2010/2011-05
PROPOSED MANDATE
FOR
UNIVERSITY COUNCIL
TITLE: Major in Business Administration for Day Students
OBJECTIVE:
In response to our Program Review and consistent with Plan 2020, we are undertaking an
extensive revision of the Management department. Joining our International Business (IBU)
major and minor is the recently approved major and minor in Family Business and
Entrepreneurship (FBE). We are seeking approval to update the existing Management major by
introducing two new majors and minors: Leadership, Ethics and Organizational Sustainability
(LEO) and Managing Human Capital (MHC). These two new majors and minors will replace
the existing Management major and minor.
In response to a perceived demand for a general Business Administration degree, for day
students, we seek approval to bring the existing Business Administration degree currently
offered in the College of Professional and Liberal Studies to the Haub School of Business for day
students. The Management Department will administer this major.
The program’s objective is fundamentally to prepare students to launch a general career in
business. At this time, we plan to offer only a major in this program of study. By doing so, the
major has the following goals:

Provide interested students with the tools, theory, and practical knowledge required to
function within a general business environment.

Provide a program of study for day students interested in a general business degree at
Saint Joseph's University.
REASONS FOR PROPOSED MANDATE:
In AY 2008-2009 the management department underwent Program Review. We found this
exercise extremely helpful as we looked towards the future. One particularly helpful observation
was:
“In reality, we are only encouraging a detailed review of the major because of (a) the
management department’s own concern about student perception as reflected in the self-study,
and (b) the reality that it seems to be missing a crucial component that the majority of
management majors across the country contain—formal study of HR. “
(see Appendix D for the entire report)
1
Starting with Program Review, we embarked on an extensive two-year review of the current
department offerings. We examined what we might be able to offer that was: a) consistent with
our department and College strengths, b) topically important to the external environment, and c)
consistent with the Mission of Saint Joseph’s University and Plan 2020.
The results were the reaffirmation of the excellence of our International Business major and
minor the introduction of Family Business and Entrepreneurship major and minor. We are also
seeking approval to re-package the Management major into Leadership, Ethics and
Organizational Sustainability (LEO) and Managing Human Capital (MHC) majors and minors.
We will phase-out the current Management major and minor. With these revisions, we believe
we enacted the spirit of our Program Review and Plan 2020.
However, what these changes do is leave potential Haub School of Business day students
without a general business degree. To address the needs of students wanting to major in
Business without specializing, we propose to offer the current Business Administration major
from the College of Professional and Liberal Studies to day students. We proposed
administering this major at this time in the Management Department with the recommendation
that we review this major yearly with the Dean’s Office and HSB Advising Center in terms of
curriculum and numbers of majors. It will involve only a minor curriculum change (adding more
option departments for the major elective courses) and we anticipate at this time, no
administrative changes.
RECOMMENDED FOR STUDY BY WHICH BODY?
_____ Faculty Senate:
Academic Policies and Procedures Committee
_____ Faculty Senate:
Faculty Policies and Procedures Committee
_____ College Council:
College of Arts and Sciences
__X__ College Council:
Haub School of Business
_____ Standing Committee on Student Affairs, Full-time Undergraduate
_____ Standing Committee on Student Affairs, Part-time Undergraduate/Graduate
_____ Administrative/Staff Council
Signature:
Date: December 02, 2010
Please forward to the Provost who serves as Chair of the University Council, along with
complete documentation to substantiate the need for the proposed mandate.
2
Program Description
1. Curriculum Outline – Majors
The Business Administration major is from the existing offering in the College of Professional
and Liberal Studies. In recognition that students may want to study in all of the departments in
the Haub School of Business, we increased the menu to include all HSB departments rather than
the four (4) listed in the College of Professional and Liberal Studies. Due to the interdisciplinary
nature of this degree, we stipulate that no student majoring in Business Administration can
double major or minor in another major within the Haub School of Business. A double major or
minor in the College of Arts and Sciences would be permitted, with the appropriate permissions
from the College of Arts and Sciences.
General Education Requirement (GER) or General Education Program (GEP) – See
Curricula
Electives General selections (4 – depending on Language Placement for GER; 5-10 for GEP)
Business Foundation Requirement, all Business majors (10 Courses)
ACC 101 Concepts of Financial Accounting
ACC 102 Managerial Accounting
DSS 200 Introduction to Information Systems
DSS 210 Business Statistics
DSS 220 Quantitative Methods for Business
FIN 200 Introduction to Finance
MGT 110/120 Essentials of Organizational Behavior/Essentials of Management
MGT 360 Legal Environment of Business I
MKT 201 Principles of Marketing
BUS 495 Business Policy
Major Courses (6 courses)
(For prerequisites, see course descriptions of the upper division courses)
Two (2) upper division courses from each of three different areas –
ACC, DSS, FIN, FMK, PHM, MGT, MKT. These courses must be in addition to any course that
is part of the Business core.
