SMITH SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
S T R AT E G I C P L A N ( 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 4 )
D R A F T: N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
G. “Anand” Anandalingam (Dean)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Smith School has made a remarkable transformation from a very good regional
school to a top research and teaching institution offering a wide range of products and
services around the world. The capabilities of our faculty, the scale and quality of our
facilities, and the quality of our students have soared. The Smith School is now in the
process of another transformation. This transformation will carry the school from
excellence to greatness with the following mission:
be a world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging global economic and
business paradigm, and providing thought leadership to students, corporate
executives and policy makers so that they can be agents of both economic prosperity
and transformative social change. We want to be counted among the top business
schools in this country and the world. We want to be known for superb scholarship,
excellent students and flawless operations, not just among those who know us well,
but everyone.
The school’s strategy ranges from initiatives aimed at producing research and
program greatness to initiatives to improve job placement, build the Smith community,
technology, brand, and revenues. Within this strategy the school will accomplish the
following:
•
Develop a culture of thought leadership around our internationally recognized
faculty stars and continue key hires of senior faculty with leading research and
teaching records.
•
Strengthen MBA curriculum in both the full and part time programs to include
entrepreneurial skills sets, corporate responsibility and social value creation.
•
Increase career options for all students by broadening career paths to include
associations, governments and other unique employers in the greater DC region.
•
Continue the expansion of Smith Undergraduate Fellows Program so that all
students will be able to participate in at least one Fellows track.
•
Strengthen the Smith Community of students, faculty, alumni, and recruiters by
integrating activities of student, alumni, career services and mentoring programs.
•
Offer intense intercontinental learning through study, travel experiences for every
full time MBA student in either Asia, Europe, the middle east and South America
•
Continue to leverage technology to facilitate remote learning opportunities across
continents.
1
•
Position the school’s communications, marketing and branding activities through
a focus on reaching significant external constituencies and improving the
perception and ranking of our programs
•
Improve employee retention and hiring practices to ensure continued
improvement in staff and faculty quality
•
Align existing assets of the business school to support the execution of these
initiatives, and add to these assets when necessary
Is this strategy achievable? We believe it is. International programs in China and
Europe, and the numerous student global study trips that have been generated by the
Smith School have established the school as a global institution. At home, many of our
academic areas have been recognized for excellence in their respective fields.
While the Robert H. Smith School of Business is poised to become the best global
business school in the greater Washington DC area, several challenges can hinder
progress. For example:
•
Faculty salaries continue to escalate with bidding wars taking place among top
schools for key faculty. This makes recruiting and retaining top faculty a financial
challenge as well as increasing the cost of our programs
•
There seem to be significant fiscal challenges on the horizon for the State of
Maryland and the region impacting both our budget and the number of students
enrolling in our entrepreneurial programs.
•
The school continues to make progress in developing its alumni network but
additional resources and time must be invested to expand the network to achieve
its full potential. Furthermore, external development efforts need to be managed
more efficiently to generate the desired results.
•
Students need additional preparation to compete for the best initial job placement
opportunities thereby attracting broader and more attractive employers .
•
As a consequence of dealing with the pressures of creating research and rising in
the academic ranks, many faculty members remain absent from community
activities.
Even with these challenges, the Robert H. Smith School of Business is led by
dedicated faculty and staff and energized by extraordinary students
2
TABEL OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary…………………………………………………………
1
Vision………………………………………………………………………..
4
Five-Year Objectives……………………………………………………….
5
Strengths and Baseline……………………………………………………
6
Competitors…………………………………………………………………
9
Financial Strategy………………………………………………………….
12
Challenges………………………………………………………………..
13
Strategic Priorities …………………………………………………………
15
Tactics for the Academic Years 2007- 2012…………………………….
17
Appendix 1: Administrative and Financial……………………………….
23
Appendix 2: Academic Programs…………………………………………
26
Appendix 3: Rankings………………………………………………………
30
Appendix 4: Research………………………………………………………
34
3
VISION
The Smith School has made a remarkable transformation from a very good regional
school to a top research and teaching institution offering a wide range of products and
services around the world. The capabilities of our faculty, the scale and quality of our
facilities, and the quality of our students have soared. The Smith School is now in the
midst of another transformation. This transformation will carry the school forward with
the vison:
To be a world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging global
economic and business paradigm, and providing thought leadership to students,
corporate executives and policy makers so that they can be agents of both
economic prosperity and transformative social change. We want to be counted
among the top business schools in this country and the world. We want to be
known for superb scholarship, excellent students and flawless operations, not just
among those who know us well, but everyone.
The stature of the Robert H. Smith School of Business has advanced dramatically
over the last decade. Overall, the school’s average of all of its undergraduate and
graduate rankings is #15 in the U.S. and when research is taken into account, the Smith
School is among the top 10 U.S. business schools.
While in 1998 the school had no programs or departments ranked in the top 25, today
there are many such rankings. For example, in 2007/08, the following areas were
recognized by one or more surveys as being among the nation’s best programs:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Information Systems
Quantitative Analysis
Supply Chain/Logistics
Entrepreneurship
Management
Operations Management
Finance
Marketing
International Business
Custom Executive Programs
Top 10
Top 15
Top 10
Top 10
Top 15
Top 20
Top 15
Top 10
Top 25
Top 20
We need to take on the mantle of becoming thought leaders in the new business
paradigm. Over the next several decades we will see an evolution from pure private
sector market capitalism to much deeper and broader private-public partnerships, with a
resurgence of focus on business ethics, environmental sustainability, corporate social
responsibility, and social value creation. All over the world, governments are going to be
working very closely with financial, manufacturing and service companies. We need to
4
lead the way in helping both business and government define the parameters of this new
relationship.
FIVE YEAR OBJECTIVES
By the year 2014, The Smith School will be viewed as one of the best business
schools in the world. The Smith School will be known for superb academic programs that
integrate traditional business functions with knowledge of the practice and challenges
created in the new global digital economy.
The Smith School will have key programs, centers and partnerships located in
significant parts of the world. These programs and partnerships will allow the ready and
freely flowing exchange of ideas, students, faculty and corporate partners across
international boundaries.
The resources available to the Smith School will enable recruiting, developing and
retaining world-class students, faculty and staff, ongoing innovation and quality
improvement in our programs, and a satisfying and supportive work and learning
environment for all members of the Smith School of Business community.
The Smith School’s status in research and recognition will place the school among
the top business schools as measured by an average of all external recognition rankings
and research metrics.
•
At least four of the school’s academic departments will be among the top 10
in research and of these, at least two will be in the top 5. Overall, the school
will be among the top five in the world in research.
•
The average ranking of school’s full-time MBA program will be consistently
in the top-20 based on evaluations at Business Week, Financial Times and US
News and World Report. The average ranking of the undergraduate and parttime MBA programs will be in the top-15. The PhD program will be in the
top-10.
•
Student placement and salaries will be at or above those of our peer
institutions. World-class organizations will recruit at the Smith School.
•
The School will have a dominant position in the mid-Atlantic region with a
broad family of programs and activities, and will have national recognition in
the areas of globalization, entrepreneurship and technology.
•
The physical facilities will add to the Smith School’s attraction and we will
continue to offer state-of-the-art technical capabilities for research, teaching
and our engagement with external communities
5
STRENGTHS AND BASELINE
We are well on the way towards achieving this vision. The Smith School has grown
from 70 to 150 faculty members over the last nine years. Many new faculty have been
recruited from the world’s premier research institutions, each selected for excellence in
research, teaching, and their ability to advance the agenda of the school. Many faculty
“superstars” are at the pinnacle of their profession and have been awarded endowed
chairs or professorships in their respective fields. Sixty-four percent of our full professors
have endowed professorships or chairs while about twenty-four of our faculty are
assistant professors with tremendous potential in the coming years.
The strength of the faculty is perhaps the school’s most significant strategic
advantage. In the last decade, the production of published research in the consensus
world’s best research journals has soared. For example, Table 1 shows the year-by-year
position with regard to total output in the 24 leading business journals indexed in the
University of Texas (UT), Dallas, “Top 100 Business Schools” database. The rise of
Smith School faculty research is unparalleled. From a position of #76 in the world in
1995, the Smith School placed #5 in the world in 2005 and #4 in the world in 2006.
Table 1: World Ranking of Annual Research Output in 24 Top Journals
(http://citm.utdallas.edu/utdrankings/)
1990-1995: #51
1996-2000: #20
2000-2005: #11
2004-2009: #9
Academic program quality has risen in parallel with our ascent to the top in research.
Academic quality continually increases, attracting outstanding students and significant
corporate recognition. The school’s undergraduate program attracts spectacular students
and external recognition for its programs has extended from the Maryland to the MidAtlantic and Northeastern United States. About forty-three percent of the fall 2007
freshman class was out-of-state.
The school is the largest and top ranked supplier of an accredited part-time MBA
education in the Washington-Baltimore region, offering part-time MBA tracks in
Washington, D.C., Shady Grove and Baltimore, Maryland, serving over 1,200 students in
evening and weekend programs. The school is now making significant efforts to integrate
placement activities for both full and part time students. This is especially significant
because our high quality part time students gives the MBA program substantial size and
mass and enhances our ability to attract top recruiters.
