Microchim.
Acta 142, 177–185 (2003)
DOI 10.1007/s00604-003-0009-1
Original Paper
Quality Management in Undergraduate Laboratories. A Systematic
Approach to its Implementation
Gemma Rauret and Ramon Compañó
Departament de Quı́mica Analı́tica, Universitat de Barcelona, c=Martı́ i Franqu
es 1-11, E-08028 Barcelona, Spain
Received January 12, 2003; accepted March 7, 2003; published online June 13, 2003
# Springer-Verlag 2003
Abstract. A systematic approach to the implementa-
tion of a quality management system in the teaching
laboratories of higher education institutions is de-
scribed, based on the experience of the Faculty of
Chemistry of the University of Barcelona. The main
planning issues (definition of the aims and scope of the
project, adoption of a model and of the appropriate
strategy, leadership and adherence of personnel) are
dealt with. Implementation (launching of the steering
group and the quality assurance unit, definition of
the processes and of the organisational structure) is
discussed, and quality measurement activities are
described.
Key words: Quality management; teaching laboratories.
The increasing concern regarding the quality of the
information supplied by analytical laboratories has
been one of the most significant changes in Analytical
Chemistry over the last fifteen years. In this period,
the assurance of the quality of results has become as
important as the development of new and improved
methodologies to satisfy the stringent demands of so-
ciety. More recently, other non-analytical chemical
laboratories have become aware of the need to apply
quality criteria to their processes.
 Author for correspondence. E-mail: grauret@agenqua.org
Aware of this change, some higher education insti-
tutions have included theoretical subjects on quality
assurance in several curricula, such as chemistry,
engineering and pharmacy. However, as in other
branches of science, practical teaching is also neces-
sary in order to provide the students with a global and
coherent view of this subject.
Moreover, a new scenario in higher education has
arisen from the adoption of a system of readable and
comparable degrees throughout Europe [1]. This situ-
ation, together with the new requirements of the
stakeholders, make it necessary not only to manage
teaching laboratories adequately and traditionally,
but also to provide an adequate answer to the rapidly
occurring changes in the curricula and the pro-
grammes. The way to deal with these challenging
demands is through the management of teaching
laboratories within the framework of a quality man-
agement system (QMS). A QMS can be defined as a
set of interconnected elements for the establishment
of the policy and objectives of quality and for the
attainment of these objectives [2]. These elements in-
clude the organisational structure, the human and
technical resources and the technical and management
processes. All the processes can be grouped into the
key categories considered in quality management:
planning, performing, assessing, and improving.
Since 1996, the Faculty of Chemistry of the
University of Barcelona (UB) has worked in this
178
direction. Our experience [3] enables us to propose a
systematic approach that could be applied by other
universities interested in the implementation of qual-
ity assurance elements in the teaching laboratories.
The aim of this paper is to show the main issues of
this approach.
The Planning
Aims
The aims of the project can be summarised as follows:
– To implement a QMS in teaching laboratories in
order to improve the technical and economic man-
agement as well as the performance of these
laboratories and the educational quality of the prac-
tical work carried out.
– To stimulate the centre’s staff towards the culture of
quality management and continuous improvement.
– To offer an image of solidity and competence to
customers (students and their families, employers),
education authorities, and society in general.
– To disseminate the experience acquired in the Fac-
ulty of Chemistry of the University of Barcelona to
other centres.
Thus, this implementation is addressed to:
– The students, in order to train them in practical as-
pects of quality assurance in laboratories as a com-
plement to their theoretical training on this topic.
– The teachers of the different chemistry subjects, not
only because laboratory management is a relevant
tool to be developed as a student ability, but also to
instil in them the need for good laboratory manage-
ment in order to achieve good results in their sci-
entific work.
– The support personnel in the laboratories and in the
centre in general. The stimulation in people of a
mentality of responsibility and interest in continu-
ous improvement is also crucial.
– The stakeholders (graduate students, employers,
and society in general) which are the target group
of the public service provided by the university.
