4 Kunskapsskolan’s Business and Corporate plan..........................................64

4.1.5 Quality policy, Quality plan and Quality costs.............................................69

4.1.6 Feedback and evaluation.............................................................................73

4.2 Kunskapsskolan’s organisational structure.........................................................74

4.3 Educational leadership at Kunskapsskolan..........................................................82

4.4 Teamwork for quality at Kunskapsskolan............................................................83

5. Conclusion...................................................................................................................86

References..........................................................................................................................90

Appendix 1: Quantitative research......................................................................................95

Questionnaire 1: Customers: students and parents........................................................95

Questionnaire 2: Organisation and Staff.........................................................................96

Appendix 2: Qualitative research......................................................................................100

Set 1: Customers: students and parents.......................................................................100

Set 2: Senior management, teaching and non-teaching staff........................................100

Appendix 3: The KED Programme.....................................................................................101

3.1. Personalised Goals and Strategies..........................................................................102

3.2. Coaching.................................................................................................................103

3.3. The Learning PortalTM.............................................................................................105

3.4. Room for learning...................................................................................................106

3.5. Curriculum..............................................................................................................107

3.6. The Teacher............................................................................................................108

3.7. Time.......................................................................................................................108

Dissertation Module – MA ManagementLondon Metropolitan University Carina Balbo – ID No.10029671

iiiTotal Quality Management in Secondary Education

Figures

Figure 1 The strategic planning process ...............................................................................9

Figure 2 A possible strategy planning sequence .................................................................10

Figure 3 Customers in Education.........................................................................................13

Figure 4 Stakeholder mapping in education........................................................................14

Figure 5 CSR stances ...........................................................................................................16

Figure 6 SWOT Analysis of an educational institution ........................................................19

Figure 7 Example of external and internal CSFs..................................................................20

Figure 8 Ansoff Matrix ........................................................................................................23

Figure 9 External Standards in Education............................................................................28

Figure 10 Examples of prevention and failure costs in education ......................................29

Figure 11 Phases of institutional development ..................................................................31

Figure 12 Example of a tall structure: staff relationship......................................................33

Figure 13 Flat organisational structure in a small school district........................................34

Figure 14 Matrix structure of a school................................................................................34

Figure 15 The differences between a quality institution and an ordinary institution..........37

Figure 16 Institutional alignment .......................................................................................38

Figure 17 The attributes of an educational leader..............................................................40

Figure 18 The five stages of team formation.......................................................................44

Figure 19 Tips for an effective team....................................................................................45

Figure 20 Kunskapsskolan’s corporate mission ..................................................................56

Figure 21 Kunskapsskolan’s internal and external customers.............................................57

Figure 22 Stakeholder mapping of Kunskapsskolan/ LST....................................................61

Figure 23 Overview of Kunskapsskolan’s performance management system in Sweden . .63

Figure 24 KED's Building blocks...........................................................................................65


ivTotal Quality Management in Secondary Education

Figure 25 Supportive systems and concepts of the KED programme..................................66

Figure 26 Ansoff Matrix summarising Kunskapsskolan’s strategic plan ..............................67

Figure 27 Result of a survey carried out in 23 Kunskapsskolan schools in Sweden.............74

Figure 28 Board of Directors of KED....................................................................................75

Figure 29 Board of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB.................................................................76

Figure 30 Partial organisational structure of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB.........................77

Figure 31 The LST Trust Board.............................................................................................78

Figure 32 International expansion of Kunskapsskolan........................................................79

Figure 33 Specialisms of the Academies in the UK..............................................................80

Figure 34 Partial overview of management line at Ipswich Academy.................................81

Tables

Table 1 Advantages of centralised and decentralised structures........................................35

Table 2 Disadvantages of centralised and decentralised structures...................................36

Table 3 Features of a quality institution..............................................................................38


vTotal Quality Management in Secondary Education

Acknowledgements

First of all, I must thank all my family for their support during the course of these studies.

I also want to express my gratitude to Kunskapsskolan and the Learning Schools Trust for

having initially accepted to support me on this project, although full access to the

organisation was later denied.

Last, but not least, I must also thank my supervisor, who supported and advised me the

best way possible during this project.


viTotal Quality Management in Secondary Education

Abstract

This objective-approach research study aimed to look into the organisation and

performance of schools run by Kunskapsskolan under this new educational policy, in the

light of Total Quality Management (TQM), taking into account strategic planning,

organisational considerations, leadership styles and approach to teamwork. The study

would have involved a quantitative method, using a standard audit checklist (Sallis,

2002:156), which has been divided into two questionnaires, one for students and parents,

and other for staff including senior staff, high and middle-management, teaching and

support staff. A qualitative method would have also been followed by interviewing some

of my respondents to the questionnaires, from students and parents to school staff.

Similarly, for this two sets of questions were created. However, due to the fact that full

access to the organisation was not granted at the moment of data collection using those

methods, data was collected from other sources such as websites, and books and analysed

in the light of the TQM theory discussed in the literature review. The study concludes that

Kunskapsskolan meets all the characteristics of a TQM organisation and that it would be

interesting to conduct a comparative study with the organisational approach adopted in

mainstream and independent schools.


1Total Quality Management in Secondary Education

1.Introduction

1.1 Background of the study

In today’s economy, quality has become a high priority and is at the top of most agendas.

Improving quality is probably one of the most important tasks any organisation may be

facing, whether private or public. Educational institutions are not foreign to this reality; on

the contrary, they have also recognised the need to pursue this quest for quality and to

deliver it to pupils and students alike. When talking about sources of quality of education

we can list outstanding teachers, strong leadership, appropriate resources and the latest

technology applied, an appropriate curriculum, excellent exam results and the support of

parents, just to mention a few (Sallis, 2002).

For the last 20 years, different economic circumstances have pushed education systems in

many countries towards a system of privatisation, transforming education into a new

market and adapting education to the current demands of labour markets (Hirtt, 2008).

Compulsory education in industrialised countries, especially in the EU, seems to have

moved towards decentralisation and deregulation, progressively reducing the central

power of the state (Eurydice, 1997). In this context, the former state-run education

systems become flexible and competitive school networks, managed by Local Educational

Authorities (LEAs) or non-governmental groups, with more local power for developing

their own programmes and teaching methods. This is accompanied by a dramatic cut in

education expenditure (Eurydice, 2005).

This movement seems to have been crystallised in the UK under the new Con-Dem

government, which promotes a two-fold way of marketisation and privatisation of the

school system. First, all schools will be able to become Academies, gaining more freedom


over the curriculum and admissions and more control over staff because, being under

private school legislation, they would not have to comply with national or local union

agreements on pay and conditions. Secondly, alternative providers – private organisations

and groups of parents and teachers – will be allowed to open up so-called ‘free schools’,

again outside local authorities and funded by government. This new policy has arisen

much controversy and debate, which, leaving politics aside, poses a question on the

quality of education these groups of parents and teachers as well as private organisations

will provide at the expense of tax payers.

Examples of this recently introduced policy are Hampton Academy, Twickenham Academy

and Ipswich Academy which are operated by Kunskapsskolan through an independent

Charity called the Learning Schools Trust (LST). Kunskapsskolan is one of the largest chains

of ‘free schools’ in Sweden, currently running 33 schools with a network of schools with

more than 12,000 students and 1,000 employees. Kunskapsskolan is the owner and

developer of the KED (Kunskapsskolan Education) programme — a coherent and proven

concept for personalised education. In Swedish, “Kunskapsskolan” means knowledge or

learning school. This name is an expression of their passion for providing excellence in

learning and knowledge for the next global generation (www.kunskapsskolan.com).

Kunskapsskolan Education Sweden AB is a private company owned by Peje Emilsson, his

family and companies (67%), Investor AB (29%) and Kunskapsskolan management (4%).

Kunskapsskolan Education Sweden AB (KED) is the result of new Swedish educational

reforms introduced in 1992, which opened the doors for school choice, competition, and

innovation within primary and secondary education. KED was founded in 1999 and

opened its first schools in 2000. The idea was to collect the very best practices from

pedagogy, technology, school design and process management and integrate them



together into a coherent model of personalised education for the new century

(www.kunskapsskolan.com).

In the United Kingdom, it is against the Law for a private company, like Kunskapsskolan, to

make profit out of tax-payers’ money, unless they link up with some other non-profit

organisations, such as charities. That is why Kunskapsskolan operates these three

Academies in England through the Learning Schools Trust (LST), a charity which plans to

sponsor other five Academies in the UK from 2012.

1.2 Purpose and organisation of the study

This research study aims, at a general level, to look into the organisation and performance

of schools set up under this new educational policy, in the light of Total Quality

Management (TQM). In particular, it aims to answer the following questions:

1. What do the schools take into account in order to guarantee good quality

educational provision to their customers?

2. Within what quality standards does the organisation operate?

3. What management and leadership styles do these schools follow in order to

ensure organisational effectiveness and performance?

4. What measures are taken into consideration so that the staff members build an

effective TQM culture throughout the institution?

5. What strategies, tools and techniques are considered when planning for quality?

In order to accomplish this aim, the study will focus on schools run by Kunskapsskolan and

the LST, and it will be conducted through questionnaires sent to the Managing Director at

LST –my primary contact, high, middle and low managers of the schools and some

teaching staff. It is worth point out that I have no connection whatsoever with the



organisation. My interest in this topic is not only professional, having worked in the

educational sector for 15 years, but I am also interested in this area as a parent, having a

son with Special Educational Needs who, I believe, has not entirely benefited from the UK

mainstream educational.

To begin with, after defining what TQM is, a discussion on the notion of quality, product

and service in education will follow. The study will also examine what steps a school can

follow to strategically plan for quality, the best type of organisation, leadership style and

work approach a school can follow in order to guarantee quality in education. Before

looking into the findings and analysing them against the literature review, a brief

explanation of the research methods will be provided. Finally, some conclusions will be

drawn and suggestions for further research will be made.



2.Literature Review

In the realm of Education, quality has become synonymous with the latest government

structure on standards, exam success, school performance and league tables. In response

to the need for quality improvement in education, ruthless regimes of school inspections

have been introduced. However, from a Total Quality Management (TQM) perspective,

inspections serve as a means of quality control, rather than quality improvement, which is

the responsibility of the institution and cannot be handed over to an external inspector

(Sallis, 2002).

The purpose of this chapter is to establish the theoretical framework for this study.

Here, we will look first at the implications of the term Total Quality Management (TQM).

Then, after trying to define the term Quality, we will examine the many aspects integrated

in TQM, such as organisation, leadership, teamwork, just to name a few.

2.1 What is Total Quality Management?

Sallis (2002), describes Total Quality Management (TQM) as a management model that

emphasises leadership, teamwork, strategy, rigorous analysis and self-assessment. It

should be understood as a long-term philosophy, rather than a short-term fix, and in our

continuously changing world, it seems more necessary than ever. In order to stay ahead of

the competition, organisations should try to find out what their customers want and the

focus themselves on meeting and exceeding these requirements.

The rapid advances in technology result from a knowledge revolution which has changed

the way people work, think and even the way they learn, and in order to deal with this

information age, high standards in education are required. All children, and adults, have



the right to accomplish high educational attainments levels, which is why a high quality

education is a must. The message of TQM in education is that every child has worth and

demands the best possible change in life.

TQM is both a philosophy and a methodology which can help institutions manage changes

and organise themselves to deal with the plethora of new external pressures. However,

TQM does not bring results overnight; neither is it a universal remedy for all the problems

that beset education. It is rather an important set of tools that can be employed in the

management of educational institutions.

2.2 Quality, product and service in education

In order to fully understand the whole philosophy of TQM, it is necessary to examine what

it is meant by quality, what the product and the service is and who the customers are in

the educational context.

2.2.1 Quality in education

The term quality, from the Latin quails, meaning “of what kind, of such a kind”, can be

used as an absolute and as a relative concept (Sallis, 2002). Used as an absolute, quality

things are probably of the highest standards and seem unattainable. This concept used in

the educational context is elitist in essence, and according to this definition, just a few

institutions are able to offer such top quality education to their students. In contrast, in its

relative sense, quality is a means by which the end product is judged as being up to

standard- or not, rather than being the end in itself, and what makes a product or service

of quality is the fact that it meets the standards set for it. The notion of quality as an

absolute is more elitist, whereas its relative sense is more egalitarian.



In turn, there are two aspects to this relative notion of quality. On the one hand, there is a

procedural concept, emphasising that a product or service complies with certain

predetermined standards and criteria. In the educational context, hard quality indicators

comprise public examinations and league tables for schools and colleges. On the other

hand, transformational quality focuses on softer and more concrete aspects of quality,

including care, customer service and social responsibility. Rather than through adhering to

systems and procedures, transformational quality is achieved through the exercise of

leadership, which establishes the vision that later translates into customer service and

builds the structures and organisational culture that make it possible for all staff to deliver

a quality service. In a nutshell, the ultimate aim of transformation quality is excellence.

2.2.2 Product and service in education

In education, learners are often referred to as the output, mainly when discussing

institutions’ performance, and in so doing, education sounds as if it were a production

line. Instead, it is probably more helpful to talk about education as a service, for a number

of reasons (Sallis, 2002). First, services entail direct contact between the provider and the

end-user, and it cannot be separated from who delivers it (the institution) or from who

receives it (the students). Second, the time aspect is important as services are derived on

time, and consumed at the moment of delivery, which means that the control of its quality

buy inspection is often late. Third, a service cannot be serviced of mended, and therefore

it is imperative that its standard is right first time. Next, services are largely about process,

rather than product, making them intangible. Another characteristic of services is that

they are sometimes rendered by junior employees, as opposed to senior staff, who tend

to be remote from customers, and this is why it is so important to train staff and keep

them motivated. Finally, the intangible nature of services makes it difficult to measure

successful output and productivity, being customer satisfaction the only meaningful



performance indicator. Such soft indicators as care, courtesy, concern, friendliness and

helpfulness are often the ones that remain in customers’ minds.

In conclusion, education can be defined as a provider of services, including tuition,

assessment, and guidance, not only to students but also to parents, sponsors, and other

members of the community.

Now it is important to discuss what steps institutions could follow in order to plan for and

ensure quality in education.

2.3 Strategic planning for quality

Quality must be the ultimate goal any institution must accomplish, and for this institution

is to be a long-term culture-change programme, it must be planned for following a

strategically rigorous systematic approach.

To achieve long-term direction, the institution must first create constancy purpose

(Deming, 1986), which can only be achieved within the context of a corporate strategy. A

strong customer focus must underlie the strategy, but at the heart must be a strong

strategic vision, which is one of the most important critical success factors for any

institution.

A strategic planning process for an educational institution is not different from that of

another industry, and without a strategy an institution cannot be certain it is best placed

to exploit new opportunities as they develop. Figure 1 below shows the key questions and

issues the institution should address in the strategic planning process.

When undertaking strategic planning, it seems more sensible to go from the philosophical

to the practical, even though there is no special sequence of activities. Strategy must be



based around various customer groups and their expectation, from which policies and

plans develop, which, in turn, deliver the mission and develop the vision. This is why it is

important to take a systematic approach to planning the organisation’s corporate future.

Figure 2 suggests a possible strategy planning sequence any educational institution could

adopt.

Figure 1 The strategic planning process (adapted from Sallis, 1994: 108)

2.3.1 Mission, vision, values and goals

Usually organisations make a distinction between their mission, vision, values and goals

(also called aims or objectives) in order to define what sort of business they are in, what

sort of institution they wish to be and the direction they want to move towards.

The mission is the organisational and it expresses la raison d’être (i.e. the reason for its

existence) of the organisation. It makes it clear why an institution is different from the


Mission, vision, values and goalsWhat is our purpose?

What are our mission, vision and values?

Customer/Learner requirementsWho are our customers?

What do our customers expect of us?What do we need to be good at to meet customer expectations?

What do our learners require from the institution?What methods do we use to identify learner/customer needs?

Investing in PeopleHow should we make the most of our staff?

Are we investing sufficiently in staff and staff development?

Routes to successWhat are our strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats?

What factors are critical to our success?

Quality performanceWhat standards are we going to set?How are we going to deliver quality?

What will quality cost us?

Evaluating the processDo we have processes in place to deal with things that go wrong?

How will we know if we have been successful?


others, it describes what it does and for whom and answers the question, Why do we do

what we do? (de Wit and Mayer, 2010). The organisational beliefs are expressed in its

vision, which communicates what it stands for, and what it does in order to accomplish its

tasks. It differs from the mission in that while the latter focuses on the present, the latter

looks at the future; however, they are closely linked since it is the desire for a better

future (vision) that motivates the organisation and individuals to perform their mission

today.

Figure 2 A possible strategy planning sequence (adapted from Sallis, 2002: 125)

The values are the set of fundamental principles which guide the organisation’s strategic

decision-making through which the organisation operates and seeks to achieve its mission

and vision (Sallis, 2002; Johnson et.al, 2008). The values must be aligned to the

environment in which the institution operates.


Mission, Vision, Values & Goals

Stakeholder Analysis & CSR

SWOT , CSFs & Benchmarking

Corporate & Strategic Plan

Quality Policy & Quality Plan

Quality Costs

Evaluation & Feedback


After the mission, vision and values have been set up, they need to be translated into

objectives, or goals. These are statements of specific outcomes that are to be achieved.

Although they are often expressed in financial terms – e.g. profit levels, rates of growth,

dividend levels or share valuations, organisations may also have market-based objectives,

many of which are quantified as targets – such as market share, customer service, among

others (Johnson et.al, 2008). It is important that goals are realistic and achievable and that

they are expressed in a measurable way so that the final outcomes can be measured

against them. Institutional goals must take place at three levels: immediate, short-term

and long-term, which must be reflected when monitoring and assessing quality (discussed

in 2.3.6 below).