6
The Executive Masters in Business Administration (EMBA), a program launched in
2003, is offered in College Park; Shanghai, China; and Zurich, Switzerland with over 100
students.
The quality of our undergraduate students is superb, and the innovative Smith
Fellows program is creating a fabulous undergraduate experience. The Smith School
entering freshman class quality in each of the last six years exceeded that for all other
entering freshman classes at the College Park campus. Retention of freshman for last
year’s class, at 95 percent, was also at the top as were the school’s graduation rates and
student teaching ratings.
Table 2 summarizes some of the pertinent ranking statistics for the Smith School.
Our centers have achieved significant national recognition, attracted external funding,
and important corporate partners. Celebrating its twentieth anniversary last year, the
Dingman Center for Entrepreneurship is well established, and a leading partner to the
technology entrepreneurs of the Washington-Baltimore region. Our research centers such
as Excellence in Service, Electronic Markets and Enterprises, Human Capital, Innovation,
and Technology, Health Information and Decision Systems, and Supply Chain
Management, are bringing added distinction to the school and creating partnerships
among the school and the corporate and government communities. A new center for
studying Complexity in Business was launched in Spring 2008.
The Netcentric Research Laboratories: Supply Chain Management, Financial
Markets, Electronic Markets, and Behavioral Labs are creating an integrated electronic
teaching and research environment, with applications to e-commerce, supply chain
management, financial markets, auctions, and consumer research. Identified as a special
strength by the 2005 AACSB International accreditation review, the laboratories foster
demonstration projects and research in these areas, as well as exploring the associated
organizational and behavioral implications of these changes. This is the most extensive
such operation of its kind in the country, reflecting the vision of converging technology
applications across the various functions of business. The school is successfully engaging
its large and established alumni base and corporate network, with the prospect of
generous private giving and employment opportunities for students.
The school was also the beneficiary of generous gifts to expand its facilities by
adding the South Wing in 2002 and the North Wing in 2007 and to increase PhD stipends
to the highest in the nation in 2008. The expanded Van Munching Hall will continue to
provide the most advanced technological teaching environment among all leading
business schools. Additional financial support from Mr. Robert H. Smith, the school’s
leading benefactor, has seeded new technology, branding and development initiatives.
This funding is now supporting the transformational undergraduate program for
undergraduates—“The Smith School Fellows Program” that formally began in Fall 2006.
7
Table 2: Mission Baseline (Academic Year 2007/2008)
Mission: To ascend to one of the top global business schools as measured by the school’s
stature in research and teaching, and the quality and placement of its students. We will
provide a superb research and teaching environment for our faculty and students as well
as give our students a first class return on investment for their time and expense.
Research (World):
UTD*
Overall School
9
Decision and Information Technologies:
6
Finance
12
Marketing
10
Management and Organization
3
Average Academic Program Ranking
25
Top Individual Program Rankings
Part-Time MBA
16 (US News)
Full-Time MBA
20 (Financial Times)
Undergraduate
17 (U.S. News)
Graduate Salaries
Part-Time MBA (ROI)
7 (Forbes, 2006)
Full-Time MBA (ROI)
2 (of FT Top 20)
Full-Time MBA (MBA Salary/Pre MBA Salary)
8 (Business Week)
Undergraduate (Starting Salary/Cost)
8 (Business Week)
Faculty Salaries
Average/(Median Percentile)**
Full Professor
106.5%/(107.1)
Associate Professor
102.9% /100.5)
Assistant Professor
92.5% /(95.2)
* UT-Dallas (UTD)
**Salary Comparison Group: Berkeley, UCLA, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell, Ga. Tech, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, NYU,
UNC-Chapel Hill, Ohio State, Wharton, Texas-Austin, Washington, Wisconsin.
8
COMPETITORS
The Smith School has both public and private business school peers and competitors.
We compete with some schools, such as Georgetown, in attracting MBA students but
have few other areas of competition with them. Some schools, such as University of
Texas at Austin, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) or Carnegie Mellon, have
substantial reputations as technology oriented schools. In other cases, individual
departments (e.g., Finance) might compete with a specific school (e.g., Northwestern).
We believe that the key to long-term academic success as measured by academic
reputation among other business schools is research prominence. The speed of the Smith
School’s rise (and similarly, the limited strength of the university’s branding) explains
much of its lack of recognition as a great academic institution.
Table 3 provides business school research rankings from the University of Texas,
Dallas. We believe that this is a representative indicator of the Smith School’s primary
research competitors. As is evident, the Smith School’s competitors are recognized to be
among the very best business schools in the United States.
Table 3: Top 10 U.S. Business Schools Research Rankings *
1. Wharton
2. Duke
3. NYU
4. Chicago
5. Michigan
6. Columbia
7. Harvard
8. Stanford
9. Maryland (Smith)
10. Texas - Austin
Trade magazine rankings are summarized in the Appendix at the end of this report.
Table A10 provides the summary research ranking for the business school based on
productivity in top-rated journals. The best ranked department is Management and
Organization (ranked 3), while Decision and Information Technologies (rank 6),
Marketing (rank 10) and Finance (rank 12) are all in the top 15. It should be noted that in
many areas, the school’s strengths are much greater than its public recognition. These
same Departments are not as highly ranked when Deans and other senior academic
administrators are surveyed by US News and World Report. For example, the Marketing
Department has been placed in the top 10 by the UT-Dallas research productivity
measure, but otherwise appears rarely in top-10 marketing department rankings. We are
very well regarded among major finance departments and finance faculty, as
*
Global rank based on research publications in 24 top academic journals for the five-year period 20042008 (University of Texas at Dallas).
9
demonstrated by our success in faculty recruiting, but the Finance Department does not
get the recognition it deserves in trade magazine rankings. There is significant work that
needs to be done in order to get the research reputation known to people who matter,
especially those who fill in rankings surveys.
For the purposes of accreditation by AACSB International, the Smith School’s current
peers and aspirant group are given in Table 4. The rankings of most of these programs are
in line with normal expectations but programs such as Harvard’s are worse than expected
because of the lack of strength of its PhD program compared to the others and some
programs such as Virginia’s and Georgetown’s fall far below their branding because of
their weak research records when compared to the major research schools. For this
reason, neither Georgetown nor Virginia are considered to be other peers or aspirational
peers of the Smith School.
Table 4: AACSB Int. Comparable Peers and Aspirant Group *
Smith Brand Recognition – 17, Research Rank – 9, Overall – 25.
Comparable Peers – Average brand recognition, research rank, overall average rank
University of Texas at Austin – 16, 11, 24
University of Michigan – 8, 5, 9
University of Indiana – 21, 27, 20
University of CA – Berkeley – 6, 16, 11
Ohio State University – 38, 17, 44
University of North Carolina – 28, 19, 19
Aspirant Group – Average brand recognition, research rank, overall average rank
Harvard University – 10, 7, 1
New York University – 5, 3, 10
University of Chicago – 3, 4, 4
Stanford – 4, 10, 3
Mass. Institute of Technology – 7, 11, 7
Columbia University – 9, 6, 6
*
Research rank based on Table A9 in the Appendix; overall ranking based on Table A7. Brand
recognition taken from previous Strategic Plan report.
10
FINANCIAL STRATEGY
While the Smith School is a public business school within the flagship public
university of the State of Maryland, the financial position of the school more closely
resembles a private institution. About 15 percent of the school’s support is from the State
of Maryland. The school, like many other major public business schools does not retain
its undergraduate tuition nor the university-specified graduate tuition for its full-time
MBA students. In return, the school receives a “base budget.” In the Smith School’s case,
we estimate that we generate about $35 million in undergraduate tuitions for the
university. The university provides a “base budget” of about $19 million in return. At
standard university tuition rates, we estimate that the Smith School provides courses that
generate about $25 million of the $35 million tuition gross. In addition, the school
receives university services such as university paid employee fringe benefits (social
security, employee retirement, and health insurance), some facilities maintenance and
personnel, financial and developmental services. (Details in Appendices A1 and A2.)
The school generates additional revenues with activities such as its Executive MBA
Program (EMBA), non-degree executive education and its part-time MBA programs.
Various agreements with the university define revenue sharing and tax structures for each
program. Total Smith School revenues have grown from approximately $15 million in
1998 to over $60 million in the academic year ending June 2008. When an estimate of
university services not in the Smith School’s budget is included, total revenues are now
above $70 million per year.
The school uses a five-year forecasting model to report and project revenues by
category, product line and location. This model augments an operational budget reporting
system that interfaces with the university’s accounting systems. The forecasting system
enables the Smith School to investigate various tuition/cost scenarios as well as to
incorporate hiring, operational and facilities investments. Figure 1 shows the historical
distribution of the school’s revenues as well as the actual revenues for academic years up
to 2007/2008 (FY 2008) as well as forecasts for 2008/09 (FY 2009.) The portion marked
“University Paid Benefits” is a crude estimate of the value of the employee benefits and
other services paid by the university on behalf of the Smith School.
