Quality assurance bodies

Governed by the General University Rules (article 51, points 1 and 2), the Planning and Liaison Committee is an entity established following the periodic review activities of the University's QA system in 2022. Its role is to ensure close coordination and effective integration between strategic direction, operational and managerial activities, and the uUniversity's QA system and processes. 

Planning and Liaison Committee Activities 

Specifically, the Committee evaluates the implementation status of strategies and actions and assesses any impacts from external and internal scenarios, based on comprehensive monitoring results. It also collaborates with relevant bodies to define any necessary corrective actions or revisions. 

In particular, the tasks assigned to the Planning and Liaison Committee include: 

• Analyzing the progress of strategic and operational objectives, along with associated actions, using monitoring results. This involves synthesizing achievements across various areas (teaching, research, third mission and social impact, resources) and assessing cross-cutting impacts at both academic and operational levels. 

• Evaluating the ongoing relevance of defined policies and strategic objectives or determining the need for their revision. 

• Reviewing proposed improvement actions or developing new ones as needed. 

• Working with the support of the Quality Assurance Committee to ensure adequacy and coherence with the University's governance system and the organization's QA policies and procedures (review of the Governance system). 

• Transmitting evaluation results to higher-level governance bodies (Executive Committee and University Board) to adjust strategy and policies as needed, promptly and effectively. 

• Communicating analysis results and any necessary actions downstream to other governance bodies, academic structures and operational units. 

Planning and Liaison Committee Composition  

The members of the Planning and Liaison Committee include: 

• University President 

• Rector 

• Managing Director 

• Dean for Academic Strategy and Institutional Affairs 

• President of the Evaluation Unit 

• President of the Quality Assurance Committee 

• Director of Planning, Control and Valuation. 

Given the objectives and purposes of strategic alignment, the Committee ensures a solid link with the University Board and the University’s governance and QA structures within its composition. 

Technical and operational support for the Planning and Liaison Committee’s activities is provided by the Planning, Control & Valuation Unit, along with other competent organizational units in their respective areas. 

Planning and Liaison Committee members

The University Evaluation Unit (NdV) is the academic body responsible for proposing and overseeing the QA processes developed by the University. Its responsibilities are defined by the University's Statute and General Regulations, specifically outlined in the University Evaluation Unit Regulation, in accordance with relevant national legislative provisions governing its competencies applicable to non-state universities. The composition of the unit, as defined by the University's Statute, includes at least two faculty members, two administrative managers, two external experts in QA, and a student representative. 

The University Board appoints the members of the Evaluation Unit after consulting the Academic Council for the “Faculty” component.  The student representative is elected by the students in accordance with the specific Regulations. The outcome of the elections is announced by the Rector through an official Decree. 

The Evaluation Unit relies on guidance and direction from the central governing bodies of the University, including the Board, the Rector, and the Managing Director. Externally, to the Ministry of Education (MUR) and the Italian National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes (ANVUR) for oversight and support.  
 

In general terms, the Evaluation Unit carries out the following tasks: 

• Reviews the University's QA system to ensure it is adequate and effective. 
• Analyzes and evaluates the results of evaluation and QA activities, offering recommendations to internal stakeholders to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and quality of university operations. 
• Assists academic governance bodies in reviewing the QA system. 
• If requested, provide opinions to internal stakeholders on matters concerning evaluation and QA.   

Regarding accreditation procedures for the university and study programs, the Evaluation Unit carries out the following specific functions (as outlined in DM n.1154/2021): 

• Provides a binding opinion to the University on the fulfillment of requirements for initial accreditation for the establishment of new study programs; 
• Verifies, including through hearings of academic programs, PhD programs, and departments (where deemed appropriate or necessary), the proper functioning of the QA system and how internal bodies and stakeholders monitor the progress of study programs, PhD programs, and departments; 
• Supports ANVUR and MUR in monitoring compliance with initial and periodic accreditation requirements for academic programs and campuses; 
• Assists university governance bodies and ANVUR in monitoring outcomes against periodic evaluation indicators, as well as supporting the university in developing additional indicators to achieve its strategic planning objectives. 

In executing its assigned duties and its designated responsibilities, the Evaluation Unit operates autonomously, coordinating externally with relevant national bodies and internally with the PQA. 

To support its analyses and evaluations, the Evaluation Unit relies on the PQA reports and the Student-Faculty Joint Teaching Committees, along with the outcomes of student opinion surveys, as well as any additional documents and data provided by the PQA and academic governing bodies. 