2.3.2 Stakeholder analysis and CSR

In order to implement TQM effectively, it is essential to conduct good market research by

listening to the organisation’s customers, both actual and potential. Therefore it is vital to

identify who the customers in education are, analyse them and what the CSR stance of the

institution is in relation to its stakeholders’ expectations.

2.3.2.1 Customers in education

The customers are the stakeholders of the service, and a distinction can be made between

internal and external customers (Figure 3); i.e., employees and those who have a direct

responsibility for the institution’s success, on the one hand, and those who influence and

are influenced by the institution but are not a member of it, on the other (Johnson, et. al.,

2008). The latter can, in turn, be divided into three subgroups according to the nature of

their relationship with the institution (Sallis, 2002):

primary customers: those who directly receive the service, i.e. the learners;



secondary customers: those who have a direct interest in the education of a

particular individual, or in a particular institution; e.g., parents, governors,

sponsoring employees of vocational students, or sponsoring universities of

student teachers;

tertiary customers: those who have less direct contact with the institution, but are

nevertheless highly interested in education; e.g., government, unions, future

employers, the community in general.

Not always do the needs and views of these various customer groups coincide, and, in

fact, there will always be conflicts of customer interest. Of paramount importance is to

ensure the primary customers’ views, which is not always easy, especially when the

learners’ needs collide with funding mechanisms emphasising efficiency at the cost of

quality, making it difficult for an institution to put the learners first. Perhaps one way of

resolving these conflicts of interests is to acknowledge their existence and try to find the

core issues that unite all the parties involved.

Another way of understanding where to problem lies and the best way to solve it is to

map the stakeholders on a power/ interest matrix, which helps identify stakeholders’

expectations and power, and helps understand political priorities, very important when

dealing with changes in educational policies and government funding issues. This matrix

does not differentiate between external and internal stakeholders and arrange them on a

two-by-two grid where the dimensions are the stakeholder's interest in the institution and

the stakeholder's power to affect the institution’s future.



Figure 3 Customers in Education

The stakeholders’ position in Figure 4 shows the actions the institution should take with

them. Quadrant D identifies the key players, the ones with a lot of power and, therefore,

of paramount importance such as the government – the direct source of funding, learners

and pupils – the primary customers, and senior staff and teaching staff, without whom the

institution could not be run. This is why it seems vital that the institution invests in staff

development at an early stage, almost at the same time as analysing the learners’

requirements. If there are some SEN pupils, for example, it seems only logical that the

school makes provision to develop its staff to be able to cater for these pupils’ needs.


Headteacher Senior Staff

SCHOOL

Teachers Support Staff

Other employees

Learners

Parents

Governors

Sponsoring employees of

vocational students/ Sponsoring

universities of student teachers

Government

Unions

Future employers

General Community


Figure 4 Stakeholder mapping in education

Although those in quadrant C may seem relatively passive, their needs and interests

should be met to prevent their moving to quadrant D. These are context setters (Bryson,

2004) who have power but very direct interest. With new educational policies, such as the

one introducing free schools and academies in the UK, the media should be kept satisfied

so that they help create a positive attitude among the general public – and potential

customers – towards the implementation of this new type of institutions. Similarly, Unions

may eventually have a say in this new policy as teacher pay scheme reforms or

deregulations may be introduced as a result.

Institutions must not forget to address the expectations of stakeholders in quadrant B by

keeping them informed, as these can be crucially important allies for the institution and

may influence the attitudes of other powerful stakeholders. For example, often parents

organise a Parent’s Association to provide a structure through which the parents or

guardians of children attending the school can work together for the best possible

education for their children. The PA works with the headteacher, staff and board of


AMinimal effort- Community in general

BKeep informed- Parents- Governors- Sponsors- Universities

CKeep satisfied- Unions- Pension funds- Media

DKey players- Headteacher and senior staff- Teaching staff- Learners- Government


management to build effective partnership of home and school and to create a forum for

educational discussion and communication. Lastly, quadrant A consists of the crowd, i.e.

stakeholders with little interest or power (Bryson, 2004).

2.3.2.2 Corporate social responsibility (CSR)

Traditionally, CSR has been reserved to analyse corporate for-profit business organisations,

which schools and the educational sector never seemed to be part of, since education

provision – at least primary and secondary – has always been regarded as being the

government’s responsibility, from which no profit was made. However, nowadays, the new

educational policies allowing private organisations to set up schools seem to be leading

education towards a marketised sector, which therefore calls for an analysis of their

corporate social responsibility stance with respect to their stakeholders.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is defined as ‘the way in which an organisation

exceeds its minimum obligations to stakeholders through regulation' (Johnson et.al, 2008:

146). An institution’s CSR reflects its role in the society; nevertheless, it is not possible for

an organisation to put equal interest to all its stakeholders, due to the nature of the laws

and regulations under which a company works. CSR policies are particularly important to

both contractual and community stakeholders; whereas the former are legally related to

the company, the latter are not (Johnson et.al, 2008). The contractual stakeholders of an

educational institution are headteachers and senior managers, administrators, teaching

and non-teaching staff, students, partners, and distributors, just to mention some.

Organisations also take very different standpoint on social responsibility, and, accordingly,

they are classified into four types, summarised in Figure 4 below. The further away they



move, the more inclusive they are of stakeholders’ interests and the wider their vision for

strategy implementation.

Figure 5 CSR stances (adapted from Johnson, et.al. (2008: 146))

At one end of the spectrum, a laissez-faire organisation considers the sole responsibility of

business is the short-term interests of shareholders and to make a profit, pay taxes and

provide jobs (Murdoch, 1997). The government prescribes, through legislation and

regulation, the constraints society imposes on businesses in their pursuit of economic

efficiency; but the organisation will meet only these minimum obligations, no more.

Enlightened self-interest recognises ‘the long-term financial benefit to the shareholder of

well-managed relationships with other stakeholders’ (Johnson et.al, 2008: 155). The

organisation’s reputation is important to its long-term financial success, and in order to

ensure compliance with best practice, systems and policies are usually set up. Similarly,


Laissez-faire Enlightened self-interest

Forum for stakeholder interaction

Shaper of society

RationaleLegal compliance: make profit, pay

taxes and provide jobs

Sound business sense Sustainable Social and market

change

Leadership Peripheral Supportive Champion Visionary

ManagementMiddle

management responsibility

Systems to ensure good

practice

Board-level issue; organisation-

wide monitoring

Individual responsibility through the organisation

ModeDefensive to

ouitside pressures

Reactive to outside pressures Proactive Defining

Stakerholder relationship

Unilateral / one-way Interactive Partnership

Multi-organisation

alliances


top management they support the firm by taking a more proactive social role. Sponsors of

major sports or art events are an example of such companies.

A forum for stakeholder interaction ‘explicitly incorporates multiple stakeholder interests

and expectations rather than just shareholders as influences on organisational purposes

and strategies’ (Johnson et.al, 2008: 155). In this view, the organisation’s performance is

more pluralistic and they might retain uneconomic units in order to preserve jobs, avoid

manufacturing or selling ‘anti-social’ products, and be prepared to bear reductions in

profitability for the social good. Here the difficulty lies in balancing the different

stakeholders’ interests. For example, many public sector organisations fall into this

category as their performance measurement depends on a wide diversity of expectations.

Through the way that they operate, many family-owned small firms may also be included

in this group.

Last but not least, at the other end of the spectrum, shapers of society consider financial

issues to be of secondary importance, or even a constriction. The social role is the raison

d’être of the organisation, who seek to change society and social norms, thus being

considered activists. Some would argue that public services have succeeded in

transforming the quality of life for millions of people mainly because they are ‘mission

driven’ in this way and operate in a politically supported framework. These type of

organisations take a socially responsible position, as they believe that being socially

responsible reduces the risk of negative stakeholder reactions and can help retain loyal,

motivated employees. In the light of this description, educational institutions seem to be

an example of this type of organisations: by educating the younger generation, they have

the power to shape society, they always operate in a changing political framework, and

they are not financially-driven. However, with the emergence of Charities and Trusts



running academies funded directly by the government (hence taxpayers’ money), the

legitimacy of their mission-driven stance is beginning to be challenged, but at the same

time, they are expected to demonstrate good results.

2.3.3 SWOT, CSFs and Benchmarking

All organisations should have a clear idea of what they need to be good at in order to

devise their routes to success. They can do this by analysing their strengths, weakness,

opportunities and threats (SWOT), their critical success factors (CSFs) and benchmarking

the institution in relation to both the school and other similar organisations, and the

school itself.

2.3.3.1 SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis is probably one of the most common but most effective instruments of

strategic planning used in education to locate the institution’s potential. It is divided into

two elements: an internal audit concentrating on analysing the strengths and weaknesses

of the performance of the institution itself, and an external audit focusing on the threats

and opportunities of the environmental context in which the institution operates (Figure

6). This activity aims at maximising strengths and minimising weaknesses, while reducing

threats and building on opportunities.

The SWOT exercise can be reinforced by ensuring the analysis concentrates on the two

key variables in developing a long-term corporate strategy: the customer requirements

and the competitive context the institution operates in. The institution’s strategy should

be developed in such a way as to enable the institution to defend itself against the

competition and maximise its attractiveness to its customers. Combined with an

examination of the mission and values, this analysis can help seek a distinctive niche



Figure 6 SWOT Analysis of an educational institution (adapted from Sallis, 2002: 126)

which may differentiate the institution from its rivals. Once this distinctive characteristic is

developed, the quality characteristics for an institution can be identified more easily

(Sallis, 2002).

2.3.3.2 Critical Success Factors (CSFs)

In order to develop the strategic capability in an organisation, from the potential

providers’ viewpoint, it is crucial to understand not just the needs of customers, but which

product/service features are particularly important to a group of customers and,

therefore, where the organisation must excel to outperform competition (Jonson et.al.,

2008) This is known as the critical success factors (CSFs), which must be achieved if an

institution is to satisfy its customers and its mission statement. They are similar to

performance indicators (PIs), the difference being that the latter are often generated by



others and do not always relate to the mission statement of the institution or its

customers’ requirements (Sallis, 2002).

On its list of CSFs, an institution could include not only external measures but also internal

indicators, some of which are illustrated in Figure 7.

Figure 7 Example of external and internal CSFs

2.3.3.3 Benchmarking

All organisations providing public services face additional demands of increased scrutiny

and accountability. Benchmarking helps educational institutions develop tools that can be

integrated into their own organisation so that they can learn from the best practices of

others as well as their own success and failures, and it can be approached in various ways.

Functional benchmarking gives insights about performance standards by comparing the

performance of one’s own institution with other educational organisations against a set of

performance indicators; such is the case of league tables of school examination results

published in the UK. This approach can be competitive in nature, where institutions want

to find out how the rival does it; however, the key information is often difficult or

impossible to obtain, and this may turn into a spying exercise. This is why many


Internal CSFs

an accessible admissions systemlearning modes which meet learner needsproperly functioning teamsimproved examination pass rateslearner development of social, personal, cultural and ethical valuesimprovements in teaching/learning strategiesimprovement of the majority of staff in improvement teamsimproved progression rates, e.g. into employment and further and higher education

External CSFs

improved access to the institutiongreater customer satisfaction evidenced through surveysincreased market shareincreased take up of provision by minority and disadvantaged groupsgreater responsiveness to community needsstronger relationship with industry and commerce


institutions prefer a more collaborative type of functional benchmarking, where the

institution being benchmarked works in partnership in the exercise, resulting in a mutual

benefit as any institution has lessons to gain from another.

Another approach to benchmarking compares an institution’s performance against best-

in-class performance, no matter where that is found, which may help senior staff at

schools understand that incremental changes in resources or competences may ultimately

lead to satisfactory improvements in performance. These two approaches go hand in hand

and they seldom take place in isolation. After all, the ultimate goal of benchmarking is to

learn the lessons of others and to use them to improve areas in one particular institution.

A very simple example of benchmarking would be that a headteacher together with other

senior members of staff visited an outstanding school (according to Ofsted) in the area in

order to discover best practice and ensure that theirs matches it, and then aspire to do

even better.

An institution can also examine its internal processes to determine its own best-practices

by comparing and learning from the performance of other departments or subjects within

the institution itself (Weller, 1996; Sallis, 2002), which can be done through systematic

lesson observations, information-sharing forums and knowledge-sharing communities.

This is known as internal benchmarking. This practice of benchmarking one’s own

institution before searching outside for exemplars is probably more valuable than doing it

otherwise since it does not pose a threat to any confidentiality issues or problems with

accessing sensitive data and saves time on external ventures.

Internal benchmarking is closely related with knowledge management (KM) and the

notion of becoming a learning organisation. The former involves a range of strategies and

practices used in an organisation to identify, create, represent, distribute, and enable



adoption of both insights and experiences comprising knowledge, either embodied in

individuals or embedded in organisations as processes or practices. KM focuses primarily

on organisational objectives such as improved performance, competitive advantage

(Porter, 1985), innovation, the sharing of lessons learned, integration and continuous

improvement of the organisation. When an organisation develops and encourages an

open knowledge-sharing culture, and facilitates the learning of all its members,

consciously transforming itself and its context is said to be a learning organisation (Pedler

et.al., 1997).

This is typically exemplified when the story or history of a particular institution is written

up and filmed in such a way that the most noticeable features of success come to the fore.

This learning story can be used as part of a staff development or quality improvement

session.

Benchmarking is important as a means of establishing competitive advantage, learning

from and doing better than the market leader. It is a systematic approach to

organisational improvement which may considerably speed the development of a new

curriculum and assure that quality standards are built in at the planning stage.

2.3.4 Corporate and Strategic Plan

In order to give the institution direction into how it is going to achieve success in this

competitive educational market, the production of a strategic plan, or corporate plan,

becomes vital.

Probably the best way of illustrating this is to use the Ansoff matrix (Ansoff, 1988), a

product/market growth matrix which provides a simple way of generating four basic

alternative directions for strategic development (see Figure 8):



Figure 8 Ansoff Matrix (Ansoff, 1988)

An organisation normally starts in box A, with two choices:

market penetration: the organisation takes increased share of its existing markets

with its existing product range; it builds on existing strategic capabilities and

without having to venture into unknown territory. However, organisations seeking

greater market penetration may face two constraints:

o retaliation from competitors: increasing market penetration is likely to

aggravate industry rivalry as other competitors in the market defend their

share; therefore, when in danger of retaliation, organisations seeking

market penetration need strategic capabilities that give a clear

competitive advantage;

o legal constraints: greater market penetration can encounter legal

obstacles pertaining to a specific country as most countries have

regulators with the powers to restrain powerful companies or prevent

mergers and acquisitions that would create such excessive power.

consolidation: focuses defensively on the organisation’s current markets with

current products, but is not orientated to growth. It can take two forms:


A Market

penetration/Consolidation

BProduct

development

CMarket

development

DDiversification


o defending market share: when facing aggressive competitors,

organisations have to work hard and often creatively to protect what they

already have;

o downsizing or divestment: when the size of the market as a whole is

declining, reducing the size of the business seems unavoidable; another

option is divesting (selling) some activities to other businesses.

Buying up rivals in a fragmented industry can also be described as consolidation. By

acquiring weaker competitors, the consolidating company can gain market power and

increase overall efficiency. Although this form of consolidation could be seen as a kind of

market penetration because it increases market share, the motivation here is essentially

defensive.

Moving rightwards (box B), organisations can develop new products for its existing

markets. Market penetration normally implies some product development, but here it

requires a greater degree of innovation. This can, however, result an expensive and high-

risk activity because of two main reasons:

o new strategic capabilities: product development entails mastering of new

technologies that may be unfamiliar to the organisation, therefore

involving heavy investments and high risk of project failures;

o project management risk: some projects usually attract some delays or

cost increase due to their complex nature.

Since product development may be expensive and risky, the organisation may resort to an

alternative strategy: market development (box C), i.e. bring its existing products into new

markets. This can take three forms:



o new segments: e.g. in public services, an educational institution may start

offering educational services to mature students through the opening of

evening courses;

o new users: e.g. a software that was originally developed for virtual

communications in international companies is now used by schools so that

students can communicates with their peers in other countries;

o new geographies: the best example is internationalisation, e.g. when an

organisation expands his services to other countries.

Probably the most radical step is diversification (box D), which takes the organisation to all

new markets and new products, involving building on new relationships with existing

markets or products. Diversification can also result from market penetration and product

development, and should be seen as question of degree, rather than a strategy on its own.

There are three main value-creating reasons why this strategy is followed:

o efficiency gains: also described as economies of scope, i.e. when an

organisation applies its existing resources or capabilities to new markets

and products or services

o stretching corporate parenting capabilities: new markets and products or

services can be another source of gain; this extends the point above about

applying existing competences in new areas.

o increasing market power: resulting from having a diverse range of

businesses, which may enable an organisation to cross-subsidise one

business from the surpluses earned by another, thus giving an

organisation a competitive advantage; and in the long run driving out

other competitors.



Some other reasons may serve managerial interests rather than stakeholders’ interests:

o responding to market decline: the best example is Microsoft when

venturing with the Xbox, which involved a very high cost in launching and

marketing; the shareholders would have probably left Sony and Nintendo

to create games, and keep the Xbox money;

o spreading risk across a range of businesses;

o the expectations of powerful stakeholders, including top managers, can

sometimes drive inappropriate diversification.