Private contributions are a very important part of the school’s financial plan.
However, significant revenue growth is also required for the school to meet its ambitious
goals. Similar to previous years, the Smith School plans to add 15-20 faculty members in
the next three years. The school would like to double its marketing and communications
budget over the next five years, invest in expanding executive education, and increase its
information technology support, and alumni and development activities. In each case, we
expect the departmental budgets to grow anywhere from 30 to 100%. Another significant
challenge is to grow funding for the Smith Undergraduate Fellows program from a very
small base to well over $1.5 million per year.
11
Figure 1: Robert H. Smith Actual and Projected Revenues
(As of June 2008:1998-2008 actual, 2009 projected).
North Wing
90000
80000
Private Revenues and
Gifts
70000
60000
B-School Retained
Tuitions/Fees
50000
40000
Univ Funded Projects
30000
20000
Base Budget
10000
0
1998 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
University Paid
Benefits
CHALLENGES
Faculty Issues
Several challenges can hinder continuing progress toward realizing our vision. Our
endowment is significantly smaller than the major private institutions in our aspirant
group. Faculty will be attracted and retained only if we can continue to compete with
other top schools by offering endowed chairs and research professorships. As the school
has grown in stature, our faculty has become raiding targets of other top business schools.
The school has achieved a very competitive salary profile but will require additional
resources and endowed positions to compete with the academically elite private business
schools for future top level recruiting. Faculty salaries are becoming an increasing
concern because of the escalation of salaries by competing schools for a relatively small
group of the very top faculty. Retention and recruiting packages are creating compression
salary issues as well as unrealistic expectations for many faculty members and may limit
growth of the tenure track.
Another weakness of the school has been the relative absence of many of our faculty
in activities related to building the Smith community. There are strong pressures on
faculty for world-class research and teaching. In addition, assistant professors are
12
sheltered from most service activities so that the bulk of such activities have fallen on the
tenured faculty. Part of this problem is self-correcting as assistant professors are
promoted to higher ranks but steps to correct this weakness and transform the faculty
culture to a more balanced one involving greater service is a long-term process and
sustained efforts are essential.
Rankings
The overall quality of the Smith School is greater than some of the major external
rankings. One contributor to this deficiency is the time required to build academic
reputation. However, it is not clear how far the Smith School’s brand recognition can
climb without comparable increases in the brand recognition of the university. What is
clear is that a number of business schools whose universities have stronger brands than
Maryland’s are rated above the Smith School’s even though objective comparisons do not
show them to be superior.
In addition, the Smith School does not do too well in the following important
rankings factors: placement indicators—starting salaries and student job acceptance rates,
and the reputation of the Smith School with corporate recruiters. There has been a
historic weakness in the office of career management at the Smith School, and this has to
be attended to. As yet, many top companies do not recruit at the Smith School. Student
mentoring, job placement and development efforts are only now approaching the level
required for a fine business school but many companies that should have been recruiting
at the Smith School have only recently started this process. In addition, bringing
additional top companies to recruit on campus is a long, time-consuming process.
Two other points can be made with respect to ranking. One is that many magazines
rely on self-reported business school data that is frequently inconsistent and suggestive of
reporting errors or exaggerated data. Second is that while the school has made steady,
year-to-year, progress in faculty and student quality, specific magazine rankings have
fluctuated wildly because of relatively small changes in measured parameters, often
caused by flaws in the rankings methodologies, creates much concern among students
and alumni.
Alumni Network
The school is catching up in the development of its alumni network but still lags behind
its major competitors. We have many very successful and well-placed alumni but more
must be brought into active partnerships with the school. In fact, even though the Smith
School has over 45 thousand alumni worldwide, less than 5 percent are active in any way.
The University of Maryland has historically had a very indifferent attitude towards
alumni and this feeling is mutual. Over the past 15 years or so, many initiatives have
started at both the Smith School and the University to engage our alumni many different
ways. We need to expand the scope of our alumni relations operations by improving date
integrity, enhancing the activities and events for alumni, engaging alumni in current
Smith School operations including student mentoring, speaking engagements and student
placement.
13
Resources
The greatest challenge for the Smith School of Business is the availability of consistent
and increasing resources. The University provides less than 20% of the budget, and the
school needs to generate the rest by being very entrepreneurial. Much of the revenue
comes from the part-time MBA program that is subject to the risk of the well-being of the
global and regional economy. In fact, we expect budget cuts due to the downturn of the
economy of the U.S. and the State of Maryland. The recessionary pressures will also
adversely affect the number of students enrolling in our revenue producing endeavors.
As mentioned above, our endowment is also very small, less than $50 million, and the
participation of our alumni in philanthropy is also limited. Thus the income from private
sources can also not match many of our regional and national competitors and aspirants.
On the other side, the school has increased the financial support to attract top quality
Masters and PhD students but additional resources will be needed. While PhD stipends
have are now at the top, substantial additional resources are needed for undergraduate and
MBA scholarships. Further, recruiting and retaining top faculty and staff also requires a
significant infusion of funds.
The fundraising objectives for the Smith School of Business reflect these goals.
Endowment funds for faculty chairs and professorships, student scholarships and
financial aid are central to realizing the vision for the Robert H. Smith School of
Business. Our fundraising objectives include additional resources to maintain the
competitive edge of the technological infrastructure of Van Munching Hall and to
improve operations at our part-time locations.
Strategic Differentiators
Although we have relied on “technology” being the main differentiator for the Smith
School of Business and pride ourselves in being a pioneer in incorporating technology at
the core of our teaching and overall educational missions, over the past two years we
have moved on to consider our strategic differentiation as being on the nexus of
globalization, entrepreneurship and technology. We call it the “GET Strategy.” We
believe that a leading business school in the 21st century has to be global in its outlook
and mission. However, being a business school that is “global” does not differentiate us
in a strategic manner. We continue to excel in both research and teaching as it pertains to
technology, especially information systems and technology. We expend a considerable
amount of time on entrepreneurship, in research, teaching, and also in experiential
learning for our graduate and undergraduate students. In fact, we are the premier business
school with a focus on entrepreneurship in the mid-Atlantic region, from New Jersey to
South Carolina.
We have a number of programs on the interface of globalization, entrepreneurship and
technology. Every year we conduct a business plan competition in Beijing, China which
14
is very successful with more than 200 companies competing for start-up or bridge funds.
We have a number of global study trips to different parts of the world where the students,
both undergraduate and MBA, learn about the entrepreneurial landscape in the countries
they visit. Further, we have revamped the MBA curriculum to ensure that all students,
full-time and part-time, take required courses in globalization, entrepreneurship and
technology. We plan to extend this curriculum requirement to the undergraduate program
in future years.
In addition to the GET strategy, we also believe that a key strategic differentiator for the
Smith School of Business is its proximity to Washington DC. Given the location, and the
fact that over the next several decades we will see an evolution from pure private sector
market capitalism to much deeper and broader private-public partnerships we believe that
we have the opportunity to lead the way in helping both business and government define
the parameters of this new relationship. We are planning to extend our strategy to include
programs on business ethics, environmental sustainability, corporate social responsibility,
and social value creation.
Competitors
A short-term threat to enrollments the part time program is the increased activity of
Georgetown in building its part time program. A longer- term threat is the creation of the
Cary School of Business at Johns Hopkins University. This program is not accredited by
the AACSB, but now has a greater potential than the previous Hopkins Continuing
Education MBA Program to draw students from the Smith part time program and
therefore affect our revenues. In addition, Johns Hopkins University’s superior branding
to the University of Maryland increases this threat.
15
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
The school has attracted world-class faculty, enhanced the distinctiveness and caliber
of its programs and centers, and improved the financial and administrative elements of its
infrastructure. It has also achieved recognition nationally and internationally for several
competencies such as the technology focus of the school and our activities in
entrepreneurship. However, we have not yet reached the status to which we aspire.
In our continued campaign toward attaining our strategic goals and correcting areas of
weakness, we continue our focus on several strategic priorities:
•
Maintaining research greatness throughout the school.
•
Transforming academic programs from excellent to great.
•
Building the Smith community to create a dynamic faculty, staff, student,
and alumni network.
•
Marketing the distinctions of the school.
•
Increasing resources and infrastructure support for the school.
The next section outlines, the tactics underlying each of these strategic priorities.
16
Research Greatness
Maintain research greatness throughout the school.
•
Continue “signature” hires of senior faculty with major international
reputations and leading research records throughout the school.
•
Aggressively recruit mature junior faculty with the potential to be “stars” in
their fields
•
Continue to build department research reputations by promoting existing
capabilities and accomplishments including bringing to Smith high-visibility
research seminars and national conferences with the goal of one major event
per month.
•
Exploit and improve synergies across departments in joint leading edge
research Centers.
•
Support and increase faculty research grant activities and develop additional
summer research funding opportunities for tenured faculty.
•
Continue to reduce workload for PhD students to support top talent. Increase
placement opportunities for Ph.D. students with earlier and more stringent
research paper requirements.
