Which is better for embedding risk management in higher education quality assurance: ISO 31000 or the COSO framework?

Padro, Fernando F. (2015) Which is better for embedding risk management in higher education quality assurance: ISO 31000 or the COSO framework? In: 18th International Conference on Quality Management and Organisational Development (QMOD 2015) and International Conference Quality and Service Sciences (ICQSS 2015), 12-14 Oct 2015, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

[img]
Preview
Text (Submitted Version)
18 QMOD ERM 2015 paper[1][1].pdf

Download (1093Kb) | Preview

Abstract

Purpose: The focus of this paper is two-fold: [1] to explain risk management (RM) from an enterprise (ERM) or institutional perspective and from a regulatory (RRM) perspective and [2] to explore issues pertinent to choices involved in determining whether to adopt RM and how to implement it from the single college or university standpoint and/or from a sector viewpoint in relation to existing quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) practices.

Design/Methodology/Approach: This paper is a conceptual analysis of the RM literature as it applies to higher education. RM is a developing practice in higher education and RM itself is a maturing field with transdisciplinary interests.

Findings: There are different RM models that are utilized by different business and industry sectors. Two models are dominant, the COSO Framework and the ISO 31000 standard, RRM is practiced in Australia and the UK is about to use RRM as the key component of its higher education oversight process. In the USA, the practice of RM is more indirect and voluntary based on following the dicta set forth in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Practical implications: QA frameworks in higher education (HEQAs) are noticing the development of RM and, as the most recent development in QA, may want to consider adopting RM. There are a number of considerations in pursuing the adoption and implementation of RM at the institutional and sector levels and this paper highlights key considerations. Six concerns and seven questions are identified and discussed to help frame the decisionmaking process relating to RM adoption.

Originality/Value: There is little in the literature regarding the adoption, implementation, and use of RM in higher education. There is also a scant amount of articles and studies on how to integrate RM into QA schemes, especially in higher education. This paper provides an introduction to both these discussion points.


Statistics for USQ ePrint 28688
Statistics for this ePrint Item
Item Type: Conference or Workshop Item (Commonwealth Reporting Category E) (Paper)
Refereed: Yes
Item Status: Live Archive
Additional Information: No evidence of copyright restrictions preventing deposit of Submitted Version.
Faculty / Department / School: Current - Division of Academic Services - Learning and Teaching Support
Date Deposited: 13 Jun 2016 05:35
Last Modified: 18 Jul 2016 23:29
Uncontrolled Keywords: COSO; higher education evaluation; HEFCE; ISO 31000; risk management; Sarbanes-Oxley; TEQSA
Fields of Research : 13 Education > 1301 Education Systems > 130103 Higher Education
Socio-Economic Objective: C Society > 93 Education and Training > 9305 Education and Training Systems > 930501 Education and Training Systems Policies and Development
URI: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/id/eprint/28688

Actions (login required)

View Item Archive Repository Staff Only