USQ intends to apply for AACSB accreditation

If I were a non-American international student who would like to study in Australia and have no plans of going to the US, AACSB accreditation would give me comfort only in the sense that I know I'm definitely not applying to a diploma mill.

I wouldn't use AACSB as my "gold standard in business" for Australian universities, however, since (1) it is primarily an American business accreditor, not an Australian body that oversees the performance of Australian schools, and (2) I don't think it would really matter to my employer or prospective PhD/DBA Business school in Australia or any other part of the world outside the USA whether my MBA is from an AACSB-accredited school or not. The very top schools in Europe, Australia, and Asia don't have AACSB accreditation. Do they need it? No (unless they want to attract American students). Do they care? I don't think so.

 

First off, AACSB is actually known as AACSB International and although it is American-based, it is quickly spreading its tentacles around the world. I would tend to disagree with your comments that the top schools in Europe, Australia and Asia don't have AACSB accreditation.

Most definately the top business schools in Canada are either AACSB accredited or are in the process of obtaining it. Same holds true in the UK and France. Look it up, it's on the AACSB International website, you will find a comprehensive list of the best international business schools.... all AACSB accredited.

As far as Australia is concerned, the Australian Graduate School of Management, The University of Queensland and The University of Sydney are AACSB accredited. Top schools, no doubt.

My personal opinion is that if someone is pursuing a DBA or PhD in Business for the purpose of teaching.... then AACSB is a must. Again, my personal opinion, is that anything else would be a waste of time.

 

Reading the individual postings I get the impression that a professional accreditation, such as AACSB, matters only if you want to apply for a teaching position. However, will AACSB accreditation give you an advantage in the real business world, when applying for a job?

Dennis

 

It gives prestige to the school for sure and putting this accreditation in your resume normally gives a stamp of quality. It is not necessary for employment as many other variable fit into place. It also gives you better chances for admission into PhD programs with AACSB accreditation and it makes your credits more transferable to other AACSB institutions.

This said, it doesn't hurt to have the accreditation. The fact is that there are millions of MBA programs around and the concept of a universal business accreditor can help in the future and eventually employers would recognize it as the seal of quality for MBA programs.

 

Well, my answer to that would be "depends". If the hiring officer has knowledge of the topic then perhaps AACSB would matter. If not, then no.

Put in perspective, most engineering companies know to ask if a program is ABET accredited during interviews. The same probably does not hold true for AACSB at this time, but a few years from now that may change.

AACSB can be a very powerful marketing feature for the applicant. If someone graduated with a DBA from Harvard, then perhaps AACSB would not be needed as a reinforcer of added value. However, if someone graduated with a DBA from a little known regional university or a DL program, then AACSB would be a definate added value.

My pespective on the matter is simple: If you're going to spend 5 years working on a doctorate in business administration (DBA or PhD) it would be worth the investment in time and money to pursue it from an AACSB-accredited school. There is nothing to lose and everything to gain.

I can't imagine a worse feeling than making it through the interview process for your dream job and then getting rejected because your program was not accredited. The worst part is that there is no way to correct it unless you want to go back to school and start the doctorate over again from an AACSB school. No thanks.

 

The DETC accreditation that Australian Universites have taken out to their Master degree level courses only [of course] really relates to funding for US students. However with my alma mater I notice their blurb about it doesn't tell us that - http://www.une.edu.au/uneweb/detc.htm

International Accreditation of UNE's Distance Education Programs

The University of New England distance education (off-campus) programs, up to and including Masters level, are accredited by the Accrediting Commission of the US-based Distance Education and Training Council (DETC).

Founded in 1926, DETC promotes sound educational standards and ethical business practices in distance education. Its Accrediting Commission was established in 1955 to identify and accredit distance education and training institutions that meet the high academic and business standards required.

DETC accreditation guarantees that The University of New England provides the quality of education it claims to offer, that it operates on a sound financial basis, offers approved programs of study, follows recruitment and admissions policies that meet set standards and has qualified teaching staff, as well as adequate equipment and facilities.

The DETC Accrediting Commission is listed by the US Department of Education as a nationally recognised accrediting agency and is a member of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). For more information on the DETC, please visit: http://www.detc.org

DETC accreditation is a recognised worldwide standard for distance education. For current and prospective students of The University of New England, it represents an important guarantee of quality that complements and extends the quality assurance mechanisms operated by the Australian Government.

 

Just one person's experience here - My employer only reimburses AACSB schools in a graduate setting. It is the case for all graduate work - professional accreditation is a must for reimbursement.

Anyway, I think all the discussion is a good one, and like Carlos, I did a huge amount of research on AACSB when I looked at my MBA program.

P.S. - I have heard that AACSB is going to change their names in the near future, as they have a more international focus now.