•
Expand the Smith Undergraduate Research Fellow Program and provide
research fellowships for undergraduate students to assist faculty in faculty
research.
•
Achieve placement goals for PhD students in top 50 business schools and
research universities.
17
Academic Program
Distinctions
Transform Smith academic programs from
excellent to great.
ƒ
Maintain high teaching quality across all levels of the undergraduate programs
and all locations of the MBA program. Improve teaching support for faculty and
begin the development of a series of expanded teaching quality enhancements.
Improve the partnership between adjunct faculty and the school by increasingly
integrating adjuncts into the intellectual life of the school. .
ƒ
Improve the measurement of student teaching satisfaction by developing and
implementing a “customer service” oriented series of satisfaction surveys and
integrate them into the university’s new on-line course satisfaction system.
•
Continue implementing the Smith Undergraduate Fellows Program. Implement
additional Junior/Senior Fellows tracks so that all students have the opportunity to
participate in at least one Fellows track.
•
Implement the second year of the new MBA program (both core and electives) for
all full and part time students. Find mechanisms to integrate the Smith brand into
the curriculum and improve job placement for all MBA students.
•
Continue enhancing the part-time MBA program with additional student services,
teaching quality improvements, technology advances and physical infrastructure
improvements.
•
Enhance the quality of students and teaching in our successful MS in Accounting
program.
•
Assess the market and develop specialized EMBA and Master of Science
programs such as finance and information systems, and supply chain
management.
•
Intensify the effort to enhance the quality of the PhD Program through all phases
of admission, coursework, research and placement.
•
Offer global opportunities in Asia, Europe and the United States for
undergraduate, MBA and EMBA students.
18
Building the Smith Community
Build the Smith community to create a
dynamic faculty, staff, student, and
alumni network.
•
Continue building the Smith community of students, faculty, alumni and
recruiters—integrating activities of student, alumni and mentoring programs with
special effort on building the part-time/full-time MBA student/alumni network.
•
Expand the scope of our alumni relations operations by improving date integrity,
enhancing the activities and events for alumni, engaging alumni in current Smith
School operations including student mentoring, speaking engagements and
student placement.
•
Establish regionally-based alumni-relations with operations in New York as a
starting point.
•
Continue to improve placement opportunities for full and part-time students with
enhanced emphasis in developing employment relationships with top companies.
•
Improve the school’s governance system, accountability and reporting systems,
and committee and organizational structures to stimulate the development of the
Smith community, marketing efforts, program delivery and operational
efficiencies in line with the Smith School’s emergence as a mature top research
institution.
•
Refine faculty service standards and metrics to reflect the importance of faculty
collaboration in building a strong Smith community culture.
•
Execute coordinated strategies to build and strengthen corporate partnerships that
will lead to increased student career opportunities, research, sponsorship and
philanthropic support of key Smith School initiatives.
•
Extend the mentoring program to part time MBA and undergraduate students.
•
Integrate center, academic and external relations event programming and
sponsorship into a unified strategy for corporate sponsorship and fund raising.
19
Marketing the Smith School :
Market the distinctions of the school with special emphasis on the school’s
global activities, leading edge application of technology and
entrepreneurship.
•
Expand the school’s branding activities through increased promotion and
advertising using traditional, video and web-based media and also expand
departmental functional branding efforts.
•
Continue to develop branding materials that help students, alumni and recruiters
translate the Smith School strategy into clearly understood career benefits.
•
Support the school’s research centers to advance faculty expertise while serving
as a focal point for external recognition and business partnerships.
•
Expand advisory board activities to advance business partnerships, research
opportunities, financial support, and student placement
•
Maintain the number of high-visibility research symposia with at least one major
symposium per department per year and overall, hold at least one significant
public symposium, conference or event at the Smith School each month during
the academic year.
20
Resources and Infrastructure
Increase resources and infrastructure
support for the school.
•
Secure major commitments from alumni, friends and corporations to reach the
campaign goal of $90 million range by December 2011.
•
Expand the non-degree executive education program to $5 million by FY 2011
•
Continue revenue generating entrepreneurial activities aimed at sustaining Smith
School revenue growth at a pace sufficient to continue expansion of tenured and
tenure-track faculty to 125 and total faculty to 160 by 2011, maintain salaries at
the median of the top 10 research business schools, maintain our technological
lead, build the Smith brand and fuel our global expansion.
•
Develop and launch a series of revenue-generating, high-value Executive Master
of Science degree programs for executive students in Maryland and abroad.
•
Increase overall revenues for the school so that by 2012, the school has total
revenues among the top three public business schools.
•
Create a space plan for future business school expansion.
•
Continue improving operational processes within administrative and program
offices including automating the back office operations of the business school as
an element of the school’s major IT initiatives.
•
Provide the best possible work climate for all staff including professional skills
development for all levels of staff.
21
APPENDIX
FIGURE A1: ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
22
FIGURE A2: STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS
The Smith School operates a continuous improvement model spearheaded by its strategic
planning process. This process began in the 1997/98 academic year. Under this model,
annual and five-year objectives and tactics are set in six areas: research, academic
programs, the Smith community, information technology, marketing, and resources and
infrastructure.
Each department (academic and administrative) participates in the strategic plan, sets
strategic objectives for itself as well as collaborating in the statement of objectives for the
school. The school’s department chairs and senior staff (assistant, associate deans and
department directors) led by the Dean’s Office, insure the implementation of the
objectives.
The strategic planning process operates on the following time-table.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Goals and
Objectives
June - Finalize Faculty Recruiting Plan
September - Satisfaction Surveys Completed for Baseline
ƒ Faculty Satisfaction
ƒ Undergraduate Student Satisfaction
ƒ MBA Student Satisfaction
ƒ External Rankings
November – Management Strategy Retreat
February – Department Strategic Plans and research metrics
March – April Integration of strategies, plans, and financial forecasts
May – Strategic Plan Presented at School Assembly and to MBA Students
May – Draft Plan Published for Review and Feedback
April – May Strategic PRD Objectives for next year
June – Plan Published
August – Planning Cycle Begins Again
Baseline
Data
Department
Plan
Management
Retreat
Plan
Presentatio
Publish
Plan
June
June
23
Table A1. Smith School Pro Forma Actuals and Financial Forecast ($000)
(as of June 2009)
Revenues
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Forecast
Base Budget
13,764
14,769
15,834
17,162
18,559
19,535
Other Univ.
776
1,403
1,953
1,937
1,911
2,434
Tuition/Fees
20,732
23,923
25,904
29,144
32,466
30,801
Private
6,568
8,787
11,763
11,973
9,308
10,621
Subtotal
41,849
48,880
55,454
60,216
62,244
63,391
North Wing
0
0
1,230
7,500
7,724
613
Total Revenues
41,840
48,882
56,684
67,716
69,968
64,005
Table A2. Smith School Selected Key Expenditure Forecast ($000)
(as of June 2009)
2008
D e b t S e r v ic e
F a c u lty H i r e s
S u m m e r R e se a rch F u n d
C a re e r S e rvice s
S tr a te g ic M a r k e ti n g
P h . D . S tu d e n t S u p p o r t
M B A S t u d e n t S u p p o rt
S m ith F e ll o w s P r o g r a m
A lu m n i /D e v e lo p m e n t
I T T e c h n o lo g y /L a b s
24
2009 (Forecast)
1 ,9 8 3
2 ,6 3 4
533
19 6 2
2 ,2 3 6
1 ,4 8 9
1 ,1 9 7
497
1 ,5 1 7
3 ,2 1 0
2 ,4 3 6
3 ,2 1 5
6 75
1 ,9 5 0
2 ,0 4 8
1 ,5 8 9
1 ,4 7 7
5 70
1 ,6 9 1
2 ,9 9 6
Table A3: Academic Programs at Smith:
2008 Graduates with Bachelor of Science Degree programs with majors in: 1,044*
- Accounting
256
- Information Systems
54
- Finance
335
- General Business and Management
73
- International Business
121
- Logistics, Transportation & Supply Chain Management
70
- Marketing
224
- Operations Management
53
2007-08 MBA G RADUATES
414
MS Degree Graduates
21
Ph.D. Graduates
14
* Sum of individual undergraduates in majors may not equal total number of graduates because of graduates with
dual majors.
•
Approximately 2,900 undergraduates ranging from freshman to seniors majoring
in business at College Park and Shady Grove, Md.
•
257 full-time MBA students in College Park, Md., from 32 countries.
•
1,073 part-time MBA students attending weekend and evening programs in
Washington, D.C., Shady Grove, and Baltimore, Md.
