Juha Kontio

Information utilization in tactical decision making of middle management health managers.

Healthcare is an information-intensive field, as information is needed to make strategic, tactical, and operational decisions. The purpose of this study was to identify the tactical decisions that middle management healthcare managers make, the information that is available, and the necessary information that is missing using the cardiac care process as an example. Data were collected through focused interviews of nurses and physicians who work in middle management in a secondary healthcare field. The interviews were coded and analyzed using the thematic content analysis method. We identified two main categories of tactical decisions: those concerning the process of care and those concerning the resources for the care. We termed the categories “process decisions” and “resource decisions.” The availability of information varied. Much of the necessary information was created and processed manually. Our results show that the collection, mining, and systematic use of information are difficult because of the existence of many types of information systems and their varying abilities to produce and report information. Finally, much of the important information is missing. In conclusion, the information management process in healthcare settings needs to be improved, and a new generation of information system is needed to support tactical decision making in middle management.

Improving Quality Assurance with CDIO Self-Evaluation: Experiences From a Nordic Project

The main goal of the Nordic project Quality Assurance in Higher Education was to develop and implement a self-evaluation model in the participating Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) to support their quality assurance work and continuous curriculum development. Furthermore, the project aimed at strengthening the cooperation of HEIs in quality assurance (QA) and disseminating good practices of QA. The framework of development is based on the CDIO approach and the CDIO self-evaluation process. The main results are a detailed definition of the self-evaluation process, well-documented self-evaluations of the participating degree programmes, and the identification of the main development areas and actions in each participating degree programme. Furthermore, the project has increased the partners’ understanding of other partners and their challenges. Finally, quality assurance has been enhanced in each participating programme and new ideas and support for quality assurance work in other higher education institutes have been produced. DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012040106 56 International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education, 2(2), 55-66, April-June 2012 Copyright

QUALITY ASSURANCE WITH CDIO SELF-EVALUATION - FIRST RESULTS OF A NORDIC PROJECT

This paper describes the Nordic project „Quality Assurance in Higher Education‟. The main goal of the project is to develop and implement a self-evaluation model in the participating Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to support their quality assurance work and continuous curriculum development in the field of engineering. Furthermore, the project aims at developing cross-evaluation methods for international use as well as strengthening the cooperation of HEIs in quality assurance and disseminating good practices of QA. The framework of development in this project is based on the CDIO initiative and the CDIO selfevaluation model. The project started in October 2009 and will continue until the end of October 2011. The project is divided into two phases. The first phase focused on selfevaluation and the second will focus on cross-evaluation. This paper describes the first project phase. The main results are a detailed definition of the self-evaluation process, welldocumented self-evaluations of the participating degree programmes, as well as identification of main development areas and actions in each participating degree programme. The development actions included, for example, a) implementing a capstone project into the curriculum, b) practical training – improving the connection between the industry and a HEI, c) integration of teaching activities – CDIO awareness, and d) programme organization – programme management team including student representatives. Furthermore, the project has increased the partners‟ understanding of other partners and their challenges. Finally, the quality assurance has been enhanced in each participating programme. Hopefully, this project will provide new ideas and support for quality assurance work on other higher education institutes.

Critical incidents and important information in the care processes of patients with cardiac symptoms

AIM To describe important information in the care processes of patients with cardiac symptoms. BACKGROUND Process-based work-flow models are increasingly being used in healthcare. At the same time, developments in information systems offer the possibility of supporting improvements in process and information management in healthcare. To better utilize these possibilities we need to understand more about important information content and flow during treatment processes. METHOD A qualitative approach involving the critical incident technique was used. Critical incidents were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire (50 respondents) and interviews (n=10). RESULTS Three incident categories of important information were identified: (1) process-related incidents, (2) managerial incidents and (3) clinical incidents. Process-related incidents focused on agreed-care practices and the importance of the care environment. Managerial incidents focused on human and material resources. Clinical incidents focused on medical and nursing care and the importance of patient education. CONCLUSIONS Information content, information flow and the timing of such information should be modelled further in order to improve the management of care processes. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT Increasing knowledge about essential points of information as part of nursing management is important.

Collaborative quality enhancement in engineering education: an overview of operational models at a programme level

ABSTRACT This article discusses the tension between quality assurance and quality enhancement in engineering education at a programme level. It acknowledges that accreditation has evolved for many years, but does not agilely support innovation or implement changes in educational programmes. Existing quality assurance systems, institutional collaboration networks, as well as new innovative quality enhancement models and processes are described, contrasted and synthesised. Quality enhancement is analysed based on its function as a source of inspiration and dissemination of good practice. The article reflects on a novel and more collaborative approach to quality enhancement, built on the foundations of specific pedagogical standards and rubrics (e.g. CDIO). One solution leading to real continuous quality enhancement could be flexible and agile evaluation processes. These are founded on measurement and rating frameworks and complemented with quality assurance for engineering education. Incremental enhancement is based on relevant needs identified collaboratively between programmes.

The Power of Self-evaluation Based Cross-Sparring in Developing the Quality of Engineering Programmes

This paper discusses how the quality of engineering education can be improved in practice by using a process of sharing and critique. Starting with a self-evaluation followed by a cross-sparring with critical friends, this new approach has proven successful in initiating change. With a focus on quality enhancement as much as quality assurance, the engagement in and attractiveness of the engineering education are key considerations of the development activities that are inspired by the process. In the process programmes are paired with appropriate partners and, using the self-evaluation as a foundation, the cross-sparring enables each partner the best opportunities to learn from each other. The approach has been developed in an ERASMUS + project involving eight European universities and has been called QAEMP (Quality Assurance and Enhancement Market Place).