3
Implementation Timeline
It is our hope that the proposed major will have gained approval of the full Saint Joseph’s
University governance process by February 2011. This will allow the major to be implemented
in the fall semester of 2011.
Marketing Plan
We will work with the Advising Center and Associate Dean O’Brien, department chairs and
advisors.
Enrollment Projections
Based on the current Management Major, we conservatively believe that the Business
Administration major option might be selected by 5-10 students per class per year to reach 20-40
total students with a declared major of Business Administration
Resources
1. Faculty
The Chair of the Department of Management will initially serve as the advisor for these students.
The Status of the Major will be reviewed yearly with the Dean’s Office and Advising Center.
The anticipated few numbers of students can be accommodated in the existing classes and
opening it up to all departments will spread the number of students out to be, on average 1-2, in
any given section.
2. Other Required Resources
The major does not require specialized resources. The university’s current technology and
library resources are sufficient to satisfy the requirements of students in the Family Business and
Entrepreneurship major.
Methods of Program Assessment
The new major will be included in the Haub School’s Undergraduate Business Program. Thus,
the major will be subject to the school’s existing program assessment procedures.
Program Budget
This major is inter-disciplinary in nature. Consistent with this, the proposed Business
Administration major will draw from courses offered by various departments. We propose
initially housing the Business Administration major in the Management Department for
4
budgetary and administrative purposes, but this will be reviewed annually with the Dean’s Office
and the HSB Advising Center.
5
Appendix A
GEP
BSA Typical Course Sequence
Freshman Year
Fall
Accounting 101
1st Year Seminar/MGT 110,120 or 121
Eng 101 Craft of Lang* or Eng 102
Foreign Language
Math Beauty/Micro Economics
Excel & Math Competency
Spring
Accounting 102
1st Year Seminar/MGT 110,120 or 121
Eng 102 Text & Context/ Free Elective
Foreign Language
Math Beauty/Micro Economics
Excel & Math Competency
Sophomore Year
Fall
Principles of Finance/Marketing
Statistics
Information Systems/HIS Forging Mod
World
Integrative Learning 1 Macro Econ
PHL Moral Foundations
Spring
Principles of Finance/Marketing
Quant Methods
Information Systems/HIS Forging Mod
World
BSA Major Elective 1
THE Faith, Justice, Catholic Tradition
Junior Year
Fall
MGT 360 Leg Env of Bus either semester
BSA Major Elective 2
BSA Major Elective 3
Integrative Learning 2
PHL Philosophical Anthropology
Spring
BSA Major Elective 4
Integrative Learning 3
BSA Major Elective 5
Free Elective
Free Elective
Senior Year
Fall
BUS 495 Business Policy either semester
BSA Major Elective 6 either semester
Nat Sci
Faith and Reason
Free Elective
Spring
Fin Art/Lit
THE Religious Difference
Nat Sci** = Free Elective
Free Elective
Free Elective
* ENG 101 may be demonstrated through AP English scores of 4 or 5. In this case, ENG
101 can be taken during the Fall semester of the Freshman year allowing an extra
elective.
** Either a 4 credit laboratory course or two 3 credit non-laboratory course satisfy this
requirement
6
Appendix B
BSA Typical Course Sequence
Pre-AY 2010-2011 GEP Curriculum for declared BSA in Junior year
Freshman Year
Fall
Accounting 101
ENG 101
MAT 105/155/161
Foreign Language
DSS 200/ECN 101
Spring
Accounting 102
ENG 102
MAT 106/156/161
Foreign Language
DSS 200/ECN 101
Sophomore Year
Fall
MGT 110/MGT 120
DSS 210
3rd Lang or ECN 102 or SOC SCI
HIS 101
PHL 101
Spring
FIN 200/ MKT 201
DSS 220
ECN 102 or SOC SCI
HIS 102
THE Level 1 or PHL 101
Junior Year
Fall
MGT 360 Leg Env of Bus either semester
PHL 154 or REL Level 2
BSA major elective1
ECN 1021 or SOC SCI
FIN 200/ MKT 201
Spring
BSA major elective2
BSA major elective3
PHL 154 or REL Level 2
Art Lit
General Elective
Senior Year
Fall
BUS 495 Business Policy either semester
BSA major elective4
BSA major elective5
Nat Sci
3rd PHL or THE Level 3
Spring
BSA major elective6
General Elective
General Elective
Nat Sci
3rd PHL or THE Level 3
7
Appendix C
BSA Integrative Course Options
The new GEP allows each department to specify three courses in the variable core that are suited
to the unique needs of each discipline. The Haub School has previously identified ECN 101:
Micro Economics as a required course for all business majors. The Management department, as
part of its three integrative courses, has decided that ECN 102: Macro Economics is required of
its students. The two remaining courses can be selected from any College of Arts and Science
courses that are especially pertinent to the discipline of management.