Scope
In its preliminary stage, the QMS outlined could only
cover the teaching of practical subjects. However, from
both a pedagogical and a managerial point of view, all
the teaching laboratories of the centre should be
n
G. Rauret and R. Compa~ o
managed under the same quality principles and organ-
isation. In a second stage, the quality criteria of man-
agement should also be extended to the remaining
teaching and administrative activities of the centre.
In principle, the implementation of a QMS in a
particular area of a centre, such as the teaching labora-
tories, can be a more feasible task than a more com-
plete implementation covering all the activities of the
centre. However, when the QMS is extended, some
inconsistencies could appear, and these must be prop-
erly addressed.
On the other hand, the existence of a stated quality
policy in the whole organisation (university) to which
the centre belongs and a clear commitment of both the
university and the centre top managers, is an essential
premise for the success of the project.
The Model
One of the first steps in establishing a QMS is to
choose the most suitable quality model for the insti-
tution. Among the standardised models, that of ISO
9001:2000 standard [4] is one of the most widely
known and applied internationally in the private sector
and, more recently, it has also been applied by public
administrations. Although it is difficult to obtain ac-
curate information about the exact number of institu-
tions of higher education that have implemented such
a model, the perception of the authors is that the num-
ber is low, but has been increasing in the course of the
last few years. Moreover, the tailoring possibilities
introduced in the last edition of the standard in rela-
tion to the content of section 7 (Product realisation)
will facilitate its implementation. Furthermore, the
adoption of a certifiable model would enable the orga-
nisation to apply for an ISO certification in the future.
The obtaining of such a certification could be a stim-
ulus for the staff as well as a valuable tool to increase
the competitiveness of the organisation.
Although the standard ISO=IEC 17025:1999 [5] is
specifically addressed to the quality management and
the technical competence of testing laboratories, it is
conceived for the professional laboratories, and it is
not an appropriate model for teaching laboratories.
The aim of a professional laboratory is to carry out
correct processes and to produce valid results. On the
contrary, in a teaching laboratory, a defective process
or a bad result can be an excellent tool in the hands
of the teacher to be used in the teaching=learning
process.
Quality Management in Undergraduate Laboratories. A Systematic Approach to its Implementation
Moreover, as stated above, a general quality man-
agement model, extensible in the future to all teaching
and administrative activities of the centre, would be
more appropriate.
The Approach
Depending on whether an external recognition of the
QMS (usually as an ISO 9001 certificate) is required or
not, several approaches are possible. When such rec-
ognition has to be obtained in a relatively short time,
some kind of external consultation will be necessary.
The main task of this consultation will be to help the
quality committee (QCM) in the interpretation of the
general requirements of the standard and their concre-
tion in the case of a higher education institution.
When reaching external recognition is regarded as a
medium or long-term objective, the implementation of
the quality system may be based on the centre’s own
capabilities, with a strong involvement of the steering
group. In this case two strategies, top-down and
bottom-up, are possible. The top-down strategy is a
more formal approach beginning with the writing of
the quality manual and of the general procedures of
the QMS. By contrast, the bottom-up strategy begins
with actions affecting the management of laboratories
at a practical level, delaying those associated with
more formal or difficult issues. From our experience,
when obtaining external recognition is not the primary
aim, the bottom-up strategy is more appropriate, since
it allows the institution to achieve some practical im-
provements in a short period of time from the begin-
ning of the implementation of the QMS. The rationale
underlying this approach resides in the fact that, tra-
ditionally, any cultural change at a university is more
effective if the staff understands and approves of it
and does not perceive it as an imposition. However,
this form of implementing the process may take lon-
ger than desired. A drawback of the bottom-up ap-
proach is that, since it goes from more specific to
more general issues, some inconsistencies are likely
to appear during its progressive implementation. In
order to minimise these dysfunctions, the organisa-
tional and documentary structures have to be clearly
designed by the QCM when the implementation starts.
