Quality Management Of Education Vs Internal Control Management: Efficiency Or Bureaucracy?
Around the same year, 2005, in the Romanian education system have been initiated two demarches for improving
Keywords: Managementquality evaluationcontrolaudit
Starting with 2005, the necessary movement towards implementing the
instruments, already functional in some EU countries (
the early '90s for all UK public entities, at the initiative of then Prime Minister John Major) have been
promoted with the purpose to generalize the implementing process in the entire EU territory. One of the
1This article is from the point of view of the authors
main focus areas was (and will further be)
the educational systems are too big – they have a large amount of educational entities, public entities; b) a
considerable amount of people are working in the educational processes –
(indirect clients, but beneficiaries of the educational services and products). Although the two models,
movements in Romania approximately in the same year, the implementation of them in the Romanian
educational system has been successively approached, at the beginning in a ‘huge rush’, only in the
department of quality assurance in education. This was done through a legal-normative package which
was finalised in 2007 and applied in the system starting with the 2007 - 2008 school year. In 2009, the
second step which was designed to increase the quality of public services-
have the desired effects – the increase of quality in the services provided by the public educational
increase of paperwork).
This is what we want to analyse in our work and also to identify some opportunities to improve or
actually formulate proposal in this aspect.
To fully understand the aspects regarding the implementation of the respective models, we
consider it is necessary to highlight some useful concepts:
factors, ideas, persons, parts, etc.) dependent and co-dependent which influence each other continuously
(directly or indirectly) so that they can sustain the activity and existence of the system with the purpose of
reaching its major targets.”
b.Quality system management (SMC) (ISO 9000:2006):” Quality system management is that part
of the organizational management system orientated towards obtaining results reporting to the objectives
of the quality in order to satisfy the necessities, expectations and requirements of the interested parties”.
administration of an organization (the administration council) and it is conducted by designated members
from within the organization. The process is meant to offer a reasonable assurance in regards to
reaching the efficient and effective operational objective, the financial dependability reports and the
compliance to the Romanian legislation. The generic name for the internal control is
Management System (ICMS).
3.The Current Theoretical Context of Implementing the Two Models
The models have popped into the Romanian educational ‘scenery’ approximately at the same time,
respectively in 2005. Both are important elements in the chapters regarding the adherence of Romania in
the common EU space, with an emphasis on the
environments. The implementation process was based on the regulations in the educational field which
were previously mentioned. ‘The construction’ of the two models was based, more or less, on some
concepts and consecrated practices found at the European and worldwide level in this field. From
analyzing them, some common aspects arise in both models (this making them compatible) but, there also
are aspects which differentiate between them.
3.1.Normative and Legislative Reglementations for Qms and Icms
3.1.1Quality Management System(Qms) in Education
QMS in education was established through a normative act in 2005 (
quality management:” The assurance of quality expresses the capacity of a supply organization to offer
educational programmers according to the announced standards.” From here comes the necessity of a
quality assurance system (QAS) in education (A system of procedures which the organization has to
implement in order for its actions and educational processes to develop up to the announced standards).
planning, control, improvement)
The effects of a implementation on a theoretically –normative approach, in the Romanian vision,
have been numerous (Dragulănescu China, Militaru & Colceag,2014), most of them being
our point of view. The quality assurance in education, according to the legislative-normative framework,
framework through two essential processes: a process of external evaluation – handled by a specialized
the first is
European Commission: increasing the percentage of internal evaluation processes and decreasing the
percentage of the external one! Thus, the responsibility of the organization itself increases when being
faced with the objectives pre-established in order to meet the requirements of the
Currently all the entities in the pre-university educational system (
the legislation is "education establishment". It also uses the phrase "education provider") are being
evaluated based on three types of standards:
21/2007 approving standards for (authorization) / accreditation / periodic evaluation)
A. Institutionally capacity; B. Educational efficiency; C. Quality management. The differentiating
amongst the standards is held at the
exists/it doesn’t exist, while checking if the requirements presented are being up to standard. There are
approximately 178 requirements formulated in each standard. ‘Forcefully’(without a pre-preparation of
the educational system) applying the implementation of the Romanian model of
quality assurance has generated some positive aspects but also several negative ones – especially visible
in increased bureaucracy in the educational system (Dragulănescu, &Chină, 2010). According to the
official data (
3000 schools (over 7000 levels of education/specialization/professional qualifications) which means that
the effects of
functioning ever since 2004 must have met considerable efforts at the community level of the institutes.