•
237 Executive MBA participants in the U.S., China and Zurich
•
104 PhD students from 22 countries
25
Table A4: 2008-09 Teaching Statistics/Faculty
Department Courses
UG
MBA
AIA
DO&IT
Finance
LBPP
M&O
Marketing
104
74
72
96
71
67
37
55
57
47
81
42
144
144
138
147
163
114
PhD # Students
3
15
9
4
11
5
1856
1997
1709
1949
2705
1174
FT Faculty
Area
Student
Rating
4.25
4.33
4.18
4.25
4.27
4.41
Tenure/
Tyser
Tenure Teaching FT Lect- Hires
Total
Track
Fellows
urers 2008-2009 Faculty
7
28
18
13
21
18
5
8
3
4
7
3
1
1
2
5
4
3
2
0
2
0
0
1
15
37
25
22
32
25
105
30
16
4
156
Student Teaching Rating
Overall Smith School
4.23
CP UG Lower
4.19
CP UG Upper
4.27
Shady Grove UG
4.20
CP MBA
4.24
DC MBA
4.18
Shady Grove MBA
4.16
Baltimore MBA
4.18
26
Table A5: Average Student Evaluations- 2007-08
(5.0 maximum)
Fall 2007
Department # of Sections
Spring 2008
Average
# of Sections
Average
ACCT
48
4.28
49
4.19
DIT
68
4.32
55
4.24
FIN
51
4.04
55
4.17
LBPP
55
4.22
58
4.17
MKTG
47
4.26
53
4.25
M&O
62
4.36
69
4.39
4
4.12
6
4.15
334
4.27
339
4.24
CP UG Lower
12
4.18
21
4.16
CP UG Upper
148
4.29
167
4.23
Shady Grove UG
26
4.41
24
4.38
CP MBA
43
4.21
50
4.19
DC MBA
49
4.19
45
4.19
Shady Grove MBA
14
4.34
14
4.30
Baltimore MBA
9
4.15
11
4.14
OCM (BMGT 367)
Smith School
Area
27
TABLE A6: ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
Program Sizes for Top 25 U.S. Schools in 2009 Financial Times MBA Rankings *
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
School name
University of Pennsylvania: Wharton
Harvard Business School
Columbia Business School
Stanford University GSB
MIT: Sloan
New York University: Stern
University of Chicago: Booth
Dartmouth College: Tuck
Yale School of Management
Northwestern University: Kellogg
Duke University: Fuqua
University of Michigan: Ross
Emory University: Goizueta
University of Virginia: Darden
UCLA: Anderson
University of California at Berkeley: Haas
Cornell University: Johnson
Georgetown University: McDonough
University of Arizona: Eller
University of Maryland: Smith
University of North Carolina: KenanFlagler
University of Rochester: Simon
University of Texas at Austin: McCombs
Carnegie Mellon: Tepper
Rice University: Jones
University of Pittsburgh: Katz
*
Undergrad
FT MBA
PT MBA
EMBA
PhD
2528
0
0
0
225
2305
0
0
0
0
0
1051
582
0
0
613
0
1353
5382
2882
1611
1801
1234
733
788
841
1144
498
382
1254
782
877
373
765
731
500
591
522
316
257
2466
0
0
0
0
2137
1589
0
0
1150
0
682
313
0
772
753
0
283
108
1073
407
0
767
56
0
209
183
0
0
559
378
147
177
60
214
144
312
312
61
237
184
31
92
99
80
100
114
0
27
124
82
100
41
9
65
78
39
0
136
104
638
0
4380
435
0
1960
559
185
1062
392
473
215
0
75
0
358
0
526
316
118
152
0
132
83
57
39
94
93
0
57
Note: Virginia has a separate Undergraduate School of Business (McIntire); Georgetown and Dartmouth
have no PhD Programs
28
TABLE A7: MBA RANKINGS (BY AVERAGE)
Top 50 MBA Rankings Arranged in Rank Order of Average (2009)
Rank
Business School
University
USN
2009
BW
2008
FT
2009
1
Harvard Business School
Harvard University
1
2
4
2
The Wharton School
University of Pennsylvania
3
4
1
3
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Stanford University
2
6
3
3
University of Chicago (Booth)
University of Chicago
5
1
6
5
Kellogg School of Management
Northwestern University
3
3
10
6
Columbia Business School
9
7
2
6
Sloan School of Management
Columbia University
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
5
9
5
8
Tuck School of Business
Dartmouth College
8
12
8
8
Ross School of Business
University of Michigan
13
5
10
10
Stern School of Business
11
13
7
11
Haas School of Business
New York University
University of California,
Berkeley
7
10
15
11
Fuqua School of Business
12
8
14
13
UCLA Anderson School of Management
Duke University
University of California,
Los Angeles
14
14
11
14
Yale University
10
24
9
Cornell University
17
11
17
16
Yale School of Management
S.C. Johnson Graduate School of
Management
Darden Graduate School of Business
Administration
15
16
16
17
Tepper School of Business
University of Virginia
Carnegie Mellon
University
15
19
23
17
Goizueta Business School
Emory University
22
23
12
17
Kenan-Flagler Business School
University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill
20
17
20
20
Kelley School of Business
Indiana University
22
15
31
21
Foster School of Business
University of Washington
26
27
21
21
Marshall School of Business
University of Southern
California
20
25
30
23
McDonough School of Business
19
40+
18
24
McCombs School of Business
18
21
43
15
Georgetown University
University of Texas,
Austin
29
Top-50 MBA Ranking
(Continued)
University of Maryland,
College Park
40
Olin School of Business
Washington University
22
28
39
Simon School of Business
University of Rochester
29
40+
22
28
Mendoza College of Business
University of Notre Dame
33
20
45
28
Marriott School of Management
Brigham Young
University
29
22
48
30
Georgia Tech College of Management
Georgia Institute of
Technology
22
29
50+
30
Eli Broad School of Business
Michigan State University
33
40+
34
32
Mays Business School
Texas A&M University
33
40+
31
32
Krannert School of Management
Purdue University
32
40+
34
34
Owen Graduate School of Management
Vanderbilt University
33
30
43
35
Eller College of Management
40+
40+
27
35
40
40+
28
35
Smeal College of Business
UC Davis Graduate School of
Management
University of Arizona
Pennsylvania State
University
University of California,
Davis
40
40+
28
35
Tippie College of Business
44
40+
25
39
Thunderbird School
University of Iowa
Thunderbird School of
Global Management
40+
40+
31
39
University of Florida
37
40+
34
39
Warrington College of Business
Jessie H. Jones Graduate School of
Management
Rice University
38
40+
34
39
UIUC College of Business
38
40+
34
43
Cox School of Business
University of Illinois
Southern Methodist
University
47
18
50+
44
Fisher College of Business
44
Moore School of Business
46
25
Robert H. Smith School of Business
26
26
26
18
26
40+
52
53
40+
25
Wisconsin School of Business
Ohio State University
University of South
Carolina
University of Wisconsin,
Madison
28
40+
53
47
Carlson School of Management
University of Minnesota
33
40+
49
47
Carey School of Management
Arizona State University
29
40+
53
47
Carroll School of Management
44
40+
40+
50
Merage School of Business
Boston College
University of California,
Irvine
51
40+
38
30
TABLE A8 – UNDEGRADUATE RANKINGS (BY AVERAGE)
2009 Top 50 Undergraduate Rankings Arranged in Rank Order of Average
Rank 1 2 2 4 4 6 7 7 7 10 11 12 13 14 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 27 28 29 29 31 32 School Pennsylvania (Wharton) Virginia (McIntire) Michigan (Ross) UC‐Berkeley (Haas) MIT (Sloan) Texas (McCombs) Notre Dame (Mendoza) Cornell North Carolina (Kenan‐Flagler) NYU (Stern) Emory (Goizueta) Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) Washington U. (Olin) Indiana (Kelley) USC (Marshall) Illinois Brigham Young (Marriott) Boston College (Carroll) Wake Forest (Calloway) Georgetown (McDonough) U. of Washington (Foster) Babson Maryland (Smith) Wisconsin Penn State (Smeal) Ohio State (Fisher) Texas A&M (Mays) Case Western (Weatherhead) Miami U. (Farmer) SMU (Cox) William & Mary (Mason) Villanova 31
BW 2009 3 1 4 6 7 10 2 8 13 15 9 19 16 20 21 22 5 17 14 24 25 23 35 40 38 42 37 39 18 31 30 11 USN 2009 1 6 3 3 2 6 17 11 6 5 13 6 13 11 10 13 35 25 30 21 21 25 17 13 21 17 30 30 52 39 43 65 Top‐50 Undergraduate Business Ranking 32 34 35 36 37 37 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Bentley Rensselaer Polytech (Lally) Boston U. Santa Clara (Leavey) Richmond (Robins) Georgia Tech Syracuse (Whitman) Northeastern Baylor (Hankamer) American (Kogod) San Diego Fordham Lehigh U. of Miami Texas Christian (Neeley) James Madison Ohio Binghamton 33 36 43 32 12 51 49 27 45 28 29 41 26 50 34 44 47 48 43 43 39 52 74 35 39 65 52 74 74 74 95 74 95 95 95 121 Note: Schools that were not ranked in both publications were not included.
