Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.84.1.31-39
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
How Project Management Tools Aid in Association
to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)
International Maintenance of Accreditation
Cynthia W. Cann & Alan L. Brumagim
To cite this article: Cynthia W. Cann & Alan L. Brumagim (2008) How Project Management
Tools Aid in Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) International
Maintenance of Accreditation, Journal of Education for Business, 84:1, 31-39, DOI: 10.3200/
JOEB.84.1.31-39
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.1.31-39
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 17
View related articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 22:43
HowProjectManagementToolsAid
inAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiate
SchoolsofBusiness(AACSB)International
MaintenanceofAccreditation
CYNTHIAW.CANN
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
ALANL.BRUMAGIM
THEUNIVERSITYOFSCRANTON
SCRANTON,PENNSYLVANIA
ABSTRACT. Theauthorspresentthe
caseofonebusinesscollege’suseofproject
managementtechniquesastoolsforaccomplishingAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiate
SchoolsofBusiness(AACSB)International
maintenanceofaccreditation.Usingthese
techniquesprovidesanefficientandeffectivemethodoforganizingmaintenance
efforts.Inaddition,usingthesetoolsto
prepareformaintenanceofaccreditation
providesacommunicationsframeworkthat
simplifiesthereviewprocessforaccreditationteamsandhelpsfaculty,staff,and
administratorstounderstandandaccomplishAACSBInternationalgoals.Thecase
canserveasausefulmodelforaccreditationandmaintenanceofaccreditation
efforts.
Keywords:accreditation,communication
framework,maintenanceofaccreditation,
projectmanagement,workbreakdown
structure
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
M
any business schools are working toward Association to
Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) International accreditation. Even more schools are or will be
workingtowardtheprocessesofmaintenanceofaccreditation.Thepurposeof
thepresentarticleistopresentacasein
whichonebusinessschoolusedproject
management techniques to help organizeitseffortofworkingthroughthese
processes.Thisarticlefocusesprimarily
on using project management tools for
the process of maintenance of accreditation rather than initial accreditation.
AACSBInternationalEligibilityProcedures and Accreditation Standards for
BusinessAccreditation(2008)Standard
10statesinpart,
Thefaculty,has,andmaintains,intellectual qualifications and current expertise
to accomplish the mission and to assure
that this occurs; the school has a clearly
defined process to evaluate individual
faculty member’s contributions to the
schoolsmission.(p.43)
Thisstatementcontainsseveralimplications for obtaining and maintaining
AACSB International accreditation.
First,itimpliesthattheschool’smission
mustbeclearlyidentified.Eachschool
has a unique mission. Therefore, the
requirements forAACSB International
accreditation differ to some degree for
each business school. Second, Standard 10 indicates that evidence must
be presented of a clearly defined process that evaluates individual faculty
members’contributionstothatmission.
The school’s method of deriving specific outcomes at an appropriate level
of detail that precisely supports the
school’s mission can be difficult to
articulate(Martin,2003).Furthermore,
definingandmaintaininganevaluation
process that supports this linkage can
alsobedifficult.
The case that we present here indicates that project management techniques not only helped the school
efficiently complete the work necessary for successful maintenance of
accreditation but also—perhaps this is
just as important—provided a communicationsframeworkthatsimplified
the review process for the accreditation team and helped faculty, staff,
and administrators to understand and
accomplishAACSBInternationalgoals
in a way that was consistent with the
goalsofthebusinessschool.
Beforeelaborating,weshouldoutline
afewdefinitions.AACSBInternational
Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards for Business Accreditation (2008) indicates that “processes
playanimportantroleinaccreditation”
andimpliesthatprocessesrefertooutcomes(p.2).TheProjectManagement
Institute (PMI) uses the word deliverabletomeanthesamethingasoutcome.
AccordingtoPMI,adeliverableisany
September/October2008
31
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
unique and verifiable product, result,
or capability to perform a service that
mustbeproducedtocompleteaprocess,
phase, or project (2004). BothAACSB
InternationalandPMIusethetermprocess to identify specific and preferably
documented work streams necessary
to achieve outcomes or deliverables.
A common difficulty in efficiently and
effectivelycompletingprojects,includingAACSB International accreditation
efforts,istheconfusingandcomingling
of processes and outcomes or deliverables during the detailed work efforts.
This is particularly problematic for
AACSB International maintenance of
accreditation efforts that a school may
makebutappliestocomplexprojectsin
general.TheAACSBInternationalstandards are general to accommodate the
uniquemissionofavarietyofbusiness
schools. This generality can make the
identificationofspecificoutcomesmore
difficult.Wesuggestthatusingdeliverables and specific project management
techniques can in some circumstances
increasetheefficiencyandeffectiveness
ofthemaintenanceprocess.
Standards from AACSB International include general requirements
that would be similar to what project
managers call a statement of work.
According to PMI (2004), a statement of work is a narrative description of products, services, or results
to be supplied. In general, statements
of work are nonspecific and come
from a more strategic level. A work
breakdown structure (WBS) takes the
statementofworktoamoredetailed,
operational level. Later in the present
article,wediscussanddemonstratethe
WBS.TheWBSisdefinedasadeliverableorientedhierarchicaldecompositionoftheworkthattheprojectteam
shouldexecutetoaccomplishtheproject objectives and create the required
deliverables. According to PMI, the
WBS organizes and defines the total
scopeofaproject.
Inthecasewepresentinthisarticle,
thecreationofaprojectWBS(seeFigure 1) helped the accreditation effort
substantially and was a useful model
for working through the maintenance
ofaccreditationeffort.Withtheunique
mission of each business school, the
usual and customary method of a
32
JournalofEducationforBusiness
school’s preparing for accreditation is
useful as a set of broad guidelines. In
thecasethatwepresent,theschool’suse
of project management tools enabled
the process to proceed more smoothly
andefficientlywithinthecontextofthe
broad guidelines provided byAACSB
International.Inaddition,projectmanagement tools enabled more specific
and focused communication with the
accreditationteam.
RELATINGAACSB
INTERNATIONALSTANDARDSTO
PROJECTWBSDELIVERABLES
Table1providesamatrixoftherelation between predetermined, top-level
deliverables and 19 of the 21 AACSB
International standards (Eligibility procedures, 2008). Standard 21 relates to
business schools with PhD programs,
and Standard 19 relates to specialized
master-degreeprograms.Ourexample’s
schoolofferedneitherkindofprogram.
Theexamplecollegeinthisarticleis
afreestandingschoolofbusinessthatis
part of a private institution. The business school includes 36 full-time facultymembers.Thereareapproximately
750undergraduatebusinessmajorsand
115 master of business administration
(MBA) students.AACSB International
originallyaccreditedtheschoolin1995.
Theschoolwasdueformaintenanceof
accreditation in the fall of 2005. The
AACSB International Maintenance of
AccreditationHandbook(2007)states,
The approach emphasizes continuous improvement. The process creates
an ongoing “maintenance of accreditation” signaling that once an institution
has achieved accreditation, a process
of continuous improvement maintains
the accreditation status. Maintenance
of accreditation is not a standard-by-
standardreview.(p.1)
For initial accreditation, the AACSB
International Self Evaluation Report
Guidelines(2008)statethat“basedonthe
longstandingexperienceoftheAACSB
International accreditation process, a
well-organized, complete Self Evaluation Report that is prepared on a standard-by-standard basis is an important
stepinasuccessfulaccreditationeffort”
(p. 1). However, certain major deliverables need to be addressed. AACSB
Internationaloutlinedtheseoutcomesin
theMaintenanceofAccreditationHandbook revision of January 2007. In the
presentarticle,wesuggestthattheWBS
can serve as a template for any initial
or maintenance of accreditation effort
andthatschoolscanmodifyitasnecessary.Forexample,aschoolthatdoesnot
have an MBA program would not need
the subdeliverable I.13.6 Overview of
MBA Courses and a school applying
foraccreditationforthefirsttimemight
want to make each standard a major
deliverable.
