Quality management research in higher education: Bibliometric mapping and a thematic conceptual synthesis
-
Author(s)Adina YessengaliyevaLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3291-3459
,
Aknur ZhidebekkyzyLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3543-547X
,
Yuriy BilanLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0268-009X
,
Timur BuldybayevLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8199-653X
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/kpm.10(3).2026.14
-
Article InfoVolume 10 2026, Issue #3, pp. 225-241
- 12 Views
-
1 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Research on quality management in higher education remains conceptually fragmented, with recurrent organizational issues examined across partially disconnected strands of literature. This study analyzes Scopus-indexed higher education research using quality management terminology and organizes its recurrent concerns into an integrated conceptual account. A two-level design combined bibliometric mapping of 1,829 records published between 2004 and 2025 with full-text thematic conceptual synthesis of 159 retained studies. Publication activity increased from 25 records in 2004 to a peak of 157 in 2019, while total quality management terminology remained prominent alongside quality assurance and quality improvement vocabularies. The conceptual synthesis organized recurrent concerns into four higher-order dimensions: strategic leadership and governance, implementation of QM frameworks and digital transformation, quality culture and organizational dynamics, and performance evaluation and external accountability. Studies situated in emerging and developing country contexts additionally highlighted external quality requirements, adaptation of established frameworks, institutional capacity for implementation, and supporting information systems. The four dimensions were integrated into a conceptual model spanning strategic, operational, organizational, and evaluation levels. Overall, the results place framework adoption within a broader organizational context by highlighting the conditions under which quality arrangements are implemented and sustained. For institutional leaders and quality managers, this suggests assessing whether formal arrangements become embedded in organizational practice and inform subsequent decisions.
Acknowledgment
This research was funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant No. BR28712521).
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)I23, I28, M10, L15
-
References54
-
Tables3
-
Figures5
-
- Figure 1. PRISMA-informed flow diagram for bibliometric mapping and thematic conceptual synthesis
- Figure 2. Annual scientific production in the retrieved Scopus corpus, 2004–2025
- Figure 3. Country scientific production in the retrieved Scopus corpus
- Figure 4. Strategic thematic map of the retrieved Scopus corpus (N = 1,829)
- Figure 5. Conceptual model of quality management in higher education
-
- Table 1. Eligibility criteria and analytical scope
- Table 2. Conceptual organization of representative study-level analytical focuses within four higher-order dimensions
- Table 3. Directions for future research derived from the review
-
- Aguilar-Alonso, I., Escobedo, F., Manco, M., & Amasifuen, M. (2020). Accreditation models and digital platforms used for university academic programs in Peru. 2020 2nd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication Control and Networking (ICACCCN) (pp. 95-100).
- Alzafari, K., & Ursin, J. (2019). Implementation of quality assurance standards in European higher education: Does context matter? Quality in Higher Education, 25(1), 58-75.
- Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975.
- Becket, N., & Brookes, M. (2008). Quality management practice in higher education - What quality are we actually enhancing? Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education, 7(1), 40-54.
- Beerkens, M. (2022). An evolution of performance data in higher education governance: A path towards a ‘big data’ era? Quality in Higher Education, 28(1), 29-49.
- Belawati, T., & Zuhairi, A. (2007). The practice of a quality assurance system in open and distance learning: A case study at Universitas Terbuka Indonesia (The Indonesia Open University). The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8(1).
- Bendermacher, G. W. G., Egbrink, M. G. A. O., Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P., & Dolmans, D. H. J. M. (2017). Unravelling quality culture in higher education: A realist review. Higher Education, 73(1), 39-60.
- Blanco Ramírez, G., & Jahirul Haque, H. M. (2016). Addressing quality challenges in the private university sector in Bangladesh: From policy formulation to institutional implementation. Quality in Higher Education, 22(2), 139-151.
- Burli, S., Bagodi, V., & Kotturshettar, B. (2012). TQM dimensions and their interrelationships in ISO certified engineering institutes of India. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 19(2), 177-192.
- Calvo-Mora, A., Leal, A., & Roldán, J. L. (2006). Using enablers of the EFQM model to manage institutions of higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(2), 99-122.
