The institutionalisation of accreditations An exploratory case study of Dutch business schools

Master Thesis

Drs. Liesbeth Nederlof Student number 10684557 29/06/2015 Executive Programme in Management Studies - Strategy Track Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam Supervisor: Dr. Marten Stienstra

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student Liesbeth Nederlof who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document. I declare that the text and the work presented is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and in its references have been used to creating it. The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision and completion of the work, not for the contents. Signature

Logo´s cover page retrieved from: http://www.nvao.net/, https://www.efmd.org/, http://www.aacsb.edu/ and http://www.mbaworld.com/ at 5-1- 2015 List of frequently used terms and abbreviations

AACSB = Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, that accredits whole universities. ABS = Amsterdam Business School Accreditation = a formal, published statement regarding quality of an institution or programme, following a cyclical evaluation based on agreed standards. AMBA = Association of MBAs. AMBA accredits MBA, DBA and MBM programmes. Assurances of learning = cycle with objectives, programme, exams, results, improvements, objectives, etc. It is a requirement of the AACSB accreditation. Autonomy = self-government of institutions for higher education or self-managed positions of faculty Autonomy in teaching = to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study. EFMD = European Foundation for Management Development EPAS = an international programme accreditation system operated by EFMD. EQUIS = business school accreditation from EFMD the European, Quality Improvement Scheme. EQUIS is a voluntary accreditation for whole business schools. e-learning = e-learning is electronic learning, this means using a computer to deliver part, or all of a course whether it's in a school, part of your mandatory business training or a full distance learning course. Entrepreneurship = the activities of actors who have interest in particular institutional arrangements and who leverage resources to create new institutions or transform existing ones. FEM = Faculty of Economics and Management HU HU = Hogeschool Utrecht, University of Applied Sciences IBMS = International Business & Management Studies, a programme in the FEM, HU Incremental innovation = step by step innovation, improving and transforming business schools ISO 9001 = International Organization for Standardization, 9001 is an international hallmark for quality of an organization. MBA = Master of Business Administration, a programme in the ABS, UvA and in the SBE, MU MU = Maastricht University NVAO = Dutch – Flemish accreditation organization, Nederlands-Vlaamse Accreditatieorganisatie, Radical innovation = disruptive innovation, creating new business schools RSM = Rotterdam School of Management SBE = School of Business and Economics, MU UvA = University of Amsterdam

i

Summary

To enhance the understanding on business schools’ compliance with accreditations, a multiple case study approach has been followed to ground a research model in institutional theory. Emerging finding give an answer to the following research questions: How have accreditations been institutionalised in Dutch business schools over time? What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers and on entrepreneurship in business schools?

Three exploratory case studies have been conducted at three business schools: Faculty of Economics and Management (FEM), Hogeschool Utrecht (HU), University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam

Business School (ABS), University of Amsterdam (UvA), and School of Business and Economics

(SBE), Maastricht University (MU). In total, 17 interviews were held. In addition, a document analysis was conducted to triangulate interview results.

On the antecedents part of the model, results indicate that all types of coercive, mimetic, and normative pressures are present, but their influence depends on the type of accreditation involved, either national or international

For national accreditations, coercive pressure exerted by the government Dutch/Flemish accreditation organization is the strongest. External normative pressures, exerted from partner universities, potential students, and potential staff, have the greatest impact on international accreditations.

Although mimetic pressures play a role with regard to reputation, distinctiveness, and the desire to achieve international triple-crown accreditation, mimetic pressure do not influence national accreditations. Moreover, internal normative pressures are present in the form of processes of improvement and management’s intrinsic motivation to acquire accreditations.

On the consequences side of the newly developed research model, the relation between accreditations and autonomy in teaching appears to be a complex one. Lecturers state that in the Dutch – Flemish accreditation organization (NVAO), teachers are free to conduct their classes independently, however, an indirect relationship exists, as NVAO standards are incorporated in the policy of the ii programme or business school. If a lecturer wants to deviate from norms in an appropriate manner, this is accepted as long as the end qualifications are met. At the same time is argued that teacher autonomy is slightly restricted, as the NVAO requirements are more rigorous with respect to examinations and graduation standards.

Finally, this study illustrates an ambiguous relation between accreditations and type of entrepreneurship.On the one hand, incremental innovations are possible, like adjusting the curriculum or didactical methods. As such, accreditations act as a mirror, as the accreditation committee draws attention to the weak aspects of a programme. This information can then be used to continuously improve a programme. On the other hand, no radical innovations took place in two out of three business schools after accreditations had been implemented. Radical innovations do occur, but completely independent of accreditations, without guidelines and limitations. Accreditation is only an internal quality check while innovations bring something entirely new to the institutions. In one case, radical innovations were recognized in response to certain international accreditations.

Broader implications suggest that the institutionalization of accreditations in business schools follows a process similar to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) norms. When the first business school acquired international accreditations, other business schools strived to follow.

Although managers are aware that business schools may end up looking all the same, not having suitable accreditations would signal a questionable level of professionalism.

Key words: institutional pressures - accreditation - business schools - employees - autonomy - entrepreneurship

iii

Preface

My interest and enthusiasm for this subject is deeply rooted in my experience of working in a business school environment. I have spent a considerable amount of time organising internal audits at the

Faculty of Economics and Management at Hogeschool, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences. I further participate in internal audits at the Hogeschool Utrecht, as a member of several audit teams, and I give lectures in quality management. The area studied in this thesis is crucial to the continuous development of knowledge institutions like business schools.

I would like to express my warmest thanks to my supervisor Dr. Marten Stienstra for his challenging intellectual support. I would also like to thank all the managers and lectures interviewed for this study for their time and efforts. It was very interesting to talk to so many intelligent people, who could contribute so thoroughly to the puzzle. I enjoyed conducting the interviews, particularly with experienced interviewees who have such an international perspective. I am further indebted to

Maurice Oudejans and Pascale Veenings, with whose help I was able to contact the lecturers and managers of the business schools. Finally, I thank Carla Kalkhoven for peer-reviewing the data analysis, and my children for their patience with their perpetually studying mother.

Generally, I really enjoyed conducting research and writing my thesis. At the Hogeschool Utrecht

University of Applied Sciences, I supervise students during their theses. Following this study, I am certain that I have developed my skills enough to be a better supervisor for them – I did practice what

I preach. In the end, it turned out I was so absorbed by the amount of data I gathered from the interviews that I wanted to disappear underground to analyse everything thoroughly.

Last of all, I enjoyed my master’s degree at the University of Amsterdam very much, and strategy was a fascinating track to study. I have learned a lot about theories, structures, and strategies. Moreover, the international perspectives of the lecturers from Germany, Finland, and Canada were a wonderful addition to this study, in terms of their expertise regarding international companies. These speakers, as well as the managers of Carré and of DeLaMar, constitute the apex of this study. These professionals from recognised businesses told interesting stories about their companies and themselves. iv

Table of contents

Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Research topic 2 1.2 Research problem 2 1.3 Research questions and sub questions 4 1.4 Thesis overview 6

Chapter 2 Research methodology 7 2.1 Exploratory case study 7 2.2 Population and sample 8 2.3 Data collection methods 8 2.4 Data analysis methods 10 2.5 Reliability and validity 11

Chapter 3 Main constructs 13 3.1 Accreditations in business schools 13 3.2 Institutional pressures 15 3.3 Autonomy in business schools 17 3.4 Entrepreneurship in business schools 20 3.5 The preliminary research model 22

Chapter 4 Results 24 4.1 Research context of accreditations in European and American business schools 24 4.2 Accreditations in Dutch business schools 27 4.3 Results case analysis IBMS, Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht, University of Applied Sciences 28 4.4 Results case analysis MBA, Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 37 4.5 Results case analysis MBA, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 44 4.6 Cross-case analysis and propositions 50

Chapter 5 Discussion 53 5.1 Discussion of the new research model 53 v

5.2 Theoretical and practical implications 55 5.3 Strengths and limitations 56 5.4 Suggestions for further research 56

Chapter 6 Conclusions 58 6.1 The institutionalisation of accreditations over time in Dutch business schools 58 6.2 The influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers and on 59 entrepreneurship in business schools

References 61

Appendices Appendix 1 Definitions for accreditation 65 Appendix 2 Definitions for autonomy 68 Appendix 3 Definitions for entrepreneurship 70 Appendix 4 The population: a list of public higher education business schools that have business administration programmes 73 Appendix 5 Steps in searching literature and other sources for the literature review 74 Appendix 6 Interview questions linked to sub questions and preliminary propositions 76 Appendix 7 A list of interviewees 78 Appendix 8 Development of interview questions 79 Appendix 9 Interview questions for directors and for lecturers 81 Appendix 10 The development of codes during data analysis 86

Appendix 11 Summaries of interviews IBMS, Faculty for Economics & Management,

Hogeschool Utrecht 88 Appendix 12 Summaries of interviews MBA, Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 96 Appendix 13 Summaries of interviews MBA, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 105 Appendix 14 Results case IBMS, Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht, University of Applied Sciences, 110 Appendix 15 Results case MBA, Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 117 Appendix 16 Results case MBA, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht 124 University Appendix 17 Results cross-case analysis 130 Appendix 18 Accreditations of business schools 135 Appendix 19 Preliminary propositions into propositions 141 Appendix 20 Answers on sub questions 146 vi

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research topic

Business schools presently acquire multiple accreditations. It appears that this has a probable impact on the professionals working at these institutions. Obligatory and voluntary accreditations are becoming more important, as they show that the business schools comply with high quality standards.

Business schools in the Netherlands have been accredited by different accrediting organisations: the

Dutch – Flemish accreditation organization (NVAO), European, Quality Improvement Scheme

(EQUIS), Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), and Association of MBAs (AMBA). These accredit different levels of a university: NVAO and AMBA accredit programmes, EQUIS accredits business schools, and AACSB accredits universities as a whole. Some business schools have double or triple accreditations. Business schools are defined as Schools of

Business and Economics in this thesis.

1.2 Research problem

Institutional theory can be used as a starting point to explain different pressures on business schools to obtain accreditations. Three potential external pressures can be exerted by the surrounding environment: coercive pressure renders institutions subject to the law, punishment follows if the institute does not comply; mimetic pressure is voluntary, however, it comes about when other institutes obtain accreditations; and normative pressure, which is also voluntary, in the norms and values of the institutes, in professionalisation, in the culture, in trainings (Dimaggio and Powell, 1983;

Scott, 2001; Özen and Küskü, 2009). These pressures are examined in this thesis.

When institutional theory is applied on accreditations of business schools in the Netherlands, it reveals that coercive pressure comes from the NVAO, the national accreditation agency. Mimetic pressure arises from the other competitive business schools, while normative pressure stems from norms in the business administration profession. Responses to these pressures can vary from reactive to pro-active strategies; and from conforming to the regulations of the NVAO and the requirements of

1 rankings, to the voluntary acquisition of international accreditations, like EQUIS, AACSB, and

AMBA. It appears that accreditations have not been studied in the context of institutional pressures thus far. How could institutional pressures lead to acquisition of accreditations, and how do accreditations influence autonomy and entrepreneurship constitute the theoretical research gaps. Is this similar to or different from other institutional practices or industries?

Moreover, compliance research depends on the institutional framework as a lens for understanding the dynamics of compliance in national and international contexts (Edelman and Suchman, 1997, as cited by Appari et al, 2009). The primary contribution of this study is the novel application of institutional theory to explain the variability of institutional compliance with accreditations.

The institutional perspective suggests that organisations seek accreditation due to mimetic pressure or, in other words, the need to conform to institutional and market pressures within their business environments. (Scott, 2001; DiMaggio & Powel, 1983). According to Clement and Stevens (1989), one of the positive features of higher education teaching faculties is their autonomy in research and education. As institutional diversity increases and as institutions become more flexible, innovative, and autonomous, no single set of criteria can assess the performance of all institutions in a single nation. (DeWit, 2006, as cited by Lewis et al., 2007). This leads to the question: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of employees? Nigsch and Schenker-Wicki (2013) argue that many scholars view accreditations as a restriction of academic freedom , a bureaucratic process, and that they obstruct innovation and adaptation. As such, the standards of accreditations can be considered to conflict with the autonomy of the employees in education and research. According to Harvey (2007), there is a tension between academic priorities and professional ones. Therefore, accrediting agencies and academics struggle for power.

Furthermore, Bell and Taylor (2006) investigated how academics construct identities in relation to quality processes. Barnett (2003) in Bell and Taylor (2006) states, “quality in higher education is now seen and felt as external, as alien and as separate”. In lieu of this perspective, this thesis can be seen as a contribution to the investigation of accreditations of business schools from the institutional perspective.

2

Moreover, the head of postgraduate education, at the School of Business and Economics (SBE),

Maastricht University (MU), asked for a measurement of the impact of accreditations on the ability to innovate or to adopt critical approaches, or to pursue unconventional avenues of thought. I thus include the construct ‘entrepreneurship’ in my research questions., as institutional entrepreneurship also fits well in institutional theory (Garud, Hardey, and Maguire, 2007). Institutional entrepreneurs are individuals that must break with existing rules and practices associated with the dominant rationales, and institutionalise the alternative rules, practices, or rationales they are championing

(Garud and Karnoe, 2001, Battilana, 2006, as cited by Garud, Hardey, and Maguire, 2007). Levy and

Scully (2007), in Garud, Hardey, and Maguire (2007) describe these institutional entrepreneurs as modern princes or collective agents, who organise and strategise counter-hegemonic challenges.

The concept of entrepreneurship further raises several more questions: How do business schools find new ways to innovate or to create entrepreneurship in response to accreditations? Does this increase or decrease the autonomy of lecturers? Is it possible to create entrepreneurship while simultaneously conforming to the three above mentioned forces, which possibly thwart autonomy? Is this a paradox?

Garud, Hardey, and Maguire (2007) articulated this problem as follows: if actors are embedded in an institutional field and subject to regulative, normative, and cognitive processes that structure their cognitions, define their interests and produce their identities (Friedland and Alford, 1991; Clemens and Cook, 1999, as cited by Garud, Hardey, & Maguire (2007)), how are they able to envision new practices and then convince others to adopt them too? This thesis strives to gain and offer greater insight into this contentious issue.

1.3 Research questions and sub questions

This paper is centred on the following research questions:

1. How have accreditations been institutionalised in Dutch business schools over time?

2. What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers and on entrepreneurship

in business schools?

3

Three constructs in the research questions require further clarification, namely accreditation, autonomy, and entrepreneurship.

Following Helmig et al. (2010), accreditation is defined as “a formal, published statement regarding quality of an institution or programme, following a cyclical evaluation based on agreed standards”.

In appendix 1, several definitions of accreditation are given, while their differences are explained.

This study further defines autonomy as the self-governance of institutions of higher education

(Perkins, 1978, cited by Albornoz, 1991), or self-managed positions of faculty (McPherson &

Schapiro, 1999, as cited by Day and Peluchette, 2009). In appendix 2, more definitions of autonomy are given and differences are explained. Pullin (2004) discusses the academic freedom of a university:

“The university should be free from governmental intervention in the intellectual life of the university.

Four freedoms are essential: to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study.” These all apply to teaching autonomy, which is a further point of research of this thesis. Lambert (2003) concludes that meanings of autonomy and freedom in the business school are multiple and disputed.

Moreover, Maguire, Hardy, and Lawrence (2004) define institutional entrepreneurship as “the activities of actors who have interest in particular institutional arrangements and who leverage resources to create new institutions or transform existing ones.” This study follows this definition of institutional entrepreneurship, while more definitions of entrepreneurship can be found in appendix 3.

The research questions subsequently lead to the following sub-questions:

Q1. What kind of coercive or regulative pressures to obtain accreditations does the government exert on institutions?

Q2. What kind of mimetic or cultural cognitive pressures to obtain accreditations are exerted by other business schools?

Q3. What kind of normative pressures (external and internal) exist to acquire accreditations?

Q4. To what extent do business schools conform to accreditations?

Q5. What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of employees and their teaching?

Q6. What is the influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship in business schools?

4

1.4 Thesis overview

Following the introduction in chapter one, chapter two discusses the research methodology including the multiple case study of selected Dutch business schools. Chapter three then offers an overview of the existing literature regarding the main constructs: accreditations in business schools, institutional pressures, autonomy, and entrepreneurship and provides the preliminary research model. Furthermore, chapter four describes the results of the research context of accreditations in European and American business schools, accreditations in Dutch business schools, and the three within case analyses and the cross case analysis and propositions. A detailed discussion of the new research model, practical implications, strengths and limitations, and suggestions for further research are then given in chapter five. Finally, chapter six offers succinct conclusions, and specifically articulates a response to the research and sub-questions guiding this study.

5

Chapter 2 Research methodology

2.1 Exploratory case study

This paper follows a qualitative methodology and is designed as an exploratory multiple case study.

The units of analysis are the employees, who teach in business schools, and the managers of the programmes. I employ institutional theory to examine the institutional pressures regarding acquisition of accreditations in business schools. To begin with, a preliminary research model was constructed, including preliminary propositions. It demonstrates an interaction between data and theory. In the end, the model was adjusted according to the text and document analysis and following the data analysis of the interviews.

Thus, it was designed inductively: creation of a new model, followed by the building of theory from existing case studies (Eisenhardt, 1989). Eisenhardt (1989) articulates eight steps in his article, which this study’s model is based on. To begin with, the research question had to be defined, and possibly additional a priori constructs, yet this stage does not include either theory or hypotheses. Glaser and

Strauss (1967) further advise against applying a theory at this point in time, and propose using a pet theory instead. Thus, institutional theory is applied as the initial pet theory. At the second stage, cases are selected according to specified population and theoretical sampling. These are rigorously determined and not selected at random. Third, instruments and protocols are crafted, involving multiple data selection methods and qualitative data. The fourth step encompasses entering the field for data collection and analysis, including taking field notes, and flexible and opportunistic data collection methods. The fifth step is the data analysis section and includes the within case analysis and search for patterns in the cross case analysis. Sixth, propositions are established, which involves iterative tabulation for each construct, replication (not sampling), logic across cases, and the search for reasons behind the results of the analysed relationships. At the seventh stage, a discussion of relevant literature is undertaken, including a comparison of the conflicting and similar literatures. At last, closure is reached, while links to the selected theory were established wherever possible.

6

2.2 Population and sample

The population used in this study consists of all public business schools with a business administration programme in the Netherlands. A list of higher education business schools in the

Netherlands that teach business administration is provided in appendix 4. From this population a sample was taken including the following three business schools: the Faculty of Economics and

Management (FEM), Hogeschool Utrecht with a single accreditation, Amsterdam Business School

(ABS), University of Amsterdam (UvA) with double accreditations, and the School of Business and

Economics (SBE), Maastricht University with five accreditations. The sampling rationale was typical

(one or two accreditations) and extreme (five accreditations).

The first case study took place at the Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht.

The employees that were interviewed work in the International Business and Management Studies programme (IBMS). This bachelor programme was chosen as it is one of the few international programmes that can be compared with the Master of Business Administration (MBA) programmes at the Amsterdam Business School (ABS), University of Amsterdam (UvA) and the School of Business and Economics (SBE), Maastricht University (MU).

2.3 Data collection methods In the case study, first, I explored the key constructs in the literature: accreditations in business schools, isomorphism, autonomy, and entrepreneurship. Appendix 5 offers a detailed explanation of the research process using digital libraries of the UvA and the Hogeschool Utrecht.

Second, as the primary data collection method, I conducted interviews with lecturers and managers in three business schools. The interviews were in between open and semi-structured. The interview questions were prepared, but there was room to ask further questions to explore the constructs in- depth. The employees that were interviewed work in the IBMS or MBA programme. The latter is an international programme, which has been accredited and which exists all over the world. IBMS at the

FEM, Hogeschool Utrecht (HU), is also an international programme. The professionals of these three business schools were involved in the accreditations process, so they were well aware of the procedure and standards of accreditations. Both men and women were interviewed for this study, 7 whose jobs entail tasks in either teaching or management. The interviews included questions regarding the effects of accreditations on autonomy and entrepreneurship, and about pressures to obtain accreditations. Lecturers knew more about the effect of accreditations on autonomy, while managers knew more about the institutional pressures to acquire accreditations. Appendix 6 shows how the interview questions are linked to the sub questions and preliminary propositions.

Furthermore, I interviewed lecturers, a project leader and policy advisor for accreditations, and managers from three business schools to gather enough qualitative data. A list of the interviewees is given in appendix 7. These open and semi-structured interviews lasted between 18 and 61 minutes each. Questions were prepared, but there was room for enquiring further to obtain in-depth information. The interviews were conducted in March, April, May, and June 2015. One pilot interview was conducted with one of my managers at my work. Following this, some questions were altered, which is explained in appendix 8. All interviews were conducted in person and in Dutch, except one, which was in English, and another, which was conducted over the telephone. In appendix

9, the interview questions for directors and lecturers are given.

The interviews were recorded with a voice recorder. All interviewees, except the dean and the interviewee on the telephone, received a voucher to buy a book as compensation for their time.

A notebook and smartphone were used to make notes of ad hoc, yet interesting findings during the interviews and during the data analysis. The interviews are available in a file on my computer.

Third, as a data collection method, text and document analysis was employed. Internal documents and websites of the selected business schools and accreditation organisations were examined for data triangulation. Appendix 5 explains how the digital libraries of the UvA and HU were employed in this study. Besides for the case study I used text and document analysis also for the study of the field of business schools in the Netherlands.

8

2.4 Data analysis methods

In the analysis, O’ Dwyer’s (2004) study was used as an example of transparency in the process of data analysis. He gives a detailed and succinct description of how he analysed his data. I tried to do the same by describing thoroughly the different steps of the data analysis.

The analytic strategy used relies on theoretical propositions. In the beginning, some preliminary propositions were made, which reflected the research questions, and the literature review. The objectives and design of the multiple case study were based on these propositions. The propositions shaped the data collection plan and helped establish analytic priorities. The data analysis strategy used in this study was a cycle involving the research questions, the data, the analysis and interpretation of the data, and the conclusions.

Within this general strategy, analytical techniques were applied, such as pattern matching, chronological sequences from time-series analysis, and cross-case synthesis (Yin, 2014).

This case study is an explanatory study, and the patterns revealed could be related to the constructs.) were analysed. The first two case studies, IBMS (FEM, HU) with NVAO, and MBA (ABS, UvA) with NVAO and EQUIS were expected to yield identical results, which could then be considered to be literal replication. The third case study MBA (SBE, MU) with NVAO, EQUIS, AACSB, AMBA and an accreditation in consortium was expected to yield a result that contrasts with the former two, which could then be considered to be theoretical replication.

Moreover, the chronological sequence focused on the fact that a case study could allow you to trace events over time. This procedure allowed for the investigation of presumed causal events. This technique was then employed for the evaluation of the chronological order of pressures, and the chronological order of obtaining initial international accreditations by business schools.

Finally, a cross-case analysis was applied to explore whether the cases could be replicated or contrasted with each other.

The data were analysed according to the following steps: data condensation, data display, and results.

First, data condensation included that differences and common features between definitions of the key constructs were identified in the literature review (these are further explained in appendices 1, 2,

9 and 3). The interviews were recorded, typed on the computer, and translated into transcripts. The transcripts were then analysed and coded. For an overview of the codes, face appendix 10. From the transcripts I made summaries to put in the appendices 11,12, and 13.

Secondly, for data display of the literature review, tables were constructed with findings from articles about the accreditations, autonomy, and entrepreneurship in business schools. These can be found in appendices 1,2, and 3. Furthermore, tables were constructed to display the information gathered in the interviews. Firstly, the within case analyses of the three separate business schools were executed in appendices 14, 15, and 16. Secondly, a cross case analysis was conducted between the different business schools selected for this study. Tables in appendix 17 present this. Finally, for the text and document analysis, I constructed tables for accreditations generally, and for the accreditations of

Dutch public business schools (in appendix 18), and the accreditations of the specific business schools chosen for this study.

Thirdly, to show the results, for each preliminary proposition, a pattern was identified in the tables.

The results from the interviews were then linked to the results from the text and document analysis for data triangulation. Following this evaluation, the preliminary research model was then scrutinised and adjustments were made accordingly.

2.5 Reliability and validity The reliability relates to the requirement of repeatability of the results. To enhance the reliability, the research questions and the research methods were described in detail. All the steps taken in the methods section were meticulously recorded in a logbook. Similarly, all interviews were voice recorded to ensure the accuracy of the data collected. I kept the analysis in a separate file (case study database), to do the analysis again, if necessary. I went through the analysis, and collected further data. I kept in contact with my supervisor about design and implementation of the research.

Furthermore, peer evaluation helped augment the data collection and data analysis. I further applied data triangulation (interviews and text and document analysis) to answer the research questions. I registered the results systematically (methods of analysis,). The names of the organisations are also

10 mentioned in this study in order to enhance its reliability (Verhoeven, 2010; Gibbert and Ruigrok,

2010).

Different forms of validity are relevant to the methods and analysis of this study. First, it is questioned whether this paper is generally applicable to all universities in the Netherlands. In other words, the external validity or population validity must be scrutinised. For increasing external validity, a cross case analysis, multiple case studies, a rationale for case study selection, and details on the case study context have been provided.

Next, the conceptual or construct validity is evaluated. This questions whether the general context of this case study is applicable. For increasing the construct validity, data triangulation is employed.

Hence, the original interviews were carried out by the author, while a third party conducted a peer review of the transcripts and the draft. Also, a clear chain of evidence is demonstrated in order to enhance construct validity. Thus, it is thoroughly explained how access to data had been achieved, the circumstances of data collection versus actual procedure are evaluated, and how the data analysis procedure is applied.

Finally, internal validity is scrutinised. This raises the following questions: does the analysis measure what it is meant to measure, and how does one measure autonomy and the influence of accreditations on autonomy. To enhance the internal validity of this study, a research framework is applied that is explicitly derived from literature.

To diminish systematic faults, tested instruments and systematic analyses are employed, particularly for note taking and for recording the interviews. Moreover, in the analysis, institutional theory is applied as an initial lens through which to study accreditations. Following this, data triangulation

(interviews, and text and documents in the case studies) is employed to answer the research questions

(Verhoeven, 2010; Gibbert and Ruigrok, 2010).

