AACSB Standard 5 is one of the most important accreditation standards because it makes business schools explicitly accountable for student learning. Unfortunately,in practice, Assurance of Learning (AOL)often presents the greatest challenges for most business schools undergoing accreditation.
Across business schools worldwide, AOL is the area most associated with faculty resistance, missed deadlines, incomplete data, and the infamous failure to “close the loop.”
Importantly, this resistance rarely comes from a lack of commitment to students or teaching quality. Instead, it usually reflects how AOL is designed, supported, and managed within the institution.
The most frequent causes of faculty resistance to AOL are examined below, along with—and perhaps more importantly—what actually works to get past those obstacles.
1. Faculty Don’t Understand AOL
The Problem
Many faculty members experience AOL as a confusing, jargon-heavy, compliance-driven exercise. Terms like learning goals, rubrics, direct measures, and closing the loop can feel abstract, disconnected from day-to-day teaching, and inconsistently applied across programs.
When faculty don’t clearly understand what AOL is, why AOL exists or how it improves student learning, resistance is almost inevitable.
What Works
The following can be done to equip faculty with practical AOL knowledge:
Invest in practical, faculty-centered AOL training
Focus on how AOL supports better teaching, not just accreditation
Provide hands-on workshops using the school’s actual courses and assignments
For example, Accreditation.Biz works directly with faculty to both train them on AOL concepts and co-develop assessment plans, rubrics, and reports, reducing confusion and anxiety.
2. Faculty Lack Time
The Problem
Faculty are already stretched thin by teaching, research, advising, and administrative work. AOL often feels like “one more unfunded mandate” added on top of an already overloaded workload. When AOL is perceived as extra work with no support, deadlines slip and enthusiasm disappears.
What Works
The following can be done to free up faculty time so that they can perform their normal duties and, at the same time, engage in AOL in a meaningful way:
Hire dedicated AOL staff or assessment coordinators
Use consultants to handle technical and administrative tasks
Streamline data collection and reporting processes
Faculty should focus on academic judgment and improvement, not on spreadsheets, templates, and accreditation compliance paperwork.
3. There Are No Meaningful Rewards for AOL Work
The Problem
In many schools, faculty see AOL work as:
Invisible
Uncompensated
Not valued in tenure, promotion, or merit decisions
When faculty quickly realize that AOL efforts are not rewarded—financially or professionally—they deprioritize this important task.
What Works
The following mechanism can be used to offer faculty tangible incentives for participating in AOL:
Create financial stipends or course releases for AOL leadership
Establish non-financial recognition, such as awards and public acknowledgment
Make AOL contributions a formal component of annual reviews, tenure, and promotion
Recognizing and rewarding AOL champions signals that assessment work truly matters.
4. AOL Doesn’t Lead to Real Change
The Problem
Perhaps the most demoralizing issue: faculty collect data year after year, but nothing changes. Reports are written, uploaded, and forgotten; there are no curricular revisions, no pedagogical innovation, and no feedback loops. This situation creates deep cynicism towards AOL. Indeed, why bother if nothing changes?
What Works
The following can be done to make AOL a real vehicle for positive change and improvement in student learning:
Enforce full AOL cycles, including documented actions and follow-up assessments
Implement changes at course, program, department, and college levels
Actively communicate improvements that resulted from AOL to all the relevant stakeholders
When faculty see tangible improvements tied directly to assessment results, buy-in increases dramatically.
Additional Resistance Factors You May Be Overlooking
Beyond the “big four,” several other factors often fuel AOL resistance:
Fear of evaluation or blame (AOL perceived as faculty performance review)
Inconsistent leadership support
Overly complex assessment systems
Poor alignment between learning goals and curriculum
Each of these issues points back to system design—not faculty motivation.
Conclusion: It’s Not the Standard—and It’s Not the Faculty
AACSB Standard 5 is not the problem. Faculty commitment to teaching and learning is not the problem either.
In most cases, the real issue is an inefficient, overly complex, or poorly supported AOL system.
With the right design, tools, incentives, and leadership, AOL can:
Improve student learning in meaningful ways
Reduce faculty frustration and resistance
Strengthen accreditation outcomes
Build a sustainable culture of assessment
An experienced accreditation partner like Accreditation.Biz can design, implement, and manage an AOL system that meets AACSB Standard 5, supports faculty, and, most importantly, delivers real improvement in student learning.
When AOL works well, faculty stop resisting it and start owning it.
Aligning with AACSB Standard 1 (Strategic Planning) entails more than just creating a strategic plan. The standard requires the creation of a continuous, systematic, and effective strategic planning process that connects the business school’s mission, vision, goals, and results in a continuous improvement cycle. AACSB Standard 1 requires business schools to articulate a clear direction, involve a diverse range of stakeholders, and regularly assess progress toward mission-related objectives. The ultimate goal of this standard is to help business schools become better versions of themselves through the AACSB accreditation process.