2.3.5 Quality policy, Quality plan and Quality costs

Educational institutions are involved in quality assurance activities on the basis of

professional responsibility, as well as other reasons linked with the competition inherent

in educational marketplaces or from the need to demonstrate accountability. According to

Sallis (2002), there are four quality imperatives that reflect the complex environment in

which educational establishments operate:

the moral imperative: it is the duty of educational professionals and

administrators to provide the very best possible educational opportunities for

students, parents and the community.

the professional imperative: professionalism entails a commitment to the

students’ needs and an obligation to meet those needs by putting the most

appropriate methodology into practice.

the competitive imperative: competition has become a reality in the educational

sector, this requires strategies that makes institutions different from their

competitors, and most often quality is the only differentiating factor for an



institution; focusing on students’ needs is one of the most effective ways of

tackling competition and surviving.

the accountability imperative: as part of their communities, schools have the duty

to publicly demonstrate their high standards, thus meeting the political demands

for education.

Should the institution fail to meet any of the above imperatives, its well-being and survival

can be in jeopardy. These are moments in which both politicians and parents’ demands

are high, and for the industry of education quality improvement is no longer an option,

but a must.

The quality of education an institution provides can be assessed using external quality

standards, which are not compulsory and many institutions chose not to be burdened with

meeting someone else’s standards; however, they are worth considering when developing

a quality programme, for the following reasons:

they help the institution develop a TQM culture,

they can be used as a framework for auditing quality processes, and

they serve as a self-assessment tool.

From the general to the specific, from the international to the national, Figure 9 identifies

some of the school award schemes an educational institution may choose to follow.

Even though it is not compulsory for schools to apply for these awards, it is, to some

extent, important since customers – students, parents and the community - need the

assurance and confidence that the supplier – the school – has the ability to provide the

product or service consistently to the defined quality.



In contrast, Ofsted inspections are compulsory and schools cannot opt out. Ofsted is an

independent and impartial body reporting directly to Parliament, who inspect and

regulate services which care for children and young people, and those providing education

and skills for learners of all ages; therefore, hundreds of inspections and regulatory visits

throughout England are carried out every week (www.ofsted.gov.uk).

Figure 9 External Standards in Education

These inspections serve, for educational institutions, as means of verifying self-assessment

and quality control, rather than quality improvement, which is a much greater task and

cannot be externally imposed. Institutions cannot hand over the process of improving

quality to an external inspector.

Quality costing implies to measure the benefits of quality improvement. TQM aims at

approaching things the right way first time and every time, with zero defects. Most often


EXTERNAL STANDARDS

IN EDUCATION

ISO9000:2000

INVESTORS IN PEOPLE

OFSTEDAWARD

QUALITY MARK

IQM(INCLUSION

QUALITY MARK)

HEALTHY SCHOOLS

ARTSMARK

ECO-SCHOOLS


the costs involved in prevention, are essential to stop things going wrong and to ensure

things are done properly. While these costs can be directly quantified, the costs of failure,

which usually involve opportunity costs – lost opportunities or businesses, are more

difficult to measure. Figure 10 below provides some examples of how costs can be

prevented and what may cause cost failure, both at an internal and external level.

Figure 10 Examples of prevention and failure costs in education (Sallis, 2002:131)

2.3.6 Feedback and evaluation

If the institution is a learning organisation, in order to prevent failure and to ensure quality

systems are in place, monitoring, feedback and evaluation are key elements in strategic

planning. This should customer-focused and should explore two issues:

the degree to which the institution is meeting the requirements of its customers,

or stakeholders, both internal and external;

how well it is achieving its mission and goals, at the three levels discussed above:



o intermediate – by checking students’ progress on a daily basis; this is quite

an informal evaluation, carried out termly by teachers, for instance;

o short-term – involving more structured assessment to verify the students

are on track, and can be used as a quality control method to highlight

mistakes and problems; the focus here is on corrective action to prevent

student failure or under-achievement;

o long-term – implying an overview of the progress towards achieving

strategic goals; as an institutional-led evaluation, it requires large-scale

sampling of customer views as well as monitoring of institutional PIs. This

type of evaluation can result in the institution’s updating the strategic

plan.

2.4 Organisational considerations

Educational institutions and their environments are in a state of constant change, and like

all organisations, they have a life cycle, i.e., formation, growth, maturity, and either

decline and decay, or renewal and revitalisation (Figure 11). Therefore, at each stage, an

institution must change, adapt and develop. With its powerful components of long-term

strategic planning and the engagement of staff in continuous improvement, TQM provides

the necessary means of confronting challenges at each stage.

The question that should be discussed now concerns what type of organisational structure

and design is most effective in light of the TQM model.



Figure 11 Phases of institutional development (Sallis, 2002:61)

2.4.1 Organisational structure and design

Organisations have existed for over two millennia, where human beings, forming social

entities have worked together towards a common goal arranged in a structure designed

according to the influence the environment exerts on it, and traditionally directed by a

manager assigning tasks and responsibilities to other individuals or groups. The system in

which a company’s important tasks are subdivided and grouped to create the processes,

decision centres, and behavioural network that carries out the strategies is known as

organisational structure (Bloisi et.al., 2003), which are usually represented by a symbolic

structure with boxes and lines showing the positions and reporting relations, i.e. an

organisational chart. Another important concept is that of organisational design, defined

as ‘the process managers go through to create meaningful structures, decision and

information networks, and governance systems’ (Bloisi et.al., 2003: 624). The design is the

framework on which a more organic, emergent social structure develops as people

interact, argue, fall out, come together and otherwise manage their daily situation (Bate

at.al., 2000), whereas organisational structure includes both ‘the prescribed frameworks



and realised configurations of interaction, and the degrees to which they are mutually

constituted and constituting’ (Ranson, 1980: 3).

The organisational design is important because it provides for

1. the allocation and grouping of tasks;

2. communication networks;

3. a structure locating the authorities;

4. processes for coordination, control and conflict resolution; and

5. the way to link key activities with the relevant external stakeholders.

Traditionally, four basic structures have been identified as a method of organisational

design (Bloisi et.al., 2003):

organisational design by function groups people into departments according to

expertise, functions performed, and similar skills;

organisational design by geography applies when organisations grow, they usually

expand to other regions, or even countries;

organisational design by product line groups different departments according to

the product or service they provide;

organisational design by customer/channel market allows the staff to concentrate

on specific services based on the type of customer or channel market.

Even though organisations may be structured in different ways, probably the most

common ones are tall, flat and matrix structures.

Tall structures show a both hierarchical and psychological distance between the

top and the bottom. They can result in complex reporting relationships, operating



and support systems, promotion and career paths, and differentiated job titles;

however, spans of control tend to be small and the proportion of staff with some

form of supervisory responsibility tends to be high with respect to the whole

organisation (Pettinger, 2007). For instance, in Figure 12 below, the Human

Resource Manager (reporting directly to Director C) and the IT controller

(reporting directly to Director B) are in staff relationship to the organisation as a

whole.

Figure 12 Example of a tall structure: staff relationship

Flat structures, in contrast, show a short hierarchical distance between top and

bottom as there few levels or ranks, and jobs tend to be concentrated at lower

levels, often carrying responsibilities of quality control or deadline targets. Spans

of control is usually large and career paths may be limited, but these may be

replaced by opportunities for functional and expertise development as well as

participation in various projects.


S u p e rv iso r

C h ie f c le rk 1

C le rk 1 C le rk 2

C h ie f c le rk 2

S u p e rv iso r

M a n ag e r 1 M a n ag e r 2

D ire c to r A

IT co n tro lle r

M a n ag e r 3 M a n ag e r 4

D ire c to r B

H u m a n R e sou rce M a n a g er

D ire c to r C

C E O


Figure 13 Flat organisational structure in a small school district

Matrix structures incorporate dual responsibilities and reporting relationships

linking certain functions with specific products or projects. This type of structure is

generally used in organisations where people with functional expertise are

assigned to a project only temporarily, and then are reassigned to another project

once the previous one has been accomplished (Bloisi et.al., 2003).

Figure 14 Matrix structure of a school

2.4.2 Centralisation vs. decentralisation

The structure of an organisation usually tells where decisions are made, and managers

usually have to decide whether to adopt a centralised or decentralised approach.



Centralisation ‘is the concentration of authority and decision-making towards the top of

an organisation’, whereas decentralisation ‘is the dispersion of authority and decision-

making to operating units throughout an organisation’ (Bloisi et.al., 2003: 631)

Many medium-to-large companies tend to have a degree of both centralisation and

decentralisation in their structure, whereas large organisations, with highly qualified

employees are less centralised, diffusing decision-making and allowing greater

participation.

Naturally, both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. Table 1 summarises

the advantages of these two approaches:

Table 1 Advantages of centralised and decentralised structures

Advantages of Centralised Structures Advantages of Decentralised StructuresSenior managers enjoy greater control over the organisation.

Senior managers have time to concentrate on the most important decisions (as the other decisions can be undertaken by other people down the organisation structure.

The use of standardised procedures can results in cost savings.

Decision making is a form of empowerment. Empowerment can increase motivation and therefore mean that staff output increases.

Decisions can be made to benefit the organisations as a whole, whereas a decision made by a department manager may benefit their department, but disadvantage other departments.

People lower down the chain have a greater understanding of the environment they work in and the people (customers and colleagues) that they interact with. This knowledge skills and experience may enable them to make more effective decisions than senior managers.

The organisation can benefit from the decision making of experienced senior managers.

Empowerment will enable departments and their employees to respond faster to changes and new challenges. Whereas it may take senior managers longer to appreciate that business needs have changed.

In uncertain times the organisation will need strong leadership and pull in the same direction. It is believed that strong leadership is often best given from above.

Empowerment makes it easier for people to accept and make a success of more responsibility.

Contrastingly, the drawbacks of both styles are summarised below (Campbell and Craig,

2007):



Table 2 Disadvantages of centralised and decentralised structures

Disadvantages of Centralised Structures Disadvantages of Decentralised StructuresIt restricts the ability of certain area managers to use their knowledge of specific circumstances to adapt their area of activity for the optimum benefit of the organisation

It may lead to the problem of co-ordination at the level of an enterprise as the decision-making authority is not concentrated.

It has a detrimental effect on management development by stifling initiative

It may lead to inconsistencies (i.e. absence of uniformity) at the organisation level.

It is generally incompatible with effective management in highly competitive environment

It is costly as it raises administrative expenses on account of requirement of trained personnel to accept authority at lower levels

Bureaucracy controls of efficiency inhibit overall organisation's effectiveness

Its introduction may be difficult or impracticable in small concerns where product lines are not broad enough for the creation of autonomous units for administrative purposes.It creates special problems particularly when the enterprise is facing number of uncertainties or emergency situations

Burns and Stalker (1966) grouped organisations according to how they respond to their

environment into two categories: mechanistic and organic organisation. Mechanistic

organisations show a rigid hierarchical structure, where control and authority is at the top,

tasks are divided into specific functional duties, also related to individual roles. Here a

direct link with the centralised approach can be established. On the other hand, organic

organisations tend to value knowledge and experience for its contribution to the common

task, and individual tasks are seen in relation to the organisation as a whole, which are

constantly redefined through the interaction with others. Authority and control has a

lateral direction, rather than vertical, and power is based around knowledge, which can be

located anywhere in the organisation, and therefore, prestige is more associated with

experience than position (Morgan, 2006).

These two types of organisations are found at opposite ends of a continuum and most are

expected to have a mix of both types.

2.4.3 An effective TQM structure



An effective TQM institution is usually diametrically opposed to the traditional centralised

model. Quality is integrated into its structure, involving everyone at all levels to make their

own contribution; thus the institution acting like one in a more organic fashion.

An institution embracing TQM tends to eliminate hierarchies, which are replaced by a

flatter structure with strong cross-institutional links built around a strong teamwork. Tall

hierarchies, such as the one in Figure 12, with excessive layers of management usually

hold back the job of those in the classroom. Whereas such traditional organisations are

structured around functions, a TQM institution is organised around processes which are

under a single and simple chain of command. Excellent organisations have simple and

non-bureaucratic structures based on active and enthusiastic teams. Some of the main

differences between a quality and an ordinary organisation are summarised below:


Figure 15 The differences between a quality institution and an ordinary institution (Sallis, 2002: 64)


Taking into account that structure follows process under TQM, the features needed for

any quality institution are the following (Sallis, 2002):

Table 3 Features of a quality institution

Unit optimisation every department needs to function efficiently and effectively operating within clear quality standards

Vertical alignment it may not be necessary for all members of staff to have a detailed breakdown of objectives but all of them need to understand the strategy, the direction and mission of the institution

Horizontal alignment there should be mechanisms in place in order to bar out any problems arising from competition between departments and gear everyone towards an understanding of the aims and requirements of other parts of the institution

A single command for each process key processes such as curriculum, pastoral and administrative should be charted and organised so as to bring each process under a single chain of command. The charting process usually results from analysing who the customer is what their needs are and the standards they should expect.

Figure 16 Institutional alignment (Sallis, 2002: 65)



An institution is not required to undergo a structural reorganisation for TQM since, as

much as useful and necessary process it may be a, it can divert attention from quality

improvement and lead to institutional fatigue. Therefore, the most sensible move is

probably to avoid institutional restructuring at the beginning of the programme and let

structure change be an effect of the quality improvement process, rather than been

forced upon it.

2.5 Educational leadership and TQM

Leadership is the key factor in any TQM institution. The leader should be visible and have

an understanding and feeling for the front-line and the process of the institution. The

leader should communicate the vision and the values of the institution to others, and in

order to do this effectively, the leadership style they need to exercise is that of

‘management by walking about’ (MBWA) (Peters and Austin, 1986). A passion for

excellence and the values of the institution are not communicated behind an office desk;

the leader must get out among the staff and the customers and experience the service for

themselves. The figure below summarises the attributes of an educational leader (Peters

and Austin, 1986).

In order that the improvement process can be sustained, leadership must be at all levels

of the institution. The primary role for any leader should be that of commitment to

quality, and equally important are those of communicating the vision, developing a quality

culture and empowering teachers. That is why TQM is said to be a top-down process.



Figure 17 The attributes of an educational leader

2.5.1 Communicating the vision

Mission, vision and inspiration should be communicated and cascaded throughout the

institution by senior management. It is probably middle managers who may find it more

difficult to accept and implement this total quality, as this presupposes a change of the

management mind-set, from that of “I’m in charge” to the one of leader of front-line staff

supporting them to deliver the quality of learning. The ultimate aim is to empower

teachers and provide them with greater scope for initiative. For this reason, it is often said

that TQM institutions require less management and more leadership (Sallis, 2002).

2.5.2 Developing a quality culture

In order to develop a quality culture in the institution, leader must (Sallis, 2002):

have a vision of total quality for their own institution;

have a clear commitment to the process of quality improvement;


the Headteacher or Principal must communicate the institution’s values to the staff, students and the wider communit

Vision and symbols

this is required leadership style for any institution‘Management by walking about’

the educational equivalent to ‘close to the customer’, it ensures the institution has a clear focus on its primary customers‘For the kids’

educational leaders must encourage innovation among their staff, but they should also be prepared for failures, which inevitably accompany innovation

Autonomy, experimentation, and support for failure

the leader should create a feeling of community among the all the pupils, students, parents, teachers and support staff of the institution

Create a sense of ‘family’

these are the essential personal qualities required of the educational leader

'Sense of the whole, rhythm, passion, intensity, and enthusiasm'


communicate the quality message;

lead innovation within their institutions;

lead staff development;

build effective teams;

be careful not to blame other when problems arise without looking at the

evidence; often problems result from the policies of the institution itself rather

than from staff’s failures;

ensure organisational structures clearly show responsibilities and delegation in

line with accountability;

be committed to the removal or artificial barriers, either organisational or cultural;

ensure that customer needs are at the centre of the institution’s policies and

practices;

ensure there are adequate channels for the voices of the customers;

develop appropriate mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating success.

2.5.3 Empowering teachers

It is important that the leaders guide, support and empower not only teachers, but also all

those involved in teaching-learning process, so that they feel committed to and involved in

the course of improving their students’ learning.

Spanbauer (1992) argues that educational leaders should guide and assist others to

develop a similar set of characteristics, encouraging shared responsibility and a style

which will create an interactive working environment. Leaders must be patient and

‘understand that change happens by degree, not by decree’ (Spanbauer, 1992: 16). He

concludes that in order to empower teachers, leaders should:



involve teachers and all staff in problem-solving activities;

induce thinking by asking them how they would go about things and how projects

can be handled, rather than actually telling them how they would happen;

share as much management as possible in order to help foster their commitment;

find out from staff what systems and procedures prevent them from delivering

quality to their customers (students, parents, colleagues?);

strengthen professional growth by moving responsibility and control for

professional development directly to the teachers and technical workers;

implement systematic communication among everyone involved in the school;

develop skills in conflict resolution, problem-solving and negotiations while

displaying greater tolerance for and appreciation of conflict;

learn to be more like a coach and less like a boss;

provide autonomy and allow risk-taking while being fair and compassionate;

be helpful without having all the answers and without being condescending;

model by personally exhibiting desired characteristics and spending time walking

around, listening to teachers and other customer;

provide education in quality concepts and subjects such as team building, process

management, customer service, communication, and leadership;

engage in the delicate balancing act of ensuring quality to external customers

(students, parents, the community), while at the same time paying attention to

the needs of internal customers (teacher, board members and other colleagues)

2.6 Teamwork for quality



A TQM organisation is built around strong teamwork which must penetrate, permeate

throughout the institution and extend at all levels and across all functions including both

teaching and support staff.

The synergy required to make quality improvements comes from people working in

harmony. The team is considered to be the essential building block for delivering quality

and has a number of important functions (Miller et.al., 1992):

being accountable for the quality of learning;

being accountable for the use of the teachers’ time, non-teaching time as well as

the materials and space;

being a vehicle for monitoring, evaluating and improving quality;

acting as a channel of information to management on the changes needed to

improve provision and the opportunities for its learners.