11

Chapter 3 Main constructs

This chapter elaborates on the main constructs: accreditations in business schools, institutional pressures, autonomy, and entrepreneurship. A description of several definitions of accreditation and what their differences imply are given. In this literature review the research questions are viewed through the theoretical lens of institutional theory. Furthermore, the influence of accreditations on autonomy of employees is discussed, different types of autonomy are introduced and explained. At last entrepreneurship is explained. In appendix 7,8, and 9, summaries of the articles about accreditation in business schools, autonomy, and entrepreneurship are shown.

3.1 Accreditations in business schools Trapnell (2007) argues that AACSB accreditation can be an influential factor in an increasingly competitive, global market for business students and for an increasing number of business programmes. It provides external validation and can be important for students, faculty, and employers.

Also, benefits result from exchange in the international community of business schools when all have

AACSB accreditation. This explanation supports the market power theory: with acquired accreditations, universities demonstrate that they are able to maintain high quality standards

(Montgomery, 1994). Therefore they are able to compete with other universities for prospective students and faculty. Thus, with accreditations, they aim to attract excellent students and employees.

Moreover, Scherer et al. (2005) state that European business schools need accreditation to increase their strategic alliances and exchange programmes. Julian and Ofori-Dankwa (2006) support this with their claim that accreditation provides legitimisation through external constituencies.

A disadvantage of having multiple accreditations are the additional costs of making self-evaluation reports for each agency, different review teams coming to the school, different standards of each accreditation, and different kinds of documentation (Trapnell, 2007). Apart from the efforts and time of the business schools, AACSB and EQUIS accreditation agencies charge a significantly high sum for accreditations. AACSB accreditation fees, from eligibility application through to the initial

12 accreditation visit, are €14.993, while fees for accredited institutions annually are priced at €4.048.1

The total fee for the EQUIS process is €41.275 for a five-year accreditation and €34.925 for a three- year accreditation. For re-accreditation, the costs are €9.525 for three years and €15.875 for five years.2 On the other hand, NVAO accreditations for a programme cost around €10.000 for a six-year accreditation. 3 AMBA accreditation fees consist of the following: initial application priced at €2.343, candidate registration and pre-assessment priced at €5.860, and assessment visit priced at €17.580.4

Furthermore, Harvey (2007) supports the statement that accreditations are expensive and further mentions that accrediting teams sometimes induce money shifts from unaccredited to accredited programmes in their recommendations. Another disadvantage can be that the certification function overwhelms improvement, as the process leads to a public relations document that exaggerates the strengths and hides its weaknesses.

Additionally, Julian and Ofori-Dankwa (2006) argue that accreditation standards increase the chance of poor strategic decision making in turbulent environments, as they rely on four key process characteristics: formalisation, documentation, hard data use, and continuous improvement. Thus, they advocate scenario development, seeking latent needs of customers, real-time and soft data analysis, and double-loop learning. They plead for a need to analyse accreditation and its implication for business schools.

Van Berkel (2000, as cited by Scheele, 2004) observes that by using checklists in accreditations, fundamental relationships between the elements within education are not examined. He advocates a more holistic approach.

Furthermore, Leeuw (2003, as cited by Scheele, 2004) states that evaluation performance can lead to organisational paralysis and can inhibit innovation. He promotes triangulation of data, for example, in combination with mystery guests and unobtrusive measures.

1 http://www.aacsb.edu/en/accreditation/fees/, retrieved 5-1- 2015, Dollars converted to Euros with onlineconversions.org 2 http://www.efmd.org/accreditation-main/equis/equis-fee-structure, retrieved 5-1-2015 3 Interview with Albert Jansen-Schoonhoven (director task force kwaliteit, FEM, Hogeschool Utrecht) at 8-12- 2014 4 http://www.mbaworld.com/en/Accreditation.aspx, retrieved at 17-1-2015, Pounds converted to Euros with onlineconversions.org 13

3.2 Institutional pressures The institutional pressures explain the increase in similarities between business schools. In this isomorphic adaptation, normative pressures are significant. “Professionalization means that employees define conditions and methods of their work to establish a cognitive base and legitimation for their occupational autonomy” (Dimaggio & Powell, 1983). Thus, institutional theory predicts that business schools react the same way due to outside market mechanisms.

Organisations are gradually built through interactions between groups of actors who comprise the organisation’s field. Organisational choices cannot be regarded as isolated from the institutional context (Powel, 1991, as cited by Özen and Küskü, 2009).

Institutional pressures are applied to a range of situations, for example, to compliance with the health insurance portability and accountability act in home healthcare, corruption in private firms, and to the implementation of corporate environmental social responsibilities or citizenship behaviour (Appari et al, 2009; Venard, 2009; Özen and Küskü, 2009).

When a new regulation, for instance, an accreditation, is introduced, organisations respond by changing their business practices and processes to comply with the standards of the regulation. The speed of adoption varies, as competitive and institutional environments affect organisational responses (Dacin, 1997; Haveman and Rao, 1997, as cited by Appari et al, 2009). This means that organisations can comply with different extents.

Furthermore, the tendency of a firm to imitate other organisations is called organisational isomorphism. DiMaggio and Powel (1983) identified two types of isomorphism: competitive and institutional. Competitive isomorphism is brought about by pressure on organisations to copy successful organisations because of market competition. This form of isomorphism is not researched further in this thesis. On the other hand, institutional isomorphism occurs due to the confluence of three forces: coercive pressure, mimetic pressure, and normative pressure. Coercive or regulative pressure stems from the political power of the state and its regulations, which can constrain firms.

Mimetic or cognitive pressure arises in understanding situations to which companies respond by coping with leading competitors within their fields. Thus, companies may decide to follow the path of

14 their successful peers. Lastly, normative pressure stems from the norms embedded in a particular profession or industry (Scott, 2001; DiMaggio and Powel, 1983; Özen and Küskü, 2009). This thesis examines institutional isomorphism.

In response to these strong pressures, organisational responses may vary from reactive to proactive strategies. Also, responses may vary from conforming to regulations to voluntary actions. All organisations functioning in the same national context are expected to be isomorphic to conform to the stipulated regulations. Therefore, variation emerges as a product of the mimetic and normative aspects. Organisations vary in the extent to which they go beyond what is legally expected of them.

Consequently, the three types of pressures correspond to three categories of adoption patterns: regulative adoption is implemented to avoid punishment by the government, normative adoption is pursued to obtain approval from important players in the field, and cognitive adoption is applied to reduce uncertainty by imitating successful practices (Özen and Küskü, 2009).

When institutional theory is applied to assess accreditations of business schools in the Netherlands, it becomes evident that coercive pressure comes from the NVAO, the obligatory national accreditation.

Moreover, mimetic pressure arises from the other competitive business schools, while normative pressure stems from norms in the business administration profession. Responses to these pressures can vary from reactive to pro-active strategies, and from conforming to the regulations of the NVAO to voluntary actions for acquiring international accreditations, like EQUIS, AACSB, or AMBA. How could institutional pressures lead to acquisition of accreditations constitutes the first theoretical research gap.

15

3.3 Autonomy in business schools Autonomy and academic freedom are explained first (detailed definitions of autonomy are given in appendix 8).

Albornoz (1991) mentions the relationship between autonomy and accountability. As a country develops, interest in the autonomy of business schools diminishes and interest in accountability increases. Thus, academic freedom is crucially linked to autonomy. University autonomy depends on the political system, while democracy specifically guarantees their autonomy. With regard to business schools, the concept of academic autonomy is used for no interference with the affairs of the schools by outside parties, for example, accountability. Autonomy further includes a balance between the requirements of society and the needs of the business school itself, such as academic freedom.

Business schools control their own affairs, which renders them autonomous. However, they are accountable and have a moral responsibility towards society and their stakeholders. The university wants to enhance and maintain its autonomy, however, society has the right to control and diminish this autonomy if conflicts arise between university and society. Thus, autonomy can be regarded as an unstable equilibrium, while relative, and academic freedom can be considered absolute.

Consequently, Albornoz (1991) concludes that the relationship between autonomy and accountability is complex, because the way they are defined and applied varies according to place and time. Harvey

(2007) further concludes that accreditation demands accountability and compliance, as managerialism continues to hamper academic autonomy and undermine the skills and experience of educators.

Moreover, Berdahl (1971, cited by Alboroz, 1991) recognised two dimensions of autonomy: procedural and substantive. In the procedural dimension, control is from administrative decisions, and in the substantive dimension, the control of fundamental academic matters influences the university.

In addition, there are three levels of pressure on university autonomy: from the national society, from the institution itself, and international pressure.

Furthermore, Durham (1989, cited by Albornoz 1991) presents four categories of university autonomy: research or scientific, teaching, administrative, and financial autonomy. Scientific autonomy means that employees can set their own agenda and are evaluated by their peers without

16 external interference. Teaching autonomy includes independently establishing a body of knowledge and techniques for the students. Additionally, administrative autonomy yields that the business school can control the admission of students, teaching, and research staff, designs its curricula, confers academic degrees, and establishes partnerships as it sees fit. Finally, autonomy of financial expenditure means that a business school can manage its own budget. This study focuses on teaching autonomy. To establish a more succinct understanding of teacher autonomy, Pearson and Hall (1993) developed a Teacher Autonomy Scale. They found that teaching autonomy is composed of two dimensions: general teaching autonomy and curricular autonomy. General teaching autonomy relates to the need for teachers to be independent in order to ensure their own critical thinking and creativity in their professions. On the other hand, curricular autonomy has to do with the need for teachers to have autonomy in decisions of teaching and learning. Moomaw (2005) replicated and verified the study of Pearson and Hall (1993). The Teacher Autonomy scale was the starting point for some interview questions developed for this study (see appendix 6).

Furthermore, Day and Peluchette (2009) described that a faculty is very important for establishing the curricula and involving the students. The focus of accreditations standards in business schools is on faculty qualifications and student output, and not on management of faculty or whether they feel empowered. McPherson and Schapiro (1999, as cited by Day & Peluchette, 2009) further mentioned that faculty positions are generally among the most “self-managed”. This implies that they can choose their own research and teaching areas, scholarly collaborators, and service commitments. Thus, they work mainly unsupervised. Along with autonomy, faculty positions have other positive job design aspects: skill variety, task identity, and task significance. Due to this, faculty rated their level of empowerment high. Scherer et al. (2005) supported this view and argued that business school deans in

European countries manage faculty employees minimally, allowing the teaching faculty to have considerable independence and autonomy.

According to Katz (1968, as cited by Moomaw, 2005), “The greater the degree of specialized knowledge and skills required of the occupant of a position, the greater the degree of autonomy that accrues to the position”. This means that a teaching professional gains autonomy due to their grounded knowledge in a specific area (Myers, 1973, as cited by Moomaw, 2005). Consequently, the

17 profession of higher education teaching is characterised by worker authority or autonomy.

Pullin (2004) further outlines the academic freedom of a university, what this requires to flourish and what it looks like in practice. The university should be free from governmental intervention in the its intellectual life. Four freedoms are essential: to decide who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study. These all apply to teaching autonomy. The government can regulate higher education institutions if there is a legitimate reason to do so. This definition for autonomy in teaching is applied in this study.

Bridgman (2007) regarded the university as a knowledge-intensive firm. In the past, the employees in

Western democracies had high levels of autonomy, embodied in the notion of academic freedom, and they still expect this today. However, the values of freedom and autonomy can conflict with the movement that governments want to change universities into enterprises, where academics commercialise research. Consequently, government agencies sometimes perceive academic freedom as a means to evade accountability and regard it as resistance against managerialism.

This creates a tension between the knowledge work and the desired entrepreneurial culture in business schools. Academic freedom is regarded as the freedom to be entrepreneurial, to seek new ways to create revenue. This applies to the organisational level of the university, where ways must be found to develop strategies for academic entrepreneurs and handle the risks associated with them. This also applies to the employees’ collective identity as academic entrepreneurs. The employees are considered entrepreneurial due to consultancy activities or by establishing spinout companies

(Lambert, 2003, cited by Bridgman, 2007). Lambert (2003) extends the meaning of scientific autonomy to include the freedom to be entrepreneurial. Academic freedom can be thwarted by partnerships with industry and government sponsors, as they can lose their independence and their critical voice. Thus it is clear that the meanings of autonomy and freedom, with regard to business schools, are multiple and disputed. This can be one of the reasons why the relation (process or mechanisms) between the two constructs, accreditation and autonomy, has not been researched yet.

How do accreditations influence autonomy of lecturers constitutes the second theoretical research gap.

18

3.4 Entrepreneurship in business schools

A variety of entrepreneurships have been identified in existing literature. However, most articles about entrepreneurship and business schools are about teaching entrepreneurship and about entrepreneurship from research activities. Thus, only a few articles are applicable to entrepreneurship in teaching in business schools (appendix 9 provides a summary of the articles used).

Maguire, Hardy, and Lawrence (2004) defined institutional entrepreneurship as “the activities of actors who have interest in particular institutional arrangements and who leverage resources to create new institutions or transform existing ones”. This definition for entrepreneurship is applied in this study, as it is sufficiently specific and it pays attention to actors, resources, and change. Other definitions are discussed in appendix 9. Furthermore, this definition implies certain consequences of entrepreneurship: improving business schools through incremental innovations, and creating new business schools through radical innovations.

Moreover, Hazeldine and Miles (2007) identified four generic forms of entrepreneurial activity: innovation of a product, an organisation and its processes, a business concept and strategy, and the product, marketing, and technology domain of an organisation. This can be transferred to the concepts of entrepreneurship in teaching, which include new curricula, new programmes, new business universities, as well as new concepts and innovation in the domain of the business schools. Delivering high-quality programmes is one way to remain competitive, increase enrolments, and maintain student retention. Moreover, the authors created an instrument to measure the dimensions of entrepreneurship in business schools. The results of using this instrument were: the AACSB deans must reassess the school’s mission, support and reward entrepreneurship as well as opportunity creation and discovery, and link entrepreneurship with the school’s overall strategy.

Furthermore, Prince (2007) established that two paths for developing third stream activity in new university business schools exist: one focused on execution of funded activity, for example, projects funded by the European Union (EU), regional development activities, learning and skills councils, and supplies service partnerships; while the other is focused on more commercially based activities like in-company programmes, contract research, and accreditation. Prince (2007) further contends that

19 business schools funded by the government can learn from these new universities business schools to raise money for entrepreneurship in teaching.

Similarly, Woods, Woods, and Gunter (2007) distinguish four types of entrepreneurship for academies: business, social, public, and cultural entrepreneurship. Business entrepreneurship refers to entrepreneurship in the private business sector, social entrepreneurship originates outside the traditional public sector, public or civic entrepreneurship takes place in the public sector, and cultural entrepreneurship is concerned with personal and social development. The academies are hybrid organisations: they combine features of private institutions with public characteristics. In this thesis, the presence of public entrepreneurship in public business schools is examined.

How do accreditations influence entrepreneurship constitute the third theoretical research gap.

20

3.5 The preliminary research model

In figure 1, the preliminary research model is shown and the link to the research questions is clarified.

Figure 1 The preliminary research model

Following the preliminary research model, three external pressures on business schools are identified: first, coercive pressure, which is exerted by the law – punishment follows if the institute does not comply (e.g. to NVAO-accreditation); secondly, mimetic pressure – other institutes also have accreditations and push business schools into acquiring accreditations; thirdly, normative pressure, which is located in the norms and values of the institutes, in professionalisation, the institutional culture, and in training (e.g. for AACSB, EQUIS, and AMBA accreditations).

21

Preliminary propositions:

According to institutional theory, institutional isomorphism occurs via three forces. Institutional forces are classified into three types that lead organisations to isomorphism: coercive pressure, mimetic pressure, and normative pressure (DiMaggio and Powel, 1983). Application of this theory to pressures to acquire accreditations leads to the following propositions:

P1 Coercive pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations.

P2 Mimetic pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations.

P3 Normative pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations.

The order of pressures is unknown. It is known that coercive pressure is important for NVAO accreditation, however, which pressure follows and which pressures are important for international accreditations must still be researched.

P4 The order of pressures for getting accreditations is: coercive – mimetic – normative.

Nigsch and Schenker-Wicki (2013) state that many scholars see accreditations as a restriction on academic freedom. This is supported by Harvey (2004), who concludes that accreditation is a struggle for power between accrediting bodies and academics. Julian and Ofori-Dankwa (2006) state that accreditation agencies play a prominent role in the policies and programmes of business schools, and accreditation and their implications for business schools need to be analysed. This leads to the next proposition:

P5 A negative relation exists between accreditations and the autonomy of employees.

According to Hazeldine and Miles (2007), AACSB and EQUIS accreditations pay more attention to the value of entrepreneurship in business schools. This could create superior value for the schools’ stakeholders. This statement leads to the proposition:

P6 Accreditations create entrepreneurship in business schools.

22

Chapter 4 Results

Founded on an international quality assurance perspective, this chapter begins with an overview of

European and American field of business schools and how their programmes differ. Information about the types of accreditations and summaries of the articles about accreditation in the field of business schools are shown in appendix 18 on page 135. An overview of acquired accreditations of

Dutch public business schools is presented. The competitive field of public business schools and initial international accreditations in the Netherlands is examined. This is based on text and document analysis. Tables are provided in appendix 18 on page 140. This partly answers the first research question: How have accreditations been institutionalised in Dutch business schools over time? Next, the results of the within case analyses of the three Dutch business schools are presented, followed by the cross case analysis. These results from the cross case analysis are combined with the results of the text and document analysis to answer the first research question. Then the results of the cross case analysis give an answer on the second research question: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers and on entrepreneurship in business schools?

4.1 Research context of accreditations in European and American business schools The level of playing field of accreditations in European and American business schools is described.

In a review article by Harvey and Williams (2010), they explore the 15 years of history of the journal

‘Quality in Higher Education’. They concluded that “there has been a tension between assurance as a bureaucratic task and the improvement of the quality of academic endeavours. This has led to problems of engaging academics”. Also, they conclude that conceptions of quality assurances originating in North-West Europe and the Unites States of America (USA) dominate the world over.

The accreditation agencies show little variation in their methods, which are used by accreditation organisations. Leicht and Fennell (1997) support this finding and discovered a divergence in arrangements of professional services and a convergence of professional control of accountability.

The professional control shifted from informal control between colleagues to formal control.

The convergence in professional control is explained by institutional theory as the expected result of

23 isomorphic adaptation over time (Dimaggio and Powell, 1983). Institutional isomorphism is a process by which organisations within an industry adopt similar organisational forms and practices over time as they compete for political power and institutional legitimacy. Three mechanisms can cause isomorphic change: coercive pressure from government or state, mimetic pressure on organisations to copy successful forms in uncertain conditions, and the normative expectations of powerful groups within organisations. With regard to the professional control of universities by accreditation organisations, the mechanism of coercive pressure is important, as the governments influence national accreditation agencies to keep the standards high.

Antunes and Thomas (2007) studied the strengths and advantages of European business schools as opposed to American business schools. European schools are relatively small and can adapt faster to market needs, so they are more flexible than the large business schools in the USA. The former also have strong Customer Relations Management (CRM) capabilities and nurture close connections to corporations. Moreover, they have close links to the public sector, as this sector funds a great part of

European economic activity. In addition, European schools are innovative in teaching – this is reflexive, based on dialogue, and individualised instruction. Additionally, they have an international mind-set, as they have an internationally mixed faculty and student population. This aspect is similarly enforced by the European Union (EU), as a trading agency, and the numerous historical colonial regimes that offer the European Business schools competitive strength.

Delgado- Marquez et al. (2013) studied the relationship between internationalisation and reputation in top higher education institutions. They found out that internationalisation positively influences a university’s reputation. Internationalisation also moderates the relationship between a university’s reputation and its performance regarding quality of research, teaching, and graduate employability.

Moreover, Scherer et al. (2005) identified that the stress that European business schools put on practical experience in their programmes is highly advantageous for their students. He further argues that European programmes provide better value for money, as they are cheaper and shorter (MBA in one year) compared to their American counterparts. Also, the integration of Information, and

Communication Technology ( ICT) into academic programmes is increased.

On the other hand, Antunes and Thomas (2007) found that the strengths of American business schools

24 were that they were first movers in global management education, as they standardised their MBA programmes, the brands and reputations of their business schools are affirmed, and above all, they have financial strength, largely due to private donations.

However, unlike previous studies, Scherer et al. (2005) took into account the challenges for European business schools to get Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation, as opposed to American business schools. Challenges for European business schools involve incorporating creativity and an entrepreneurial attitude in their curricula. Furthermore, strategic issues for European business schools are competition, digital ways of delivery of education, increased pressure for external accreditation, and internationalisation of the market and universities.

However, the challenges that European business schools face were alleviated somewhat due to the

Bologna Declaration. This made it possible to align systems of higher education of 40 European countries to improve transparency, increase mobility and opportunities for students, and align the grading system of all degrees offered. This creates new market opportunities, as barriers to admission are removed. Moreover, in Europe, the government plays a pivotal role in funding the business schools. Compared to the American business schools, the European business schools are underfunded.

To counter this, Scherer et al. (2005) suggest the following: first, identify the internal and external drivers and resources (human, financial, and physical) to meet the accreditation standards. Secondly, identify peer universities that have been accredited successfully and use these as a benchmark.

Thirdly, analyse the specific challenges of other institutions.

Furthermore, Trapnell (2007) found that on a global level there is a shortage of qualified faculty at business schools. This is becoming a major problem, because of the equally increasing demand for business programmes and level of faculty retirements. Accrediting agencies and governments demand accountability from business schools. Another challenge is the competition between business school accrediting agencies. He advises business school deans to first analyse the value of one or more accreditations for their business schools. Secondly, deans should assess the success of the accreditation, based on their schools’ compatibility with the accreditation organisation’s philosophy and standards.

25

4.2 Accreditations in Dutch business schools

An overview of acquired national and international accreditations in the Netherlands is shown in table 48 Appendix 18. The business schools with multiple accreditations include the Amsterdam

Business School, University of Amsterdam, Tilburg School of Economics and Management, Tilburg

University, and Maastricht School of Management with double accreditations (NVAO and EQUIS); the Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, with triple accreditations (NVAO,

EQUIS, and AACSB); Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, with quadruple accreditations (NVAO, EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA); and the School of Business and Economics,

Maastricht University, with fivefold accreditations.

The competitive field of business schools and the achievement of first international accreditations was investigated to see in which order the business schools acquired their first international accreditations

(face table 49 appendix 18 for more details). Rotterdam School of Management is the frontrunner in getting international accreditations, followed by the School of Business and Economics in Maastricht.

They both have triple-crown accreditations. The Faculty of Economics and Business, University of

Groningen, follows as the third, with EQUIS and AACSB. The following business schools have only one international accreditation: Tilburg School of Economics and Management, Tilburg University, holds the AACSB accreditation, Maastricht School of Management, Maastricht University, holds the

AMBA accreditation, and Amsterdam Business School, University van Amsterdam, is accredited with

EQUIS.

26

4.3 Results case IBMS, Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht, University of Applied Sciences

Context of the IBMS programme and Faculty of Business and Economics

The first case study took place in the Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht.

This Faculty offers different programmes at graduate level and a few at the master’s level. The employees interviewed work in the IBMS programme. The IBMS programme exists since 20005. It is one of the largest programmes in the faculty. 18 new classes commenced in the academic year 2014-

2015. Most of the other programmes in the faculty have a numerus fixus, while IBMS does not.

Consequently, this programme has grown significantly.

IBMS acquired the NVAO re-accreditation on 14th May, 2013 (see table 1). The site-visit was conducted on 20th September, 2012. The final judgement was good.6 Moreover, the entire

Hogeschool Utrecht, University for Applied Sciences, acquired an institutional quality assurance assessment in 2014.7

Table 1 Accreditation of IBMS, Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht

2006 2013 NVAO reNVAO re means reaccreditation

The programme manager now strives for IBMS to be EPAS accredited in the future, which is also a programme accreditation, but an international one. They see that exchange partners have acquired this accreditation and other IBMS programmes in the Netherlands also strive to obtain it. Consequently, it is an important topic of discussion across the IBMS platform.8 However, because the finances for the programme are based on the number of students two years before, and because they have grown a lot,

5 Asked to former team leader IBMS on 16-6-2015. 6 http://www.nvao.net/ in the NVAO-DATABANK BEOORDEELDE OPLEIDINGEN, Nieuw accreditatiestelsel, beperkte opleidingsbeoordeling, retrieved on 13-3-2015 7 http://www.nvao.net/overzicht_instellingstoets_kwaliteitszorg_nederland, studied at 23-5-2015 8 Based on interview with the programme manager on 23-3-2015. 27 this creates tension. 9 IBMS needs to be facilitated, as the workload is high.10 IBMS managers thus face the dilemma of managing the programme’s growth or acquiring an international programme accreditation.

Institutional pressures to get accreditations

In the next paragraphs, findings are based on interviews and text and document analysis. Tables with quotes from the interviews linked to the key constructs are shown in (see appendix 14 for further details).

Coercive pressures from the government to get accreditations

NVAO accreditation is the national accreditation assigned by the Dutch government. All Dutch business schools are obliged to meet NVAO standards. Without this accreditation, the IBMS programme cannot exist, because the Dutch government is funding this programme and the business school. So for NVAO-accreditation, the coercive pressure is crucial. Thus, accountability to the government’s tax-payers plays a pivotal role. This is shown in the following statement: “There is an accountability issue, we are talking in funded education about tax money of course. Is that spent wisely? NVAO is a must have, you have to do it. ” This view is further corroborated by another interviewee who states, “The most obvious external pressure is that without accreditation you do not exist.” This has to do with the funding by the government and the obligation to obtain NVAO accreditation.

Conversely, the interviewees’ perceptions of NVAO differ significantly from their views on EPAS, as the latter is a voluntary accreditation. Therefore, no coercive pressure is present. As one interviewee states, “EPAS is something different, it is chosen by ourselves.”

9 Based on interview with lecturer 3 on 16-4-2015. 10 Based on interview with the programme manager on 23-3-2015. 28

Mimetic pressures from other business schools to get accreditations

Mimetic pressure exists for the international programme accreditation EPAS, thus, if colleagues in foreign countries have EPAS, other IBMS programmes also start to acquire EPAS-accreditation. As the interviewees stated, “You price yourself out of the market, because colleagues in foreign countries have EPAS and “EPAS is own initiative to play in the international field on a somewhat longer term”

In contrast, NVAO is not known internationally, according to the programme manager of IBMS, “We have no other accreditation apart from the NVAO, which they do not know outside the Netherlands and Flanders”. Internationalisation thus plays a key role here. Another reason for IBMS to acquire

EPAS-accreditation is, because colleague IBMS programmes try to obtain the accreditation, as this lecturer told, “Other IBMS programmes too, they want to join, from the same motivation to internationalise, an internationally recognized network of accredited universities”, and In contrast, mimetic pressure does not exist for NVAO-accreditation, as all the programmes are obliged to be

NVAO accredited.

