shared vision in higher education institutions

Summary

The quality of education should be considered as the result of the educational process, and that is developed and carried out within an institution or organization, which can not be considered only teaching, educational, political, physical, material aspects, among others separately, but rather they should be studied strategies to effectively link all these aspects in relation to governance, which must be framed within the continuous improvement of processes and sustained by a socially constructed vision. In this vein, it should be noted that in many educational institutions, teachers, administrative staff and workers not share the organizational vision and in many cases unknown, this being a problem, which poses a challenge to the scope of a quality management . That is why the purpose of the paper framed within the theme of training and educational management is to address the shared vision as an element of management of educational quality, for which there will be a review of related concepts, in addition to taking into consideration the theory of human action proposed by Argyris and Shön (1974), from which one can understand and interpret organizational reality dynamic, up to build solutions to problems in this reality show, and achieving transformation into knowledge for action , aspect that should be the strategic north of all educational institutions that are in the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean, seeking the formation of citizens with a deep humanistic vision of society where values ​​such as respect, equality, peace, solidarity, justice, dialogue, are the guide so they can practice and develop a citizens' aspiration to good living.

Keywords: quality education, quality management, shared vision.

Introduction

Management of educational quality, seen as an effective refreshing approach that aims, improving the functioning of institutions, necessarily have to draw on a framework of concepts that play the role of guiding paradigm and give coherence and basis for action, plans, policies and strategies.Without forgetting at any time, the quality management philosophy, is itself in principle the business environment and has potentially adapted to the educational sector.

Furthermore, if deemed Lopez (1997), who points out that human concepts, especially scientific concepts are complex entities whose meaning goes beyond the contents of a brief definition to connect in a substantial way with other concepts or even other frameworks, or conceptions, which determine the allocation of different subjects give meaning to the same term.

The term quality has varied from its initial conception, and according to Cedeno (2013), must be adapted to each institution, as each institution is unique and has its own history and very own to understand and build their mission ways, the quality is based in a socially constructed vision, which introduces what Kaplan and Norton (2000) and Senge (1995), called shared vision, which is to share, discuss and design the strategy with members of the organization to ensure effective linkage the same, with the future of the institution, as they fail to understand that their individual actions support this visionary to be achieved.

In this sense, it follows that the process of rebuilding the vision with employees of educational institutions, is a factor that must be met based on the fundamental principles of quality management, as both are based on the commitment of staff It is working in an agency or institution with continuous process improvement, and this is only possible if they are identified with the vision we want to achieve the organization and direct all their efforts to the satisfaction of both direct clients and indirect who govern all important indicators of processes.

In this vein, it should be noted that in many educational institutions, teachers, administrative staff and workers not share the organizational vision and in many cases unknown, this being a problem, which poses a challenge to the scope of a quality management and that can be studied through the theory of human action proposed by Argyris and Shön (1974), from which one can understand and interpret this dynamic organizational reality, up to build solutions to problems in this reality presents , to achieve transformation into knowledge for action.

It should be noted that organizations also have their theories of action and are represented in their purposes, functions and organizational activities. However as Argyris (1999) points out a theory encompassing and applicable administrative and organizational behavior requires the integration of humanistic theories and techniques of action , to transform knowledge into action.

In this context, the purpose of this paper framed on the theme of educational training and Event Management Education, Research and Training Citizenship, is to form a body of ideas and reflections related to the management of educational quality, and the theory of human action proposed by Argyris and Shön (1974), being based for it on a documentary work, based on a review of literature sources related to educational quality, quality management, shared vision and theory of action.

Educational quality

Rodriguez (1994), points out that in education, quality can be related to the coverage and access to system efficiency, the pedagogical management or administrative management.

Poggioli (1998) also notes that quality has a theoretical dimension - conceptual, where quality depends on who makes the demand, a political dimension, in which it is considered that no linkage between what is perceived as quality and formulation of coherent for the same policy, an educational dimension, trying to measure and evaluate the academic achievement of students as well as the conditions of the teaching - learning and administrative dimension, which involves planning and scheduling system education in order to achieve its qualitative growth.

For its part, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization-UNESCO (1995) suggests that educational quality is determined by what you learn as a practice derived from the process undertaken by the students, in the quality of the processes that support the practice, in academic results and general process that involves all aspects and should be the leitmotif of the management process, which necessarily involves the vision of the organization.

From the above statements, you can see that the concept of educational quality, comprises and includes several management processes such as: the activities of teaching, research and extension, the entry and stay of both students and the faculty, staff and workers, as well as the management and control of material and financial resources.

Similarly, it should be noted that educational quality is associated with the educational and administrative dimensions, internal and external context and the criteria and indicators of them may arise, to meet the needs of the social actors involved the work of educational institutions.

