In 2003, AACSB again overhauled the accreditation system, and management science reappeared in the accreditation standards. However, the 2003 standards provide softer, more flexible guidelines than the pre-1991 standards.

In this article, I discuss the changing AACSB standards as they apply to OR/MS, and the mixed impact of the new standards on management science. In an accompanying article I suggest actions that savvy management science instructors can take to use the new accreditation standards to their benefit.

Accreditation is big business. There is an alphabet soup of business school accreditation entities, including ACBSP (The Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs), NCA (The North Central Association, one of seven U.S. regional entities), CEEMAN (The Central and East European Management Development Association), FIBAA (The Foundation for International Business Administration Accreditation, in Germany), BAC (The British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and Higher Education, in the United Kingdom) and others. There is even an "Association of Specialized and Professional Accreditors" and a "Council for Higher Education Accreditation" that exist to accredit accreditors.

AACSB has the most prestigious and influential membership. Based in St. Louis, its current full name is "AACSB International — The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business." As of April 2003, AACSB has 884 member schools — 656 in the United States and 228 international. A total of 451 member schools are accredited — 406 in the United States and 45 international. AACSB states that more than 50 percent of U.S. business degrees are granted by AACSB-accredited institutions.

AACSB's standards have strong impact on business school curricula. AACSB made dramatic changes to the accreditation standards in 1991 and 2003. These changes reflected a significant change in philosophy, and should not be viewed as minor tweaks.

Pre-1991 AACSB Standards


The Curriculum section of the pre-1991 standards is remarkably short — three pages for both undergraduate and MBA degrees. The key content is as follows:

"To provide students with the common body of knowledge in business administration, programs shall include in their course of instruction the equivalent of at least one year of work comprising the following areas:

1. a background of the concepts, processes and institutions in the production and marketing of goods and/or services and the financing of the business enterprise or other forms of organization;
2. a background of the economic and legal environment as it pertains to profit and/or nonprofit organizations along with ethical considerations and social and political influences as they affect such organizations;
3. a basic understanding of the concepts and applications of accounting, of quantitative methods, and management information systems including computer applications;
4. a study of organization theory, behavior, and interpersonal communications;
5. a study of administrative processes under conditions of uncertainty including integrating analysis and policy determination at the overall management level."

The pre-1991 standard mandates in part "C" substantial time for "quantitative methods," which in practice meant "management science." In effect, this standard required accredited business schools to teach management science.

1991 AACSB Standards for Curriculum


In 1991, AACSB changed the philosophy of accreditation. This philosophy was "mission-linked" and had little to say about curriculum.

Here is the curriculum portion of the standard for undergraduate programs (section C.1.2.b, p. 16):

"The curriculum should include foundation knowledge for business in the following areas:

• accounting,
• behavioral science,
• economics, and
• mathematics and statistics."

"The curriculum should include instruction in the following core areas:

• financial reporting, analysis and markets,
• domestic and global economic environments of organizations,
• creation and distribution of goods and services, and
• human behavior in organizations."

The removal of the mandate for quantitative analysis/management science led to a rapid decline as many programs cut the amount of required management science. This decline is documented by surveys of faculty and MBA deans in the Magnanti Report [Jordan et al 1997]. In "Causes of the Decline of the Business School Management Science Course" [Grossman, 2001], the author analyzes what happened and concludes that the root cause of the decline was that management science instructors took shelter behind the accreditation mandate, and delivered courses that were valued by management scientists, but were not valued by students and alumni.

2003 AACSB Standards for Curriculum


In 2003, AACSB again changed the accreditation standards. (Be aware that at time of writing some minor edits are underway, with a final, final standard expected in July 2003.) The new standards focus on management processes and continuous improvement. The standards have detailed requirements regarding the development and application of a school's mission and associated objectives, and learning goals for each program. Schools are required to create an evaluation mechanism to assure that the learning goals are achieved by students at the end of the program. Accreditation will require more top-down design and management of programs, and less reliance on grids and checklists.

Partially in response to the successful record of established international schools, the standards enable wide diversity. The new standards include lengthy "interpretations" that will affect the way in which business schools are managed. They require annual measurement, documentation and reporting of many variables over time, and a periodic five-year review of "strategic progress" that focuses on alignment of resources and research with mission and objectives.

The curriculum standard (standard 15) requires that schools use a "well documented, systematic processes to develop, monitor, evaluate and revise the substance and delivery of the curricula of degree programs and to assess the impact of curricula on learning." There are suggestions for curriculum, but it is not clear what they will mean in practice. Here is the curriculum portion of the 2003 AACSB standards for both undergraduate and MBA programs (section 2, part 15, pp. 18-19):

"The standard requires use of a systematic process for curriculum management, but does not require any specific courses in the curriculum.