External normative pressures to obtain international accreditations

External normative pressures come from potential foreign students and from partner universities, who acquire EPAS accreditation. International students and partners are familiar with EPAS, while NVAO is not known. This is supported by the following statement: “NVAO is of course national, yes,

Flemish, Dutch, but that does not play any role in the world”. Regarding the student body, an interviewee further states, “For the foreign students, recognisability and visibility in the foreign countries are important, that is why IBMS chose to do EPAS.” Furthermore, interviewees voiced their views of their partner universities. As one interviewee claims, “The most important reason to start with EPAS is that we have to do with partner universities and the quality check plays more and more a role. In the future you can only be partner with EPAS – accredited partners. But that is the external pressure, the contact with the partners, the international appearance, the international reputation you do not reach with NVAO accreditation, so therefore the international accreditation is important.

29

It is informal pressure in mutual contacts, that you maybe screw up slowly the expectations, the demands”. Following this view, it appears that quality assurance and reputation in the international field are important external normative arguments to acquire an international accreditation like EPAS.

Internal normative pressures to get accreditations

Internal normative pressures from groups within the organisation for NVAO-accreditation are strong, because it is about the right to exist. As one interviewee contends, “In the NVAO accreditation the pressure comes from the groups within the organisation there, because the interests are large. It touches the right to exist for a programme”.

For EPAS-accreditation, the Faculty board and the department international affairs support the acquisition of EPAS, however, the executive board of Hogeschool Utrecht is not convinced yet. This is made evident by one interviewee: “Not pressure, I feel support from the Faculty board and from international affairs to strive for EPAS-accreditation”. Moreover, another interviewee states that

“The Faculty management is interested in EPAS, but the executive board is not directly convinced.

These type of things do not have priority at Hogeschool Utrecht level, but we think this has priority, because your right to exist on a longer term in the international field is at stake”. So it is important to convince all groups within the organisation to acquire an accreditation.

The chronological order of the pressures to get accreditations

The chronological order of pressures to acquire NVAO

Coercive pressure is discussed in relation to NVAO in all interviews, as it is an obligation from the government. Consequently, coercive pressure has the greatest impact on the NVAO-accreditation.

Internal normative pressures are included in three interviews , once mentioned before coercive pressure and twice after. Following the statement of an interviewee that “Quality is not in the genes of the organisation,” this study assumes that internal normative pressure does not occur before coercive pressure. Furthermore, internal normative pressure is exerted by Faculty management, the directors of the institutes, and the programme manager of IBMS. Internal normative pressure follows coercive pressure, however, some interviewees perceive different forms of external pressures in between. For

30 example, external normative pressure is identified by two interviews, once as pressure from the rankings and once as pressure from colleagues in the networks.

Mimetic pressure does not occur, as NVAO is obligatory according to Dutch law.

Table 2 The chronological order of pressures for NVAO

Coercive pressure → (external normative pressure) → internal normative pressure

The chronological order of pressures to acquire EPAS

Mimetic pressures are mentioned in three interviews, as other business schools have it, and exchange partners or other IBMS programmes in the Netherlands are trying to obtain EPAS, for example, the

University for Applied Sciences in Rotterdam. Similarly, internal normative pressures are also mentioned in three interviews. This is largely exerted by the international office, which plays a vital role, as they have a contact pool comprised of 80 partner universities. Acquisition of an international accreditation is essential for continued partnership. Moreover, the intrinsic motivation of the programme manager, the management, and the lecturers are mentioned. The lecturers themselves were not aware of the managers’ endeavours to acquire EPAS. Furthermore, external normative pressures are mentioned once, which are thought to be exerted by the rankings. Coercive pressure is absent completely, as this type of pressure cannot exist for an international programme accreditation.

Table 3 The chronological order of pressures for EPAS

Mimetic pressure → internal normative pressure

31

The extent to which the programme conforms to accreditation

Accreditations are considered an extra asset. According to an interviewee, “It is not so that quality is in the genes of the organisation. It (accreditation) is seen as an additional thing and they have to do efforts for”. When the NVAO-accreditation leads to recommendations, the follow-up varies, as other requests are made by the Faculty or university, so the programme has to set priorities.

Another interviewee further states, “The recommendations are points we have to work on. The follow- up is varying, because the programme has to do with endless many things from the Faculty, the

University of Applied Sciences or other impulses”. Moreover, another interviewee offers a critical view of the current situation: “We are no frontrunner. We are a little behind, we do not think pro- actively how we could prepare for the next accreditation or pass it in a good way”.

Moreover, the speed of getting NVAO-accreditation is the same compared to others, as now programmes are accredited simultaneously in a cluster. Two interviewees supported this by stating that “The speed of getting accreditations is standard for NVAO”, and that “ The speed of reaction, compared to others, should be the same, because we have the same cadence, you are in a cluster

(NVAO-accreditation), because you are judged in groups, cluster accreditation and that is every six years. So there is a certain cycle”.

For the last accreditation, IBMS Utrecht passed the NVAO-accreditation quickly. As one lecturer states, “I know that at a certain moment we did the NVAO-accreditation with other universities of

Applied Sciences, and we were passed firstly, because we examination and graduation was okay with us”. However, according to the IBMS programme manager, the programme is behind with international accreditations: “With EPAS we are significantly behind, if we compare ourselves to our direct colleagues from Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and the Hague”.

All interviewees state that the standards of the NVAO-accreditation were met abundantly, and the programme was judged as ‘good’ overall. This is supported by the NVAO-report.11 Working in the direction of meeting the NVAO’s demands is important, and support from lecturers and

11 11 http://www.nvao.net/ in the NVAO-DATABANK BEOORDEELDE OPLEIDINGEN, Nieuw accreditatiestelsel, beperkte opleidingsbeoordeling, retrieved on 13-3-2015

32 administration is essential. According to the current and former team leader, “It is the basics covered and you have to meet the requirements of the NVAO”, however, “To get the accreditation is a minimal objective, but to get it in a good way, you need support from the lectures of the team and the administration”.

Influence of accreditations on autonomy The relationship between accreditations and autonomy is a complex one. In certain aspects, the accreditation does not have any influence, while in others, the autonomy is decreased. Some people stringently believe that it has no influence. They mention the following reasons: “I did not see a link between accreditations and my autonomy”, “The way you teach is up to you, you have high autonomy in that. You are as free as a bird, every year you can change the course guide, the exams, and if you follow your own way of working, you are really super free, so you can change everything, but consequences are attached,” and “The influence of the NVAO-accreditation on autonomy is particularly indirect, because nearly all aspects, that play a role in the accreditation are incorporated in HU, Faculty, or programme policy.” Thus, they do perceive an indirect relationship, how you teach is to the lecturer and the standards of NVAO-accreditation are included in the policy of the programme, Faculty or University. This can be considered an intermediating variable.

At the same time, some people think their autonomy is slightly restricted. “Some lecturers experience making an exam matrix for the whole programme and then look per course, where your piece fits in as very restrictive”. Furthermore, one interviewee addresses examination and graduation as particular areas of contention: “So I think that accreditation diminishes the autonomy in certain aspects, because the requirements are tighter, e.g. in examination and graduation.” Thus, examination and graduation are specific areas in which requirements are increased and autonomy is consequently decreased.

33

Influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship The interviewees’ opinions on the influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship are highly ambiguous: it can be positive or negative, according to the interviewees. On the one hand, in the preparation of accreditations, accreditations can be used as a catalyst for entrepreneurship to adjust the curriculum or for changing didactical methods. The international programme accreditation EPAS, for example, can induce entrepreneurship through contact with businesses. This assertion is based on certain responses in the interviews: “For didactical methods sometimes, also to adjust your curriculum. You can use accreditation as a flywheel for this”. Moreover, interviewees state that they

“see in EPAS more that accreditations can lead to entrepreneurship, because you are more challenged in contacts with business firms,” and that they “think that accreditations can realise innovations in education, because the frames of programmes change of course. In an accreditation, you have to test if you meet the frames of your programme”. Thus, the frames of a programme change under the influence of the external environment, including business firms. Furthermore, incremental innovation is deemed to be possible, as accreditations facilitate the discussion, and thus, the improvement of the programmes in question amongst the accredited organisations. As such, it can be considered that entrepreneurship is given a platform through accreditations. According to a lecturers

“Incremental innovation is possible, and accreditation offers a platform therefore, it invites to go outside and to deliberate with other organisations”. As a lecturer argues, “You are more conscious of the whole, of the feedback, that you get, then that can have impact on what is developed further or you get ideas”. Thus, accreditations allow lecturers to perceive and understand a programme as a whole and, by giving feedback, accreditations stimulate the further development of the programme.

On the other hand, accreditations also happen afterwards on an education process that has happened before. Radical innovations happen outside accreditations, without guidelines and limitations.

Accreditation is only an internal quality check and innovations are something new. As one lecturer states, “ I see accreditation as something what happens afterwards on a process that happened before.

Real radical innovations must happen outside accreditation firstly, because then you can work outside the existing context”. Furthermore, accreditation is also deemed to be “only an internal quality check and innovation is something different”.

34

4.4 Results case MBA, Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam

Context of the MBA programme and Amsterdam Business School

The second case study was the Amsterdam Business School (ABS), University of Amsterdam. This business school offers several programmes at graduate and master’s level. Amsterdam Business

School is a relatively young business school, having opened in 2007, while their MBA programme exists since 2005. The MBA programme currently includes 17 candidates.12 It began to acquire accreditations relatively late. The MBA-programme acquired the limited programme accreditation of the NVAO, while the ABS obtained EQUIS-accreditation. The University of Amsterdam acquired an institutional quality assurance assessment in 2013.

Table 4 Accreditations of MBA and Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam

2006 2009 2012/13 2012 EQUIS reEQUIS reEQUIS reNVAO 13 re means reaccreditation

The Amsterdam Business School and the MBA programme would like to acquire AACSB- and

AMBA-accreditations. The University of Amsterdam (UvA) has applied for AACSB accreditation and is in the last phase of the accreditation procedure. The committee intends to visit the UvA in

November 2015. AACSB and NVAO committee members plan to collaborate to create a combined accreditation. The MBA programme should be accredited by AMBA in February 2016. The dean of the Amsterdam School for Business and Economics is the former dean of Rotterdam Business School.

Consequently, he has experience with triple-crown accreditation.

12 Based on interview with programme manager on 15-4-2015. 13 http://www.uva.nl, retrieved at 13-3-2015 and based on interview with project leader accreditations UvA, checked on websites NVAO and EQUIS 35

Institutional pressures to get accreditations

In the next paragraphs, findings are based on interviews and text and document analysis. Tables with quotes from the interviews linked to the main constructs are shown in Appendix 12.

Coercive pressures from the government to get accreditations

Coercive pressures are compulsory for the NVAO-accreditation of funded programmes. According to interviewees, “The pressure begins with the ministry of education, because the ministry determines with her policy measures how much we get”. Moreover, “The first is the legal pressure, to get programmes financed, for the funded programme, you need accreditation”. If you are not accredited, you do not get your programme financed This is further corroborated by another interviewee, who states that “There is a legal pressure in the sense that you need to be an accredited programme to be able to teach, so that is a kind of baseline to have a license to operate as a university, as a business school. That is for the NVAO-accreditation”. However, as the MBA is not publicly funded, no coercive pressures are exerted in relation to this programme.

Mimetic pressures from other business schools to get accreditations

International and national pressure from other business schools are present. A telling example is the pressure exuded by the Rotterdam School of Management. According to one interviewee, “They do not put pressure on us, but you want as the Rotterdam School of Management triple crown accreditation, that is what you want. It is important that you join as business school”.

Following this, another interviewee makes a very apt observation: “If there is one business school with accreditations, there will follow more”. Thus, they assess that a mimicry effect takes place. As two lecturers explain, “It is meaningful for the others to have it. I think so. It is a sort of competition”.

Moreover, “If other business schools come in the rankings, that would be the same as your neighbour getting a better car, you look at it and say: “Okay, maybe we need that too”. Thus, they conclude that

“So it is more of a kind of mimicry effect, in the sense that business schools tend to be more rather similar around the world, they typically would like these types of accreditations. If you are the top of

36 the top, you do not really need to care about it. If you are an emerging or a kind of middle level business school, then you usually need to care about it and especially those that doing not so well, they even care more about it”. As all business schools in the Netherlands, including Amsterdam

Business School, are classified as emerging business schools, they must strive to meet the standards of their more highly ranked competitors.

External normative pressures to get accreditations

The rankings play an important role with regard to pressures. For one, the rankings listed in the

Financial Times are frequently mentioned. Furthermore, internationalisation emphasises differentiation and international quality hallmarks. Therefore, the Dutch quality accreditation, NVAO, is not enough. As one interviewee suggests, “Rankings are important, because they define your reputation and your reputation defines your admissions. When you have a lot of admissions, you can select good students”. This is substantiated by the claims of another interviewee: “I think the rankings are nowadays more and more important for business schools, especially trying to create a competitive

European market for business schools”.

Furthermore, the direct aims of acquiring accreditations are stated by the latter interviewee: “If you have a status and a reputation, but as long as you don’t have it, you must collect as many attributes as possible, on the basis of which people can conclude, that you are good”. Additionally, “For an international accreditation counts, that if you are an international operating Faculty and you want to attract good students and good staff members, then it is almost necessary that you have international accreditations, like EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA. That is international pressure. The same counts for the attraction of scientists. These scientists will be directed partly by EQUIS or AACSB. That is international pressure.” Thus, these interviewees delineate that the attraction of potential students and faculty are part and parcel of external normative pressures. As one lecturer states, “The foreign students more and the Dutch students especially if they are going to work abroad, then is an internationally recognised accreditation important”.

37

Internal normative pressures to get accreditations

The executive board of UvA prescribes that all programmes must acquire NVAO-accreditations and that internationalisation must be included in accreditations. In the context of the Amsterdam Business

School, the dean exerted pressure on the director of the MBA programme to obtain the AMBA- accreditation. The programme director in turn had an intrinsic motivation to obtain the international accreditation and thus, he put pressure on the programme manager of the MBA to acquire AMBA.

However, the boss of the programme director, the manager executive programmes, was not convinced that AMBA was necessary. This is supported by the interviews with the dean, “Nobody is calling: ‘we need accreditations’. No, if somebody does it, it is me”. At the same time, the programme director of the MBA states: “The dean has triple accreditation as strategic objective” and “My boss was rather sceptical if AMBA was necessary”, and the programme manager MBA claims that

“Internal pressures come from the executive board, it is a demand for NVAO-accreditations. The dean wants triple-crown. The director wants it also to distinguish yourself from the other MBA- programmes”.

The chronological order of the pressures to get accreditations

The chronological order of pressures to acquire NVAO

Coercive pressure from the government plays a role in the acquisition of the national accreditation.

However, this does not apply to the MBA programme, as this is an unfunded programme.

Internal normative pressure is more significant, as groups inside the organisation want to demonstrate that the programme meets national standards. These pressures come from the executive board, the faculties, the programme directors, and the potential students. As one lecturer mentions: “As a collective I think the potential is there, especially MBA students. I think they would like an accreditation, the more the better, basically. Not that they know much about them, but in the sense of that it would be good to have a very good accredited programme.”

Table 5 The chronological order of pressures for NVAO:

Coercive pressure → internal normative pressure

38

The chronological order of pressures to acquire international accreditations

For international accreditations, external normative pressure from the rankings, like the Financial

Times, plays a pivotal role. There are a variety of rankings for different programmes, business schools, and universities. First, mimetic pressure specifically comes from other business schools. The deans and programme director compare their business school with other business schools, and consequently they aim to acquire triple-crown accreditation as well. Groups within the organisation, like the aforementioned deans and programme director, and the executive board, strive to achieve the same standards, reputation, and prestige as more highly ranked business schools.

Table 6 The chronological order of pressures for international accreditations

External normative pressure → mimetic pressure → internal normative pressure

The extent the programme or the business school conforms to accreditations

The ABS is not triple-crown accredited. While the school has acquired EQUIS, it is still behind regarding AACSB and AMBA. According to one interviewee, “Some business schools in the

Netherlands are triple-crown accredited, so we are no frontrunners”, while another highlighted, “I think we were one of the first programmes that were EQUIS-accredited, but with AMBA we are behind of course”. At the same time, the MBA at ABS was fast to obtain NVAO-accreditation. As one interviewee states, “If you look at the NVAO-accreditation, we are as fast, maybe faster, we have the accreditation files in order and internationally, yes, Rotterdam and Maastricht, Rotterdam was number one, then Maastricht followed, thereafter Tilburg, Groningen, and then us, so we are somewhat behind”. Moreover, one lecturer emphasises that it was important for the school to follow its own path: “It is not so much the speed compared to others, it is about what do you want yourself in the future and when do you start such a process”.

39

The NVAO-standards were met sufficiently, and a few were even considered to have been met well.

One interviewee claims that “The 21 standards were judged sufficiently for the NVAO-accreditation and a few parts were judged good”. For EQUIS, however, an extra re-accreditation had to take place once because the school’s presentation was disorganised.

The influence of accreditations on autonomy The interviewees either do not perceive any influence of accreditations on teaching autonomy, or only a slight decrease in autonomy. The former view is iterated in the statement of one lecturer, who contends that “You keep the autonomy, in that sense you have complete autonomy in how you set it (a course) up, of course you have certain norms to meet, but if you deviate from that, and you do that in a motivated manner, then there is nothing to worry about, if you meet the final qualifications.”

Conversely, the school’s dean perceives a slight decrease in autonomy and argues, “If you put or force something in a corset, then the autonomy decreases a little.”

The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship The answers of the interviewees offer mixed results regarding the influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship at the ABS. Some see negative or positive influences. For one, the schools are obliged to focus on the accreditation standards, so in this sense, entrepreneurship is thwarted.

Furthermore, accreditations can have a negative influence on innovation, “In the sense that accreditations force everybody in the same corset, you could argue that they are a brake on differentiation”. This is further suggested by the view that “ Accreditations are inherently conservative and that is why we maybe get a brake on innovation”. Thus, according to another interviewee, accreditation is in the way of radical innovation, “because you have to meet requirements, that are invented in the past on the basis of performance in the past”. So accreditations force business schools to meet standards and therefore, there is no room for experimentation or radical innovation. Consequently, all business schools look and function the same way.

40

Conversely, a positive influence of accreditations is identified as such: “Maybe accreditations are good for incremental innovations, you get tips and ideas how to do things different.” Moreover,

“Accreditations can effect innovations in education, absolutely. It is a mirror, because the accreditation committee will point at weak spots in a programme and with this you can improve your programme continuously, e.g. the advice to have a second examiner in the bachelor thesis or critic on the end qualifications”. Another interviewee further stresses the benefits of exchange between international staff: “The positive side is that through accreditations, through experiences, the international staff, who do this a lot, they come and tell ideas of how things are and it can support the development of the school, the benefits are at the individual school level”. Thus, accreditations can be at the root of incremental innovations, as the feedback from the accreditation committee can help develop and innovate the programme.

41

4.5 Results case MBA, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University Context of the MBA programme and School for Business and Economics

The third case study took place at the School of Business and Economics (SBE), Maastricht

University. Founded in 1983, SBE is the youngest economics and business faculty in the Netherlands.

SBE follows the method of problem-based learning in small-scale groups of 14 students, so there are only 14 students in the programme.14

Maastricht University has been awarded three accreditations: AACSB, EQUIS, and AMBA. This is known as a triple-crown accreditation. SBE is one of only one percent of business schools worldwide to be triple-crown accredited (EQUIS, AACSB and AMBA). However, they have also acquired quadruple accreditations, including the additional NVAO accreditation and an accreditation from a

Euro MBA Consortium. Maastricht University was awarded the AACSB accreditation in 2002 and was reaccredited in 2012. SBE was awarded the EQUIS accreditation in 2005 and reaccredited in

2008 and 2011. Furthermore, the MBA was awarded the AMBA accreditation in 2007 and was reaccredited in 2012. All of SBE’s regular bachelor’s and master’s programmes are NVAO accredited. However, the MBA programme of SBE does not have an NVAO accreditation. 15 All mentioned accreditations are shown in table 7. Maastricht University acquired the institutional quality assurance assessment in 2013. They further obtained the special attribute internationalisation.1617

Table 7 Accreditations of MBA and School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 2002 2005 2007 2008 2011 2012 2015 AACSB EQUIS AMBA re EQUIS re EQUIS re AACSB Re re AMBA AMBA18 re means reaccreditation19

14 Interview MBA director on 2-6-2015 15 Questioned policy advisor on 8-6-2015 16 http://www.nvao.net/overzicht_instellingstoets_kwaliteitszorg_nederland, studied at 23-5-2015 17 http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/web/Faculties/SBE/Theme/AboutTheSchool/Accreditations.htm, Nieuw accreditatiestelsel, uitgebreide opleidingsbeoordeling, retrieved on 26-2-2015 18 This accreditation is not achieved yet, the review committee advises positively according to MBA director SBE. 19 http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/web/Faculties/SBE/Theme/AboutTheSchool/Accreditations.htm, Nieuw accreditatiestelsel, uitgebreide opleidingsbeoordeling, retrieved on 26-2-2015 42

Institutional pressures to get accreditations In these paragraphs, findings are based on interviews and text and document analysis. Tables with quotes from the interviews linked to the main constructs are shown in Appendix 13.

Coercive pressure from the government to get accreditations

Coercive pressures exist especially for the NVAO accreditation. As one lecturer states, “Without that you do not get funding nor certified diploma’s”. Another lecturer argued that the government appreciates all accreditations, both national and international, “because the quality of your universities tells something about the knowledge level in your own country, it gives appearance externally, it gives an identity for the Ministry.” The MBA programme is not obliged to have an NVAO accreditation and thus, does not have it.

Mimetic pressures from other business schools to get accreditations

Mimetic pressures for international accreditations are present. According to the MBA director, “It begins to get a rat race. At the moment that other business schools in your country or in your market have accreditations, and you not, then a pressure arises to acquire these accreditations yourselves.”

Thus, there is a clear competition, according to lecturers, as other schools want to belong to triple- crown universities as well. Moreover, the policy advisor at SBE further enforces the necessity to maintain triple-crown status: “It is troublesome to lose triple-crown, it is nice to keep it”.

External normative pressures to get accreditations: the role of rankings?

The role of accreditations in establishing a school’s rank is unclear. The Financial Times calls SBE about accreditations, but does not include it in their ranking. The MBA director argued, “If you are very high in the rankings, you do not need accreditations. This does not count for the Netherlands.”

Another lecturer further believes that “Certain rankings in which accreditations play a role, or direct, but indirectly for sure.” This emphasises the unclear role of rankings in accreditations.

Furthermore, another lecturer stresses the indirect impact of accreditations on a school’s ranking:

“Accreditation puts very clearly emphasis on quality control and you see it back in your rankings.”

On the other hand, as another interviewee suggests, “There is no pressure from the rankings, we put

43 the pressure of the rankings on ourselves. It is more an indirect effect of accreditations on rankings.”

Consequently, this pressure exerted by international rankings has to be further investigated, as its effects are ambiguous and complex.

Internal normative pressures to get accreditations

Internal normative pressures come from the management and particularly from the cluster entitled

Policy Development Quality Assurance (PDQA). According to the policy advisor, “From Maastricht

University the programmes must be accredited – NVAO or other accreditations. We are the only

Faculty with other accreditations.” Moreover, the director of the MBA programme contends, “The pressure is on the dean and the director of the MBA, because at the moment you lose an accreditation, you hold the leader responsible, of course.” AMBA and SBE and Maastricht

University have triple-crown accreditations – this pressures the school to maintain their triple-crown.

They do not want to lose it. However, students also implicitly exert pressure, including current students, “who are proud if the business school acquires accreditations”, and potential students as well. When asked: “Why did you come to Maastricht?” They responded: “Because of the accreditations.”

The chronological order of the pressures to get accreditations

The pressure to acquire NVAO

Regarding NVAO-accreditation, only coercive pressure exerted by the government is clearly identified. This argued by the MBA director, “The pressure from the Ministry is only through the

NVAO”, as well by a lecturer, “The government is only interested in the NVAO, because it gives legitimacy of your diploma's, it gives the validity of those diploma’s also, and you need it. Without accreditation you do not get funding nor certified diploma's”.

Table 8 pressure for NVAO

Coercive pressure

44

The chronological order of pressures to acquire international accreditations

For international accreditations, external and internal normative pressures are identified. As external normative pressure, the interviewees recognise the following as important: pressure from the rankings

(New York Times and Elsevier are mentioned) and pressure from colleagues outside the organisation.

The latter was deemed the weakest. Additionally, the MBA director stated, “There is competition on the institutional level, so not so much on an individual level”. Competition takes place between institutes, not between colleagues, MBA directors for example. Thus, mimetic pressure comes from other business schools. Moreover, internal normative pressures are also present and are exerted by groups within the organisation, particularly management and students.

Table 9 chronological order of pressures for international accreditations

External normative pressure – internal normative pressure

The extent the programme or the business school conforms to accreditations

The MBA programme, the SBE, and Maastricht University acquired the accreditations swiftly. The

MBA director thus considers their programme to be a front-runner (see table 49 in appendix 18 on page 140). They are number two among Dutch business schools in acquiring international accreditations. The MBA is a part of post-graduate education, which is a market in its own right. It is a fast-paced environment, which requires one to be quick and adaptable.

Furthermore, their level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards is ‘good’ to ‘excellent’, according to the interviewees. Compared to other business schools with AACSB and EQUIS accreditations, they are good. The feedback they get is generally positive, with some critical points.

As one lecturer states, “I have the perception that we are a learning organisation and we improve something where possible”. The business schools reacts on recommendations, given by the accreditation agencies.