Too often in education teamwork is just expected to happen, but the fact is that this is a

skill and we have to learn to be part of a team. It is not a natural human function (Crosby,

1979). A team is made of individuals with different personalities, ideas, strengths and

weaknesses, levels of motivation and demands from their jobs. Some of them may like

each other from the start while some other may tend to disagree on certain things more

often. However, each one of these individuals has to learn how to pick up the best

qualities of each team member and identify their strengths and weaknesses in order to

work effectively together. Like people, teams also need nurturing and mentoring if they

are to function at its best, and here is where the leader should come in.

Traditionally, four stages of team formation have been identified, to which a fifth was

added later (Tuckman, 1965; Tuckman and Jensen, 1977; Taggar and Ellis, 2007):



Figure 18 The five stages of team formation

A well-functioning institution consists of a large number of overlapping teams, and mixed

teams – of academic and non-academic staff – playing an important role. Whereas some

teams may have a long life, others will take on smaller short-term tasks. Figure 19

illustrates some tips that could be followed so that teams work effectively.


Forming

The team is assembled and the task is allocated. Team members tend to behave independently and although goodwill may exist they do not know each other well enough to unconditionally trust one another. Time is spent planning, collecting information and bonding.

Storming

The team starts to address the task suggesting ideas. Different ideas may compete for ascendancy and if badly managed this phase can be very destructive for the team. Relationships between team members will be made or broken in this phase, some of which may never recover. In extreme cases the team can become stuck in the Storming phase.

Norming

The team moves towards harmonious working practices, agreeing on the rules and values by which they operate. Teams begin to trust themselves during this phase as they accept the vital contribution of each member to the team. Team leaders can take a step back from the team at this stage as individual members take greater responsibility.

Performing

Team members have worked out their differencies, established their ways of working and can start the process of working together solving problems. This is a fully mature mature team, functioning at a very high level., with the focus is on reaching the goal as a group.

Adjourning

The project is coming to an end and the team members are moving off into different directions. The team leader should ensure that there is time for the team to celebrate the success of the project and capture best practices for future use.


Figure 19 Tips for an effective team


clearly defined roles among its memberssuch roles as the leader, the facilitator (i.e., the one assisting the team to make the best use of problem-solving and decision-making tools), the researcher, note-taker and the one in charge of public relations

clear purpose and goalsthe teams needs to know where it is going and what goals to achieve; the task set must be achievable

the basic resources to operatepeople, time, space, and energy (usually neglected but important to harness and dot over-extend its life)

clear knowledge of accountability and authority limitsto know who they are accountable to

a plan to work toincluding the terms of reference, the mission, perhaps a flowchart on the steps to follow and the resources available to the team

a set of rules to work tointegral part of the norming stage, they set high standards of behaviour and to keep the team on course

appropriate tools to tackle problems and to arrive at solutionssuch as brainstorrming and flowcharting- among others, which are easy to adopt and can be powerful problem-solving and decision-making tools

development of beneficial team beaviour such as initiating discussions, seeking information and opinions, suggesting procedures for reaching goals, clarifying or elaborating or ideas, summarising, compromising and be creative in resolving differences, getting the group to agree on standards, praising and correcting others with equal fairness, accepting both praise and complaints- among others


3.The Research Study

The context of study has already been established in the introductory chapter and

the background of the organisation has been exposed. This chapter aims at describing my

research study in detail, referring to the research philosophy, the method of research and

data collection, sample selection and ethical issues to the taken into account.

3.1 The research philosophy

Due to the complexities that are always involved in any educational institution, the

philosophy underpinning this piece of research follows the realist stance. This research

has intended to assume a scientific approach, reflected in the data collection methods and

approach to analyse that data. Thanking into account that business and management

research is focuses on the social world we live in, of two forms of realism (Saunders, 2009)

this research is more identified with critical realism. In this view, the researcher will only

be able to make sense of the social world once s/he understands the social structures

resulting in the phenomena s/he is trying to understand (Bhaskar, 1989). In other words,

this stance helps understand the bigger picture, which is not always evident. Dobson

(2002) argues that social conditioning has an effect on our knowledge of reality and

cannot be understood independently of the social actors involved in the knowledge

derivation process. What is more, critical realism recognises the importance of multi-level

study, i.e., it looks at all levels of the institution (the individual, the group and the

organisation) and how they interact with one another, rather than looking at them

separately, as direct realism does. Therefore, it could be argued the critical realism

perception that the social world is always changing is more in agreement with the purpose



of business and management research, which is quite often to understand the cause of

phenomena as a precursor to recommending change.

3.2 The method of research and data collection

The research method which I found most useful for this study is the case study method.

Adelman et.al. (1976), in defence of the case study method, argue that the research of a

single case is a genuine form of investigation. The researcher selects an instance from the

class of objects and phenomena s/he is investigating, and studies the way this instance

functions in context. In other words, the case study researcher observes the

characteristics of an individual case – say a child, a class, or a school – with the purpose of

probing and analysing in depth the significance of the multifarious phenomena that

constitute the life cycle of the case in order to establish generalisations about the wider

population which this case belongs to (Cohen and Manion, 1985).

Adelman et.al. (1976) identify six main advantages of the case study as a research method:

1. it is strong in reality, and therefore likely to appeal to practitioners,

2. generalisations can be drawn from a single case,

3. it can represent a multiplicity of viewpoints,

4. it provides a database of materials which may be interpreted by future

researchers,

5. the insights yielded by a case study can be immediately put into practice for

diverse purposes,

6. the data collected from case studies are usually more accessible than

conventional research reports.



Saunders et.al (2009) suggest that for descriptive research, such as this one, attitude and

opinion questionnaires and questionnaires of organisational practices should be

undertaken in order to help identify and describe the variability in different phenomena.

The objective-approach study involved a quantitative method using a self-assessment

checklist in a form of questionnaire (Appendix 1) in order to audit the school effectiveness

on the ten TQM indicators (Sallis, 2002:156). The whole checklist has been divided into

two questionnaires: questionnaire 1 was intended for students and parents/carers, since

the indicators are more customer-service related, and questionnaire 2 was aimed for

teaching and non-teaching staff at all levels, including senior management. The indicators

have been weighed to show their relative importance in the quality process:

access (5%),

service to customers (5%),

leadership (15%),

physical environment and resources (5%),

effective learning and teaching (20%),

students (15%),

staff (15%),

external relations (5%),

organisation (5%),

standards (10%)

The checklist also includes a grading scale, where score 5 is for poor performance and 1,

for excellence. The criteria for each score are as follows:

grade 1: excellent performance, there is a majority of strengths and few

weaknesses;



grade 2: good performance, strengths outweigh weaknesses;

grade 3: average performance, there is a balance between strengths and

weaknesses;

grade 4: below average performance, weaknesses outweigh strengths;

grade 5: poor performance, there is a majority of weakness and few strengths.

Since the respondents live in different geographical locations within the UK, and some in

Sweden, the questionnaires were intended to be administered electronically using the

Internet (Internet-mediated questionnaires) via the website SurveyMonkey.com. The

following steps were intended to be followed:

1. establish a pre-survey contact with the recipients by email advising them to

expect a questionnaire,

2. email a direct web link with a covering email, keeping the letter, questionnaire

and/or link as part of the email body to avoid viruses and to avoid rejection, since

attachments tend to be put aside, whereas answering an email is more practical

and quicker,

3. email one follow-up thanking early respondents and reminding non-respondents

to answer,

4. email a second follow-up to those who have not responded after three weeks, and

5. should the response rate not be as high as expected, and time allowing, email a

third follow-up.

The study was going to follow a qualitative method of research, whereby data was going

to be collected using semi-structured interviews, with a list of topics and questions to

cover, allowing also to omit or alter the order of the questions. This type of interview was



chosen hoping it could help me understand the ‘whats’ and the ‘hows’ of my research

questions, and also emphasising on the ‘whys’.

The interviews would have been conducted either face-to-face, by telephone or by Skype,

as conveniently agreed previously between the respondents and myself. Whereas the

advantages of face-to-face interviews are obvious, the latter offer advantages related to

access, speed and cost, bearing in mind that none of the schools is located in my area.

However, it is true that in face-to-face interviews a relation of trust can be established,

which is difficult to achieve over the telephone. An alternative to face-to-face and the

telephone is Skype, although this relation of trust would still be difficult to establish.

The interview would have consisted of five explorative questions related to the areas

included in the questionnaire. Again two sets of questions were prepared, one for

students and parents/carers and the other for senior managers and staff (see Appendix 2).

However, when it came the time to actually collect the data, I approached to my

gatekeeper within the organisation and had the unfortunate surprise that they would no

longer support me in this project. All access to the organisation was denied and I and was

therefore unable to collect any data using the methods explained above. Nevertheless, I

collected my data through articles and video interviews available on the Internet, as well

as some legal and policy documents available to the public on the LST website.

3.3 Sample selection

For the administration of questionnaires random sampling would have been used. This

involves selecting members if the population to be included in the sample on a completely

random basis, and this way, it minimises the effects of any subjective variables that might

affect the outcome of the survey study (Dörnyei, 2003). The population would have



consisted of 40-50 respondents, including the CEO of Kunskapsskolan Sweden, the MD of

Kunskapsskolan UK, the CEO of the LST, the Principals (headteachers) of the Academies in

the UK, middle-lower managers such as HoDs, other teaching and non-teaching staff, such

as LSAs, some students and parents/carers.

Interviews would have been conducted to 8-9 respondents taking part in the

questionnaire. However, this time, convenience or opportunity sampling would have been

used, where an important criterion of sample selection was convenient for me, the

researcher. Members of the target population would have been selected on the basis of

meeting certain criteria, such as graphical proximity, availability at a certain time, or easy

accessibility. Again, this sample would have included the MD of Kunskapsskolan UK (my

gatekeeper), a Principal of one Academy, HoDs, teaching and non-teaching staff as well as

a few students, and their parents/carers, if possible.

However, as access to the organisation had not been granted, my sample included content

and data extracted from the Internet. This involved careful scrutiny of content available on

the web taking into account the source of such data and bearing also in mind ethical

issues in connection with data extracted from the Internet. The sources where the data

was collected from were authoritative enough, including journalistic reports and

interviews, legal and policy documents from the LST website and information available on

the Kunskapsskolan’s website. Naturally, the data from the organisation’s website may

raise some issues regarding objectivity, which have also been taken into account.

3.4 Ethical issues

Kunskapsskolan agreed to support me in this research study after emailing the CEO of the

organisation in Sweden, the MD in the UK and the CEO of the LST, and it was agreed that



the MD would act as my gatekeeper, who, naturally, holds a very powerful position within

the organisation.

From the moment the organisation agreed to support me in this project, I started

considering a number of key ethical issues that could arise across the stages and during

the study which relate to the:

privacy of possible participants;

voluntary nature of participation and the right to withdraw partially or completely

from the process;

consent and possible deception of participants;

maintenance of the confidentiality of data provided by individuals or identifiable

participants and their anonymity;

reactions of participants to the way sought to collect data, including

embarrassment, stress, discomfort, pain and harm;

effects on participants of the way in which data is analysed and reported, in

particular the avoidance of embarrassment, stress, discomfort, pain and harm;

behaviour and objectivity of myself as a researcher.

Needless to say, I assured my gatekeeper that all kind of information would be treated as

confidential and no reference to specific names of staff would be made. This issue of

confidentiality and anonymity is of crucial importance. It becomes evident in an interview,

for instance, where points of significance are likely emerge and the researcher may want

to explore certain issues with other participants or senior managers within an

organisation, which may lead to participants indirectly identifying which person was

responsible for making the point that the researcher wishes to explore with them.

Because this may result in harmful repercussions for the person whose openness allowed



to identify this point for exploration, the researcher must exercise great care in

maintaining each participant’s right to anonymity. For example, in order to get others to

discuss such a potentially sensitive point the researcher may try to steer the discussion to

see if they will raise it without in any way making clear that one of the other participants

has already referred to it.

Use of the Internet and email during data collection can also lead to serious ethical, or

“netiquette”, issues related to confidentiality and anonymity. For instance, it would be

possible to forward the email (or interview notes) of one research participant to another

in order to ask this second person to comment on certain raised issues, which would not

only violate the right to confidentiality and anonymity even causing harm, but would also

lead to a data protection issue related to the use of personal data, which is why it should

definitely be avoided (Saunders, 2009).

Even though access to the organisation was not granted, meaning there were no ethical

issues involving the information provided by respondents, I still had to bear in mind ethical

issues involving data protection from the data collected from the Internet. Therefore, data

was taken only from sources available in the public domain; however, I have chosen to

disclose the full name of children interviewed to preserve their identity, even though their

full name may appear on the video interviews on YouTube.



4.Findings and Analysis

Kunskapsskolan's founding idea is that successful learning must be personalised and based

on each student’s individual strengths, weaknesses, previous educational experiences and

goals. This task demands a tailor-made education at an individual level. Kunskapsskolan

assumes the responsibility of conceptualising and standardising materials, tools and

systems, thereby freeing the schools to customise and personalise the students’

education. When the resources of learning — time, curricula, syllabuses, premises and

working tools — are geared to support the same educational concept and if these

resources are designed from the best proven practices, optimal conditions are created for

schools to succeed in the task of focusing on each individual.

Even though the organisation granted me access and agreed to support me in this project,

at the time the data had to be collected through the questionnaires and interviews, they

argued they could no longer support me due to their busy schedule in running the schools.

Therefore, most of the data collected to analyse the organisation against the literature

review has been based on independent resources such as interviews published on the

web, an Ofsted report from the inspection at one of the Academies, as well as information

and legal documents downloaded from their website. For this reason only those areas

where information was found will be analysed below.

4.1 Kunskapsskolan’s strategic planning

Kunskapsskolan pride themselves in their systematic approach to quality assurance. Their

strategic planning to quality will be analysed here in the light of the above literature

review.



4.1.1 Mission, vision, values and goals

Kunskapsskolan’s mission is to “develop and operate outstanding schools where students,

through personalised learning and clear goals will stretch their boundaries and learn more

than they thought possible” (www.kunskapsskolan.com). Their mission is both educational

and social: a long-term commitment to excellence and world-leading standards in schools

and education. As a company of experienced teachers and educators, they are convinced

all children can grow beyond what is thought possible, provided the time, skills and

resources are available to identify their unique individual needs and talents.

The organisation's educational vision “empowers every student to master the challenges

of today and shape the world of tomorrow” (www.kunskapsskolan.com). All aspects of

their schools are designed to provide a personalised education that meets the needs of

each student and is built around the following their four core values:

1. All people are different : we all learn in different ways and at different rates, and

they have set this as their challenge to meet, regardless of students’ ability.

2. Clear requirements and challenging goals : reaching excellence in knowledge and

skills demands a mutual agreement between students and teachers – individual

commitment from students through their own hard work, perseverance, and

ambition, on the one hand, and teachers’ cooperation, guidance and support, on

the other.

3. Education is for life : it empowers young people to make a positive contribution to

society and to enjoy a fulfilling life by preparing them to live and work in a

modern, global society full of challenges and difficult choices.

4. Life is what I make it !: each student is given a foundation for personal

development where self-discipline, empowerment, a sense of responsibility and

self-confidence provide the foundation for a constructive attitude.



Last but not least, Kunskapsskolan’s goal is to run the best schools. “Best” is defined in

four dimensions:

1. The best academic performance

2. The most satisfied students and parents

3. The best and most satisfied teachers

4. Operational excellence – generating an operational surplus for long term

development

The ultimate aim is to establish, operate and develop schools where every student is

recognised as a unique individual with the ability, ambition and support to learn and grow

beyond what they thought possible.

Figure 20 Kunskapsskolan’s corporate mission (adapted from de Wit & Mayer (2010: 598))

Figure 20 summarises their compelling and consistent corporate mission, where the four

components mutually reinforce. Clearly, the company’s strategy is breaking the mould

through the provision of personalised learning and education for the future. The idea is to


Organisational Purpose: (Why does the firm exist?)

"Recognise students as unique individuals"

Organisational Beliefs:(What are the driving ideas and assumptions?)

"develop and operate outstanding schools where students, through personalised learning and clear goals will stretch their boundaries and learn more

than they thought possible"

Organisational Values:(What is of fundamental

importance?)

"all people are different,clear requirements and

challenging goals,education is for life,

life is what I make it"

Business Definition: (Where does the firm operate?)

"the education industry"


find an educational concept for this century, where the rigid structures of the traditional

school are replaced with modern techniques for coaching, thus empowering each

individual student.

4.1.2 Stakeholder analysis and CSR

As already mentioned, Kunskapsskolan is a private company jointly owned by Mr

Emilsson’s family and other shareholders. The company runs schools not only in Sweden,

but also in the US and the UK. It would actually be quite difficult to analyse all the

customers/ stakeholders involved in the process due to the complexity of the

organisational structure, discussed further on. Internal stakeholders are the board of

directors, senior managers, departments, the schools and senior management staff in the

different geographical locations, and all the employees, from teaching and support staff to

other staff, such as cleaners.