"Normally, the curriculum management process will result in an undergraduate degree program that includes learning experiences in such general knowledge and skill areas as:

• Communication abilities
• Ethical understanding and reasoning abilities
• Analytic skills
• Use of information technology
• Multicultural and diversity understanding
• Reflective thinking skills

• Ethical and legal responsibilities in organizations and society
• Financial theories, analysis, reporting and markets
• Creation of value through the integrated production and distribution of goods, services, and information
• Group and individual dynamics in organizations
• Statistical data analysis and management science as they support decision-making processes throughout an organization
• Information technologies as they influence the structure and processes of organizations and economies, and as they influence the roles and techniques of management
• Domestic and global economic environments of organizations
• Other management-specific knowledge and abilities as identified by the school"

• Capacity to lead in organizational situations
• Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines
• Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments

More visibility for management science. For the first time, management science is explicitly mentioned in the accreditation standard. It is mentioned for both undergraduate and MBA programs. The good news is that the new standard gives management science a seat at the curriculum table. It places at our disposal one of the most powerful forces in the universe: laziness. It is now easier for a school to offer management science than not to.

Many schools look to AACSB for guidance on the curriculum, and these schools will undoubtedly offer a course on statistics and management science. In the final analysis, there is a good chance that most schools will teach everything on AACSB's list, including a substantial amount of "statistical data analysis and management science."

Implementation unclear. It is not clear how AACSB will implement the curriculum standard. The amount of management science to be taught and the course(s) in which it is delivered will vary across schools. It is possible (but unlikely) that a school with an adequate curriculum management process will not teach management science. More likely is that some threshold amount of management science is required.

Connection to mission and objectives. Salvador Aceves, my colleague at the University of San Francisco, attended an AACSB workshop in June 2003 on the new standards. He tells me that the amount of curriculum coverage for a topic will depend on the school's mission and objective, which each school will use to develop written learning goals for each program (undergraduate or MBA). These will vary widely across programs. Mission, objectives and program learning goals are now more important than ever.

No requirement for a management science course. Since AACSB states explicitly that they do not require any specific courses, the standard does not require a course in management science. The new standards suggest only a "learning experience" in OR/MS, not a course. It is possible that the traditional business school structure of single-instructor, stand-alone courses will transition into more flexible structures.

At some schools, the standard could likely be satisfied by providing a small amount of management science in an operations management, MIS or finance course. At other schools, a full course or more of management science will be needed.

The requirements in the standard for measurement and documentation may actually make it easier to build the case to shrink or eliminate a course that is badly taught or fails to support the overarching mission and objectives. We must not confuse the mention of management science in the 2003 AACSB standards with a return to the pre-1991 standards where an OR/MS course was essentially required.

Impetus to merge with statistics. The standards now mention management science and statistics in the same breath: "Statistical data analysis and management science as they support decision-making processes throughout an organization." This will likely exacerbate the recent trend to merge an OR/MS course and a statistics course into a combined course that is shorter than the two original courses. At those schools that have unpopular courses in both statistics and management science, such a merger will appear particularly attractive.

The future of quantitative analysis. In the age of spreadsheets, the research-driven methodological distinction between "statistics" and "management science" doesn't make a lot of sense to students or alumni who are working as business analysts. In the long run, the pressure from mission and objectives may encourage development of a business school quantitative analysis that is focused on what business analysts and managers actually do on the job.

I predict the emergence of a spreadsheet quantitative analysis course that is based on the real activities of business analysts and managers. In business, quantitative analysis generally means the creation, manipulation and maintenance of a spreadsheet model. We as a profession need to think clearly about what this means for teaching. Steve Powell at Tuck is the leader in this important task, arguing that the fundamentals of building, engineering and analyzing spreadsheet models are vital topics. These topics are underappreciated prerequisites to the actual application of management science.

I predict that the role of statistics will diminish, because the technology of spreadsheet Monte Carlo simulation is more flexible and robust than the technology of statistics. But you can be sure the statistical community will wake up and start to address their own pedagogical challenges.

Acknowledgments The author thanks long-time AACSB examiner Dean Gary Williams of the University of San Francisco and Associate Dean Salvador Aceves for their insights. Any errors of omission and commission are the sole responsibility of the author.

1. AACSB International: www.aacsb.edu
2. AACSB accreditation standards: www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/standards.asp
3. 1991 AACSB standard: www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/business/BusinessStandards2000.pdf
4. April 2003 AACSB standard (Note: a new version of the standard is expected in July 2003): www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/brc/proposedstandards.pdf
5. Grossman, T.A. Jr. (2001), "Causes of the Decline of the Business School Management Science Course," INFORMS Transactions on Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, ite.informs.org/Vol1No2/Grossman/Grossman.html
6. Jordan, E., L. Lasdon, M. Lenard, J. Moore, S. Powell, and T. Willemain, 1997, "OR/MS and MBAs," OR/MS Today, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 36-41. education.forum.informs.org/magnanti.html.

Table of Contents

OR/MS Today Home Page


OR/MS Today copyright © 2003 by the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences. All rights reserved.


Lionheart Publishing, Inc.
506 Roswell Rd., Suite 220, Marietta, GA 30060 USA
Phone: 770-431-0867 | Fax: 770-432-6969
E-mail: lpi@lionhrtpub.com
URL: http://www.lionhrtpub.com


Web Site © Copyright 2003 by Lionheart Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.