ACBSP Vs AACSB

Can anybody explain the clear distinction between ACBSP and AACSB accreditation.

 

AACSB ist far more recognised. It accredits the programs from the better/more well known schools.

 

Triggersoft is correct - AACSB is the "gold standard" and ACBSP is less regarded. Only 18% of so of U.S. business schools are accredited by AACSB. In particular, they have high expectations of faculty credentials and research. All of the top business schools in the U.S. (take your pick of ranking lists) are AACSB accredited.

ACBSP has a place though, and is CHEA recognized. I applaud middle tier schools that can't meet AACSB's research requirement for pursuing ACBSP. In my own experience ACBSP standards have lead deans to do things they probably wouldn't otherwise do.

IACBE is a third contender in business school accreditation. I've been through an IACBE visit and I am not impressed. Further, they have granted accreditation to some schools without even a visit. For example, all AACSB schools were offered initial IACBE accreditaiton without being visited. IACBE is not CHEA recognized.

Regards - Andy

 

Re: Re: ACBSP Vs AACSB

Don't you find this rather strange considering the same guy founded both the ACBSP and the IACBE? I really don't get it.

 

Re: Re: Re: ACBSP Vs AACSB

As I understand it, the fellow that founded IACBE was involved in ACBSP, got fed up and decided to start his own new organization. The idea of accreditation with out a visit was an attempt to "jump start" the building of IACBE. It was, IMHO a bad idea.

Regards - Andy

 

ACBSP vs. AACSB

If I have my ducks in a row, and that is not always the case, AACSB is the accreditation that is founded on research, so schools wanting a high-level of research go for this.

What is really funny is that Harvard, for many years, told AACSB where they could put their accreditation.

The other business programs that were not overly concerned with research (those, for example, who want to teach future teachers of business) were the target market for ACBSP.

Different target markets, differing purposes for the schools.

One is not better than the other, they are only different in their aims. To compare the two is apples to oranges.


jim

 

Re: ACBSP vs. AACSB

JimLane: What is really funny is that Harvard, for many years, told AACSB where they could put their accreditation.

Yes, and that's even funnier when you learn that Harvard was a founding member.

JimLane: One is not better than the other, they are only different in their aims. To compare the two is apples to oranges.

Personally I agree but have to admit that AACSB accreditation is =perceived= to be "better".

As an aside, I think the AACSB admission requirements (at least in the form of testing) are a bit suspect considering the GMAC is a "sustaining member".

 

Re: Re: ACBSP Vs AACSB

Do you mean

AACSB - First tier.
ACBSP - Second tier
IACBE - Third tier.

Thanks,

 

Re: Re: Re: ACBSP Vs AACSB

I agree with this - in part because of the standards each maintains, in part due to the type of institutions that have chosen to be accredited by each.

Regards - Andy

 

Re: Re: Re: ACBSP Vs AACSB

I disagree with this and with Andy. This is an elitist view. One is apples, the other - oranges. It purely depends on the flavor you like.

As they are rating different parameters, they cannot be directly compared. Suppose your thrust were toward teaching only, then ACBSP might very well be #1, and which of the other follows in which order, is a matter of conjecture.


jim

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: ACBSP Vs AACSB

I guess Jim and I will have to disagree here. The whole "AACSB is research focused" and "ACBSP is teaching focused" is somewhat of a false dichotomy. AACSB, for example, believes that:

"Through accreditation, business schools provide stakeholders with the assurance that they:

1. Guide educational delivery by a carefully constructed mission
2. Select and support students to produce outstanding graduates
3. Deliver degree programs with qualified faculty
4. Structure learning through relevant curricula
5. Contribute to knowledge through research and scholarship "

This suggests that AACSB is interested both in scholarship and learning. I believe that high standards of scholarship and learning cannot only coexist - but that they actually support one another.

ACBSP by its nature focuses less on #5
and the "Select" part of #2. However,
I think ACBSP has a place in this world. Indeed, only 20% of business schools in the U.S. are AACSB accredited - the other 80% need accreditation to ensure the very things AACSB is after - albeit with a somewhat different focus.

