1. Italian Good Practice Projects Michela Arnaboldi and Giovanni Azzone1

2. Agenda
The context
The Target of GP projects
The Model
The main “products”
The general results for the Italian University system

3. The context Autonomy means:
Impact of central services on differentiation
Impact of central services on cost reduction
But we need management tools consistent with the characteristics of central services

4. The target of Good Practice
Identify performance indicators;
Identify good practices;
Understand key driver of good practice, in order to suggest opportunities for improvement.

5. The universities involved

6. The Model: GP approach Process volume Activity quality Volume Quality
Resources

7. The measures and area addressed
The measurement system have included:
Efficiency indicators
Effectiveness indicators:
Subjective quality
Objective quality
The areas of the university included are:
Student support services
Accounting
Procurement and Logistics
Personnel management (humane resource)
Research support services
Information system services

8. The area addressed

9. The efficiency indicators
ACTIVITY
Input
output
The indicator used for measuring efficiency is the cost
The model based on activity allows to measure:
The total cost of the activities
The unit cost per output of the activities
For example if we consider the matriculation activity:
Total cost for university A = 120,000€
N. of matriculated students of A = 10,000 students
The unit cost per output is 120,000€/10,000 = 12 €/matriculated student
Cost
Output (or driver)

10. An example of activities and drivers

11. Effectiveness Indicators
Output volume (Efficiency)
Input
Output characteristics(Effectiveness)
The effectiveness may be measured in two ways:
Objective quality:
Objective indicators (e.g. delivery time; system availability; presence of controls)
Subjective quality:
User perception

12. The main “products”

13. Accounting activities: total costs

14. Accounting activities: Unit costs of single activities

15. Acccounting: the unit costs and the scale effect

16. Variance from the curve

17. Variance from the curve

18. The evolution of unit costs between two projects
Confronto dati
515,01
786,14
547,07
443,52
576,95
293,39
645,42
961,54
454,39
999,75
620,10
391,37
695,08
331,36
614,75
842,08
200
400
600
800
1.000
1.200 A B C E G I L N
€uro/preson
GP 2001
GP 2003

19. Student Support Services: drivers of perceived quality
Too high investments
Strenghts
Low importance
Weaknesses

20. Student Suuport services: perceived quality and actual quality

21. Student Support Services: quality
The relation between perceived quality and actual quality

22. Accounting: actual quality
The objective time for two accounting procedures

23. The integration of Efficiency and Effectiveness

24. The impact
Common language
Community on performance measurement
Diffusion of practices