Title of publication

Audit of Tampere University of Applied Sciences (Tampereen ammattikorkeakoulun auditointi)


Turo Kilpeläinen, Hannele Keränen, Leena Pöntynen, Paavo Sormunen, Karl Holm & Laura Partanen.

Self-assessment of Tampere University of Applied Sciences (eds.) Teemu Jokinen, Piia Tienhaara & Anu Vainonen

The Higher Education Evaluation Committee’s decision

The Tampere University of Applied Sciences passed the audit on February 16, 2022.

The Quality Label is valid until 16 February 2028.


The audit team’s evaluation of the evaluation areas I-III

I: HEI creates competence: good level

II: HEI promotes impact and renewal: good level

III: HEI enhances quality and well-being: good  level

HEI as a learning organisation – evaluation area chosen by Tampere University of Applied Sciences (TAMK)

Common services of the higher education community – customer control and service management of the service buyer as part of the buyer’s quality system

Theme and partner for benchlearning

Theme: Best quality management practices in two higher education institutions – promoting effectiveness and reform

Partner: Hanze University of Applied Sciences (the Netherlands)

Key strengths and recommendations


  • The quality management procedures for the planning and implementation of education provide excellent support for student-centred and work-based activities.
  • TAMK’s operating culture encourages experimentation, sharing of ideas and co-development.
  • The information produced by the quality system is utilised in various ways at different levels of the organisation and it is used to develop operations in a target-oriented manner.
  • In a short time, common services have improved the smooth delivery of services and customer experience of service efficiency.


  • The quality management of degree education and continuous learning should be developed as a whole in the future.
  • The role of RDI activities must be strengthened as part of TAMK’s strategic development and annual planning process, which helps to coordinate strategic objectives and RDI activities.
  • A simplification and prioritisation of quality management procedures would strengthen the steering effect of the strategy.
  • The operational service activities and the service-specific management teams of the higher education community should be separated so that operations development is steered by the strategy and the future service development as a whole. Service-specific management teams now deal too frequently with operational problems.