This article outlines a step-by-step guide for developing and managing a strategic management process that satisfies AACSB’s requirements outlined in Standard 1 (see Figure 1). Each of these steps is covered in greater detail in the sections that follow, along with typical pitfalls associated with each step.
Step 1: Develop a Focused and Differentiated Mission
AACSB expects a school’s mission statement to define its niche, purpose, and distinctive competencies clearly. A good, focused mission should answer the following three questions:
Who do we serve?
What do we provide?
How are we distinct from others?
A good mission statement helps the school clarify its competitive advantage, prioritize allocation of resources, and demonstrate alignment across all academic and operational activities.
Common Pitfalls in Mission Statements
Many business schools start with a broad or generic mission statement that could apply to almost any school.
For example: “To educate future business leaders who will make the world a better place.”
This statement is inspirational but too general; it does not define who the school serves, what makes it distinctive, or where it operates. AACSB reviewers often flag such statements for lacking focus and distinctiveness.
Examples of Strong Mission Statements
A well-crafted mission provides clarity and focus with respect to the niche that the school is serving and the school’s distinctive competencies. Here are examples of AACSB-aligned mission statements:
“To develop innovative entrepreneurs and business leaders in Latin America through experiential learning and community engagement.”
“To advance sustainable business practices by educating socially responsible leaders in Southeast Asia.”
“To empower working professionals in the Midwest through flexible, technology-driven business education.”
These mission statement examples are much better because they identify:
Target audience (entrepreneurs, working professionals, etc.),
Geographic focus (Latin America, Southeast Asia, Midwest), and
Having a focused mission statement is important for meeting AACSB Standard 1 requirements and, on a broader note, giving the entire business school a sense of a clear, common purpose.
Step 2: Formulate a Realistic and Measurable Vision
A vision statement should describe the school’s aspirational future while remaining achievable and time-bound. AACSB peer review teams look for evidence that:
The vision is realistic given current resources and market conditions
The school tracks progress toward the vision through specific outcomes
The vision guides strategic and operational decisions
Common Pitfalls in Vision Statements
One of the common pitfalls in relation to a vision statement is that some schools aim too high, too soon, or express aspirations without a clear direction. For example:
“To be the world’s best business school.”
This statement is overly ambitious, lacks context, and provides no clear improvement trajectory.
AACSB reviewers prefer visions that are ambitious yet plausible and that can facilitate progress that can be tracked over time.
Examples of better vision statements are provided below:
“To become the leading provider of entrepreneurship education in South America.”
“To be recognized as a top regional business school for innovation and applied research.”
“To shape the future of sustainable business education in the Pacific region.”
These examples are ambitious yet plausible; they communicate the direction and scope of aspirations, allowing schools to show measurable progress in future reports.
Step 3: Define Strategic Goals Aligned with the Mission
Once mission and vision are clarified, the next step is to define five to six strategic goals that describe what the school intends to accomplish over the next five years.
These goals should:
Support the mission and vision
Address AACSB requirements (such as societal impact, innovation, and engagement)
Serve as the foundation for assessment and reporting
Examples of mission-aligned goals include:
Strengthen faculty qualifications
Enhance global engagement and partnerships
Demonstrate positive societal impact through entrepreneurship development
Achieve and maintain AACSB accreditation
Although AACSB is currently following a six-year accreditation cycle, business schools going through accreditation usually have to prepare evidence of compliance with AACSB standard way before the 6 year mark. Thus, aiming for a five-year strategic planning cycle is advisable
Step 4: Establish SMART Objectives and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
AACSB expects measurable evidence of progress toward goals. To make attainment of goals measurable, each strategic goal should have 2-3 linked SMART objectives, which are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. Each objective should have a measurable, time-bound KPI (or several KPIs).
For example:
Goal: Strengthen academic quality and faculty qualifications.
Objective: Ensure 90% of faculty meet AACSB qualification standards by 2027.
KPI: Percentage of faculty categorized as Scholarly Academic (SA), Practice Academic (PA), etc.
Goal:Enhance societal impact.
Objective: Implement five community engagement projects by 2030.
KPI: Number of projects completed, beneficiaries reached, or partnerships formed.
These metrics provide evidence for both strategic progress and continuous improvement, a cornerstone of AACSB accreditation.
Step 5: Identify and Describe Strategic Initiatives
AACSB Standard 1 requires specifying how goals and objectives will be achieved. Each objective should be targeted by one or more strategic initiatives. A strategic initiative is a project or program undertaken to achieve measurable results towards the mission, vision, and goals.
