The perspective of faculty hired after AACSB accreditation on accreditation's impact and importance.

Roberts, Wayne A., Jr. ; Johinson, Roy ; Groesbeck, John 等

ABSTRACT

Obtaining AACSB accreditation is a long, resource consuming exercise. In this study 62 faculty hired by 24 schools that had recently received AACSB accreditation between 1997 and 2001 were surveyed to determine their impressions of the impact and importance of accreditation on various stakeholders. Their responses are subsequently compared to the responses of faculty who were employed by their school prior to gaining AACSB accreditation. Overall, accreditation was perceived as being beneficial to the business school, students, and faculty, and to the employers of students. This is consistent with the perception of faculty who were employed at newly accredited institutions prior to receiving AACSB accreditation. Newly hired faculty perceive that they value research and teaching more than established faculty. In contrast, previously published results indicate faculty employed prior to receiving accreditation believe those hired since accreditation value teaching less. Importantly, everything else being equal, respondents decidedly prefer working at AACSB accredited schools.

INTRODUCTION

Obtaining AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) accreditation is a major undertaking. It takes time, diverts a lot of administrative and faculty time from other activities, is fraught with uncertainty, and takes money. A fundamental question is whether or not it is worth the effort and expense.

A previous paper addressed the results of a survey of faculty who went through the accreditation process regarding their perceptions of the impact of AACSB accreditation (Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck, 2004). Faculty from recently accredited schools rated the impact of accreditation on the business school, faculty who were with the school before accreditation, faculty hired since accreditation, the programs, and students and employers of students.

In this paper we seek to supplement the insights gained from that study by focusing on faculty who were newly hired by schools that had recently received AACSB accreditation. Understanding the perceptions of potential new faculty should be an important consideration in deciding whether or not to pursue AACSB accreditation. How do new hires differ from established faculty with regard to the perceived impact of AACSB accreditation? Do those who are drawn to newly accredited programs feel differently about accreditation than those who joined programs that were not then accredited, but who later instigated the accreditation process? Are the values of new faculty different from established faculty, and is AACSB accreditation an important consideration in judging alternative schools?

AACSB ACCREDITATION

There are currently 466 AACSB accredited business programs (AACSB International, 2004). The cost of gaining this accreditation can be high. The direct costs--application fees, conference fees, air fares, meals, and the ever-present cost of hiring consultants--can be well over $50,000. If the school is aggressive, these costs typically approach $100,000 (see Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck, 2004).

In addition to the direct costs of pursuing accreditation is the time and effort that faculty and administrators are required to invest to achieve compliance. While it is true that a substantial amount of the effort required by AACSB is really nothing more than the good management practices that most schools should be doing whether or not they are pursuing accreditation, there remains a large amount of reporting and compliance work, which crowds out more important work. Overworked faculty do most of it (Holmes, 2001), and they see such work as unrewarded service work (Henninger, 1998).

With regard to ongoing costs, inevitably a school in candidacy will have to hire academically qualified faculty, and those faculty are not cheap. For the sake of comparison, the average salary of an associate professor at a public AACSB accredited school was about $85,000 in 2002-03. The average salary of an associate professor at a non-AACSB accredited school was about $69,000 for that same year. Hiring a new associate professor with AACSB-appropriate credentials to anchor an academic program could easily cost more than $91,000 in that same year, depending on the discipline (see AACSB International, 2002). Salary gaps between existing business faculty and newly hired academicians can be very large, and this can cause problems with existing faculty, and with university administrators. Not insignificantly, faculty in other disciplines outside of business, who do not like the salary gap as it is, may become even more upset when market salaries for new AACSB-appropriate faculty starts to take place.

One of the most visible consequences of AACSB accreditation has been an increased focus on research. In fact, Udell, et al. (1995) note that, "Discussions of the validity and desire for AACSB accreditation generally become discussions of the seeming dichotomies of teaching and research" (p. 108). They found that faculty of AACSB accredited schools published significantly more journal articles than faculty of institutions denied accreditation, though there was no difference in broadly defined "scholarly activities." Ehie and Karanthanos (1994) found that, while overall emphasis on teaching had grown, "accredited institutions perceive instructional responsibilities as less important and intellectual contributions as more important than do nonaccredited institutions."

