Participants in this discussion concentrated on three related questions. Their debate answered the questions posed as well as raising further issues for consideration. Issues discussed are:

Is there too much emphasis upon policies and procedures and too little on enhancing the services for end-users?

Does achieving IIP actually improve business effectiveness?

What relationship, if any, is there between quality assurance and quality assurance systems, and performance management and impact analysis?

Participants in this discussion concentrated on three related questions. Their debate answered the questions posed as well as raising further issues for consideration.

Does much quality assurance place too great an emphasis upon policies and procedures and too little on directly assessing and enhancing the impact of services on end-users?

Participants in this section of the discussion argued both for and against the value of quality assurance systems. Some saw them as another layer of bureaucracy which encouraged complacency, other felt standards enhanced their practice and motivated them. A recurring theme was the question of what are the measurable and desirable outcomes of guidance.

Does achieving IIP actually improves business effectiveness

Does achieving IIP actually improves business effectiveness; or could it simply mean that those businesses that had the time, resources and motivation to go for a nationally recognised quality mark were already effective organisations, and that the award itself has added little value? Participants in this section of the discussion argued both for and against the value of IIP. Some saw IIP as "just another hoop to jump through rather than an opportunity to critique organisational practice with a view to improvement," others point to evidence of its benefits.

What relationship, if any, is there between quality assurance and quality assurance systems...

What relationship, if any, is there between quality assurance and quality assurance systems, and performance management and impact analysis? Participants in this section of the discussion highlighted the need for greater staff in quality assurance processes and the need to embed standards into delivery. 'Quality assuring the whole process and accessing reliable and credible data on the difference we make is essential but it must be owned by all staff, permeate all that we do and its raison d`etre identified by all as the pursuit of continuously improving learning outcomes for the client.'

Full Text of The Disscussion

Quality assurance, performance management and impact analysis - Team Task Two, second time-bound online discussion