Each strategic initiative should include:
A brief description and rationale
The responsible unit or leader
Financial allocations and funding sources
A timeline for implementation
Expected outcomes linked to KPIs.
Including financial data is especially important for demonstrating that the school is serious about pursuing its strategic initiatives. Specifying sources of funds for major initiatives is also required by AACSB Standard 2 (Physical, Virtual, and Financial Resources).
Step 6: Develop a Comprehensive Risk Management Plan
AACSB expects business schools to demonstrate awareness of internal and external risks that may affect their performance. A formal risk management plan ensures proactive identification, mitigation, and communication of potential threats in the internal and external environments.
A risk management plan should include the following parts:
Risk Identification: identify financial, academic, operational, regulatory, technological, or reputational risks that the school is facing.
Risk Analysis and Prioritization: evaluate the likelihood and potential impact of each risk.
Mitigation Strategies: define preventive and corrective actions.
Accountability: assign responsible individuals or committees for each risk.
Crisis Reflection: discuss institutional responses to past crises (for example, pandemics or economic shocks) and lessons learned.
An annual or quarterly review of the risk management plan, which can be done as a part of general strategic planning meetings, demonstrates that the school maintains institutional resilience and a culture of preparedness.
Step 7: Establish a Strategic Planning Committee
AACSB values stakeholder engagement and inclusive decision-making. A formal strategic planning committee (SPC) ensures ongoing oversight of the strategic management process.
The SPC should:
Include diverse stakeholders such as faculty, students, administrators, alumni, and employers
Meet at least annually to review progress towards the goals in the strategic plan
Document discussions and decisions in detailed meeting minutes, and
Integrate a Risk Management Subcommittee responsible for monitoring and updating the risk plan.
The committee’s meeting minutes serve as documented evidence of strategic management activities for AACSB reviewers.
Step 8: Institutionalize Continuous Improvement
The hallmark of AACSB accreditation is evidence of continuous improvement through strategic planning. At the most basic level, strategic planning can be viewed as a structured process of planning, implementing, evaluating, and refining strategic actions based on strategic, long-term thinking. The following can be done to institutionalize strategic planning:
Conduct annual reviews of goals, KPIs, and risk factors
Adjust strategies based on internal data, stakeholder input, and environmental changes
Communicate progress towards meeting goals and objectives regularly to internal and external stakeholders
Use data from internal assessment and stakeholder surveys to inform future plans
This cyclical, continuous process ensures the strategic plan remains dynamic, relevant, and aligned with the school’s mission, vision, goals, and objectives. Including accreditation-related objectives is important for meeting accreditation requirements and giving the strategic plan additional purpose and importance in the eyes of stakeholders.
Conclusion: Turning Strategy into a Living System
AACSB Standard 1 is not just about composing a strategic plan and sharing it with all the stakeholders. AACSB aims for every business school undergoing accreditation or reaccreditation to enhance their performance through strategic planning. By following the steps and recommendations provided in this article, business schools can transform their strategic plans from static documents into living systems of continuous improvement. These systems should be inclusive, agile, driven by an overarching purpose, shaped by data-driven decision-making, and aligned with AACSB’s global standards of excellence in business education.
AACSB accreditation is widely recognized as the gold standard for business school quality. In addition to being committed to excellence in business education, business schools considering pursuing AACSB accreditation must also be prepared for a significant financial commitment that all accreditation projects require. So, how much does AACSB accreditation actually cost?
Direct AACSB Fees
According to the official AACSB fee schedule, the total direct cost of AACSB accreditation over a six-year initial accreditation period is approximately $73,000. The breakdown of this amount is provided in Table 1 below:
Table 1. AACSB Accreditation Fees
Fee Type
Description
Amount
Eligibility Application Workshop
Starting February 2025, AACSB requires schools to attend a mandatory eligibility application workshop
$1,000
Eligibility Application Fee
One-time fee due after submitting the initial eligibility application
$2,400
Initial Accreditation Committee Process Acceptance Fee
One-time fee due after the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC) accepts the eligibility application
$7,800
Initial Accreditation Fee
Annual fee applied while the school is in the initial accreditation process. The first payment is due following acceptance of the eligibility application.
$7,140 × 6 = $42,840
Initial Accreditation Visit Application Fee
One-time fee charged following submission of the initial accreditation application
$18,000
Total:
$73,040
The total of $73,040 does not include the travel expenses associated with visits by the school’s assigned AACSB Mentor. These mentor visits are required by AACSB and are carried out at the institution’s expense.