45

The influence of accreditations on autonomy When asked about the general autonomy of lecturers, the MBA director responded, “The autonomy of lecturers is relatively high. You have a lot of voice, also in the formation of the programme, which subjects must be given, that is a mutually made decision.” Another lecturer added, “The autonomy is rather high. So it is about constraints in the sense of amount of hours and themes, but the lecturer determines for the most part the content and the way it is taught. It is nice, but it has a risk, but I think we have good lecturers.” Thus, the autonomy of lecturers is deemed to be reasonably high, as they can determine what is to be taught and how they wish to teach.

The effects of accreditations on autonomy are either not recognised (no influence), or considered to be negative. No influence was justified as such: “Accreditations are not about the content.” and “We have to document more things, but it has no influence on the autonomy.” Thus, accreditations are deemed to cause more work, but they do not have an impact on teaching autonomy in the MBA programme.

At the same time, the negative relation is justified as follows: “The assurances of learning issue of the

AACSB has implications for you as a lecturer, because you have to do it all.” Regarding the assurances of learning specifically, an interviewee state, “Some people have to do things, they do not want. That decreases the autonomy.” Thus, assurances of learning from AACSB accreditation are assumed to influence teaching autonomy negatively.

The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship

Out of all the interviewees, two people saw negative effects of accreditations on entrepreneurship.

The MBA director framed the problem as such: “On one side, you have to meet the quality standards, but how can you innovate in addition, that is still a conflict.” A lecturer augmented this view by stating, “If you mean innovations to begin something complete new, a compete new programme, a new teaching method, to experiment with, then I think that accreditations can be somewhat limiting, if they (accreditations) are handled strictly.” Thus, strict standards of accreditations could potentially limit space that is necessary for innovation and experiments.

46

In contrast, all interviewees saw a positive relation between accreditations and entrepreneurship. Most people mentioned incremental innovations as positively influenced by accreditations. Accreditations deliver a stimulus or a trigger and, through feedback, the business schools are able to change and improve. One lecturer, lecturing on entrepreneurship, mentions radical innovation explicitly: “It can be incremental and radical innovations both. I see radical innovations more on MBA level than in

NVAO, because you have fixed structures there. I think it is innovative to bring more groups online together. A task force is working on strengthening the business school in a radical way, we are in the phase of brainstorming.” Furthermore, the MBA director also notes considerable changes: “I think that every business school, that begins in the accreditation process, especially in the beginning, that it leads to a change. Accreditations achieve that you become accountable for performance in education, if you look at the whole assurances of learning, it can lead to considerable changes in your organisation.”

47

4.6 Cross-case analysis and propositions

In this section, the emerging findings of the three business schools are compared, while similarities and differences are explained. The findings are based on interviews, and text and document analyses.

Tables with results from the interviews linked to the main constructs are shown in appendix 17 on page 130. The initial preliminary propositions of this study are now studied again using the findings from the within and cross case analyses, and the text and document analysis. These analyses yielded information about the relations between the main constructs: institutional pressures, autonomy, and entrepreneurship. A detailed explanation of this process from preliminary propositions into propositions can be found in appendix 19.

Institutional pressures to get accreditations

Coercive pressures exist in the sense that NVAO-accreditations are compulsory for funded programmes, like IBMS. They are not present for unfunded programmes, like MBA, neither for international accreditations. International and national pressures from other programmes and business schools encourage institutions to acquire international accreditations. This is called mimetic pressure.

For NVAO-accreditation, mimetic pressure does not exist, as all funded programmes must get an

NVAO-accreditation. External normative pressures for international accreditations come from potential foreign students and from partner universities for IBMS (FEM, HU), for MBA (ABS, UvA), and for MBA (SBE, MU). Moreover, rankings are important, because they define the reputation and the reputation defines the number and quality of students admitted. If an international operating faculty wants to attract good students and good professionals, then it is almost necessary to have international accreditations. Internal normative pressures from groups within the organisation of the

IBMS programme at FEM, HU, for NVAO-accreditation are strong, as the programme requires the national accreditation in order to exist. Furthermore, the executive board of the HU and the UvA prescribes that all programmes must acquire NVAO-accreditations. At the UvA, internationalisation must be included as a sub-standard in the accreditations. Regarding the IBMS (FEM, HU) and MBA

(ABS, UvA) programmes, people have different stances about the need to acquire international

48 accreditations. Some do stress its necessity, while some are not convinced. Conversely, the programmes at MU must be accredited, either with NVAO or other accreditations. The SBE at MU is the only Faculty included in this study with other accreditations than NVAO. The interviews revealed that some master students explicitly chose SBE because they are triple-crown accredited.

The chronological order of the pressures to get accreditations

The chronological order of pressures to acquire NVAO

Coercive pressure has the most influence on business schools’ decisions to obtain NVAO- accreditation. Some interviewees of IBMS, at FEM, view external normative pressures from rankings and colleagues in the network as the following factor on NVAO acquisition, while the professionals from the MBA programme, at ABS, do not consider external normative pressures to have any impact.

This is closely followed by internal normative pressure exerted by faculty management, the directors, and the programme manager for IBMS at HU, and exerted by the executive board, the faculties, the programme directors, and the potential students for the MBA at ABS. In contrast, interviewees from the MBA programme, at SBE at MU, only perceive coercive pressures with regard to NVAO. The

MBA programme is not obliged to have an NVAO accreditation, however, they are aware that NVAO is required for other programmes.

The chronological order of pressures to acquire international accreditations

Mimetic pressures are mentioned in three interviews in IBMS (FEM, HU). Because other business schools, exchange partners, or other IBMS programmes in the Netherlands get internationally accredited, it is important for an institution to obtain EPAS-accreditation. Moreover, internal normative pressures are perceived to come from the international office and, in the case of IBMS

(FEM, HU), from the programme manager as well. In the case of the MBA (ABS, UvA), external normative pressure is exerted by the institutional rankings. Mimetic pressure from other business schools with more accreditations further challenges the business school to acquire more as well.

Internal normative pressure is considered the third pressure in order, and is exerted by the institutional groups, the deans, the programme director, and the executive board.

49

In the case of the MBA (SBE, UM), external, mimetic, and internal normative pressures are perceived as present. As external normative pressure, they recognise the pressure of the rankings, while pressure from colleagues outside the organisation is considered to be minimal. Thus, there is competition on the institutional level, while it remains limited on the individual level. Moreover, mimetic pressure is identified as pressure from other business schools. After this, internal normative pressures come from groups within the organisation, particularly management and students.

The influence of accreditations on autonomy The relationship between accreditations and autonomy is judged as follows: in certain aspects it does not have an influence on the three business schools, while in certain other aspects their autonomy is decreased. On the one hand, no influence is perceived because lecturers have complete autonomy in developing their courses, and when they deviate from that in an acceptable manner, this is accepted as long as they meet the end qualifications. This reason is voiced in the interviews for all three business schools. On the other hand, autonomy is considered to decrease, particularly with regard to examinations and graduation. These are areas in which requirements are increased and autonomy is decreased. In IBMS, (FEM) the requirements of examination and graduation were increased, which in turn decreased the lecturers’ autonomy. This is stated by interviewees from IBMS (FEM). Standards of the NVAO were included in the policy of this school. Moreover, in the MBA programme at SBE, the assurances of learning of the AACSB accreditation has had an impact on lecturers and has decreased their autonomy, because they had to design their courses according to the assurances of learning loop.

The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship The interview questions on influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship yielded mixed results.

According to the interviewees, it could be positive or negative. With regard to the negative impact, the interviewees from IBMS (FEM) and from MBA (ABS) saw no radical innovations take place at their institutions following accreditation. Accreditations are conservative and happen afterwards on an education process that has happened before. Thus, radical innovations are perceived to occur outside independent of accreditations, as they are not subject to external guidelines and limitations. The risk,

50 however, can be at the institutional field level: when all business schools comply with the same standards, every school begins to function and teach in the same way. This can lead to entrepreneurial endeavours being practiced outside of the business schools. Only in the MBA programme of SBE

(MU) radical innovations were seen as rooted in the assurances of learning of AACSB and in assessment questions regarding the MBA’s approach to innovation in online education innovation from the AMBA accreditation. These two accreditations thus challenge the business school to change.

MBA (ABS, UvA) is preparing AACSB and AMBA. This can be a reason why the possible radical innovation is not seen yet.

Conversely, most people from the three business schools perceive that potential incremental innovations, like adjusting the curriculum or for didactical forms, take place after accreditation. They state that it acts as a mirror, as the accreditation committee identifies the weaknesses in a programme.

Consequently, it delivers a stimulus in the form of feedback, which can be used to improve a programme. Additionally, accreditation encourages programme coordinators to discuss their issues with their counterparts in other organisations. The benefit of this becomes evident at the business school level.

51

Preliminary propositions into propositions

In table 10, the initial preliminary propositions of this study are shown. A detailed explanation of this process from preliminary propositions into propositions can be found in appendix 19 on page 141.

Table 10 Preliminary propositions into propositions

P1 Coercive pressures force business schools to → P1 new: Coercive pressures force business acquire accreditations schools to acquire national accreditations for funded programmes, not international accreditations. P2 Mimetic pressures force business schools to → P2 new: Mimetic pressures force business schools acquire accreditations. to acquire international accreditations, not national accreditations except unfunded programmes. P3 Normative pressures force business schools to →P3a new: Internal normative pressures force acquire accreditations. business schools to acquire accreditations, for national and international accreditations both. → P3b new: External normative pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations, for national and international accreditations both. P4 The order of institutional pressures for getting → P4a new: The order of institutional pressures for accreditations is: coercive – mimetic – normative. getting the national accreditations is: coercive – (external normative) – internal normative pressures. → P4b new: The order of institutional pressures for getting the international accreditations is: external normative - mimetic – internal normative pressures. P5 A negative relation exists between accreditations → P5 new: A neutral or a (slightly) negative relation and autonomy of employees. exists between accreditations and autonomy of lecturers. P6 Accreditations create entrepreneurship in →P6a new: Accreditations can decrease business schools. entrepreneurship in business schools. →P6b new: Accreditations can create entrepreneurship in the form of incremental innovations in Dutch business schools. →P6c new: Accreditations can create entrepreneurship in the form of radical innovations in Dutch business schools.

52

Chapter 5 Discussion

In this chapter, the new research model is explained, while the preliminary propositions are identified as confirmed or in need of further specifications. These are the theoretical implications. Moreover, other theoretical and practical implications for this study are given, and the strengths and limitations of the multiple case study are explored. Finally, suggestions for further research are discussed.

5.1 Discussion of the new research model

Figure 2 New research model

Compared to the preliminary research model in Figure 1 on page 22 in this thesis, the preliminary research model in Figure 2 is extended. Policy is added as an intermediating variable between coercive pressure and accreditation, a difference is made between national and international accreditations, different types of normative pressures are distinguished: internal and external normative pressures, and relations between accreditations and autonomy of lecturers and entrepreneurship became clear. Furthermore, in the explanation of this new research model certain

53 accreditations are mentioned as an example of the relations between accreditations and autonomy or entrepreneurship.

The nominal variable of this research model is the accreditation type: national or international. institutional theory can be applied to accreditations in business schools. All types of coercive, normative, and mimetic pressures are present, but it is the type of accreditation that determines which pressures are more influential.

For national accreditations, coercive pressure plays a role for funded programmes specifically.

Business schools include coercive pressures in their policy and this could be an intermediating factor, business schools incorporate accreditation standards in their policy. At the same time, internal and external normative pressures are also present. For international accreditations, external normative pressures from rankings and from peer groups have the most impact. Mimetic pressure plays no role in national accreditations, as every programme must be NVAO accredited. Unlike in national accreditations, mimetic pressure plays a role in international accreditations. It is related to the institutions’ reputations, thus, the business school wants to be internationally recognised by others.

The effect of accreditations on autonomy in teaching was either remained constant, or was found to decrease (slightly). A reason for accreditations having no effect on teaching autonomy is that as long as teachers could justify their deviations from the accreditations’ standards, their efforts would not be thwarted by the accreditations. On the other hand, a reason for the slight decrease in teaching autonomy was the NVAO requirements for examinations and graduation. AACSB’s assurances of learning decreased the autonomy of lecturers.

Furthermore, the effect of accreditations on entrepreneurship in the business schools was considered negative, weakly positive (incremental innovation), or strongly positive (radical innovation). As such, an ordinal variable emerges: the degree of innovation, which appears either as a brake on innovation, incremental innovation, or radical innovation. A brake on innovation was explained by the tension between standardisation and innovation. At the same time, incremental innovations were a consequence of the feedback of accreditations that triggered the business schools to improve. Finally, radical innovations were seen as a consequence of the AACSB’s assurances of learning and of the

AMBA’s assessment of innovations in e-learning.

54

5.2 Theoretical and practical implications

The first two case studies, IBMS (FEM, HU) with NVAO, and MBA (ABS, UvA) with NVAO and

EQUIS were expected to yield identical results, which could then be considered to be literal replication. In both case studies, the influence of accreditations on autonomy of the lecturers was the same or slightly decreased, and entrepreneurship was decreased or incremental innovations was perceived. The third case study MBA (SBE, MU) with EQUIS, AACSB, AMBA and an accreditation in consortium was expected to yield a result that contrasts with the former two, which could then be considered to be theoretical replication. In this case study the effect of accreditations on autonomy of the lecturers was the same or decreased, and entrepreneurship was decreased or incremental innovations or radical accreditations was seen. Having more accreditations influences the autonomy more, if a decrease was seen, it was not a slightly decrease, and it could possibly lead to radical innovation, which was not seen in the other two business schools.

The practical implications of this study are that different groups within an organisation have different opinions regarding international accreditations. If a business school seriously wishes to obtain accreditations, it must be able to convince its staff and students. This thesis may contribute to this endeavour. Arguments for acquiring international accreditations are an increased reputation, partnerships with other business schools, accountability, distinctiveness, rising higher in the rankings, quality assessments, improved internal processes, acquisition of good students, and attraction of good, professional staff.

Moreover, business schools have developed different strategies to meet the standards of different accreditations. One business school strives to obtain two parallel accreditations (IBMS at FEM, HU, with NVAO and EPAS). At the same time, the MBA programmes and the business programmes from the universities as a whole at ABS (UvA) and SBE (MU) will be visited by two accreditation agencies together (NVAO and AACSB). Moreover, the MBA and SBE (MU) have a process management approach with a focus on accreditation standards, and actors involved in delivering documents to accreditation organisations and a feedback loop following recommendations on a strategic level.

55

5.3 Strengths and limitations

A strength of this study is the research design, comprised of a multiple case study involving three schools. This potentially enhances the external validity, particularly through the cross case analysis.

Another strength is the triangulation of data. This form of triangulation may increase construct validity as well as internal validity.

However, certain limitations of this study must be accounted for. First, these case studies only included public business schools, so these results can possibly count for public business schools but not for private business schools.

Secondly, the international accreditation of IBMS (FEM, HU) – the EPAS programme accreditation

– is not completely comparable with the other international accreditations EQUIS, AACSB, and

AMBA. AMBA is also a programme accreditation, however, EQUIS is a general business school accreditation and AACSB is a university accreditation. So EPAS is, to a certain extent, comparable to AMBA, as both are programme accreditations. It was not possible to make a distinction between all the international accreditations in the interviews, due to the limited time for the interviews.

The last limitation of the design is that operationalisation of autonomy in teaching yields many topics and all cannot be discussed in interviews. Consequently, only general questions about work processes and teaching conditions were included.

5.4 Suggestions for further research

One suggestion for further research focuses on the topic of rankings. The following questions could be used as research questions: Which rankings play a role for programmes, which for business schools, and for whole universities? And on which different criteria are the rankings based? In which countries are the targeted students and what rankings do they consider?

A second suggestion is that it would be interesting to study is if business schools are front-runners in getting international accreditations, in comparison to other subject faculties. Other faculties are known to internationalized more slowly. To what extent are other faculties internationalised? Which international accreditations do other faculties want to acquire? What can other faculties learn from

56 internationalisation in business schools?

A third suggestion is that this topic accreditations could be explored using other theories: stakeholder theory, agency theory, and the resource based view. Trapnell (2007), for instance, identifies the following stakeholders in accreditation: current and prospective students, prospective employers, and current and prospective faculty. Research has been done about the perspectives of directors of accreditation agencies (Thompson, 2004 and Urgel, 2007), of deans Lejeune and Vas (2009) and

Roller, Andrews, and Bovee (2003) (both in Nigsch, 2013), of students (Helmig et al. 2010) and of whole business schools. The perspective of the lecturers is underexposed and interesting to study. In addition, a stakeholder analysis of all stakeholders included in accreditations would be a further suggestion to study. Other possible theoretical perspectives on this subject accreditations are agency theory (Barney & Hesterly, 1996; Battilana, 2006; Garud, Hardy, and Maguire, 2007), and the resource based view (Wright, Piva, Mosey, and Lockett, 2009).

A last suggestion was posed by a manager that the relationship between autonomy and quality of education is a curve: a little less autonomy increases the quality of education, but too much limitation of autonomy decreases the quality. This could be a complex next challenge to study, because it is difficult to measure autonomy and quality of education.

57

Chapter 6 Conclusions

To enhance the understanding on business schools compliance with accreditations, a preliminary research model was developed embedded in institutional theory. This model was then tested using a multiple case study. The leading research questions were: How have accreditations been institutionalised over time in Dutch business schools? What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers and on entrepreneurship in business schools? The research questions led to sub questions, and these are answered in appendix 20 on page 146. When all the sub questions are answered, at the end it is possible to answer the research questions.

6.1 The institutionalisation of accreditations over time in Dutch business schools

From the institutional pressures, coercive pressures from the government, specifically the Ministry of

Education, exist to ensure that accreditations for institutes and programmes are in place. This counts only for the national accreditation, the NVAO. The MBA is an unprotected programme and not funded by the Dutch government, thus, there are no direct coercive pressures on it to acquire national accreditation. As such, coercive pressures do not exist for the international accreditations.

Moreover, mimetic pressures from other business schools encourage business schools to obtain accreditations. Business schools see that other business schools are accredited, thus, this prompts them to acquire them too. This is an indirect pressure. Triple-crown accreditation in particular is a popular objective. The Rotterdam School of Management (RSM) is mentioned frequently as a counter example for Amsterdam Business School (University of Amsterdam). The RSM has triple-crown accreditation (EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA) and is the front-runner in achieving international accreditations. The School of Business and Economics (Maastricht University) also has triple-crown accreditation, is number two, and does not want to lose this asset. Other universities in the

Netherlands are following suit, with some already having acquired one or two accreditations.

In addition, normative pressures exist for business schools to obtain accreditations. Colleagues from the national and international networks exert external normative pressures, this is not felt very

58 strongly, and can be considered as indirect pressure. In contrast, pressure from the rankings is felt more strongly. The Elsevier ranking and the Financial Times’ ranking are frequently cited. As such, the topic ‘rankings’ is complicated, as a variety of rankings on programmes, business schools, and universities exist. Internal normative pressures come from the managers of the different business schools. For international accreditations, people revealed different stances about the need to acquire international accreditations. Some do support it, while others are not yet convinced. At the

Hogeschool Utrecht and at Amsterdam Business School, the policy of the executive board is that all master programmes must have NVAO-accreditations. In contrast, at Maastricht University, the policy is that all programmes have NVAO or other accreditations. Accreditations give the business school status and enhance their reputation, allowing them to compete with other business schools to attract potential students and highly qualified employees. After studying the pressures that influenced the acquisition of accreditations, this study was focused on the influence of accreditations on autonomy and entrepreneurship.

6.2 The influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers and on entrepreneurship in business schools The relation between accreditations and autonomy is a complex one, as in certain aspects it does not have an influence, while in others the autonomy is (slightly) decreased. Some perceived no influence, as lecturers have complete autonomy in developing a course, and when they deviate from that in a justifiable manner, this is acceptable as long as they meet the final qualifications. Especially examinations and graduation requirements stipulated by NVAO are areas in which requirements are increased and the autonomy of lecturers is decreased. This was seen in the IBMS programme (FEM,

HU). Furthermore, the assurances of learning of AACSB accreditation decreased the autonomy of lecturers through compliance with the assurances of learning cycle in the SBE(MU). This decrease in autonomy is supported by Nigsch and Schenker-Wicki (2013), who state that many scholars see accreditations as a restriction on academic freedom. Harvey (2004) concludes that accreditation is a struggle for power between accrediting bodies and academics. The tension exists in three areas: programme content, programme delivery, and bureaucratic requirements. Julian and Ofori-Dankwa

59

(2006) state that accreditation agencies play a prominent role in the policies and programmes of business schools, and accreditation and their implications for business schools need to be analysed.

The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship gives mixed results: it can be positive or negative, according to the interviewees. Incremental innovations are possible, like adjusting the curriculum or for didactical methods, as the business schools can improve their programmes through the feedback they receive from the accreditation committee. Thus, business schools lease between each other, and thus new potential for change and discussion is facilitated by the accreditations. The benefit is at the business school level. In IBMS (FEM) and MBA (ABS) no radical innovations were seen. Radical innovations happen outside accreditations, without guidelines and limitations. Accreditation is only an internal quality check, while innovations are something entirely new. The harm can be at the business school field level, as when all business schools comply with the same standards, all schools begin to look the same. This negative influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship is supported by Leeuw

(2003, as cited by Scheele, 2004), who states that evaluation performance can lead to organisational paralysis and can inhibit innovation. On the other hand, radical innovations were seen in the MBA and SBE (MU) as a consequence of accreditations: AACSB’s assurances of learning and AMBA’s questions about innovation in e-learning triggered the school to innovate. Hazeldine and Miles

(2007) found that AACSB and EQUIS accreditations pay more attention to the value of entrepreneurship in business schools. Adoption of entrepreneurship could be leveraged to create superior value for the schools’ stakeholders and could possibly enhance prospects for successful accreditation. So this positive influence of AACSB accreditation is supported by this article. The influence of EQUIS accreditation on entrepreneurship was not mentioned in SBE (MU).

Moreover, getting accreditations in business schools could be compared to getting ISO norms, for example, ISO 9001, in business firms. In the beginning, when a business school acquires accreditations or the business firm acquires ISO norms, they are front-runners. Consequently, other business schools and business firms follow, but in the end not having accreditations or ISO norms signals a lack of professionalism. Therefore, customers generally expect institutions to have accreditations.

60

References

Albornoz, O. 1991. Autonomy and accountability in higher education. Prospects, 21(2): 204-213. Antunes, D. & Thomas, H. 2007. The Competitive (Dis)Advantages of European Business Schools. Elsevier Long Range Planning, 40: 382-404. Appari, A., Johnson, M.E. & Anthony, D.L., 2009. HIPAA Compliance in Home Health: A Neo-Institutional Theoretic Perspective, ACM Association for Computing Machinery, 13-20. Conference proceeding SPIMACS '09 Proceedings of the first ACM work shop on Security and privacy in medical and home-care systems, 13-20. Barnett, R. 2003. Beyond all reason: living with ideology in the university (Buckingham, Society for Research into Higher Education). Barney, J.B and Hesterly, W. 1996. Organizational Economics, In: Handbook of Organization Studies, Stewart R. Clegg, Cynthia Hardy and Walter R. Nord., Eds., London: Sage. Battilana, J.A. 2006. Agency and Institutions: the enabling role of individual’s social position. Organization, 13(5): 653 – 676. Bridgman, T. 2007. Freedom and autonomy in the university enterprise, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 20(4): 478-490. Bryant, M. 2013. International accreditations as Drivers of Business School Quality Inprovement, Journal of Teaching in International Business, 14(3-4): 155-167. Clemens, E. S., and Cook, J. M. Institutionalism: Explaining durability and change, Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 441 – 446. Clement, R.W. & Stevens, G.E. 1989. Performance Appraisal in Higher Education: Comparing Departments of Management with Other Business Units, Public Personnel Management, 18(3): 263-278. Cornuel, E. 2007. Challenges facing business schools in the future, Journal of management Development, 26(1): 87-92. Dacin, M.T. 1997. Isomorphism in Context: The Power and Prescription of Institutional Norms, The Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 46-81. Day, N.E. & Peluchette, J. 2009. Do We Practice What We Preach? Journal of Leadership & Organizational studies, 15 (3), 275-286. Delgado- Marquez, B.L., Escudero-Torres, M.A., & Hurtado-Torres, N.E. 2013. Being highly internationalised strengthens your reputation: an empirical investigation of top higher education institutions. Higher Education, 66: 619-633. DeWit, K. 2006. How universities perceive and manage globalization and Europeanisation: Six case studies. Paper presented at the 28th Annual Forum of the European Association for Institutional Research, Rome, Italy. DiMaggio, P. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theory in Institutional patters and culture. Cambridge MA: Ballinger Publishing Company: 3-22. DiMaggio, P.J. & Powell, W.W. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, American Sociological Review, 48(2): 147-160. Eisenhardt, K. 1989. Building Theories form Case Study Research, The Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550. Elliott, C.J. & Goh, S.C. 2013. Does accreditation promote organizational learning? A multiple case study of Canadian Business schools, Journal of Management Development, 32 (7): 737-755.

