Search results

This paper aims to examine current trends in business accreditation by describing and comparing the major international business accreditation agencies (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, European Quality Improvement System, Association of MBAs, Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs and International Assembly for Collegiate Business Education), and analyze their recent market expansion strategies (development and penetration using Ansoff model) as they compete for the schools seeking initial or continuing accreditation.

This is a comparative study of the business accreditation agencies and their competitive strategies, using publically available data such as lists of accredited schools published by the agencies as main data collection method.

Business accreditation agencies have utilized the market penetration and market development strategies to expand their market share in recent years. The key growth areas are international schools, regional teaching-oriented institutions, two-year institutions and for-profit institutions.

This study is based on publically available data published by accreditation agencies. More in-depth analysis with survey method could be utilized in future study to identify more specific strategies and their impact on business schools seeking accreditation.

Accreditation is no longer a luxury but a requirement for business schools, but they have to make an informed decision on which agency to pursue to assure an appropriate fit.

The public needs to understand the value and the requirements of accreditation. Multiple agencies provide different options to fit the missions of the different types of schools.

This study is valuable to business school stakeholders for understanding accreditation, the need for accreditation and the options they have available.

For over a decade now, various stakeholders in accounting education have called for the integration of technology competencies in the accounting curriculum (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), 2013, 2018; Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC), 1990; American Institute of Certified Public Accountant (AICPA), 1996; Behn et al., 2012; Lawson et al., 2014; PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), 2013). In addition to stakeholder expectations, the inclusion of data analytics as a key area in both the business and accounting accreditation standards of the AACSB signals the urgent need for accounting programs to incorporate data analytics into their accounting curricula. This paper examines the extent of the integration of data analytics in the curricula of accounting programs with separate accounting AACSB accreditation. The paper also identifies possible barriers to integrating data analytics into the accounting curriculum. The results of this study indicate that of the 177 AACSB-accredited accounting programs, 79 (44.6%) offer data analytics courses at either the undergraduate or graduate level or as a special track. The results also indicate that 41 (23.16%) offer data analytics courses in their undergraduate curriculum, 61 (35.88%) at the graduate level, and 12 (6.80%) offer specialized tracks for accounting data analytics. Taken together, the findings indicate an encouraging trend, albeit slow, toward the integration of data analytics into the accounting curriculum.

Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) member schools often compare their faculties’ research records to journal lists of their “peer and aspirational” programs. They often survey faculty and administrators’ perceptions of journal quality; number of Social Sciences Citation Index downloads; or “count” the number of faculty publications – but rarely analyze accounting programs’ actual journal quality lists. To examine this issue, we use a survey of national accounting programs. We identify a set of quality-classified journal lists by sampling 38 programs nationwide, varying by mission (e.g., urban or research), degrees granted (e.g., doctoral degrees in accounting), and national ranking (e.g., classified as a Top 75 Research Program) – from which we derive 1,436 data points that classify 359 journals that appear on these 38 programs’ journal lists. We also describe a case study that an accounting program used to revise its old journal list. We also find that while programs generally use generally accepted “bright lines” among the top three categories (A+, A, A−), they tailor their listings from the wide variety of B or C classified journals to create their own sets of acceptable journals in these categories. The study provides guidance and data for accounting programs who wish to develop or revise their own journal lists. While many studies have examined journal rankings, this is the first study to document the use of journal lists by accounting programs with a wide array of missions.

The post-globalization epoch has placed academic institutions internationally in competitive situations where knowledgeable, effective and capable decisions have come to provide the comparative edge. Academia has turned to explicit – and even conceptualizing on tacit – knowledge management to elaborate a systematic approach to develop and sustain the intellectual capital needed to succeed, in response to the employment market demand for its products. To be able to do that, you must be able to visualize your organization as consisting of nothing but knowledge and knowledge flows. The use of web-based technologies in academic institutions for their diverse practices has been widespread in colleges and universities for several decades. These applications include surveying stakeholders, assessing classes, reporting on faculty development and assurance of learning (AoL) data to mention a few. Further advances have led to the integration of applications that not only enable the sharing of knowledge but which also support the reporting requirements necessary to obtain and retain accreditation, for example; likewise, satisfy the supply of intellectual capital to the employment marketplace. The purpose of this paper is to portray the relationship between AoL and accreditations at large in business schools, with the particular articulation of a modus operandi and relevant model that could facilitate curriculum improvement likewise.

