Search results

In the last two decades, a proliferation of business process management (BPM) modeling languages, standards and software systems has given rise to much confusion and obstacles to adoption. Since new BPM languages and notation terminologies were not well defined, duplicate features are common. This paper seeks to make sense of the myriad BPM standards, organising them in a classification framework, and to identify key industry trends.

An extensive literature review is conducted and relevant BPM notations, languages and standards are referenced against the proposed BPM Standards Classification Framework, which lists each standard's distinct features, strengths and weaknesses.

The paper is unaware of any classification of BPM languages. An attempt is made to classify BPM languages, standards and notations into four main groups: execution, interchange, graphical, and diagnosis standards. At the present time, there is a lack of established diagnosis standards. It is hoped that such a classification facilitates the meaningful adoption of BPM languages, standards and notations.

The paper differentiates BPM standards, thereby resolving common misconceptions; establishes the need for diagnosis standards; identifies the strengths and limitations of current standards; and highlights current knowledge gaps and future trends. Researchers and practitioners may wish to position their work around this review.

Currently, to the best of one's knowledge, such an overview and such an analysis of BPM standards have not so far been undertaken.

The paper aims to develop a process model for implementation in a business school setting, by doing a thorough analysis of the requirement of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) standards relating to the learning and teaching area.

The process model is developed by adopting a three-step approach. The authors have presented an articulated procedure for the development of the process model.

The process model presented in this paper offers a systemic approach to process design and implementation in a business school environment. The process model was developed and applied over the course of systematic reviews in a business school setting by aligning with the requirements of AACSB accreditation standards belonging to the learning and teaching area.

The limitation of the present study is that the scope of the process model presented here is limited to the requirements of the AACSB standards belonging to the learning and teaching area only. The authors plan to develop process models for the other areas of AACSB standards in the near future.

It is hoped that this paper can bring a contribution to professionals as well as academics, in regards to development of process framework complying with the requirements of the AACSB standards. The process model presented in this paper comprises macro-level processes and the related activities. It will serve as a guide to develop processes in a business school setting.

The present study has attempted to present a process model complying with requirements of the AACSB standards belong to the learning and teaching area. The authors feel that developed process model can be used by the business schools that are planning to implement AACSB standards for accreditation or are interested in modifying their current processes following the requirements of the AACSB standards.

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.

The purpose of the paper is to introduce the concept of a checklist, focusing on the detailed analysis of requirements of the AACSB International – the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) standards related to the learning and teaching area – for evaluation of implementation readiness in a business school setting.

The present study adopted a multi-method approach for developing the final content of the checklist.

The introduction of the checklist has provided a systemic approach to process design and evaluation of readiness of a business school for AACSB accreditation related to the learning and teaching area. The checklist was developed and applied over the course of systematic reviews in a business school setting.

The checklist has been developed considering the requirements of the AACSB standards related to the learning and teaching area only. In the near future, the authors intend to develop checklists for the remaining areas of AACSB standards.

This research offers a comprehensive checklist comprising the requirements of the standards related to the learning and teaching area. The checklist would be useful to the business schools that are planning to implement AACSB standards for accreditation or are interested in changing their current processes to follow AACSB standards.

The purpose of this paper is to report on the findings of an exploratory survey designed to measure AACSB member deans’ perceptions about the recently revised 2013 Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) Accreditation Standards. In April of 2013, AACSB International released a major revision of its accreditation standards to better reflect the increased globalization of management education.

The present study surveyed AACSB member school deans via e-mail using SurveyMonkey during October and early November of 2013. A total of 1,131 valid e-mail addresses were found for the deans/heads of member schools (accredited and non-accredited). In total, 259 surveys were completed, resulting in a 23 per cent response rate for member schools with valid e-mails (n = 1,131).

The present study found that the AACSB membership largely perceives that AACSB accreditation is a basic requirement to be a credible and competitive business school, is an indicator of a quality education and is linked to enhancing a business school’s ability to be effective in faculty recruitment and student placement. Even business school’s holding association of MBA (AMBA) and the European Foundation for Management Development’s International Accreditation Program (EQUIS) accreditation seemed to think that AACSB accreditation is a basic requirement to be a competitive business school. The most notable finding of this study is that most deans indicated that they will be able to meet the 2013 standards.