61

Frackmann, E. 1990. Resistance to change or no need to change? The survival of German Higher Education in the 1990s, European Journal of Education, 25(2): 187-202. Friedland, R., and Alford, R.R. 1991. Bringing society back in: symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions in The new Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. W. W. Powell and P. J. Diamagio (eds), Chicago: University of Chicagoo Press: 2320 – 2363. Garud, R., Hardy, C., and Maguire, S. 2007. Institutional Entrepreneurship as Embedded Agency: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Organization Studies, 28 (7): 957- 969. Garud, R., Jain, S., and Kumaraswany, A. 2002. Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: the case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 196-214. Garud, R. and Karnoe, P. 2001. Path creation as a process of mindful deviation in Path dependence and creation. R. Garud and P. Karnoe (eds)Lwarence Earlbaum Assiociates: 1-38. Gibbert, M. & Ruigrok, W. 2010. The “What” and “How” of Case Study Rigor: Three Strategies Based on Published Work. Organizational Research Methods, 13(4): 710-737. Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. Haakstad , J. 2001. Accreditation: The new quality assurance formula? Some reflections as Norway is about to reform its quality assurance system. Quality in Higher Education, 7: 77-82. Harvey, L. 2001. Evaluating the evaluators, Opening keynote, International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) Biannual Conference, Santiago, Chile, May. Harvey, L.2004. The Power of Accreditation: Views of academics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26:2, 207-223. Harvey, L. & Williams, J. 2010. Fifteen Years of Quality in Higher Education, Quality in Higher Education, 16:1, 3-36. Haveman, A.H., 1993. Follow the Leader: Mimetic Isomorphism and Entry Into New Markets, Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 593-627. Hazaldine, M., and Miles, M. 2007. Measuring Entrepreneurship in Business Schools. Journal of Education for Business, 82(4): 234 – 240. Helmig, B., Bürgisser, S., Lichtsteiner, H., & Sprau, K. 2010. On the relevance of accreditations of executive MBA programs – the perceptions of the customers. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark, 7: 37-55. Julian, S.D., & Ofori-Dankwa, J.C. 2006. Is Accreditation Good for the Strategic Decision Making of Traditional Business Schools? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(2), 225-233. Katz, F. 1968. Autonomy and organization. New York: Random House. Leech, B.L. 2002. Asking Questions: Techniques for Semistructured Interviews. Political Science and Politics, 35(4): 665-668. Leeuw, F.L. 2003. Challenges for national quality assurance agencies: a view from the evaluation world, paper at ENQA conference, March. Leicht, K.T. & Fennell, M.L. 1997. The changing organizational context of professional work, Annu.Rev. Sociol., 23: 215-231. Lejeune.C., & Vas, A. 2009. Organizational culture and effectiveness in business schools: A test of the accreditation impact. Journal of Management Development, 28, 728- 741. Levy, D., and Scully, M. 2007. The institutional entrepreneur as modern prince: The strategic face of power in cotsted fields. Organization Studies, 28(7): 971 – 991.

62

Lewis, D.R., Hendel, D.D., & Kallsen, L. 2007. Performance Indicators as a Foundation of Institutional Autonomy: Implications for Higher Education Institutions in Europe. Tertiairy Education and Management , 13(3): 203-226. Lock, A. (1999). Accreditation in business education. Quality Assurance in Education, 7(2): 68-76. Maguire, S., Hardy, C., and Lawrence, T.B. 2004. Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 657 -679. Miles, M.P., Hazeldine, M.F. & Munilla, L.S. 2010. The 2003 AACSB Accreditation Standards and Implications for Business Faculty: A Short Note. Journal of Education for Business, 80(1): 29-34. Montgomery, C.A. 1994. Corporate diversification. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(3): 163-178. Moomaw, W.E. 2005. Teacher-perceived autonomy: a construct validation of the teacher autonomy scale. A dissertation submitted to the Division of Graduate Studies College of Professional Studies, The University of West Florida. Myers, D.A. 1973. Teacher power: professionalism and collective bargaining. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books Nigsch, S. & Schenker-Wicki, A. 2013. Shaping performance: do international accreditations and quality management really help? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(6): 668-681. O’Dwyer (2004) Qualitative data analysis: illuminating a process for transforming a Messi but attractive nuisance. In C. Humphrey & B. Leeds (Eds.) The real life guide to accounting research: a behind-the-scenes view of using qualitative research methods, (chapter 23, 389-405). Elsevier Ltd. Özen, S. & Küskü, F. 2009. Corporate Environmental Citizenship Variation in Developing Countries: An Institutional Framework, Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2), 297- 313. Pearson, L.C. & Hall, B.C. (1993). Initial construct validation of the teaching autonomy scale. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 172-177. Porterfield, R.I., Clark, L., & Keating, R.J. 2014. European and U.S. Accreditations Standards and Globalization: Vie from a U.S. Regional Public Business School. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 25(4): 300-321. Powell, W.W. 1991. Expanding the Scope of Institutional Analysis, in W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio, The new Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 183-203. Prince, C. 2007. Strategies for developing third stream activity in new university business schools. Journal of European industrial training. 31(9); 742 -757. Pullin, D. 2004. Accountability, economy, and academic freedom in educator preparation programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(4): 300-312. Roller, R.A., Andrews, B.K., & Bovee, S.L. 2003. Specialized accreditation of business schools: A comparison of alternative costs, benefits, and motivations. Journal of Education for Business, 78, 197-204. Saunders, M. & Lewis, P. (2012). Doing Research in Business & Management. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Scheele, K. 2004. Licence to kill: About Accreditation issues and James Bond. Quality in Higher Education, 10(3): 285-293. Stahli, A. 2005. The stakeholders perspective on the international business school, Corporate Governance. The International journal of business in society, 5(2): 121-129.

63

Scherer, R.F., Javalgi, R.G., Bryant, M., & Tukel,O. 2005. Challenges of AACSB Internationl Accreditation for Business Schools in the United States and Europe, Thunderbird. International Business Review, 47(6): 651-669. Thompson, K. 2004. A Conversation with Milton Blood: The New AACSB Standards. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(4): 429-439. Trapnell, J.E. 2007. AACSB International accreditation. Journal of Management Development, 26(1): 67-72. Urgel, J. 2007. EQUIS accreditation: value and benefits for international business schools. Journal of Management Development, 26(1): 73-83. Venard, B. 2009. Organizational Isomorphism and Corruption: An Empirical Research in Russia, Journal of Business Ethics, 89(1), 59-76. Van Berkel, H. 2000. De visitatie-illusie, een pleidooi voor een andere benadering van visiteren, Thema,5. Verhoeven, N. (2010). Wat is onderzoek? Den Haag: Boom Lemma uitgevers. Wadhwani, R.D. 2012. How Entrepreneurship Forgot Capitalism: Entrepreneurship Teaching and Research in Business Schools. Sociology, 49: 223-229. Wicks, D. 2002. Institutional Bases of Identity Construction and Reproduction: The Case of Underground Coal Mining. Gender, Work and Organization, 9(3): 308-335. Woods, P.A., Woods, G.J. and Gunter, H. Academy schools and entrepreneurialism in education. 2007. Journal of Education Policy, 22(2): 237 -259. Wright, N. Piva, E., Mosey, S., and Lockett, A. 2009. Academic entrepreneurship and business schools. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34: 560-587. Yin, R.K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th Ed.). London: Sage. Zheng, Y. & Ao-Sun. 2009. The Analysis for Quality Accreditation of Business School, International Conference on E-Business and Information System Security, May 2009, IEEE Conference Publications: 1-4.

64

Appendix 1 Definitions for accreditation and summary articles

In this appendix, several definitions of accreditation are posed and differences are explained.

Scherer et al. (2005) found that the AACSB Web site explains that “accreditation is a process of voluntary, non-governmental review of educational institutions and programs”. This is a definition that counts for voluntary accreditations. In my thesis I am going to study voluntary and obliged accreditations.

Scheele (2004) described accreditation “as a “License to kill” and adopted a James Bond metaphor in a perspective and amusing analysis of accreditation and the dominant “peer-evaluation” approach.”

This definition is about punishment to stop the license to educate in business schools, accreditation systems are more focused at improvement, rather than sanctioning.

Accreditation is generally defined as “a formal, published statement regarding quality of an institution or program, following a cyclical evaluation based on agreed standards” according to

Helmig et al.(2010). This definition describes that the process is formal and cyclical and institution or program has to comply to standards. I chose for this definition, because it covers voluntary and obliged accreditations and it explains the essence of accreditations very shortly.

Haakstad (2001), as cited by Nigsch & Schenker-Wicki (2013), defines accreditation as “a process by which an institution obtains the authorisation to conduct educational programmes recognised by the state or another authority” This process makes use of a benchmarking method, refers to specific standards and aims at a ‘yes or no’ verdict”. This is also an excellent definition, but it is long and need a lot of explanation of the concepts.

Harvey (2004) states that accreditation may be of programmes or institutions. “Accreditation is the establishment or restatement of the status, legitimacy or appropriateness of an institution, programme or module of study.” He describes that accreditation has three nuances: a process, a label, and an abstract notion of a formal authorising power.

65

Table 11 Articles about accreditations in business schools

Author(s), Qualitative or Research method Results year quantitative and focus research Antunes & Qualitative and Desk research and There is no one, widely-accepted European model for a Thomas quantitative secondary data business school. National elites have emerged in Europe. They (2007) research analysis are a combination of national and cultural characteristics and some US characteristics . Zheng & Ao- Qualitative Desk research New AACSB standards arose in 2007. Sun (2009) research AACSB Standards are: A strategic management standards, B participants standards, C the standards of assurance of learning. The international higher education assurance pattern transfers from school condition and recruitment of students to teaching process, the knowledge and the abilities students learned. Bell & Taylor Qualitative Multiple case The emerging discourse of quality in UK business schools (2006) research study in 4 relies on elitism and masculinity which are used to support English business the institutionalization of quality frameworks, and to influence schools the social construction of academic and administrative identities. Bryant (2013) Qualitative Case study in a Evaluations and assessments of business school quality need research French business to be based on interactive processes that involve stakeholders school from diverse constituencies to ensure support and acceptance. AACSB and AACSB and EQUIS support open, peer-driven processes EQUIS which include assessments based on peer-review team visits. Elliott & Goh Qualitative Multiple case AACSB accreditation facilitated organizational learning in (2013) research study in three of the four schools. Accreditation promoted strategic 4 Canadian alignment, a re-assessment of the school’s mission, and an business emphasis on performance management; others identified an universities increased focus on quality and/or research. Accreditation also AACSB served as a catalyst for change, it motivated program improvement. As contextual factors, leadership and resource dependence had influence on organizational learning effects. Harvey & Qualitative Desk research Throughout the 15 years there has been a tension between Williams research Overview article assurance as a bureaucratic and administrative task and the (2010) improvement of the quality of and the growing pressure of academic endeavors. This has led to problems of engaging academics. Conceptions of quality assurance from North West Europe and the US are accepted globally. There is little variation in the methods adopted by quality assurance agencies. Helmig et Quantitative Survey H1 which stated that the perceived importance of accreditation al.(2010) research AACSB and for the choice of a program is higher for students than it is for EQUIS alumni is supported. Students H2 which stated that the perceived importance of accreditation perspective has an influence on the choice of a program depending on its accreditation status (accredited or not accredited) is also supported. The perceived standard of knowledge on accreditation is high, but the knowledge on accrediting institutions is low. Lock (1999) Qualitative Desk research There is an expansion of the number of MBA programmes research AACSB and throughout Europe and the entry of providers into the market AMBA and attracted by the demand for MBA programmes. The range of EQUIS quality of programmes and course participants is very wide. The leading providers establish or collaborate with external service quality certifications mark agencies which will distinguish them and their graduates.

66

Miles et al. Qualitative Desk research New AACSB standards arose in 2003. The experimental (2010) research AACSB accreditation maintenance process is designed to achieve three outcomes: quality, continuous improvement, and better stakeholder management. Scherer et al. Qualitative Desk research A strategic analysis of the internal and external drivers must (2005) research be done. Identify the human, financial, and physical resources necessary to successfully meet the accreditation standards. Then identify peer institutions already accredited that can be used as benchmarks for making decisions. At the end other institution specific challenges must be identified. Porterfield et Qualitative Case study in U.S. Describe decision filters to develop policy. al. (2014) research business school First filter- should the business school partner only with AACSB international business schools accredited by AACSB? Second filter – international partner schools national accreditation activities Third filter – international business school accreditation ? Nigsch & Quantitative Survey International accreditations are positively related to research Schenker- research AACSB and performance, while quality management systems do not Wicki (2013) EQUIS exhibit any significant relationship to ranking positions. Thompson Qualitative Interview New AACSB standards were developed in 2003. A key (2004) research Director AACSB success would be that the school has done a very careful and thoughtful job of developing learning goals. The test is the achievement of learning. Trapnell Qualitative Desk research AACSB accreditation is global brand delivering external (2007) research AACSB validation of high-quality business schools providing key stakeholders, students, faculty and employers, with a decision criterion for selecting institutions with which to be associated. It can be a major differentiating attribute for global competition in a market of management education. Delgado- Quantitative Survey Results reveal that internationalisation positively influences a Marquez et research university’s reputation but also moderates the relationship al. (2013) between an institution’s reputation and its institutional performance in research and teaching quality and graduate employability. Urgel (2007) Qualitative Desk research The added value from accreditation systems stems from three research Director EFMD areas: assessment of the quality of the school, enhanced brand recognition through the accreditation label, and the contributions to the improvement of the school. Lewis et al. Qualitative and Case study By linking performance management, strategic planning, and (2007) quantitative U.S. university an internal resource allocation model, all stakeholders can research make better-informed decisions about the allocation of resources. Harvey (2007) Qualitative Email Accreditations processes represent a struggle for power that research correspondence influences academic freedom. Academics and directors Scheele Qualitative Desk research Although the Bologna Declaration aims at quality assurance (2007) Opinion of convergence, divergence is the main trend. research inspector of higher education Julian & Qualitative Desk research Current accreditation standards increase the chance on poor Ofori-Dankwa strategic decision making in turbulent environments. research (2006)

67

Appendix 2 Definitions for autonomy and summary articles

In this appendix different definitions of autonomy are given and differences are explained.

According to Perkins (1978), cited by Albornoz (1991), “autonomy or self-government has been a key ingredient in the ideology of institutions of higher learning”.

McPherson and Schapiro (1999), as cited by Day & Peluchette (2009), mention that faculty positions are generally among the most “self-managed”; they can choose their own research and teaching areas, scholarly collaborators, and service commitments. They work mainly unsupervised.

Autonomy is thus self-government of institutions for higher education or self-managed positions of faculty.

Frackmann (1990), as cited by Lewis et al. (2007), mentions institutional autonomy. “Institutional autonomy seems to be a precondition for an institution of higher education to be able to compete for money, students, reputation or whatever. The financing and budgeting mechanisms in particular are likely to permit both autonomy and competition”.

Durham (1989), cited by Albornoz (1991), presents three categories of university autonomy: autonomy of research, teaching autonomy, administrative autonomy and autonomy of financial expenditure. Scientific autonomy means that the employees can set their own agenda, evaluated by peers, and no external interference. Teaching autonomy includes setting up the body of knowledge and techniques for the students. Administrative autonomy yields that the business school can control the admission of students, teaching and research staff, design its curricula, give academic degrees and establish partnerships. Autonomy of financial expenditure means that the business school can manage its own budget.

Lambert ( 2003), cited by Bridgman, (2007) makes an extension of the above mentioned scientific autonomy, the freedom to be entrepreneurial. Academic freedom can be hurt by partnerships with industry and government sponsors, because they can lose independence and critical view. Lambert concludes that meanings of autonomy and freedom in the business school are multiple and disputed.

68

Pullin (2004) discusses the academic freedom of an university. The university should be free from governmental intervention in the intellectual life of the university. Four freedoms are essential: to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught , and who may be admitted to study. These are all applied on the above mentioned teaching autonomy. Teaching autonomy is researched in this thesis.

Table 12 Articles about autonomy in business schools

Author(s), Qualitative or Research method Results year quantitative research Leicht & Qualitative Desk research Some researchers have documented the increasingly diversity in Fennell (1997) research arrangements for the delivery of professional services, others point to a convergence of professional control around accountability. Albornoz Qualitative Desk research The concept of accountability is interesting, because it (1991) research presupposes that it will be accompanied by techniques to control and regulate the university by government. Universities believe that suitable forms of accountability could increase their internal efficiency. Many kinds of resistance to accountability exist. Day & Quantitative Survey Results show that faculty believe that most high-performance Peluchette research HRM practices are used by their schools, particularly (2009) employment security, empowerment/self-management, and information sharing. Pullin (2004) Qualitative Desk research Differences of opinion between faculty and higher education research institutions and between higher education institutions and government regulators are both expected and common. Considerations of academic freedom become more important as governments compel dramatic change in educator preparation programs and as academia faces the need to respond to external pressures by considering reductions in autonomy and change in curriculum and faculty practices. Any loss in academic autonomy may infringe on academic freedom. Bridgman Qualitative Interviews According to government policy, the university must be seen (2007) research as an enterprise within a competitive marketplace with the “entrepreneurial academic” who commercializes research. However, management practices and identity processes amongst faculty reveal inconsistencies within the articulation of the university enterprise. Lewis (2007) Qualitative Case study The use of performance measures can solidify institutional research U.S. University autonomy when external forces (e.g. the Bologna Declaration) serve as a counter-balance. Pearson & Quantitative Surveys Teaching autonomy is composed of two dimensions: general Hall (1993) research teaching autonomy and curricular autonomy. Moomaw Quantitative Desk research The study verified the Teacher Autonomy Scale. The original (2005) research Surveys factors of general autonomy and curriculum autonomy were confirmed. Harvey (2007) Qualitative Email Accreditation demands accountability and compliance as research correspondence managerialism continues to bite into academic autonomy and undermine skills and experience of educators. Academics and directors

69

Appendix 3 Definitions for entrepreneurship and summary articles

In this appendix different definitions of entrepreneurship are given and differences are explained.

Wadhwani (2012) saw that entrepreneurship in 1970s increasingly came to be defined as the launching of new startup firms and its context was that of revitalizing old industrial economies, rather than spurring growth in emerging ones. After this period interest in small business and startups followed. Entrepreneurship was defined more narrowly than before as the establishment of new business organizations or pursuit of new business opportunities in

1990s.

Maguire, Hardy and Lawrence (2004) define institutional entrepreneurship as “the activities of actors who have interest in particular institutional arrangements and who leverage resources to create new institutions or transform existing ones”.

This term relates to DiMaggio (1988), as cited by Garud, Hardy, and Maguire (2007), who argued that “new institutions arise when organized actors with sufficient resources see in them the opportunity to realize interests that they value highly”.

Both definitions mention resources, important to realize change and both mention actors.

These actors, institutional entrepreneurs, create a whole new system of meaning that ties the functioning of disparate sets of institutions together (Garud, Jain, and Kumaraswany, 2002), as cited by Garud, Hardy, and Maguire (2007).

The first definition is more in depth, it explains the creation of new institutions or transforming ones, so I chose to take the first definition of entrepreneurship of Maguire,

Hardy and Lawrence (2004) for my thesis.

Woods, Woods and Gunter (2007) have a definition of entrepreneurialism or entrepreneurship: “the predisposition to and practice of achieving valued ends, by creating,

70 taking or pursuing opportunities for change and innovation and finding new resources or utilising in new ways existing resources”.

Resources are mentioned again, actors are not included in this definition, but the opportunities are here new.

Academic entrepreneurship is a specific kind of institutional entrepreneurship. According to

Wright, Piva, Mosey and Lockett (2009) academic entrepreneurship in business schools is

“the creation of new firms in which academic scientists and universities themselves are equity-holders”. They give examples of such an entrepreneurship as licensing, spin-outs or start-ups. They write about entrepreneurship as a result of research, but this can also be a result of education.

Table 13 Articles about entrepreneurship in business schools

Author(s), Qualitative or Research Results year quantitative method research Garud, Qualitative Desk They mention different challenges facing institutional entrepreneurs. Hardy, and research research All these challenges can be researched, so they developed a research Maguire. agenda. (2007) Does institutional entrepreneurship reveal a strategic face of power? Where do new practices come from? What is the role of powerful actors in bringing about change? What is the role of discourse in institutional entrepreneurship? What are unintended consequences of institutional entrepreneurship? How do new institutional arrangements emerge in the face of the difficulties associated with organizing collective action? What is the nature of the various activities undertaken by institutional entrepreneurs, and are different skills associated with them? How is it that some actors escape the constraints of their institutional environment to become the instigators of change? Prince Qualitative Multiple case The ability of business schools to develop a strategy towards growing (2007) research study third stream activity in a range of sub-markets is constrained by their 6 UK new resources, capabilities and organisational arrangements and by university market opportunities in their region. Two developments paths are business distinguished: one for funded activity and one more commercially schools based activity. Maguire, Qualitative Interviews Institutional entrepreneurship in the emerging field of HIV/ AIDS Hardy, and research and desk treatment advocacy involved three critical activities: the occupation of Lawrence research “subject positions” that have wide legitimacy and bridge diverse (2004) stakeholders, the theorization of new practices through discursive and political means, the institutionalization of these new practices by connecting them to stakeholders’ routines and values. Hazaldine Quantitative Surveys The study consists of a scale development to measure the dimensions and Miles research deans of entrepreneurship in business schools. AACSB deans must reassess (2007) AACSB- the school’s mission, nourish entrepreneurship, reward and support accredited opportunity creation and discovery, and link entrepreneurship with the school’s strategy.

71

business schools Woods, Qualitative Desk The emerging pattern of participation in the academies programme Woods and research research suggests the existing structural advantages in the field of business is Gunter replicated and strengthened, and so academies are constructed as sites (2007) intended to enhance the growing influence of private versions of entrepreneurialism. Academies also present an unfolding programme and the development in time is subject to complex local and national factors, including the agency of groups and individuals differently positioned in their fields. Wadhwani Qualitative Desk Entrepreneurship as it is understood in business schools today has (2012) research research largely lost it reason to be as the engine of change in capitalist economies. Wright, Qualitative Interviews in Academic entrepreneurship is constrained by the institutional Piva, Mosey, research 8 UK structures of universities, which influence the strategies, links between and Lockett universities business schools, technology transfer officers, and scientists, and (2009) processes issues, expertise differences and the content of interactions.

72

Appendix 4 The population: a list of higher education business schools that have business administration programmes

This list is based on studies of business administration programmes and business administration and management programmes, and International Business and Management programmes, and the schools, which offer these programmes. Below is listed all the higher education business schools that have business administration programmes. These include government subsidized schools. The private schools are excluded.202122 Amsterdam Academie Artemis Amsterdam Business School, University van Amsterdam ArtEZ hogeschool voor de kunsten Avans Hogeschool Christelijke Hogeschool Windesheim De Haagse Hogeschool Den Bosch Avans Hogeschool Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen Fontys Hogescholen Hanzehogeschool Groningen HBO Da Vinci Drechtsteden Hogeschool Inholland Hogeschool Rotterdam Hogeschool SDO Hogeschool TIO Hogeschool Utrecht Hogeschool van Amsterdam Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen HZ University of Applied Sciences Maastricht School of Management, Maastricht University NHTV internationaal hoger onderwijs NHL Hogeschool Open University Radboud University Nijmegen Rotterdam Academie Artemis Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Saxion Enschede School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University School of Economics and Management, Tilburg University Stenden Hogeschool Technical University of Delft Technical University of Eindhoven TIAS School for Business and Society TSM Business School University of Twente University of Wageningen Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Zuyd Hogeschool

20 http://www.kiesjestudie.nl/studierichtingE05-Bedrijfskunde.html, retrieved at 31 jan 2015 21 http://www.kiesjestudie.nl/studierichtingE06-Bedrijfskunde-en-management.html, retrieved at 31 jan 2015 22 http://www.kiesjestudie.nl/opleiding34936-International-Business-and-Management-Studies.html, retrieved at 31 jan 2015 73

Appendix 5 Steps in searching literature and texts and document analysis

Desk research is conducted on the topic of accreditations in business schools. Using the key words

“business school”, “employees”, “autonomy” and “accreditation” yielded in the digital library of the

University of Amsterdam (http://uba.uva.nl/home) an enormous amount of articles about the subject

(the amount was 1951). I screened the first 13 pages with articles and selected 70 articles. Then I read the abstracts of these articles and I selected 35 articles to be relevant. I printed these articles and read them making notes for the relevance for my thesis.

I made two tables with articles about accreditations and about autonomy.

To get to know more about the accreditations and their standards and to know which Dutch universities were accredited I studied the websites of NVAO, EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA.

My supervisor recommended me some articles: Dimaggio, and Powel (1983) and Wicks (2002) about institutional theory and Eisenhardt (1989) about case studies.

The next step in desk research was to find articles that could help me with the operationalization of autonomy. How could I measure the influence of accreditations on autonomy? I searched with searching machine Google with search terms “questionnaire” and “teaching autonomy” on the

Internet. I found an useful article and I translated the questions into topics, see appendix 8.

After this I studied the standards of the accreditations (NVAO, AACSB and EQUIS) at the time the business schools were accredited and I looked at which topics of teaching autonomy the standards should have influence. I found these websites with searching machine Google.

In the UvA library (http://uba.uva.nl/home) I searched for “Dimaggio” “Powell” “Institutional theory” “pressures”, Then I found some articles, that applied institutional theory: Appari, A., et al.

(2009), Venard, B. (2009) and Özen, S., and Küskü (2009). In the introduction, the theoretical background or framework and research model they explained institutional theory and in the reference lists of these articles I found other articles about institutional theory.

74

In the courses thesis proposal, research design and research analysis from the UvA mandatory and facultative articles and books were prescribed. I downloaded as much articles as I could, and I bought two books about these subjects. Sometimes I was not able to get a few articles. Also I used the digital library of Hogeschool Utrecht to obtain the articles.

In the UvA library I searched for articles about entrepreneurship and innovation with the following search terms: “institutional entrepreneurship” and “business schools”, and

“institutional innovation” and “business schools”.

I wanted to find more information about entrepreneurship and I looked for “entrepreneurship” and

“business schools” in the UvA library again. I found a lot of articles about teaching entrepreneurship in business schools or entrepreneurship from research activities, but a few on entrepreneurship in teaching.

75

Appendix 6 Interview questions linked to sub questions and preliminary propositions In this table the interview questions are linked to the sub questions and the preliminary propositions, so you can see which sub question is answered with answers on which interview question(s) or which preliminary proposition is tested with which interview question(s).

Table 14 Interview questions linked to sub questions and preliminary propositions Sub question (Q) preliminary proposition Interview question(s) (P) Q1. What kind of P1 Coercive pressures 4. What kind of pressures are there for the coercive or regulative force business schools to business school to acquire accreditations? Which pressures from the acquire accreditations. accreditations? government exist to get 6. What kind of pressures from the government accreditations? exist to get accreditation? Which accreditations?