1. ECN 102: Macroeconomics
2. Any two courses from the following areas:
Economics (MAXIMUM OF ONE COURSE FROM THIS SECTION)
ECN 322 International Macroeconomics
ECN 370 Economic Development
ECN 470 (THE373) Ethical Values in the Marketplace
ECN 380 Managerial Economics
ECN 360 Industrial Organization
Political Science
POL 111 Introduction to American Government and Politics
POL 113 Introduction to Comparative Politics
POL 302 Modern Political Thought
POL 303 American Political Thought
POL 315 Government and Business
POL 352 Political Economy of Booms and Busts
POL 357 Ethics and Globalization
Psychology
PSY 100 Introductory Psychology
PSY 200 Personality
PSY123 Psychology of Men and Women
PSY 212 Multicultural Psychology
PSY 230 Social Psychology
PSY 235 Psychology of Gender
Sociology
SOC 101 Introductory Sociology
SOC 102 Social Problems
SOC 363 Philadelphia: In Black and White
8
SOC208 Sociology of Gender
SOC 211 Classical Sociological Theory
SOC312 Social Research Methods (with lab, 4 cr.)
SOC 335 Classes and Power in the United States
SOC 262 White Collar Crime
Interdisciplinary Courses
IHS 346: Administration of Health Care and Public Health
English
ENG 206 Rhetoric in Modern Practice
ENG 263 Writing for Organizations
PLEASE NOTE: The list of approved courses will be revised in the future as appropriate.
9
Appendix D
Saint Joseph’s University
Haub School of Business
Program Review
Management Department/Program
TEAM VISIT REPORT
Statement of Team Recommendation
(Insert team's recommendation based on the following three criteria)
1. Assessment of overall high quality,
2. Continuous improvement environment, and
3. Ability of the program to achieve desired outcomes.
We have not included any material here because this section seems intended for an AACSB type
Recommendation. Our report answers the rest of the Template’s questions.
I.
Identification of Areas That Should be Addressed in the Future. Recommendations
are as follows:
A. Curriculum—Review required courses for management major. Consider
instituting a required HR course. This would not only make great sense for a school
that has an MS in HR, but it is also probably the norm for the majority of
management majors in AACSB schools. The areas studied in HR are becoming
increasingly important for managers in the 21st century. One consideration might be
that the Organizational Perspectives course could be made an elective or could be
revamped somewhat to spend less time on the history of management and unions
while using the time freed up to focus more on stakeholder vs shareholder
considerations or to bring in more HR topics through the vehicle of this course. The
Business core OB course might also be re-examined to see if it could be deemed
sufficient to cover organizational study needs in the major, thus freeing up the space
for an entire course in HR. The consulting course might also become an elective for
the purpose of freeing up space; at a minimum, it may need to be re-packaged to
increase perceived relevance on the part of the students. In reality, we are only
encouraging a detailed review of the major because of (a) the management
department’s own concern about student perception as reflected in the self-study,
and (b) the reality that it seems to be missing a crucial component that the majority
of management majors across the country contain—formal study of HR.
B. Internships-- Consider emphasizing the internship program more, too. Students
report the need for better linkages between theory and practice, and a more
extensive internship program would help answer their need. Some schools give
small stipends to internship faculty advisors—say $250 per internship—as
recognition that having an intern requires extra faculty effort. It also helps students
bond to individual faculty members and increases their enthusiasm for the school
10
and the major. Current deterrents to student election of internships in addition to
possible lack of faculty enthusiasm in sponsoring them include lack of clear student
knowledge about them as well as whether they can be paid coupled with the thought
of a weekly diary and a 15 page paper that must be done. SJU may be competitively
disadvantaging itself vis a vis other business schools by not better communicating to
students that field sponsor organizations are allowed to pay interns if they so wish;
in our discussion with students, many did not realize this.. They thought it was only
the co-op program that allowed pay and for whatever reasons, they did not wish to
get involved with the co-op program. We also think an internship can be
academically sound with slightly less onerous requirements of, perhaps, a 10 page
analytical (not merely a history of the internship) paper and a journal that should
be kept available for inspection but need not be handed in. We also have seen
internship programs at other institutions that have benefited from administrative
assistance from the career planning and placement office or a stand-alone
internship office. Faculty and Haub administrators should not have to bear the
entire brunt of recruiting field intern sponsors and attending to the necessary
paperwork to administer them in a continuous improvement environment. See
section II-H for additional discussion.
C. Student involvement—Work harder as a department on valuing management
majors and helping them see career possibilities and feel good about their major;
take the lead in giving guidance to student clubs such as the management club
rather than leaving it mostly to students to set the agenda. Alternatively, consider
setting up a SHRM-focused club. SHRM is very anxious to help out such clubs.
