Policy Statement

PSU ensures a periodic review of the University’s data against the comparators to allow cross-university comparisons which are crucial in developing and implementing action plans as required to sustain the University's comparability to other distinguished organizations.

Background and Justification

Background: Prince Sultan University (PSU) strives in providing quality education to its students, which is at par with other reputable universities around the world. To validate this, PSU compares its academic and administrative processes to analogous universities, both local and international; to track to what extent PSU is on course to achieve its vision. Prince Sultan University (PSU) believes that KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) and the benchmarking process should be embedded in practice within all key areas of the University for Continuous Improvement. Adherence to benchmarking policy ensures efficient and effective evidence-based decision practices which are inevitable for this outcome.

Justification: Benchmarking is an essential practice for any institution seeking continuous improvement, and Prince Sultan University (PSU) recognizes its significance in the context of higher education. This policy, identified as QA0008 and titled "Benchmarking Policy," establishes a structured framework for benchmarking processes at PSU. This background and justification section outlines the rationale behind the creation of this policy.

Scope and Purpose

Scope

This Policy applies to university key provisions and processes including management structures, academic programs, primary and support services, and all KPIs (program, college, and institutions) which are either a part of or affiliated with PSU. The scope also entails the collection of benchmarking data from all relevant academic and non-academic departments internally or with other institutions that PSU has an agreement of data sharing.

Purpose

The purpose of the benchmarking policy is to provide clear guidance on all activities, warranting that the benchmarking process at PSU is advanced in a synchronized, cautious, and systematic manner.

Principles of the Policy

• Data Accuracy: The benchmarking data used among the partners should be accurate, reliable, and relevant.
• Data Privacy: Establish mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of sensitive data when sharing information with benchmarking partners.
• Compliance and Ethical Considerations: Ensure that benchmarking activities comply with legal and ethical standards.
• Communication and Transparency: Communicate benchmarking data transparently to all stakeholders, fostering trust and accountability using visual dashboard.

Definitions

Benchmark: A benchmark is a point of known elevation marked for surveying. In academic and industry organizations, a benchmark is a target level of performance for a given KPI or a metric.

Key Performance Indicators: A Key Performance Indicator is a metric used to measure and evaluate the success of the organization in some or all areas of engagement. A KPI must be measurable and written in a way designed for assessment. When benchmarking and analysis are used in tandem, they provide evidence for assessment to guide judgments and decision-making.

KPI Analysis: Refers to a comparison and contrast of benchmarks to determine strengths and recommendations for improvement.

Benchmarking: Refers to the process of studying, comparing, and reviewing data or best practices against similar data or best practices in use by other Colleges, Universities, or similar HEIs (Higher Education Institutions). In concert with the NCAAA terminology and nomenclature practices, benchmarks are boxed into the following set of typologies:

• Actual Benchmark: Refers to the current level of achievement or performance indicated by the value of the KPI for a particular benchmark in the organization.
• External Benchmark: Refers to a benchmark from another similar institution or program with which performance is being compared.
• Internal Benchmark: Refers to benchmark from another entity in the same organization or institution. Comparable performance of the previous year’s KPI may also be used as Internal Benchmark.
• Target Benchmark: Refers to the anticipated performance level or desired outcome (goal or aim) 1 for a KPI as exemplified above.
• New Target Benchmark: Refers to the establishment of a new or desired performance level or goal for the KPI determined based on the outcome of the KPI analysis.

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU): An MOU is a document that records the common intent of two or more parties where the parties do not wish to assume legally binding obligations. An MOU is usually less complex and less detailed than a contract, but provides a framework and set of principles to guide the parties in undertaking a project or working arrangement.

Higher Education institutions (HEIs) are independent, self-governing bodies active in teaching, research, and scholarship. Higher education institutions include traditional universities and profession-oriented institutions.

Responsibilities and Implementation Strategies

Responsibilities

1. DQAD is responsible for DQAD is responsible for exchanging benchmarking data with the approved partners.
2. CSI is responsible for collecting the relevant data for preparing accurate benchmarking data.
3. The academic program leaders are responsible using benchmarking data for making fact-based decisions.

Implementation Strategies

Types of Benchmarks

For Internal Benchmarks,

• Institutional: The institution will compare its current performance with its performance in the previous year, which allows knowing if the performance is improving, deteriorating, or in a steady state.
• Program: Each program will identify a similar program within the institution and exchange data and KPIs.