This focus on research by the AACSB has been downplayed by new "mission driven" standards implemented in 1994. Several studies have examined the impact of these new standards, especially as they concern research requirements. Henninger (1998) found "only modest changes in faculty selection and work resulting from the new standards." Similarly, Jantzen (2000) found that, "The adoption of 'mission-related' standards, by itself, has not resulted in a change in either the number or character of schools being accredited." Arlinghaus (2002), in a study of AACSB accounting programs, found that "the expectation for the volume of publication has increased at the majority of respondent institutions for both tenured and untenured faculty."

AACSB has again been revising these standards through a blue ribbon commission over the past few years, and formally adopted new standards in 2003. These new standards will take effect very soon, and it is too early to tell what will happen to the entire "mission driven" focus of the organization. Some changes have taken place recently that hint a return to more of a traditional research-based focus within AACSB. These changes include dismantling the Candidacy Committee as a separate group within the organization, which appeared to be one of the strongest advocates for the "mission-driven" movement. From now on, all accreditation processes for both new and existing schools will be managed by the Accreditation Committee, which tends to be populated more by the larger and older business schools which were the traditional accredited members of AACSB. Further, in about 2002 AACSB began requiring that accredited and candidacy schools annually report peer-reviewed journal articles by each faculty member over the previous five years, regardless of the school's mission. For good or bad, the emphasis on research appears to remain.

It thus seems clear that AACSB accreditation has a major impact on business schools. Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck surveyed faculty who were employed by recently accredited schools prior to AACSB accreditation to determine their impressions of the impact of accreditation on various stakeholders (2004). Overall, accreditation was perceived as being beneficial to the business school, students, and faculty hired since accreditation, and to the employers of students. These faculty members, however, did not perceive accreditation as helping them personally.

Given that accreditation may result in a cultural change and a resetting of priorities and rewards in a school, it was thought that more insight into the value of accreditation might be gained by contrasting the perspectives of faculty who are hired after accreditation with those of faculty hired prior to accreditation. New faculty may use accreditation as an indication of whether schools meet their career expectations. They have actively chosen a school with the priorities that accreditation gives them. Faculty hired prior to accreditation, on the other hand, may well have had different expectations when they joined a program and have seen the established culture changed. Many of these faculty members may be moving grudgingly in a direction they recognize as important to their school's future (Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck, 2004).

The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of AACSB accreditation on the schools through the eyes of faculty hired since accreditation, to assess the importance of accreditation on their decision to accept employment at the institution, and to compare the impressions of these faculty members to those who experienced the institutions prior to accreditation as well as subsequent to it.

DATA AND SAMPLE COLLECTION METHOD

A list of business schools which obtained AACSB accreditation during the years 1997 through 2001 was obtained, and six United States business schools were randomly chosen for each year, resulting in a total of 30 schools. Table 1 lists the chosen schools. Email addresses for business school employees were obtained via the Internet, except for one university, which agreed to forward emails and questionnaires to their faculty.

Each email address was sent a cover letter with links to questionnaires on two different occasions. Ten schools were emailed April 12 and April 29, 2001, and the other 20 schools were surveyed November 21, 2001 and January 28, 2002. Faulty who were with the institution prior to receiving AACSB accreditation were requested to access one questionnaire, the results of which are discussed elsewhere (Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck, 2004). Non-faculty were asked to reply to the email and indicate that they were not faculty. Faculty hired since accreditation, the focus of this study, were asked to fill out a questionnaire designed for them.