D. Rearrange/lessen the workload for the Chair with the help of Dean and
department members and possibly grad assistants and work study students. The
Department might help the Chair to identify best areas for more delegation.
E. Investigate the viability of improving physical spaces for student breakout
groups and Marie’s office.
F. Re-examine continuous improvement strategies around evaluation of learning
outcomes and program rather than course assessment. Use of Bloom’s Taxonomy as
a tool central to the AOL process presents problems and merits reconsideration, as
suggested in section II-F below.
G. Advising system—Some parts of the advising system seemed ripe for
reassessment to us. For example, it was unclear whether new management faculty
hires had much in the way of advising responsibilities. In our experience, giving
them important advising duties helps socialize them to a school and helps distribute
the load on the faculty, their need to undertake a productive research program and
gain tenure notwithstanding. Additionally, while in an ideal world the chair might
meet with every new major in an advising capacity, it is not clear if that luxury is
affordable within the current SJU model. Perhaps a suitable alternative to such a
taxing process can be found. Finally, it was not clear from our brief study whether
11
SJU management majors can expect to have the same faculty advisor throughout
their years at the institution. If that is so, it is to be commended; in instances where
it may not be happening, it might be considered. We realize that when faculty
turnover is high, it is not always possible to do this. Students seem to like having an
advisor who comes to know them over their years at the school. It helps build a
brand—the management major.
H. Various faculty development and department development suggestions are also
included in the text of the report following this section.
II.
Relevant Facts and Assessment of Strengths and Weaknesses
A. Strengths—congenial, well-qualified faculty (high AQ, good aggregate ICs); good
faculty esprit de corps; a committed and dedicated chair; an outstanding online advising
program; Dean who wants to be helpful; pride in the school on the part of all
stakeholders
B. Challenges—curriculum for the major could use a retreat; students and faculty alike
think the major needs better definition; students are unclear as to the value of their
consulting courses; an undercurrent of insecurity seems to exist among students vis a vis
other SJU business school majors which seem to have more identity and better chance
of employability; there is a perceived need for better connection with real world practice
for majors among students; HR is missing as a requirement in major; AOL should
revolve more around outcomes rather than goals; physical space in office is in need of
rearrangement/enhancement; classrooms could have more movable furniture and/or
breakout rooms to facilitate students working in small groups; more faculty involvement
with student clubs or groups would help gain student commitment to the major; more
diversity (especially Latino) would be a plus; International Business major—only major
without a department--could use more commitment from faculty and administrators;
chair could consider more delegation and could use either help or more time for her
duties.
C. Opportunities—SJU management majors do not lack for motivation; they are generally
good students and interested in ethical approaches to business; they want to become
more committed to their major as they observe the Food Marketing, Marketing, and
Pharmaceutical Marketing majors to whom they most often compare themselves, to be
having more fun; SJU has an excellent reputation as a Jesuit northeastern university in
the top ten of northeast regional universities; SJU students are proud of their school; SJU
alumni are committed to their alma mater and are great resources with even more
potential than is currently being actualized; a tradition of fine basketball has helped give
SJU a national reputation.
D. Threats—threats are usually thought of as external environment challenges, and we
didn’t really study those much; usually they would be in the competitive environment in
the same region (e.g., Villanova’s or LaSalle’s management departments might
12
represent threats; the recession might represent a threat in competing for scarce financial
resources as well as helping students pay for their education in an area of prominent
public colleges and universities), however, we didn’t see SJU at risk as a result of the
recession or losing more students than usual to community or public institutions or to
peer competition; faculty recruitment might have been an issue of the recent past but did
not look like one to us in the present; some faculty chairs are under-funded but that did
not seem a major threat at the moment; possible lack of funds to help endow the chairs,
or to provide help for department chairs, or to fund desired physical environment
enhancements might be considered a threat
E. Instructional resources and responsibilities—It seems that the management faculty
has more than enough human capital to carry out its duties; we are not sure if there are
enough IT resources, but there seemed to be; classroom resources could be more
conducive to breaking students into teams, so that could be a present shortcoming; it
seemed that not very much was expected of non-tenured tenure track faculty in the way
of service and advising, and perhaps that is something that could be looked at, especially
inasmuch as such faculty are in greater numbers than ever within the department with
the number of recent and anticipated new hires. It is our understanding that SJU already
allows for a sabbatical after 3 years as well as a lesser schedule and advising
responsibility for junior non-tenured faculty. Perhaps with good hires, they could be
given more of the normal responsibilities of a faculty member. It has been our
observation that newly hired faculty can bring a lot of energy to student advising and
certain committee responsibilities. If they are hired in with a publication or a couple of
peer-reviewed presentations already—increasingly the case in an era of greater attention
to doctoral consortia (62 attended the Eastern Academy’s doctoral and junior faculty
consortium this year, and an additional 40-plus attended the works-in-progress sessions
at which senior faculty helped juniors with their prospective publications)—then we can
expect them to become more academically socialized, and faster. In fact, many of them
have spent 10 or more of their last two decades at a college or university. They can do
more than we give them credit for! Additionally, we sometimes forget that we are
getting them used to a reduced level of responsibility that is not good for them to get too
habituated to.