Q2. What kind of P2 Mimetic pressures 4. What kind of pressures are there for the mimetic or cultural cognitive force business schools to business school to acquire accreditations? Which pressures from other acquire accreditations. accreditations? business schools exist to get 10. What kind of pressures from other accreditations? business schools exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations? Which business school do you have as an example? Q3. What kind of P3 Normative pressures 4. What kind of pressures are there for the normative pressures force business schools to business school to acquire accreditations? Which (external and internal) exist acquire accreditations. accreditations? to get accreditations? 9. Does pressure come from the rankings to get accreditations? Which rankings? 12. What kind of pressures from colleagues outside the organization, for example in national and international networks, exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations? for external normative pressures. 14. What kind of pressures from groups within the organization exist to get accreditations? From whom? For example the dean, the program manager, the lecturers or the students? Which accreditations? for internal normative pressures. P4 The order of 15. Can you recognise a chronological pressures for getting order, a sequence of the pressures to get accreditations is: accreditations? Which accreditations? coercive – mimetic – You can choose between governmental pressures normative. – pressure from the rankings - rival pressures from other business schools – pressure from colleagues (in networks) outside the organization – pressure from groups inside the organization (on a sheet, see appendix 6) Can you explain this? Can you give an example? Do pressures strengthen each other? Q4. To what extent do P5 Higher education 16. What is the reaction of the business business schools conform to organizations conform to school to these pressures? accreditations? standards of Does your business school conform to accreditations. accreditations? Or over conform or resist? How

76

does the organization react? Is it ahead, a front runner and over-regulated, does it act like the others and does it do what is necessary to meet the accreditation standards, or is it behind, a laggard? How is the fit between external pressures and internal implementation? How is the speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools? How is the level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards? Q5. What is the P6 A negative relation 22. What is the influence of accreditations influence of accreditations exists between on the autonomy of lecturers? on the autonomy of accreditations and Autonomy in teaching is to decide itself who employees in teaching? autonomy of employees. may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught , and who may be admitted to study. Can you give an example? 23. Is your or their autonomy (in teaching) increased or decreased by accreditations? Is this good or not? Q6. What is the P7 Accreditations create 25. Can accreditations lead to influence of accreditations entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship in education? Can you clarify on entrepreneurship in innovations in business this?24. Can accreditations conduct innovations business schools? schools. in education? Do you have an example?

77

Appendix 7 A list of interviewees At Hogeschool Utrecht I read the accreditation NVAO-report of IBMS and I asked the programme manager if it was okay to interview lecturers of IBMS. At the UvA I interviewed the project leader accreditations and handled him a list with lecturers in the MBA programme. He knew if the lecturers were involved in the NVAO and EQUIS accreditations and he chose the right people for me to interview. At the School of Business and Economics, MU, I asked the dean for a list and he gave me a list of three lecturers and the MBA programme manager. I interviewed three lecturers, a project leader accreditations and two managers from the first two business schools and one manager, a policy advisor accreditations and three lecturers from the third business school to gather enough qualitative data. I did the interviews in March, April, May and June 2015. In this appendix, a list is provided with the interviewees, their gender, and the length and date of the interview.

IBMS FEM HU 1. Chair task force quality Faculty for Economics and Management, former team leader IBMS (pilot interview), man, 42:02 on 17-3-2015 2. Programme manager IBMS, woman, 25:53 on 23-3-2015 3. Former team leader IBMS, man, 45:38 on 25-3-2015 4. Lecturer 1 IBMS, woman, 34:41 on 25-3-2015 5. Lecturer 2 IBMS, man, 26: 18 on 27-3-2015 6. Lecturer 3 IBMS, man, 32:12 on 16-4-2015

MBA AMS UvA 1. Project leader accreditations, man, 22:55 on 1-4-2015 2. Programme manager MBA, woman, 26:41 on 15-4-2015 3. Programme director MBA and lecturer 2, man, 51:19 on 22-4-2015 4. Dean Business school and Economic school, man, 15:59 on 17-4-2015 and 19:19 on 22-4- 2015 5. Lecturer 1 MBA, man, 53:53 on 15-4-2015 6. Lecturer 3 MBA, man, 18:11 on 24-4-2015

MBA SBE Maastricht University 1. Policy advisor accreditations and rankings, woman, 30:00 on 2-6-2015 2. Programme director MBA, man, 01:01:45 on 2-6-2015 3. Lecturer 1 MBA, man, 25:51 on 2-6-2015 4. Lecturer 2 MBA, man, 41:23 on 2-6-2015 5. Lecturer 3, woman, 36:04 on 2-6-2015

78

Appendix 8 Development of interview questions

In Leech (2002) techniques for semi structured interviews are described. The author gives tips for putting respondents at ease, they know what happens behind the scenes, describe the project in one minute, the topic and type of questions you are going to ask. To repeat the sentence of the respondent shows him that you are interested and you have understood what he said. Begin with the easy questions and ask personal questions at last.

Types of questions are grand tour questions, these questions ask respondents to give a verbal tour of something they know well.

Grand tour questions in the interview are questions number 4, 19, 20 and 21.

Example questions are more specific. Can you give me an example of ...... I added example questions to questions number 14,19 and 20.

Prompts keep people talking and they rescue you when responses turn to mush. Planned prompts are like why, what, who. Prompts are not scripted as are the initial questions. I added the possibility to use prompts to questions number 19 and 20. Informal prompts are Uh-huh and yes.

Floating prompts are used to clarify: how, why, and then.....

The first three questions are introduction questions about accreditation(s) of the business schools and about the involvement. Then the three pressures for accreditations are asked and also the pressures of the business schools on the institutions. There is a question about the order of pressures.

After this teaching experience and tenure questions are treated. The influence of accreditations on work processes and teaching conditions is determined. At the end general questions about the influence of accreditations on autonomy of lecturers and entrepreneurship in the business school are asked.

After the pilot interview I adapted the interview at the following points: I should tell the subject of my thesis by head in the introduction of the interview. I put an exclamation mark for two questions, I forgot to ask: question 5 and a sub question of question 15 Do pressures strengthen each other?

I reformulated difficult, cruddy questions: 11,12, and 16, and 22.

79

Question 11 Are you regarded as a role model by other institutions? is reformulated in: Is the MBA or

IBMS programme regarded as a role model by other institutions? I added national and international networks to Question 12: What kind of pressures from colleagues outside the organization, for example in national and international networks, exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations?

I split up Question 16: What is the reaction of the business school to these pressures? into:

How is the speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools?

How is the level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards?

I added a question in between question 19 and 20: How is the autonomy of lecturers in the business school? I changed question 22: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of employees? into: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers? I made it more specific. I added question 23: Is your or their autonomy (in teaching) increased or decreased by accreditations? Is this good or not?

The dean in School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, wrote me in an e-mail, he quoted the head of postgraduate education: “It would become more relevant and interesting to me if the impact of accreditations was measured on the ability to innovate or to adopt critical approaches/pursue unconventional avenues of thought.” And he quoted the MBA director: “To be honest I do not see our benefit, as I do not believe that we would get any wiser from her study.

Obviously autonomy is reduced if you need to adhere to certain standards and criteria.” Because I really wanted to include School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, and because I thought it was an interesting demand, I decided to add some questions about innovation and entrepreneurship. I was just in time to ask them in the other business schools as well.

24. Can accreditations conduct innovations in education? Do you have an example?

25. Can accreditations lead to entrepreneurship in education? Can you clarify this?

After interviewing the first two business schools: IBMS, FEM, HU and MBA, ABS, UvA.

I decided to drop two questions, because the interviewees could not tell something about it, so it was frustrating for them and it gave no results: 9. Did the university itself play a role by stressing the importance of accreditations to the government? And 10. Does pressure come from the inspectorate to acquire accreditations?

80

Appendix 9 Interview questions for directors and for lecturers

Welcome, this interview is for my thesis of my master study in business administration at the

University of Amsterdam. I investigate the influence of accreditations on the autonomy in teaching of employees and on entrepreneurship in business schools.

In the report I will not mention your name, just your function. When I have finished my thesis, I can send you the results of my research, if you are interested.

“Autonomy in teaching is to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study”.

Before the interview takes place I would ask you to sign the form of consent.

This is an interview about the influence of accreditations on the autonomy in teaching and on entrepreneurship in business schools with Name on Date, time.

Your function is …

1. Which accreditations does the business school or the MBA programme have?

2. When was / were the last accreditation(s)?

3. Were you involved in the accreditation(s)? In which manner? Which accreditations?

4. What kind of pressures are there for the business school to acquire accreditations? Which

accreditations?

5. Which business school began acquiring accreditations? What happened next? Which

accreditations? Who followed

6. What kind of pressures from the government exist to get accreditation? Which accreditations?

7. Did the university itself play a role by stressing the importance of accreditations to the

government?

8. Does pressure come from the inspectorate to acquire accreditations?

9. Does pressure come from the rankings to get accreditations? Which rankings?

81

10. What kind of pressures from other business schools exist to get accreditations? Which

accreditations? Which business school do you have as an example?

11. Is the MBA program regarded as a role model by other institutions?

12. What kind of pressures from colleagues outside the organization, for example in national and

international networks, exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations?

13. Which role does your university play in these networks?

14. What kind of pressures from groups within the organization exist to get accreditations? From

whom? For example the dean, the programme manager, the lecturers or the students? Which

accreditations?

15. Can you recognise a chronological order, a sequence of the pressures to get accreditations?

Which accreditations?

You can choose between governmental pressures – pressure from the rankings - rival

pressures from other business schools – pressure from colleagues (in networks) outside the

organization – pressure from groups inside the organization (on a sheet, see appendix)

Can you explain this? Can you give an example?

Do pressures strengthen each other?

16. What is the reaction of the business school to these pressures?

Does your business school conform to accreditations? Or over conform or resist? How does

the organization react? Is it ahead, a front runner and over-regulated, does it act like the

others and does it do what is necessary to meet the accreditation standards, or is it behind, a

laggard? How is the fit between external pressures and internal implementation?

How is the speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools?

How is the level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards?

17. What is your tenure in education?

18. What is your tenure in this university?

19. Do or did you teach yourself? How many years of teaching experience do you have?

How is the autonomy of lecturers in the business school?

82

20. Which work processes in teaching are important according to accreditation standards? Which

accreditation? How is the influence on autonomy in teaching? What is the influence of

accreditations on the autonomy of employees in these work processes?

How autonomous are you in ... when they teach themselves

“Autonomy in teaching is described in this research as to decide itself who may teach, what

may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study”.

Can you give an example? Can you clarify this?

21. Which teaching conditions are important according to accreditation standards? Which

accreditation? How is the influence on the autonomy in teaching? What is the influence of

accreditations on the autonomy of employees in these teaching conditions? Can you give an

example? Can you explain this further?

22. What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers?

Autonomy in teaching is to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be

taught , and who may be admitted to study. Can you give an example?

23. Is your or their autonomy (in teaching) increased or decreased by accreditations?

Is this good or not?

24. Can accreditations conduct innovations in education? Do you have an example?

25. Can accreditations lead to entrepreneurship in education? Can you clarify this?

83

– governmental pressures

– pressure from the rankings

– rival pressures from other business schools

– pressure from colleagues outside the organization

– pressure from groups inside the organization

84

Form of Consent for the interview

The influence of accreditations on the autonomy in teaching of employees and on entrepreneurship in business schools

Liesbeth Nederlof, master thesis, Master of Science in Business Administration, University of Amsterdam

Your initials please

1. I agree to take part in the research. ……………….

2. I agree that the interview is recorded. ……………….

3. I agree to the use of anonymised quotations in publications. ……………….

Show what you wish

4. I am interested in the transcript of this interview. Yes  No 

5. I would like to give feedback on the concept of the thesis. Yes  No 

6. I am interested in the results of this research. Yes  No 

Name of participant :…………………………………Signature:……………………………

Researcher’s Name: ……………………………………..Signature:……………………………

Date: ……………………………………..

85

Appendix 10 The development of codes during data analysis

I made transcripts of all the interviews and this took weeks. The first interview transcript took me twelve hours and I included every “ah and uh, yes and okay”. Later I saw this was not necessary to do. Also sometimes I was not able to hear what the interviewee told me after listening to the sentence at least five times. In the end I think about 99 percent of what is said is written down. For the following interviews it took about eight hours per interview, depending on the length of the interview. In the transcripts I coded the paragraphs. I used the following codes.

Codes

I developed the first group of codes from the institutional theory from my literature review.

P = Pressures Pc = coercive pressures Pm = mimetic pressures PnI = internal normative pressures PnE = external normative pressures IM = intrinsic motivation: This one I added from the interviews.

I developed the second group of codes, because I wanted to study some relations or influences of accreditations and autonomy, entrepreneurship and innovation. These codes were derived from my sub questions.

Influences Ac-Au = influence of accreditations on autonomy Ac – E = influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship

I developed the next codes from the process of operationalization of the construct autonomy. I saw that the following groups were used as groups to measure the construct autonomy in education.

Pearson & Hall (1993) developed an initial construct validation of the Teaching Autonomy Scale.

This scale operationalizes the construct autonomy in teaching. This scale was repeated by Moomaw

(2005) is his dissertation and appeared to be valid. They used two categories of autonomy in teaching: work processes and teaching conditions.

86

Autonomy in education WP = work processes TC = teaching conditions

The following group is about the different accreditations, the business schools have or would like to obtain.

Accreditations AMBA AACSB NVAO EQUIS EPAS

The next group of codes appeared during the process of data reduction. These different themes popped up during the coding. I tried to cluster them and grouped them.

Type of accreditation IA = institutional quality assurance assessment LPA = limited programme assessment

Reasons for accreditation AB = accountability D = distinctiveness Ra = rankings Re = reputation Q = quality check P = processes Le = legitimacy I = internationalization TC = triple crown

Groups inside organization EB = executive board De = dean F = faculty management Di = director PM = programme manager PS = potential students CR = current students PF = potential faculty L = lecturers TW= team work

Rest group S= strategy C = conclusion

87

Appendix 11 Summaries of interviews IBMS, Faculty for Economics & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht

Summary interview Chair task force quality and former team leader IBMS, man, Faculty for Economics & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht 17- 3- 2015 14.00

The IBMS-programme has the NVAO-accreditation and is busy to acquire EPAS-accreditation. IBMS wants EPAS, because then you join the big boys and play in their league. The pressure from the government is accountability to stakeholders, in public business schools the business schools receive tax money. Pressure from the rankings is not a reason to request for an accreditation. It is the choice from the institute to get an international accreditation. You want to show that you belong to the same league. It is indirect pressure from other business schools. IBMS chose for EPAS, because of the recognition and visibility for foreign students Hogeschool Rotterdam has begun with EPAS. Colleagues in networks ask why should you go for EPAS. What are the differences between NVAO and EPAS? IBMS participates in the national platform IBMS and is connected to partners of University of Applied Science Utrecht for exchange of students and lecturers. One of the reasons is that we have partners with EPAS- accreditation to join them for EPAS-accreditation. The pressures from inside the organization come from the people of the program. They regard it as a rosaceous project to profile. The order of pressures for NVAO-accreditation is the government, because we are a public business school.

The order of pressures for EPAS-accreditation is a combination between pressure from business schools in other countries and groups within the organization, management and lecturers, and the international office. Other business schools do not recognize NVAO and ask us: do you not have accreditations? We want to make visible that we meet the same quality norms.

Accreditations is not in the genes of the organization. It is seen as an addition, it costs effort, and they are busy. They see contributing to processes that lead to accreditation as something extra, an addition that distracts attention from the primary processes. The NVAO-accreditation is a must have, it is the law, and we follow the law. EPAS is self-chosen, the internal implementation, the pressure from groups within the organization, the people busy with internationalization, with connections to the outside, the business schools, the pressure to meet the requirements of EPAS, is felt in the management, not everybody in the team of IBMS acclaims the fact we are going to meet EPAS standards. The program manager tells us it must not be something new, because we are very busy, the desire is to do the two accreditations for NVAO and for EPAS parallel.

Standards of accreditation say something about the professionalism of the knowledge worker in the higher education. The lecturer must keep contact with the professional practice and the academic world, to keep his knowledge up-to-date and to transfer it to his courses and the relations with colleagues in that program, he must now didactic forms, which head to the direction of blended learning. He must collaborate with people inside and outside the organization, networking, and he must be an test expert, these are the requirements of the profile of a new lecturer in higher education.

There is in no sector so much autonomy than in education, but autonomy is freedom of choice in dependency. The way how to reach the goals can be different. Dependency means that you are in a team and you have to deliberate about the process. The professional has the freedom to choose the conditions, important for reaching his goal, but in dependency, because he is restricted in hours. The University of Applied Science gives a framework how the schedule must be, how the roster must be, but in the new building with less classrooms, the roster problem is more diffuse. Lecturers have to show resourcefulness, creativity and act autonomously to choose the conditions that fit him and his group of students.

The student-lecturer ratio is important as teaching condition, but at micro-level in the classroom accreditations do not have conditions. It is important that you reach your goals, that you coach students to the end goal, how you do it, is up to the lecturer, to the professional. I do not see the influence of accreditations on autonomy.

88

Autonomy should be enhanced. Lecturers must deliberate in a professional discourse with their program manager about the limits of the possibilities. This is not the case here, this is my dream.

Summary interview programme manager IBMS, woman, Faculty for Economics & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht 23 – 3 – 2015 11.30

We have the NVAO- accreditation and we are preparing EPAS-accreditation. Intrinsic and extrinsic pressures exist for achieving accreditations. I want my students to get a good diploma, which has its value. For the Faculty, for the organization, it is important that IBMS is reaccredited. As international programme you want to join the benchmark with your colleagues international programmes. An international hallmark is very important and EPAS is most usual in Europe. IBMS in Rotterdam and Amsterdam are preparing an EPAS-accreditation. Pressure from the government is for getting an NVAO- accreditation, not for an international accreditation. Pressure from the rankings to get accreditations is from the ranking of Elsevier. This ranking includes the NVAO-accreditation. Pressure comes from ourselves, the University of Applied Sciences, and from the peers. Our exchange partners ask us why we don’ t have an international accreditation, they don’ t know the NVAO- accreditation. IBMS programmes in Groningen and in Rotterdam are good examples, because they have their own profile. In the past we were a role model, because we had the specialisation emerging markets. Without accreditation you don’ t have a partner, you are not a conversational partner. We participate in a national IBMS platform. Accreditations mentioned in that platform are NVAO, EPAS, EQUIS, AISCHE, and AACSB. There is no pressure from within the organization, but we feel support from the Faculty director, and from international affairs.

The order of pressures for getting the NVAO-accreditation is groups inside the organization and then the government. The order of pressures for achieving the EPAS-accreditation is the rankings and the business schools. That strengthens each other.

The internal accreditation in the University of Applied Sciences prepares for the external NVAO-accreditation. The internal accreditation costs too much time, planning, effort and money. We had the judgement good for the last NVAO- accreditation, so we succeeded. We achieved this by “the basis in order” and by meeting the standards that the NVAO expected from us. The speed of reaction to acquire accreditations is standard for NVAO and is behind for EPAS, when compared with direct colleagues.

The NVAO - accreditation looks at work processes like exam matrices, examination processes, the assurance with students and in the trade and industry. Some lecturers experience making an exam matrix for the whole programme and look where your course fit in as cramping. Teaching conditions are minimal contact time, the amount of computer rooms, signage, and facilities for students. We can’t influence these factors. Here is a negative correlation with autonomy.

Accreditations can sometimes have positive effects, because you can achieve things before or after an accreditation. I organized training in examination e.g..

Sometimes lecturers see negative effects, because they have to change something in the curriculum. Accreditation is sometimes used as an excuse then. I think that accreditation does not influence autonomy, the autonomy stays the same.

Accreditations can lead to innovations in education. Examples are didactical forms or adjustment of your curriculum. You can use accreditation as a flywheel therefore. A lecturer can use knowledge about what is needed for an accreditation as a flywheel too. This can stimulate entrepreneurship.

89

Summary former team leader IBMS, man, Faculty for Economics & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht 25 – 3 -2015 11.30

IBMS is NVAO-accredited. We are busy with the first steps to acquire EPAS-accreditation. In the autumn we have the internal audit. The most important pressure for acquisition of NVAO- accreditation is external pressure, without accreditation, you don’ t exist. And of course quality check, this is an internal pressure. Only for the accreditation internal and external pressure come together of course. The NVAO-accreditation is national, Dutch, Flemish, it does not play any role in the world. For the EPAS-accreditation are other pressures important, you look at a number of criteria, Internationalization strength e.g., but the most important reason is that we have partner universities. The quality check plays more and more a role. In the end you can only be a partner when you are EPAS-accredited. That is the external pressure, the contact with the partners, the international appearance, the international reputation. IBMS has exchange programmes with around eighty partners. The EFMD, the accreditation organization of EPAS, is purely focused on research universities. We have to talk to this organization about the binary system with universities and universities of applied sciences in the Netherlands.

The quality check, our quality system is an instrument to watch the quality and repair where it is behind and to hold it actual. We have panels of students, student evaluations of lecturers and courses, the NSE, all feedback we get on programmes. The board of professional practice gives external impulses, the company supervisor gives feedback on our students or the programme. We get information about the actuality and the level of the programme. The NVAO accreditation only gives the external quality check. We have no exchange with other universities of applied Sciences or programmes, which can count as an external check. The NSE is developed into a national benchmark.

Different IBMS-programmes are busy with an EPAS- accreditation. Rotterdam is far with the datasheet, which counts as an admission test. In Rotterdam, the former chair of the IBMS-platform is going to share all his experiences and knowledge. The expectation is that all IBMS- programmes or all international programmes in English want EPAS in the end. The NVAO has experimented with a separate international notation. This was too Dutch, too internal. It has less international exposure than an internationally recognized accreditation.

Pressure from the government is for the NVAO-accreditation 100 %. Without accreditation, you don’t exist. For EPAS there is no pressure, so far as I know, that is own initiative to play in the international field on a long term. With the inspectorate we have no formal connection, because the NVAO acts as a sort of inspector. Pressure from the rankings is not for the NVAO- accreditation, because when you don’ t have it, you don’ t exist, and when you have it, that is normal. Rankings play a role in international accreditations, like EPAS and EQUIS. Foreign partners try to acquire these accreditations, because they enhance your reputation. I don’t know if you climb in the rankings. I think we get more attractive for our international students, if we are EPAS-accredited. It is not completely clear to which extent students take this into account in their choice for a University. Pressure from other business schools counts not for the NVAO-accreditation. For EPAS the story is different. Partners ask for quality, standards, and competencies. We screened our partners for accreditation in their own country. That is a demand for a partnership. The expectation is and this causes pressure, that in de future EPAS is a demand. This is informal pressure in mutual contacts. The expectations, the demands are screwed up slowly. Colleagues are people you meet in international or national platforms and contacts. You talk on behalf of your institute, you know your institute is going to set demands for the partner. That partner feels that and talks about it in mutual contacts.

IBMS is involved as partner in exchange programmes, in guest lectures, and in international programmes. The Staff department Internationalization of the Faculty visits and checks the partners every three or four years. Contacts are also on the level of lecturers and students. The coordinators for study abroad and incoming exchange have contact with partners. In all manners there is contact with partners.

The NVAO-accreditations is a must. Not everybody is waiting for this accreditation. It is a considerable effort. EPAS is an initiative from Internationalization of the Faculty in combination with IBMS. The importance of EPAS is clarified to the board of the Faculty. They did an exploration and visited a partner in Finland, that was just accredited. They looked at the experiences and made a cost and benefit analysis. The Faculty board is

90 interested, but the executive board is not convinced immediately. At University level this is not a priority. We think this is a priority, because your long term existence in the international world is at stake. For EPAS there is one pressure, the pressure from the government, it is self-evident, unavoidable. The chronological order of pressures is for EPAS is between other foreign business schools and groups in the organization, staff Internationalization. These two pressures can strengthen each other.

In the reaction from IBMS on NVAO-accreditation the internal and external quality check is important. Not only during the accreditation procedure we are busy with quality. It gets an enormous boost, because you do your best to get the accreditation, but in a good manner. This can be the only element of the NVAO which can play a role in the choice of Dutch students and in rankings. Of course we communicate the overall judgement “good” on websites and on open days. For a judgement good you need support from the lecturers, the team, and the staff. We are not good in providing fast, complete and understandable management information. For this you need the staff and the systems. We met amply the standards of the NVAO-accreditation, we did the limited accreditation, because the University was accredited at the level of the institute already. The recommendations from the NVAO- accreditation are topics we have to work on between two accreditations. The follow-up is varying, because as a programme we get a lot of things from the Faculty or University or other impulses. You have to set priorities. The priorities are not always the priorities of follow-up of accreditation recommendations. Here is a considerable tension, all these disruptions don’t set your quality process on hold, but sometimes move it to another direction.

In the NVAO- accreditation of the institute the policy of personnel, the quality system, finances, policy on assortment on a higher strategic level are studied. In the limited programme accreditation these elements were excluded. These three criteria focus on the right for existence of the programme, the content, (the organization of) the competencies, the quality of lecturers, and in our case very important, the diversity of lecturers and students, and examination and graduation. You catch nearly everything when you sum up the accreditation of the institute and the accreditation of the programme. Then you have all aspects of an organization and the right for existence and what the organization is doing.

The influence of the accreditation on autonomy in education is especially indirect, because all aspects, that play a role in the accreditation, are included in the policy of the University, the Faculty or the programme. For EPAS academic rigor is important, that is expressed in percentage PhDs, but also the percentage visiting professors and the amount of published articles. To meet the EPAS requirements, we look at PhDs. This is an indirect influence, but the policy of the institute went in that direction, so it converges. Another indirect story is about examination. The approach of examination is professionalized in the past years, it is made tighter. The competence of lecturers to make a good exam is enhanced, we have had training. They were needed for acquisition of the accreditation, but also because it is university policy. Thus that also comes together. The lecturers have to accept that. Everybody has to join, they have to provide an examination plan, an examination matrix, are your Learning objectives clear? That gives tension and it influenced the autonomy. I don’ t know if specific requirements are set to teaching conditions. The freedom of programmes to arrange education is considerably large. The only thing you have to do is demonstrate that you reach the objectives, your learning output, your learning outcomes, at the level you aim. In how you reach it, there is more the autonomy. We don’ t have a prescription which didactical form we have to use. They look at the facilities, with blended learning at the amount of computers. There is room, the criteria from the NVAO yields: do you do what you say, what you promise more than the way how you reach it. Examination and graduation are influenced from the outside. The programme translates the policy goals from the university and the faculty. I think that the autonomy in education in didactical forms is more determined by the means, coupled to the policy. The autonomy of lecturers is more influenced through internal processes than through accreditations. The amount of time lectures get for courses and blended learning have nothing to do with an accreditation.