In the remainder of this article, we
provide and discuss specific examples
oftheprojectmanagementtoolsthatwe
includedaspartofasuccessfulmaintenanceofaccreditationeffort.
DeliverableI.1:Mission
Statement
For our example business school,
Deliverable I.1 is a redesigned missionstatementasStandards1–3require.
Developing the new mission statement
was a time-consuming process. The
dean accepted the new mission statementinFebruary2004.AlthoughDeliverable I.1 does not specifically state
thefollowingcircumstance,initsmaintenance report the example business
schoolincludesadescriptionofhowthe
mission statement governed decisions
made in the school and through what
avenues the mission was disseminated
andmadepublictoallstakeholders,as
Standard1requires.Itiseasytoseethis
series of events as a process but also
identify it as a deliverable by using a
WBS, which helps the school to focus
theeffort.
DeliverableI.2:Completed
StrategicandFinancialPlans
Deliverable I.2 involves a completed Strategic and Financial Plan that is
requiredbyStandards4and5(AACSB,
Eligibilityprocedures,2008).Thedean
was ultimately responsible for writing
theplans.However,hereceivedagreat
dealofinputfromavarietyofbusiness
school stakeholders, including (a) the
chairoftheAACSBInternationalMaintenance Visitation Team and (b) two
AACSB International consultants. The
strategic process began with the institution’s strategic plan for 2000–2005.
Positive
AACSB
maintenance
report
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
1.1
Mission
statement
1.2
Completed
strategic
and
financial
plan
1.3
Developed
governance
system
1.5
Integrated,
strategic,
financial,
and
assessment
plans
1.6
Faculty
development
plan
1.8
Completed
flexible
MBAa
program
plan
1.9
Completed
summaryof
student
information
1.10
Completed
process
manual
1.7
Completed
financial
development
plan
1.4
Completed
assessment
plan
1.12
Completed
appendices
and
supporting
material
1.11
Implemented
consistencyplan
FIGURE1.WorkbreakdownstructureusedtoachieveAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusinessmaintenanceofaccreditationforanexampleschoolofbusiness(2005).aMBA=MasterofBusinessAdministration.
Onceadraftoftherevisedmissionhad
been presented in the fall of 2003, the
workondefiningstrategicgoalsbegan.
Todesignthestrategicplan,theschool
held a series of workshops involving
faculty members. There were six faculty workshops and one workshop for
staff, emeriti, and adjuncts. Workshop
participants discussed and determined
everything from a situation analysis of
thebusinessschooltostrategicthemes.
Astrategicplanningcommitteeandthe
deanguidedtheprocess.Inthesummer
of 2005, the dean, associate dean, and
selectfacultymettorefinethestrategic
plan and write the financial plan. In
Augustofthatyear,thebusinessschool
invited two AACSB International consultantstogothroughamockvisitand
maintenancereview.InlateSeptember,
thedeanpresentedtherevisedandfinal
strategicandfinancialplanstothefacultyforreview.Thefacultyendorsedthe
plansatthattime.Thelaststepwasto
producealogofallactivitiesinvolvedin
thestrategicandfinancialplanning.The
logwasusedbyfaculty,administrators,
andthevisitationteamtohelpverifythe
strategicandfinancialplanningprocess
andwasinsertedintotheProcessManualasDeliverable1.10.Inthiscase,the
examplebusinessschooldidnotusethe
financial strategies table suggested in
the Documentation Guidance of Standard5(AACSB,Eligibilityprocedures,
2008). Information was incorporated
September/October2008
33
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
34
JournalofEducationforBusiness
TABLE1.DeliverablesasRelatedtoAACSBStandards
Strategic
standards1–5
Participant
standards6–14
Assuranceoflearning
standards15–18,20
Deliverable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
I.1Mission
I.2Strategicand
financialplans
I.3Governance
system
I.4Assessment
plan
I.5Integrated
strategic,
financial,
assessment
plans
I.6Faculty
development
I.7Financial
development
plan
I.8Revitalized
MBA
I.9Student
information
I.10Process
manual
I.11Faculty
database
I.12Completed
appendixes
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Note.AACSBInternational:TheAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusiness(AACSB;2007).InEligibilityproceduresandaccreditationstandardsforbusinessaccreditation.MBA=Masterof
BusinessAdministration.
directly into the financial plan, and so
it was not mentioned separately in the
WBS under Deliverable I.2. This is an
example of an effort that transcended
AACSB International Standards 4 and
5. As readers can see, this effort was
fairly complex, involved several stakeholders, and involved some revision. It
wouldbeusefulforschoolstoaddmore
detailedWBSdeliverablestofocusthis
effort,asthePMIsuggested.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
DeliverableI.3:Completed
GovernanceSystem
Theexamplebusinessschooldidnot
have a structured and fully functional
governancesysteminplacepriortothe
developmentoftheWBS.Acomplete,
organized governance system was
developedduringthesummerof2005.
AACSB International (Eligibility procedures,2008)Standard4requiresthe
schooltospecify“actionitemsthatrepresenthighprioritycontinuousimprovementefforts”(p.27).Thedevelopment
of action items leads to the need for
a governance system to monitor and
enforceobjectivesandtosetnewobjectives as necessary. Toward those ends,
the example business school instituted
a business advisory board and set up
a committee structure. In addition, to
provide transparency and to help faculty become involved and knowledgeableofallthathappensinthebusiness
school,anintranetwasdeliveredbythe
administration of the business school
in the form of an existing, completed
communication network. In this case,
the WBS, by outlining very specific
deliverables, could act as a communication tool to keep all stakeholders
aware of the detailed objectives and
the relation among the objectives and
theprocessinwhichtheobjectivesare
involved.
DeliverableI.4:Completed
AssessmentPlan
AACSB International Standards
16, 18, 19, and 21 concentrate on the
setting and achievement of learning
goals (AACSB, Eligibility procedures,
2008, pp. 73–77). The example business school spent considerable time
and effort in preparing an assessment
planthatbeganwithalmostthreequar
ters of the faculty’s attending AACSB
International-sponsored seminars on
assessment in 2002–2004. The first
assessment workshop on campus for
faculty took place in September 2003.
Five workshops followed and involved
continued development of learning
goalsfortheundergraduateandgraduate programs. In November 2004, an
all-dayfacultyworkshop,facilitatedby
an external consultant, took place to
finalize the learning goals and objectives. In February 2005, an assessment
committeewasestablishedandcharged
with developing and implementing the
business school assessment plan. From
that point, the assessment committee
became responsible for the following
tasks:
1. Relating the learning goals for
each program to the school’s mission
(Standards16–18,and20).
2.Determiningtheschool’sresponse
tostandard15.
3.Managingthecurricula.
4. Providing the faculty with incentives to get involved in designing
and evaluating rubrics to satisfy the
requirementsspecifiedinStandards16
and18.
5.Schedulingthetrainingoffaculty.
6.Developingtheassessmentplan.
Because the visitation year for our
example business school was 2005,
AACSB International Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards
for Business Accreditation (2006) only
required the school to meet the following requirements: “An assurance of
learning system will be in place with
measuresandrecordkeepingforassessingprogrameffectiveness”(p.67).The
school was not required to close the
assurance-of-learning loop by taking
resultsandfunnelingthembackintothe
curricula as proof of continuing development of degree programs. However,
theschoolcouldusetheWBStohelpto
prepare budgetary requirements specifiedbythiseffort.
