ENQA is pleased to publish a new thematic analysis on the topic of stakeholder involvement in quality assurance. The analysis, available here, concentrates on quality assurance agencies’ approaches to stakeholder involvement in their governance and work, including the design and improvement of methodologies. The requirements for this are set out by two standards of the ESG: standard 3.1 “Activities, policy and processes for quality assurance” and standard 2.2 “Designing methodologies fit for purpose”. The report provides an insight into the variety of approaches across the European Higher Education Area as well as reflection on how external review panels perceived these approaches in terms of showcasing the examples of good practice or persistent difficulty. For this purpose, the external review reports of 50 quality assurance agencies from 27 countries have been studied. The external reviews were conducted in the period of 2020-2024 and followed the review methodology of ENQA Agency Reviews.
The evidence shows that stakeholder involvement in quality assurance is firmly established. Almost all agencies analysed engage various stakeholder groups in their governance and work, most commonly academics, students and professionals. Stakeholder groups typically contribute through a variety of bodies, including supervisory, decision-making, technical, and auxiliary structures. These arrangements are complemented with other approaches such as working groups, consultations or pilot initiatives, particularly to engage stakeholders in the design and improvement of methodologies.
Review panels have commended agencies’ efforts to ensure the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders. They have also praised collaborative and iterative approaches that foster engagement, connection and trust. At the same time, the analysis identifies areas for improvement. Panels have frequently recommended that agencies further formalise and structure stakeholder involvement to ensure a meaningful impact, as well as broaden their stakeholder base to incorporate additional perspectives.
The analysis also reveals some inconsistencies in panel assessments, most notably in relation to student participation across agency bodies. While ENQA will continue its efforts to ensure the consistency of agency reviews through its Agency Review Committee and review coordinators, the forthcoming revision of the ESG provides a valuable opportunity to consider whether the requirement to involve stakeholders in governance and work needs some additional clarification.