Figure 21 Kunskapsskolan’s internal and external customers


Board of DirectorsCEO PresidentManaging DirectorKUNSKAPSSKOLAN

IT , Design, Legal, Finance, etc. Departments

schools in Sweden, USA, UKTeaching/support staff & other

satff

Learners

Parents

Architects,Designers

& Suppliers

Owners & Shareholders

Government Local

Authorities

Trade Unions

Universities/ future

employers

General Community


Of the three subgroups of external stakeholders (Figure 21) Kunskapsskolan pays greater

attention to their students, i.e. the key payers who benefit directly from the curriculum

(Appendix 3.5) and the premises where learning takes place (Appendix 3.4). These are

some of the comments on the design of the premises and the furniture (Isis Concepts -

Twickenham Academy, 2011):


I think this kind of room is brilliant for the students because depending on their abilities and

particularly their uses of technology, they’ve got the freedom they want to take it as far as they

would go […] It’s good because it’s quite a relaxed environment so it suits all the different type of kids

in different ways. (member of staff at Twickenham Academy)

It’s easier to learn cos you’re excited to learn […] you have your own space work, you don’t have

to listen to all other people irritating you(a student at Twickenham Academy)


Students seem to also benefit a great deal from the learning portal (Appendix 3.3). They

get their course materials through the web portal, and they take the classes in workshops

set to their proficiency level. Commenting on the use of the learning portal, one student

said (Welle, 2008):


I like the pods because they’re soundproof and you can work without anybody having to be

disturbed (a student at Twickenham Academy)

They go “wow” when they go into this space, so it lifts them, and they feel good about themselves and about their learning […] I have absolutely no doubt, from the

responses given by the students, that they really value a learning space like this and that enables us to think about and plan, both for teachers and for students, how we’re

going to teach and learn in the future. So the environment, and furniture makes a really big different to

that.(Principal at Twickenham Academy)


Some of these comments make reference to some questions in Questionnaire 1 (Appendix

1), showing that the students (at least) seem satisfied with the premises and the facilities,

such as access to resources and opportunities for students to organise their activities;

although there are many other important questions that remain unanswered.

Other key players are Kunskapsskolan, in Sweden, and the LST, in the UK, i.e. the trust

running the schools and, of course, the teaching staff, who provide as much individualised

instruction as possible to the students. However, particular attention should be paid to

Central government who should, as well, be placed in box D of the stakeholder mapping

matrix, since the organisation receives funding directly from them. In Sweden, each

student has a funding allocation from the public system, and the school the student

choses gets the tuition funds. Therefore, the more students, the more tuition money.

Likewise, in the UK, the Secretary of State pays the Learning Schools Trust directly to

establish, maintain, and run an Academy. The Secretary of State also pays grants towards

capital and recurrent expenditure for each Academy. However, unlike the Swedish

schools, the UK Academies are not funded according to the number of students they have,

and the admissions policy they operate is the same as that of the LA schools they replace.

The Master Funding Agreement states (LST, 2010:25):


We are responsible for ourselves. Everyone works at their own pace and we don’t worry about what the others students are doing, how far they’re in each subject. I

make my own decisions, and I think it’s great.(Signe, 14 year-old Swedish student)


a) Formula Funding: Funding equivalent to the level of funding which would be provided through the funding formula of the LA to a maintained school which had all of that Academy’s relevant characteristics, including its number of pupils; b) Local Authority Central Spend Equivalent: Funding representing a proportion of the LA Education Budget money which the LA would be able to retain, from the non-delegated elements of the Schools Budget and the relevant items in the LA Block, if that Academy were a maintained school. The proportion which this funding will represent will be based on the elements of the LA's Section 52 Budget Return which are relevant to that Academy. c) Specialist Schools Allowance: Funding equivalent to that which a maintained school with that Academy’s characteristics would receive in respect of their participation in the specialist schools programme.

The media, being the shaper of public opinion, should be kept satisfied as they may

enhance or ruin the organisation’s reputation. Trade Unions also fall into this box, and

especially in connection to the Ipswich Academy, in relation to which special policies have

been issued together with the LST. Equally satisfied must be Ofsted, the external body that

will eventually assess the Academies’ quality of educational provision. Even though

Academies are run independently, i.e., without the intervention from the Local Authority

(LA), a representative of the LA for the area in which the Academy is situated must be a

member of the Advisory Board (LST, 2010), thus placing the LA in quadrant C.

The learning portal not only benefits the students, but also their parents/carers, who are

kept informed by being able to take part in their child’s learning by following their

timetable and performance. Shareholders are also placed in quadrant B, since so far they

have not been paid any profits, which private schools under Kunskapsskolan have proved

possible in the field of education. Per Ledin, the company’s CEO, explains the following

(Welle, 2008):



Naturally, this was with the reference to the educational system in Sweden, as in the UK

they would not be allowed to make a profit out tax-payers’ money.

Finally, the LST agreed that the schools they run “will be at the heart of its community,

sharing facilities with other schools and the wider community” (LST, 2010: 8); therefore

placing them in box A. Figure 22 summarises the stakeholders influencing the

organisation.

Figure 22 Stakeholder mapping of Kunskapsskolan/ LST

By looking at the company’s mission, vision values and goals when considering its social

responsibility stance, there is no doubt it can be placed on the right end of the spectrum

as a shaper of society (Figure 4 above). As discussed above, all educational institutions


AMinimal effort- Other schools- Local Community

BKeep informed- Parents- Governors- Shareholders

CKeep satisfied- Ofsted- Media- Local Authority-Trade Unions

DKey players- LST/ Kunskapsskolan- Headteachers and senior staff- Teaching staff- Learners- Government

We don’t pay our profits to our shareholders. Instead, we invest in new school, but at some point we might change that.

(Per Ledin, CEO Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB)


should fall into this category, as they are the shapers of the minds of the future

generations. This becomes evident in Kunskapsskolan’s vision statement:

Kunskapsskolan's educational vision empowers every student to master the challenges of today and shape the world of tomorrow.

4.1.3 Kunskapsskolan’s CSF’s and Benchmarking

A vital part of Kunskapsskolan’s concept is its system for monitoring and assessing results.

Kunskapsskolan’s qualitative and quantitative key performance indicators (KPI’s) – their

term for CSF’s – for both the schools’ and students’ performance are designed to support

the organisation’s four goals:

to have the best student performance among their peers,

to reach the highest student and parental satisfaction,

to have the best and most motivated teachers, and

to operate with financial prudence and sustainability.

Kunskapsskolan’s R&D programme identifies correlations and possible common

denominators for achieving excellence. In all these key areas — student outcome, student

and parent satisfaction, teacher satisfaction and motivation, and financial performance —

their goal is that Kunskapsskolan’s performance shall exceed that of comparable schools.

All the schools, therefore, work to develop the KPI’s and assessment methodology in each

area.

Kunskapsskolan measures performance and outcomes according to their four overarching

goals. Student outcomes and results are monitored through tests, marking systems and

benchmarking against other schools, within and outside the network of the organisation.

Surveys are used to measure student, parent and employee satisfaction and motivation. In



addition, the set of KPI’s are also employed to measure financial prudence and the

efficiency of school operations. Figure 23 gives an overview of the performance

management system.

Figure 23 Overview of Kunskapsskolan’s performance management system in Sweden (www.kunskapsskolan.com)

According to this chart, Kunskapsskolan seems to perform in line with their objectives.

Most of their schools in Sweden are among the best in their districts and they are above

average in academic performance as well as student and family satisfaction, in their view.

It would seem fair to say that all educational institutions organise their CSF’s in the best

way that works for them. Kunskapsskolan organises them according to goals, rather than

in an external/internal dichotomy as discussed above.



Figure 23 seems to suggest they carry out functional, best-practice as well as internal

benchmarking. Unfortunately, it was not possible to have access to any official data

regarding the actual results of their benchmarking practices carried out in Sweden, or in

the UK by LST, who have chosen to work with a private company for this, as they believe it

provides them with an integrated framework enabling them to benchmark management

information across their partnership of academies.

4.1.4 Kunskapsskolan’s Business and Corporate plan

The organisation’s business model approach is to structure and organise the building

blocks of excellence. They offer a complete and coherent system for excellent secondary

education: the KED programme. For all key elements of the educational programme

(Appendix 3), Kunskapsskolan provides developed methodology, educational material and

support from their Pedagogical Development team.

All other systems in Kunskapsskolan are designed to support and facilitate the educational

programme and the effectiveness of the school — both from a pedagogical and an

administrative perspective. In key areas, Kunskapsskolan provides ready-to-adapt systems,

manuals and support. Each area also has dedicated Kunskapsskolan specialists who

provide the support to all the practitioners in their schools. In this way, they are able to

maximise their collective experience and expertise, making sure continuous development

and improvement. Every member of the Kunskapsskolan network also gets access to the

collective result of all efforts in the network.

A KED school not only practices the KED education programme, but also has access to an

extensive system of supportive resources and systems, ranging from helping apply for

licenses, applications, grants and setting up schools, to administrative systems and



exchange of experiences with other schools. In all of these areas, Kunskapsskolan has

developed best practices, manuals and guidelines and has its experts standing by to

support you. The figure below gives an overview of areas of Kunskapsskolan resources,

which are the building blocks of a KED school (www.kunskapsskolan.com).

Figure 24 KED's Building blocks

The supportive systems and concepts are the foundations of the programme. Figure 25

outlines the main components of each of them.



Figure 25 Supportive systems and concepts of the KED programme


Market research and planningStakeholder counselling processes Project management and concept adaption process School application processes Grants management Professional development in the KED programme

School establishment and start up

IT vision and policyPlatforms and applicationsIT development and support

Information Technology (IT)

Facilities, policies and programme Architectural and design programmeReal Estate

Quality and performance definitions Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) Grading and evaluation modelsTests and surveysPerformance management database

Performance Management

Financial performance indicators Accounting model Reporting system

Finance

EDS —Educational Documentation System Organisation model Planning model Administrative tools and support

Organisation and administration

Intellectual Property (IP) Protection Licenses and agreements Governmental relations and legal support

Legal

Job descriptions Tools for recruiting and evaluation HR development Talent management Training tools

Human Relations

Educator exchange and cooperation International student networking Alumni services

Network and exchange

Intranet and internetCommunication policy and manuals Branding policy and manuals Marketing and communication plans Crisis management plans Marketing and stakeholder surveys Marketing and communication templates and material Public relations and public affairs

Marketing and Communications


In terms of Kunskapsskolan’s strategic plan to compete in the educational market, no

official data could be collected. However, there is enough to be able to trace their plan

and summarise it using the Ansoff matrix (Figure 26):

Figure 26 Ansoff Matrix summarising Kunskapsskolan’s strategic plan (Ansoff, 1988)

Before when the non-socialist government in Sweden had implemented its “free-school

reform”, the public sector had a monopoly on educating Swedish pupils. After the reform,

municipals schools and the new free schools were competing against each other to attract

students, who were able to choose which school to attend. Therefore when Peje Emilsson

launched his new school company in 1999, their strongest competitors were without

doubt their municipal counterparts. Non-municipal schools were new and unpractised and

there was an ingrained Swedish tradition keeping the driving forces of free enterprise and

competition outside school doors. The KED programme was developed, after years of

research, in order to offer personalised education thus catering for all kinds of students,

since no pupil learns in the same way (Fällgren, 2011).


A: Market penetration/Consolidation - penetrate & consolidate Swedish market- penetrate & consolidate market in UK, USA and other countries

B: Product development- develop KED programme in the light of personalised education

C: Market development- develop and adapt KED programme according to educational curriculum in different countries

D: Diversification-develop mobile apps to connect to the Learning Portal??

-develop the KED programme for primary education??


After penetrating and consolidating the educational market with over 30 schools in

Sweden, the organisation has decided to expand their wings to other territories. They

have taken advantage of the educational reform initiated by the former Labour

government, under Tony Blair, introducing the Academy reform, and expanded into the

new free-school reform under the current Tory government, and Kunskapsskolan decided

to sponsor three state schools in the UK maintained by their corresponding LEAs: Whitton

School and Hampton Community College (Richmond upon Thames LAE) and Holywells

High School in Suffolk. The three of them were reborn under the names of Twickenham

Academy and Hampton Academy in 2010, and Ipswich Academy in 2011. The Ofsted

report of these three schools in the years 2008-2009 had not been very good, ranging

from “satisfactory” to “good“, and the schools being issued with notices to improve . It is

probably because of Mr. Emilsson’s desire of “giving children the best possible start in life”

(Fällgren, 2011:10) that Kunskapsskolan decided to “adopt” these three schools.

Kunskapsskolan has also opened schools in the US and is planning to expand in other

continents as well, possibly Asia.

Needless to say, because of the different nature of the educational curricula in these

countries, the KED programme will have to be developed and adapted in line with the

requirements of each country’s educational system. For example in the UK, there several

more steps per subject because the programme here covers five years of secondary

school, also bearing the GCSE exams in mind, compared to four years in the Swedish

system, with a different grading system.

It is difficult to guess how this organisation may diversify in the future, and if they will do it

at all, or if they will just keep expanding into new countries and penetrating the

educational markets there. However, with all this technological advancement, it would not



be difficult to imagine that they may create applications for mobile phones for students,

and parents, to access their portion of the Learning Portal on the go. Likewise, since the

KED has proved so effective for secondary school provision, it could be developed and

adapted for primary education.

4.1.5 Quality policy, Quality plan and Quality costs

While the quality of the academies is judged externally by Ofsted in its inspection

framework, and by the annual production of performance data published by the DFE, the

LST assesses the quality of what it does against a clear set of objectives, values and

principles, at the heart of which is the Planning Cycle, comprising the Strategic Plan, the

Annual Operational Plan, the Academy Activity Plan and the Quality Report (LST, 2012).

The LST Board sets the Strategic Plan and provides long term direction in alignment with

other schools operated by Kunskapsskolan. The Strategic Plan includes the vision, values,

organisational concept, and core objectives of the LST, each of which has measurable

medium-term (3-5 years) outcomes. It also identifies the key social and educational

contexts in which the three Academies operate, and provides the framework for the

Annual Operational Plan which the Trust produces each year, which draws on the Strategic

Plan, the LST Quality Report and priorities identified in the Academy Activity Plans and

Quality Reports.

The Annual Operational Plan identifies the strategies, actions and targets to be achieved at

the LST levels against each of the core objectives. It is based on the evaluation of data and

process from the previous year including:

Data regarding student attainment, progress and engagement;

Surveys of students, parents and staff;



The staff appraisal processes;

Benchmarking between Academies and with other schools;

Internal and external quality reviews (e.g. learning walks, operational reviews,

OFSTED inspections);

Input from the LST Board, Academy Councils and other stakeholders;

Professional judgements of strengths, challenges and priorities of the LST

Executive and Academy Leadership Teams.

Following the review of the Strategic Plan in the spring, the Board will consider a draft

plan, including budgets and staffing recommendations in the summer before confirming

the final plan at the beginning of the autumn term when the previous year’s student

outcome and results have been analysed. The LST Board will review progress against the

Annual Operational Plan during the year, and an LST Quality Report will be produced in

the summer each year to review achievement against the objectives and actions in the

Annual Operational Plan. The Quality Report will be a major input to the next year’s

Operational Plan. The targets within the LST and Academy annual plans will be used to set

personal objectives for LST Executives.

The Annual Operational Plan will be developed in parallel with the LST plan and will

provide context for each Academy to produce an annual Academy Activity Plan setting the

strategies, actions and targets specific to each Academy against each core objective.

The targets within the Academy Activity Plan will be used to set personal objectives for

Principals and other Academy based staff.

The progress of the Academy Activity Plans will be reviewed by the Academy Councils

during the year. For this, the Academies will monitor pupil progress at two points through



the year and conduct an annual survey of student, teacher and parental opinion. Each

Academy will produce a Quality Report each summer which will review achievement

against the objectives and actions in the Activity Plan. The Quality Report will include the

extent to which the Academy is delivering measurable objectives as well as how it is

implementing the LST learning model. The Quality Report will be a major input to the

following year’s Activity Plan.

The KED programme appears to be a self-contained unit which Kunskapsskolan has

created to ensure quality is well looked after across the board. Under this programme, the

purpose of the school is to be a greenhouse for learning and development, where the

student — as an individual, with capabilities, ambitions and personality, is the centre, and

the most important assets for student success are skilled teachers with the time and

capability to teach, coach and support the learning process. Therefore, CPD becomes an

essential component of the teaching and learning strategy. LST’s CDP programme provides

access to training opportunities arranged so that each one of them fulfils their potential. It

includes the following elements (LST, 2011:12)

induction for all new staff;

an annual programme for NQTs (newly qualified staff);

a weekly session for training of all staff supported each month by the central

pedagogical team;

three training days which are subject- based and common to all academies where

subject specialists meet with curriculum leads to review work and look at

outstanding teaching and learning strategies;

two academy focused training days;

leadership development and support;



individual support where the programme matches the business plan of the

schools or the Trust;

individual coaching sessions for all staff on a monthly basis.

The former Hampton Community College (HCC) –now Hampton Academy– was rated

‘satisfactory’ and ‘good’ by Ofsted in 2008 and 2009 respectively. Even though students’

achievent had improved considerably from Ofted’s previous visit, the quality of teaching

remained variable: “much is now good, but a large proportion is satisfactory and a small

amount inadequate” (Russell, 2009:2).

In April 2012, the Academy had another visit from Ofsted and “the teaching observed was

at least satisfactory with an increasing proportion of good teaching” (Ofsted, 2012:3).

Effort is devoted to improve the quality of teaching and good or outstanding practice is

beginning to be shared across the academy. However, the overall GCSE results mask

weaknesses in Maths, mainly due to difficulties in recruiting experienced Maths teachers,

which has affected outcomes. Because of this, senior leaders have set challenging targets

for the current academic year with a strong focus on improving teaching, literacy and

numeracy across the curriculum. Since the start of the current academic year, partnership

work with St Mary’s University, intensive and regular professional development, and links

with local partner schools, coaching and mentoring have been used to improve teaching

further.

