Managing university business educational quality: ISO or AACSB?
| Date | 19 April 2013 |
| Published date | 19 April 2013 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881311310674 |
| Pages | 127-144 |
| Author | Ellen J. Dumond,Thomas W. Johnson |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Managing university business
educational quality: ISO or
AACSB?
Ellen J. Dumond and Thomas W. Johnson
California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, California, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into quality management for business
education. The paper provides business schools and Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
Business (AACSB) with information about two different quality standards and suggests how the
AACSB accreditation process might be strengthened – thereby improving the quality of theeducation
process and product.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors compare two prevalent but different approaches to
quality management: the AACSB accreditation standards and ISO 9001, a set of quality requirements
developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). For this comparison, the
authors review the literature in the field, including published quality standards, organization
examples documenting implementation of AACSB or ISO 9001 standards, and existing empirical
research results on the two approaches.
Findings – Both quality approaches have their merits and followers. It seems feasible that AACSB
might be able to borrow some elements from the ISO 9001 components and process to improve their
accreditation process. For example, they might wish to consider more standardized auditor training,
the use of a third party auditing body, incorporation of a process orientation and a system of
continuous improvement, as well as more overall reliance on the quality principles in ISO 9001.
Research limitations/implications – This paper is a conceptual one without empirical data. As
such, it has limitations. Further research is needed to gather empirical data to continue the
investigation between these two approaches to quality management in education.
Practical implications – It is hoped that, with awareness and integration of some of the ISO 9001
components, AACSB and educational administrators are able to improve the accreditation process for
business schools, thereby improving the overall education process and product.
Originality/value – The paper provides a comparison of two different but prevalent approaches to
quality management within educational organizations. It presents insight for business schools seeking
to adopt either of these approaches and provides suggestions for improvement of the AACSB
standards. This discussion is valuable as it seeks to improve the quality of business education while it
operates in an environment with increasingly limited resources.
Keywords ISO 9000 series, Association to Advance CollegiateSchools of Business, Higher education,
Quality assurance,Quality management, Business studies
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
Universities across the globe are facing difficult times. Increasing competition, reduced
budgets, higher expectations, and a changing mix of student backgrounds and
capabilities have created significant challenges. To continue to operate in this
environment, educational units have responded by focusing on providing a better
organization and product (Lomas, 2004). These efforts have traditionally been guided
by the accreditation processes put forward by organizations like the Accreditation
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
Managing
educational
quality
127
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 21 No. 2, 2013
pp. 127-144
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684881311310674
Board for Engineering Technology (ABET) or the Association to Advance Collegiate
Schools of Business (AACSB). The AACSB accreditation process takes place within the
context of a business school, often within the environment of an institution of higher
education The AACSB process focuses on measuring and improving the learning
output and it is periodically updated to reflect the current operating environment. The
accreditation process is based on the use of external peer review and it can ensure
conformity to minimum standards; however, because the reviewers are individuals
operating in the academic environment, it is likely that these individuals hold their own
views and beliefs about the process. Consequently, without adequate control, the
process can be evaluated or applied subjectively to various organizations ba sed upon
the review team. Further, if a particular set of beliefs is widely held within AACSB, the
process or interpretation of the results of the process may be difficult to change.
In recent years an increasing number of educational organizations have developed a
quality management system based on the internationally accepted ISO 9000 standards
(IOS, 2009). These standards, developed by a worldwide network of standards bodies
from 164 countries, provide guidance for organizations who want to ensure that their
products and services consistently meet customer’s requirements, and that quality is
continuously improved.
To provide insight into quality assurance for business education, this paper
compares the AACSB accreditation process for business schools, often embedded
within a wider higher educational context of a university, with the process and quality
requirements of the ISO 9001 standard. Each framework is briefly presented, followed
by a discussion of their most significant similarities and differences. We end with a
discussion about what AACSB and business schools in general can learn from the ISO
9000 standards.
AACSB accreditation
AACSB International was founded in 1916 by a group of leading business schools with
the goal of enhancing the quality of management education at the collegiate level. As of
July 2012, AACSB has granted business accreditation to 655 institutions in 44
countries (AACSB, 2012a). AACSB began to expand its accreditation program
internationally in 1995 when it granted accreditation to the first business school
outside of North America. As of July 2012 AACSB International business accreditation
has been extended to 166 business schools outside the US (AACSB, 2012a). According
to Jerry Trapnell (2007), executive vice president and chief accreditation officer of
AACSB, international institutions now constitute the majority of schools seeking
AACSB accreditation.
AACSB’s accreditation standards were first adopted in 1919. For most of its history
AACSB focused primarily on the extent to which schools met a series of standards
dealing with matters such as curriculum and faculty quality. In 2003, AACSB adopted
a new set of Accreditation Standards that represented a substantial change from past
practice. The new standards incorporated a focus on the school’s mission and goals.
The standards are revised annually, with minor modifications being incorporated. The
most recent version of these standards was issued on January 31, 2012 (AACSB,
2012b). A new set of standards is expected to be adopted in 2013 as part of the process
of standard revision and improvement.
QAE
21,2
128
To continue reading
Request your trial