Eliminating those that indicated they were not faculty resulted in a total of 1121 email addresses. Sixty-two respondents indicated they were faculty hired since accreditation, while 221 respondents were hired prior to accreditation. Hence, the minimum response rate was 25.25%. Depending on the number of non-faculty that remained on the list, the response rate might be considerably higher. It is not, of course, known how the response rate of those hired since accreditation compares to the response rate of those hired prior to accreditation.

QUESTIONNAIRE

The questionnaire consisted of 17 Likert statements and 6 questions regarding the status and history of the respondent. It was developed using Microsoft Frontpage, and submitted questionnaires were automatically dumped into an Excel file, thus eliminating input error. For the purposes of analysis, Likert responses were coded as follows: -2 = strongly disagree, -1=disagree, 0=neither agree nor disagree, 1=agree, and 2=strongly agree. For some statements respondents were given a 'not applicable' choice, which was treated separately.

RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS

Table 2 summarizes data regarding the respondents. With regard to rank, 56.5% were assistant professors, 14.5% were associate professors, and 12.9% were full professors. With regard to tenure, at least 14.5% had tenure. With regard to discipline represented, 16.1% were from accounting, 11.3% taught economics, 8.1% finance, 4.8% information systems, 21.0% management, 19.4% marketing, and 8.1% quantitative methods. With regard to their academic experience, 40% reported that their current position was their first faculty position, while 30% reported that they had more than seven years experience at other academic institutions.

Based on these results there is little reason to suspect that the respondents do not constitute a representative sample of faculty hired at institutions subsequent to AACSB accreditation.

RESULTS

Responses to the survey are provided in table 3. The exact wording of the Likert statements is provided. For presentation purposes the order of the statements have been rearranged, and do not reflect the sequence in which they appeared on the questionnaire. The main discrepancy is that overall assessment questions were asked near the end of the questionnaire, just before demographic data was collected. The 2-tailed significance value provided reflects the probability that you would get the sample mean if the null hypothesis, that the mean value equals 0, is true. Zero represents the neutral point (neither agree nor disagree).

Perhaps one of the most interesting results presented in table 3 is represented by the first item regarding faculty and faculty choice impacts. As shown, the mean score for the statement "Everything else being equal, I would prefer to work at an AACSB accredited institution" was statistically significant with a mean value of 1.62. This mean was the highest of the survey, and more respondents strongly agreed with that statement than with any other. Fully 90.2% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, while only 1.6% of the respondents disagreed, and none strongly disagreed. Among the 24 respondents in their first academic position, 19 (79.2%) strongly agreed, 4 (16.7%) agreed, and only 1 (4.2%) neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement. Clearly, at least for faculty hired at AACSB accredited institutions, such accreditation is very important. If we make the assumption that among academically qualified faculty for whom AACSB accreditation is not important there is no bias against accepting employment at accredited schools, it appears that AACSB accreditation is a critically important characteristic among academic job seekers.

The other items regarding faculty and faculty choice show that respondents perceive AACSB accreditation as benefiting them, new faculty, and faculty who were there prior to accreditation. Over 85% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement regarding AACSB accreditation benefiting them, 80% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement regarding new faculty, and almost 57% agreed with the statement regarding faculty hired prior to receiving accreditation.

With regard to the impact of accreditation on the business school, respondents, in general, agree with the statement that it has been positive. As shown in table 3, the mean response for the overall statement, 1.41, was significantly above zero. Ninety-five percent agreed or strongly agreed that it was good for the business school, and only 1.6% disagreed with the statement. The majority of respondents agree that AACSB accreditation helps the business school compete for financial resources, students, and faculty. Further, 75.4% agreed or strongly agreed that accreditation helps ensure that they have, and will continue to have, a quality program. Only 6.6% disagreed with that statement.

With regard to statements concerning values of faculty hired since accreditation as compared to faculty employed there prior to accreditation, respondents saw the newer faculty as valuing research and teaching more. Mean scores for the statements concerning research and teaching, provided in table 3, were both positive and statistically significant. Importantly, though, 52.6% neither agreed nor disagreed that new faculty value teaching more, and an additional 10.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. With regard to the statement that new faculty have better contracts, while the mean value was positive the level of significance of the univariate test was.056, which, it could be argued, is marginally significant. Over 35% neither agreed nor disagreed with that statement, and almost 20% disagreed or strongly disagreed with it. Results regarding the university/public service component of faculty work were not statistically significant, and 50% neither agreed nor disagreed with that statement.