Ofsted corroborates that, in line with the LST’s policies discussed above,

“the academy has robust monitoring systems for all areas of provision and

uses its evaluation schedule and data to ensure that all students have equal

access to the provision and support. This highly effective approach to



monitoring and evaluating has resulted in targeted support for students in

difficult circumstances; those requiring additional intensive literacy and

numeracy; and girls, who are not all performing as well as boys. […] The

Academy Council participates in reviews and provides challenge. It is keen

to increase the level of challenge through monitoring visits. Procedures to

ensure that students are safe are robust” (Ofsted, 2012:5).

Of course changes and excellent results do not happen overnight. Nevertheless, with the

strong system Kunskapsskolan and the LST seem to have in place and patience and

dedication, there is no doubt the Academy is on the right path. It will be very interesting

to read Oftsted’s report after their visit in a few years’ time.

4.1.6 Feedback and evaluation

As the policy documents of the organisation show, feedback and evaluation from

students, parents and teachers is essential in order to plan for quality, since good quality

of the school is critical to student achievement, and therefore it is very important for the

organisation to measure satisfaction and find out how students perceive their life in

school and how parents look at the children’s achievement.

The results of the satisfaction surveys conducted each year with students and parents are

analysed carefully and should a school have worse outcomes in the survey in any

significant respect, measures are sought at once in order to find a solution. Schools that

receive high scores in the surveys serve as role models for other schools, who are able to

embrace the best Kunskapsskolan’s practices. Figure 27 shows the result of the aggregate

performance of 23 Kunskapsskolan schools in Sweden, according to which 75% of the

students think they have good teachers and 80% are satisfied with their achievement.



Similarly, 84% of the parents agree that their children’s hard work at school contributes to

a positive development of their personality and 79% recommend the institutions

(www.kunskapsskolan.se).

Figure 27 Result of a survey carried out in 23 Kunskapsskolan schools in Sweden

This follow-up process stems from the view that students are customers and that

potential students constitute a market. Teachers are providers of a service that students

expect from the school. The surveys clarify any variations in the teachers’ performance

within a school during a particular year. Then the principal reviews the surveys with each

teacher, the results are openly compared to those of achieved by other teachers, clarifying

each teacher’s individual performance and indicating what is missing and what can be

improved. The outcomes of students’ surveys are compared to the results of other

schools, which enables Kunskapsskolan to see performance in another dimension and

understand, for instance, why so many students in this schools recommend their school to

their peers. This, in turn, surveys a school’s performance, which is important to know as it

may have a decisive bearing on the number of students wanting to attend a particular

school.



4.2 Kunskapsskolan’s organisational structure

Kunskapsskolan Education Sweden (KED) is headed by a Board of Directors and a line of

managers, which is represented in Figure 28, which, in turn is headed by Peje Emilsson, its

founder in 1999. Cecilia Carnefeldt, Mr. Emilsson’s daughter, was member of the team

that started Kunskapsskolan in 1999. During the last two years, she has been working on

the internationalization of Kunskapsskolan, focusing on the Academies project in the UK.

She is also the Executive Chairman of Kunskapsskolan Sverige AB and member of the

board of the LST in the UK.

Figure 28 Board of Directors of KED

It is worth noticing that two of the Board members are related to one of the owner

companies, Investor AB. Daniel Nodhäll is Investment Manager at Investor AB focusing on

consumer and capital goods sectors, and Johan Röhss is Investment Manager of the

Operational Investments at Investor AB. Call Emilsson is Mr. Emilsson’s son and Board

member of other renowned companies.


Founder and Executive Chairman of Kunskapsskolan

EducationPeje Emilsson

CEO & President of KED

Cecilia Carnefeldt

Executive Vice President of KED

Odd Eiken

Executive Vice President of KEDFredrik Lindgren

Global Director of Education of KEDBirgitta Ericson

Member of the Board 1

Calle Emilsson


Daniel Nodhäll


Johan Röhss


Former State Secretary for Schools and Adult Education in the Swedish Ministry of

Education and Science in 1991-94, Odd Eiken has been a member of the board of

Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB since 2009 in his position of Executive Vice President,

together with Fredrik Lindgren, who also joined Kunskapsskolan in 2009 to focus on the

internationalisation process after holding several positions at Investor AB. Mr. Lindgren is

a member of the board of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB and the LST.

Birgitta Ericson was part of the team that developed the Educational Program of

Kunskapsskolan in 1999. She was school manager in one of the first Kunskapsskolan

schools in Sweden and Education Director of the Swedish Operations 2001-2011, and in

2011 Ms. Ericson joined Kunskapsskolan Education as Global Director of Education,

responsible for the Educational Program worldwide.

KED is the mother company with ownership of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB, headed by its

own Board of Directors and Per Liden as CEO. Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB operates many

schools in Sweden, providing them with shared services for real estate, IT, finance,

marketing, communication and educational development. Figure 29 shows the structure

of the Board of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB:

Figure 29 Board of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB


Executive Chairman

Cecilia Carnefeldt

Odd EikenMember of

Board 1

Fredrik LondgenMember of

Board 2

Birgitta EricssonMember of

Board 3


Figure 30 below illustrates the structure of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB, showing the CEO

overseeing the 33 schools. However, for the sake of concision and space, only some

schools and positions are represented.

Since the organisation was founded, it has shown an organisational design by function of a

hierarchical type, where board members and managers are grouped by function, similar

position or skills. As the organisation grew and started setting up schools in the rest of in

Sweden it shows an organisation design by geography, covering new areas of the country,

but also retaining the hierarchical design by function. Figure 29 shows, for instance, that

all schools are headed by a Principal, who in turn is responsible for a group of people,

namely, the school coordinator, the doctor, who, in turn is responsible for the school

nurse. In the cases where the same principal heads two schools, as in the case of

Helsingborg and Landskrona, an Assistant Principal has also been appointed, sharing their

responsibility for the school coordinator, the doctor, as well as other staff.



In the last two years Cecilia Carnefeldt directed KED’s internationalisation, resulting in the

creation of Kunskapsskolan International KIAB SB (KIAB), which oversees the schools run in

the USA and the UK and is headed by Steve Bolingbroke as Managing Director.

In the United Kingdom, Kunskapsskolan the three Academies in England through the LST,

also headed by a Trust Board, composed of 12 members, some of which are members of

KED’s Board of Directors (www.learningschoolstrust.org.uk):


Board of Kunskapsskolan i

Sverige AB

CEOPer Ledin

BoråsPrincipal: Björn

Nyman

School Coordinator Doctor

School Nurse

Responsible for Kitchen and Café

Resource for Kitchen and Café

HelsingborgPrincipal: Joakim

AnderssonAssistant Principal: Lotta

Björklund

School Coordinator

LandkronaPrincipal: Joakim

AnderssonAssistant Principal: Lidija Lapadatovie

School Coordinator Doctor

School Nurse

Figure 30 Partial organisational structure of Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB

Chairman & Independent Director(Per Unckel)

Sponsor Director 1 Sponsor Director 2 Sponsor Director 3(Beatrice Engstrom-Bundy) (Birgitta Ericson) (Cecilia Carnefeldt)

Sponsor Director 4 Sponsor Director 5 Sponsor Director 6(Fredrik Lindgren) (Patricia Hamzahee) (Per Ledin)

Chief Executive & Educational Director


Below the line is the Trust Executive, composed of the CEO and the Principal of each

academy: Hampton Academy, Twickenham Academy and Ipswich Academy. Figure 32

gives a snapshot of the organisational structure after its internationalisation. This shows

again a hierarchical organisation, by function and naturally, by geographical location, both

at an international level (Sweden, USA and UK), and at a local level again in the UK

(London and Ipswich). Even the LST Trust Board seems to be arranged by nationality and

function or position within the company: from the Chairman to Sponsor Director are all

Swedish, and from the CEO to the Parent Director are all from England.

The LST Board has a sub-committee for each Academy known as the Academy Council.

This is made up of representatives of various stakeholders including students, parents,

staff and the local community. The parents who serve on the Academy Councils elect one

of their members to serve as a Director on the main LST Board.


Chairman & Independent Director(Per Unckel)

Sponsor Director 1 Sponsor Director 2 Sponsor Director 3(Beatrice Engstrom-Bundy) (Birgitta Ericson) (Cecilia Carnefeldt)

Sponsor Director 4 Sponsor Director 5 Sponsor Director 6(Fredrik Lindgren) (Patricia Hamzahee) (Per Ledin)

Chief Executive & Educational Director

Figure 31 The LST Trust Board


Figure 32 International expansion of Kunskapsskolan

Since all schools have to comply with the laws and regulations of their own country, up to

a certain extent, this international geographical design coincides with a design by product

line. Here the product is education/instruction but in the UK, the qualifications offered are

based on the National Curriculum incorporating Kunskapsskolan’s unique personalised

learning model.

In the UK, it is against the Law for a private company, like Kunskapsskolan, to make profit

out of tax-payers’ money, unless they link up with some other non-profit organisations,

such as charities, resulting in the creation of the LST. It can be argued that this structure

shows semi-decentralisation, since the LST oversees the academies in the UK. However,

most of the Trust Board members are KED’s Directors and/or have relationship with

Investor AB for it is in the best interest of the organisation to provide the schools with the

adequate resources. Needless to say, there is a partnership spirit among the three

academies which offer different specialisms, or “product lines”, summarised in Figure 33:


Kunskapsskolan Education Sweden AB

(KED)

Kunskapsskolan International KIAB SB (KIAB)

(UK & USA)MD: Steve Bolingbroke

Learning Schools Trust (LST)

CEO: John Baumber

Hampton Academy

Principal: Sue Demont

Twickenham Academy

Principal: Nick Jones

Ipswich AcademyPrincipal: Nancy

Robinson

Kunskapsskolan USA

President: Margaret Hoey

Kunskapsskolan i Sverige AB(Sweden)

CEO: Per Ledin

33 schools in Sweden

TRU

ST E

XECU

TIVE


Figure 33 Specialisms of the Academies in the UK

It can be argued that the geographical design of the organisation in its post-international

expansion also illustrates a design by customer or market channel. For example, both

Hampton Academy and Twickenham Academy are located in London, but they offer

different product lines, different specialisms. Twickenham’s “product” seems to cater for

the more holistic student. ‘Themed COURSES´ students study technology, humanities and

the arts, undertaking exciting projects, dealing with the ‘Big Issues’ and emphasising the

connections between subjects. Students study six COURSES in the academic year. PSHCE

(Personal, Social, Health & Careers Education) is delivered through the ‘Themed COURSES’

and within the three college structure (www.twickenhamacademy.org.uk).

Even though the customers are students and students’ parents, the market channel

changes, and therefore their “product lines” should be marketed according to the

different countries and locations, respecting also the educational laws of regulations of

each country.

Analysing the organisation according to the mechanistic/organic dichotomy, there is no

doubt Kunskapsskolan organisational structure shows a mechanistic, hierarchical and

bureaucratic type. Management shows a top-down approach, with power, authority and

control is at the top, rather than a flatter structure.


Ham

pton

Aca

dem

yThe Arts

Ipsw

ich

Aca

dem

y

Business & Enterprise

Twic

kenh

am A

cade

my

Themed Courses:>Humanities>Arts>Technology


It could be argued that at the school level the organisation is more of the organic type

since “individual tasks are seen in relation to the organisation as a whole”. However, the

organisational charts of the Swedish schools show a hieratical order, and so do the English

Academies. Figure 34 shows part of the top-down organisational structure of Ipswich

Academy (www.ipswichacademy.org.uk):

The organisational structure and design depend upon the strategies and the goals that

drive a given organisation. Accordingly, organisations can show a flat structure, if people

tend to be more goal-oriented or a hierarchical vertical structure if centralised control is

important.

“Kunskapsskolan’s mission is to develop and operate outstanding schools where students,

through personalised learning and clear goals will stretch their boundaries and learn more

than they thought possible” (www.kunskapsskolan.com). The figures and charts described

above show that this is better achieved by having a vertical structure, with control at the

top, ensuring the KED programme is applied in all schools on an equal basis and that all


Figure 34 Partial overview of management line at Ipswich Academy


decisions made benefit the organisation as a whole. Also, the organisation, having

expanded as they have, needs strong leadership to pull all institutions in the direction; and

most often strong leadership is best given from above.

4.3 Educational leadership at Kunskapsskolan

In Ofsted’s view (Ofsted, 2012), the leadership and management of the Hampton academy

results from the well-established experience of the Principal and the LST structure,

especially the support from the CEO, John Baumber, and the Executive Team (comprising

the Principals of the LST academies) as well as the Academy Council. The Principal is and

surrounded by a cohesive and experienced senior team, all driving forward improvements

effectively.

Ofsted has also perceived clarity of vision and a skilful approach to leading staff through

the complexities of innovative change meaning that the Principal and the LST have won

the loyalty and commitment of staff, parents, carers and students, and that there is a

mature understanding of the academy’s strengths and weaknesses. For instance, despite

the on-going construction of the new build, the leaders and managers have been

persistent in establishing the approach to learning, even though the technology and space

required for the operation of the learning concept is not all finalised. “This is leadership at

its best in relation to communicating a shared vision about the future, which all

understand and are working towards, despite continuing obstacles” (Ofsted, 2012:5).

Also, according to Ofsted, the Principal uses a coordinated approach to develop the

unique features of the academy. Effective management systems are established across the

three levels of the school. Responsibilities are clear and a detailed development plan

provides staff with a clear overview of the journey the academy is undertaking to raise



standards and enable every student to fulfil their potential. The fact senior leaders have

set challenging targets for the current academic year with a strong focus on improving

teaching, literacy and numeracy across the curriculum is a clear example of this.

4.4 Teamwork for quality at Kunskapsskolan

Teamwork seems to be a fundamental quality Kunskapsskolan and the LST look for in

teachers and all staff members. A strong feature of the organisation is their employees’

involvement in R&D and concept development. More than 30 full time employees in

Sweden, for instance, work with pedagogical and methodological development and a large

fraction of all Kunskapsskolan’s professional teachers also participate as discipline or

methodology specialists serving the entire network of schools. Each teacher belongs to a

subject team that includes staff members teaching the same subject to other year groups

at the school. For example, Martin, a teacher at Kunskapsskolan Eskede, leads a team of

humanities teachers for Year 6, 7, and 9, and Sanna is a team member for Swedish, but

together they comprise the work team for Year 8 and their mission is to ensure that those

students get as much out of their school year as possible.

A team of curriculum leads for all of the UK academies develop the resources on the

Learning Portal. Each academy has a teacher responsible for a specific subject managing

the school’s local work in order to develop new curriculum packages for the Learning

Portal, and all teachers can contribute new course and exercise material. All teachers of

the UK Kunskapsskolan academies are able to utilise these step and theme resources once

published on the Learning Portal. One of the teachers at Twickenham Academy

comments:



“Being able to participate and influence the content of our education,

and to develop exciting assignments and themes, is an incredible

opportunity. [...] it’s a strength to know that we’re operating in the same

fashion as Kunskapsskolan schools in other countries. Twickenham

Academy is put in an international context” (Fällgren, 2011:58).

Working in such a collaboratively manner does not only make teachers feel empowered,

but it also makes them feel they are part of something bigger and that their efforts pay

off. Teachers also feel they are a vehicle for monitoring, evaluating and improving quality,

thus making them accountable for the quality of learning.

By working in teams teachers are accountable for the use of the teachers’ time, non-

teaching time as well as the materials and space. For example, at the Hampton Academy,

in order to create extra time, the teachers have to collaborate in a structure manner. Ms

McMahon forms part of a team teaching science, and all the team member work together

to develop the curriculum for steps on the Learning Portal as well as exchange lesson

material and exercises. When Ms McMahon does not have to prepare her own material

for every single lesson, she can devote that time to coaching and workshops. One of the

teachers assumes the main responsibility for each subject and in turn, reports to the

curriculum lead, who works across the academies to develop the entire new curriculum

for Kunskapsskolan in the UK. This scenario illustrates another benefit of teamwork: that

of acting as a channel of information to management on the changes needed to improve

provision and the opportunities for its learners.



5.Conclusion

In today’s world we can see a shift of power from capital to knowledge, and knowledge,

when managed properly, can drive the development of individuals and a society. For this

reason, there is no doubt that good quality educational provision is of utmost importance

to educate our younger generations.

There are many reasons that lead me to doing research in TQM in education. First, I

worked in the teaching profession for many years in my country and after a few years in

the UK I decided to retrain as a teacher in the UK educational system by engaging in a

PGCE course, during which I felt, and was made felt, like a misfit in the system because

there were so many things I did not agree with, starting with the rigidity of the curriculum,

and the setting system many schools apply for grouping students according to ability. It

was equally demotivating to see so many teachers and senior teaching staff with so little

passion for their job, and the students with so little enthusiasm for learning. It was as if

both teachers taught for inertia and learners went with the flow. I should probably admit

that in Argentina I used to teach in a private school where students were aware of the

value of the education and worked very hard, with some exceptions, of course.

A few years after starting my PGCE my son was diagnosed with Autism, and this changed

the way I looked at educational provision, on which I starting reflecting on the quality of

education, but now as a parent. Although my son has attended an “outstanding” school in

the area, I still noticed they were not flexible enough. At the beginning I blamed the

school, but I later realised that it was the system, maybe the LEA to which the school was

accountable. However, since the new educational reform introducing free schools, I have

started noticing some changes in my son’s school educational approach, even though it is



still accountable to the Local Educational Authority. However, since it is now his time to

move to a secondary school, I cannot help thinking what is the best kind of school for him

and that he would benefit so much from the kind of personalised education

Kunskapsskolan offers.