Without a doubt the strongest MBA programs are operated out of AACSB schools. The ranking lists make this clear - and not just because of an elitist bias. Which schools get the most recruiters and the highest rankings by recruiters - AACSB or ACBSP? Overall, I believe AACSB schools offer the best in student learning and scholarship. For students that are qualified - go to a good AACSB school if at all possible. This is especially important for younger folks who may only have their education to sell to an employer.

For some mid-career folks this may not be possible - ACBSP schools have a niche to fill.

As for schools that are neither AACSB or ACBSP accredited - here is a good question to ask their admissions people: "If your school is so good, why doesn't it seek accreditation from a CHEA listed business school accreditor (ie AACSB or ACBSP)?" If you hear a lot of mumbling - beware.

Regards - Andy

 

If you simply call around to all of the business schools in your area, you will find that AACSB is the top dog here. It does seem that you will have at least a shot a teaching school with an ACBSP degree, but then it will still be easier to get tenure at that same school with an AACSB degree. What I can tell you is that AACSB schools say with no problem that they will not hire anyone who does not have an AACSB degree.

Considering my credentials,

BSB- Management Universtiy of Phoenix
MBA- Fontbonne (College at the time) University
PhD- (pursuing) Touro University International

the bias hurts, but I can tell you that AACSB is by far and unequivically the best.

 

ACBSP

While Andy and I might disagree, here is ACBSP, so you can make up your minds about where they are coming from:

ACBSP, founded in 1988 and located in Overland Park, Kansas, a suburb of Kansas City, was created by its members to fulfill a need for specialized accreditation by institutions of higher education with business schools and programs. Specifically, that need was for business education accreditation based on the mission of the institution and of the respective business unit, an accreditation that acknowledged and emphasized quality in teaching and learning outcomes.

and further on:

The association had its beginning in Kansas City, Missouri, April 28, 1988, when representatives of over 150 business schools and programs met to consider possible alternatives for external accreditation of their business programs. It was decided at this meeting that a study group should explore the feasibility of establishing a second accrediting body whose mission would be to promote teaching and learning, and thus to improve the quality of education in business schools and programs.


So, this body is about "teaching" excellence. Not research, not anything else. A valid case can be made that my thrust about "teaching" is off on the side a bit, but, this puts it into perspective. Their website, www.acbsp.org has all the information the thread originator would want. I suggets he look over this one and www.aacsb.edu and compare the two.

BTW, Andy, the list you gave is about the outcomes of the accredited schools and not about AACSB's actual mission. This is from their Accreditation page:

AACSB International accreditation represents the highest standard of achievement for business schools worldwide.  Institutions that earn accreditation confirm their commitment to quality and continuous improvement through a rigorous and comprehensive peer review.  AACSB accreditation is the hallmark of excellence in management education.

Hmmm, is teaching missing from this statement and that entire page? You bet. Does AACSB sign-off on any institution that does not have research as an integral part of their program?

AACSB is about research, ACSBP about teaching. Simple and should be easily seen on anyone's radar screen.


Oh yes, Happy Turkey Day everyone, excpet for the turkeys.


jim

 

Jim: If their missions (and presumably the significance of accreditation) are so disjoint, then why don't we see schools seeking and obtaining accreditation from both organizations?

 

Re: ACBSP

Jim - I guess we can go back and forth on this subject quoting various parts of the AACSB and ACBSP websites. For instance consider the following statement in the AACSB standards for accreditation:

** after talking about all the changes going on in the business world:

"In this environment, management education must prepare students to contribute to their organizations and the larger society and to grow personally and professionally
throughout their careers. The objective of management education accreditation is to assist programs to meet these challenges.

Accreditation focuses on the quality of
educational activities. Standards set
demanding but realistic thresholds,
challenge schools to pursue continuous improvement, and guide improvement in educational programs."

This sure sounds like a focus on teaching and learning to me.

As for ACBSP, they don't ignore intellectual activities by faculty. Consider the following from the ACBSP site:

"Faculty and staff success depends upon having meaningful opportunities to develop and practice new knowledge and skills. Schools and programs should invest in faculty and staff development efforts. "

The point is that there is not a clear dichotomy between AACSB and ACBSP on teaching and research. Both bodies believe in both. The difference is a matter of degree.