Two of the most important groups to any university are, of course, students and employers of students. As shown in table 3, respondents agreed, as a group, that AACSB accreditation benefits both. With regard to the statement that AACSB accreditation benefits students, the mean response was 1.11, and was statistically significantly different from zero, with 72.1% agreeing or strongly agreeing. Only 9.8% neither agreed nor disagreed, and only 4.9% disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. With regard to the statement that AACSB accreditation benefits the employers of students, the mean response was .62, which was statistically significant, with 55.8% agreeing or strongly agreeing, 39.3% neither agreeing nor disagreeing, and only 4.9% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing.

At the bottom of table 3 are the responses to two statements intended to assess respondents' general feelings about the value of accreditation. Over 72% agreed or strongly agreed that AACSB is worth the effort to obtain it, while only 4.9% disagreed or strongly disagreed. The mean response was .97 and statistically significant. Over 73% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that they would recommend it to other schools, while only 4.9% disagreed or strongly disagreed. Again, the mean response was .93 and statistically significant.

It is interesting to compare how perceptions of faculty hired since accreditation compare to perceptions of faculty who were present prior to their school's gaining AACSB accreditation. Table 4 compares the mean responses from the two groups, and tests the hypotheses that the means are equal, without assuming that the variances are equal. The mean responses from new faculty are taken from table 3, while responses from faculty who went through the accreditation process are from Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck (2004). As mentioned earlier, the two surveys were administered at the same time to faculty at the same institutions. It should be noted, however, that the Likert statements were worded slightly differently in the two surveys, in an attempt to make them more meaningful to the respondents. Basically, the statements provided established faculty used the past tense, while those to new faculty used the present tense. For example, whereas new faculty were asked to indicate their agreement with "Overall, I believe AACSB accreditation is good for the business schools," the wording for established faculty was "Overall, AACSB accreditation has been good for the business school." The exact wording for new faculty is provided in table 3, and the exact wording for established faculty is provided in Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck (2004). Nevertheless, it is believed that the comparisons are appropriate and meaningful.

Restricting the discussion to those statements where the achieved level of significance was less than .01, new faculty tended to agree more that accreditation helped the respondents themselves, as well as new and established faculty in general. Further, they agreed more that AACSB accreditation helps the business school, overall, and more specifically when competing for appropriate faculty. Perhaps surprisingly, new faculty tended to agree that new faculty value teaching more than established faculty, while established faculty tended to disagree. Finally, new faculty agreed more that AACSB accreditation benefits students and employers.

Expanding the discussion to include achieved levels of significance between .01 and .05, the results suggest that there may be significant disagreement between the two groups regarding university/public service, and on the extent to which the two groups recommend pursing AACSB accreditation to other schools. With regard to university/public service, new faculty tended to disagree with the statement suggesting new faculty value it less than established faculty, while the mean response from established faculty was above zero, although not statistically significantly so. Importantly, the modal response for both groups was the neither agree nor disagree category. With regard to recommending accreditation to other schools, the new faculty are more inclined to do so.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The results suggest that faculty hired at AACSB accredited institutions view such accreditation very positively. Their perception is that it helps the business school compete for students, faculty, and financial resources, and helps ensure a quality program. Their perception is that it benefits all business faculty, and in particular, themselves. Perhaps because of this, they prefer to work at AACSB accredited institutions.

New faculty also believe that AACSB accreditation benefits students and their future employers, believe AACSB accreditation is worth the effort, and would recommend AACSB accreditation to other schools.