 

A number of good questions have been raised in this thread and a number of good answers have been proposed. My own sense is that the world has gotten quite a bit smaller since the advent of distance learning and especially the internet. Globalization, international corporations, people rise up in organizations from all corners of the world. People want credentials that will have maximum acceptance on a worldwide basis. Organizations (universities) are in a supply-and-demand situation. In my own opinion, USQ would not be pursuing this option if they did not feel that it would buy them (and their products=degrees) prestige and thereby a larger market share of students.
That's why.
Jack

 

The Chair of the Marketing Dept at the highly rated University of Florida (AACSB,EQUIS)does not have an AACSB accredited doctorate:

http://www.cba.ufl.edu/research/faculty/professor.asp?WEBID=139


Dr. Joseph W. (Joe) Alba
Chair, Marketing Department; Distinquished Professor
PHD - Experimental Psychology, 1981 Temple University

Nor does the Chair of the Management Dept at the University of Florida:

http://www.cba.ufl.edu/research/faculty/professor.asp?WEBID=193

Dr. Larry A. Di Matteo
Chair, Management Department; Associate Professor
JD - Law, 1982 Cornell University


Please show me where in the AACSB accredidation standards a doctorate from an AACSB school is required to teach full-time at an AACSB school.


Thanks

 

You're right that the ACCREDITATION STANDARDS don't require it, in fact, they allow for the very situation you describe at the U of F, but the problem is that many POSITIONS at AACSB B-schools require it. If you stride in with a Juris Doctorate from an Ivy League and you're applying for a position teaching primarily law courses in the Business school, then that's fine. If you are applying for a position in Marketing and you've got all the other right stuff (experience and stellar teaching/research acumen) in addition a cross-discipline PhD in another field from a nationally-recognized university like Temple, you might get a look and they might bend the rules at a solid AACSB like U of F if you blow them away in the interview.

But I can almost guarantee you that a PhD from Jimmy John's Non-AACSB For-Profit School of Business will get your CV a one-way ticket to the old circular file.

 

I know you are right and are giving good advice based on reality. It is the absurdity of the situation that I find sad.

CarlosB who has extensive experience in labor negotiations and helped design a very successful marketing program for a medium sized company received his business PhD from RA only IOU-U. While earning this degree he built a new real-estate oriented business in Palm Beach County and is doing quite well.

SamA received his PhD from fourth-tier AACSB FAU while attending full time. He has no substantial real world experience at all.

Both apply for a full time position at FIU. The AACSB says both candidates meet their requirements. Would it be in the best interests of the STUDENTS to give the position to SamA ?

I seriously doubt it!

Just my opinion

 

These professors do not have business doctorates. Also, stardards change over time (they graduated almost 25 years ago). Also, they probably teach specialized courses within the deparment related to their field.

Let's draw an analogy. Do you think a engineering professor at an ABET accredited school can teach mainstream engineering subjects without having himself an ABET accredited degree? I think not.

However, it is possible for a non-ABET-acccredited scientist (Ph.D. in Physics, Chemistry, etc...) to teach hard science courses in an engineering program as long as they are limited to the hard sciences.

I think something similar applies to the example you cited.

 

And they are also the Chairs of their respective programs. That means in marketing and management, two very business areas, UoF, a Top Fifty at least AACSB business school most likely passed over PhDs holding AACSB degrees to promote two people without AACSB degees.

Guess AACSB and EQUIS didn't mind at all.

Like you said:

I think it would be worse to go through all the full time AACSB PhD work only to get passed over for your dream position as Chair of the UoF Management Dept by someone that has a non-AACSB law degree!!

Kinda know as life in the real world.





Just my opinion

 

I consider that it would be a big plus if what you have gotten is obviously a DL degree. My concern is that even if I get a MBA from an RA school (I live in Canada) it will be pretty damn obvious that I didn't go to the school. If this happens to be an unknown school (say a place like Marist College) then at least I can say in an interview that they are accredited by the AACSB, which also accredits (insert long list of well known Canadian and US schools here).

This would help to make a potential employer feel more comfortable about the school.

It is certainly worth remembering that there is still a significant number of recruiters/employers/people with preconceived notions that DL is no good. AACSB, or any professional accreditation, will be helpful.

 

I think it is interesting how many will debate the value of AACSB. I think those that find it has no value will not change their mind's, just as those who find value will not either. I think there is evidence on both sides, but overall it is a decision one must make on their own.

I personally think there is overwhelming evidence that in academia, especially AACSB school's, that for the most part, they find value in degreeholders from AACSB schools. Yes, can you find some out there that are the exceptions to the rule, of course, but it is not the norm. (And all examples I have seen is not that they received their degree from non-AACSB schools, but rather they do not hold their degree in business, i.e. psychology). In industry, I think it truely depends. For me I have experienced it does, but found many other's experiences are otherwise, so the industry debate is still up in the air for me.

 

For me the perceived value of AACSB was never in doubt. If you want to teach you will be better off with it. No if, ands, or buts about it.

My issue was the true quality of the accreditation. No professional licenses I know of require it. No additional Federal student financial aid is available due to it.

I wanted to know the true value and why schools will pay a fair sum of money and give up total control of their business program to get it.

What I found was an accreditation that appears to serve the needs of the facility and the marketing department of the school at the expense of the students.

For over a year here I have questioned the use of full-time professors with no real world experience vs those that do.

The following from the Harvard Business Review June 2005 echoes my opinion:

The article, "How Business Schools Lost Their Way," was written by Warren G. Bennis and James O'Toole, both prominent professors at the University of Southern California's Marshall School of Business.

USC Marshall School of Business is AACSB accredited!

Unlike others here that post in favor of AACSB here I have no vested interest one way or the other. If the above statement “The dirty little secret at most of today’s best business schools is that they chiefly serve the faculty’s research interests and career goals, with too little regard for the needs of other stakeholders” is true how can you justify it?
Just my opinion