Abstract
Background Up to now, quality and environmental management systems are usually evaluated by means of an internal and external audit. Although auditors are expected to have certain competencies, such personal attributes, expertise, experience and skills, the audits typically end up in a costly and bureaucratic exercise. The possibility of making use of the wisdom, tacit knowledge and the critical views of practitioners, i.e. sharing best practices, asking thought-provoking questions and providing support for each other based on a common professional experience, is mostly not a specific aspect of an auditing procedure. Objective To provide a concept to sustainability managers at Higher Education Institutions focussing on collegial dialogue by peer-to-peer audits The focus is not limited to external, evidence-based performance assessment but pays attention particularly to improvement and organisational learning by proving a framework for collegial dialogue under peers. Methods The concept was derived from a literature review and is a result of a joined project work based on several years of professional experience in the field of environmental management systems and sustainability. Results The paper characterizes peer-audits and provides detailed guidance on quality requirements, organisation and coordination as well as how a peer-review audit programme could be conducted within a 3-step approach.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
This differs from clinical audits according to BÄK (2013) where a group up to 4 persons conduct an audit.
- 3.
Goals should be specific (target a specific area for improvement), measurable by an indicator of progress, assignable (specify who will do it), realistic (state what results can realistically be achieved, given available resource), time-related (deadlines).
References
Ajlouni, K. M., & Al-Khalidi, U. (1997). Medical records, patients outcome, and peer review in eleventh-century Arab medicine. Annals of Saudi Medicine, 17(3), 326–327.
Anand, K. C., Bisaillon, V., & Ben Amor, M. (2016). Confronting the challenges in integrating sustainable development in a curriculum: The case of the civil engineering department at Université de Sherbrooke (Canada). In J. P. Davim & W. Leal (Eds.), Challenges in higher education for sustainability, management and industrial engineering. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
BÄK. (2013). Curriculum Ärztliches Peer Review. Texte und Materialien der Bundesärztekammer zur Fortbildung und Weiterbildung Band 30, 2. Auflage.
BÄK. (2014). Leitfaden Ärztliches Peer Review. Texte und Materialien der Bundesärztekammer zur Fortbildung und Weiterbildung Band 31, 1. Auflage.
Brauweiler, J., Will, M., & Zenker-Hoffmann, A. (2015). Auditierung und Zertifizierung von Managementsystemen - Grundwissen für Praktiker. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Chambers, D. P., Walker, C. (2016). Sustainability as a catalyst for change in Universities: New roles to meet new challenges. In J. P. Davim & W. Leal (Eds.), Challenges in higher education for sustainability, management and industrial engineering. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Dalgleish, S. (2006). Changing audits to be a value added activity. Quality, 45, 18
Deming, W. E. (2000). Out of the crisis. Reprint: The MIT Press.
Disterheft, A., Caeiro, S., Azeiteiro, M. U., & Leal, W. (2013). Sustainability science and education for sustainable development in universities: A way for transition. In S. Caeiro et al. (Ed.), Sustainability assessment tools in higher education institutions. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02375-5_1
European Commission. (2011). Horizon 2020—The framework programme for research and innovation. Brussels: European Commission.
Goldman, R. L. (1994). The reliability of peer assessments: A meta-analysis. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 17(1), 3–21.
Gordon, D. (2001). Standards and audits will have value only if organizations being audited—And their customers—Demand it. Quality Progress, 34, 80.
Grol, R. (1994). Quality improvement by peer review in primary care: A practical guide. Quality Health Care, 3(3), 147–152.
ISO International Standardization Organisation. (2011). Guidelines for auditing management systems (ISO 19011).
Karapetrovic, S., & Willborn, W. (2000). Quality assurance and effectiveness of audit systems. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17, 679–703. doi:10.1108/02656710010315256
Karapetrovic, S., & Willborn, W. (2002). Self audit of process performance. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 19, 24–46. doi:10.1108/02656710210413435
Kluse, C. (2013). Third-party quality management system audit: Perceptions, limitations and recommended improvements. Quality Issues and Insights in the 21st Century, 2(1), 4.
Leal, W. (2011). About the role of universities and their contribution to sustainable development. Higher Education Policy, 24, 427–438 (Palgrave).