With regard to comparing themselves to faculty established at their institution prior to AACSB accreditation, new faculty see themselves as valuing research and teaching more. With regard to whether or not they have better contracts, while they tended to agree, the significance level of the test that they neither agree nor disagree was only .056.

Comparing established faculty responses to new faculty hires, the primary difference seems to be that newer faculty more strongly agree that AACSB accreditation benefits faculty, helps their school compete for appropriate faculty, helps the business school overall, and benefits students and employers. Both groups perceive that AACSB accreditation changes the values of the organization, in that new faculty value research more. There is disagreement between the two groups regarding teaching: new faculty think they value teaching more, while established faculty believe new faculty value teaching less.

CONCLUSIONS AND COMMENTS

While the sample size obtained for this study was relatively small, statistically significant and practical results were obtained. A limitation of this study concerns not the raw numbers, but the unknown response rate, and the possibility that the sample was heavily weighted towards faculty hires familiar with AACSB accreditation. That is, newly minted Ph.D.s unfamiliar with AACSB International would not have a basis for evaluating its significance, and hence may have been less inclined to respond to this survey.

With this limitation in mind, it is still possible to state that among those familiar with AACSB International (at least those that end up in AACSB accredited institutions), AACSB accreditation is an important institutional characteristic. Further, such faculty, like those who lived through the accreditation process, believes it helps the business school, the faculty, students and employers, enough so that they would recommend it to others.

One perceived consequence of AACSB accreditation is that the character of the faculty changes in at least one respect: New hires value research more. It is not clear whether or not this means they also value teaching less: faculty hired after accreditation do not believe so, but as reported in Roberts, Johnson & Groesbeck (2004), established faculty do. An interesting question is whether discrepancies of perceptions sets up conditions that generate conflict.

For those contemplating pursuing AACSB accreditation, the majority of faculty that witnessed changes at schools that successfully went through the process, as well as faculty hired since accreditation, believe its achievement is worth the effort. Further, at least among those that end up at accredited institutions and know what it stands for, it tends to be an important institutional characteristic that presumably impacts their choice of employer.

REFERENCES

AACSB International (2002). 2001-2003 Salary Survey Report. St. Louis: Knowledge Services.

AACSB International (n.d.). Why Join AACSB? Retrieved July 15, 2004, from http://www.aacsb.edu/members/why.asp

Arlinghaus, B. P. (2002). The environment for professional interaction and relevant practical experience in AACSB-accredited accounting programs. Journal of Education for Business, 77 (4), 38-45.

Ehie, I. C. & D. Karathanos (1994). Business faculty performance evaluation based on the new AACSB accreditation standards. Journal of Education for Business, 69 (5), 257-263.

Jantzen, R. H. (2000). AACSB mission-linked standards: effects on the accreditation process. Journal of Education for Business, 75 (6), 343-48.

Henninger, E. A. (1998). Dean's role in change: the case of professional accreditation reform of American collegiate business education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 20 (2) 203-214.

Henninger, E. A. (1998). Perceptions of the impact of the new AACSB standards on faculty qualifications. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11 (5), 407-424.

Holmes, L. (2001). Seeking accreditation is well worth the work. Black Issues in Higher Education, 18 (20), 152-153.

Roberts, W. A. Jr., R. Johnson and J. Groesbeck (2004). The faculty perspective on the impact of AACSB accreditation. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 8 (1), 111-125.

Udell, G.G., S. Parker, and C. Pettijohn (1995). An examination of the research productivity of marketing faculty at newly minted AACSB schools. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 3 (2), 106-113.