In certain aspects the autonomy is decreased, because the requirements are tighter and on other aspects accreditation has no influence. The concept autonomy is difficult, because you look at it on the level of a team, a lecturer can’t determine individually what he is going to teach. Appointments are made in the team. Tighter requirements are in examination and in graduation and for EPAS the policy of personnel that has to publish. Here the autonomy is not diminished, but strongly directed. People are stimulated to start such a routes, this is caused by external stimuli. Because of this, your autonomy does not decrease, you get more chances.

91

Accreditations can’t cause innovations in content and didactical forms. It is the other way around, if you have applied innovation of education, you are proud and you show it, and maybe it plays a role in the acquisition of the judgement “good”. You apply innovation to attract a special group of students or to enhance your prestige. With EPAS I see more that accreditations can lead to entrepreneurship, but I think that there internal factors are also more important. Entrepreneurship is important in education, so you have to give room for it and means. This has a relation with the policy of the programme, the Faculty, and the University. If we find it important that lecturers are entrepreneurial, you have to include this in your policy. For the accreditation it can have a positive effect. You show that they are entrepreneurial and you try to distinguish yourself. Accreditations ask for distinctiveness, you don’ t do that for the accreditation. You do it to distinguish yourself nationally or internationally, and you want a certain position within the competitor group. You show it to students and trade and industry that we have something special.

Summary lecturer 1 IBMS, woman, Faculty Economie & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht 25 – 3 -2015 10.00

IBMS has the NVAO-accreditation. Pressures to acquire accreditations are the rankings, accreditations are a formal manner to compare and to measure business schools, so how many accreditations does the program have? Students look at this when they compare the quality of different programs. The pressure from the government is when the financial means are coupled to the acquisition of accreditations and the permission to offer a program, when accreditation is not acquired, the government has means to stop the program. Lobbying to emphasize the importance of accreditations does not happen. The inspector is the same as the government. They monitor the quality. It is a sort of tool or an objective manner to compare programs. The rankings of Elsevier are important, this is the strongest pressure to climb in the rankings. You are always compared. That happens through rankings, students choose programs high in the rankings. That is the pressure, the amount of students the program attracts. That is determined by the publicity, the rankings, and accreditations play a role in this. The pressure from other IBMS programs is indirectly through competition. I do not think IBMS is seen as a role model for other IBMS programs. Pressures from colleagues outside the organization to get accreditations is may be international, because it is an instrument for partner universities to look at accreditations, are the partners reliable, how is the quality? IBMS is a contributor to the IBMS-platform. They are one of the programs that determines the policy and the IBMS-framework in the future. Stakeholders inside the organization to acquire accreditations are the management, the Faculty director and the institute director. There is no pressure from students or lecturers. Of course as a lecturer you want a good result for the program accreditation.

The order of pressures for NVAO- accreditation is the government, the management , and the rankings.

The reaction of IBMS to these pressures is that they are not a frontrunner, they are a little behind, they do not prepare pro-active for the next accreditation. The deadlines give pressure. The level of meeting the accreditation norms is good. We are slow in using that feedback for innovation. The daily chaos, the bureaucracy dominates. It should be a chance to use the feedback and mobilised energy. Everybody is happy and the next accreditation is far away, so it is not used for continuous improvement processes.

Work processes in education important to accreditation norms are examination of competencies. This decreases the autonomy of course, you have a profile of competencies and you have to meet this and you have to test this. Another important thing is that you show that you collaborate with colleagues, you show enthusiasm, motivation, and involvement in the program, and to students how they experience the program, the student satisfaction, and the connection with the professional practice and companies. Teaching conditions are that you are qualified to teach that course. We had to show literature and recent books. They look at the building and at classrooms, at the computers and beamers. The rosters for the students are

92 important. The other courses, the weight and exams, and the roster influence the lectures in a positive or negative way. The autonomy is restricted through teaching conditions.

Accreditations form a certain framework, people have to commit themselves to. Too much autonomy is not always positive. It depends on what someone does with his autonomy, people can teach a course in their own manner, it can be very subjective and can deviate from what is thought in general in that subject.

I do not see the connection between accreditations and my autonomy.

Accreditations can conduct innovations, because in an accreditation you have to test if you satisfy to the framework of your program. The external environment changes and the IBMS- framework changes. It must be updated to include sustainability and recent developments. Other factors that lead to innovation are the pressure from trade and industry. We should involve them into the development of the curriculum or to evaluate the internships and determine the satisfaction on our students and what companies need. I think the triangle with education, research, and professional practice in our strategy is ideal. Accreditations can lead to entrepreneurship, because you are more conscious about what happens in the program and about what other lecturers do and about the whole program. You get feedback, and through the feedback you are conscious what you can improve, in our program Internationalization e.g.

Summary lecturer 2 IBMS, man, Faculty for Economics & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht 27- 3- 2015 10.30

We had the NVAO-accreditation twice. I was involved in the double degree programme with Plekhanov University in Russia. The NVAO is obliged by law. That is the motivation to get this accreditation. Further IBMS looks at international accreditation from the motivation of Internationalization policy. Other IBMS-programmes want to join an internationally recognized network of accredited universities. IBMS has the double degree programme and joins Erasmus staff Exchange programmes. For pressure from groups inside the organization he refers to the director international affairs, she must know this.

The chronological order of pressures to get accreditations is for NVAO only the government and for an international accreditation are intrinsic motivation, so no pressure, international acknowledgement of your programme to acquire international students and Exchange of experiences in the network. You are not forced to get an international accreditation to undertake something together.

The IBMS-programme got the judgement good. Other Universities of Applied Sciences were accredited simultaneously and we were first accredited, because in particular examination and graduation were all right.

For accreditation you have to make verifiable what you do. It emphasizes documentation, so it has the tendency to be a paper exercise. On one side the autonomy of the lecturer is attacked, you have to follow certain procedures very strictly and formally, the chance exists that het procedure does not match the practice, where the lecturer has to deal with. On the other side I see changes to acquire autonomy, you can determine for a large part what you want or how you are going to record. The general trend is that lecturers can work less on islands, fully autonomously, but collaborate more in teams and networks inside and outside the organizations. This is not per se pressure purely from accreditations, all though accreditation asks for connections with the professional practice, other Universities of Applied Science, and alumni. I think that it had led to mistakes that a lecturer could do it in his own way, and that it led to student dissatisfaction, e.g. as a lecturer was ill or left the organization, that his task was not transferable. So it is more a pressure to get a successful organization that people have to collaborate. For a large part you can determine the policy yourself. A strategic nota must be aligned with government regulations and with the strategic nota of the University, but you can emphasize accents yourselves. That is autonomy to a certain extent.

93

There are guidelines for teaching conditions, but I don’t know if these played a role in the accreditation. What you teach is not influenced by a lecturer, but that is determined by the course Leader and especially by the management. The course Leader determines the literature, the didactical forms, and the examination. Who can teach is determined by the management of course. How it is taught is decided by the course Leader, within the frames , the use of Faculty standards, contact time. The lecturer can choose the suitable didactical form. Who can be admitted are determined by government rules. I don’ t think accreditation has had much influence on my autonomy. I only see the effect that I have to be accountable for what I do, I have to record more, the exam matrix, documentation have to be there, my role is somewhat more formal.

I don’ t think that an accreditation has a strong relationship with innovation itself. Accreditations are afterwards on a process that has taken place, and gives a context, within which innovation can take place. Radical innovations must take place outside accreditation, because of course only then you can work outside the existing context. Accreditation gives to a certain extent a platform for incremental innovation, it invites to leave the business school and deliberate with other organizations.

Summary lecturer 3, man, Faculty for Economics & Management, Hogeschool Utrecht 16- 4- 2015 15.00

The pressure for a business school is very simple, no accreditation, then you are not allowed to teach. So no driver license, then you are not allowed to drive. If you step in such a process, I experienced the pressure that you look critically at your own way of working, and that is not always perfect and through the daily practice sneak in imperfections may be and in such a process you are pointed at these, that is a certain pressure. If you inherit a course from someone, then someone else has worked in a certain way for years, and that is not always idiot proof or fraud proof, yes, then this was a wake-up call to my conscience. And then you have to act to change things. You have to change the procedures, colleagues have to get used to that, and next you have to operationalize it in all kinds of documentation. You are reminded by yourself, because you are involved in the accreditation, That the NVAO it directs, it is the way it is. For me the accreditation itself is not so very interesting, because that turn you have made earlier. I think the ministry wants to have the illusion, that something reached a certain level. Yes, money is spent from the ministry to the different schools. They want to put a finger in, they want to have a moment of a dipstick, just as oil in a car. Yes, if something exists, as a good quality and how you define that, no idea. The inspectorate is according to me for us not applicable, because that is for elementary and high schools. We do that ourselves, we have to do that ourselves. You may hire different clubs, so we can ask our own police officer in that sense. I am absolutely not interested in pressure from rankings. As a director may be, but on the other side, which rankings are you talking about, the Financial Times, or those from America, or from Elsevier in the Netherlands, on which variables are you judged, I do not care at all. We grow every year nearly 40 percent. I do not know if growth is good, because the financiering is two years afterwards, then you are tighter in your budget, yes, I noticed that on the work Floor. Why do we grow? Because all programmes at the FEM have a numerus fixus, except IBMS, that is not allowed, because we have to accept international students, and they do not know before March where they will be in September, so we cannot do that. So, people who do not take the risk, to be casted, because they subscribe for IBMS and that is one cause of the growth, and that influences the quality, because you are tighter in personnel, so there is something. We exchange lecturers for different courses, summer schools. IBMS things about getting international accreditations, but at this moment we focus on our shop in the Netherlands to keep that in order, certainly with growth it is more important than to diversity, and so firstly we take care that the boat navigates not in the wrong direction. The pressure from groups inside the organization comes from the programme managers, that pressure. The executive board wants of course that you are accredited. The directors of the institutes are important too. From lecturers there is no pressure, I think, because it is just extra work, you have to reserve hours for that, hours we really need to teach and to examine, and from students, no, they like it like this.

94

The chronological order in pressures is colleagues and the ministry of course, and the organization itself, but that is induced by the ministry. It should start with the ministry, and then may be outside the organization and then inside. Look, if you say that rankings do not interest me, we try to be the best, if someone things so or not, we do not care, that is possible. It is not important what other business schools do.

IBMS meets the NVAO standards abundantly. The only thing to improve we had was the English signage in the building, and if you cannot control something as a programme, then it is the building and facilities, like the signage. We could not do something about it. Other IBMS have the same cadence, you are in a group, because you are accredited in groups.

In work processes the only thing which is paid attention to is that you do what you say yourself that you are doing and the level. If we test on a certain level, you have to show that. So the competencies, do you test them on different levels, how do you do that, and then you have to proof that with materials like the course guide, with exams, for graduation everybody has to judge in the same way. You must show that you can do research systematically, based on facts. You are as free as a bird, I have been course leader of several things, yes, I can write that course guide, of course in the spirit of the IBMS-platform about that subject, but you can change the course guide every year, you can change the exams, and then, if you follow your own way of working, you are really super free. The question is: do you use that space, because when you want to change something, you have to ask for new positions in Osiris, you have to let it tested by the test committee, you have to make a new knowledge matrix, you can change everything, but consequences are attached of course. It cost energy to change it. Influence of accreditation on autonomy is not applicable according to me. No, because again the only thing what accreditation does is control if you do what you say what you do, so the autonomy stays the same. Teachings conditions are that you have good tools, have a beamer, a smart board, a laptop, and that the signage is in English. The influence on the autonomy is zero, the signage does not change.

The influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers in teaching is that you still can do what you want basicly, if you do it within your framework, what you say so, so I think that you are super free. Nowadays you have to have a masters title minimally. And they want such a percentage of PhDs. Who can teach is decided by the business school, by the directors of the Faculty. What can be taught is determined by the lecturers themselves in their team. How you do it is up to everyone themselves. Accreditations can give feedback on didactical forms. Who can be admitted to study, the exam committee requests certain demands. The exam committee is the internal accreditations club really. Because the only thing the exam committee does is look if you follow your own rules. They have the same concept. Do what you say and if you want to deviate, explain why. It is more or less a second pair of eyes. My autonomy is the same through accreditations.

Accreditation is an internal control check and innovation is something else. Innovation is looking at new things, what are the developments, innovation is a general construct. Accreditation and innovation, that bites each other a little. Are that creative people from the NVAO, no, they just control if you follow the processes and the procedures. I doubt if accreditations can lead to entrepreneurship in education. You are an entrepreneur or not. What is an entrepreneur? Someone who dares to take risk, someone who has self-confidence, someone who sees chances in the market, that others do not see. Accreditations has nothing to do with that at all.

95

Appendix 12 Summaries of interviews MBA, Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam

Summary Project leader accreditations, man, University of Amsterdam 2- 4- 2015 10.00

The pressure from the law is the first pressure, because when you want to get your programmes financed, then you need the accreditation. That is for the NVAO- accreditation. You have financed programmes and non- financed programmes. For financed programmes the NVAO- accreditation is important, because otherwise you don’ t get financial means, if you don’ t get the accreditation. For non- financed programmes the accreditation is a sort of acknowledgement, that the current and the potential students know that the programme meets standards of the NVAO, it is recognized by the Dutch government. This counts for the financed programmes too, an indirect effect is that you show you meet a number of quality standards. This is the pressure from the law, but also quality pressure, for both financed and non- financed programmes. Above all the pressure from the University of Amsterdam exists. The policy from the University is that all programmes, bot financed and non-financed get an NVAO-accreditation. Universities of Applied Science get NVAO- accreditations for their master programmes. That is a little pressure from competitors. For the international accreditations counts that when you are an international operating Faculty and you want to attract good students and staff, it is nearly necessary that you have EQUIS-accreditation and AACSB- accreditation, and for the MBA of course AMBA, because when you have these accreditations you can easily attract good foreign students. They know the international accreditations, and most good business schools have an international accreditation, like AACSB e.g.. The same counts for the attraction of good staff. They will be led by a small part through EQUIS and AACSB. This is pressure from Internationalization. Rotterdam School of Management was early to get accreditations in The Netherland, but also in Europe. Rotterdam is seen in the top ten of business schools from a European view. The pressure from the government is only for the NVAO - accreditation of course for the financing , but also for the quality. There is no pressure from the Dutch government for an international accreditation. That pressure is from the Faculty itself, they operate internationally, they have to get an international hallmark. The University wants to acquire the hallmark internationalization in the next institutional accreditation, so the University has agreed with her Faculty that Internationalization must come back in accreditations. The inspectorate visits us to check a certain part, the examination commission or a process, graduation e.g. in a programme. I don’ t know what the relationship between the inspectorate and the accreditations is. They focus on a part and probably it is driven by the government. The Financial Times rankings are important. I don’ t know the correlation, but I assume that rankings play a role in the accreditations. There will be a certain pressure, I think. I don’ t know if international accreditations give you points in te ranking. I know that salary at the start from MBA students will be taken along. Pressure from other business schools is international, if you see that your competitors have it all, then you are going to acquire that yourself. Examples are Rotterdam School of Management, Norwegian School of Management, Marconi Business School in Italy, St. Gallen in Switzerland, and Copenhagen Business School. London Business School is better than them. Rotterdam School of Management has a great reputation, but they feel the competitors are coming up. Maastricht and Amsterdam, the amount of students is grown, we have extended our portfolios, we attract more foreign students, our connections with trade and industry are getting tighter. They feel competition from our MBA, because in the past we did not have an MBA. The VU is busy with AACSB. That is, because we will acquire this accreditation. They see they are a laggard, if they don’ t have that. We meet twice a year in a network of quality experts of universities. We talk about quality assurance and accreditations, the collaboration with AACSB e.g., the development of blended Learning, and of new programmes, the set up of assures of learning, in which manner it is assured in quality systems, so we help each other, we exchange information, but there is a limit, some reports are confidential.

96

The dean is the most important person in the organization that puts pressures to get accreditations. For MBA Alan Muller is important too and the director of the business school too.

The chronological order in pressures to get accreditations is from the government for the NVAO-accreditation, and then the executive board and then the faculties. International developments in business education are important for international accreditations, what do others do? These are pressures from other business schools. Colleagues in networks play a small role. Internal groups within the organization are the executive board and the Faculty director.

The business school meets the standards abundantly. In the national accreditation we are as fast as the rest, may be faster, we have the accreditation dossiers in order. Internationally we are a little bit behind, Rotterdam was number one, after that came Maastricht, then Tilburg and Groningen and after them we came. We are going to pass everybody. Behind us the VU and Nijmegen come.

Who can be admitted to the programme can be found in the education and exam regulation, set up by the director of education and programme directors. This regulation is discussed in the commission of the programme, which includes lecturers. The decision who can teach is made by the programme director and the head of the section. What can be taught, the programme has the end qualifications that have to be achieved in courses by students. The global content and the courses must meet the end qualifications of the programme. These are determined by the programme director and a lecturer. Here the lecturer has influence. In how it shell be taught, the lecturer has quite large autonomy. Unless the Faculty wants to use more blended learning, that autonomy is still there. I don’t see a relationship between work processes of lecturers and accreditation, they teach according to the agreements with the programme director and the head of the section, but this is not influenced by accreditations. Teaching conditions are that a lecturer must have a PhD, most lecturers have BKO ( basis qualification of education). Most lecturers are good scientists, they must transfer their research to students. Every course is evaluated and if something is wrong, that will be discussed with the lecturer. I don’t think the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers is so large. The autonomy of a lecturer concentrates itself on the decision in which manner education is given. Mostly he can do that himself. I think the effect is neutral.

Accreditations can realize innovations in education, It is a mirror, an accreditations commission points out the weak spots in the programme. With this information you can improve a programme. We have had feedback on one examiner in the bachelor thesis and on the end qualifications. Improvements improve the quality of education because of the accreditation.

Summary dean ABS UvA Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 17 – 4 – 2015 9.30 and 22 – 4 – 2015 9.00

Accreditations is a requirement for your reputation. And you are regarded as a frontrunner in the world of the business schools, if you have triple crown, those three, so, I am not for so long here, I have been busy to hunt behind it. Rotterdam was the frontrunner. I have been dean in Rotterdam. We were the first in Rotterdam acquiring EQUIS and AACSB. Amsterdam is a relatively latecomer, because Amsterdam Business School became relatively late a separate kind of business school in 2007. Different accreditation organizations followed different strategies, it has become business. At this moment you see that AACSB is more dominant, it is by far the largest in the world, AMBA has a difficult time. Maybe they will be taken over by AACSB and at this moment there is clearly a sort of competition battle between the EFMD in Brussels and the AACSB.. It is the price you have to pay as a school to join the big angry world. The acquisition of students is from Asia, Mediterranean Europe, and Latin America. The pressure from the ministry is for the NVAO, the ministry has the stance that the Dutch education product has to meet certain demands. It is an issue of resource allocation, if you as an education institute find it worth to put a lot of money, it is about considerable amounts, into those accreditation systems and if it yields in terms of quality improvement. I

97 have heard that we as the Netherlands have invested 40 million of euros. That is not peanuts. I think that we are pretty turned over. For us as a business school counts strongly that those international accreditations are important. I can announce proudly that after 15 years of talking I succeeded in collaboration with Paul Zevenberg from the NVAO that two accreditations are done at once. Rankings use accreditations as a kind of preselection tool. The financial Times is important. It is the price to stay in the business. Otherwise you are not seen, you are not taken seriously. Your reputation is important to be able to acquire the best students. Business faculties are frontrunners in internationalization. They educate for an international labour market and Internationalization puts pressure on differentiation and international quality hallmarks. Therefore the Dutch quality mark is insufficient. The dean puts pressure to get accreditations. That is in our strategic plan. As lecturers you can better teach in an accredited business school. Students get a diploma at a moment and they want their diploma to get more value, so they benefit, if the reputation increases of the institute they graduated from.

The pressure begins in your own environment, the institutional regulation in that environment, is primarily through the Ministry of Education. The ministry wants to assure the quality. Also she wants to stimulate her objectives, to increase the percentage of higher educated people. In the Netherlands a tension exists between higher education as a public good and higher education for a smaller, selected group. Research has demonstrated that if people are going to study is related to the socio-economical background of their parents. So the pressure begins with the ministry of education, because the ministry determines in her policy measures how much money we get. Pressure from the rankings follows. In the sense that you have the ambition, and that is reflected in the rankings, and these rankings determine in the international field the choice behaviour of potential students. There are rankings of programmes and rankings of business schools and rankings of universities. Rankings are important, because they define your reputation and your reputation defines your admissions. When you have a lot of admissions, you can select good. There is a tension in the Netherlands, because we didn’t want to select or didn’t get the possibilities of the government legislator to select. Other business schools do unwise to put pressure on me. Why? If you have the accreditation, you must prevent that your neighbour gets it. It is about differentiating and to distinguish yourself, you see that the more everybody gets the accreditations, the distinctive character disappears and it becomes a hallmark, we play in the same league. The executive board says: why don’t you do it? For young employees it is important to have a job at a reputed school. That determines partly their chances in their career. You take the reputation of your employer with you. Nobody is calling: “we need accreditations”. No, if somebody does it, it is me. They had EQUIS, I think we have to acquire in high tempo AACSB and AMBA. AACSB joins us in November, AMBA in the spring, so mission completed.

Work processes important according to accreditation norms are quality processes, the way they are arranged, the way they are measured, the way in which quality is directed. There is tension, in the sense that accreditations force everybody in the same corset, you could argument that they are a brake on differentiation. It costs a lot of effort to get accreditations, the accreditations must be stable over time, you could argument that accreditations are inherently conservative and that is why we maybe get a brake on innovation. Accreditations are regulation frames and regulating frames have always a kind of fundamental brake on innovation within them. Lecturers are in this kind of environments entrepreneurial. They do research, they teach and they must be visible in the public arena. Teaching conditions important according to accreditation norms are the quality of classrooms and the quality of media support. lecturers of course are in an academic environment considerably autonomous. They are a little limited by the conditions, e.g. the lay-out of the class room. If you put or force something in a corset, then the autonomy decreases a little, although I have to say: EQUIS and AACSB, they are less prescriptive in content. They give the framework of quality systems and how the content fits in the vision. AMBA does prescriptive statements about the content, the subjects in a business curriculum. Courses like operations management, finance and organizational behaviour must be included. NVAO is not prescriptive also.

98

Summary interview programme manager MBA Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 15 – 4 – 2015 9.20

Accreditations are important for your reputation, the better the reputation, the more students you get in the end. I think it is important for us, because MBA is not in the rankings, because we have relatively small student numbers, so then it is important to get accredited. The MBA- title is not protected. There are a lot of MBA-programmes. Therefore it is important to distinguish yourself from other programmes and is it also a demand from the executive board that all master programmes are accredited. Every ranking has other criteria. I think rankings play a role, MBA is not in the rankings, because we have not high student numbers, so because you are not in the rankings, you must distinguish yourself in another way. Other business schools do not put pressure on us, but you want as Rotterdam School of Management triple crown accreditation. So although they do not put pressure, it is important that you join as business school. We look at the demands from AMBA, because you have apart from the request of 20 students per cohort, other requests, your programme must have 90 ECTS, 500 hours contact time, we want to meet those demands, so in that sense we are ready for AMBA. The executive board and the dean, she wants triple crown accreditation of course. The executive board is for the NVAO-accreditation, because you have to be accredited, the MSI-title must be delivered. The director MBA wants it too, to distinguish yourself from other MBA- programmes, because it is not a protected title. At the moment that potential students look at different MBAs it is important to show that you are accredited, so that you have a good programme and you meet all the demands. I experienced only the pressure form within the organization and the executive board.

I think that different accreditation bodies demand different requests to the programme. That is difficult, because we are a MBA–programme, we have to be accredited by the NVAO and the NVAO has other demands, because they see you as a master of Science programme than the demands from AMBA. We are always in a sort of split, because you have to meet requests from the NVAO, they have to write master thesis, while as an MBA-programme you wants students to do a company project, because of the practice, so how you solve this is difficult of course. On 21 parts we were judged by the NVAO and we did that sufficiently. I think we were one of the first, accredited by EQUIS, but with AMBA we are behind, because RSM is AMBA accredited, that is what we want also.

Work processes important for accreditations are for NVAO and EQUIS are Dublin descriptors, entrance demands, how do you meet them, how do you test quality, how do you evaluate. An important part the NVAO focused on is theses, because when the theses are okay, it is of course the end product, than the whole previous route is probably okay. Certain subjects like Ethics and integrity are certainly for AMBA important.

Definition of autonomy Who can teach is determined by the programme director. He has a meeting with the lecturers. We give a lot of freedom to the lecturer, because we see the lecturer as an expert in his topic. What and how is taught is determined by the lecturer himself. There is autonomy for sure. He gets the course outline of a previous lecturer and there is a meeting with the programme director. Of course you have to meet certain demands: 60 percent of the end score must be an individual performance, we want 30 to 40 percent to be group assignments and how they fill it in is up to them. The course format is seven weeks of tree and a half hours, the course outline must fit in a certain format. As long as it is within the boundaries and within the formats, they have freedom in teaching. I think most rules are put through the exam committee, the rules I just mentioned. I think the effect of accreditations on autonomy is neutral, because most demands here are requested by the exam committee. Who can be admitted is determined by the sales and recruitment manager and the programme director. Students have to have an master of Science or a masters title, they have to have three years of working experience. People must be motivated, a GMAT could be requested, a worldwide test.

I think you have to show in accreditations how you are innovating, how you are up-to-date, how you use new technologies. For EQUIS Internationalization is an important focus point of course, study trips, collaboration with other universities, the student population must be international, the lecturers population must be

99 international, what do you do with exchange. I don’t know if accreditation is the starting point of entrepreneurship, I think it is more in the lecturer himself, enough lecturers with secondary activities are here, but is it is caused by accreditations, I don’t believe so.