DeliverableI.5:Integrated
Strategic,Financial,and
AssessmentPlans
Aswementionedabove,ourexample
business school did bring in outside
consultants prior to the AACSB Internationalmaintenanceteamreview.The
consultants,aswellastheteamleader,
repeated an emphasis of the need for
consistency in every activity, plan, and
processthattheschoolexhibited.Therefore, the results of reviewing for that
uniformitywereestablishedasamajor
deliverable. Using theWBS methodology for this single effort is probably
unnecessary,butweincludeitforconsistentuse.
DeliverableI.6:Established
FacultyDevelopmentPlan
The example school completed
Deliverable I.6 mainly in response to
AACSB International Standard 2 (Eligibilityprocedures,2008),whichstates
that,“Themissionincludestheproduction of intellectual contributions that
advancetheknowledgeandpracticeof
businessandmanagement”(p.21).The
guidance for this standard states that
each business school must have “clear
policiesthatstateexpectationstoguide
faculty in the successful production of
a portfolio of intellectual contributions
that are consistent with the school’s
mission”(p.24).TheFacultyDevelopment Plan delivered by the example
business school involved completion
of a Statement of Faculty Intellectual
Expectations and a Faculty DevelopmentSupportPlan.
Developing a Statement of Faculty
IntellectualExpectationswasadifficult,
but inclusive process for the example
businessschool.Itwasdifficultbecause
the business school resides within a
faculty-unionized campus (American
Association of University Professors)
and because there were many divergent opinions among the faculty about
whatthoseexpectationsshouldbe.The
processbeganinFebruary2005witha
faculty workshop.Although discussion
was hot, those present voted to accept
a statement that very clearly defined
the number and type of intellectual
contributions expected from each fulltimefacultymemberonarolling5-year
period. From that point, the statement
bounced back and forth between the
AACSBInternationalsteeringcommittee, members of the faculty, and the
facultyunionofficersoncampus.Once
September/October2008
35
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
the union gave its support to the statement, and the faculty had an opportunity for input on the revisions, the
AACSBInternationalsteeringcommittee recommended the statement to the
dean. The dean accepted the statement
withaminorrevisioninMay2005.
In addition to the Statement of FacultyIntellectualExpectations,thebusinessschoolneededtodefineadevelopmentplanthatwouldsupportfacultyas
indicatedinAACSBInternationalStandards 5 and 11 (Eligibility procedures,
2008),butthatneedwasalsoacceptable
tothefacultyunionandtheadministration. At the center of the general plan
wasaFacultyAdvancementPlan(FAP)
that the business school initiated but
that the institution’s administration for
facultyacrossthecampuslatertookup.
The FAP is generated by each faculty
memberandreviewedbythedeanwith
that individual. The plan outlines how
the faculty member proposes to grow
professionally during a 3-year period.
As an example, an individual may ask
forfundingtoattendaspecialmanagement-training program offered through
Harvard. This process began in 1998.
After two iterations, the first cycle of
the plan began for the faculty at large,
andasecondcycleoftheplanbeganfor
thebusinessschoolinOctober2003.In
addition, the business school administration,withinputfromthescholarship/
editorial committee and the university
administration, initiated a scholarship
rewardsystem,aworkingpaperseries,
researchseminars,andteachingawards
plus research mentorship/coauthorship
toenableandencourageresearchamong
thefaculty.
As we look back over Deliverable
I.6,itseemstousthatthereshouldhave
been another set of items that more
extensively satisfied Standards 11 and
12. However, to a great extent these
itemsarecoveredinI.10,whichdelivers
acompletedprocessmanual.
Aswepreviouslymentioned,AACSB
International Standard 2 from the Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation
Standards for Business Accreditation
(2008) indicates that the school must
“display the portfolio of intellectual
contributions” (p. 22). As readers can
seeintheexampleWBS,ourcasebusiness school did not include this port36
JournalofEducationforBusiness
folio under Deliverable I.6, Faculty
DevelopmentPlan.Theschoolfeltthat
the development of a Web-based facultydatabasetohouseallofthefaculty
informationwassocriticalthatitshould
be a major deliverable. It is indicated
on the WBS as I.11. Last, the school
assembled a log of activities toward
completion of the deliverables. Again,
creatingafacultydevelopmentplanisa
verycomplicatedprocessthataddresses
several AACSB International requirementsandinvolvesseveraliterationsof
work.RevisiontotheWBSdeliverables
by using a simple configuration management system would enable (a) the
effective communication and (b) efficientadjustmenttothevariouschanges
requiredbythiseffort.
DeliverableI.7:Completed
FinancialDevelopmentPlan
The example school included a
deliverable of a Completed Financial
DevelopmentPlaninitsWBStosatisfy
Standard 5.AACSB International (Eligibility procedures, 2008) requires not
onlysometypeoffacultydevelopment
plan but also a plan to guarantee that
thereissufficientfinancialsupportfrom
theinstitutionortheschool“tocontinuously enhance the intellectual capital
ofthefacultytoensurethatinstruction
keepspacewiththesubjectmatter”(p.
28). In this case, the main avenue that
the example school pursued to provide
financial support to faculty was to get
approval from the institution’s administration for the business school dean
tosolicitfundsdirectlyfortheexample
school.Anexampleoftheutilityofthe
WBSwouldbetoseparatethebudgetaryrequirementsunderDeliverable1.4
fromthoseofDeliverable1.7.Although
this could be accomplished by standard budgetary means, using the WBS
methoddoescommunicatemoreclearly
tothefacultyandotherstakeholdersthe
specific differences between the two
deliverables.
DeliverableI.8:Completed
FlexibleMBAProgramPlan
For the example business school, it
seemed appropriate for the school to
includeinformationabouttherevitalization of the MBA program in prepara-
tionfortheAACSBInternationalmaintenance review. The school included
that information to provide full disclosure about a problem area that it was
addressing and to indicate the school’s
commitment to continuous improvement. In this case, six activities and
their related deliverables were specified. They included (a) approving the
newMBAprogram,(b)completingproposalofthenewMBAprogramsentto
FacultySenateCurriculumCommittee,
(c) individual faculty member’s giving
inputonthenewMBAtotheassociate
dean,(d)studyingtheadultMBAmarket, (e) faculty’s developing a baseline
forthenewMBA,and(f)keepingalog
ofactivities.
This experience demonstrates that
each of the major deliverables, including the aforementioned deliverables,
comprises subdeliverables. The listing
of the various items provides an overview of what was involved in completingthisdeliverable.Aresponsibility
matrix, which we address later in this
article, forms a record of what parties
areinvolvedinandresponsibleforeach
subdeliverable.
DeliverableI.9:Completed
SummaryofStudentInformation
The Summary of Student Information was a direct response toAACSB
InternationalStandards3,6–8,and14
(Eligibility procedures, 2008). This
deliverable consisted of a thorough
report that fulfilled the Guidance for
Documentation section under each of
the standards mentioned above.As an
example, in partial compliance with
Standard 8, one section in the report
describes the business school’s advising center, the number of advisors,
howmanystudentsthecenterseeseach
academicyear,howoftenwhichactivities are performed there, and the like.
Again, this experience shows a deliverable that transcends many AACSB
International standards. Streamlining
the process of reporting may be possible by using the WBS to guide not
only the effort, but also—and perhaps
this is more important—to communicatetorelevantstakeholdersthesystem
that emerged to satisfy these various
AACSBInternationalstandards.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
DeliverableI.10:Completed
ProcessManual
Either choice would be acceptable in
creatingtheWBS.
