The two things which are sacred to quality assurance agencies are self review reports and site visits. The value of these two tools is undisputed in QA circles. The degree of structure in using these tools varies widely between QA agencies.
The site visit is now not in-person. Its virtual. As all virtual goes, its close to but not exactly the real stuff. Most western QA agencies are doing the virtual assessment visits but still prefer the old. Some of these agencies have stated clearly the virtual visit is a temporary response to the pandemic. They will revert to the old normal. But many others especially in Asia are smitten by the flexibility, cost reduction and simply by the digital branding. Users - assessors, institutions and other regulators appear to have warmed up to it. The digital hawks are thrilled and are exhorting all to adopt going forward.
So site visits have finally met with some digital innovation. Thanks to Covid19! What about the self review report? Will it also be hit by the same question? The self review document has gone digital with Word decades ago. Some QA bodies e.g., Finance Accreditation Agency, Malaysia and BAN-PT, Indonesia, use online SER template for institutions to complete as self review. Digital has changed the form. Now there is talk that machine learning can be used to assess the descriptive content institutions upload onto the online accreditation system! Will real assessors be a thing of the past with the arrival of 24/7 AI assessors? As sexy as AI assessor may sound, its just automating the present.
What about the concept of self review? Is there an alternative to self review? A QA friend, Oliver recently floated a new idea. Instead of writing a self review, can the review be a workshop with different stakeholders in one place offering their piece with all the bells and whistles in the presence of institution managers and QA assessors. At the end, the QA assessors or institution can compose a review summary which all need to sign on. Differences must be negotiated and resolved. Will this more complex process but with good merit be the innovation in waiting? Any chance this might be an innovation to the sacred cow of QA? Let us wait and see.
Comments