A good university listens not only to its students and lecturers but also to people beyond its gates: the employers who hire you, the government bodies that oversee education, alumni and the community around campus. At FPT University this listening isn’t left to chance, it is written into policy, with procedures and clear responsibility.

A written policy on stakeholder participation in decision-making

Since 2019 our university has applied ISO 21001:2018, the management standard designed for educational organisations, as its quality-assurance framework. On that basis it issued the “Partnership Relations Process” (QT-10/HDCV/FE), which defines stakeholders’ roles in decision-making on teaching and learning. The policy was created in 2006 and last reviewed in 2025, a long-standing, regularly updated mechanism, not a one-off.

Identifying external stakeholders, including government

Following ISO guidance, the university maps eight stakeholder groups:  learners, staff, parents, government, external providers, suppliers, the labour market and competitors and rates each group’s interest and form of participation: involved, consulted, represented or checked. At university level, government is rated “Involved”, while the labour market, employers, has high interest and direct involvement.

Table 1. Levels of interest and participation of interested parties (ISO 21001:2018; reproduced from the 21 Dec 2024 article). Interest: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L). Participation: Involved (I), Consulted (C), Represented (R), Checked (Ch)

Figure 1. Visual map of Table 1: eight stakeholder groups under ISO 21001 at university level, government rated ”Involved”

With employers, FPTU runs the iCASE model (Internship – Co-research – Academic – Scholarship – Employment): partners host interns, co-research, give academic input, fund scholarships and recruit. This brings the labour market’s voice straight into how programmes are designed.

Consultation channels: regular surveys and open feedback

External input is collected systematically: an annual employer survey on programmes, employers’ evaluation of students after on-the-job training (OJT), an alumni survey 12 months after graduation, plus internal surveys of students and staff. The survey forms are published online. Anyone can also send general feedback to [email protected], or directly to academic heads, vice rectors or the rector.

Table 2. Stakeholder survey system (forms published online)

From input to decision: a time-bound PDCA loop reporting to leadership

What makes the mechanism ‘meaningful’ is that feedback doesn’t sit in a drawer. Every survey follows the Plan–Do–Check–Act (PDCA) cycle. Within 7 working days of closing a survey, the responsible unit reports to the Board of Directors and the Board of Management — with sample size, responses, scores per criterion and a 3-year comparison — and sends results to relevant departments for a review meeting and corrective and preventive actions.

Units then propose improvements, implement them, and track and report back to leadership. The procedure is published on the website, the internal QA system and the FAP system. In short: external input → time-bound report to leadership → university action → follow-up.

Figure 2. PDCA loop: stakeholder input reported to leadership within 7 working days and turned into improvement actions

FPTU’s feedback and complaint handling process

Figure 3. Feedback and complaint handling process

Extending to the wider local community

Beyond surveys, our university works directly with the authorities where its campuses are located.

Today our mechanism is strongest with employers, alumni and regulators, and already includes direct cooperation with ward authorities. The next step is to broaden recorded dialogue with residents around FPTU campus, commune and ward authorities and civil society organisations, so the community where the university lives has a voice in its development decisions, in the spirit of SDG 16.2 on participatory decision-making.