Throughoutall21Standards,AACSB
International emphasizes the need to
define the processes behind the deliverables.As an example,AACSB International (Eligibility procedures, 2008)
Standard 11 specifically states, “The
school has well documented and communicatedprocessesinplacetomanage
and support faculty members over the
progression of their careers consistent
withtheschool’smission”(p.14).Standard 15 requires under “Management
of Curricula,” that “The school uses
well documented, systematic processes
todevelop,monitor,evaluate,andrevise
the substance and delivery of the curriculaofdegreeprogramsandtoassess
theimpactofthecurriculaonlearning”
(p. 15). Therefore, the example businessschoolmadeavailableamanualof
all the processes involved in the governance and operations of the school.
Someoftheprocesseswereattheinstitutionlevel,andsomewereatthelevel
of the business school. An adaptation
oftheWBScouldbeusedasatableof
contentstothismanual,toorganizethe
various processes that lead to specific
deliverables. Each high-level deliverable in the manual could also identify the AACSB International standard
beingsatisfied.
DeliverableI.12:Completed
AppendicesandSupporting
Material
DeliverableI.11:Faculty
Database
In accord with Deliverable I.6, the
example business school considered
development of a Web-based faculty
database as a very important deliverable. The school felt that such a database would provide a very efficient
and organized venue for the visitation
team to access the necessary information about each faculty member and
their intellectual contributions. This
schooldevelopedthedatabaseinhouse
to meet its specific needs. Because the
database is Web based, reviewers can
access the information from anywhere,
therebymakingitefficient.Tohighlight
the significance of this database, the
schoolsetitupasaseparatehigh-level
deliverable.Itwouldalsobeconsistent
withthemethodologyforaschooltoset
itupasasubsectionofDeliverableI.6.
The last major deliverable, DeliverableI.12,isalistofappendicesofsupporting material. Deliverable I.12 lists
20 appendices, including Table 1 and
Table 2 required by AACSB International Standards 9 and 10 (review of
faculty participants; Eligibility procedures, 2008). Many of the items are
copies of actual documents that were
mentioned as deliverables in theWBS,
such as the FAP. In addition, Deliverable I.12 includes some items that the
coordinatorsoftheAACSBInternationalmaintenanceeffortfeltwouldprovide
abetterunderstandingoftheschooland
what it is about, such as overview of
undergraduate curriculum, postgraduate activity, and employment profiles.
The school could arrange the items in
theappendixeitherbyAACSBInternationalstandardorbyWBSdeliverable.
Because of the overlap of documents
acrossstandards,itmaybemoreeffectiveforcommunicationtousetheWBS
approach.
SUMMARY
Inthissectionofthearticle,wehave
identifiedallpossibledeliverablesfora
specific school’s accreditation maintenance process. Following each subsection,wehaveidentifiedpossiblebenefits
ofusingaprojectmanagementapproach
and the utility of the WBS tool. Our
goal was to summarize several WBS
benefits.Althoughsomeeducatorsmay
not deem this approach as appropriate
or necessary for their schools, we feel
thatitisatoolthatisusefulforincreasing the effectiveness and efficiency of
manybusinessschools’efforts.
ComplexityOfMaintenance-ofAccreditationProcessesandthe
ResultingUtilityoftheWBS
As shown inTable 1,AACSB International sorts its standards for businessaccreditationintothreecategories:
strategic management standards, participants standards, and assurance of
learning standards. Each category has
a unique basis for judgment and guidance for documentation, yet the category may link or overlap with other
standards. This circumstance is where
projectmanagementtechniquesbecome
so useful. One example of the broad
nature of AACSB International (Eligibility procedures, 2008) Standards is
foundinstandard16:
Bachelor’s or undergraduate level
degree: knowledge and skills. Adaptingexpectationstotheschool’smission
and cultural circumstances, the school
specifies learning goals and demonstrates achievement of learning goals
for key general, management-specific,
and/or appropriate discipline-specific
knowledge and skills that its students
achieve in each undergraduate degree
program.(p.16)
In addition, some of the standards
require documentation of processes
and input by stakeholders as part of
thebasesofjudgment.Asanexample,
under“BasisforJudgment”inAACSB
International Eligibility Procedures
andAccreditationStandardsforBusinessAccreditation (2008), Standard 1
states, “The school demonstrates that
itsmissionstatementderivesfromprocessesthatincludeinputfromitsstakeholders” (p. 20). Making the process
even more difficult, the accreditation
review includes all degree programs
in the business school. This means
that the school must be prepared to
defendeachstandardforeverydegree
program that it offers, such as bachelor of science, MBA, and executive
MBA. Last, “Consistent with its missionanditsculturalcontext,theinstitutionmustdemonstratediversityinits
businessprograms”(p.9).Also,“The
institutionorthebusinessprogramsof
theinstitutionmustestablishexpectations for ethical behavior by administrators, faculty, and students” (p. 11).
Allofthesevariousrequirementscreate a complex situation that necessitates excellent organization skills,
involvement of various stakeholders,
and proper sequencing to lead to successful accreditation. Trying to keep
track of what has been accomplished
and what has not becomes very difficultwithoutsomekindofmechanism
to organize the effort. The use of a
toolsuchasaWBScanprovidetoall
involved a clear, pictorial overview
September/October2008
37
TABLE2.ExampleofaResponsibilityAssignmentMatrix
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
Deliverable
Faculty,staff,
and
committees
Administrators
External
stakeholders
andgroups
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
I.1Missionstatement
I.1.1Inputfromstakeholders
I.1.2Missionstatementalignedwith
universitymission
I.1.3Workshopswithfacultyand
staffondevelopmentofmission
I.1.4Preliminarymissionstatement
I.1.5Logofactivitiesthatledto
missionstatement
I.2Completedstrategicandfinancial
Plan
I.2.1Completedplanbasedonreview
bybusinessschoolstakeholders
I.2.2Writtenfinancialplanaligned
withstrategicplan
I.2.3Finalalignmentwithmiddle
statesstandards
I.2.4Writtenstrategicplan
I.2.5Facultyandstaffworkshopson
strategicgoals
I.2.6Facultyandstaffworkshopson
SWOTanalysis
I.2.5Logofplanningactivities
P
Note.Unnamedexampleschoolofbusiness(2006).SWOT=strengths,weaknesses,opportunities,
andthreats.
of the entire AACSB International
accreditationeffort.
It is most important that without
someguidanceofthisnature,itiseasy
forstakeholders,especiallyfacultyand
staff, to distance themselves from the
effortbecausetheydonotfeelthatthey
know or understand what needs to be
producedorwhattheirpartis.Theuse
ofWBS provides a way for the school
tobringallstakeholderstogetherinthe
effortforaccreditation.
Last, one of the school’s key objectives in preparing for maintenance
of accreditation should be to make a
clear,thorough,andconcisecasetothe
accreditation team. The use of a WBS
will accomplish that. Once the WBS
hasbeendeveloped,theplancanbefollowed to prepare for a successful visit,
aswellastoprovidethedocumentation
necessaryfortheAACSBInternational
teamtoreview.