32
Table A9: Summary of Smith School External Rankings, 2008-2009
School-wide
#17 Undergraduate Program (USNews, 2008)
#35 Undergraduate Program (Business Week, 2009)
#6 Public Business School, U.S. (Financial Times, 2009)
#20 MBA Program, U.S. (Financial Times 2009)
#26 MBA Program, U.S. (Business Week, 2009)
#40 MBA Program (USNews, 2009)
#16 Part-time MBA Program (USNews, 2009)
#3 Intellectual Capital (Business Week, 2009)
#12 in Research, World (Financial Times, 2009)
Undergraduate Programs
#5 Management Information Systems
#8 Supply Chain Management/Logistics
#9 Entrepreneurship
#11 Quantitative Analysis
#14 Management
#16 Production/Operations Management
#15 Finance
#16 Marketing
#14 International Business
-- U.S. News & World Report, 2008
Graduate Programs
#6 MBA Information Systems
#13 MBA Supply Chain/Logistics
#22 MBA Entrepreneurship
#20 MBA Management
#23 MBA Production/Operations
-- U.S. News & World Report, 2009
33
Table A10: TOP RESEARCH BUSINESS SCHOOLS
(By Scholarly Productivity)
Source: UT Dallas, Top 100 Business Schools, 2004-2008
http://citm.utdallas.edu/utdrankings/rankingbydate.aspx
Top 10 Research Schools (World)
Rank
University
Articles
Score
Country
1
University of Pennsylvania (Wharton)
298
160.38
USA
2
Duke University (Fuqua)
235
124.14
USA
3
New York University (Stern)
237
119.22
USA
4
University of Chicago (Booth)
182
108.04
USA
5
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross)
202
107.20
USA
6
Columbia University (Graduate School of Business)
199
105.25
USA
7
Harvard University (Harvard Business School)
172
104.77
USA
8
Stanford University (Graduate School of Business)
179
96.54
USA
9
University of Maryland at College Park (Smith)
177
96.40
USA
10
University of Texas (McCombs School of Business)
177
91.10
USA
11
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan)
170
91.03
USA
12
INSEAD
151
81.65
FRANCE
13
University of Southern California (Marshall)
146
81.41
USA
14
Pennsylvania State University (Smeal)
149
80.76
USA
15
Northwestern University (Kellogg)
144
79.32
USA
34
Table A10.1 - Top 15 Finance Departments (U.S.)
Rank
University
Articles
Score
Country
1
University of Chicago (Booth)
54
31.64
USA
2
New York University (Stern)
65
30.37
USA
3
Harvard University (Harvard Business School)
49
26.42
USA
4
Duke University (Fuqua)
48
23.77
USA
5
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross)
44
23.73
USA
6
University of Pennsylvania (Wharton)
43
22.64
USA
7
University of California at Los Angeles (Anderson)
41
19.51
USA
8
Columbia University (Graduate School of Business)
40
19.44
USA
9
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan )
36
17.67
USA
10
University of Texas (McCombs)
34
17.03
USA
11
Stanford University (Graduate School of Business)
29
16.95
USA
12
University of Maryland at College Park (Smith)
30
16.50
USA
13
University of California at Berkeley (Haas)
27
15.29
USA
14
Washington University at St. Louis (Olin)
29
13.68
USA
15
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (College of
Business)
24
13.14
USA
35
Table A10.2 - Top 15 Marketing Departments (U. S.)
Rank
University
Articles
Score
Country
1
University of Pennsylvania (The Wharton School)
78
41.33
USA
2
Duke University (The Fuqua School of Business)
64
32.46
USA
3
University of Chicago (Graduate School of Business)
54
30.66
USA
4
Northwestern University (Kellogg School of Management)
51
28.63
USA
5
University of Florida (Warrington College of Business)
43
26.06
USA
6
Columbia University (Graduate School of Business)
45
24.86
USA
7
University of Southern California (Marshall School of
Business)
44
24.16
USA
8
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross School of
Business)
45
23.95
USA
9
New York University (Leonard N. Stern School of
Business)
47
23.91
USA
10
University of Maryland at College Park (Robert H.
Smith School of Business)
32
18.06
USA
11
University of Minnesota at Twin Cities (Carlson School of
Management)
37
17.58
USA
12
University of California at Los Angeles (Anderson School
of Management)
34
16.91
USA
13
University of Texas (McCombs School of Business)
31
16.00
USA
14
Stanford University (Graduate School of Business)
33
15.36
USA
15
Pennsylvania State University at University Park (Smeal
College of Business)
28
15.26
USA
36
Table A10.3 - Top 15 Decision and Information Technologies Departments
(Also Information Systems, Operations and Production): U. S.
Rank
University
Articles
Score
Country
1
University of Texas at Dallas (School of Management)
51
31.08
USA
2
Columbia University (Graduate School of Business)
52
26.91
USA
3
Duke University (The Fuqua School of Business)
41
24.03
USA
4
New York University (Leonard N. Stern School of
Business)
40
22.95
USA
5
University of Minnesota at Twin Cities (Carlson School of
Management)
40
22.60
USA
6
University of Maryland at College Park (Robert H.
Smith School of Business)
42
22.43
USA
7
Michigan State University (The Eli Broad College of
Business)
35
20.58
USA
8
Stanford University (Graduate School of Business)
35
19.80
USA
9
University of Pennsylvania (The Wharton School)
33
18.41
USA
10
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan School of
Management)
35
17.37
USA
11
Carnegie Mellon University (Tepper School of Business)
30
16.11
USA
12
Georgia Institute of Technology (College of Management)
31
15.05
USA
13
Indiana University at Bloomington (Kelley School of
Business)
29
14.85
USA
14
University of Texas (McCombs School of Business)
30
14.70
USA
15
University of British Columbia (Sauder School of
Business)
24
11.95
Canada
37
Table A10.4 - Top 15 Management and Organization Departments
(Also Strategy, Organization and Human Resources): U. S.
Rank
University
Articles
Score
Country
1
University of Pennsylvania (The Wharton School)
109
55.10
USA
2
Harvard University (Harvard Business School)
76
46.95
USA
3
University of Maryland at College Park (Robert H.
Smith School of Business)
70
38.23
USA
4
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross School of
Business)
64
36.50
USA
5
Pennsylvania State University at University Park (Smeal
College of Business)
65
33.91
USA
6
Duke University (The Fuqua School of Business)
59
31.56
USA
7
University of Texas (McCombs School of Business)
59
30.75
USA
8
Stanford University (Graduate School of Business)
53
30.08
USA
9
New York University (Leonard N. Stern School of
Business)
60
28.78
USA
10
Columbia University (Graduate School of Business)
49
26.95
USA
11
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (College of
Business)
47
26.75
USA
12
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan School of
Management)
46
25.03
USA
13
University of Southern California (Marshall School of
Business)
44
24.05
USA
14
Northwestern University (Kellogg School of
Management)
43
22.86
USA
15
Washington University at St. Louis (Olin School of
Business)
40
21.65
USA
38
Table A11 - UT Dallas Journal List for Ranking
Name
Since
The Accounting Review
1990
Journal of Accounting and Economics
1990
Journal of Accounting Research
1990
Journal of Finance
1990
Journal of Financial Economics
1990
The Review of Financial Studies
1990
Information Systems Research
1990
Journal on Computing
1990
MIS Quarterly
1990
Journal of Consumer Research
1990
Journal of Marketing
1990
Journal of Marketing Research
1990
Marketing Science
1990
Management Science
1990
Operations Research
1990
Journal of Operations Management
1990
Manufacturing and Service Operations Management
1999
Production and Operations Management
1992
Academy of Management Journal
1990
Academy of Management Review
1990
Administrative Science Quarterly
1990
Organization Science
1990
Journal of International Business Studies
1990
Strategic Management Journal
1990
39
TA B L E A 1 2 : S M I T H S C H O O L C O N S E N S U S TO P B U S I N E S S J O U R NA L S B Y A R E A
Accounting & Information Assurance
• The Accounting Review
• The Journal of Accounting Research
• The Journal of Accounting and Economics
• Journal of Accounting and Public Policy
Information Systems
• Information Systems Research
• Management Science
• Management Information Systems Quarterly
Management Science/Operations Research
• Management Science
• INFORMS Journal on Computing
• Operations Research
• Transportation Science
Operations Management
• Management Science
• Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
• Operations Research
• Production and Operations Management
Business Statistics
• Journal of the American Statistical Association
• Journal of the Royal Statistical Society
• Technometrics
• Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics
• Journal of Business and Economic Statistics
Finance
• Journal of Finance
• Journal of Financial Economics
• Review of Financial Studies
• American Economic Review
• Journal of Economic Theory
• Rand Journal
• Journal of Business
40
Business Law
• The American Business Law Journal
• Law journals published by the top law schools
International Business
• The Journal of International Business Studies
• Also top economic journals and top management journals
Logistics and Transportation
• Transportation Research
• The Journal of Business Logistics
• The Transportation Journal
• Transportation Science
Management & Organization
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Management Science
Organization Science
Journal of Applied Psychology
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Academy of Management Review
Academy of Management Review
Strategic Management Journal
Marketing
• Journal of Marketing
• Journal of Marketing Research
• Marketing Science
• Journal of Consumer Research
41
Transforming the University of Maryland –
The Smith School As A Leading Edge
G. “Anand” Anandalingam
Dean Smith School of Business
Dean,
May 2009
Goals of the Presentation
ƒ Provide Other Deans and even the Provost (!)
knowledge of the Smith School of Business
ƒ Summarize the Strategic Goals of the Smith School
to Align with University Strategy
•
•
•
•
•
Faculty and Research
PhD Program
Masters Program
Undergraduate Program
Executive Programs
9 If Time Permits
The Smith School of Business
Today
ƒ ~ 151 Faculty
• ~111
111 T
Tenured
d or T
Tenure-Track
T
k
ƒ 3000 Undergraduates
ƒ 1400 MBA Students
• 250 Full-time
• 1150 Part-time
ƒ 106 PhD
h Students
d
Strategic Planning at the
Smith School of Business
ƒ Annual event
• Academic
A d
i D
Departments
t
t
• Administrative Departments
ƒ Basis of Resource Allocation
ƒ Requirement by AACSB
• Best practice among all business schools
ƒ Believe
l
in continuous improvement
• Easy to set Goals
• Implementation
p
is the Key
y
Our Vision
ƒ Our vision is for the Smith School of Business to be a
world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging
global economic and business paradigm, and providing
thought leadership to students, corporate executives and
policy makers so that they can be agents of both economic
prosperity and transformative social change.