- Cardoso, S., Rosa, M. J., Videira, P., & Amaral, A. (2019). Internal quality assurance: A new culture or added bureaucracy? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(2), 249-262.
- Cronemyr, P., Bäckström, I., & Rönnbäck, Å. (2017). Quality culture deployment – using behaviours to explain, diagnose and improve a quality culture. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 9(3-4), 498-518.
- Dill, D. D. (1995). Through Deming’s eyes: A cross-national analysis of quality assurance policies in higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 1(2), 95-110.
- Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296.
- Dumond, E. J., & Johnson, T. W. (2013). Managing university business educational quality: ISO or AACSB? Quality Assurance in Education, 21(2), 127-144.
- Ehlers, U. D. (2009). Understanding quality culture. Quality Assurance in Education, 17(4), 343-363.
- Elassy, N. (2015). The concepts of quality, quality assurance and quality enhancement. Quality Assurance in Education, 23(3), 250-261.
- Farida, F., Prabowo, H. A., & Vidayanti, D. (2019). Evaluation of the foster program as an effort to accelerate the implementation of the quality assurance system in Indonesian private university. Academia, (16-17), 145-167.
- García Juanatey, A., Jordana, J., Pérez Durán, I., & Sancho, D. (2021). Independence, accountability and responsibilities of quality assurance agencies in higher education: European and Latin American countries compared. European Journal of Higher Education, 11(2), 175-196.
- Hartono, H. (2024). Research developments in quality management at universities in Indonesia: A systematic literature review. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 16(2), 661-669.
- Harvey, L. (2024). Extended editorial: Defining quality thirty years on: Quality, standards, assurance, culture and epistemology. Quality in Higher Education, 30(2), 145-184.
- Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34.
- Harvey, L., & Stensaker, B. (2008). Quality culture: Understandings, boundaries and linkages. European Journal of Education, 43(4), 427-442.
- Hou, A. Y., Ince, M., Tsai, S., & Chiang, C. L. (2015). Quality assurance of quality assurance agencies from an Asian perspective: Regulation, autonomy and accountability. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(1), 95-106.
- Hu, B., Moro-Cabero, M.-M., & De-La-Mano, M. (2024). Quality management in Chinese academic libraries: A systematic review. Sustainability, 16(7), 2700.
- Iqbal, S., Bin Taib, C. A., & Razalli, M. R. (2024). The effect of accreditation on higher education performance through quality culture mediation: The perceptions of administrative and quality managers. The TQM Journal, 36(2), 572-592.
- Kudaibergenova, R., Zhidebekkyzy, A., Buldybayev, T., Utepkaliyeva, B., & Bilan, S. (2025). Perceptions and practices of academic excellence: Insights from university stakeholders. Knowledge and Performance Management, 9(2), 246-261.
- Lauer, S., & Wilkesmann, U. (2017). The governance of organizational learning: Empirical evidence from best-practice universities in Germany. The Learning Organization, 24(5), 266-277.
- Liu, Q., & Liu, L. (2018). Exploring organisational learning in universities’ responses to a quality assurance reform: Experiences from Ontario, Canada. Quality in Higher Education, 24(1), 29-42.
- Lodi, S. H., Shaikh, A. A., Tufail, M., Wasif, M., & Butt, F. A. (2022). A quality 4.0 assurance framework for the higher education institutes. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’22) (pp. 725-732).
- Magrupov, T., Karimov, M., & Vasileva, S. (2015). Implementation of the system quality management education and accreditation of educational programs in Tashkent State Technical University. In 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL) (pp. 63-68). IEEE.
- Manatos, M. J., Sarrico, C. S., & Rosa, M. J. (2017). The integration of quality management in higher education institutions: A systematic literature review. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(1-2), 159-175.
- Mgaiwa, S. J. (2021). Leadership initiatives in response to institutional quality assurance challenges in Tanzania’s private universities. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(9), 1206-1223.
