Question

Toolkit Exercise 10.2

Reflecting on the Impact of Measures and Control Processes on Change

Think of a higher education change initiative that you are familiar with.

1.      What measures and control processes were employed in tracking and guiding the change initiative? Were they consistent with the vision and strategy of the change? Were they viewed as legitimate by those who would be using them?

2.      How was the measurement information captured and fed back to those who needed to use it? Was it a user-friendly process and did the information arrive in a useful and timely form?

3.      Did the change managers consider how the measures might need to evolve over the life of the change initiative? How was this evolution managed? By whom?

4.      Were steps taken to ensure that the measures used during the change would be put to proper use? Were there risks and potential consequences arising from their use that would need to be managed?

5.      Were goals and milestones established to plot progress along the way and used to make midcourse corrections if needed? Were the smaller victories celebrated to reinforce the efforts of others when milestones were achieved?

6.      What were the end-state measures that were developed for the change? Were they consistent with the vision and strategy? Were they viewed as legitimate by those who would be using them?

7.      How was the end-state measurement information captured and fed back to those who would need to use it? Was it a user-friendly process?

8.      Were steps taken to ensure that the measures would be put to proper use? Were there risks and potential consequences arising from their use that would need to be managed?

Answer 1

A higher education change initiative that was done recently in many educational universities are that the distribution of marks have changed in terms of theory as well as practical work, earlier more importance was given to theory but now equal importance is given to practical as well as theory, students are now focusing more on practical knowledge rather than theoretical knowledge.

1. The marking scheme was changed and also the allocation of credits were completely revised for students so that it can be measured and track that what amount of practical knowledge the student has gained and what is the theoretical knowledge. The teachers also focussed more on giving case studies and assignments that require going out in the market and collect data to derive the results rather than just reading text books. Yes, these changes are very consistent with the vision and strategy of change since it ensures that students get a lot more practical exposure and they are marked basis that now. Yes they would be seen as legitimate since students get ready for the practical world and also they gain insights to what is in store for them in the professional market, this was not only legitimate but was also supported by mostly all the stakeholders.
2. The information was taken through exams and the scores were fed back via the internal tool of the universities that store and track marks of the students. Yes, since the information was credible and the system can be accessed by the stakeholders so the process was user friendly. The information arrived in real time i.e. as when the scores were entered anyone who has the access can see it.
3. As of now since the change is very new and still in pilot phase so this was not thought by the change managers.
4. Yes a major step was taken that a time sheet was maintained in which the student has to get the practical knowledge and give exams so that the progress can be tracked. As of now risks need not to be managed since the change has just being rolled out for a smaller audience.