Wayne A. Roberts, Jr., Southern Utah University

Roy Johnson, Southern Utah University

John Groesbeck, Southern Utah University Table 1: Recently AACSB accredited schools selected for study St. Mary's University The U. of Tampa Marshall University Illinois Institute of Tech. SW Texas State Chapman University Fairfield University Seattle Pacific U. New Jersey Institute of Tech U. of Mass.--Dartmouth Pace University Iona College Jacksonville State U. Niagara U. Henderson State U. Winston-Salem State U. Rice University No. Carolina St. U. Longwood College Indiana University Kokomo Coastal Carolina U. Fairleigh Dickinson U. The College of NJ U. of Mass.--Boston Quinnipiac University Michigan Tech. U. Truman State Long Island U. St. Joseph's U. No. Dakota State University Table 2: Selected respondent characteristics Number of Areas of Teaching Respondents by Year Accredited Responsibility Year Number Discipline Number 1997 19 Accounting 10 1998 20 Economics 7 1999 13 Finance 5 2000 5 Information systems 3 2001 5 Management 13 TOTAL 62 Marketing 12 Quantitative methods 5 Other response 7 TOTAL 62 Respondent Tenure Status Tenured 9 Not tenured 48 Missing Other 5 TOTAL 62 Academic Experience Faculty Rank Other Current schools school 1 year or less 3 18 Instructor 6 More than 1 to 3 5 29 Assistant Professor 35 More than 3 to 5 4 8 Associate Professor 9 More than 5 to 7 6 1 Full Professor 8 More than 7 18 4 Other 3 1st faculty 24 - Missing 1 position Missing 2 2 TOTAL 62 TOTAL 62 62 Table 3: Perceived AACSB accreditation impacts Mean (Standard SA deviation) Sig. (b) (a) A Likert Statement (n) (a) (2-tailed) (+2) (+1) On faculty and faculty choice Everything else being equal, 1.62 .000 73.8 16.4 I would prefer to work at an (.71) AACSB accredited institution. (61) Overall, I believe AACSB .57 .000 18.3 38.3 accreditation has benefitted (1.02) faculty who were here prior to accreditation. (60) Overall AACSB accreditation 1.18 .000 41.0 44.3 benefits me (61) (.90) Overall, AACSB accreditation 1.18 .000 43.3 36.7 benefits new faculty (60) (.89) On business school Overall, AACSB is good for 1.41 .000 47.5% 47.5% the business school (61) (.64) AACSB Accreditation helps our business school compete for ... ... financial resources (62) .90 .000 29.0 38.7 (.90) ... students (62) 1.05 .000 30.6 48.4 (.82) ... What I consider to be 1.18 .000 47.5 34.4 appropriate faculty (61) (1.01) AACSB accreditation process .90 .000 24.6 50.8 helps ensure that we have, (.93) and will continue to have, a quality program (61) On new versus former faculty Compared to faculty who worked here prior to AACSB accreditation efforts, new faculty ... ... generally value research 1.16 .000 33.3 50.9 more. (57) (.73) ... generally value teaching .40 .002 15.8 21.1 more. (57) (.92) ... generally value -.18 .115 3.6 12.5 university/public service (.834) less. (56) ... have better contracts. .27 .056 7.8 37.3 (51) (1.00) On students and employers Overall, I believe AACSB 1.11 .000 32.8 52.5 accreditation benefits (.84) students. (61) Overall, I believe AACSB .62 .000 11.5 44.3 accreditation benefits (.76) employers of our students. (61) Overall assessment and recommendation Overall, I believe AACSB .97 .000 31.1 41.0 accreditation is worth the (.91) effort to obtain it. (61) Overall, I believe AACSB .93 .000 26.2 47.5 accreditation is something I (.87) would recommend to other schools. (61) N D SD Likert Statement (n) (0) (-1) (-2) On faculty and faculty choice Everything else being equal, 8.2 1.6 0.0 I would prefer to work at an AACSB accredited institution. (61) Overall, I believe AACSB 26.7 15.0 1.7 accreditation has benefitted faculty who were here prior to accreditation. (60) Overall AACSB accreditation 8.2 4.9 1.6 benefits me (61) Overall, AACSB accreditation 16.7 1.7 1.7 benefits new faculty (60) On business school Overall, AACSB is good for 3.3% 1.6% 0.0% the business school (61) AACSB Accreditation helps our business school compete for ... ... financial resources (62) 25.8 6.5 0.0 ... students (62) 16.1 4.8 0.0 ... What I consider to be 8.2 8.2 1.6 appropriate faculty (61) AACSB accreditation process 18.0 3.3 3.3 helps ensure that we have, and will continue to have, a quality program (61) On new versus former faculty Compared to faculty who worked here prior to AACSB accreditation efforts, new faculty ... ... generally value research 14.0 1.8 0.0 more. (57) ... generally value teaching 52.6 8.8 1.8 more. (57) ... generally value 50.0 30.4 3.6 university/public service less. (56) ... have better contracts. 