GuidelinesforCreatingtheWBS
Figure 1 shows a WBS at the highest level only. As a practical matter,
38
JournalofEducationforBusiness
work deliverables shown in Figure 1
aredecomposedintomoredetailedlevels. The detailed subdeliverables must
capture 100% of the deliverable at the
higher level.A simple rule for schools
whencreatingtheWBSistousenouns
insteadofverbs.Manyprojectmanagers
areactionorientedandthinkintermsof
what needs to be done (verbs), instead
ofwhatneedsbeproduced(nouns).This
distinctionmightseemtosomemanagerstobeatrivialpoint,butexperience
has shown us that following this rule
cansignificantlyimprovethecommuni
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
How Project Management Tools Aid in Association
to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)
International Maintenance of Accreditation
Cynthia W. Cann & Alan L. Brumagim
To cite this article: Cynthia W. Cann & Alan L. Brumagim (2008) How Project Management
Tools Aid in Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) International
Maintenance of Accreditation, Journal of Education for Business, 84:1, 31-39, DOI: 10.3200/
JOEB.84.1.31-39
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.1.31-39
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 17
View related articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 22:43
HowProjectManagementToolsAid
inAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiate
SchoolsofBusiness(AACSB)International
MaintenanceofAccreditation
CYNTHIAW.CANN
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
ALANL.BRUMAGIM
THEUNIVERSITYOFSCRANTON
SCRANTON,PENNSYLVANIA
ABSTRACT. Theauthorspresentthe
caseofonebusinesscollege’suseofproject
managementtechniquesastoolsforaccomplishingAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiate
SchoolsofBusiness(AACSB)International
maintenanceofaccreditation.Usingthese
techniquesprovidesanefficientandeffectivemethodoforganizingmaintenance
efforts.Inaddition,usingthesetoolsto
prepareformaintenanceofaccreditation
providesacommunicationsframeworkthat
simplifiesthereviewprocessforaccreditationteamsandhelpsfaculty,staff,and
administratorstounderstandandaccomplishAACSBInternationalgoals.Thecase
canserveasausefulmodelforaccreditationandmaintenanceofaccreditation
efforts.
Keywords:accreditation,communication
framework,maintenanceofaccreditation,
projectmanagement,workbreakdown
structure
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
M
any business schools are working toward Association to
Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) International accreditation. Even more schools are or will be
workingtowardtheprocessesofmaintenanceofaccreditation.Thepurposeof
thepresentarticleistopresentacasein
whichonebusinessschoolusedproject
management techniques to help organizeitseffortofworkingthroughthese
processes.Thisarticlefocusesprimarily
on using project management tools for
the process of maintenance of accreditation rather than initial accreditation.
AACSBInternationalEligibilityProcedures and Accreditation Standards for
BusinessAccreditation(2008)Standard
10statesinpart,
Thefaculty,has,andmaintains,intellectual qualifications and current expertise
to accomplish the mission and to assure
that this occurs; the school has a clearly
defined process to evaluate individual
faculty member’s contributions to the
schoolsmission.(p.43)
Thisstatementcontainsseveralimplications for obtaining and maintaining
AACSB International accreditation.
First,itimpliesthattheschool’smission
mustbeclearlyidentified.Eachschool
has a unique mission. Therefore, the
requirements forAACSB International
accreditation differ to some degree for
each business school. Second, Standard 10 indicates that evidence must
be presented of a clearly defined process that evaluates individual faculty
members’contributionstothatmission.
The school’s method of deriving specific outcomes at an appropriate level
of detail that precisely supports the
school’s mission can be difficult to
articulate(Martin,2003).Furthermore,
definingandmaintaininganevaluation
process that supports this linkage can
alsobedifficult.
The case that we present here indicates that project management techniques not only helped the school
efficiently complete the work necessary for successful maintenance of
accreditation but also—perhaps this is
just as important—provided a communicationsframeworkthatsimplified
the review process for the accreditation team and helped faculty, staff,
and administrators to understand and
accomplishAACSBInternationalgoals
in a way that was consistent with the
goalsofthebusinessschool.
Beforeelaborating,weshouldoutline
afewdefinitions.AACSBInternational
Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards for Business Accreditation (2008) indicates that “processes
playanimportantroleinaccreditation”
andimpliesthatprocessesrefertooutcomes(p.2).TheProjectManagement
Institute (PMI) uses the word deliverabletomeanthesamethingasoutcome.
AccordingtoPMI,adeliverableisany
September/October2008
31
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
unique and verifiable product, result,
or capability to perform a service that
mustbeproducedtocompleteaprocess,
phase, or project (2004). BothAACSB
InternationalandPMIusethetermprocess to identify specific and preferably
documented work streams necessary
to achieve outcomes or deliverables.
A common difficulty in efficiently and
effectivelycompletingprojects,includingAACSB International accreditation
efforts,istheconfusingandcomingling
of processes and outcomes or deliverables during the detailed work efforts.
This is particularly problematic for
AACSB International maintenance of
accreditation efforts that a school may
makebutappliestocomplexprojectsin
general.TheAACSBInternationalstandards are general to accommodate the
uniquemissionofavarietyofbusiness
schools. This generality can make the
identificationofspecificoutcomesmore
difficult.Wesuggestthatusingdeliverables and specific project management
techniques can in some circumstances
increasetheefficiencyandeffectiveness
ofthemaintenanceprocess.
Standards from AACSB International include general requirements
that would be similar to what project
managers call a statement of work.
According to PMI (2004), a statement of work is a narrative description of products, services, or results
to be supplied. In general, statements
of work are nonspecific and come
from a more strategic level. A work
breakdown structure (WBS) takes the
statementofworktoamoredetailed,
operational level. Later in the present
article,wediscussanddemonstratethe
WBS.TheWBSisdefinedasadeliverableorientedhierarchicaldecompositionoftheworkthattheprojectteam
shouldexecutetoaccomplishtheproject objectives and create the required
deliverables. According to PMI, the
WBS organizes and defines the total
scopeofaproject.
Inthecasewepresentinthisarticle,
thecreationofaprojectWBS(seeFigure 1) helped the accreditation effort
substantially and was a useful model
for working through the maintenance
ofaccreditationeffort.Withtheunique
mission of each business school, the
usual and customary method of a
32
JournalofEducationforBusiness
school’s preparing for accreditation is
useful as a set of broad guidelines. In
thecasethatwepresent,theschool’suse
of project management tools enabled
the process to proceed more smoothly
andefficientlywithinthecontextofthe
broad guidelines provided byAACSB
International.Inaddition,projectmanagement tools enabled more specific
and focused communication with the
accreditationteam.
RELATINGAACSB
INTERNATIONALSTANDARDSTO
PROJECTWBSDELIVERABLES
Table1providesamatrixoftherelation between predetermined, top-level
deliverables and 19 of the 21 AACSB
International standards (Eligibility procedures, 2008). Standard 21 relates to
business schools with PhD programs,
and Standard 19 relates to specialized
master-degreeprograms.Ourexample’s
schoolofferedneitherkindofprogram.
Theexamplecollegeinthisarticleis
afreestandingschoolofbusinessthatis
part of a private institution. The business school includes 36 full-time facultymembers.Thereareapproximately
750undergraduatebusinessmajorsand
115 master of business administration
(MBA) students.AACSB International
originallyaccreditedtheschoolin1995.
Theschoolwasdueformaintenanceof
accreditation in the fall of 2005. The
AACSB International Maintenance of
AccreditationHandbook(2007)states,
The approach emphasizes continuous improvement. The process creates
an ongoing “maintenance of accreditation” signaling that once an institution
has achieved accreditation, a process
of continuous improvement maintains
the accreditation status. Maintenance
of accreditation is not a standard-by-
standardreview.(p.1)
For initial accreditation, the AACSB
International Self Evaluation Report
Guidelines(2008)statethat“basedonthe
longstandingexperienceoftheAACSB
International accreditation process, a
well-organized, complete Self Evaluation Report that is prepared on a standard-by-standard basis is an important
stepinasuccessfulaccreditationeffort”
(p. 1). However, certain major deliverables need to be addressed. AACSB
Internationaloutlinedtheseoutcomesin
theMaintenanceofAccreditationHandbook revision of January 2007. In the
presentarticle,wesuggestthattheWBS
can serve as a template for any initial
or maintenance of accreditation effort
andthatschoolscanmodifyitasnecessary.Forexample,aschoolthatdoesnot
have an MBA program would not need
the subdeliverable I.13.6 Overview of
MBA Courses and a school applying
foraccreditationforthefirsttimemight
want to make each standard a major
deliverable.
