By Dr. Vlad Krotov

Accreditation is widely recognized as one of the most powerful mechanisms for continuous improvement in business schools. Whether operating under the standards of AACSB International, EFMD Global, the Association of MBAs/BGA, ACBSP, or other accreditation bodies, business schools are expected to demonstrate systematic processes for improving academic programs, supporting faculty development, ensuring that students achieve meaningful learning outcomes, and advancing broader organizational goals.

However, despite good intentions, many accreditation initiatives lose momentum over time. Business schools may begin with enthusiasm and strong leadership support, but progress can gradually slow. Committees stop meeting regularly, and critical accreditation processes—such as assurance of learning (AoL), faculty qualification tracking, and strategic planning—become inconsistent. In some cases, accreditation efforts stall completely, putting the school at risk of losing accreditation or failing to achieve reaccreditation.

Understanding why accreditation efforts stall (and how to restart them) is essential for schools that want to maintain their accreditation status and continue improving their academic programs.

Why Accreditation Efforts Stall

Leadership Transitions

One of the most common reasons accreditation initiatives stall is leadership change. When a dean, associate dean, or accreditation director leaves the institution, the momentum built around accreditation can quickly dissipate.

New leaders often arrive with different priorities, and accreditation processes may temporarily fall to the background while the administration focuses on other pressing issues such as enrollment, budgeting, or program development. Without a dedicated champion, accreditation initiatives can easily lose direction.

Unfortunately, accreditation timelines do not pause during leadership transitions. Required reporting cycles, assurance of learning processes, and faculty qualification tracking must continue regardless of administrative changes.

Accreditation Is Treated as a One-Time Project

Another common issue is the perception that accreditation is a temporary project rather than an ongoing management system. Business schools sometimes mobilize faculty and staff only when an accreditation visit approaches, producing large amounts of documentation in a short period of time.

Once the review is completed, however, many of these processes lose priority. Committees stop meeting, data collection slows, and institutional knowledge begins to fade.

Accreditation bodies increasingly expect continuous improvement systems, not periodic bursts of activity.

Faculty Burnout and Administrative Overload

Accreditation work often falls on a small number of dedicated faculty members or administrators. Over time, these individuals can become overwhelmed by the demands of data collection, reporting, and coordination across departments.

Without clear systems and support structures, accreditation work can feel like an additional administrative burden rather than a meaningful quality improvement process. When key individuals step back, the entire system may stall.

Poor Data Management

Many schools struggle with maintaining consistent and reliable accreditation data. Information related to faculty qualifications, research productivity, Assurance of Learning results, and strategic initiatives is often scattered across spreadsheets, emails, and departmental files.

When data systems are fragmented, preparing accreditation reports becomes time-consuming and frustrating. Faculty may lose confidence in the process, and institutional leaders may underestimate the effort required to maintain compliance.

The Risks of a Stalled Accreditation Process

When accreditation systems stall, the risks can be significant.

Schools may fall behind on critical processes such as:

Assurance of Learning data collection and analysis
Faculty qualification monitoring
Strategic planning and impact reporting
Documentation required for accreditation reviews

Over time, these gaps can lead to negative outcomes during accreditation reviews, including additional documentation requests, accreditation deferral, or even the loss of accreditation status.

Beyond reputational consequences, losing accreditation can affect student recruitment, employer perception, and partnerships with other institutions.

For these reasons, maintaining momentum in accreditation processes is essential.

How Schools Can Restart Accreditation Efforts

Reestablish Clear Governance Structures

The first step in restarting stalled accreditation efforts is to reestablish clear governance structures. Schools should ensure that accreditation responsibilities are clearly assigned and supported by institutional leadership.

Effective accreditation systems typically include:

A designated accreditation leader or director
Faculty committees responsible for Assurance of Learning
Administrative support for data collection and reporting
Regular review meetings to monitor progress

Creating clear accountability helps restore momentum and ensures that accreditation work is distributed across the organization.

Simplify and Systematize Processes

Many stalled accreditation systems suffer from unnecessary complexity. Schools often develop overly elaborate assessment systems that become difficult to sustain over time.

Restarting the process often requires simplifying procedures, clarifying responsibilities, and implementing manageable data collection systems that faculty can realistically maintain.

Maintain Continuity During Leadership Changes

Because leadership transitions are inevitable, institutions should ensure that accreditation systems do not depend entirely on one individual.

Documentation, procedures, and data systems should be delegated to different people and structured in a way that allows new leaders to quickly understand the institution’s accreditation processes and continue them without disruption.

The Role of Accreditation Consultants in Maintaining Momentum

One of the most effective ways to prevent accreditation initiatives from stalling is to engage experienced accreditation consultants.

An accreditation consulting firm such as Accreditation.Biz can provide continuity, expertise, and project management support that helps schools maintain steady progress even during periods of organizational change.

In general, accreditation consultants can assist institutions in several critical ways:

Maintaining Continuity During Leadership Transitions

When internal leadership changes occur, consultants can provide stability and ensure that accreditation processes continue without interruption. Because consultants are already familiar with accreditation standards and institutional systems, they can not only maintain the momentum but also help new administrators quickly understand the status of ongoing initiatives.

Preventing Costly Mistakes

Accreditation standards are complex and constantly evolving. Schools that attempt to navigate these requirements without experienced guidance may inadvertently make mistakes that delay accreditation progress. Experienced accreditation consultants can help business schools interpret standards correctly and design simple yet effective systems that are less likely to stall.

Providing Immediate Expertise

Hiring a full-time accreditation officer can take months, and new staff may require significant time to develop expertise in accreditation standards and reporting processes. In contrast, accreditation consultants can begin supporting the institution almost immediately, bringing years of experience and proven frameworks for managing accreditation systems.

Keeping the Process Moving Forward

Perhaps most importantly, consultants help maintain momentum. Accreditation requires consistent attention over multiple years. External advisors provide structure, accountability, and project management discipline that ensures progress continues even when internal priorities shift. Quite often, even simple reminders about important accreditation requirements and deadlines can help everyone stay on track.

Accreditation as a Long-Term Commitment

Successful accreditation is not achieved through short bursts of activity before peer review team (PRT) visits. Instead, it requires a sustained commitment to continuous improvement, supported by effective leadership, clear systems, and reliable data.

When accreditation efforts stall, the consequences can be significant. However, with the right governance structures, simplified processes, and experienced guidance, institutions can quickly restart their accreditation initiatives and regain momentum.

For many schools, partnering with experienced accreditation consultants provides the expertise and continuity needed to keep accreditation systems functioning smoothly. Such partnerships can help business schools ensure that the institution continues moving forward and avoids costly setbacks.

In the end, accreditation is not just about meeting external standards. It is about building a stronger institution that consistently delivers high-quality education and meaningful learning outcomes for its students.

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

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.

Tag: Project Management