The components of it are:
Implementing =at =the =educational =system =levels =(and =professional =training) =some
models/mechanism/instruments and procedure similar to the
to implement specific models and tools TQM philosophy - Total Quality Management. See the, for
example: ASQ -What is Total Quality Management (TQM?) practice in the business area , based on two
renowned and worldwide validate models –
Creating a culture of quality at the educational system levels and the professional training one, aspect established through the
Bergen Reunion (2005);
These types of initiatives had a fundamental motive: finding a considerable discrepancy between
the European space (educational) – being way behind compared to the
(which is more evolved) and to the Asian educational space (which is even more evolved) (AN:
Appearance found to through projective act with distant horizon the Europe 2020 Strategy). The planning
events and documents previously mentioned have not imposed the obligation of introducing these models
in the pre-University educational system. However, through this normative-legislative package previously
mentioned, Romania has established
assurance in education.
In this context, Romania has become a model, probably the only one, in the community educational system, in which, at the level of pre-university educational system, work in parallel an ‘educational quality assurance system’ but also a school inspection system, but also other control and monitoring instruments!
3.1.2Internal Control Management System (ICMS)
In the past, few years, the pressures created by the financial crises lead to an obvious endeavor:
creating in all the public entities a
especially in the public filed, desiderata essential to all the advanced societies on the civilization scale:
‘a negotiation arrangement assumed by Romania in chapter 28 ‘Financial Control’, currently chapter
32(AN: See paper "Comparative analysis of the internal management control system”, p 6). As a
consequence of Romania following the EU adherence process, in the chapter mentioning normative acts
send in 2005 (AN: It is about the OMFP nr. 946/2005 later edited OMFP nr. 1649/2011), the Internal
Control Standards the Managerial (ICSM) have been elaborated which are obligatory for the public
institutions in Romania. The objective of implementing a ICSM, based on the management internal
control standards, is to make responsible the management of any public entity in Romania for obtaining
and rational, efficient and effective utilizing the public resources in order to achieve the designated targets
for the respective entity. ICSM is based on a set of
‘A minimum of management rules which public entities must follow. These have the objective of
creating a reference model which is uniform and coherent with which the management/internal control
systems are evaluated/auto-evaluated and with the help of which the risk areas and future action point
directions are identified’(Project Ministry of Education (MECSA), cod SMIS 37635, p 6).
It should be noted that MICS had a more dynamic evolution than QMS. Thus, in 2015, the entire
‘construction’ of MICS had been revised, corrected, improved and adapted to the current situations
through a normative act issued by the Romanian General Secretary of the Government. Currently, the
entire endeavor regarding MICS is
Romanian Court of Accounts –for all the public entities (that have a juridical persona) and by GGS
(Management Internal Control Direction) for all the main credit release authorities. ICSM is a direct and
obligatory responsibility for leading any public entity (AN:The term "public authority" is explained
(along with other terms in this field) by Law no. 672/2002, republished with amendments and additions).
The ICSM standards are in a total of 16 ((Project Ministry of Education (MECSA), cod SMIS
37635:”Comparative analysis of the internal management control system” p 20), all being elaborated
based on the experience gained along the years of
etc, grouped in ”
management control system” pp 20 - 26)
management; c. Control activities; d. Informing and communication; e. Audit and evaluation”.
3.2 Comparative Aspects of the Two Models: Qms and Icsm
Both models have been elaborated based on
mentioned, and express a minimum level of accomplishing the formulated requirements. For example,
at a minimum level required by it (defined by the legislation as a minimal level of quality), the standards
of ICSM regard the
period of existence.
The management internal control standards regard essential aspects for a high achieved
functionality of the educational entity:
Making the educational entities responsible with the
Rolling some processes responsible with
It can be said, from the quality management perspective that ICSM is more orientated towards
implementing specific elements in this domain rather than the other model studied in this article, QMS.
Although, at the time of writing the present article, there is no data officially published analyzing the
implementation of ICSM at the pre-University educational system nor analyzing a comparison between
the effects the two models have.
In figure, no 1 we presented the structure of both models and the possible compatibilities between
4.Implementing Qms and Icsm – Efficiency, Effectiveness or Increasing
After 2005, the Romanian adherence process in the EU territory had engaged numerous
adherence process was the one dedicated to ‘the education of professional training and youth’ (
Affiliation: negotiation chapters, p 12) which had a major objective:” according to the EU Treaty, the
Union must contribute to the development of the quality in education which must include an European
supposed to create the necessary conditions for the educational system to evolve in such manner it can
reach compatible performances with other systems of development in the Union, were absolutely
necessary. A major ‘defect’ of the implementation process regarding QMS and ICSM is, in our opinion,
maintaining, in parallel, existing educational models in the system (with their specific admeasurements):
school inspection, school evaluation in the professional and technical education system based on a
appropriate and personal model, external evaluation based on the national standards, management
pre-University educational system, must separately account to all four institutions (accordingly to the four
obligatory models)! It is hard to believe that efficiency and effectiveness exist in this context, because the
requirements for the four models
schools in the system!