Leadership
An attitude of leadership from the top managers of the
centre in regard to the project will be essential for its
179
success. Among the tasks deriving from this leader-
ship we can point out the following:
– To analyse the current and future needs of the
stakeholders in order to orientate the institution
and the QMS in the proper way.
– To stimulate in the staff a proactive attitude towards
the aims of the institution.
– To convince people of the advantages of working in
a quality management scheme.
– To provide the humane and material resources re-
quired for the implementation of the QMS.
– To participate actively in the revision and improve-
ment of the QMS.
Involvement of the Staff
Higher education institutions are complex organisa-
tions in which the functional and hierarchical relation-
ships among the staff members are not always well
defined. Moreover, the parallel dedication of staff to
teaching and research tasks can lead to conflicts of
interest that may cause detrimental effects on both
activities, but especially on teaching. The implemen-
tation of a QMS will entail a clearer definition of the
organisation and of the staff functions which should
mitigate the negative effects of the situation depicted
above.
Besides the leadership of the top management, the
adherence of people at all levels of the organisation is
the other essential support element the QMS requires.
People should be motivated to use all their technical
and personal capabilities for the attainment of the ob-
jectives of the organisation, in benefit of the stake-
holders.
The students are the main target group of the insti-
tution’s activities. Thus, in spite of the temporary na-
ture of their links to the institution, their involvement
will be important both for the improvement of the
system and for their formation and personal maturity.
The Implementation
The Steering Group and the Quality
Assurance Unit
The steering group of the project, hereafter termed the
quality committee (QCM) is an essential tool for the
success of the project (see Fig. 1). The QCM defines
the quality policy, establishes the annual objectives
180
Fig. 1. Structure of the quality committee for teaching laboratories
and plans the actions (quality plans) to attain them,
applies for the necessary resources, and carries out
periodical revisions of the system’s performance.
The QMS is chaired by the head of the centre (Dean
of the Faculty, Director of the School, etc) or his=her
delegate and is composed of the representatives of the
centre’s teaching units, one of whom acts as the sec-
retary of the QCM. These representatives are the links
between the QCM and the teaching units. Their role is
to lead the implementation of the QMS in their units,
charging them with raising the interest of their col-
leagues in the advantages of working in such a sys-
tem. Often colleagues do not properly acknowledge
their task, and the representatives will need the insti-
tution’s clear support. The launching of improvement
groups in each department, as internal enlivening
groups, is highly advisable. The representative of
the department in the QCM and the co-ordinators of
n
G. Rauret and R. Compa~ o
the laboratories and the practical subjects should con-
stitute these. The participation of the representative in
the safety committee is also recommendable. These
improvement groups will be a solid support for the
task of the representative of the department in the
QCM.
A Quality Assurance Unit (QAU) is another essen-
tial element for successful implementation and oper-
ation of the QMS and must be present from the
beginning of the process. From an organisational
point of view, this unit should depend directly on
the head of the centre and, normally, it will be com-
prised of one or two people. The leader of the QAU
will be a member of the QCM and should be a grad-
uate, preferably a chemist, with knowledge and expe-
rience in quality management. Taking into account
that quality management in a chemistry education in-
stitution is strongly connected to safety and waste
Quality Management in Undergraduate Laboratories. A Systematic Approach to its Implementation 181

management issues, some expertise on the part of the – Chemicals: purchasing, storage, preparation, stan-
QAU leader in regard to these fields will be necessary. dardisation and labelling.
His=her main tasks will be to train the members of – Bibliography: textbooks, handbooks and tables.
the QCM in quality management issues, managing the – Documents of the QMS (general and specific pro-
controlled documents of the QMS and assessing the cedures and registers): writing and revising.
system by means of periodical internal audits. Since – Personnel: assignment, qualification, training and
advanced students could bring with them a specific motivation.
point of view regarding the performance of the – Waste management, minimisation, storage and
QMS, their participation in the tasks of the QCM is elimination.
advisable. In the case of the Faculty of Chemistry of
The third process is the realisation of the product,
the UB, the participation of some students in succes-
that is, teaching the practical subjects to the students.
sive steps of the QMS implementation is considered a
This involves putting into practice all the planning of
successful experience. They are students who have
the previous stage. The final process includes the as-
passed more than 75% of the credits required for the
sessment of the three aspects involved in teaching=
degree, and they are granted 10–15 hours per week to
learning practical subjects: the adequacy of the con-
help the members of the QCM. In addition, they are
tent of the programmed practical work, the perfor-
trained in quality management of laboratories and
mance of the QMS and the knowledge and the
have gained some experience in this field.
training acquired by the students.