35.3 13.7 5.9 (51) On students and employers Overall, I believe AACSB 9.8 3.3 1.6 accreditation benefits students. (61) Overall, I believe AACSB 39.3 4.9 0.0 accreditation benefits employers of our students. (61) Overall assessment and recommendation Overall, I believe AACSB 23.0 3.3 1.6 accreditation is worth the effort to obtain it. (61) Overall, I believe AACSB 21.3 3.3 1.6 accreditation is something I would recommend to other schools. (61) (a) 5-point scale where +2=strongly agree (SA), +1=agree (A), 0= neither agree nor disagree (N), -1=disagree (D), and -2 =strongly disagree (SD). (b) 2-tailed significance associated with H:mean=0 Table 4: Evaluation of differences between new and established faculty (a) Mean Values (b) (n) New Established Likert Statement Subject Faculty Faculty Difference Impact on faculty Overall, accreditation has 1.18 .13 1.055 benefited me (61) (216) Overall, accreditation has .57 -.01 .580 benefited faculty who were here (60) (220) prior to accreditation Overall, accreditation's 1.18 .79 .389 benefited new faculty (60) (214) Impact on business school Overall, accreditation has been 1.41 1.06 .346 good for the business school (61) (221) Accreditation helps compete for .90 .73 .177 financial resources (62) (219) Accreditation helps compete for 1.05 .83 .223 students (62) (218) Accreditation helps compete for 1.18 .77 .406 appropriate faculty (61) (217) Accreditation helps ensure .90 .72 .179 program quality (61) (220) On new versus established faculty New faculty value research more 1.16 1.04 .121 (57) (217) New faculty value teaching more .40 -.32 .726 (57) (217) New faculty value university/ -.18 .09 -.272 public service less (56) (215) New faculty have better .27 .48 -.204 contracts (51) (211) Impact on students, employers, and overall assessment Overall, accreditation has 1.11 .60 .510 benefitted students (61) (220) Overall, accreditation has .62 .24 .386 benefitted employers (61) (219) Overall, accreditation's worth .97 .78 .184 the effort (61) (221) Overall, I'd recommend .93 .66 .271 accreditation to other schools (61) (220) Sig. Likert Statement Subject t (2-tailed) Impact on faculty Overall, accreditation has 7.524 .000 benefited me Overall, accreditation has 3.909 .000 benefited faculty who were here prior to accreditation Overall, accreditation's 2.985 .004 benefited new faculty Impact on business school Overall, accreditation has been 3.344 .001 good for the business school Accreditation helps compete for 1.321 .189 financial resources Accreditation helps compete for 1.838 .069 students Accreditation helps compete for 2.793 .006 appropriate faculty Accreditation helps ensure 1.280 .203 program quality On new versus established faculty New faculty value research more 1.081 .283 New faculty value teaching more 5.194 .000 New faculty value university/ -2.101 .038 public service less New faculty have better -1.286 .202 contracts Impact on students, employers, and overall assessment Overall, accreditation has 4.010 .000 benefitted students Overall, accreditation has 3.384 .001 benefitted employers Overall, accreditation's worth 1.341 .183 the effort Overall, I'd recommend 2.030 .045 accreditation to other schools (a) 2-tailed significance associated with H: difference=0, equal variances not assumed. (b) 5-point scales where +2=strongly agree, +1=agree, 0= neither agree nor disagree, -1=disagree, and -2 =strongly disagree