F. Assurance of Learning/Assessment—We realize that the AOL program may well be
dictated by Haub administration. However, in that we are being asked to comment on it,
we will do so. We saw evidence that individual course performance evaluations were
being administered and that they were being discussed and serving as important data for
the continuous improvement process. We did not see any evidence that entire programs
(e.g., major, MBA degree, etc.) were being evaluated for student performance and
achievement of program objectives, though this may be in process. Bloom’s Taxonomy
is in use as a tool to help assure learning, however, it is a dated approach that has been
under the microscope for lack of empirical validation. in scholarly circles; additionally,
it has trouble prioritizing (e.g., some facts are important to know, others are less
important to know, but use of the taxonomy often blurs the differences by focusing on
the idea that knowing facts is not as important as “analyzing” or “synthesizing”);
perhaps even more important, it doesn’t focus our attention on the importance of
13
measuring outcomes and performance from an objective point of view. A systemic AOL
system might involve faculty members measuring the work products of each others’
students using program (rather than course) learning rubrics all had decided on in
advance. Many business schools have begun developing far more sophisticated AOL
programs that are now funded by summer monies dedicated to pedagogical
measurement rather than individual research alone.
G. Students—It is hard to draw conclusions about students based on talking to only 15 or
so of them for an hour. However, the 15 we did get a chance to speak with included
some student leaders and some very outspoken and dynamic representatives of the SJU
Haub management student community. They were thirsting for more faculty leadership
within the management department for their club. They compared themselves to the
entrepreneurship club and to the Food Marketing and Marketing clubs, and thought, why
not us? In leadership terms, they need initiation of structure within their number rather
than being encouraged to self-organize. They also mentioned that they saw the
affiliations other clubs had as a plus. (SHRM, anyone?) In fact, other majors seem to
market themselves even on the hallway walls, and they were feeling a bit marginalized
and out-organized by these clubs, but they looked and talked as if they longed for some
of what those clubs had. They are one dynamic advisor away from being just as active as
their Haub brethren in other clubs. We have seen new faculty hires made with
management club advisorship as a key requirement of the job, so this may be a way to
enhance faculty leadership within the club.
Students also need the meaning of a management major better framed for them.
Increased activities around the successes of management major alumni might help here.
In fact, the management major is the most closely aligned to the overall mission of SJU
in terms of its eclectic approach, its inclusion of the liberal arts in the study and practice
of business, and the premium it places on communication and ethics, all concepts
celebrated in the SJU mission statement. If a systematic program to manage the meaning
of the management major itself were instituted, it might go a long way to increasing both
the stature of the department and students’ pride in their major.
Finally, the students we spoke with had some questions about the specifics of their
curriculum. They did not have a clear understanding of the value of a consulting course
as a capstone course in their major. None or few of them wanted to be consultants, and
apparently there are no actual real-life business consultations as a part of the curriculum,
something they brought up as potentially valuable. They also were not clear on the value
of studying consulting if one wanted to learn to be a good manager. Either that needs to
be made clearer to them or they risk spending the semester partly lost as they ponder the
significance of the course. At the same time, none or few of them had more than a
sketchy idea of what HR consisted of or what one might study in HR. For a school that
offers a Masters that is HR-based, it seems ironic that the undergraduates should have
studied HR matters so little. Only 2 or 3 had taken intro HR, and one of those had done
so at the school s/he had transferred in from. This seemed like a major soft spot in the
management curriculum. All of us on the team repeatedly spoke to each other of what
seemed like a hole in the major in this area. Most of us were much more familiar with
14
management majors that had HR as a required course, and even required an HR course
in sister majors like Sport Management, Hospitality and Leisure Studies, and General
Business. In today’s world, if managers do not have a clear idea of how to hire, promote,
terminate, train, evaluate, and compensate their own employees, or how to assure
workplace compliance on a number of fronts, they are putting the survival of their
organization at risk. Asking one business law course to cover contracts as well as labor
law is also a bit of a stretch in an increasingly litigious world.
The good news is that the management majors seem anxious for more to do that is
connected with their major. They have the SJU spirit in their bones. It just needs a little
additional coaxing to rise to the surface.
H. Curriculum/Program(s) (undergraduate and graduate [if applicable] )—In addition to
the comments in the section above that relate to curriculum, we have a few other
comments. In our experience, the SJU internship program is under-developed.