Observational research (or field research) is a type of correlational (i.e. non-experimental) research in which a researcher observes ongoing behavior. There are a variety of types of observational research, each of which has both strengths and weaknesses. A select set of business schools and leading accreditation agencies have been observed and reported upon in pertinence with the expected practices and modus operandi toward assuring learning.

The use of web-based technologies in academic institutions for their diverse practices has been widespread in colleges and universities for several decades. These applications include surveying stakeholders, assessing classes, reporting on faculty development and AoL data to mention a few. Further advances have led to the integration of applications that not only enable the sharing of knowledge but which also support the reporting requirements necessary to obtain and retain accreditation; likewise, satisfy the supply of intellectual capital to the employment marketplace. In this paper, the author aims to portray the relationship between AoL and assessment at large with real-life examples and approaches.

Observational research types are organized by the extent to which an experimenter intrudes upon or controls the environment. Observational research is particularly prevalent in the social sciences. It is a social research technique that involves the direct observation of phenomena in their natural setting. This differentiates it from experimental research in which a quasi-artificial environment is created to control for spurious factors, and where at least one of the variables is manipulated as part of the experiment. Henceforth, other research methods may be engaged in to quantify and investigate the phenomenon of AoL vs international practices reported upon as per internal and external forces acting on business schools.

The diversity of approaches followed by business schools and encouraged by accreditations agencies is immense and at times may be connected to the choices such schools make as to how they ought to measure the learning curves of their constituents. Herein, a practical AoL approach is transcribed, as liaised with assessment and evaluation data.

Academia has turned to explicit – and even conceptualizing on tacit – knowledge management to elaborate a systematic approach to develop and sustain the intellectual capital needed to succeed, in response to the employment market demand for its academic products and services. To be able to do that, you must be able to visualize your organization as consisting of nothing but knowledge and knowledge flows.

This research is conceptualized upon as per the international standards and expectations from the field with an Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business framework in mind and aims to link AoL to curriculum management and through e-Assessment in a practical manner.

A truly successful continuous improvement review (CIR) visit does more than merely check the boxes for a positive recommendation. It builds the story of the school and should be an opportunity for its culture to shine through. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to facilitate a successful CIR visit by moving from the basics of accreditation to understanding, implementing and “living” best practices.

Short tenure and high turnover among business school deans, mean that the majority of those leading the CIR may have no previous experience with the process.

This study begins by providing an overview of the role of accreditation and the role of the dean in the accreditation process. With a combined experience of over 35 years in the dean role and having served on or chaired over 35 accreditation visits, the authors share their experiences and offer a seven-step process for understanding and implementing best practices in the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business accreditation process.

The suggestions offered in this study should help schools enhance long-term positive outcomes and serve as a guide to those navigating the CIR process.

Professional schools, including collegiate business schools, are pulled in two opposing directions. The academy, where they live, pulls them to emphasize science and its values, and to focus on expanding the field of knowledge. The profession, into which their graduates move, pulls them to deal with immediately relevant, practical problems. The two also seek different characteristics in curriculum, the academy emphasizing that which will groom future scientists and the profession emphasizing that which will produce immediately employable practitioners. Collegiate business schools have not done a smooth, integrated job of balancing these competing claims for allegiance. Rather, history shows that they have satisfied one side and then, when the other side’s complaints became too loud, switched sides completely to the irritation of the constituency just jilted. This article describes what has happened and proposes a model which, if built into the accreditation standards, could reduce these unfortunate pendulum swings.

The purpose of this study is twofold. The first purpose is to inform faculty who are thinking of becoming a department head about the challenges they face if they choose to pursue a department head opportunity. The second purpose is to provide insight into the leadership of the accounting departments by looking at various workload aspects of department heads. The authors surveyed accounting department heads from programs with the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accounting accreditation, AACSB business only accreditation, and non-AACSB accreditation. Surveys were sent to 918 individuals listed as the leader of an accounting program in the 2016–2017 Hasselback Accounting Directory with 144 individuals responding (15.7% response rate). In addition to the workload of the department head in the areas of teaching, research, and service, the study analyzed the major challenges and difficulties the department head faces. The study also sought responses from survey participants on additional issues such as the benefits of AACSB accreditation and compensation.

