IACBE and CHEA

Latest news - perhaps others have seen this:

"International Assembly for Collegiate Business Education (IACBE)
Earns CHEA Recognition. The Board of Directors and the Board of
Commissioners of IACBE have announced that the Board of Directors
of the Council of Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) granted
recognition to IACBE at its January 24, 2011 meeting."

According to ACBSP's BEW newsletter.

Bottom line - ACBSP and IACBE are both CHEA recognized, but IMHO still a big step below AACSB.

R Andy

 

Andy,

Perhaps that’s why your alma mater IACBE accredited Nova Southeastern (Huizenga) is undergoing that arduous process toward AACSB accreditation; as is my current university Tarleton State (ACBSP accredited).

 

I do not understand why you would think aascb is so far above the others. Maybe if you are trying to become a teacher since the aascb accreditation is geared towards research. ACBSP and IACBE are geared towards real world business. You are entitld to your opinion but very few businesses would know or care about the difference between the three

 

Some large companies do have policies that favor AACSB degrees. For example, Intel caused a stir a few years ago when they halted tuition reimbursements for non-AACSB business programs. My understanding is that some other high-profile companies, like Fed-Ex and Lockheed Martin, have also gone that route.

My guess is that the distinction is most likely to be recognized at larger companies, and less likely to be recognized at smaller companies.

 

AACSB has been around much longer (1916) than ACBSP (1988) and IACBE (1997), so its longevity alone weighs heavily into the AACSB value perception and in that AACSB was the first business accreditation body … that’s why most of the premier name University business schools have it; and AACSB is not really practical for smaller B-programs. ACBSP came about quite awhile later (72-years) and was started by several AACSB members who were discontented with AACSBs focus on serving institutions for which research is a high priority and they probably realized a market niche opportunity (?). It’s infrequent to find outside university leadership and academia, or fortune 500 firms, those who recognize the specialized /programmatic accreditation system.

As regards employability, frequently employers don’t understand the system of accreditation. However, employers are far more likely hire and pay more for a HBS, Wharton or Darden MBA because it’s Harvard, Penn or Virginia – reasonably not due to AACSB accreditation. And even though other institutions have AACSB accreditation e.g. Abilene Christian, Appalachian State, Arkansas Tech, Coastal Carolina University, Sam Houston State, Elizabeth City State, Grambling State, Prairie View A&M, etc.; there would be little comparison in B-program recognition significance (all AACSB accredited) in relation to the first three B-School examples I’ve listed. One wouldn’t necessarily be hired or be compensated because of his/her institution’s programmatic accreditation but rather the reputation of the individual university /B-School and/or the individual’s own professional achievements, experience and qualifications. Nonetheless, the top-tier B-schools will also be AACSB accredited.

 

Consider any ranking list you care to view - the top business programs in the world are AACSB accredited. It isn't a matter of AACSB or their standards - the best programs are AACSB and every ACBSP or IACBE school I know would trade their accreditation for AACSB if they could.

Why can't ACBSP and IACBE schools achieve AACSB? Size is an issue for many - programs with less than 15 faculty members are effectively barred from AACSB. Money is another issue.

Regards - Andy

 

This seems redundant to me.
I'm not familiar with them but why to have these 3 business programs accrediting agencies?

Isn't one sufficient?

 

AACSB accredits major research universities.
ACBSP accredits small teaching colleges.
IACBE accredits working adult universities.

 

It may generally follow those lines, but it is not exclusively this way.

UoP is by no means a small teaching college, but they have ACBSP accreditation.

 

Historically (1916 to 1988), there was only one: AACSB.

But it wasn't sufficient, because AACSB was only interested in accrediting programs at the most selective schools. In 1988, there were approximately 2,400 schools in the US with business programs. AACSB -- after some 70 years of operation -- only accredited about 260 of them, or about 11%.

So there was a huge potential market for alternative forms of business school accreditation, to address the other 89% of business schools. ACBSP (in 1988) and IACBE (in 1997) were established to serve that market.

Both ACBSP and IACBE were founded by the same individual. My understanding is that he came to a disagreement with the ACBSP Board about the appropriate philosophy of accreditation, and therefore left ACBSP to start IACBE. My impression is that there is not a well-defined separation between ACBSP programs and IACBE programs; this line is likely to become blurrier now that IACBE has CHEA recognition.

 

It's very similar to the situation with seminary accreditation ... there you have the oldest and "gold standard" of accreditation (ATS) and two other USDE/CHEA approved seminary accreditors (ABHE & TRACS). They do seem somewhat redundant to me, as do AACSB/ACBSP/IACBE.