In the remainder of this article, we
provide and discuss specific examples
oftheprojectmanagementtoolsthatwe
includedaspartofasuccessfulmaintenanceofaccreditationeffort.
DeliverableI.1:Mission
Statement
For our example business school,
Deliverable I.1 is a redesigned missionstatementasStandards1–3require.
Developing the new mission statement
was a time-consuming process. The
dean accepted the new mission statementinFebruary2004.AlthoughDeliverable I.1 does not specifically state
thefollowingcircumstance,initsmaintenance report the example business
schoolincludesadescriptionofhowthe
mission statement governed decisions
made in the school and through what
avenues the mission was disseminated
andmadepublictoallstakeholders,as
Standard1requires.Itiseasytoseethis
series of events as a process but also
identify it as a deliverable by using a
WBS, which helps the school to focus
theeffort.
DeliverableI.2:Completed
StrategicandFinancialPlans
Deliverable I.2 involves a completed Strategic and Financial Plan that is
requiredbyStandards4and5(AACSB,
Eligibilityprocedures,2008).Thedean
was ultimately responsible for writing
theplans.However,hereceivedagreat
dealofinputfromavarietyofbusiness
school stakeholders, including (a) the
chairoftheAACSBInternationalMaintenance Visitation Team and (b) two
AACSB International consultants. The
strategic process began with the institution’s strategic plan for 2000–2005.
Positive
AACSB
maintenance
report
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
1.1
Mission
statement
1.2
Completed
strategic
and
financial
plan
1.3
Developed
governance
system
1.5
Integrated,
strategic,
financial,
and
assessment
plans
1.6
Faculty
development
plan
1.8
Completed
flexible
MBAa
program
plan
1.9
Completed
summaryof
student
information
1.10
Completed
process
manual
1.7
Completed
financial
development
plan
1.4
Completed
assessment
plan
1.12
Completed
appendices
and
supporting
material
1.11
Implemented
consistencyplan
FIGURE1.WorkbreakdownstructureusedtoachieveAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusinessmaintenanceofaccreditationforanexampleschoolofbusiness(2005).aMBA=MasterofBusinessAdministration.
Onceadraftoftherevisedmissionhad
been presented in the fall of 2003, the
workondefiningstrategicgoalsbegan.
Todesignthestrategicplan,theschool
held a series of workshops involving
faculty members. There were six faculty workshops and one workshop for
staff, emeriti, and adjuncts. Workshop
participants discussed and determined
everything from a situation analysis of
thebusinessschooltostrategicthemes.
Astrategicplanningcommitteeandthe
deanguidedtheprocess.Inthesummer
of 2005, the dean, associate dean, and
selectfacultymettorefinethestrategic
plan and write the financial plan. In
Augustofthatyear,thebusinessschool
invited two AACSB International consultantstogothroughamockvisitand
maintenancereview.InlateSeptember,
thedeanpresentedtherevisedandfinal
strategicandfinancialplanstothefacultyforreview.Thefacultyendorsedthe
plansatthattime.Thelaststepwasto
producealogofallactivitiesinvolvedin
thestrategicandfinancialplanning.The
logwasusedbyfaculty,administrators,
andthevisitationteamtohelpverifythe
strategicandfinancialplanningprocess
andwasinsertedintotheProcessManualasDeliverable1.10.Inthiscase,the
examplebusinessschooldidnotusethe
financial strategies table suggested in
the Documentation Guidance of Standard5(AACSB,Eligibilityprocedures,
2008). Information was incorporated
September/October2008
33
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
34
JournalofEducationforBusiness
TABLE1.DeliverablesasRelatedtoAACSBStandards
Strategic
standards1–5
Participant
standards6–14
Assuranceoflearning
standards15–18,20
Deliverable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
I.1Mission
I.2Strategicand
financialplans
I.3Governance
system
I.4Assessment
plan
I.5Integrated
strategic,
financial,
assessment
plans
I.6Faculty
development
I.7Financial
development
plan
I.8Revitalized
MBA
I.9Student
information
I.10Process
manual
I.11Faculty
database
I.12Completed
appendixes
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Note.AACSBInternational:TheAssociationtoAdvanceCollegiateSchoolsofBusiness(AACSB;2007).InEligibilityproceduresandaccreditationstandardsforbusinessaccreditation.MBA=Masterof
BusinessAdministration.
directly into the financial plan, and so
it was not mentioned separately in the
WBS under Deliverable I.2. This is an
example of an effort that transcended
AACSB International Standards 4 and
5. As readers can see, this effort was
fairly complex, involved several stakeholders, and involved some revision. It
wouldbeusefulforschoolstoaddmore
detailedWBSdeliverablestofocusthis
effort,asthePMIsuggested.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
DeliverableI.3:Completed
GovernanceSystem
Theexamplebusinessschooldidnot
have a structured and fully functional
governancesysteminplacepriortothe
developmentoftheWBS.Acomplete,
organized governance system was
developedduringthesummerof2005.
AACSB International (Eligibility procedures,2008)Standard4requiresthe
schooltospecify“actionitemsthatrepresenthighprioritycontinuousimprovementefforts”(p.27).Thedevelopment
of action items leads to the need for
a governance system to monitor and
enforceobjectivesandtosetnewobjectives as necessary. Toward those ends,
the example business school instituted
a business advisory board and set up
a committee structure. In addition, to
provide transparency and to help faculty become involved and knowledgeableofallthathappensinthebusiness
school,anintranetwasdeliveredbythe
administration of the business school
in the form of an existing, completed
communication network. In this case,
the WBS, by outlining very specific
deliverables, could act as a communication tool to keep all stakeholders
aware of the detailed objectives and
the relation among the objectives and
theprocessinwhichtheobjectivesare
involved.
DeliverableI.4:Completed
AssessmentPlan
AACSB International Standards
16, 18, 19, and 21 concentrate on the
setting and achievement of learning
goals (AACSB, Eligibility procedures,
2008, pp. 73–77). The example business school spent considerable time
and effort in preparing an assessment
planthatbeganwithalmostthreequar
ters of the faculty’s attending AACSB
International-sponsored seminars on
assessment in 2002–2004. The first
assessment workshop on campus for
faculty took place in September 2003.
Five workshops followed and involved
continued development of learning
goalsfortheundergraduateandgraduate programs. In November 2004, an
all-dayfacultyworkshop,facilitatedby
an external consultant, took place to
finalize the learning goals and objectives. In February 2005, an assessment
committeewasestablishedandcharged
with developing and implementing the
business school assessment plan. From
that point, the assessment committee
became responsible for the following
tasks:
1. Relating the learning goals for
each program to the school’s mission
(Standards16–18,and20).
2.Determiningtheschool’sresponse
tostandard15.
3.Managingthecurricula.
4. Providing the faculty with incentives to get involved in designing
and evaluating rubrics to satisfy the
requirementsspecifiedinStandards16
and18.
5.Schedulingthetrainingoffaculty.
6.Developingtheassessmentplan.
Because the visitation year for our
example business school was 2005,
AACSB International Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards
for Business Accreditation (2006) only
required the school to meet the following requirements: “An assurance of
learning system will be in place with
measuresandrecordkeepingforassessingprogrameffectiveness”(p.67).The
school was not required to close the
assurance-of-learning loop by taking
resultsandfunnelingthembackintothe
curricula as proof of continuing development of degree programs. However,
theschoolcouldusetheWBStohelpto
prepare budgetary requirements specifiedbythiseffort.