Additional Institutional Costs
It’s important to note that AACSB fees are only part of the story. Achieving and maintaining AACSB accreditation typically requires additional investments, which vary by institution. These may include:
Hiring Faculty and Staff: Many schools find it necessary to hire new faculty members and staff to meet AACSB’s standards for faculty sufficiency and to manage the added workload associated with accreditation. This includes efforts in faculty credentialing, strategic planning, and assurance of learning.
Infrastructure and Technology Upgrades: AACSB accreditation often leads schools to improve their digital learning platforms, student services, or physical facilities to align with global best practices.
Training and Development: Faculty and staff may require AACSB-specific professional development to fully implement accreditation standards—especially in areas like curriculum design and assessment.
Accreditation Consulting: Some institutions choose to engage external consultants or hire dedicated internal project managers to support the accreditation process and address identified gaps.
These non-fee expenses can vary widely and may easily exceed the direct AACSB fees. A thorough gap analysis—which evaluates the school’s current practices against AACSB standards—is essential for estimating the total cost of the full accreditation journey.
Is AACSB a Worthwhile Investment?
While the direct cost of AACSB accreditation is about $73,000, the true total may be substantially higher when accounting for staffing, infrastructure, and training investments. However, it’s important to note that most of these additional costs go towards organizational improvement, and not AACSB per se. For many business schools, the long-term benefits of international recognition, improved program quality, and enhanced student outcomes make AACSB accreditation a worthwhile investment.
For business schools pursuing AACSB accreditation, Assurance of Learning (AoL) is often the most misunderstood and most labor-intensive component of the accreditation process. From selecting learning goals to designing rubrics, collecting data, and closing the loop—the process can easily overwhelm internal teams already juggling teaching, research, and numerous service responsibilities.
So the question becomes: should you outsource your AoL to a consulting company? This article is an attempt to reflect on this important question.
When Outsourcing Makes Sense
Outsourcing is not about handing over control—it’s about leveraging expertise to build a system that is both compliant and sustainable. Here are three scenarios where outsourcing offers significant benefits:
Limited Internal Expertise. Many institutions have never been through the accreditation process. Working with consultants who’ve designed AoL systems for dozens of schools reduces trial-and-error and ensures alignment with AACSB expectations.
Tight Timelines. If you’re under pressure to meet a visit deadline, building AoL processes from scratch internally may cause costly delays. A consulting partner can fast-track design, training, and implementation without compromising quality.
Accreditation Fatigue. Faculty burnout is real. Outsourcing the technical design of rubrics, curriculum mapping, and data collection allows your faculty to save time and energy and focus on what matters most—using the results to improve student learning.
Strained Relationships. Nagging faculty who are already sick and tired of the accreditation work will not do any good to AoL yet will ruing the relationships between faculty and administrators. With an external consultant, at least some of this negative energy can be directed to outside of the organization.
When to Keep It In-House
If your school has already built a mature AoL system and simply needs minor tweaks or updated documentation, internal teams may be better suited. Similarly, if faculty ownership is a core institutional value and you have experienced accreditation leadership in place, an in-house model can work well.
A Smart Hybrid Approach
At Accreditation.Biz, we often recommend a hybrid approach: let outside experts design the structure and tools, while internal faculty and staff own the assessment process. This balance ensures compliance without eroding institutional culture or autonomy.
Final Word
Outsourcing your AoL system design isn’t a shortcut—it’s a strategic investment. The goal is not to just “pass the accreditation,” but to embed a system that continuously improves learning outcomes long after the visit ends. Because of all those reasons, your AoL should start and continue on a good note. This requires a substantial investment of resources no matter how you go about designing and implementing your AoL system.
In today’s increasingly global economy and competitive education market, business schools from around the world must keep abreast with international best practices and incorporate regional nuances into their curriculum and operations in order to remain competitive. Within the Asia-Pacific region, one organization plays a pivotal role in advancing the quality, relevance, and global connectivity of business schools: The Association of Asia-Pacific Business Schools (AAPBS). In this article, we provide a brief overview of AAPBS and discuss how this organization relates to international accreditation agencies for business schools, such as AACSB, EQUIS, and AMBA-BGA.
What is AAPBS?
Founded in 2004, the Association of Asia-Pacific Business Schools (AAPBS) is a collaborative network of business schools dedicated to enhancing the quality of business and management education throughout the Asia-Pacific region. Unlike traditional accreditation bodies such as AACSB, AAPBS primarily serves as a platform for networking, knowledge-sharing, and regional development, rather than formal accreditation.
Mission and Vision
The mission of AAPBS is to “..provide leadership and representation to advance the quality of business and management education in the Asia-Pacific region.” This vision reflects a strong commitment to cultural diversity, regional relevance, and the development of future business leaders who are equipped to thrive in Asia’s complex and dynamic economies and internationally.
Who Are the Members?