Management majors indicated they were unclear on what a management major does
following graduation, on what their professional opportunities might be. And they were
unsure of what industry they might go into. When asked why they did not explore the
co-op opportunities available to them, they seemed to think of co-op students as
different from themselves. They apparently erroneously believed Haub or SJU do not
approve of allowing students to be paid in 3 or more credit student internships. They
also think that the required 15 page paper and diary are onerous requirements. Perhaps
they could be encouraged to keep a private diary or journal and they could be required to
meet every 2 or 3 weeks with the faculty advisor as well as writing a more manageable
yet still analytical paper, say a 10 page paper that must analyze the experience, not just
record it. In some majors around academia, internships are a required course and pay is
optional, if you can get it. This might make the internship more appealing to the students
and provide them with an opportunity to see if a particular career seemed suited to them
or not. Finally, one aspect of the internship that is much overlooked is the amount of talk
that goes on among students who are interning about their experience. This in itself is a
valuable part of the experience that helps supply answers to the inevitable question most
management majors everywhere have: “What can a management major do, anyway?”
An intriguing resource on internships is Professor Douglas K. Reed at University of
Pittsburgh at Johnstown (dougreed@pitt.edu) . He recently made a presentation at
OBTC 2009 entitled “ Internship Program: How to provide real world application of
organizational behavior theory (showcasing the start-up and sustained success of a seven
year effort).” The abstract stated: “The session shares the successful start-up and growth
of the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown’s Management Internship Program. MIP
gives students an experiential learning opportunity… to apply "theory" in the dynamic
environment of an organization. Through the participating host companies, students
achieve professional work experience the mentored by managerial practitioners and
faculty. Internship = “Real World” Work Experience = Career Opportunities
The session will be a short overview the MIP seven year history, results/benefits
followed by a Question / Answer (open dialogue) among participants currently involved
in internship programs or interested in developing a program.” He is an excellent nearby
15
resource for SJU to gain ideas for improving its internship program and providing
management students with a good experiential answer to “What can a management
major do, anyway?”
We were also impressed with the idea of an ethics center. Unfortunately, David
Steingard was on sabbatical, but his CV as well as his known energy seem a real asset to
the department. The ethics center provides a value-added element, even a bit of a
potential branding to the management department. It’s not quite as exciting as a Trading
Room is to Finance, but maybe the two could increase their collaboration! Given the
ethical and CSR challenges in today’s business environment, it seems that there is a
world of potential for the ethics center to be extensively involved within the curriculum
and the realm of the management department.
MBA Program—We did not speak with any MBA students, but we can comment on the
curriculum. The SJU MBA curriculum for the part-time program covers all the areas it
should within an MBA program. Specifically, organizational structure and design are
covered in MBA 3315 and project management and team leadership skills are covered
in MBA 4005 at the Foundation level. These are key areas of coverage required of any
management department in helping fulfill MBA program goals and objectives. We
especially applaud the non-waivability of MBA 4005. At the Core level, MBA 4535
apparently proceeds from the empowerment movement or the 1990’s and brings
students up to date to the human capital and knowledge management approaches of the
last decade. Valuing human capital is an important concept for all students. A second
Core course, MBA 4515, focuses on stakeholder theory and social responsibility. This
course is squarely in keeping with the SJU mission in its emphasis on community and
non-profit organization contact. Small businesses are also at the center of this course in
that students evidently work with them, too. Ethics and social responsibility are clearly
important to SJU’s Jesuitical mission, as is helping, so this kind of required course is
also to be applauded. The Global Business Strategy and Strategic Management in
Health Care represent expected capstone courses in the program, depending on whether
the student is following a general program or a health care one. Electives include many
important areas such as leadership, compensation, negotiation, change management, etc.
There is a Managing Diversity in the Workforce elective and several HR electives, and
we hope and expect that diversity study and important HR concepts are also significant
in at least one if not all of the Core and Foundation management courses as well.
Overall, the curriculum seems well thought out, and it only remains for the faculty to
validate accomplishment of programmatic objectives through a sound AOL process.
I. Faculty Qualifications—We were impressed with the level of AQ qualifications that
the SJU management department presented. There are 18 listed as AQ and 3 listed as
PQ professors on the faculty of 21 names for which we were given data by the Dean.
Three of the AQ are also listed as PQ. Based on the CV’s presented to us, one of those
listed as PQ would probably not qualify as PQ under current AACSB standards, and one
listed as AQ would probably not qualify as AQ or PQ.
16
Ten of the faculty are currently listed as members of the Academy of Management,
which is a good majority of the department’s AQ members, especially when it is
considered that business law professors quite naturally attend their own conferences..
Ten faculty have made 18 Academy presentations from 2004-2009. No faculty are listed
as members of the Eastern Academy of Management in 2008, which is surprising.