As a teacher I have always strived for bringing quality into the classroom, and as a parent I

have always demanded quality from the school. Also, I have always been horrified at cases

where the government decided to close down a school. This research study has helped me

realise that quality in education not only involves isolated cases, a good teacher who

prepares good lessons, or a good headmaster who works hard to lift the schools from

“special measures”, or even “good” students, but a set of aspects that when well managed

and led result in good quality educational provision. Despite the limitations of not having

been granted access to the organisation and the subsequent inability of collecting

quantitative data, up to a certain extent this research has met my objectives and

answered my research questions.

I have found out that in order to guarantee good quality educational provision, schools

need to put their customers first, and to recognise that all students are different, and that

it is the school’s duty to cater for those differences. When people are allowed to express

their differences by making personal choices, individuals and society can develop.

Kunskapsskolan also knows that teachers are probably their most valuable asset, without

whom their personalised educational programme could not be delivered, this is why CPD

programmes are so valued by the organisation. But in the same way as Kunskapsskolan

expect students to stretch their boundaries to learn more than they thought possible,

teachers are equally expected to stretch their limits to instruct more than they thought



possible. By effectively using their most valuable resource – time, teachers show true

professionalism.

The organisation first has to comply with the quality standards for educational provision

set by the different countries in which they operate. However, Kunskapsskolan has its own

system in place whereby everyone, including the organisation itself, follows goals. All

students have long-term goals in all subjects for each term which are decided together

with the student’s personal coach and the parents. These are set as measurable grade

goals that have to be reasonable but also challenging in order to stretch the student’s

boundaries. Similarly, teachers’ goals are also reasonable but challenging to ensure

students progress as far as possible in their learning. Teachers systematically follow each

student’s results in relation to the goals at the beginning of their first term in order to

determine whether they may be missing any curriculum goals and what additional

learning aids can be put in place. All teaching results are compared as well as the grade

goals of the subject teams. If any subject team if far below the goal, then the principal

advises the teachers to step up their efforts to be come closer to the goal. All the results

combined also show the school’s performance, and the whether it has met the

organisation’s goals.

This illustrates the organisation follows a top-down management and leadership approach

in order to ensure organisational effectiveness and performance; i.e., to ensure the KED

programme is applied in all schools on an equal basis, that all decisions made benefit the

organisation as a whole, and to ensure all institutions pull in the direction.

This is enough to conclude that Kunskapsskolan meets all the characteristics of a TQM

organisation:



unit optimisation, since every department and school aims at functioning

efficiently and effectively operating within clear quality standards;

vertical alignment, since all members of staff understand the strategy, the

direction and mission of the institution;

horizontal alignment, since there are mechanisms in place in order to gear

everyone towards an understanding of the aims and requirements of other parts

of the institution;

a single command for each process, since such key processes as curriculum,

pastoral and administrative are charted and organised under a single chain of

command: the KED programme, which has resulted from analysing who the

customer is what their needs are and the standards they should expect.

This study focused on how a private Swedish organisation manages the quality of

educational provision in schools funded directly from Central Government in the UK. It

would be interesting to retake this study in a few years’ time, once the schools have fully

settled in with Kunskapsskolan new methodology in order to compare quality and

achievement results before and after. It would be equally interesting to carry out a

comparative research study including Kunskap schools, mainstream and independent

schools comparing the relationship between their management approach to quality and

student achievement.



References

Adelman, C., Jenkins, D. and Kemmis, S., 1976. Rethinking case study: notes from the second Cambridge conference. Cambridge Journal of Education, 6(3), pp. 139-150.

Ansoff, H., 1988. Corporate Strategy. s.l.:Penguin.

Bate, P., Khan, R., Pye, A., 2000. Towards a Culturally Sensitive Approach to Organisation Structuring: Where Organisation Design Meets Organization Development.. Organization Science, 11(2), pp. 197-211.

Bell, J., 2006. Doing your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science. 4th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Bhaskar, R., 1989. Reclaiming Reality: A Critical Introduction to Contemporary Philosophy. London: Verso.

Bloisi, W., Cook, C. and Hunsaker, P., 2003. Management and Organisational Behaviour. Midenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.

Bryman, A. and Bell, E., 2007. Business Research Methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bryson, J., 2004. What to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), pp. 21-53.

Burns, T. and Stalker, G.M., 1966. The Management of Innovation.. s.l.:Tavistock Publications..

Campbell, D. and Craig, T. , 2007. Organisations and the Business Environment. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

CEC, 1995. White Paper on Education and Training, Teaching and Learning Towards the Learning Society, Brussels: EU Commission.

Cohen, L. and Manion, L. , 1985. Research Methods in Education. London: Croom Helm.

Crosby, B., 1979. Quality Is Free. New York: Mentor Books.

de Wit, B. & Mayer, R., 2010. STRATEGY: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 4th ed. s.l.:Cengage Learning EMEA.

Deming, W., 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DFE, 2012. Healthy Schools. [Online] Available at: http://education.gov.uk[Accessed 01 February 2012].



Dobson, P., 2002. Critical realism and information systems research: why bother with philosophy?. Information Research , January.7(2).

Dörnyei, Z., 2003. Questionnaires in Second Language Reasearch: Construction, Administration and Processing. s.l.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

ERT, 1995. Education for Europeans, Towards the Learning Society, Brussels: ERT.

ERT, 1997. Investing in Knowledge, The Integration of Technology in European Education, Brussels: ERT.

ESE, 2012. Welcome to Eco-Schools England. [Online] Available at: www.keepbritaintidy.org/ecoschools[Accessed 03 March 2012].

Eurydice, 1997. Dix années de réformes au niveau de l’enseignement obligatoire dans l’union européenne (1984-1994). s.l., s.n.

Eurydice, 2005. Chiffres-clés de l’éducation en Europe, 2005. s.l., s.n.

Fällgren, C., 2011. Why we choose Kunskap: Stories from Kunskapsskolan. Stokholm: Kunskapsskolan Education Sweden AB.

Gomm, R. & Woods, P. eds., 2003. Educational Research in action. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd..

Hammersley, M., ed., 2003. Educational Rersearch: current issues. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd..

Handy, C., 1999. Understanding Organizations. 4th ed. London: Penguin Group.

HGfL, n.d. Hertfordshire Schools Award Schemes. [Online] Available at: www.thegrid.org.uk[Accessed 03 February 2012].

Hirtt, N., 2008. Marketisation of Education in the Globalised Economy. [Online] Available at: http://www.skolo.org/spip.php?article940&lang=fr[Accessed 22 May 2011].

Holmlund, H. and McNally, S, 2010. A Swedish model for UK schools?. CentrePiece, Winter 2009/2010, pp. 20-21.

IQM, 2012. Inclusion Quality Mark: Framework. [Online] Available at: www.inclusionmark.co.uk[Accessed 01 February 2012].

IsisConcepts, 2011. Isis Concepts - Twickenham Academy. [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mql9E-7KG2I[Accessed 01 May 2012].



Jamaa, S., 2010. The effectivenes of applying total quality management in public senior high school. Journal of Education, 3(1), pp. 25-35.

Johnson, G., Scholes, K. & Whittington, R., 2008. Exploring Corporate Strategy. 8th ed. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Kunskapsskolan, 2011. Kunskapsskolan. [Online] Available at: www.kunskapsskolan.com[Accessed 11 April 2011].

Kunskapsskolan, 2011. Kunskapsskolan. [Online] Available at: www.kunskapsskolan.com[Accessed 11 April 2011].

Kunskapsskolan, 2011. Mission. [Online] Available at: http://www.kunskapsskolan.com/aboutus/mission.4.52155b18128a87c7cfd80009976.html[Accessed 15 April 2011].

LST, 2010. Master Funding Agreement. [Online] Available at: http://www.learningschoolstrust.org.uk/download/18.514b581212ce80079838000612/LST+Funding+Agreement+Feb+2010+FINAL.pdf[Accessed 10 May 2011].

LST, 2011. Learning Schools Trust. [Online] Available at: www.learningschoolstrust.org.uk[Accessed 3 April 2011].

LST, 2011. Policy 4- Teaching and Learning. [Online] Available at: http://www.learningschoolstrust.org.uk/download/18.514b581212ce8007983800015956/Policy+4+Teaching+and+Learning+v2+7th+March+2011.pdf[Accessed 30 April 2012].

LST, 2012. Policy 12 - Governance. [Online] Available at: http://www.learningschoolstrust.org.uk/download/18.756dc60b1364bb524d4800012115/Policy+12+Governance+v1+24th+April+2012.pdf[Accessed 30 April 2012].

Lundahl, L., 2002. Sweden: decentralization, deregulation, quasi-markets - and then what?. Journal of Education Policy, 17(6), pp. 687-697.

Miller, J., Allison, D., Inniss, S, 1992. Improving Quality in Further Education A Guide for Teachers is Course Teams. Ware(Herts): Unknown binding.



Morgan, G., 2006. Images of Organization. California: Sage Publications, Inc..

Murdoch, A., 1997. Lateral benchmarking, or what Formula One taught an airline. Management Today, November.p. 64–67.

OD, 2012. Quality. [Online] Available at: www.oxforddictionaries.com[Accessed 16 February 2012].

Ofsted, 2012. Ofsted. [Online] Available at: www.ofsted.gov.uk[Accessed 15 January 2012].

Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J., Boydell, T, 1997. The Learning Company: A strategy for sustainable development. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

Peters, T. and Austin, N, 1985. A Passion for Excellence. Glasgow: Fontana/Collins.

Pettinger, R., 2007. Introduction to Management. 4th ed. s.l.:Palgrave Macmillan.

Porter, M., 1985. Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: The Free Press.

QM, 2012. Quality Mark- The Award. [Online] Available at: www.qm-alliance.co.uk[Accessed 01 March 2012].

Ranson, S., Hinings, B. and Greenwood, R., 1980. The Structuring of Organizational Structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, Mar., 25(1), pp. 1-17.

Rodney, C., 2012. Ofsted Report - Hampton Academy, Bristol: Ofsted.

Rönnberg, L., 2007. The Swedish Experiment with Localised Control of Time Schedules: Policy problems representations. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(2), p. 119–139.

Russell, C., 2009. Ofsted Report- Hampton Community College, Bristol: Ofsted.

Sallis, E., 1994. Total Quality Management in Education. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Sallis, E., 2002. Total Quality Management in Education. 3rd ed. London: Kogan Page Ltd..

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A., 2009. Research methods for business students. Harlow: FT/Prentice Hall.

Spanbauer, S., 1992. A Quality System for Education. Milwaukee(Wisconsin): ASQC Quality Press.

Taggar, S and Ellis, R, 2007. The role of leaders in shaping formal team norms. The Leadership Quarterly, April , 18(2), p. 105–120.



Tuckman, B., 1965. Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), p. 384–99.

Welle, D., 2008. European Journal | Sweden: The boom in private schooling. [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsGmO6RSfIE&feature=BFa&list=PLA677F7BA7AF7B420[Accessed 10 April 2011].

Weller, L. D., 1996. Benchmarking: a paradigm for change to quality education. The TQM Magazine, 8(6), pp. 24 - 29.

Wimborg, S., 2010. Learning Lessons from the Swedish Model. Forum, 52(3), pp. 279-284.



Appendix 1: Quantitative research

Questionnaire 1: Customers: students and parents

Quality indicators Grades1 2 3 4 5

1. Access (5%)Advice and guidance▌There is a clear initial contact point for all customers▌There is a welcoming reception▌Telephone response times are short▌Advice and guidance facilities are readily available▌There are clear signs around the campus

Open access▌There are appropriate ramps and lifts for people with disabilities▌Signs and literature are produced in community languages

2. Services to customers (5%)Advice and guidance▌An effective information and guidance service is available▌Effective pre-entry guidance is available for all students▌Appropriate continuing guidance is available to all students▌Careers guidance is readily available▌Accessible student welfare and counselling is available to all students who need it.

Learning resources▌A well-resourced library and resource centre is available with appropriate resources to meet curriculum needs▌Open access to learning resources is available to all students

Social and refreshment▌Affordable canteen facilities are available when students require them▌Adequate sports facilities are available▌Appropriate relaxation facilities are available▌There are opportunities for students to organise their own activities



Questionnaire 2: Organisation and Staff

Quality indicators Grades1 2 3 4 5

1. Leadership (15%)Head/ Principal▌S/He has a vision and shares it▌S/He champions the message of TQM▌S/He walks the job (walks around the school)▌S/He knows the staff▌S/He knows the students▌S/He provides leadership▌S/He ensures the quality champions are in place▌S/He leads innovations and creativity▌S/He gives top priority to quality improvement

Governance▌The Board/ Trustees works with the Hear/ Principal to develop the institution’s mission▌Ensures that the institution has a framework for quality improvement in place▌The Board/ Trustees effectively monitors the quality of provision, including the major indicators of success:

- Student achievement- Student retention- Student recruitment- Financial solvency- The self-assessment report and action plan

Values▌The institution’s mission and ethos is clear and understood by:

- Staff- Students- The community

▌The equal opportunities policy is in place and implemented▌There is a strong commitment to the needs of the community

2. Physical environment and resources (5%)Buildings, classrooms and workshops▌The buildings are clean and attractive▌The facilities are fit for purpose▌Classrooms contain appropriate visual aids and learning aids

Stimulating learning environment▌Classroom layouts/ individual learning programmes are exciting to students▌The learning environments are well planned and organised

Health and safety▌Student perception/ incident logs are kept▌Health and safety policies are regularly monitored▌There is a strong commitment to maintain a safe and secure environment

Resource control and allocation▌There is appropriate delegation of resource management▌Effective resource control is exercised▌Resources are controlled by those who use them



Quality costs▌The institution has a clear idea of the costs of quality failures▌Quality costs are regularly monitored and reported

3. Effective learning and teaching (20%)Appropriateness of learning methods▌There are teaching and learning strategies appropriate to course and programme goals▌A variety of learning modes are available to meet learners’ needs▌Teaching and learning strategies are regularly reviewed and measured by a range of specified criteria▌Teaching and learning strategies are measured by student response▌Learning is student centred▌Students are encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning▌There is a recognition of prior learning▌There is a good climate of purposefulness among students

Appropriateness of the curriculum▌The curriculum is appropriate to learners’ needs▌The content of programmes is relevant and up to date▌There is a short response time for the development of new course and programme content

Monitoring and evaluation▌Student feedback is regularly obtained▌Feedback from other customer groups is regularly obtained▌Student and community questionnaires are used where appropriate▌The institution has formal systems for review and evaluation▌There is evidence that student feedback is used in policy making

4. Students (15%)Students matter▌The communal areas are clean and well-decorated▌Student handbooks and guides are available▌There is an absence of artificial barriers▌There are good transport arrangements for students▌There are good range of leisure, recreation and sporting facilities available to students

Student satisfaction▌There is good rapport between staff and students▌Happy students and satisfied customers are evidenced through surveys and questionnaires▌Students have a sense of pride in their work▌Students are kept informed about developments that affect them▌Students’ views are regularly solicited

Monitoring students’ progress▌Students’ progress is regularly tracked and monitored▌Students’ attendance is regularly monitored and tracked▌Tutorial provision is used effectively to ensure that students are on track.

5. Staff (15%)Attitude and motivation▌Staff are committed and knowledgeable▌Staff have a student-centred approach



▌Staff take responsibility for their own quality▌Staff have a sense of pride in their work▌Staff readily respond to individual needs

Teamwork▌There is a commitment to teamwork and team approaches▌Staff are trained in the skills of teamwork▌Staff have strong cohesion▌Teams have a clear idea of the limits to their authority▌There is a resource base that allows them to improve quality▌Teams are regularly consulted on policy

Staff development and training▌The institution is committed to developing its staff▌The institution is proactive and clearly states institutional needs▌Staff development starts with a review of individual needs▌Staff training is adequately resourced and funded▌Staff training is an institutional priority▌Training includes all staff▌Staff are trained in quality improvement techniques

Facilities▌There are good staff workrooms▌There are adequate and appropriate equipment and facilities▌There are opportunities for professional discussion and debate

6. External relations (5%)Marketing▌There is a coherent marketing strategy▌Market research is regularly carried out▌The institution is positively seeking out customer views▌Student and employer questionnaires are regularly used

Community▌Excellent links with relevant communities are maintained▌Community views are regularly solicited▌There are strong links with business and industry through partnerships▌There are strong links with community agencies through partnerships

7. Organisation (5%)Strategic planning▌The institution has broad aims and objectives▌Staff at all levels are aware of the institution’s direction▌The institution has a written strategic plan▌The plan identities how staff can contrite to success

Organisational culture▌The institution has a simple and lean organisational structure▌The institution’s managers are committed to quality improvement▌Authority is delegated down▌A positive attitude to change is part of the culture▌There is universal statement of direction▌There is a strong commitment to peer evaluation and review▌The organisations is praised upon teamwork▌Learning maximisation and prudent risk-taking are emphasised▌There is a tolerance of mistakes



Communications▌Good communications are seen as a major priority▌Communications are bottom-up not just top-down▌Mutuality in communication is seen as the lifeblood of the institution

Knowledge management▌There is a policy in place for effectively using the institution’s knowledge resources▌An active approach is taken to managing knowledge through techniques such as learning stories▌Teams across the institution learn from each other’s success

Quality tools and techniques▌A range of quality tools and techniques is used to improve quality▌Project teams are formed to tackle quality issues

8. Standards (10%)Hard standards▌The institution has excellent exam results and student success▌The institution has high student retention rates▌The institution has high progression rates for students obtaining appropriate employment or places in other educational institutions▌Effective use of resources, measures of value-added capabilities are in place▌Good student and community feedback based on systematic data collection is obtained▌There is effective budgetary control

Soft standards▌There is a caring atmosphere▌Student welfare is a priority▌Customer service is in evidence▌There is a welcoming environment▌There is a commitment to learners of all abilities

Benchmarking▌Appropriate benchmarking data is obtained▌Appropriate use is made of benchmarking information

Value added▌The institution knows what value it has added to each student who leaves it▌Measures or value added are used to set students targets▌Value-added data is used as part of the benchmarking exercise▌There are strategies in place to improve the value added

Self-assessment and target setting▌A rigorous programme of institutional self-assessment is in place▌Appropriate targets are set based on best practice benchmarking data▌The institution does not measure itself on ‘hard’ priorities alone▌Data cycled back into improvement initiatives



Appendix 2: Qualitative research

Set 1: Customers: students and parents

1. How would you compare your old school with this new “learning school?

2. Can you see any differences in students’ behaviour? (In terms of discipline,

bullying, etc.)