Following the direction and oversight activities, the Evaluation Unit prepares various documents and outputs, with the most significant being the annual report. This report, drafted in accordance with guidelines issued by ANVUR, provides am account of the evaluation outcomes, compliance with regulatory QA requirements, measures taken by the University regarding study programs identified as “anomalous” based on monitoring, and initiatives aimed at enhancing the quality of academic activities. The annual report is submitted to both the ANVUR and internal Evaluation Unit stakeholders, as well as the Rector and the Managing Director. Additionally, the Evaluation Unit President presents it during a session of the Academic Council. 

Among other formal documents prepared by the Evaluation Unit are: 

• Technical-illustrative reports providing opinions on the establishment of new Study Programs. 
• Reports verifying compliance with accreditation requirements for PhD Programs. 
• Audit reports on Study Programs and Departments. 
• Annual reports detailing the activities of the Student-Faculty Joint Teaching Committees. 
• Reports validating indicators defined by the University within the three-year planning framework (not associated with ministerial databases or accessible by the MUR). 

The technical and operational support for the Evaluation Unit's activities is ensured by the Planning, Control & Valuation Unit, specifically through the QA & Accreditation office.

Annual Report University Evaluation Unit (Italian only)

Evaluation Unit's Members

University Evaluation Unit's Audit

The Quality Assurance Committee is the university body responsible for overseeing and monitoring the university's quality assurance processes, as governed by the General University Rules (Article 50) and the dedicated Regulation. 
 

The Quality Assurance Committee at Bocconi University consists of: 

• Central Coordination Component: 

• At least three members appointed by the Rector via their own decree, among whom one is designated as the President. 

• Deans of the Schools and Deans of the relevant areas as section members: 

• Undergraduate programs; 

• Graduate programs; 

• Law programs; 

• PhD programs; 

• Research; 

• Third Mission/Social Impact. 

• A student representative (elected according to the procedures outlined for the election of student representatives in the university's collegial bodies). 

• A representative for PhD students. 

In general, the responsibilities of the Quality Assurance Committee can be summarized as follows: 

• Implementing quality policies approved by the University Board, based on recommendations from the Academic Council. 

• Fostering and spreading a culture of quality and continuous improvement within the University, which may involve training and awareness initiatives regarding Quality Assurance. 

• Creating Quality Assurance procedures and ensuring their proper and consistent implementation across the University. 

• Providing support to all stakeholders engaged in self-assessment and Quality Assurance processes by developing, sharing and updating guidelines, operational instructions and any other useful tools to facilitate understanding and application. 

• Providing consultation to governing academic bodies regarding Quality Assurance matters and supporting the overall review process; 

• Overseeing the collection and internal dissemination of data to monitor qualitative and quantitative performance indicators concerning teaching, research and third mission/social impact; 

• Facilitating the exchange of information and documentation among academic governance bodies, the Evaluation Unit, Student-Faculty Joint Teaching Committees, Departments, Schools, Study Programs, PhD Programs, and external stakeholders such as ANVUR; 

• Overseeing the University's implementation of measures prompted by recommendations or directives from Evaluation Experts Groups (PEVs), Evaluation Experts Panels (CEVs) and ANVUR, particularly during Initial Accreditation and Periodic Accreditation assessments for campuses and Study Programs; 

• Coordinating closely with the Governance to advance the revision of the University's QA system;  

• Providing regular updates to the Planning and Liaison Committee and the Evaluation Unit on the operation and implementation status of the QA system. 

In addition to creating – and periodically updating – procedures, guidelines, instructions and other descriptive and operational documents concerning the management of the QA system, the Quality Assurance Committee annually prepares a summary report of completed activities and the status of QA process implementation. This report also outlines objectives and the overall action plan for the following year. It is then transmitted to the academic governing bodies, the Planning and Liaison Committee, and the University Evaluation Unit. 

The technical and operational support for Quality Assurance Committee activities is ensured by the Planning, Control & Valuation Unit, particularly through the QA & Accreditation office.

The Student-Faculty Joint Teaching Committees (CPDSs) are key stakeholders in the QA system, as outlined in the General University Rules (article 51, point 3). They are responsible for monitoring the quality of teaching in Study Programs, as well as the support services and infrastructure provided by the University. 
 

At Bocconi, there are currently seven CPDSs, structured to bring together a limited number of related study programs either from a disciplinary or vertically sequential standpoint. Each CPDS is designed to have one faculty member and one student representing each of the relevant study programs (except for CLMG, CYBER, and TS, whose CPDS consist of 2 faculty members and 2 students from those programs). 
 