Virtually all AACSB schools have at least one and usually many more members of the
Eastern Academy, which is often held in Philadelphia (it was in New Brunswick, NJ in
2007 with one SJU faculty member presenting and in Washington, DC in 2008 with no
SJU faculty attending). None went on the EAM International conference in Amsterdam,
either. In general, SJU management faculty do not seem to attend conferences to a high
degree.
We were not presented with teaching evaluations or evidence so we cannot comment on
teaching qualifications.
J. Intellectual contributions –We begin with the caveat that the materials we were given
to help analyze the IC’s for the faculty may not be all up to date. That said, the overall
number of IC’s within the department seem good for the department, though not
exceptional. Among 18 listed as AQ, 223 IC’s are listed, for an average of 12.4 per AQlisted faculty member. Six have 6 or fewer IC’s from 2004-2009. All but one faculty
member listed as AQ have at least one peer-reviewed journal publication in the past five
years, with 14 of the 18 at more than one. Two of the three with one publication have
16 and 17 IC’s, respectively. On the questionable side, one of the faculty listed as AQ
has no journal publications (and only 3 total IC’s) and one of the ones with one
publication has only 2 other intellectual contributions Based on the CV’s available to
us, the one listed AQ with no peer-reviewed journal publications would probably not be
AQ under present AACSB standards. The one with 3 total IC’s is also probably too light
on IC’s to be considered AQ after 2009. Probably neither would qualify as PQ under
current AACSB guidelines. The top 9 department producers have between 13 and 25
IC’s. There was no readily seen correlation between date of hire and number of IC’s,
and only 2 members hired since 2002 had fewer than 8 IC’s.
It is difficult to assess quality of the IC’s, but many of them are in well-respected
journals, some are conference presentations and/or proceedings (though a surprising
number of these were listed as “accepted” right next to later ones listed as “presented”)
and some are textbooks or other kinds of books, which are not normally considered
“peer-reviewed” (though they usually are!) There is a nice sprinkling of best papers as
well. There are not many “first tier journal” publications but all the peer-reviewed
journals mentioned seemed likely listed in Cabell’s, a frequently found standard in use.
III.
Commendations of Strengths, Innovations, and Unique Features
A.
Online Advising Program—It’s not that we have never seen attempts to migrate
an advising system to an online Blackboard type of site, but the one pioneered by
Ken Weidner for SJU management majors could easily become a model for the
whole university. It is also more sophisticated than other ones we’ve seen.
17
B.
Tenure and Promotion Guidelines—The guidelines for tenure and promotion
written by the management department under the leadership of the chair, Elizabeth
Doherty are refreshingly clear and important for the setting of expectations not just
for the tenure and promotion applicants, but also for the peer review committee and
other entities involved.
C.
Dedication of the Chair—The level of dedication of the department chair,
Elizabeth Doherty, is very unusual. A dedicated chair can make a department
better, and it is our sense that Elizabeth has done just that. On the other hand, we
suggest that the Dean figure out a way to help her continue this dedicated
performance for the good of a very large department, but we also suggest that the
department meet to give her recommendations on how she can delegate some of the
tasks that could be accomplished by department members or grad assistants or other
members of the Haub community with the expectation of success.
D.
Collegiality of the Department—This department seems very collegial based on
our brief visit. Credit must go to the leadership on all levels as well as every
member.
E.
III.
MBA and Executive MBA Curricula—These curricula not only cover all the
requisite MBA areas of study, but they also match nicely with the SJU mission
statement around such important elements as ethics, social responsibility,
communication, and community involvement, as mentioned earlier. The
management department’s courses seem to be at the heart of the program, and the
department should be commended for its contribution.
Opportunities for Improvement Relative to AACSB Standards
A.
Strategic Planning—A department retreat centered around curriculum in the
morning and departmental processes including improved management of the
meaning and branding of the management major in the afternoon, or alternatively
two days or half-days, might be very profitable. It would be good to have the SJU
mission statement posted on the wall during the retreat; maybe SJU university
funds would be available to upgrade such a retreat.
B.
Faculty Qualifications—If there were few mistakes or omissions on the CV’s, we
could suggest the following:
1.
For non-tenured and junior faculty: subsidized attendance at a conference
such as the Eastern Academy that focuses on doctoral and junior faculty
consortia as well as works in progress and reviewing workshops along with
the standard conference fare of presenting papers.
18
For all other faculty, elimination of the apparent rule that one must be a first
author to be funded to go to a conference. This rule deters faculty from
getting involved in putting on conferences, becoming officers, being
discussants or track chairs as well as being second authors. Low attendance
at such meetings keeps faculty from mixing with their academic peers
nationally or regionally to learn best practices and to develop joint projects.
It does not have a positive effect on department professional development.
3.