3. What is your relationship with your teachers like? Can you see any differences

from previous years in your old school?

4. How exiting is the “Learning Portal”, in your opinion? How useful do you find the

logbook?

5. What is the canteen like? Is the food good and healthy?

Set 2: Senior management, teaching and non-teaching staff

1. How would you compare teaching in your old school run by the LEA to this

“learning school”?

2. What is your relationship with your teachers like? Can you see any differences

from previous years in the old school?

3. How effective is the leadership style to maintain the quality of educational

provision?

4. How useful are the Learning Portal and the logbook in terms of monitoring pupils’

achievement and progress?

5. What are the systems that are put in place so far to guarantee quality education

(e.g. surveys, comparison with other schools in the area or with the other learning

schools)? And how do you use the results to monitor quality in educational

provision?



Appendix 3: The KED Programme

Imagine the typical school from 10, 50 or even 100 years ago: a building divided into classrooms, all connected with dead space of corridors and hallways. The teaching staff allocated to classrooms. One teacher isolated in each room, struggling to find a level of teaching that is neither too high nor too low and at the same time trying to find some time for personalised tutoring for those who need it most. Students divided into groups of some 20-30, each group constituting a class unit separated from the others.

Traditionally, the equation of education starts with the building and ends with the student. That “tradition" can be turned on its head: start with the student. Not some statistical average of a student, but the individual student with all of her individual ambitions and needs. Set the goals and decide on the optimal strategies to reach them. Dedicate a teacher to her as a personal learning coach, supporting the student in every step to reach her goals. Develop the material, the infrastructure and the processes supporting the learning. Design the facilities, not only for standardised teaching but for personalised learning. Leverage on all the opportunities for personalised support, real time feedback and access to best practices provided by modern technology.

That is education for the 21st century. That is the philosophy behind the KED programme.

Educational philosophy

The KED programme is a concept for personalised education. This means that students, with the guidance of their coach, set and work towards their own personal goals, with the ambition of achieving high final results. Students allocate their study time based on their previous educational experience as well as their individual strengths and weaknesses.

Personalised education should not be confused with students being left on their own without guidance or teaching. This is not about cutting down teacher resources, it is about maximizing teachers time spent on their most important task - teaching and coaching. Another key element is the strict and comprehensive system for assessment, follow-up and feedback. In addition to ordinary teaching sessions, all students receive support and direction from a personal tutor/coach every week. During these individual sessions the objective is to increase the students´ desire and ambition to learn more than they thought was possible.

Modern societies are characterised by globalisation, a high pace of change in economy, working life, culture, science, and technology and thus require an increasing need for learning and education. Academic skills, individual knowledge, flexibility and the ability to take personal responsibility are becoming more important and complex. At the same time, interpersonal skills and the ability to collaborate are more important than ever.

An unpredictable future calls for a competence comprised of different skills, abilities and insights as well as factual knowledge. The link between strong academic knowledge, the ability to see context and the flexibility to adapt to different situations are all essential.



Personal development

Personal development - the process through which an individual’s potential manifests itself - is a significant part of their competence. This lays the foundation for the student to develop into an intellectually empowered and responsible individual who also understands the importance of human interaction and interdependence.

The foundation for continuous personal development is built by:

personal coaching that helps strengthen the student’s endurance, self-confidence and purposefulness.

having students learn to take responsibility and influence their personal learning process. basing learning on the students´ individual attributes collaborating so that students learn to participate in group processes. conducting ethical discussions on an ongoing basis from a common set of values (e.g., in

thematic courses or daily current events discussions). exposing the students to situations and problems that challenge and foster inquiry as well as

stimulate critical, creative, and flexible thinking. giving students a variety of assignments in which they learn to formulate questions and

develop problem-solving tools.

3.1. Personalised Goals and StrategiesThe KED programme puts the individual student at the centre. The teacher is the student's personal coach, guiding her in the learning process and in the effort to reach her goals. Resources in the form of time, facilities, curriculum and learning material - are organised to support that process.

Upon entering a KED school the first meeting is a discussion with the student and her family. Together they identify the students long-term educational goals. What does she want to achieve in school? What does she need to learn? What will it take - from her, her family and the school - to succeed? The long-term goal is then decided and documented in writing.

Strategies for learning

The student is then assessed to determine what level she will start on and accordingly what strategies she will need to reach her long-term goals. The strategies are not only a list of hours that need to be spent or pages that have to be read. It is also a choice of lectures, lessons, assignments and everything else that can support the learning. This provides everyone with a working plan, which will be divided into medium-term goals for the semester and short-term goals for the week to come. Each step is followed up in the student´s weekly coaching sessions with her personal learning coach. In progress reviews and development discussions - whenever needed or at least every six months- progress is tracked and the goals and their strategies are reviewed. Is she making progress according to the plan? Does the strategy put in need to change, the efforts, or should the goals be revised?

Every goal should be both challenging and reachable. Every strategy should provide a reasonable roadmap for the learning journey. In the beginning is a process of setting goals, choosing strategies and assessing improvements often strongly geared and guided by the teacher. But step-by-step. Our students learn their capabilities and how to stretch them. Setting goals, choosing strategies, doing the job, assessing the result and draw the conclusions for next step. It all becomes part of the learning, just as natural as all the facts and knowledge achieved.



Creating meaning

Unlike conventional schools, outcomes—grades, exams and achievements—are not only an account in retrospective. It is something the student can identify and influence along the way. Neither are outcomes a surprise for the family, since every step is assessed and documented. Through the Educational Documentation System (EDS) on the Learning Portal, families — as well as the student and the teacher - get a real time insight into how learning is progressing.

Setting up individual goals and strategies to reach them creates meaning and motivation in school. It is much more interesting going somewhere if you know where you are going, how and why you will get there. Being able to see the result and your own progress step by step is satisfying and provides motivation for learning more. The ability to set up goals and strategies, to break them down into smaller steps and to experience that sometimes strategies need to be revised, is knowledge that has a life-long value. Not to mention the feeling you have, when you reach and surpass your goals and see the new horizon and opportunities ahead!

3.2. CoachingThe personal coaching method is based on thinking from several areas, such as motivational- and developmental psychology, but also from pedagogy and cognitive psychology. The theory of multiple intelligences has inspired our way of working to help students develop personalised learning strategies.

Personal coaching contributes to the student´s personal development as the student´s learning is structured, supported, assessed, and followed up. Through personal coaching, students learn to set clear and realistic, but still challenging, goals for their studies and to work in a goal-driven manner.

The student´s personal coach plays a decisive role in making the studies successful. The personal coach instructs the student in a structured manner that is not based on subject matter. This means that students receive help with defining goals, finding the strategies to reach them, planning and following up their goals and strategies and reflecting on their own learning process.

Personal coaching is not limited to scheduled talks to discuss the student´s coaching and development — it is a continuous dialogue between the student and the coach. This dialogue is characterised by closeness and concern. The coach is responsible for ensuring that the students assume the responsibility they can manage — and no more.

The content of the one-on-one tutorials varies, as in all coaching, depending on the student´s level of maturity and needs. In the beginning, the students receive mainly help and support with procedures — to accomplish their personal planning and understand the working methods. The focus gradually shifts to reflections on the student´s own learning process, where the students reflect on their goals, work, strategies and results. As students deepen their studies, they assume greater responsibility and receive additional coaching towards new challenging goals.



One-to-one coaching session. In the KED programme this is a structured session that occurs weekly and if needed daily. It is our way of organizing education and hereby leveraging on teachers´ time, the most precious of all resources in school.

To ensure a structured and successful tutoring process, we have developed a number of tools for the teacher/coach, the student and the parents:

Personal tutorials/coaching sessions: Students have a scheduled discussion with their coach on a weekly basis. This review, which is well-prepared, follows up and assesses each student´s performance according to the set goals and strategies by reflecting on their schoolwork, results and strategies. Reviewing and reflecting on their own learning process is a central part of the student´s discussion with the coach. As an outcome of the discussion, the goals, strategies and schedule for the next week are established.

Logbook: Each student has a logbook, containing his/her learning goals, activities/tasks and timetable for the coming week. The logbook is the main tool for the student´s planning and reflection process. It is important for monitoring and guiding the student´s learning process and is therefore a central tool for personalised learning. The assessment of the past week is also entered into the logbook.

Progress tracking review/Development discussion: When needed — but at least once every six months — students have a progress tracking review with their personal coaches. During the review, the goals and strategies for the student´s course of study are discussed and assessed. The review sheds light on the student´s school situation from a personal and social perspective and the goals are revised if necessary.

Individual study plan: At the first progress tracking review/development discussion, the student, parents and the coach develop the student´s curriculum with personal goals and strategies. These are the medium- and long-term goals that should be attained within six months. Ultimate goals are those that the student aims to achieve for her entire education, the courses the student wants to take, and the quality of the knowledge as expressed in marks or exam scores. Based on these goals, objectives are set for the next six months. The individual study plan is documented in the EDS. The individual study plan is a living document that is reviewed and revised on a continuous basis.

EDS: With the Educational Documentation System (EDS), the coach, student, and parents can follow the student´s learning process. The EDS contains the student´s personal curriculum and ultimate goals, and goals and strategies for the school term. The student´s grade results as well as their own personal reflections of his/her performance during the term are also documented in the EDS.

3.3. The Learning PortalTM

The Learning PortalTM is the KED programme's collective and web-based source of wisdom.



Students can find most of the learning material on the portal: the courses, the content, objectives and criteria for every step, assignments, texts, pictures, links and tests. The Learning Portal is an important tool in personalised learning because the content of the Learning Portal provides a wide variety of choices and is accessible to students anywhere and anytime.

In the KED programme we don´t need to divide tasks into schoolwork or homework. You have work to do, and you can get it done in school, at home or anywhere there is an internet connection. KED Schools have work stations all around the school where students can access the Learning Portal. Many of our schools also have a Wi-Fi network, so students can continue their work after and between lessons. Thus learning is not an activity limited to the premises of class room.

The web-based Learning Portal is the backbone of the KED Programme concept. It contains all the best material, developed by all the best teachers, and is distributed around the network of schools participating. It is under continuous development and review as teachers contribute with new material and experiences. The Learning Portal enables teachers

to spend less time preparing lessons, while still being able to use all the best material, and leaves more time to spend with their students. From an educational point of view, this way of working assures students, families, and society that what is learned is not solely a function of an individual teacher.

The Learning Portal for teachers

For teachers the portal is also our common knowledge management system. Each subject has its own community and pages. Here teachers collaborate and contribute, with their best presentations and lectures and with best practices. The forum is moderated by some of our most experienced subject experts. This is a way of sharing and enabling the learning process for teachers. Every minute saved for a teacher who doesn´t have to prepare a lesson that has already been developed by colleagues is a minute that could be spent on personal coaching instead of preparation. That is one of the reasons why it is possible for our schools to provide more personal coaching time with the same staff resources as a conventional school. The



Learning Portal gives teachers a realistic opportunity to “meet" each student where they happen to be in terms of their current knowledge development.

The Learning Portal for families

The family can take part in their child´s learning through the portal as well, by following the student´s timetable and performance through the EDS.

3.4. Room for learning “We human beings are affected by the rooms we act in. In the traditional school there are always corridors connecting classrooms. Those kinds of facilities are consuming areas without being very pedagogically effective. Schools Kunskapsskolan design, build and operates have no traditional corridors or classrooms. We have rooms of different sizes and character, because we all learn differently. All our premises are for study and learning, not only transportation, for small or bigger groups or for individual studies. And they are all designed to address different individuals´ different needs. That is my contribution to personalised education. (Kenneth Gärdestad, Chief Architect at Kunskapsskolan.)

The architecture in the KED programme has been recognised and awarded around the world. But even so, architectural design is just the last part in our formula for outstanding education. The purpose of architecture, in our philosophy, is not just to create an icon or a statement in society, but to create the optimal environment for learning.

The room as a resource

The room - in the wide sense of the word - is as a resource for student´s different ways of learning that can be seen in two perspectives. First, all our premises are designed to suit the various needs of different students and learning tasks while in school. Second, students have the option to choose other places than the school to work with their studies - provided this is beneficial to the learning process.

Our premises are modern and innovative in design. They give an open, inviting and spacious impression, characterised by bright colours, aesthetic yet functional light and frequent glass walls. This unique design creates security that provides peace and quiet for working, while at the same time it facilitates supervision.

Kunskapsskolan schools have few corridors and spaces that are not used for learning purposes. Instead, there are a variety of purpose-designed, multi-functional facilities for lectures, group sessions and individual studies. This approach allows the faculty to use the facility optimally for each individual learning task.

Besides being a superior design for pedagogical reasons, this provides a better use of space and hence economy and creates greater opportunities to convert premises originally built for other purposes to schools. Not the least, it creates a learning environment that resembles that of higher education and modern work life. Just what schools are supposed to be about — a preparation for life beyond school and for lifelong learning.



3.5. CurriculumThe curriculum in the KED Programme is based on national or state standards and core curriculum. Students shall at least reach state goals in stipulated time, but they also have the opportunity to reach further. But the curriculum in the KED programme is structured in another way than in the conventional school.

All subjects in KED Schools are organised as step courses or thematic courses. The content of the steps and courses, as well as the performance, knowledge or grade requirements, are carefully adapted to meet the requirements of local curriculum and examinations.

The steps are designed to give the student an opportunity to study at his/her own level and pace. After an introductory assessment, students start on the step that matches their current level of knowledge.

The study pace will depend on the student´s personal goals and starting point. This way a gifted student has the opportunity to study at a faster pace and a student with difficulties can spend more time. Thus, the steps are a way to organise the learning process and enable personalised learning that provides depth in knowledge and opportunities for integrating academic skills. Depending on curricula, typical subjects to be studied as steps are home language, Mathematics, Modern Foreign Languages, and Science.

All subjects in KED Schools are organised in step courses or thematic courses. Step courses provide academic depth, perspective and opportunities to advance your knowledge. Thematic courses provide the context and breadth. The picture illustrates the UK curriculum in the KED Programme

Some subjects can be studied in thematic courses. In some cases, context is just as important as hierarchy in a subject and the courses integrate several different subjects to illuminate different perspectives of a topic. In thematic studies, students are trained to change and widen their perspectives as they identify whole contexts and clarify the patterns between content subjects. In combination with the course structure, the thematic courses then form the basis for the educational process.

3.6. The Teacher



In the KED programme, the teacher accommodates and leads the students´ different ways of learning. This demands a different mind set because the teacher is not only teaching and lecturing, but she or he is first and foremost the students´ partner and coach in learning.

A teacher´s role in the KED programme consists of four parts: being a personal coach, a general coach, a subject expert, and a team member:

Personal coach: Each teacher is a personal coach for the students belonging to the teacher´s “base group." Personal coaching includes instructing and counselling the students on their knowledge, personal, and social development.

General Coach: The teacher serves as a support resource for all students in the school, teaching the students how to learn, mediate and explain general strategies. The teacher also serves as a role model for students.

Subject teacher: As a subject expert, the teacher, in collaboration with his colleagues is responsible for planning and conducting workshops, seminars, lectures and other activities in steps and thematic courses. The collaboration between teachers is done locally at the school as well as with teachers from other schools. The teachers also participate in the joint work to develop and modify the step and thematic courses on the Learning Portal.

Team member: The teachers in a school are organised into teams. The teachers in these teams work together to plan, review, develop, and evaluate their work.

3.7. TimeTime is a resource for the student´s learning. In a world where there is a good argument for every knowledge and skill you can learn, it is also the most scarce and limited of resources in school. The way it is utilised should therefore, as far as possible, be based on the student´s individual learning style and not be organised according to a traditional collective timetable.

Each student has a personal timetable that directs how time is used, based on the student´s personal goals and strategies. The school has a timetable for activities led by the teachers. From this timetable students, in consultation with their coaches, select activities that are relevant to their studies and enter those activities in their logbooks. Students also enter other activities they have planned: the development discussion/progress tracking reviews with their coaches, time for group work, their individual work tasks, etc.



Every student has a personal and tailored schedule, depending on her knowledge, goals and strategy — and best way of learning. This week's goals, schedule and action list is written down in the log book.

The students are therefore responsible for the way they spend their time and have much influence over it. However, the personal responsibility is never greater than what the individual student can manage. The personal coach is responsible for ensuring this.

Rather than the only option being the traditional classroom format, teaching and time are arranged in various forums: workshops, seminars, communication sessions, and lectures. When planning how to teach the content, the school chooses the format that is optimal for learning, ranging from individual studies to arena lectures, and every format in between. Activities led by teachers, the individual work of the students, and their work with other students is brought together in order to provide a joint foundation for the student´s learning.

(Available from www.kunskapsskolan.se)


http://www.kunskapsskolan.se/

Total Quality Management in Secondary Education

Education

Transcript of Total Quality Management in Secondary Education