Finally, I'd like to repeat my earlier comments on the compatibility of research and teaching. The whole concept of a university is that of a community of scholars where knowledge is both created and passed on to students. Faculty should be busy doing both.

Regards - Andy

 

AACSB's new

accreditation criteria proposal goes 16 pages before the first mention of teaching. Interesting, no? And then it is not about teaching as any part of the mission, but is expressed as a percentage of teaching faculty.

Question for you Andy, pure and simple, please provide me the name of one single AACSB-accredited university of college that does not require its faculty to conduct research.

Put it's name, right here:

______________________________

What's thta I hear? The deepening sounds of silence?

One thing that APPEARS to be interesting is that it APPEARS that AACSB is LOWERING it's requirement for accreditation vis-a-vis the percentage of research faculty requirements in terms of percentage of all classes taught.

This will have the effect of LOWERING their standards, as near I can tell, allowing more institutions to qualify for AACSSB accreditation, requiring less faculty to have to focus on research. Hmmm, can we all smell money?


jim

 

Exclusitivity?

Interesting question. I haven't a clue. Perhaps there's an exclusitivity thing going on. Perhaps this may come to pass.

I've noticed that AACSB seems to be LOWERING it's requirement on research. Interesting, no?


jim

 

Re: AACSB's new

Jim - Here is a reply. Regards - Andy

You're right - There are no AACSB schools that allow their faculty to wimp out on research. Why? Because excellence in management education requires faculty to be intellectually active. Folks that convey knowledge to future generations of managers should be active in creating knowledge.

Quite the opposite - the sound of quality. Faculty that teach and do nothing to contribute to their disciplines are like a machine that isn't maintained and improved - in time their intellectual capital depreciates to nothing. I'll admit that practice (in the form of consulting) is a valuable aspect of faculty development. But so is research - both in the field and in teaching methods.

I would suggest that AACSB is now fully recognizing the mission basis for accreditation. For example (one that AACSB uses), in the Boston area you have several AACSB schools - Harvard, Boston U, Suffolk U, UM Amherst and others. There are vast differences between these schools as reflected in their missions. One is among the premier business schools in the world while others are more focused on mid-career folks. All educate future managers - just in different ways.

Not necessarily. First of all, what sort of fees does AACSB charge - how about $11k for initial accreditation and $3,500 per year for on-going status - much of which goes to pay for accreditation visits and visitors. For a graduate school of 300-800 students that's chump change. On AACSB's part, they could easily raise money by extracting more from top schools. On the school's part if they really want money, they could use more part-time faculty. Why? Part-timers cost only 20-30% of full timers. But AACSB requires at least 50% of credit hours to be taught by full-timers.

If you see AACSB as a way to make money - either for AACSB or for the school, I think you're missing the real picture.

 

Re: Re: AACSB's new

Oh, Andy, you just walked right in through the door, poor boy, and didn't even see this coming your way, did you..

Now, Andy, were something really farfetched to occur (it won't, but to illustrate the point), and AACSB drop it's requirement for research, what would then separate the two bodies we have been discussing?

As far as I can tell, both want high level management instruction, both want this and both want that. But there is not a nickle or dimes real difference, excepting research.

That was and is my point.

That YOU feel that reserach is part and parcel of teaching effectively is moot.

What separates the two is AACSB's thrust mandating research and ACBSP's thrust for teaching and not mandating research. ACBSP faculty are welcome to do research. The difference -- it is from the heart or for intellectual gymnastics or whatever and not from a mandate for accreditation and tenure.



jim

 

Gary - Excellent point. I'm not aware of a single school that maintains both AACSB and ACBSP accreditation. I do know of a few ACBSP schools that have stepped (or are working to step) up to AACSB (for example, Abilene Christian University).

For the AACSB crowd - they have the "gold standard" so why go after the silver?

For the ACBSP crowd - AACSB's requirements (especially the 50% full-timer rule and the faculty research requirements) are a definite deterrent.

If the dichotomy of "AACSB is research" and "ACBSP is teaching" held true - you're right, folks would pursue both.

But it isn't that simple. I'd say - AACSB is both research and teaching oriented. ACBSP is focused on teaching (with some requirement for on-going faculty development).

In either case, potential students are well advised to ask about business school accreditation when shopping for schools.

Regards - Andy