AAPBS membership includes over 100 business schools and academic institutions across Asia, Oceania, and the Pacific Rim, including:
Deakin University (Australia)
National University of Singapore Business School (Singapore)
Hong Kong University Business School (China)
Seoul National University Business School (South Korea)
Kyoto University (Japan)
University of Auckland (New Zealand)
It should be noted that members of AAPBS range from top-tier institutions to emerging schools that are eager to enhance their international profile.
What Does AAPBS Do?
Similarly to international accreditation agencies (e.g., AACSB, EQUIS, BGA) AAPBS provides its members with the following value propositions:
Academic Collaboration: AAPBS provides a platform for facilitating research partnerships, faculty exchanges, joint academic programs, and collaborative development of teaching cases rooted in the Asian context.
Conferences and Forums: AAPBS hosts annual academic conferences and deans’ meetings; it also organizes workshops on emerging topics such as AI in education, entrepreneurship, and sustainable business practices.
Leadership Development: AAPBS supports initiatives that develop next-generation academic leaders in Asia and provides opportunities for deans, directors, and faculty to build strategic leadership skills.
Benchmarking and Best Practices: AAPBS provides a platform for sharing institutional case studies, curriculum models, and strategies for accreditation among its members; it also offers insights regional challenges in business education such as demographic shifts, digital transformation, and internationalization
How AAPBS Differs from Accreditation Bodies
It’s important to note that AAPBS is not an accrediting agency. Business schools in Asia often pair AAPBS membership with international accreditations such as:
AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business)
EQUIS (EFMD Quality Improvement System)
AMBA-BGA (Association of MBAs – Business Graduates Association)
These international business accreditations help schools demonstrate global standards, while AAPBS provides the regional context, networks, and knowledge base to thrive in Asia’s unique educational landscape.
Final Thoughts
As the Asia-Pacific region continues to rise in global influence, AAPBS plays a crucial role in shaping the future of business education. By fostering a strong, regionally rooted yet globally connected network, AAPBS empowers institutions to develop leaders who can drive sustainable and inclusive growth in the 21st century. It also offers a strong foundation for pursuing alignment with international accreditation standards published by such international accreditation agencies as AACSB, EQUIS, AMBA-BGA, etc.
In today’s competitive academic environment, ensuring the quality and effectiveness of business education is more important than ever. Business schools around the world are increasingly held accountable for the outcomes that they produce for students and other key stakeholders served by business schools. That’s why AACSB Standard 5: Assurance of Learning (AoL) plays a critical role in accreditation for business schools. But if you’re new to AoL, you may have heard the term “loop” and wondered: What exactly does that mean? This article will provide a short explanation of what a “loop” is and what “closing the loop” mean.
The essence of AACSB Standard 5
AACSB Standard 5 requires that institutions demonstrate student achievement of learning goals for each degree program. It’s not enough to just have goals; schools must assess whether students are meeting them and use that information to continuously improve. Thus, these improvements have to be driven by data (and not opinion or wishful thinking).
What is a “loop” in AoL?
In the context of AoL, a loop refers to the continuous cycle of assessment, evaluation, and improvement aimed at enhancing student learning. This cycle is comprised of the following steps (see Figure 1 below):
Define Learning Goals and Outcomes: Define what students should know or be able to do upon graduation.
Assess Student Performance: Use tools such as exams, rubrics, presentations, or portfolios to measure learning outcomes.
Analyze Results: Review assessment results to identify patterns, strengths, and areas for improvement.
Implement Improvements: Use insights to make informed changes to curriculum, pedagogy, or resources—and document those changes.
Re-assess Performance: Measure attainment of learning outcomes again to see whether the implemented actions had their intended positive effect.
Figure 1. Assurance of Learning Loop as a Quality Improvement System
What does it mean “to close the loop”?
Going through this cycle once means that you “closed the loop”. AACSB Standard 5 requires that business schools “close the loop” for each program at least once in the accreditation cycle. Of course, assurance of learning should not stop once the loop is closed. The cycle begins again to improve student learning even further.
Conclusion
In summary, a “loop” in Assurance of Learning is more than just a process—it’s a commitment to quality, accountability, and continuous improvement in business education. By systematically assessing learning outcomes, analyzing data, and making informed changes, institutions not only meet AACSB Standard 5 but also demonstrate that they truly value student success. “Closing the loop” ensures that assessment isn’t just an academic exercise, but a meaningful driver of educational excellence. As business schools strive to meet the evolving needs of students and stakeholders, maintaining and refining these loops is essential for delivering programs that are both effective and impactful.
