Master's programs with ACBSP programmatic accreditation and Delta Mu Delta

Hello. I am looking to take a master's degree program in Management with a concentration of Organizational Leadership. This college's business school is accredited by the ACBSP aside from regional accreditation. I know the ACBSP is considered the no. 2 accreditation for business schools (#1 AASCB), but considered better than the IACBE. Does all of this alphabet stuff really matter? Some colleges have business programs with no programmatic accreditation like Amberton and Western Governor's University. Aside from that, they are very inexpensive schools.

The ACBSP has the Delta Mu Delta honor society attached to it. Is anyone a member? What can you tell me about it? From what I see, it appears to be an impressive honor society. I'd love to join if my grades are high enough.

 

AACSB matters, the rest don't.

 

That's your opinion, and I and many other's don't share it pal.

 

and yet you ask the question. :sucks:

 

Its his opinion and the opinion of the people who do hiring, negotiate salaries, etc.

Not saying non-AACSB schools aren't good but the other letters aren't what make them good and don't add much to them.

 

I have an AACSB MBA, a for-profit doctorate, and teach at an ACBSP school.

For most adult learners, to be honest, programmatic accreditation isn't that big of a deal. Students earn MBA's from all sorts of schools, and they are able to find jobs, advance, etc. I'll grant that some employers are looking for AACSB grads, but at the end of the day for most adult learners, it's experience + degree that makes them employable, promotable, etc.

 

If someone were to graduate from Central Connecticut University(AACSB) would they really have that much of an advantage over a University of North Alabama(ACBSP) graduate? How about a Westminster College (ACBSP) graduate? I think the CCU graduate may fair better in New England perhaps but how about in L.A. or Dallas? I can Tell you that the Westminster grad would fair better in Utah than the CCU graduate. I suspect UNA grad may do ok in Alabama. AACSB matters most in academia, also all tier 1 MBA schools have AACSB, but we are not talking tier 1 schools, that changes the dynamic. Many State Universities can afford to have AACSB because they are a state funded institution. A college like Westminster, decides the added cost is not worth it and gets ACBSP accreditation which does still allow it's graduates to sit for the CPA exam(at least in it's home state). As Shawn points out, there are many other factors involved as well. So AACSB is not the only key.

 

I have two MBAs (different concentration areas); the most recent from an AACSB B-school; the former without programmatic accreditation. In that neither one has top-tier ranking, I’m doubtful it’s of material significance. Employers have never indicated partiality either way.

 

ACBSP has been coming on quite strong. They had over 1000 people attend their largest conference ever, almost month ago in Chicago. AACSB has stumbled a bit with their deferral by CHEA on three points.

ACBSP is already over that hump. But since there is so much at stake, AACSB will adjust and do what it has to do.

I'm not sure, but the clear cut advantage once held by AACSB seems to be eroding little by little; just my opinion though.
DMD is cool. It's highly respected.

 

There is a huge gap between the top schools at both of the large programmatic accreditors, reaching down to those at the bottom that barely make the standard.

 

Agreed. Employers do not care about the programmatic distinction between AACSB and ACBSP, but many employers do care about regional accreditation. When an employer asks if an MPA is accredited, AACSB/ACBSP is not on their radar.

 

I think this view was once true, but is now out of date. Until 2011, AACSB and ACBSP were the only business accreditors that were recognized by CHEA. So IACBE really did have less credibility as a business accreditor, and it was fair to put it at #3.

However, IACBE is now a full CHEA member, and at this point I don't see any compelling differences between IACBE and ACBSP. The two agencies accredit similar schools, were both founded by the same guy, and have considered exploring "combination opportunities" (though this now seems to be off the table).

AACSB is clearly different from ACBSP or IACBE in one respect: just about all of the most selective and prestigious business schools in the US (state flagships, Ivies, etc.) are accredited by AACSB. If you want an MBA degree from a school with a national reputation, then you need to focus on AACSB institutions.

If you are looking at less selective business schools, with regional (as opposed to national) reputations, then you have more options: AACSB, ACBSP, IACBE, or no professional accreditation at all. And at this level, it probably doesn't matter much: Podunk State is still Podunk State -- not Berkeley or Yale -- even with the AACSB "seal of approval". So in some cases, a regional IACBE/ACBSP/RA-only business school may be a better choice than a regional AACSB school, as suggested in this recent degreeinfo thread.

AACSB might be a significant plus if you planned to use a degree from a regional school in a different part of the US, or in a different country. If your school only has a regional reputation, then people in other regions or other countries may know nothing whatsoever about it. But AACSB has a national and international reputation, so if your degree is AACSB-accredited, it will have automatic credibility even if your school is unknown.

 

Acbsp adds very little value to RA universities. However, it does add substantial value to foreign universities whose accreditation is fuzzy or who need an inexpensive marketing gimmick. Amba and equis are comparable to aacsb. Therefore acbsp should be in fourth or fifth place.

 

Agreed here as well. AACSB/ACBSP is more so important if you want to pursue a terminal degree and enter academia full-time. But in the job market, most employers really only care at regional accreditation. I have a AACSB-accredited MBA and an RA-accredited MS in IT. My wife also has an RA-accredited MBA. Between the two of us, none of our previous and current employers have ever inquired into AACSB or ACBSP accreditation or listed it as a requirement on job postings.

 

If I couldn't get into or afford an AACSB-accredited school, I'd probably opt for the cheapest program even if it meant no programmatic accreditation. Besides some teaching jobs and one federal job opening I saw asking for either AACSB or ACBSP accreditation, I don't really see much added value in having ACBSP or IACBE accreditation. There is at least one state that makes the process of becoming a CPA a little bit easier if one has an AACSB or ACBSP accredited degree (programmatic accreditation is not required, though), but I personally have no interesting in becoming one.

 

As a reader of this thread who has no dog in the fight I'd like to offer this feedback. Ann asked for opinions and you provided one. However, you stated your opinion as if it was a fact and you offered no rationale for this opinion. The validity of your opinion is dependant on your rationale and without it you run the risk of appearing to be a mere troll. This is especially true when you offer your opinion in such a terse manner. Hopefully you will accept this feedback with the spirit in which it was offered.

 

I would suggest the college's football team ranking is more important then AACSB to many employers outside of academia (with the except of an MBA from Harvard, Stanford, MIT, etc.)

 

But it's pretty much the same thing. For example, of the top 25 college football teams in the final 2013 AP poll, 25 of them -- or 100% -- have AACSB accreditation.

Division I-A football teams are typically found at large universities with national reputations.
And large universities with national reputations typically have AACSB business schools.

How many ACBSP or IACBE schools play football at the Division I-A level?
I don't know if the answer is zero, but it can't be very large.

 

See, I tried to keep it simple and you got complex and out smarted me!

 

I would think almost zero if not zero of the P5 teams. The G5 teams would be the ones that would have a good portion of their teams not have AACSB or be in the AAU. Division 1 FCS (Formerly known as I-AA) football teams would have an even larger portion not be AACSB. But by playing Division I football that in itself legitimizes a school. People love sports and love winning teams. One of the reasons I picked Liberty for grad school was they played Division I FCS football. There were other reasons but sports was a factor. Aside from academia and maybe investment type jobs employers will usually gauge schools off what they immediately know or remember about it. That knowledge might very well come from ESPN.