ƒ We want to be counted among the top 15 business schools
in this country and the world, both graduate and
undergraduate.
ƒ We want to be known for superb scholarship, excellent
p
, not just
j
among
g those
students and flawless operations,
who know us well, but especially those who do not.
Faculty and Research Reputation of
the Smith School of Business
ƒ The best thing about the Smith School is the research
reputation
• #3 in “Intellectual Capital” (Business Week, 2009)
• #11 in “Research Productivity” (Financial Times, 2008)
9 #5 in 2007
• Almost
ost every
e e y area
a ea in the
t e top 12 in 2009
009 in research
esea c
productivity
9
9
9
9
Marketing - #11
Finance - #9
Management
g
and Organization
g
- #5
Decision and Information Technologies - #2
ƒ Research Recognition
• INFORMS Fellows
• Academy of Management Fellows
• Multiple Best Paper Awards Every Year
5-Year Goals on
Faculty and Research Reputation
ƒ Research Productivity ranked by Financial Times
• Consistently in the Top-5
• How?
9 Reward faculty for productivity and publishing in FT-50
9 Hire faculty who are productive and publish in FT-50
ƒ Every Area ranked by US News
• Consistently in Top-10
• How?
We are a hidden secret
9 Better Marketing campaign to other Business Deans,
Associate Deans and Senior Faculty
9 ThoughtLeadership@Smith
9 Incentives for being more visible among policy makers
and captains of industry
9 Improve PhD Program Placement (Later)
Challenges for Maintaining
Research Reputation
1. Faculty Retention
ƒ
We
e cannot
ca ot do worse
o se than
t a our
ou peers
pee s and
a d in fact
act need
eed to
do better
ƒ
Salary, Teaching Load, Summer Funding, Research
Budget, Service Expectations
2 Hiring Better Faculty
2.
ƒ
ƒ
Always hire better faculty than one already has
Future – Strategic Hiring
3 Higher standards for promotion and tenure without
3.
disrupting faculty morale
ƒ
ƒ
Impact and influence rather than productivity
Strategic rather than meeting initial expectations
ƒ
Controversial but the University has to set
standards and expectations
Research Funding
at the Smith School of Business
ƒ
ƒ
Most research characterized as “quantitative social science”
p
– Management
g
Science,, Finance External Research
• Exceptions
Funding:
• Sources of external funding are limited
FY08: $2,551,780
How is research funded at a business school?
FY07: $4,133,520
FY06: $4,753,856
• Within the School Budget!
• Our Competition
9 ALL faculty on tenure track receive 2 months summer support
until they receive tenure
9 ALL productive tenured faculty receive 2 months summer
support
9 ALL faculty receive some summer support based on research
proposals to internal committee
• FURTHER – All PhD students supported by school budget
New Research Directions
ƒ
Our vision is for the Smith School of Business to be a world leader in
generating new knowledge in the emerging global economic and
business paradigm
• Center on Financial Policy and Corporate Governance
• Center on Social Value Creation
• Center on Health Information and Decision Systems
9 Center on Global Health (Business)
• Center on Leadership, Innovation and Change
• Center on Digital Thought and Strategy
• Center on Complexity in Business
ƒ All of these offer opportunities for external research funding
and development of philanthropy
• 5Y
Year Goal
G l - $10 Milli
Million iin Naming
N
i
Opportunities
O
t iti
• 5 Year Goal - $10 Million in Research Grants
Other Challenges Viz Faculty at Smith
ƒ Insufficient Diversity of Faculty
• 5-Year
5 Year Goal: 3
3-5%
5% of faculty from under represented minorities
• 10-Year Goal: 6-7% of faculty from under represented
minorities
ƒ More tenured and tenure
tenure-track
track faculty to teach
undergraduate courses
• 5-Year Goal: 30%
10-Year
Year Goal: 50%
• 10
ƒ Biggest challenge
• Changing Mind Set
• Need to act and operate like a top-tier business school rather
than a second-tier one
9 Same challenge at the University
Highlights
g g
of the Smith PhD Program
g
ƒ Program reviewed every year
ƒ Ranking by Financial Times
• #13 in 2009 (#9 in 2008)
ƒ Recent Placements (2006-08)
• UCLA, Michigan, Minnesota, Notre Dame,
Michigan State,
State VA Tech,
Tech Georgetown (2),
(2)
Southern Methodist, RPI, McGill, Instituto de
Empresa, National Taiwan University, Nanyang
Technological University (2)
9 15 in top-50
top 50 FT among 40 PhD graduates
ƒ Best Funded PhD Students
• Second only to Harvard
• Bob Smith Initiative - Hopefully “game changing”
9 Too early to tell
Smith School PhD Program Statistics
(Meeting University Goals)
Recruitment and Enrollment
Applications
Number Admitted
Number Admitted Who Enrolled
Percentage Admitted
Percentage Admitted Who Enrolled
Average Undergrad GPA
Average Graduate GPA
Average GRE
Average GMAT
Fall 2007
543
36
24
Matriculation Date
Fall 2008
473
39
23
Fall 2009
631
30
18
6.62%
66.67%
8.25%
59.00%
4.75%
60.0%
3.61
3.69
V: 570/Q:779
704
3.86
3.70
V:580/Q:771
703
3.50
3.67
V:602/Q:776
723
Very competitive to get in; best time to graduation at University
Graduation
Average Time to Graduation (Years)
Percentage Graduating in 6 years
2006
4.82
93%
Graduation Year
2007
4.89
100%
2008
5.00
83%
Plans for the PhD Program
The PhD Program is a Reflection of future “peer
peer assessment”
assessment
ƒ Already Working On
• Improving the quality of in-take
g
evaluation of PhD student p
progress
g
• More rigorous
• Better Mentoring
9 CAPS – Career and Professionalism Seminar
ƒ Main Goal
• Improve
I
the
th placement
l
t in
i top-30
t
30 US business
b i
schools
h l
9 5-Year Goal
– Over a 3-year period, place 33% of PhD graduates in top-50 FT
business schools
9 10
10-Year
Year Goal
• How?