The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) places significant emphasis on research impact as part of its accreditation standards. Under Standard 8: Impact of Scholarship, AACSB encourages business schools to demonstrate that their faculty’s scholarly activities contribute meaningfully to business theory, practice, and education. The focus is not just on producing research but ensuring that it has a measurable influence on business, society, and academia.
Three Categories of Research as per AACSB Standard 8
AACSB’s Standard 8 posits that a business school can produce a portfolio of intellectual contributions that fall into the following areas:
Basic or Discovery Scholarship: focuses on expanding the existing knowledge base and developing new theories within business disciplines.
Applied or Integrative/Application Scholarship: leverages foundational knowledge, established theories, and methodologies to address real-world challenges faced by business professionals and their organizations.
Pedagogical or Teaching/Learning Scholarship: examines pedagogical theories and methodologies, fostering new insights, strategies, and content that improved usefulness and effectiveness of business education.
The exact nature and mix of intellectual contributions should reflect the mission of the business school. For example, a business school, as specified in its mission, may chose to become a leader in business thought, policy development, innovation, or certain business practices, such as sustainability. The portfolio of intellectual contributions should reflect that chosen area of focus.
Impact within Basic, Applied, and Pedagogical Research Categories
Each type of research outlined by AACSB Standard 8 contributes to business knowledge, practice, and education in distinct ways. Below is an overview of how each type of research generates impact.
Basic Scholarship: Expanding Knowledge and Theory
Basic or discovery scholarship focuses on advancing fundamental knowledge, developing new theories, and contributing to the academic body of work. An example of such research would be a new organizational behavior model that explains how leadership styles influence employee engagement over time.
Some of the key impact areas of this type of research include:
Theoretical Advancement: helps refine or develop new business theories in areas such as leadership, organizational behavior, strategic management, and finance.
Interdisciplinary Influence: contributes to knowledge across multiple fields, such as behavioral economics, AI in business, and business analytics.
Research influence: through theoretical and empirical insights, basic research lays the groundwork for future applied research and practical implementations.
Applied Scholarship: Solving Real-World Business Problems
Applied research builds on foundational knowledge and applies theories, methodologies, and techniques to address practical business challenges. An example of an applied research project would be a study applying blockchain technology to improve supply chain transparency and reduce fraud in the retail sector.
Applied research can have impact in the following areas:
Business Decision-Making: helps organizations make evidence-based strategic, financial, and operational decisions.
Policy and Regulatory Influence: guides policymakers in areas like corporate governance, taxation, and labor laws.
Technological Innovation: supports businesses in adopting AI, big data, and digital transformation strategies.
Entrepreneurship: leads to the creation of new products, business models, or business practices.
Industry Best Practices: develops frameworks for improving management practices, supply chain efficiency, and customer experience.
Sustainability and Corporate Responsibility: influences business policies on ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) initiatives.
Pedagogical Scholarship: Enhancing Business Education and Pedagogy
Teaching and learning scholarship can lead to the creation of new content for business education (e.g. case studies, books, book chapters, or white papers). It can also have a more research-driven and empirical focus and examine educational methodologies, student engagement strategies, and curriculum innovations to improve business education. A study exploring the effectiveness of simulation-based learning in teaching strategic management to MBA students would be an example of the latter type of pedagogical research.
Teaching and learning research can have impact in the following areas:
Curriculum Development: leads to the creation of more effective business courses and learning materials.
Innovative Teaching Methods: enhances learning experiences through simulations, case studies, and digital tools.
Student Learning Outcomes: provides insights into how students acquire business knowledge and skills.
Workforce Readiness: ensures that graduates have the necessary competencies to succeed in the business world.
Faculty Development: helps educators refine their teaching approaches based on empirical research.
Conclusion
Each type of business research outlined in AACSB Standard 8 plays a critical role in shaping business theory, practice, and education. Basic research advances theoretical knowledge, applied research translates that knowledge into real-world solutions, and pedagogical research ensures that business education remains effective and relevant. Together, these research approaches drive innovation, improve business decision-making, and enhance the quality of business education. The exact mix of research and its specific impact is driven by the mission of a business school. Regardless of the exact area of focus chosen for its mission, all business schools must provide evidence of how their research translates into real-world applications rather than just accumulating publication counts and citations by other scholars. This is the most important idea behind AACSB Standard 8.
Accreditation is a crucial project for all business schools. No business school can afford a failed accreditation project, as this can lead to serious problems with the school’s reputation and even tangible issues such as decreased enrollment or faculty resignations. Some accreditation experts have said that it is better not to be accredited than to apply for accreditation and get rejected.
Prestigious accreditation bodies, such as the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), set rigorous standards that require schools to demonstrate excellence in teaching, research, stakeholder engagement, and impact. Managing accreditation projects can be extremely complex, often likened to fixing an engine on a train that is running at full speed. This complexity demands a structured yet adaptable project management approach. In this article, it is proposed that a hybrid model, combining the strengths of both Waterfall and Agile methodologies, provides an effective way to manage accreditation projects successfully.