Although at the time of the survey no business school had been subject to review under the new standards, member deans largely felt that the guiding principles and values and the accreditation standards themselves are achievable. In addition, there was widespread agreement that AACSB accreditation is valuable, meaningful and essential in today’s globally competitive environment.

The purpose of this research is to articulate an analysis framework and a method for the cross‐national business‐to‐business integration electronic commerce (B2Bi EC) by exploring an ontology‐assisted schema and semantics resolution in the business process alignment with electronic commerce standards.

The paper presents an ontology‐assisted analysis method and alignment model in the implementation of the B2B electronic commerce standard specification over the existing trading partners' public processes in the syntactic and semantic integration and interoperability. An application of the Unified Modeling Language is made to analyze the public process in the domain and in the standard. Terms, concepts, relations, and links are created from the analysis results and converted into an ontology representation. Web Ontology Language is introduced to formulate the analyzed knowledge and experience to align the domain and the standard. There are correspondences and conflicts in the process of alignment. They are resolved via the shared and reusable ontology which is a convergence of the domain ontology and the standard ontology. The converged and shared ontology is achieved via a set of rules and heuristics that are created in the research.

The key of success in the B2Bi EC lies in the ability to accomplish the process interoperability and the schema comparability. Three main tasks have to be achieved to fulfill the requirements. This research constructs a prototype to implement the method. The prototype is used to illustrate the feasibility and validity of the method. A set of starter experiments has been conducted in use of a straight‐through example of a purchase order process in the alignment with the RosettaNet standard and the ebXML standard. The starter experiment serves as the baseline to demonstrate that the method is feasible and valid.

A syntactic and semantic analysis method and alignment model are developed and demonstrated in the research. Integration and interoperability are accomplished in use of the systematic and analytic method.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The International Association for Manage‐ment Education (AACSB) historically has been a strong supporter of the business disciplinary communities that have served to create and protect a much narrower definition of faculty qualifications. Research has supported the notion that business schools have often selected and rewarded faculty for their academic credentials and for their ability to conduct empirical research regardless of institutional type. In recent studies following the introduction of the new AACSB stan‐dards, deans surveyed generally anticipate only modest changes in the credentials and research expectations for their faculties. This multiple case study investigated dean and management and marketing chair and faculty perceptions of the potential impact of the new AACSB faculty qualifications standards on hiring, tenure, and promotion criteria at four comprehensive universities. Generally, respondents expected little opportunity for selection, tenure or promotion of faculty with doctorates outside traditional business disciplines and no opportunity for those considered professionally qualified.

This paper explores who among the AACSB categorization of academics conducts the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) research within business schools and how AACSB-accredited business schools capture SoTL research as part of their portfolio of intellectual contributions.

This study adopts a qualitative-method research design by collecting primary data through surveys, semi-structured interviews and secondary data in policy documents focused on AACSB-accredited business schools in Canada and the United States.

The findings establish that scholarly and practice academics who possess rigorously acquired research skills due to their terminal degrees are most likely to conduct SoTL research. The results also reveal an even split among respondents regarding whether their AACSB-accredited business school captures SoTL with their journal ranking frameworks.

Based on the findings, two recommendations are offered to foster more SoTL research at AACSB-accredited schools. First, higher education leaders (e.g. business school deans) can further inculcate a culture of SoTL research at the department and institutional levels by creating communities of practice (CoPs). Second, AACSB-accredited business schools could adopt more inclusive journal ranking frameworks to capture better and incentivize SoTL research.

This is the first known study to explore how AACSB Standards 3 and 8 are implemented and operationalized regarding SoTL research. Understanding how these standards are adopted and implemented could help institutional leaders, standard setters and administrators better facilitate SoTL research.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a process model, focusing on the detailed analysis of the requirement of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) standards related to Participants area, for implementation in a business school setting.

The paper presents an articulated procedure for the development of the process model. The study adopted a three-step approach for developing the process model.

The process model has provided a systemic approach to process design and implementation of AACSB accreditation standards related to Participants area in a business school environment. The process model was developed and applied over the course of systematic reviews in a business school setting.

The present study has developed the process model catering to the requirements of the AACSB standards related to Participants area only. In the near future, the authors intend to develop processes for the remaining areas of AACSB standards.

The present work attempts to develop a process model to meet the requirements of the standards related to Participants area. Academic institutions can benefit from the process model whether they are planning to implement AACSB standards for accreditation or are interested in changing their current processes following AACSB standards.