– Over a 3-year period, place 50% of PhD graduates in top-50 business
schools
9 Reward Individual Faculty and Department for Reaching Goals
9 Improve PhD Program as described above
• Challenge
9 Change of Mind Set for faculty
The MBA Program Smith School of Business
ƒ The MBA Program is the flagship program in a
Business School
• Very unlike other schools and departments
ƒ Our reputation depends in a significant way on the
ranking of the MBA program
• Our reputation among peers
peers, faculty,
faculty future MBA
students, even future PhD students
ƒ Our financials depend in a significant way on the
MBA Programs
ƒ My
M BIGGEST challenge
h ll
• The best way to hurt the business school in a
significant way is to hurt the MASTERS program
• Given our precarious reputational position,
hurting the MBA program at the Smith School will
ensure that many of the best faculty, and
students will leave for greener pastures
Precarious Smith MBA Program Ranking
ƒ Ranking is Inconsistent
• Financial Times
9 20 Overall (#6 Public)
• Business Week
9 26 Overall (#8 Public)
• US News
9 40 Overall (#17 Public)
ƒ Lesson
L
to
t be
b learned
l
d
• We really compete with Private University Business Schools
9 Many of whom do not have undergraduate programs
• We are ranked on
9 Placement of students and salaries
9 Student Satisfaction
9 Recruiter satisfaction
ƒ Our 5
5-Year
Year Goal
• Consistently in top-15 (Full-Time MBA)
• Consistently in top-15 (Part-Time MBA)
SWAT Analysis of The MBA Program
ƒ
Strengths
ƒ
Weaknesses
ƒ
Opportunities
ƒ
Threats
• Ideally located in a large metropolis
• Local Competition does not have faculty strength in numbers
and reputation
• Reputation of Maryland - Continue to lose the very top students
to Georgetown
• Inconsistent rankings - #20 in Financial Times, #26 in Business
Week #40 in US News
Week,
•
•
•
•
New leadership and mind set at the Smith School
Improvements to be made are not difficult to implement
Many untapped markets and companies
New alumni partnerships
• Misunderstanding of Masters Program Importance by Campus
• Budget
B d
crisis
i i
• New competition from Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, Wharton
and Michigan
Plans for Improving the MBA Program
ƒ
Strategic Initiatives
ƒ
Grow the Program
• “Build Community – Build Brand”
• “Raising Our Game”
• 5-Year Goal
9 Increase to 240 students per year in full-time program
9 Maintain 1000 students in part-time program
9 Increase MS Enrollment to 150
– Accounting, Finance, Information Systems, Supply Chain Management
ƒ
Recruit Better Students
• 5-Year Goal
9 Median GMAT Score F/T – 680 (Currently 660; Wharton 712, MIT 705)
9 Median GMAT Score P/T – 625 (Currently 605)
ƒ
Increase Diversity
ƒ
Better Placement and Career Management
• 5-Year Goal – 15% under represented minorities (10-Year Goal –
20%)
• 5-Year Goal
9 98% Placement 3-months after graduation (currently 91.5%)
9 90% Placement at Graduation (currently 69.5%)
Detailed Plans for Improving the MBA Program
(Read Later)
ƒ
Grow the Program
ƒ
Recruiting Better Students
ƒ
Better Placement and Career Management
ƒ
Engagement of Faculty Outside the Classroom
• Market in newer locations domestically and internationally
• Target
g international students from family
y owned businesses
• More Resources for Recruiting
• More targeted international recruiting
• Revamp entire office of career management
• Develop a better process for student engagement with career
management services
• Develop
p better relationship
p with recruiters
• Thought leadership outside the classroom
• Better mentoring of students
• Development of an intellectual community
Although seemingly straightforward, success in all these
will be “game changing”
The Undergraduate Program at the Smith School –
We have already met or exceeded University Goals
Applications
Number Admitted
Number Admitted Who Enrolled
Percentage Admitted
Percentage Admitted Who Enrolled
Average High School GPA
SAT (Math & Reading) – 75th Percentile
SAT (Math & Reading) – 25th Percentile
SAT (Math & Reading) - Median
Fall 2006
1 792
1,792
1,008
371
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
1 932
1,932
22,174
174
1,122
1,176
428
404
56.30%
36.80%
58.10%
38.10%
54.10%
34.40%
3.987
1,395
1,310
1,360
4.028
1,400
1,320
1,360
3.965
1,390
1,320
1,358
Ranked #17 in US News (Up from #21 in 2008); #9 Public
Undergrad Retention and Graduation Statistics
Fall 2002
At or near the
t
top
att the
th
University
ALL
Retained/Graduated – After 1 year
Retained or Graduated – 2 years
Retained or Graduated – 3 years
Graduated – After 4 years
Graduated – After 5 years
Graduated – After 6 years
AFRICAN AMERICAN
AFRICAN-AMERICAN
Retained/Graduated – After 1 year
Retained or Graduated – 2 years
Retained or Graduated – 3 years
Graduated – After 4 years
G d t d – After
Graduated
Aft 5 years
Graduated – After 6 years
HISPANIC-AMERICAN
Retained/Graduated – After 1 year
Retained or Graduated – 2 years
Retained or Graduated – 3 years
Graduated – After 4 years
Graduated – After 5 years
Graduated – After 6 years
Admission Date
Fall 2003 Fall 2004
Fall 2005
92.7%
89 7%
89.7%
87.4%
76.5%
85.8%
86.8%
93.8%
91 7%
91.7%
91.3%
75.8%
90.0%
95.8%
93 6%
93.6%
92.6%
76.7%
95.5%
92 3%
92.3%
92.0%
-
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
66.7%
66 7%
66.7%
66.7%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
80.0%
100 0%
100.0%
100.0%
87.5%
75.0%
62.5%
100.0%
81.8%
81.8%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
83.3%
83.3%
83.3%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
72.7%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
87.5%
87.5%
100.0%
88.9%
88.9%
Initiatives for Improving the Quality
of Undergraduate Business Education
NOTE: Smith School just completed a review of the
g
p
program
g
undergraduate
ƒ Increasing the depth and breadth of education on
ethics and corporate social responsibility
ƒ Small community in large program
• Innovative Fellows Program (next slide)
ƒ Education through experiences outside the
classroom
l
• Co-Curricular Activities in all programs
• Lemma Senbet Fund
We p
pursue our vision
with the GET Strategy
• Global Study Trips
ƒ Creating Global Citizens of the Future (two slides later)
Smith School Fellows Program
(Creating
g A Small Program
g
Experience
p
)
Accounting Teaching Scholars
Business Honors Fellows
Business Process Fellows
Design in Marketing Fellows
Emerging CFO Fellows
Entrepreneurship Fellows
International Business Fellows
Lemma Senbet Investment
Fund Fellows
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Logistics and Supply Chain
Management Fellows
Music Management Fellows
Quantitative Finance Fellows
QUEST Fellows
Smith Technology Fellows
Sports Management Fellows
STARS Fellows
F ll
Issue: Even with all of these Fellows programs
programs, only 1/3rd
of undergraduates in these specialized programs
5-Year Goal: Expand the involvement of Undergrads in
Fellows programs to 67%
How:
• Add Resources and Marketing to Fellows Program
Creating Global Citizens of the Future
ƒ What is a “Global
Global Experience”?
Experience ?
• Semester or Year long semester abroad
• Global study trips (2 to 3 weeks)
• Consulting
g Project
j
with Company
p y head q
quartered
outside the U.S.
ƒ Goals
• 5-Year Goal:
9 “We
We will enable every student who wants a global
experience to have one”
9 50% of MBA students and 33% of Undergraduates
• 10-Year Goal
9 “Every student should have a global experience
before leaving the Smith School of Business”
9 100% of all students, MBA and Undergraduate
• How?
9 Add resources to Smith Office of Global Programs
9 Expand global partnerships with Universities
9 Expand partnerships with international
organizations
Entrepreneurship and Technology
ƒ Entrepreneurship
• Expand course offerings in entrepreneurship
• Capstone course in developing business plans
9 Brings together all the functional areas
• Social
S i l venturing
t i
projects
j t
ƒ Technology
• Explore new multi-media technologies as teaching
tools
9 5-Year Goal – 100%
• Expand the involvement in social networks
Further Plans for Undergraduate Education
ƒ
M
More
tenured
d and
d tenure-track
k faculty
f
l in
i the
h classroom
l
ƒ
More diversity
•
•
2-Year Goal: 40%
5-Year Goal: 50%
• More
M
students
t d t from
f
under
d represented
t d minorities
i
iti
9 5-Year Goal – 20% of undergraduates
• More international freshmen
9 5-Year Goal – 10% international freshmen
9 UNIVERSITY ENGAGEMENT IS CRITICAL
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
More proactive faculty involvement in attracting better
pool of students
Better handle on scholarships for needy students
• Need University policy and practices
Incentives to develop new engaging and interactive
instructional methods
Reduction in size of classes and the size of the
undergraduate program
• The best business schools do not have undergraduate programs
• Not possible to retain best research faculty and have larger
percentage of undergrad courses taught by T&TT faculty
Last but Not Least –
We believe in Partnerships Across Campus
ƒ Partnering with Engineering
• QUEST
• MS in Telecommunications
• Entrepreneurship
ƒ Partnering with University
• “Smith
Smith Edge
Edge”
9 new business program for non business students
• University Honors Program (Finally!)
ƒ Many global partnerships
• New – Peking University, KAIST, Chulalongkorn,
Thammasat
• Old – Many
ƒ Many Local partnerships
• SAIC, LMI, Black and Decker, MedChi etc. etc.
9 Through Custom Executive Programs
Proposed New Partnerships That Will
Help the University and Take
Advantage of Our Location
ƒ Technology
h l
Policy
l
• Business, Public Policy, and Engineering (Life
Sciences, Computer Science)
ƒ Market Design
• Business, Economics and Computer Science
ƒ Global
Gl b l H
Health
lth
• Business, Public Health
ƒ Technology Transfer
• Business, Engineering
The Smith School of Business will be
happy to take the lead role in each of
these provided that the University
has a commitment to each
5-Year Goal – Have all of these
entities established with a budget
of at least $500K each
Executive Programs (Optional)
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Necessary to be
N
b a player
l
among the
h top-tier
i b
business
i
schools
h l
Best way to touch senior executives in companies
Important source of revenues
Executive MBA Programs
• Cohort #10 in College Park
• Cohort #6 in China (awaiting renewal)
• Cohort #5 in Switzerland ((being
g closed down))
ƒ Non-degree executive programs
• Small compared to our peers (~ $1.25 million)
ƒ Many new initiatives in non-degree executive programs
• Goal
G l – Grow
G
exec programs to
t $5 million
illi
in
i 3 years
• Industry focused certificate programs
9 Business of Medicine, Business of Law
• Life-long
g learning
g for alumni
• Global expansion
Any Questions?