The Need for a Hybrid Approach
Accreditation projects are long-term endeavors that involve multiple stakeholders, extensive documentation, and continuous quality improvements. While a structured, sequential approach is necessary for setting the foundation, business schools must also remain flexible to address unforeseen challenges. A hybrid approach integrates the clarity and structure of the Waterfall model with the adaptability and responsiveness of Agile methodologies such as Scrum. In the sections below, it is explained how both Waterfall and Agile approaches can be integrated via two broad phases.
Phase 1: Establishing the Waterfall Structure
The Waterfall model provides a clear roadmap for accreditation by breaking it down into well-defined phases with specific milestones. These typically include:
Preparation and Planning – Identifying the accreditation requirements, forming the accreditation team, and outlining a high-level timeline.
Gap Analysis and Data Collection – Conducting a thorough review of existing policies, procedures, and performance metrics to identify gaps in compliance.
Implementation and Documentation – Aligning curriculum, faculty qualifications, and operational processes with accreditation standards.
Self-Assessment Report Submission – Preparing and submitting documentation that demonstrates compliance with accreditation requirements.
Peer Review Visit and Final Decision – Hosting peer reviewers who assess the school’s compliance and providing responses to any concerns raised.
Identifying the main phases and their dependencies will help a project manager to set the most important milestones as well as the deadlines for each of these milestones. Once the milestones are identified, an accreditation project manager can zoom in on individual phases and identify the main deliverables within each phase, the people responsible for these deliverables, and other resources that need to be assigned. If necessary, a popular project management application can be used to streamline these calculations and provide an efficient repository for all this structured information.
Overall, this linear structure ensures that all necessary steps are followed systematically and in compliance with accreditation requirements, preventing critical components from being overlooked. However, within each phase, unexpected challenges often arise, requiring a more flexible or Agile approach discussed below.
Phase 2: Applying Agile Principles within Each Phase
While the Waterfall model outlines the overarching structure, the execution within each phase benefits from an Agile approach. Scrum, an Agile framework, helps business schools manage uncertainties by promoting iterative progress and continuous feedback loops.
Task Forces and Committees – Small, cross-functional teams (either task forces or committees) should be assigned to specific accreditation components such as assurance of learning, strategic planning, risk management, curriculum alignment, and faculty qualifications.
Sprints – Instead of waiting for a single massive review at the end, task forces or committees should work in short cycles (e.g., 2-4 weeks) to complete incremental tasks and assess progress toward accreditation-related goals.
Task Prioritization – As accreditation requirements evolve or new issues arise, teams must regularly reassess priorities and make necessary adjustments.
Iterative Improvements – Quality assurance efforts should be continuous, with multiple iterations to refine policies, learning outcomes, and assessment processes.
Business schools frequently encounter unexpected challenges during accreditation, such as faculty turnover, curriculum misalignment, or assessment data gaps. A rigid, linear approach alone is insufficient to address these dynamic issues. By embedding Agile within the accreditation phases, schools can adapt in real time, ensuring they respond effectively to setbacks without derailing the overall project.
Furthermore, accreditation is not a one-time event but a cycle of continuous improvement. Schools often require multiple iterations to fine-tune quality measures based on accreditation feedback. Agile’s iterative nature supports ongoing refinements, ensuring that the institution not only achieves accreditation but also maintains and enhances quality over time.
Conclusion
Managing accreditation projects in business schools requires both structure and flexibility. A hybrid approach—starting with a Waterfall model to define phases and milestones, combined with Agile practices within those phases—provides the best of both worlds. This strategy ensures that schools stay on track and comply with the most important accreditation deadlines while remaining adaptable to challenges and quality improvement needs. By leveraging this hybrid methodology, business schools can navigate the complexities of accreditation more effectively and sustain a culture of continuous excellence.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and related technologies are reshaping today’s rapidly evolving business landscape. AI deployment can help organizations improve daily operations and enhance strategic decision-making. AI also impacts employment trends and even drives structural changes in across many industries. For business students, developing AI competencies is no longer optional—it is essential for ensuring employability and future career success. Business schools must integrate AI literacy into their curricula to ensure graduates remain competitive in the job market. This article talks about some of the most essential competencies that every business student needs to acquire to be relevant in the era of AI.
