The accreditation paradigm: a comparative analysis of accreditations for management programmes

J. Srikanth Reddy, Ritu Sharma, Narain Gupta
{"title":"The accreditation paradigm: a comparative analysis of accreditations for management programmes","authors":"J. Srikanth Reddy, Ritu Sharma, Narain Gupta","doi":"10.1108/ijem-05-2023-0250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The present paper concerns the domestic and international accreditations of business schools to find the commonalities in various accreditation standards. The study also addresses cost involvement and comparisons between various accreditations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The research examined the requirements, methods and preparations for many national and international accrediting authorities. The accreditation criteria, history and guidelines were collected from secondary data sources. The content analysis was used to draw conclusions about the similarities and differences between the data sources and identify any differences and similarities between various accreditations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The study found commonalities across accreditation standards and cost analyses, helping institutions achieve suitable accreditations. To unify the administrative procedure at the institutional level and reduce duplicates for schools seeking multiple accreditations, similarities in all accreditation requirements are analysed. The comparison helps organisations determine which accreditation standard best suits their needs and goals. Schools with limited budgets might compare accreditation costs to determine which are worth pursuing.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>This study is limited to comparing a few accreditation bodies related to management education. In future research, the study may be extended to other areas. The use of the approach developed in this study for evaluating accreditation agencies of different streams, such as engineering, science and medicine, will be the study's future implications.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>The research indicates that schools can streamline accreditation by identifying commonalities, aligning procedures, comparing standards and conducting cost assessments. These insights aid efficient accreditation and inform accrediting bodies' framework enhancements. Standards facilitate global performance comparisons.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This is likely the first study to compare Indian and international accreditations using the accreditation frameworks and cost analyses using comparative analysis. The study recommends strategies for achieving academic benchmarks through continuous improvement activities and success in international competition.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":47666,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Educational Management","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Educational Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-05-2023-0250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The present paper concerns the domestic and international accreditations of business schools to find the commonalities in various accreditation standards. The study also addresses cost involvement and comparisons between various accreditations.

Design/methodology/approach

The research examined the requirements, methods and preparations for many national and international accrediting authorities. The accreditation criteria, history and guidelines were collected from secondary data sources. The content analysis was used to draw conclusions about the similarities and differences between the data sources and identify any differences and similarities between various accreditations.

Findings

The study found commonalities across accreditation standards and cost analyses, helping institutions achieve suitable accreditations. To unify the administrative procedure at the institutional level and reduce duplicates for schools seeking multiple accreditations, similarities in all accreditation requirements are analysed. The comparison helps organisations determine which accreditation standard best suits their needs and goals. Schools with limited budgets might compare accreditation costs to determine which are worth pursuing.

Research limitations/implications

This study is limited to comparing a few accreditation bodies related to management education. In future research, the study may be extended to other areas. The use of the approach developed in this study for evaluating accreditation agencies of different streams, such as engineering, science and medicine, will be the study's future implications.

Practical implications

The research indicates that schools can streamline accreditation by identifying commonalities, aligning procedures, comparing standards and conducting cost assessments. These insights aid efficient accreditation and inform accrediting bodies' framework enhancements. Standards facilitate global performance comparisons.

Originality/value

This is likely the first study to compare Indian and international accreditations using the accreditation frameworks and cost analyses using comparative analysis. The study recommends strategies for achieving academic benchmarks through continuous improvement activities and success in international competition.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认证范式:对管理课程认证的比较分析
目的本文涉及商学院的国内和国际认证,旨在找出各种认证标准的共同点。本研究还涉及各种认证的成本参与和比较。从二手数据来源收集了认证标准、历史和准则。研究结果研究发现,各认证标准和成本分析之间存在共性,有助于院校获得适当的认证。为了统一机构层面的行政程序,减少申请多项认证的学校的重复工作,对所有认证要求的相似性进行了分析。这种比较有助于各机构确定哪种认证标准最适合其需求和目标。预算有限的学校可以比较认证成本,以确定哪些认证值得追求。在今后的研究中,这项研究可能会扩展到其他领域。研究表明,学校可以通过找出共同点、统一程序、比较标准和进行成本评估来简化评审。这些见解有助于提高评审效率,并为评审机构改进框架提供依据。原创性/价值 这可能是第一项利用评审框架和成本分析比较印度和国际评审的研究。研究建议了通过持续改进活动达到学术基准并在国际竞争中取得成功的战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Educational Management (IJEM) provides those interested in the effective management of the educational process with a broad overview of developments and best practice in the field, with particular reference to how new ideas can be applied worldwide. As the whole structure and philosophy of education goes through a sea-change, and as budgets are cut, educational managers need to keep abreast of new developments in order to maximize their resources and determine the most appropriate management strategy for their institution. The journal explores research in the following areas: -Innovation in educational management across the spectrum -The development of educational delivery mechanisms -Creation of an environment in which the management of resources provides the most efficient outputs -Sharing of new initiatives, with an international application The International Journal of Educational Management addresses the increasingly complex role of the educational manager, offering international perspectives on common problems and providing a forum for the sharing of ideas, information and expertise.
期刊最新文献
Hall of mirrors to enhance a network professional learning community for ECEC centre leaders Impact of service quality, relational trust and attitude on the intention to pursue higher education within a country, than abroad Understanding burnout among special education teachers: an exploratory structural equation model in a burnout high risk profession The effect of flexible working arrangements on educator performance in Indonesia Self-efficacy of school principals for effective school functioning during the COVID-19 crisis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1