Lembbcke, P. A. (1967). Evolution of the medical audit. JAMA, 199(8), 111–118.
Lozano, R., Lozano, F., Mulder, K., Huisingh, D., & Waas, T. (2013). Advancing higher education for sustainable development: International insights and critical reflections. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48(2013), 3–9.
Meisch, S., Hagemann, N., Geibel, J., Gebhard, E., & Drupp, A. (2015). Indicator-based analysis of the process towards a university in sustainable development: A case study of the University of Tübingen (Germany). In W. Leal, L. Brandli, O. Kuznetsova, & A. Finisterra do Paco (Eds.), Integrative approaches to sustainable development at university level—Making the links. World Sustainability Series. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
Müller-Christ, G. (2011). Nachhaltigkeit in der Hochschule: Ein Konzept für die interne Selbstüberprüfung. In Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission e.V. (Ed.), Hochschulen für eine Nachhaltige Entwicklung (p. 73). Nachhaltigkeit in Forschung, Lehre und Betrieb, Deutsche UNESCO Kommission.
Raskin, P. D. (2012). Higher education in an unsettled century: Handmaiden or pathmaker? In GUNI (Ed) Higher education in the world 4. Higher education’s commitment to sustainability: From understanding to action. GUNI series on the social commitment of universities 4 (Vol. 1, pp 18–28). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sayle, A. (1999). Value added auditing—Our future. Keynote Address at the 8th Annual ASQ Quality Audit Conference, Houston, TX. Retrieved from http://www.sayle.com/sayle/Articles.htm June 22, 2015.
Sayle, A. J. (1995). Auditing: Time for a rethink and overhaul. Quality World, 29, 249–257.
Schein, E. (1993). On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(93)90052-3
Schneidewind, U. (2014). Von der nachhaltigen zur transformativen Hochschule. Perspektiven einer “True University Sustainability”. uwf, 22, 221–225. doi:10.1007/s00550-014-0314-7
Schneidewind, U., & Singer-Brodowski, M. (2014). Transformative Wissenschaft. Klimawandel im deutschen Wissenschafts- und Hochschulsystem, 2. Aufl. Metropolis, Marburg.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. London: Currency, Random House.
Tilbury, D. (2012). Higher education for sustainability. A global review of commitment and progress. In GUNI (Ed.), Higher education in the world 4. Higher education’s commitment to sustainability: From understanding to action. GUNI series on the social commitment of universities 4 (Vol. 1, pp. 18–22). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
University Hamburg—Kompetenzzentrum Nachhaltige Universität (KNU). (2013). Ideen zur Ausgestaltung der Universität Hamburg als Universität für eine nachhaltige Zukunft. Positionspapier des Kompetenzzentrums Nachhaltige Universität, Hamburg
Wals, A. J. (2012). Shaping the education of tomorrow: 2012 full-length report on the UN decade of education for sustainable development. Commissioned by UNESCO
Will, M., & Rydén, L. (2015). Trans-disciplinarity in sustainability science and education. In W. Leal, L. Brandli, O. Kuznetsova, & A. Finisterra do Paco (Eds.), Integrative approaches to sustainable development at university level—Making the links. World Sustainability Series. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
Wissenschaftlicher Beirat Globale Umweltveränderungen (WBGU). (2011). Welt im Wandel. Gesellschaftsvertrag für eine Große Transformation. Hauptgutachten. Berlin: WBGU.
Acknowledgments
The concept presented in this paper was developed within a project “BNC—Baukastensystem Nachhaltiger Campus” which is performed currently in collaboration between the Technical University Dresden and the University of Applied Sciences Zittau/Görlitz. The project aims at developing a comprehensive toolbox for sustainability management at German HEI. It is funded by the Saxonian Ministry of Science and Culture (SMWK). The authors thank two anonymous reviewers for their insights and comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. Any remaining errors are our own.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Will, M. et al. (2017). A Peer-to-Peer Approach to Evaluation and Continual Improvement of Sustainability Management Systems at Higher Education Institutions. In: Leal Filho, W., Skanavis, C., do Paço, A., Rogers, J., Kuznetsova, O., Castro, P. (eds) Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47889-0_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47889-0_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-47888-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-47889-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)