Key AI Competencies for Business Students
AI Fundamentals
Business students should have a foundational understanding of AI concepts, including machine learning, natural language processing, and predictive analytics. This knowledge enables them to grasp AI’s impact on business processes and decision-making while understanding the limitations of AI and related technologies. Although business students may not become AI engineers, they should be able to collaborate effectively with data scientists and AI professionals.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
AI thrives on data. Business students must develop skills in data analytics, visualization, and interpretation to effectively utilize AI systems and analyze AI-generated outputs. Proficiency in business analytics and related tools—such as Excel, SQL, Power BI, Tableau, Python, and R—will enable students to work with AI-driven insights effectively.
AI-Driven Decision-Making
Understanding how AI enhances decision-making is critical. Business students should learn to evaluate AI-generated insights, consider ethical implications, and use AI-driven tools for strategic planning and risk assessment.
Process Automation and Optimization
AI-powered automation streamlines business operations. Students should understand robotic process automation (RPA) and intelligent workflows to improve efficiency in supply chain management, human resources, and customer service. For example, AI-powered chatbots can personalize customer interactions through recommendation systems and sentiment analysis.In Human Resources (HR), AI-driven chatbots can efficiently handle basic employee queries and requests. Understanding these applications helps students improve customer and employee engagement strategies while optimizing internal business operations.
Strategic AI Implementation
Future business leaders must know how to integrate AI into corporate strategies. Business students should learn AI adoption frameworks, implementation challenges, and how to measure AI’s return on investment (ROI).
Ethical and Responsible AI Use
Ethical considerations are paramount in AI applications. Business students should explore topics such as bias in AI models, data privacy, regulatory compliance, and corporate responsibility to ensure ethical AI deployment.
The Future of AI in Business Education
As AI continues to transform industries, business accreditation bodies should emphasize AI competencies within business curricula. Business schools must align programs with industry needs by incorporating AI tools and applications, ensuring students are well-equipped to lead in an AI-driven world. By mastering these AI competencies, business students will be prepared to navigate the evolving job market, make data-driven decisions, and lead AI-driven business innovations within their organizations.
The term Enterprise University is often used to refer to a higher education institution that aligns its operations, programs, and culture with the market needs, emphasizing innovation, entrepreneurship, and industry partnerships. Enterprise universities focus on integrating academic and industry practices to prepare students for the workforce. On the academic side, enterprise universities foster innovative teaching and research that directly benefits the economy and society at large.
Defining Characteristics of an Enterprise University
While specific practices may vary among universities aspiring to align with the enterprise university vision, some of the defining characteristics of enterprise universities include the following:
Industry Collaborations: These universities actively collaborate with businesses, industries, and government agencies to develop programs that align with market needs.
Entrepreneurial Focus: They encourage entrepreneurial thinking among students and faculty, often providing support for such activities via incubators, accelerators, and funding for startups.
Research Commercialization: They foster research that is focused on solving real-world problems. The emphasis is on technology transfer, patents, and bringing innovations to market.
Skill-Oriented Programs: Curriculum design emphasizes practical skills that improve employability of students. This is often achieved by offering internships, co-op programs, and certifications in addition to academic degrees.
Flexible Learning Models: These universities often offer online, hybrid, and modular learning to cater to diverse groups of learners, including working professionals.
Revenue Diversification: They seek to diversify funding through grants, endowments, corporate training, consulting, etc., reducing reliance on student tuition and government funding.
How AACSB Supports Enterprise University Vision
Engagement with relevant stakeholders, innovation that improves attainment of relevant outcomes, and focus on positive societal impact are defining characteristics of AACSB accreditation philosophy. These central elements of AACSB accreditation philosophy are also well-aligned with the goals of an enterprise university. Specifically, AACSB accreditation can support an enterprise university vision in the following ways:
Promoting Industry-Relevant Education: AACSB Standards emphasize integrating current business practices and trends into curricula. AACSB also encourages partnerships with industries to design programs that address workforce needs and emerging technologies.
Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship: AACSB standards require innovation in teaching, research, and engagement, which directly supports entrepreneurial initiatives.
Enhancing Credibility among Potential Partners and Stakeholders: AACSB accreditation signals high-quality education to students, employers, and funding agencies. This reputation can help attract partnerships, funding, and talented faculty and students.
Encouraging Research with Impact: AACSB requires business schools to focus on producing impactful research that addresses societal and economic challenges. This aligns with the enterprise university’s goal of solving real-world problems through research and its commercialization.
Strengthening Global Networks: AACSB accreditation gives universities access to a global network of accredited institutions, fostering international partnerships. These connections can lead to joint research, global internships, and industry project partnerships that enhance enterprise-oriented outcomes.
Conclusion
AACSB supports the enterprise university vision by helping business schools embed innovation, market relevance, and stakeholder engagement into their operations. The accreditation framework helps business schools build stronger industry ties, develop impactful research, and prepare students for the workforce, aligning perfectly with the goals of an enterprise university.