Encourage attendance at occasional AACSB conferences. They are replete
with helpful workshops, though there are also very controversial ones. But at
least it keeps us up and participating on current issues.
C.
Curriculum/Assurance of Learning—As mentioned above, AACSB regional
conferences can be a big help in learning more about AOL. Members who attend,
on the Dean’s budget of course, can come back and report what they have learned
at Brown Bag or department meetings. Although AOL processes in place in
AACSB business schools often begin as top-down requirements, in many schools
department members get quite involved in program goal assessment, often
constructing details of such assessments and helping continuously improve the
AOL process itself within the entire school.
D.
Intellectual Contributions—Research I schools and some others have instituted
journal ranking systems to help evaluate ICs among faculty members. AACSB has
not required such rankings, and to do so for a school that has important teaching and
community service standards within its mission would seem at cross purposes to the
central AACSB requirement that a school’s research must match its mission. Most
tier-one journals focus squarely on basic research rather than pedagogical or
practice-oriented research. The management department should probably begin to
articulate a departmental position on this subject, especially given the most recent
AACSB document published on the importance of research impact. (Final Report of
the AACSB International Impact of Research Task Force, 2008). The most
important thing is to encourage IC’s of all sorts that meet SJU mission concepts
around Jesuitical and community help ideals and that have “impact.” These could
be encouraged with whatever enticements might make sense, or just because being
in accord with the mission is helpful in relationship to AACSB or even
organizational process standards. AACSB accrediting teams would undoubtedly
welcome any systems in place to support evidence of SJU research impact.
E.
IV.
2.
Other—Improvements within the International Business program and with its
integration with the management department as well as with the MSHRM
program are also quite desirable and will be covered separately in the IB and
MSHRM reports.
Effective Practices—In addition to the unique and commendable practices already
mentioned in Section III above, we were impressed with the clear guidance for tenure and
promotion candidates as well as the mentoring program set up for new hires.
19
V.
Consultative Feedback to Achieve or Enhance Overall High Quality and the
Expectation of Continuous Improvement (while not part of the program review, these
recommendations are provided in the spirit of continuous improvement)
To enhance the value of the Program Review process, the Review Team is encouraged to
provide consultative guidance relevant to the expectation of continuous improvement. This
consultative advice is provided to assist the applicant and is considered separate from the
program recommendation as stated above. The following suggestions are provided with this
in mind.
(Follow with consultative advice)
With regard to continuous improvement, we suggest that some faculty research what
other schools are doing in connection with assurance of learning program reviews. See
for example, An assurance of learning success model: toward closing the feedback loop
by Bonita L Betters-Reed, Mindell Reiss Nitkin and Susan D Sampson in Organization
Management Journal, Volume 5(4), Winter 2008 : 224-240. This article has an excellent
bibliography in it as well. Schools in general are moving more toward connecting the
goals or mission of a program tightly to program learning assurance rubrics that they can
then use objective outside or even inside evaluators to assess. Many faculty are
evaluating student work in courses other than their own over the summer against these
rubrics. Business people from the business community and faculty from other
departments are also enlisted in these evaluation efforts. The days of looking only at
student evaluations and student inventories on what they think seem to have passed.
AACSB regional conferences as well as national assessment conferences have begun to
host workshops and presentations from the best AOL practices of schools similar to SJU
on a regular basis. SJU management faculty could probably get administrative funds to
attend some of these workshops and share the results with the department.
VI.
Summary of Peer Review Visit—We would like to take this opportunity to thank
Professor Elizabeth Doherty, current Chair of the Management Department, for her
extremely high level of cooperation and her willingness to share so much of her time and
of the management department’s materials with us. We would also like to thank Professor
Bill McDevitt for his dedication in putting together such a comprehensive summary of
the departmental self study report and providing us with background from his vantage
point as past department chair.
A. Team members—William Ferris, Professor of Management, Western New England
College; Roger Kashlak, Professor and Senior Associate Dean of Management and
International Business, Loyola College in Maryland; Michael Kavanagh, Professor
Emeritus of Management, SUNY Albany.
B. Visit dates—May 4-5, 2009
20
C. List of documents and materials used in the Review Process—Departmental SelfStudy Report, Department of Management, January 15, 2009 as well as CV’s of all
faculty as provided by the Dean of the Haub School of Business
D. On-site schedule—as provided by the Management Department; included meetings
with undergraduate management majors, an MS in HR grad student, and
international business undergraduates, management department faculty, chair, Dean
of the Haub School, Provost, Vice-President of Development, and department
administrative assistant
E. Brief summary of facts about the program
1. List of disciplinary programs reviewed: undergraduate, masters.—Management
major, International Business major, MBAs, MS in HR
2. Number of undergraduate, and master’s students enrolled and degrees granted
for the self-evaluation year—2400 undergraduates, 975 graduate students
21