Processes Approach
Organisational Structure
In the last few years, the definition of the processes
Significant differences are likely to exist among the
involved in any activity has been considered an essen-
organisational structure of the practical teaching of
tial premise for its good management. According to
the centres. Hence, in this section only the main fo-
ISO 9000:2000 [2], a process can be defined as a set
cuses of this structure will be outlined, based on the
of interconnected activities that convert inputs into out-
structure implemented in the Faculty of Chemistry of
puts. The identification of the inputs and outputs of the
the UB (see Fig. 3).
processes as well as their connections with the func-
The centre (in our case the Faculty) distributes the
tions of the organisation will lead to more predictable
teaching tasks among the teaching units (in our case
results, better use of resources, shorter cycle times and
the departments). In each teaching unit, its direction
lower costs [6]. The processes involved in teaching
(the head of the department and the academic secre-
practical subjects are set out schematically in Fig. 2.
tary) is responsible for the distribution of the teaching
Four main processes must be considered. The first
tasks among the teaching force provided by the insti-
one, the design of each practical subject, is carried out
tution (professors, lecturers, associate professors and
in the teaching units following the degree objectives
Ph.D. students). The practical subjects assigned to
and the guidelines of the Studies Programme. In this
each teaching unit are taught in the respecive own
stage, the pedagogical objectives of the subjects, that
teaching laboratories. A member of the teaching staff,
is, the topics (including the quality topics) and the
called the laboratory co-ordinator, is in charge of the
procedural competencies that have to be learned by
infrastructure of each laboratory. It is the responsibil-
the students, should be discussed and agreed. Before
ity of this person to assure that the laboratory is prop-
its definitive implementation, the practical topics have
erly cleaned and maintained, and ready for teaching
to be validated in order to assess whether they fit in
different practical subjects. Since several subjects are
with the intended learning objectives.
taught in each laboratory, and most of these subjects
The second process, the planning, is the most com-
are taught to several groups each semester, there is a
plex one and can be divided into several sub-processes:
co-ordinator of each subject who ensures that the cor-
– Facilities (including safety issues): availability, responding reagents and equipment (instruments and
cleaning and maintenance. apparatus) necessary are available. He=she is also re-
– Equipment (including glassware, instruments and sponsible for the training of any inexperienced per-
apparatus): purchasing, maintenance, verification sonnel (associate professors or Ph.D. students that
and calibration. teach the subject for the first time). Each group of
182 n
G. Rauret and R. Compa~ o

Fig. 2. Processes (shaded rectangles) and sub-processes (white rectangles) involved in teaching=learning practical subjects

students (up to 35–40 students) is under the responsi- Some other administrative and technical personnel
bility of one teacher who qualifies them. Depending are involved in the practical teaching and are essential
on the number of students in the group, this teacher is for its good performance. These are the people in the
assisted by one or two additional teachers. administrative and economic services and the cleaning
Quality Management in Undergraduate Laboratories. A Systematic Approach to its Implementation 183

Fig. 3. Organisational structure of the personnel involved in the teaching of practical subjects

and maintenance services of the faculty, the represen- Formation of Staff

tatives of the department in the quality and safety
All staff members will need some periodical training
committees, those responsible for the economic man-
in relation to technical and pedagogical aspects of the
agement of the department, and the support personnel
practical work. Quality management issues, such as
of the department (technicians, purchasing head, ad-
organisation, process definition, documents of the
ministrative head).