- Mlangeni, T. C., & Ruhode, E. (2017). Data governance: A challenge for merged and collaborating institutions in developing countries. In J. Choudrie, M. S. Islam, F. Wahid, J. M. Bass, & J. E. Priyatma (Eds.), Information and communication technologies for development: 14th IFIP WG 9.4 International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, ICT4D 2017 (pp. 242-253). Springer.
- Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228.
- Nasim, K., Sikander, A., & Tian, X. (2020). Twenty years of research on total quality management in higher education: A systematic literature review. Higher Education Quarterly, 74(1), 75-97.
- Newton, J. (2000). Feeding the beast or improving quality? Academics’ perceptions of quality assurance and quality monitoring. Quality in Higher Education, 6(2), 153-163.
- Nguyen, H. C., & Ta, T. T. H. (2018). Exploring impact of accreditation on higher education in developing countries: A Vietnamese view. Tertiary Education and Management, 24(2), 154-167.
- Osseo-Asare, A. E., Longbottom, D., & Murphy, W. D. (2005). Leadership best practices for sustaining quality in UK higher education from the perspective of the EFQM Excellence Model. Quality Assurance in Education, 13(2), 148-170.
- Owlia, M. S., & Aspinwall, E. M. (1997). TQM in higher education: A review. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 14(5), 527-543.
- Ozsen, T., Uslu, B., & Aypay, A. (2023). Strategy adaptation for sustainable quality management in universities: A systematic literature review. Tertiary Education and Management, 29(4), 447-469.
- Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., Stewart, L. A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A. C.,... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 71, 372.
- Papanthymou, A., & Darra, M. (2017). Quality management in higher education: Review and perspectives. Higher Education Studies, 7(3), 132-147.
- Randa, I. O. (2020). Quality management systems in sub-Sahara Africa business schools. In Quality management implementation in higher education (pp. 24-47). IGI Global.
- Sarrico, C. S. (2022). Quality management, performance measurement and indicators in higher education institutions: Between burden, inspiration and innovation. Quality in Higher Education, 28(1), 11-28.
- Sattler, C., & Sonntag, K. (2018). Quality cultures in higher education institutions—Development of the Quality Culture Inventory. In P. Meusburger, M. Heffernan, & L. Suarsana (Eds.), Geographies of the university (Knowledge and Space, Vol. 12). Springer.
- Seyfried, M., Ansmann, M., & Pohlenz, P. (2019). Institutional isomorphism, entrepreneurship and effectiveness: The adoption and implementation of quality management in teaching and learning in Germany. Tertiary Education and Management, 25(2), 115-129.
- Stensaker, B. (2003). Trance, transparency and transformation: The impact of external quality monitoring on higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 9(2), 151-159.
- Tarí, J. J., & Dick, G. P. M. (2016). Trends in quality management research in higher education institutions. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 26(3), 273-296.
- Tran, T., & Kuula, M. (2023). Juggling quality labels with centralised analytics: How the first Nordic triple-crowned business school does it. Studies in Higher Education, 48(6), 845-863.
- Van Kemenade, E., & Hardjono, T. W. (2010). A critique of the use of self-evaluation in a compulsory accreditation system. Quality in Higher Education, 16(3), 257-268.
- Wawak, S., Domingues, J. P. T., & Sampaio, P. (2024). Quality 4.0 in higher education: Reinventing academic-industry-government collaboration during disruptive times. The TQM Journal, 36(6), 1569-1590.
- Zgodavová, K., Urbančíková, N., & Kisela, M. (2015). Enhancement of the quality assurance model at the Slovak university: Case study. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 19(2), 1-18.
- Zhidebekkyzy, A., Kudaibergenova, R., Buldybayev, T., & Serikkaliyeva, A. (2026). Pursuing academic excellence in Kazakhstan: Stakeholder perspectives and reform challenges. International Journal of Educational Development, 122, 103552.