DeliverableI.5:Integrated
Strategic,Financial,and
AssessmentPlans
Aswementionedabove,ourexample
business school did bring in outside
consultants prior to the AACSB Internationalmaintenanceteamreview.The
consultants,aswellastheteamleader,
repeated an emphasis of the need for
consistency in every activity, plan, and
processthattheschoolexhibited.Therefore, the results of reviewing for that
uniformitywereestablishedasamajor
deliverable. Using theWBS methodology for this single effort is probably
unnecessary,butweincludeitforconsistentuse.
DeliverableI.6:Established
FacultyDevelopmentPlan
The example school completed
Deliverable I.6 mainly in response to
AACSB International Standard 2 (Eligibilityprocedures,2008),whichstates
that,“Themissionincludestheproduction of intellectual contributions that
advancetheknowledgeandpracticeof
businessandmanagement”(p.21).The
guidance for this standard states that
each business school must have “clear
policiesthatstateexpectationstoguide
faculty in the successful production of
a portfolio of intellectual contributions
that are consistent with the school’s
mission”(p.24).TheFacultyDevelopment Plan delivered by the example
business school involved completion
of a Statement of Faculty Intellectual
Expectations and a Faculty DevelopmentSupportPlan.
Developing a Statement of Faculty
IntellectualExpectationswasadifficult,
but inclusive process for the example
businessschool.Itwasdifficultbecause
the business school resides within a
faculty-unionized campus (American
Association of University Professors)
and because there were many divergent opinions among the faculty about
whatthoseexpectationsshouldbe.The
processbeganinFebruary2005witha
faculty workshop.Although discussion
was hot, those present voted to accept
a statement that very clearly defined
the number and type of intellectual
contributions expected from each fulltimefacultymemberonarolling5-year
period. From that point, the statement
bounced back and forth between the
AACSBInternationalsteeringcommittee, members of the faculty, and the
facultyunionofficersoncampus.Once
September/October2008
35
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
the union gave its support to the statement, and the faculty had an opportunity for input on the revisions, the
AACSBInternationalsteeringcommittee recommended the statement to the
dean. The dean accepted the statement
withaminorrevisioninMay2005.
In addition to the Statement of FacultyIntellectualExpectations,thebusinessschoolneededtodefineadevelopmentplanthatwouldsupportfacultyas
indicatedinAACSBInternationalStandards 5 and 11 (Eligibility procedures,
2008),butthatneedwasalsoacceptable
tothefacultyunionandtheadministration. At the center of the general plan
wasaFacultyAdvancementPlan(FAP)
that the business school initiated but
that the institution’s administration for
facultyacrossthecampuslatertookup.
The FAP is generated by each faculty
memberandreviewedbythedeanwith
that individual. The plan outlines how
the faculty member proposes to grow
professionally during a 3-year period.
As an example, an individual may ask
forfundingtoattendaspecialmanagement-training program offered through
Harvard. This process began in 1998.
After two iterations, the first cycle of
the plan began for the faculty at large,
andasecondcycleoftheplanbeganfor
thebusinessschoolinOctober2003.In
addition, the business school administration,withinputfromthescholarship/
editorial committee and the university
administration, initiated a scholarship
rewardsystem,aworkingpaperseries,
researchseminars,andteachingawards
plus research mentorship/coauthorship
toenableandencourageresearchamong
thefaculty.
As we look back over Deliverable
I.6,itseemstousthatthereshouldhave
been another set of items that more
extensively satisfied Standards 11 and
12. However, to a great extent these
itemsarecoveredinI.10,whichdelivers
acompletedprocessmanual.
Aswepreviouslymentioned,AACSB
International Standard 2 from the Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation
Standards for Business Accreditation
(2008) indicates that the school must
“display the portfolio of intellectual
contributions” (p. 22). As readers can
seeintheexampleWBS,ourcasebusiness school did not include this port36
JournalofEducationforBusiness
folio under Deliverable I.6, Faculty
DevelopmentPlan.Theschoolfeltthat
the development of a Web-based facultydatabasetohouseallofthefaculty
informationwassocriticalthatitshould
be a major deliverable. It is indicated
on the WBS as I.11. Last, the school
assembled a log of activities toward
completion of the deliverables. Again,
creatingafacultydevelopmentplanisa
verycomplicatedprocessthataddresses
several AACSB International requirementsandinvolvesseveraliterationsof
work.RevisiontotheWBSdeliverables
by using a simple configuration management system would enable (a) the
effective communication and (b) efficientadjustmenttothevariouschanges
requiredbythiseffort.
DeliverableI.7:Completed
FinancialDevelopmentPlan
The example school included a
deliverable of a Completed Financial
DevelopmentPlaninitsWBStosatisfy
Standard 5.AACSB International (Eligibility procedures, 2008) requires not
onlysometypeoffacultydevelopment
plan but also a plan to guarantee that
thereissufficientfinancialsupportfrom
theinstitutionortheschool“tocontinuously enhance the intellectual capital
ofthefacultytoensurethatinstruction
keepspacewiththesubjectmatter”(p.
28). In this case, the main avenue that
the example school pursued to provide
financial support to faculty was to get
approval from the institution’s administration for the business school dean
tosolicitfundsdirectlyfortheexample
school.Anexampleoftheutilityofthe
WBSwouldbetoseparatethebudgetaryrequirementsunderDeliverable1.4
fromthoseofDeliverable1.7.Although
this could be accomplished by standard budgetary means, using the WBS
methoddoescommunicatemoreclearly
tothefacultyandotherstakeholdersthe
specific differences between the two
deliverables.
DeliverableI.8:Completed
FlexibleMBAProgramPlan
For the example business school, it
seemed appropriate for the school to
includeinformationabouttherevitalization of the MBA program in prepara-
tionfortheAACSBInternationalmaintenance review. The school included
that information to provide full disclosure about a problem area that it was
addressing and to indicate the school’s
commitment to continuous improvement. In this case, six activities and
their related deliverables were specified. They included (a) approving the
newMBAprogram,(b)completingproposalofthenewMBAprogramsentto
FacultySenateCurriculumCommittee,
(c) individual faculty member’s giving
inputonthenewMBAtotheassociate
dean,(d)studyingtheadultMBAmarket, (e) faculty’s developing a baseline
forthenewMBA,and(f)keepingalog
ofactivities.
This experience demonstrates that
each of the major deliverables, including the aforementioned deliverables,
comprises subdeliverables. The listing
of the various items provides an overview of what was involved in completingthisdeliverable.Aresponsibility
matrix, which we address later in this
article, forms a record of what parties
areinvolvedinandresponsibleforeach
subdeliverable.
DeliverableI.9:Completed
SummaryofStudentInformation
The Summary of Student Information was a direct response toAACSB
InternationalStandards3,6–8,and14
(Eligibility procedures, 2008). This
deliverable consisted of a thorough
report that fulfilled the Guidance for
Documentation section under each of
the standards mentioned above.As an
example, in partial compliance with
Standard 8, one section in the report
describes the business school’s advising center, the number of advisors,
howmanystudentsthecenterseeseach
academicyear,howoftenwhichactivities are performed there, and the like.
Again, this experience shows a deliverable that transcends many AACSB
International standards. Streamlining
the process of reporting may be possible by using the WBS to guide not
only the effort, but also—and perhaps
this is more important—to communicatetorelevantstakeholdersthesystem
that emerged to satisfy these various
AACSBInternationalstandards.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
DeliverableI.10:Completed
ProcessManual
Either choice would be acceptable in
creatingtheWBS.