184
QMS, audits, quality measurement, improvement,
etc., also need to be considered as important topics
for the continuous training of teaching personnel. The
application of new technologies of communication to
the teaching=learning process will also require signif-
icant training efforts. Training of the staff together
with a clear institutional recognition of the teaching
task will be the best stimulus for innovation and
continuous improvement of the teaching=learning
process.
Training activities have to be tailored to the char-
acteristics (senior or young, permanent or temporary)
and needs of the teaching personnel. The training of
the technicians that collaborate in the management of
the laboratories is also mandatory. All these activities
have to be carried out in accordance with an approved
annual plan.
Quality Measurement
A QMS, together with the clearly stated objectives,
must specify a set of indicators (qualitative and=or
quantitative) associated with each objective. Since
these indicators will allow assessment of the degree
of attainment of the objectives proposed in the quality
plan of each stage, they constitute a fundamental
tool of the QMS. Moreover, the definition of the
indicators will provide a beneficial feedback on the
objectives since it will lead to a more definite and
realistic formulation that will make them more
attainable.
Thus, as a final step of the proposed approach for
the QMS implementation in the teaching laboratories
of a centre of higher learning, we shall outline some
indicators for the four objectives proposed in the
planning stage.
The first objective, in fact, includes a general goal
(namely, the establishment of the QMS), and four
specific aims that refer respectively to the technical
management, the economical management, the per-
formance of the laboratory and the quality of the
teaching=learning process. Thus, we propose five
indicators:
– The percentage of fulfilment of the objectives stat-
ed in the annual quality plan defined by the QCM.
– The improvement of the technical management
measured as the degree of satisfaction of the labo-
ratory users (students and teachers). This satisfac-
tion can be assessed by means of a questionnaire,
n
G. Rauret and R. Compa~ o
distributed when each group of students finishes its
stay in the laboratory.
– The performance of the laboratories will be
measured by means of the answers given in the
aforementioned questionnaire and also by the
number of complaints presented by the users of
the laboratories. The QCM and the co-ordinators
responsible for the laboratories and the practical
subjects should assume the commitment of im-
plementing opportune corrective actions to deal
with the dysfunctions pointed out in the com-
plaints presented by teachers and students. They
should give an explanation as to whether a
corrective action is or is not feasible at that
moment.
– The benefits on the learning process can be mea-
sured on the basis of the students’ results and the
opinion of the teachers in relation to specific items,
for instance the laboratory notebook, the reports
prepared after each practical work, the precision
of the results obtained, etc. The opinion of profes-
sionals from external laboratories receiving ad-
vanced students for practical stays could also be
an excellent indicator.
In regard to the second target, two indicators can be
used to measure the increase of staff members’ inter-
est in quality management issues:
– The number of teachers attending the training
activities on these subjects.
– The number of proposals for improving actions in
relation to the management of laboratories and the
practical work.
The achievement of the third aim, the external per-
ception of the quality of practical teaching, has to be
measured in relation to the activities included in
the external promotion plan designed to fulfil this
objective.
Finally, a proper indicator for the fourth goal will
be the number of activities, such as papers, talks, sem-
inars, etc., performed with a view to disseminating the
experience to other centres.
Final Remark
The authors would be pleased to discuss the deeper
implications of the contents of this paper with inter-
ested individual or institutional parties. Opinions and
comments are, of course, also welcome.
Quality Management in Undergraduate Laboratories. A Systematic Approach to its Implementation 185

References [4] ISO 9001:2000 Standard, Quality management systems.

Requirements
[1] Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education con- [5] ISO=IEC 17025:1999 Standard, general requirements for the
vened in Bologna on June 1999 competence of testing and calibration laboratories
[2] ISO 9000:2000 Standard, Quality management systems. Fun- [6] International Organisation for Standardisation, Quality man-
damentals and vocabulary agement principles and guidelines on their application.
[3] Rauret G.; Compa~ n
o R.; Rubi
o E. Quin. Anal. 2000, 19, 103 Document ISO=TC 176=SC 2=N 376