-
Digital transformation to enhance Indonesian SME performance: Exploring the impact of market competition and digital strategy
Dorojatun Prihandono ,
Angga Pandu Wijaya ,
Bayu Wiratama ,
Widya Prananta ,
Syam Widia
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(2).2024.09
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 22, 2024 Issue #2 pp. 103-113 Views: 8074 Downloads: 1319 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯIn the current era, the challenges faced by SMEs in Indonesia are becoming increasingly complex. Previously, the primary challenge for SMEs has been to enhance performance. However, with the emergence of information technology, SMEs are now required to compete fiercely. SMEs in Indonesia are still in the process of digital transformation to improve their business strategies, thus limiting research focused on digital transformation in SMEs. Research also considers market complexity and digital strategy as crucial factors for SMEs. The aim of this study is to analyze the role of digital transformation in influencing SME performance. The research approach is quantitative, involving 171 SMEs owners as respondents. The instrument utilized is a Likert scale questionnaire, focusing on the majority of SMEs in Indonesia, particularly those in Java, the most populous island and business center of the country. This includes SMEs operating within various sectors, such as culinary, fashion, retail, and creative industries. The results indicate that digital strategy and market complexity influence digital transformation and SMEs performance. The research findings suggest that digital transformation mediates the influence of digital strategy and market complexity on SME performance. The novelty of this study lies in its focus on the current SMEs digitalization strategy area. This study indicates that digital transformation is an essential aspect affecting current SME performance. The results suggest that SMEs require focused strategies to strengthen resources and gain competitive advantage in complex markets.
-
The influence of digital transformation on the growth of small and medium enterprises in South Africa
Sanele Jeza ,
Lawrence Mpele Lekhanya
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.20(3).2022.24
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 20, 2022 Issue #3 pp. 297-309 Views: 6126 Downloads: 2237 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯFrom a global perspective, the business environment has become highly dynamic, unpredictable, and competitive due to external forces – mostly technology – that generate change. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of digital technologies on South African business sectors. The sample includes small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the KwaZulu-Natal province. Being qualitative by design, the study used semi-structured interviews for data collection, with eight interviews in the Durban area. SME managers were purposefully selected as participants based on their management positions in the business/company and that they oversee the business operation and understand the influence of digital transformation in the business. The interviews were then transcribed after data collection to determine any recurring themes. In the effectiveness of digital transformation, the study identified themes such as “gaining exposure” and “gaining effective sales figures” as a result of implementing digital transformation, which was indicated by six of eight participants. The findings showed that digital transformation significantly affects building customer relationships and ensuring easy accessibility of the business. The results further indicate online selling and digital marketing as the leading digital platforms successfully implemented by most South African SMEs. Lastly, the study revealed digital maintenance and rapid changes in technology as challenging factors. Moreover, the study recommends that South African SMEs implement more available digital technologies to gain additional exposure.
-
A bibliometric analysis of the economic effects of using artificial intelligence and ChatGPT tools in higher education institutions
Anna Vorontsova ,
Svitlana Tarasenko ,
Wojciech Duranowski ,
Arkadiusz Durasiewicz ,
John Soss ,
Artem Bilovol
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.23(1).2025.08
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 23, 2025 Issue #1 pp. 101-114 Views: 4044 Downloads: 952 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯOne of the main challenges in higher education management is the complexity of resource optimization and increasing volumes of data, which limits the efficiency and accuracy of decision-making. The application of artificial intelligence can address these issues.
The present study aims to identify the key trends, knowledge gaps, and opportunities for further research into the economic effects of using artificial intelligence and ChatGPT tools in higher education. For this purpose, a systematic literature review was conducted to identify and screen the scientific articles related to the topic of this study indexed in Web of Science and Scopus from 1986 to 2024. A total of 234 articles were selected, all demonstrating positive growth both in scholarly output and citation count. The study identified the key contributors to scientific research on this topic by region (the United States, China, and India). It concluded that the relevant research centers are still at an early stage of their development. Based on bibliometric clusters formed by co-occurrence relations, three main areas of research were defined: 1) artificial intelligence in education for decision-making; 2) process automation and digital transformation in educational institutions; 3) artificial intelligence technologies and their application in education.
The study highlights the main areas of economic effects of artificial intelligence and ChatGPT tools in higher education, including reducing administrative costs, saving time for teachers and students, and improving the quality and accessibility of educational process.Acknowledgments
The publication is part of the research topic “Economic Basics of Technology Diffusion into the National Economy of Ukraine Considering Best International Practices” (№0124U003482).