Throughoutall21Standards,AACSB
International emphasizes the need to
define the processes behind the deliverables.As an example,AACSB International (Eligibility procedures, 2008)
Standard 11 specifically states, “The
school has well documented and communicatedprocessesinplacetomanage
and support faculty members over the
progression of their careers consistent
withtheschool’smission”(p.14).Standard 15 requires under “Management
of Curricula,” that “The school uses
well documented, systematic processes
todevelop,monitor,evaluate,andrevise
the substance and delivery of the curriculaofdegreeprogramsandtoassess
theimpactofthecurriculaonlearning”
(p. 15). Therefore, the example businessschoolmadeavailableamanualof
all the processes involved in the governance and operations of the school.
Someoftheprocesseswereattheinstitutionlevel,andsomewereatthelevel
of the business school. An adaptation
oftheWBScouldbeusedasatableof
contentstothismanual,toorganizethe
various processes that lead to specific
deliverables. Each high-level deliverable in the manual could also identify the AACSB International standard
beingsatisfied.
DeliverableI.12:Completed
AppendicesandSupporting
Material
DeliverableI.11:Faculty
Database
In accord with Deliverable I.6, the
example business school considered
development of a Web-based faculty
database as a very important deliverable. The school felt that such a database would provide a very efficient
and organized venue for the visitation
team to access the necessary information about each faculty member and
their intellectual contributions. This
schooldevelopedthedatabaseinhouse
to meet its specific needs. Because the
database is Web based, reviewers can
access the information from anywhere,
therebymakingitefficient.Tohighlight
the significance of this database, the
schoolsetitupasaseparatehigh-level
deliverable.Itwouldalsobeconsistent
withthemethodologyforaschooltoset
itupasasubsectionofDeliverableI.6.
The last major deliverable, DeliverableI.12,isalistofappendicesofsupporting material. Deliverable I.12 lists
20 appendices, including Table 1 and
Table 2 required by AACSB International Standards 9 and 10 (review of
faculty participants; Eligibility procedures, 2008). Many of the items are
copies of actual documents that were
mentioned as deliverables in theWBS,
such as the FAP. In addition, Deliverable I.12 includes some items that the
coordinatorsoftheAACSBInternationalmaintenanceeffortfeltwouldprovide
abetterunderstandingoftheschooland
what it is about, such as overview of
undergraduate curriculum, postgraduate activity, and employment profiles.
The school could arrange the items in
theappendixeitherbyAACSBInternationalstandardorbyWBSdeliverable.
Because of the overlap of documents
acrossstandards,itmaybemoreeffectiveforcommunicationtousetheWBS
approach.
SUMMARY
Inthissectionofthearticle,wehave
identifiedallpossibledeliverablesfora
specific school’s accreditation maintenance process. Following each subsection,wehaveidentifiedpossiblebenefits
ofusingaprojectmanagementapproach
and the utility of the WBS tool. Our
goal was to summarize several WBS
benefits.Althoughsomeeducatorsmay
not deem this approach as appropriate
or necessary for their schools, we feel
thatitisatoolthatisusefulforincreasing the effectiveness and efficiency of
manybusinessschools’efforts.
ComplexityOfMaintenance-ofAccreditationProcessesandthe
ResultingUtilityoftheWBS
As shown inTable 1,AACSB International sorts its standards for businessaccreditationintothreecategories:
strategic management standards, participants standards, and assurance of
learning standards. Each category has
a unique basis for judgment and guidance for documentation, yet the category may link or overlap with other
standards. This circumstance is where
projectmanagementtechniquesbecome
so useful. One example of the broad
nature of AACSB International (Eligibility procedures, 2008) Standards is
foundinstandard16:
Bachelor’s or undergraduate level
degree: knowledge and skills. Adaptingexpectationstotheschool’smission
and cultural circumstances, the school
specifies learning goals and demonstrates achievement of learning goals
for key general, management-specific,
and/or appropriate discipline-specific
knowledge and skills that its students
achieve in each undergraduate degree
program.(p.16)
In addition, some of the standards
require documentation of processes
and input by stakeholders as part of
thebasesofjudgment.Asanexample,
under“BasisforJudgment”inAACSB
International Eligibility Procedures
andAccreditationStandardsforBusinessAccreditation (2008), Standard 1
states, “The school demonstrates that
itsmissionstatementderivesfromprocessesthatincludeinputfromitsstakeholders” (p. 20). Making the process
even more difficult, the accreditation
review includes all degree programs
in the business school. This means
that the school must be prepared to
defendeachstandardforeverydegree
program that it offers, such as bachelor of science, MBA, and executive
MBA. Last, “Consistent with its missionanditsculturalcontext,theinstitutionmustdemonstratediversityinits
businessprograms”(p.9).Also,“The
institutionorthebusinessprogramsof
theinstitutionmustestablishexpectations for ethical behavior by administrators, faculty, and students” (p. 11).
Allofthesevariousrequirementscreate a complex situation that necessitates excellent organization skills,
involvement of various stakeholders,
and proper sequencing to lead to successful accreditation. Trying to keep
track of what has been accomplished
and what has not becomes very difficultwithoutsomekindofmechanism
to organize the effort. The use of a
toolsuchasaWBScanprovidetoall
involved a clear, pictorial overview
September/October2008
37
TABLE2.ExampleofaResponsibilityAssignmentMatrix
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:43 11 January 2016
Deliverable
Faculty,staff,
and
committees
Administrators
External
stakeholders
andgroups
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
I.1Missionstatement
I.1.1Inputfromstakeholders
I.1.2Missionstatementalignedwith
universitymission
I.1.3Workshopswithfacultyand
staffondevelopmentofmission
I.1.4Preliminarymissionstatement
I.1.5Logofactivitiesthatledto
missionstatement
I.2Completedstrategicandfinancial
Plan
I.2.1Completedplanbasedonreview
bybusinessschoolstakeholders
I.2.2Writtenfinancialplanaligned
withstrategicplan
I.2.3Finalalignmentwithmiddle
statesstandards
I.2.4Writtenstrategicplan
I.2.5Facultyandstaffworkshopson
strategicgoals
I.2.6Facultyandstaffworkshopson
SWOTanalysis
I.2.5Logofplanningactivities
P
Note.Unnamedexampleschoolofbusiness(2006).SWOT=strengths,weaknesses,opportunities,
andthreats.
of the entire AACSB International
accreditationeffort.
It is most important that without
someguidanceofthisnature,itiseasy
forstakeholders,especiallyfacultyand
staff, to distance themselves from the
effortbecausetheydonotfeelthatthey
know or understand what needs to be
producedorwhattheirpartis.Theuse
ofWBS provides a way for the school
tobringallstakeholderstogetherinthe
effortforaccreditation.
Last, one of the school’s key objectives in preparing for maintenance
of accreditation should be to make a
clear,thorough,andconcisecasetothe
accreditation team. The use of a WBS
will accomplish that. Once the WBS
hasbeendeveloped,theplancanbefollowed to prepare for a successful visit,
aswellastoprovidethedocumentation
necessaryfortheAACSBInternational
teamtoreview.
GuidelinesforCreatingtheWBS
Figure 1 shows a WBS at the highest level only. As a practical matter,
38
JournalofEducationforBusiness
work deliverables shown in Figure 1
aredecomposedintomoredetailedlevels. The detailed subdeliverables must
capture 100% of the deliverable at the
higher level.A simple rule for schools
whencreatingtheWBSistousenouns
insteadofverbs.Manyprojectmanagers
areactionorientedandthinkintermsof
what needs to be done (verbs), instead
ofwhatneedsbeproduced(nouns).This
distinctionmightseemtosomemanagerstobeatrivialpoint,butexperience
has shown us that following this rule
cansignificantlyimprovethecommuni