To fulfill their assigned functions, the CPDSs acquire and review detailed results of the teaching evaluation and university experience surveys, key performance indicator values, course profiles, Annual Monitoring Reports (SMAs), and Periodic Review Reports related to the respective study programs. Additionally, they have the autonomy to gather further information on program performance, including through direct consultations with students, and to identify and propose specific indicators for evaluating program outcomes. 
 

CPDS members are entitled to participate in the Consultation Roundtables of the respective study programs, where they provide input and opinions on the teaching content and the adequacy of the outgoing graduate profiles. Also, CPDSs are tasked with providing an opinion (mandatory but non-binding) on establishing new Study Programs. In this regard, the relevant CPDS in the disciplinary area of the proposed program is called upon to offer its perspective. 

At the end of each calendar year, the CPDS prepares a report for all the study programs. Following the guidelines and a predefined framework established by the University's Quality Assurance Committee (in line with the AVA system model), these reports summarize the outcomes of analyses and evaluations conducted throughout the year regarding their areas of expertise. They also provide suggestions and improvement proposals directed towards the study programs, the university's governance, and the Evaluation Unit. 
 

The CPDS reports are sent to the Evaluation Unit, the Academic Council, the Quality Assurance Committee, the Program Directors, and the Deans of the Schools according to their respective areas of responsibility. Specifically, the Program Directors are responsible for reviewing the suggestions and improvement proposals mentioned in the reports. 

Technical and operational support for the CPDS activities is provided by the Planning, Control & Valuation Unit, particularly through the QA & Accreditation office. 

Quality Assurance Groups for Study Programs and PhD Programs 

The Quality Assurance Groups for Study Programs, at Bocconi University typically composed by the Program Director, the assistant director, and an administrative staff member of the program, are responsible for executing actions aimed at achieving the program's objectives, monitoring its overall performance, and conducting self-assessment activities that contribute to the periodic review process. 

For PhD programs, the equivalent structure is the Executive Council of the Faculty Board (EC), consisting of a Coordinator, curriculum coordinators (where applicable), and additional faculty members. 

In particular, each QA Group / Executive Council: 

• organizes and ensures the implementation of QA mechanisms and procedures within the respective Study Program/PhD; 
• completes and updates relevant information for the SUA-CdS (Annual Accreditation Form for PhD Programs), with the support of the relevant administrative offices; 
• coordinates with the School Dean to incorporate general guidelines set by the School regarding the management and organization of teaching activities. It also presents requests and recommendations from the Study Program Committee /Faculty Board of PhD to the Dean. 
• systematically monitors the Study Program/PhD's performance, including student career outcomes and feedback from periodic surveys of students and graduates, as well as (for Study Programs) input from interns and employers regarding internship experiences, ensuring alignment with predefined goals and reporting to the Study Program Committee/PhD Board and School Council; 
• collects input and suggestions from both faculty and students, striving to fully address them; 
• notifies the Study Program Committee/PhD Board and the School Dean of any necessary interventions to achieve the Study Program/PhD objectives and identifies situations requiring immediate corrective action, proposing corresponding measures. 
• organizes and develops preliminary activities for the annual monitoring and periodic review of the Study Program/PhD; to this end, in the case of Study Programs, it also considers the analyses and recommendations provided by the relevant CPDS; 
• sets out the annual program of quality control and assurance activities for the Study Program/PhD, in accordance with the deadlines set by the AVA system; 
• implements (or encourages) corrective or improvement actions resulting from the review of the Study Program/PhD and monitors their progress and implementation, reporting to the Study Program Committee/PhD Faculty Council and the Dean of the School. 

Quality Assurance Committees for Study Programs (CdS) and PhD Programs 

The Study Program/PhD Quality Assurance Committee consists of the same members as the Study Program Quality Assurance Group/PhD Executive Council, along with an additional student representative from the Study Program Committee and, if desired, one or more faculty members associated with the respective program. This committee acts as the internal oversight body for the Study Program (and PhD), tasked primarily with managing the processes of annual monitoring and periodic review. For this purpose, the Review Committee conducts the “review activity”, which consists of two distinct processes: 

1. Annual monitoring involves completing a dedicated form (SMA - Annual Monitoring Report for the Study Program), where comments and assessments regarding the program's performance over time and in comparison to specific benchmark values are documented. This evaluation encompasses various performance indicators, including student career outcomes, program attractiveness, internationalization efforts, graduate employability, faculty quantity and quality, student satisfaction levels, and more.  
2. Periodic review entails a recurring process of thorough self-assessment regarding the implementation status of the accreditation model's Quality Requirements by the Study Program/PhD. This activity culminates in the preparation of a comprehensive report, identifying and analyzing existing issues and the most significant challenges to address. Corresponding improvement objectives are then defined to be achieved in the subsequent cycle.