In the case of educational institutions, direct social actors are students, because they receive the immediate benefit of educational services, indirect stakeholders are individuals or organizations that have demands or needs of education and reap the benefits of education given in addition to parents and guardians of students, labor sources, society and the economy.

However, it should be considered, as stated by Edwards (1991), which indicates that quality is a value judgment on the educational reality as it is a value assigned to a process or educational product in desirable comparative terms, which must It is defined and becomes a standard or criterion of quality, and in any case will depend on the perception of having social actors.

In short, educational quality is a judicious compromise between the various internal and external elements involved in the development of an institution, which must meet the needs of actors that come together in the educational work, through quality management.

Quality Management

Quality management should be understood as a continuous improvement-oriented organizational model, in which the human resource is the main factor, because the processes are planned, developed and implemented by people to meet the needs of others. In this sense Lepeley (2001), states that:

Quality management is a management system organizations based on the principle of doing things right.

It is then, an approach that embraces all people and activities of the company; It is therefore relegated the old orientation that considered quality as their own, and exclusive competence, the quality department. Today, from the management to the last employee must participate and are involved in the quality of the final product.

For its López (1997) part, points out that good management must involve a set of processes, plans and actions of the highest level from an organizational point of view, that control or affect the effectiveness of processes lower level, which it can be achieved through a shared vision that translates into an evaluation system management, based on indicators, which undoubtedly will have a positive impact on improving the quality of that institution, because it can count with timely information on the achievement of organizational objectives.

For all described, it is considered the reference in Cedeno (2013), when he says that the quality must be adapted to each institution, as each institution is unique and has its own history and very own to understand and build their mission ways, quality it is based on a socially constructed vision.

shared vision

The shared vision of an organization is one that communicated and understood by all its members, so that they feel identified and committed to it. As Kaplan and Norton (2000) point out,

"Implementation or implementation of a strategy starts with education and involvement of the people who must execute" (p.213).

Also Senge (1995), in his book The Fifth Discipline highlights the importance of this process, indicating that it is impossible to imagine most important progress of any organization without the shared vision.

In this sense, it follows that the process of sharing the vision with employees of the organization in the case of educational institutions, is a factor that must be met based on the fundamental principles of quality management, as both based on the commitment of the staff working in an agency or institution with continuous process improvement, and this is only possible if they are identified with the vision we want to achieve the organization and direct all their efforts to the satisfaction of the actors involved, who govern all important indicators of the production process.

Senge (1995) argues that team learning is vital because the fundamental learning unit in modern organizations is not the individual but the team, one of the disciplines to innovate learning organizations is the shared vision.

The contributions of these authors point out the importance of shared vision and participatory work as the most effective way to promote change in organizations, through a collaborative environment of teamwork where members are committed, accountable and identify with them , which has as its starting point the share the vision of the organization.

In contrast to these contributions, it should be noted that in many educational institutions, teachers, administrative staff and workers not share the organizational vision and in many cases still unknown when this is raised formally in written documents of the organization, this being a problem, which poses a challenge to the scope of quality management.

According to various investigations, even though many organizations have a vision, only 33% manage to make it a reality; less than 60% of executives and less than 10% of employees believe they have a clear understanding about the strategy of your organization (Fair, 2009).

Other aspects that are collateral to the situation are evident in educational institutions where the following negative aspects are presented on many occasions: apathy by making assignments, cynicism and critical to any strategy to improve institutional performance action, high staff turnover, absenteeism, unjustified in performing the assigned work delays, which are the result often according to Argyris (1999) three problems of modern management: the structure of the organization, authoritarian leadership and administrative controls.

Theory of human action

The essence of a theory of action is the appropriate description of the motivations and causes that promote social action. Not all sociological theory ranks as the most important variable. This particular type of sociological theory is linked in social psychology and has therefore to use, implicitly or explicitly, the concept of attitude.

Humans are designers. They create, store and retrieve projects that guide regarding how to act to achieve its objectives and consistent with their ethical sense. This design is important for understanding human actions.

Argyris and Shön (1974) describe two types of theories of action: one is the theory exposed individuals embraced and embraced their beliefs, strategies and values, in the case of organizations expressed orally or in writing through various norman documents and / or regulate administrative processes.

The second theory is used, the normally applied, is that rules or conditions the action. The behaviors of individuals are very diverse, but the theory used to design and implement such behavior does not change.

Organizations are made up of people who must direct their efforts to achieve and scope of the mission and vision of the organization and as pointed out by Argyris and Shön (1974), it has values ​​and guiding principles that guide their actions within the same structures, which may be in line or not with the mission and vision of the organization ushering in the so-called theory and theory exposed in use, which are the theories of action.