As a consequence, the implementation of the two models hasn’t generated efficient and effective results – rather a significant increase of bureaucracy!
We appreciate that QMS and ICSM are two extremely important models in the evolution of the
pre-University educational system (for the entire system actually). Implementing them is an obligatory
and necessary process according to the negotiation chapters. We also consider that the
process for the two models has been achieved, in a few aspects, defectively, including through: 1.
maintaining, in parallel, other models of monitoring and controlling which were enumerated previously;
2. the inexistence of a corresponding process of compatibility for the two models; 3. not adapting the two
models to the current situations (the modification which appeared in the legislation, the types and sizes of
The major negative effect of implementing the two models was previously stated:
bureaucracy in the pre-University educational system.
The solution we propose is:
Adapting the current models in the system, the above-mentioned ones:
school evaluation in the professional and technical education system based on a appropriate and
personal model, external evaluation based on the national standards, management internal control
existing quality models which are validated both on a community level and on a worldwide level.
The creation of a single quality management model in the pre-University educational system,
based on the previously mentioned facts!
- ASQ - What is Total Quality Management (TQM)? accessed 15.08.2016 at http://asq.org/learn-about-
- Business Dictionary, accessed 01.08.2016 at http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/system.html
- Charter Mark – Customer Service Excellence (UK), accessed 25.07.2016 at
- COSO - The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, accessed 29.07.2016
- at http://www.coso.org/
- Dragulănescu, N., China, R. (2010). Timely corrective actions and corrections in the current approach to quality assurance of education. Magazine "Quality Access to Success", no. (4) (6) (8) (10), 2010, ISSN: 1582-2559 Dragulănescu, N., China, R., Militaru, C. & Colceag, F. (2014). Quality assurance in education - a proactive approach. Bucharest: Standardization Publishing House EFQM – The European Foundation for Quality, accessed 14.08.2016 at http://www.efqm.org/ Emergency Government Ordinance no. 75/205, with amendments and additions, accessed 01.08.2016 at http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/63367 G.D. 1534/2008 approving of reference standards, accessed 25.07.2016 at http://lege5.ro/en/Gratuit/geytombugu/ General Secretariat of the Government Order (OSGG) No. 400/2015 approving Internal Control Code / managerial public entities, with subsequent amendments and additions, accessed at 15.07.2006 at http://www.ub.ro/files/scim/Ordin_400_2015.pdf General Secretariat of the Government Order (OSGG) No. 400/2015 approving Internal Control Code / managerial public entities, with subsequent amendments and additions, accessed 01.08.2016 at http://www.ub.ro/files/scim/Ordin_400_2015.pdf Government Decision (G.D.) no. 21/2007 approving standards for (authorization) / accreditation / periodic evaluation, accessed 01.08.2016 at http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/63367 INTOSAI – International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, accessed 25.07.2016 at http://www.intosai.org/ ISO 9000:2006, accessed 15.08.2016 at http://www.elth.pub.ro/standarde/SR%20EN%20ISO%209000.pdf ISO 9001, ISO – International Organization for Standardization, accessed 15.07.2016 at http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/management-standards/iso_9000.htm Law no. 672/2002, with amendments and additions, accessed 10.07.2016 at http://discutii.mfinante.ro/static/10/Mfp/audit/lege672_mo856.pdf Minister of Finance Order no. 946/2005 completed with OMFP no. 1649/2011, accessed 01.07.2016 at https://codfiscal.net/26377/omfp-9462005- reprint 2011-code-control-internmanagerial-andstandards-of-control-internmanagerial-to-public entities Project Ministry of Education (MECSA): Comparative analysis of internal management control system, pp 6, 7, 20-26, accessed 10.08.2016 at http://www.scmi-educatie.ro/media/2603/analizacomparativa-SCMI.pdf RAQAHE (ARACIS), Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, accessed 30.07.2016 at http://www.aracis.ro/ RAQAPE (ARACIP) – Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (Pre- university Education), accessed 20.07.2016 at http://oldsite.edu.ro/index.php/articles/c5 The accession of Romania (to the EU) negotiation chapters, 12 pp, accessed at 10.08.2016 http://ec.europa.eu/eu_romania/tema_20.pdf The Europe 2020 Strategy, accessed 15.07.2016 at http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/ The European Higher Education Area – Achieving the Goals (Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Bergen, 19-20 May 2005), accessed 10.07.2016 http://www.ehea.info/Uploads//Bergen_Communique1.pdf
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this paper as:
Click here to view the available options for cite this article.