E-Learning Maturity Model – Process-Oriented Assessment and Improvement of e-Learning in a Finnish University of Applied Sciences

  • Ilkka Haukijärvi
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 444)


In order to institutionalize e-learning within an institution its significance as an object of continuous process assessment, process improvement and process management must be acknowledged. One of modern higher education institution´s key assets is its capability to develop and sustain social and physical structures and capabilities which enable the development and execution of high quality e-learning. In this article, a case study is presented, during which e-learning related process assessment and evaluation of eLearning Maturity Model (eMM) was carried out in a large Finnish university of applied sciences. The evaluation of the eMM was committed as part of a comprehensive process assessment of the case institution. The eLearning Maturity Model was considered beneficial, although some criticism appeared. It provided a structured, although quite a resource heavy, approach to form a comprehensive and multilevel overview of the institution´s current status of processes surrounding the e-learning. By utilizing the eMM, a more informative basis for future development of processes was formed. Based on the process assessment, the case institution´s capabilities on higher dimensions of capability are generally lower than in lower dimensions. This potentially results in high variation of performance and quality within e-learning.


E-Learning Maturity Model eMM e-learning maturity process maturity process management 


  1. 1.
    Ruohonen, M., Multisilta, J.: Preface, xiv. In: Nicholson, P., Thompson, J.B., Ruohonen, M., Multisilta, J. (eds.) E-Training Practices for Professional Organisations. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marshal, S.: What are the key factors that lead to effective adoption and support of e-learning by institutions? In: HERDSA, Sydney, Australia (2008),
  3. 3.
    Haukijärvi, I., Nevalainen, T.: Developing a Quality Enhancement Framework for Collaborative Online Courses – Building on Constructivism with a Design Science in Information Systems Approach. In: Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, pp. 480–489. AACE, Chesapeake (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Helfat, C.E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M.A., Singh, H., Teece, D.J., Winter, S.G.: Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Blackwell Publishing, Massachusetts (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hammer, M.: What is Business Process Management? In: Vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management: Introduction, Methods and Information Systems, 1st edn., pp. 3–16. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mutafelija, B., Stromberg, H.: Systematic Process Improvement using ISO 9001: 2000 and the CMMI. Artech House, Massachusetts (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kasse, T.: Practical insight into CMMI. Artech House, Boston (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marshal, S.: EMM 2.3 Process Descriptions. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington (2007), Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ilkka Haukijärvi
    • 1
  1. 1.Development ManagerTampere University of Applied SciencesFinland

Personalised recommendations