Regarding this aspect, Roman (1997) indicates in the case of the institutions of Venezuelan university education are two types of categories of behavior are given: one oriented oriented achievements and consistent with the university mission, which is relevant and bequeath, and another aimed at personal and group achievements divergent with the mission and legality.

In both cases the behaviors are complex processes in which various elements, some from outside and others from within the university, confirming the theory of action Argyris and Shön interact.

As Argyris (1999) notes, organizational learning occurs when an error is detected and corrected, and this is any discrepancy between what you want to produce an action and what actually happens when that action is implemented. It is a mismatch between intentions and results.

It also indicates that there are at least two types of organizational learning: One is aimed at modifying organizational routines, it is incremental and adaptive. The second does center on practices that lead to the creation of a new framework for learning and new habits.

Importantly, the relevant aspects of the model I, are the implicit willingness to win (and to avoid embarrassment), the action strategy main looks to the design and management of the environment without participation of others in addition to the unilateral protection of one self and others.

As such, I model can lead to the establishment of deep-seated defensive routines often not commensurate with the favoring of growth potential and greatly affecting organizational learning.

Argyris (1999) seeks to move people from a model I, a Model II guidance that promotes learning double loop. Relevant aspects of the Model II include the possibility of using good quality data and make inferences.

It seems to include the views and experiences of the participants rather than trying to impose a vision of the situation.Theories should be explicit and test positions should be motivated and open to exploration by others.

Model II can help organizations overcome the systems that limit learning, especially defensive routines. The goals of participatory research are to demonstrate the existence of patterns of causality and change the causes and patterns through the use of Model II.

Underlying this strategy the concept of design causality. The premise is that the patterns are created by the designs that humans have in their minds and designs incorporated into the guidelines, once they are working.

final Thoughts

In response to the arguments, it requires education institutions to engage in a process of change that necessarily includes a paradigm shift in institutional management and to guide the behavior of its members to a conception shared vision that allows the scope of management quality, and display translated turn in the formation of citizens with a deep humanistic vision of society where values ​​such as respect, equality, peace, solidarity, justice, dialogue, are the guide so that they can develop a citizenship practice with respect for diversity, tolerance of differences, solidarity with their fellows and an aspiration to good living.

In this sense Morales (2014) indicates, it is necessary that educational institutions initiate a process of institutional change to be in tune with the changes that have resulted in this new era. The change in question is perceived as a search for a balance between internal consistency and correspondence with the demands of the context.

Given this scenario, it is relevant to consider the process of sharing the vision with employees of the organization in the case of this presentation of educational institutions, as a factor that must be met based on the fundamental principles of quality management, since both are based on the commitment of the staff working in an agency or institution with continuous process improvement, and this is only possible if they are identified with the vision we want to achieve the organization and direct all their efforts to the satisfaction of social actors, who govern all important indicators of the educational process.

References

• Argyris, Ch. (1999). Knowledge for action. Barcelona: Ediciones Granica.
• Argyris, Ch. And Schön D. (1974). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective CA Chicago: The Dryden Press.
• Cedeno (2013). Quality of Higher Education in Venezuela.Doctoral Thesis. National Experimental Polytechnic University of the National Armed Forces.
• Edwards (1991). The Concept of Quality Education. Chile.UNESCO / OLREAC.
• Beautiful, C. 2009. Balanced Score Card. Advantages and disadvantages of B. [document online]. Available in: http://carolinahh.es.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/forobsc.htm. [Accessed: May 15, 2015].
• Kaplan and Norton (2000). The Balanced Scorecard. (4th ed.) Madrid: Ediciones Gestión 2000, SA
• Lepeley (2001). Management and Quality in Education, an evaluation model. Mexico: McGraw-Hill.
• Lopez (1997). Quality Management in Education. Madrid: Editorial La Muralla, SA
• Morales (2014). Social responsibility, a link between the university and the socio environment. Doctoral Thesis.National Experimental Polytechnic University of the National Armed Forces.
• Poggioli (1998, December). "Dimensions and Indicators of Institutional Quality in Higher Education: Principles, Models and Limits". Analysis.4 (5). pp. 55 - 71. Caracas.Venezuela
• Rodriguez (1994, August). "Criteria for analysis of quality in the school system and its dimensions". Ibero-American Journal of Education. (5). pp. 45-66.
• Roman (1997). Organizational behavior theory in higher education. Doctoral Thesis. Experimental National University "Simon Rodriguez".
• Senge, P. (1995). The Fifth Discipline in Practice. (5th Ed).Mexico: Editorial Granica.
• UNESCO (1995). Quality Education in the Education of Students.