The purpose of this study is to identify the specific skills and abilities within the broad category of data analytics that current business professionals believe are most important for accounting graduates. Data analytics knowledge is clearly important, but this category is broad. Therefore, this study identifies the specific skills and abilities that are most important for accounting graduates so that faculty can create classroom materials most beneficial for the future accounting graduates. In 2013, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business developed new standards for accounting programs, including standard A7, related to information technology and analytics. The intent of the standard clearly focuses on increasing the level of technology and analytics studied within the accounting curriculum. However, the specific details and methods for achieving the intent of A7 remain an open question. This chapter uses prior research focused on business analytics education to identify potential analytic skills, tools, techniques, and management issues of concern within the accounting profession. A survey of 342 accounting professionals identifies suggested areas of analytic competencies for accounting graduates. Specifically, the authors find preferences for skills related to data interpretation and communication over any individual technical skills or statistical knowledge. These skills suggest a role for accountants as intermediaries who may need to translate analytic activities into business language. Post hoc, the authors examine the survey results for differences based on respondent characteristics. Interestingly, female respondents report lower beliefs about the importance of analytic skills. The authors also find some differences when examining different demographics within the respondents.

The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into quality management for business education. The paper provides business schools and Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) with information about two different quality standards and suggests how the AACSB accreditation process might be strengthened – thereby improving the quality of the education process and product.

The authors compare two prevalent but different approaches to quality management: the AACSB accreditation standards and ISO 9001, a set of quality requirements developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). For this comparison, the authors review the literature in the field, including published quality standards, organization examples documenting implementation of AACSB or ISO 9001 standards, and existing empirical research results on the two approaches.

Both quality approaches have their merits and followers. It seems feasible that AACSB might be able to borrow some elements from the ISO 9001 components and process to improve their accreditation process. For example, they might wish to consider more standardized auditor training, the use of a third party auditing body, incorporation of a process orientation and a system of continuous improvement, as well as more overall reliance on the quality principles in ISO 9001.

This paper is a conceptual one without empirical data. As such, it has limitations. Further research is needed to gather empirical data to continue the investigation between these two approaches to quality management in education.

It is hoped that, with awareness and integration of some of the ISO 9001 components, AACSB and educational administrators are able to improve the accreditation process for business schools, thereby improving the overall education process and product.

The paper provides a comparison of two different but prevalent approaches to quality management within educational organizations. It presents insight for business schools seeking to adopt either of these approaches and provides suggestions for improvement of the AACSB standards. This discussion is valuable as it seeks to improve the quality of business education while it operates in an environment with increasingly limited resources.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the implications of the 2013 Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) Accreditation Standards for both business faculty and their deans who are responsible for implementing these changes.

This paper is a speculative viewpoint on the implications of the 2013 AACSB standards by a set of a co-authors that include AACSB deans who are active in accreditation reviews and serve as mentors to schools in the accreditation process and senior faculty who have written self-studies for AACSB and served as consultants for schools seeking AACSB accreditation internationally.

The implications of the 2013 AACSB business accreditation standards are arguably positive for active scholars holding a relevant doctoral degree. For example, active and engaged scholarly faculty should appreciate the ability to use additional indicators of the impact of their career’s intellectual contributions (IC) including, but not limited to, citations, editor ships, professional leadership positions and other measures of professional esteem.

The implications of the 2013 AACSB accreditation standards for deans are potentially less positive. The new standards codify one of the deans’ major duties – that of ensuring that the faculty have resources adequate to support the school’s mission.

This paper represents a starting point for understanding the implications of the 2013 AACSB accreditation standards, and that as the standards are operationalized over the subsequent years that these standards, like the previous changes in AACSB standards, will stimulate additional research on business school accreditation. The implications for both faculty and deans are speculative, but are grounded both by the literature and experience of the authors. The paper uses a set of tables to illustrate the impact of the new AACSB standards with examples for each guiding principle and standard.