For External Benchmarks, each program and institution (PSU) should identify and use two external benchmarks:

• Competitive — Local/National/Regional: This allows for a form of benchmarking in terms of the university’s mission; size, type of institution, research productivity, staffing levels, enrolments, and any other factors.
• Aspirational — International: This allows for a form of benchmarking in terms of the university’s mission strategically to be envisioned by Saudi Vision 2030.

The University's benchmarking process has three phases:

1. Phase 1: Pre-Benchmarking – Each program and institution identifies the local and international HEIs that have similar data and best practices.

   Local HEIs [LHEIs] should:

   • have roughly similar numbers of graduate and undergraduate students (the numbers of Preparatory Year Program students are irrelevant)
   • have a good number of analogous degree programs
   • have higher rankings than PSU in reputable ranking for academic institutions

   International HEIs [IHEIs] should:

   • be strong, well-regarded schools
   • ideally, be analogous in size,
   • have 4-year undergraduate degree programs
   • and, if meaningful, are private HEIs
2. Phase 2: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) — PSU negotiates and signs a Benchmarking Agreement (MOU) with the identified institutions that should address all points of cooperation. The areas of benchmarking may include:
   • Teaching & Learning Practices and KPIs
   • Progression and Graduation rates
   • Research Practices and KPIs
   • Quality Assurance Practices and KPIs
   • Learning resources and facilities
   • Curriculum Development and Review Processes
   • Teaching pedagogies and Assessment procedures and practices

   Based on the agreement, a detailed plan and budget are prepared. In the case of International Institutions, the International Affairs Office (IAO) may play a role in negotiating agreements.

3. Phase 3: Executing the Benchmarking Plan — Based on the signed agreement, the Center for Statistics and Information (CSI) at PSU and the second party execute the benchmarking plan through direct or online meetings. A detailed report should be prepared and submitted to the PSU administration.

Centre for Statistics and Information (CSI): collects and prepares all necessary data (Institutional and some Program Level) for KPIs to be benchmarked with other HEIs. CSI also collaborates with academic leaders across all levels of PSU (i.e., institutional, college, program) to prepare Benchmarking Reports and submit them to higher management.

Colleges/Departments/Programs: prepare their data, not covered by CSI, that will be used for benchmarking purposes.

Office of Vice President for Administrative & Financial Affairs (VPAFA): allocates budgeted funding for visiting other local HEIs in case of face-to-face benchmarking meetings.

After exchanging the institutional benchmarking data, SPDC, and the QAC will coordinate with the CSI in analyzing the data and provide proper recommendations for continuous improvement. However, the academic leaders of all the programs analyze the data and coordinate with SPDC, QAC, and CSI in case any institutional support is required.

Time-line for exchanging and reporting the data

The time of exchanging the data is the beginning of the academic year.

Institutional:
The Education & Training Evaluation Commission (ETEC) requests to provide the summary of KPI and Benchmarks. The external benchmarks should be reported to complete the report.

Program:
In week 6, data obtained from the benchmarking partner is required to be compared with the internal evaluation and should be reported as KPI analysis, in the Annual Program Report.

Benchmarking Reports should include a detailed yet concise presentation of the quantitative and qualitative results of the benchmarking, a summary of the benchmarking’s key findings, and the recommendations arising from these. The report may also include information related to the future review of the benchmarked processes, and the results of any implemented change.

Procedures for Handling Policy Violation

Accountability:
As a general rule, DQAD will undertake any benchmarking activities at the institutional level and the Program Quality Committee will undertake program level benchmarking exercises. The Dean of the college will ensure that all program leaders participate and cooperate with the relevant committees as required.

Data Confidentiality in Benchmarking:

• Only authorized personnel involved in the benchmarking process will have access to the specific benchmarking data.
• Before sharing any benchmarking data with external entities or stakeholders, CSI will ensure that sensitive information is anonymized or pseudonymized, protecting the identity and specifics of subjects and processes.

Stakeholder Engagement in Benchmarking:

• DQAD recognizes the importance of engaging stakeholders in the benchmarking process to ensure relevance and value.
• Stakeholders will be informed and consulted during the selection of benchmarking partners and during the interpretation of benchmarking results.
• Feedback from stakeholders will be incorporated to refine subsequent benchmarking exercises, ensuring continuous alignment with PSU's strategic objectives and stakeholder interests.

References

• —