One difference in ATS/ABHE/TRACS is that ATS does not approve any 100% DL seminary programs (so any school with ATS accreditation must include at least a few residencies), whereas ABHE & TRACS do. So that helps give ABHE & TRACS their own niche, but the line between those two is kinda blurry. Sounds like it will be the same for ACBSP & IACBE, at least until they develop their own "niche" perhaps?

 

Your US Navy will not except a non-AASCB accredited MBA in Healthcare Management for their Health Care Administration direct commissioning program. Nor will they accept a Masters in Public Health from a non CEHP accredited school. They will also not accept a Masters in Health Care Administration from any school not accredited by CAHME.

Sometimes accreditation matters, even when you are not looking for it.

 

While at this point it seems like having three business accrediting body seem redundant, when you look at the institutions that are members under each they seem to actually fill a niche. Granted there is some overlap. IMHO, all in all, there is not so much an overlap that there isn't a need for three. With that being said, more than three, would seem to be unnecessary.

 

Hmm. Probably I should not have made the equations of teaching college = small and research university = large.

 

Are there still any RA MBA programs in the U.S. that do not have accreditation from any of the 3 acreditors (AACSB, ACBSP, or IACBE)?

 

In my opinion, I agree that there is a difference between AACSB and ACBSP. But based on one’s perspective, that difference may be that AACSB is more appropriate or ACBSP is more appropriate for a specific school.

AACSB has a different focus than ACBSP. AACSB is primarily focused on faculty research and peered-reviewed publications. AACSB requirements include faculty that are Academically Qualified (AQ), meaning faculty have on-going research agendas and pursue peer-reviewed journal publications, and present papers at academic conferences. In some of these research-focused schools, I believe that teaching may have a lower priority, usually left to teaching assistants (PhD students) and non-tenured track faculty. (The tenured track faculty is focused on research and publications to maintain their AQ status). There has been much discussion of this over-emphasis of this research/publication perspective in academia. (For example see Harvard Business Review article “How Business Schools Lost Their Way” (Bennis, W.G., O'Toole, J. May 2005. Harvard Business Review; Vol. 83 Issue 5, p96, 9p, 2)). Because of this issue, I believe AACSB is now beginning to increase focus on assurance of learning and learning assessments, which has always been the major focus of ACBSP (the other guys).

ACBSP is primarily focused on teaching and assurance of learning in their students. In these “teaching-focused schools, the emphasis is on teaching and student learning, and less on peer-reviewed publications and research. I think most courses in ACBSP schools are taught by tenure-track professors (and I believe the tenure process at these ACBSP schools is focused more on teaching performance and less on research publications.)

Thus, a different perspective resulting from the difference in school focus. I have been a student and/or faculty at both ACBSP and AACSB schools and can definitely tell the difference in school focus. Maybe the question should not be "Which accreditation is better" but "Which accreditation is more appropriate for the school, depending on the mission of the school--teaching or research?

Just my opinion.

 

Probably lots. How about Capella, for example?

Fields like business or ministry are not subject to professional licensing laws. So professional accreditation is optional for business degrees. From a legal perspective, it makes no difference whatsoever whether an MBA degree is AACSB or ACBSP or IACBE or "none of the above". You can become a successful businessman with any MBA degree (or even with no MBA degree at all). So different approaches to professional accreditation are perfectly OK for business schools.

Other fields, like law, are less flexible. In most states, you must have an ABA-accredited JD degree to practice law. So in most states, law schools have no options when it comes to professional accreditation -- a law school must be professionally accredited, and the accreditation must come from ABA. Business schools simply aren't restricted in this way.

 

Actually this is incorrect. You can get a waiver quite easily to waive this requirement. The only thing that an AASCB MBA does for you in the Medical Service Corps In Service Procurement Program HCA field is give you automatic O-2 instead of coming in as an O-1

Trust me I know because I am applying to that program in 2 years. I know its ins and outs.

 

Its not incorrect, it states that right in the regulations. According to PA 115 and PA 132 you need the following accredited degree "AACSB, NASPAA, CEPH, or CAHME". The recruiter also told me that online degrees will not work and this is also backed up in the regs. Of course like everything in the military you can get a waiver for it-but waivers are not the norm. I'm only speaking to the HEALTH SERVICES COLLEGIATE PROGRAM (HSCP).

You'll probably be "exceptionally qualified" and you can get a waiver like it states in the regs, so your online degree without the wanted accreditation will probably work. But why take the chance?

 

The program you are speaking of is a new entry program and the one I am speaking of is an enlisted to commission program. So sure guess you are right.

I still do not feel AASCB is any better or more important than the other two. Its no different than people trying to say one regional accreditation is better than another. At the end of the day it is still an RA accreditation just like all three of these are secondary business accreditations.