Summary lecturer 1 MBA Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 15 – 4 – 2015 10.00

The typical deal at Amsterdam business school is like my contact, 50 percent teaching and 50 percent research. MBA programmes are relatively loose in their accreditations around the world, in that sense then for them it is important to be accredited. It is related to reputation, accreditation helps with legitimacy and reputation. So I would say that it is quite important to be recognized as one of the key programmes in Europe or in the world. The students would do not care, the MBA students might care a little bit more. The foreign students more and the Dutch students especially if they are going to work abroad, then is an internationally recognized accreditation important, because then they could easily say: hey, we have the same accreditation. So potential students helps, but it is more of a kind of a sort of mimicry effect, in the sense that business schools tend to be more rather similar around the world, they typically would like these types of accreditations. If you are the top of the top, you do not really need to care about it. If you are an emerging or a kind of middle level business school, then you usually need to care about it and especially those that doing not so well, they even care more about it. The UvA is highly ranked in all of these international competitions and rankings, it tends to do rather well, the business school is relatively new, so it is not in many of the rankings, but in terms of teaching and research, it is doing very well, I do not know if it is yet, like the MBA programme always want to get in different rankings, like the Financial Times. Those are important, because then the potential students read that and those are much based on future salaries instead of teaching quality. There is a legal pressure in the sense that you need to be an accredited programme to be able to teach, so that is a kind of baseline to have a license to operate as a University as a business school. That is for the NVAO- accreditation. So that is kind of compulsory, that you need to meet those standards and it is a standard, but it is also a kind of quality check and discussion about how things are going within the university, so that is understandable, that the funders, the tax players are paying a large part of the education. So through these accreditations they have the right to know what is going at in the university, and what sort of quality is the teaching. From the other ones (L accreditations) I am not aware of any the government pressure pushing for EQUIS or AMBA or AACSB. I think they probably would not mind it. From previous governments I know that governments wanted to have flagship universities, who are accredited and who are more international. In Finland was Aalto University triple crown accredited, so three recently emerged universities felt that it was very important to have this triple crown accreditation.

In the USA, I was in Stanford University for three years, which is one of the top business schools in the world, probably ranked number one or two, fighting with Harvard, and Stanford did not have practically any accreditations. They did not need it and they did not want it. So in essence, they do not want to follow, because they see it as a kind of iron cage, limiting your teaching and your research, so they say, we do not want anything. I think the rankings are nowadays more and more important for business schools, especially trying to create a European market, which has not really existed, a competitive European market for business schools. Well, it exists but people do not move not that much from country to country. Okay, they move for the top schools, but the rankings are important and there is a variety of different rankings out there. The financial times, times higher education, QS, there are different types of deans lists in terms of how deans rate universities. I think that probably fifty different rankings of business schools exist.

I think pressure comes from the rankings especially to the deans. To the particular teachers, they do not necessary care that much. Okay, we care in terms of how the reputation of the school, but nobody is really that fanatic about getting the school higher in the rankings. The MBAs look at specific like the financial times rankings. The other different types of rankings are more University wide or programme wide, so I think it is good that the university as a whole, UvA or ABS is in a variety of rankings.

100

I do not think there is much pressure from other business schools, it depends on the types of alliances between business schools. I am sure that CEMS (European Community of Management Schools) put a little bit of pressure on that all schools being accredited. The other business schools are not putting pressure on us, if other business schools get on the rankings, that would be the same as your neighbour getting a better car, then you kind of look at it and you say: “okay, maybe we need to get it as well”. So the deans look at other schools and are interested in comparing their own school. The MBAs, there tends to be a variety of different ones, the top US schools: Harvard and Stanford and Yale, in Europe there is a variety of strong programmes: Insead, Esade ( L Barcelona, Spain), Bocconi (Milan, Italy), St Gallen ( Switzerland), Copenhagen business school. So there is different positionings within, some are more practical and some are more research oriented, so ourselves is a very research oriented University. There are different programmes and then you can have satellite programmes in different countries, like in Asia. So there is a variety of different types of alliances and programmes, that you can do across the world. Some countries have more Internationalization of their programmes, some less. The pressure from inside the organization comes from the heads of the Educational programmes, the programme director, from the deans, the Business School dean and the Faculty dean, and the research director. I do not think ever a student came to me and talked about accreditations, so the pressure from students is not much. As a collective I think the potential is there, especially MBA students. I think they would like an accreditation, the more the better basicly. Not that they know much about them, but in the sense of that it would be good to have a very good accredited programme. And the lecturers do not really have any pressure, I would say, I do not think they really go to each other and say: “we must do something for this accreditation”. I doubt it. For the NVAO, it would be just governmental pressures.

EQUIS, I would say, it depends on the school, in the case of ABS, I think that the primary would be, it is a mix between wanting to have it, so the groups inside the organizations and others, having it, which shows from the pressures of other business schools, which is indicted in the rankings. The three types of pressures are pretty complementary, I think the direction is the same in essence. You hear it from, it is always easier for a dean or for an administrator to say that we need this, if you hear it from multiple sides, it is essentially the same story that: “ okay, the others are doing it, so we need to do it as well.” I should say others have it, since we are a sort of late comer, and we are relatively new business school, so the others have it first, it affected their reputation, it showed up in their rankings, so then people from inside said: “okay, we should have it too”.

So it depends which ranking you do first, they are a kind of complementary, so once you do one, I think the others are much easier to do. So having EQUIS and then going for AACSB, I think the pressure, I see it more as an internal thing. Getting the first accreditation is more an external thing, if you are a new business school, but the others are complementary, not necessary, but you can have them as well, so you might as well continue the process, so I would say, that it is the pressure from the inside is primarily for AACSB and AMBA.

Work processes important for accreditation norms are, they are not that oriented in terms of how you teach, but they think about essentially the principles and the objectives, so they want a very clear framing of why is this is being taught and what kind of skills will be the output essentially, that we can estimate of this , is there a measurable output from going through this programme. So they are very interested in the terminology and the measurement of those Educational output. This is mostly EQUIS, EQUIS and AACSB, so when we started with EQUIS, we started orienting ourselves towards AACSB. They have a particular way of looking at educational programmes, so most schools, like us tend to standardise towards that and start to look at programmes in a specific way, describing them in a specific way, in terms of those outputs that are needed. Autonomy as defined in terms can decide what to teach, so that I am pretty free in deciding what to teach. How to teach is completely free as well. Essentially it is more just about understanding of the learning outcomes or it is more a dialogue between the funder or accreditation agency and the university. It is a discussion of what essentially are we doing here? I do not think they care that much in terms of how particular learning outcomes are exactly achieved , but they do aim to specify them, those specific skills. So it is more a kind of developmental discussion, trying to understand how different courses fit together and what is the outcomes of specific courses. It is more a kind of support function in essence for the development of courses. Standardization affected for example the amount of materials and the amount of hours, that students re expected to put in, so ECTS credits.

101

Who may teach is more of a negotiation and a dialogue between the section heads. It is more of a discussion of I taught this last time, can I move a little bit in this direction. Who is admitted to teach, I have nothing to do with that. The MBA has GMAT and so on and different scores. Teaching conditions are a cultural, organization culture, a kind of inspirational environment in general than all of the, anything in between that and from class rooms and technology and facilities, so anything between the physical and the ideas, so I think they care about the general conditions of teaching, so the basics, the class rooms, the technology, the chairs, and the facilities need to be met of course to be able to do that. I think they look at how you teach, and what you are doing in class. They look at student evaluations. It needs to be student oriented. So they look at how Faculty interacts with students and how they speak, about teaching in the interviews. I think we have autonomy in those conditions, but it does not mean necessary that we get what we want. I think that it can help the autonomy in terms of if the accreditation says that you need more close contact teaching and smaller groups, that can be supportive of those types of autonomy decisions. I think putting emphasis on teaching increases your possibilities as a lecturer to get resources for teaching. You need to structure your aims of a course in a specific way, but I never felt it as too restrictive. Some elements increase the autonomy, some elements decrease the autonomy, but as a whole I would say pretty similar, a limited impact on autonomy.

Probably accreditations would more harm innovations than benefit. The positive side is that through accreditations, through experiences, the international staff, who do this a lot, they come and tell ideas of how things are and it can support the development of the school, the benefits are at the individual school level, the harm is at field level, so in essence if all business schools start looking like each other and have the same objectives and have the same processes, then that would harm innovation, that Some business schools are allowed or just want to do something completely different and of course those schools do not necessary need accreditations. I think that innovation is happening else than in accredited business schools. Most likely it will happen in non-profit and for profit types of initiatives in terms of education and new forms of universities. I think that accreditations, that, if they are too strictly, can lead to entrepreneurship. Two Professors from Stanford left Stanford when they got tired of it. Well, they founded Coursera, which is an interesting online platform for education. This is a negative example, but on the positive side they could, but they would need to channel funding, it would need to be shown in the performance matrix of individual lecturers, all of the criteria for advancing your career are related to research, so in that sense, if the accreditations can change that and put measurable emphasis and potentially Some funding for experimentation on the educational side, than, yes, then there can be all kinds of entrepreneurship.

Summary programme director MBA and lecturer 2 MBA ABS UvA Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 22 – 4 – 2015 10.00

For EQUIS we were accredited earlier, and then we had a re-accreditation, but that didn’t go well, so we had a year delay, we could improve things, because it had to do with presentation, not that we didn’t meet the demands, it was disorderly presented. I do not experience much external pressure. The pressure comes from yourself, you want to show the world or the market, that you meet quality standards, and that you are open to continuous improvement. For NVAO it was a demand of the executive board. The dean has set triple crown as a strategic objective, so in that sense is AMBA something which was on my mind from day one, because when the MBA-programme is a product, then potential customers look for attributes , they expect from such a product and certain accreditations belong to that, so it is not a demand, but if you want to attract the right people, they look at that, then you have to say: we have this and we have that. In our policy for alumni we have career services, AMBA- accreditation, ranking. Those are the things, people look for. The dean wants AMBA, but he does not put pressure on me. I wanted it before it was in the strategic plan. Students and alumni see the value of their diploma is partly influenced by things as rankings, accreditations and status. The more you do this kind of the things, the happier students and alumni are. Sometimes a potential student asks: “ why do you have EQUIS and not AACSB?” Or if you are far away in India or China or America, then you look at information on the website. Maybe EQUIS they have heard of, NVAO does not sound familiar. You know that business schools are big business and graduate programmes also, so everybody wants to attract

102 the customer. Of course you want the hallmark. You have to look at yourself, and strive for certain internal objectives as feedback student – programme, programme back to students, evaluations, what is the vision behind your programme, how do you manage that students learn a lot, otherwise you can call everything an MBA without it is a real MBA in the eyes of the market. It is a kind of hallmark. I experience no pressure from the government, may be the dean can answer that. If it is there, pressure is put on the executive board and it comes via the executive boards with us. The executive board wants accreditations. For so far there is pressure, then it is more from yourself, it is not to join a ranking that you need accreditations. It helps with the rankings. The better accredited, the better you do it in the rankings, but it works through yourself and your own wish to get higher in the rankings. We are in the Eduniversal rankings, not in the financial times, that has a positive influence on your ranking, the more or better accreditations, the more international accreditations, and not just the national ones. In the end your ranking is mainly determined by the salary of your graduates. Rankings must not be the driver to get accreditations.

These are the most important pressures: the rankings and the other business schools, that is never explicitly. They feed my own motivation. all the other business schools don’ t bother me, but I see that he has an accreditation, so in that sense I take that into account. Student numbers, that is the only question mark, it is more that you know you have something beautiful and you want that in it is perceived in the eyes of the external environment as valuable and partly you need those rankings to give confidence to people, so it is related to that. I should call this all pressure from the market: pressure from rankings and other business schools together with potential students, pressure from groups within the organization, that is the dean, my direct boss was sceptical if AMBA was needed. You need to have the attributes, that potential customers expect from you. I say to my boss: “we cannot permit ourselves, not to go for AMBA.” If you have a status and a reputation, but as long as you don’t have it, you must collect as many attributes as possible, on the basis of which that people can conclude, that you are good. You can translate the investment of 30.000 euros difficult or link it directly to new students, but if you acquire one student on the basis of that accreditation, then you have a return on your investment. Accreditations cost money, cost time, but a part of the benefit is that you look at yourself and your processes, make improvements, ask yourself why do we do it this way, so that is a benefit you cannot express in profit. It is benefit for the organization, maybe things can be organized more efficient, so it cost money, but I think it is worth it. I think that when you don’t do it you suffer more than when you do it.

Other business schools in the Netherlands are triple crown accredited, so we are no frontrunner. If one business school has it, there will follow more. People look at each other, o, he also, look, if nobody is AMBA- accredited, than it is not a big deal, but as everybody has it, and you do not, than people regard it and think there must be a reason for that. The schools with programmes we see as competitors have the accreditations. Once we didn’t get EQUIS, but for the MBA we did the NVAO-accreditation abundantly, the committee made some remarks on the level of the theses and the background check of international diplomas.

Learning objectives, how they will be reached and how it is tested, student evaluations, feedback, and communication are important work processes according accreditations. With AACSB the assurances of Learning, the learning objectives are made explicitly. As a lecturer the steps you go through are more administrative workload, but as a lecturer I think it is good that you think about what you are doing, and why and if it works, it is a quality demand and that begins with looking at yourself, and what did I want. The programme management presses the programmes in a certain format to meet the accreditations demands. The lecturer has less space to do your subject in your own way, because that subject can be given by more people and maybe there is less freedom in how you want to fill in your subject, because the learning objective must be consistent among all lecturers, so among the groups, I think you have less autonomy as a lecturer, and the expectation is that the transparency and coherence among all groups over semesters will increase. Standardization. AMBA wants you to realize 500 contact hours. In this sense you have less autonomy. I believe strongly in academic freedom, because you can teach in things, you are interested in in a way that works for you. I bring the Faculty together once or twice a year to discuss policy changes or issues, so everyone knows what is going on and exchange ideas to create more consistency.

103

I think it is important that people have the feeling to get room to do their own thing, but as it deviates strongly, students evaluate it negatively and you notice that in evaluations, then you have a discourse with the lecturer. What I define as autonomy is what you do in the class room or in the lecturer room, how you teach, in that sense nobody tells me that I have to teach in a specific way, not at all, because accreditation bodies want it. I think maybe my autonomy is a little decreased, because I think with accreditation demands, e.g. that the exam score must be for 60 % an individually effort, no team assignments or so. There are rules and limitations. I do not experience that per se as negative, because particularly in Amsterdam, it was ten years ago freedom, happiness, everybody did what he wanted. I think that limitation of autonomy is not only bad. That is a curve, a little less autonomy increases the quality, but too much limitation of autonomy decreases the quality.

Accreditation is in the way of radical innovation, because you have to meet requirements, that are invented in the past on the basis of performance in het past. AMBA wants you to Teach in class rooms, so distance Learning is no possibility. Maybe accreditations are good for incremental innovations, you get tips and ideas how to do things different, if that is innovative, I don’t know. I think you get blinkers through accreditations, then you are very focused on that, what is expected from you, and we do not brainstorm with all of us, how we can change things!

Summary lecturer 3 MBA Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam 24 – 4 – 2015 16.30

Pressure to het accreditations are partly to acquire more students and partly to improve internal processes. The NVAO –accreditation is obligatory from the government, the others you can choose yourself. Pressure from other business schools in the sense of if one has it (accreditation L), that the chance is getting larger for the others? It is meaningful for the others to have it. I think so. It is a sort of competition. I think that the pressure is from the perspective that you get in a better position in competition at the moment you have achieved an accreditation and the second argument is that it helps you in improving processes. It is no pressure, but a stimulus from the dean or the management team.

I do not recognize a chronological pattern. N=1, I do not know exactly how that exists, I do not know where which trigger is.

It is not so much the speed compared to others, it is about : what do you want yourself in the future and when do you start such a process, you have your own path. What others do has effect on your own plan, but you have to make up your own plan first.

You keep the autonomy, in that sense you have complete autonomy in how you set it up, of course you have certain norms to meet, but if you deviate from that, and you do that in a motivated manner, then there is nothing to worry about, if you meet the end qualifications. The influence of accreditations on autonomy is not that much. You have considerable autonomy if you define autonomy as the possibilities you have to teach in a way which fits your objective, you have to record this, je got some freedom, I think it is there for sure. If you can explain it.

The accreditation agency can check off at the moment you have met standards, so accountability is important in such an accreditation. If you cannot do it, then they cannot put a hallmark on it. It created more work to do that all. That is the only disadvantage, but the autonomy is the same. I do not see a direct link between accreditation and entrepreneurship.

104

Appendix 13 Summaries of interviews MBA, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University

Summary Policy advisor accreditations and rankings School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 2-6-2015 12.30

I do not experience pressure. The biggest competitor is the Erasmus University. It is troublesome to lose triple crown, it is nice to keep it.

Other universities are impressed by triple crown.

Financial Times asks us which accreditations we have, accreditations do not count in the rankings. Accreditations and rakings are both about quality management.

We have many German students, they are more interested in the reputation of the business school than Dutch students.

From Maastricht University the programmes must be accredited: NVAO or other accreditations. We are the only Faculty with other accreditations. The pressure in the organization comes from the cluster PDQA (Policy Development Quality Assurance). This cluster monitors internal and external signals about quality and gives advice. It is more support than pressure. The board and scientific personnel look how the strategy matches with the accreditation standards and take the advice along.

The initial accreditation is varying, if you are in, you follow the same cycle. EQUIS is the first time for three years and later for three or five years.

Radboud University and UvA prepare to acquire the initial accreditation of AACSB.

For AACSB and EQUIS we meet the standards abundantly.

The assurances of learning are important for AACSB and NVAO. Some lecturers see it as a bureaucratic process. Some people have to do things, they do not want. That decreases the autonomy.

Accreditations can lead to incremental, not radical innovations, e.g. adjustment if the curriculum after NVAO, not after EQUIS or AACSB.

Summary Programme director MBA School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 2-6-2015 10.00

With Pentecost at the congress of AACSB was announced that the CEOs of the two organizations (AACSB and NVAO) had made an agreement in a joint accreditation.

Accreditations are a distinguishing characteristic. What is more important: accreditations or rankings? If you are high in the rankings, you do not need accreditations. That does not count for the Netherlands.

Pressure for a business school to get accreditations are student numbers and the second, I do not know if it is really a pressure, it is a load, you get through standardisation a lot of administrative processes. That means that you need a supporting staff and that creates a financial load.

If you have ISO 9001, they argue that it has negative consequences for innovation force of business firms. That is the old tension: I am going to bureaucratize, I am going to standardize, and which effects does it have on that innovation force? On one side you have to meet the quality standards, but how can you innovate in addition, that is still a conflict.

105

The discussion is: what is more important: accreditations or rankings? If you are very high in the rankings, you do not need accreditations. This does not count for the Netherlands. I did not think, if you look at what rankings are, accreditation are not a part, no criteria of those rankings. You do not want to lose an accreditation. Collaboration, equal collaboration only with universities, that are triple crown also. There is competition on institutional level. The new CEO of AMBA was surprised how large the willingness was to exchange and to cooperate between the AMBA directors and deans.

It is a considerable investment, membership contributions are not little. We think: what is the process, in this accreditation organization is this important, in that accreditation that, , which people have to deliver which information?

The pressure from the Ministry is only through the NVAO, I do not think that the Ministry of education forces us to get AACSB and EQUIS.

It is in a sense, it begins to get a rat race. At the moment that other business schools in your country or in your market have accreditations, and you not, then a pressure arises to acquire these accreditations yourselves. For the MBA programmes we are a regional player, Maastricht and a radius of 150 kilo meters.

I can imagine we are a role model. One of our strengths is that we have a well thought-out education model, based on Problem Based Learning. Other universities look at it. It is for them nearly impossible to copy the model easily. That has to do with the architecture of the building. You need one hundred small rooms.

The pressure is on the dean and the director MBA, I do not think they put pressure. If this school loses an accreditation, then it gets difficult for the dean or the associate dean for education. At the moment you lose an accreditation, you hold the leader responsible of course.

We were very fast acquiring accreditation, I think we are frontrunners. In that sense we may be have pressurized the process.

I think we are an example school for AACSB and EQUIS. AACSB has the assurances of quality of learning, they say, we are one of the schools that have mastered best. We do not go for a re accreditation process with the fear we could lose it, we are relatively good compared to others.

I think there is no influence of accreditations on autonomy of lecturers. That has to do with that, accreditations are not about the content.

Accreditations can prevent or can cause innovations in the sense they show what is wrong, and therefore give reason to think how we could solve it. Accreditations deliver a stimulus, but they do not create, but they encourage people in universities to think about it and then they have a solution, but the solution itself arises not from the accreditation, it is more a trigger, there is something wrong, people have to handle it different. I think that every business school, that begins in the accreditation process, especially in the beginning, that it leads to a change. Accreditations achieve that you become accountable for performance in education, if you look at the whole assurances of learning, it can lead to considerable changes in your organization.

Summary Lecturer 1 MBA School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 2-6-2015 9:15

I think it is important to acquire those accreditations, because customers or students look at it. Students look at it, when they make their choice where to do their MBA. I think it is important. As organization you get feedback from a third party and that is useful to get feedback on a certain moment.

The pressure from other business schools to get accreditations is joining the crowd. I think AMBA is the minimum request for MBA programmes. For other programmes, like MSI or bachelor, AACSB is a good choice, EQUIS also.

It is about acquisition of students and that is a competition match.

106

We have a good programme, we can distinguish ourselves by offering leaderships skills and personality improvement.

There is a clear competition, I talked to Groningen, they are EQUIS accredited lately, they were very happy, because they wanted it very much. You see competition, within the Netherlands, within Europe are other schools regarded, that have triple crown, they want to belong to them.

I talked with Rotterdam about the internal assurances of learning, in the assurances of learning cycle, how they filled it in, we exchanged information, you learn from that.

Yes, many rankings, Financial Times ranking, CIE ranking certain rankings in which accreditations play a role, or direct, but indirectly for sure.

The pressure from groups within the organization comes from the dean. It comes from the students implicitly. They are the current students, who are proud if the business school acquired accreditations. From the other colleagues I feel no pressure.

I have no idea where the Ministry of Education plays a role.

It is about student acquisition and that is a completion match.

I think we are just in the front in the way we plan our curriculum.

I think we meet the accreditation, if we meet it abundantly, I do not think so, I think we have work to do. It is not finished for sure, there is work to do, the requests get more demanding, so, but I think we satisfy the requests of the accreditations well. The level gets higher, students expect more.

The feedback we get is generally almost positive and some critical points.

The autonomy is considerably high. There are requirements in the sense of amount of hours and themes, but the lecturer decides on the content and the way how it is taught. That is nice, it is a risk also, but I think we have good lecturers.

If a lecturer says autonomously: “I am going to make the exam like this, I am going to evaluate the students in this way”, if the rules of the game are clear, then it is okay. There is no influence on the autonomy, but it needs to be collectively coordinated. The autonomy of lecturers still exists, but it must be teamwork. We have to document more things, but it has no influence on the autonomy.

Accreditations give a trigger to innovations, they give feedback, they lead, if there is a risk that some things are not good, or at the moment that you do not get an accreditation, then they lead to improvement and that is mostly related to innovations. They are incremental innovations.

Not all accreditation organizations agree on what is good and bad education, so there is contradiction. It is not so that all accreditations are aligned with their feedback. Then we evaluate what we are going to do with that.

Summary Lecturer 2 MBA School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 2-6-2015 11:00

There is considerable pressure, because we think triple crown accreditation is important, that is internationally recognized. At EFMD conferences you see that other business schools find it important to acquire triple crown also, they visit us and look how we have done it. Internal is a pressure in the sense that people value it.

The government is only interested in the NVAO, because it gives legitimacy of your diploma's, it gives the validity of those diploma’s also, and you need it. Without accreditation you do not get funding nor certified diploma's. The NVAO is not a pressure, it is a must.

Rankings and accreditations, that is mixed up. I do not know if the Financial Times ranking if accreditations are in there. I think they are in there. And you have Elsevier ranking. Accreditation puts very clearly emphasis on

107 quality control and you see it back in your rankings. In your rankings, you see the effect of the quality control, so they are two sides of the same coin, I think, accreditation and ranking.

We had a focus group with students and we asked: “why did you come to Maastricht?” And then they said: “because of the accreditations.” Apparently a number thinks it is important that triple crown is there. It is as such accepted, recognized. It is strategic choice from the management to join the accreditations and to invest in them. Lecturers mutually see more the side of the expenses of the accreditations than the strategic interest.

As organization I think we score reasonably good, if I compare us with other schools in the EFMD accreditations.

You have a clear competition, I spoke to Groningen, they were EQUIS accredited recently, they were very happy, because they wanted it very much. You see competition within the Netherlands, but also within Europe, other schools are regarded, that have triple crown, and they want to join. Some decide not to do it of course. That effort is worth it, in the sense that accreditation forces you to look at your own processes. It has an effect on the quality and satisfaction of your students.

The accreditation determines partly that corset, you get in, you are responsible, that comes in through those accreditations in those assurances of learning. An exam matrix must be made, you have to set up learning objectives, and you have to look where you cover them and where you test them. The assurances of learning issue of the AACSB has implications for you as lecturer, because you have to do it all. The autonomy is decreased.

Accreditations can cause changes, especially in quality, quality control of the whole education system, I think that is a clear effect of those accreditations. If you mean innovations to begin something complete new, a compete new programme, a new teaching method, to experiment with, then I think that accreditations can be somewhat limiting, if they are handled strictly. I do not believe that bothered us, but theoretically seen, you could suffer from it.

Summary Lecturer 3 MBA School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University 2-6-2015 14:00

Accreditations are important instruments to attract students, so it gives an indication about the reputation of a university, it is important and rankings to score well, so I think it is important for external stakeholders for the survival of university or a school. It is important for potential students to attract new students, and it is important to convince our current students, since the Bologna declaration, to do their master here.

I think that the employees expect that it will be okay. If you go to congresses as a researcher and you show your business card with triple crown, people are surprised, so it says something about your reputation as researcher at an certain university, it gives identity, but internal in the organization people regard triple crown as an obtained right, something they have to contribute little. So it is not only about pressure, but about the motivation to contribute.

I do not know, but I assume that it is appreciated by the government, because the quality of your universities tells something about the knowledge level in your own country, it gives appearance externally, it gives an identity for the Ministry. I think this counts for all accreditations: the national NVAO, the obliged accreditation, and the international accreditations, like EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA, they can add value.

There is no pressure from the rankings, we put the pressure of the rankings on ourselves, through your ranking and accreditations, you have attraction power to the market, so you can attract better students, they pose a better position, earn better salaries. It is more an indirect effect of accreditations on rankings.

For Dutch people Maastricht is in a remote area, like Groningen. Maastricht has had may be the advantage they could attract too little Dutch students to survive, they had to be international in acquisition, that is why the accreditations are important, so may be is has been the context, the peripheral site in the Netherlands that has contributed to building something up from an underdog position, that caused the fast move in the ranking.

108

Because you have three accreditations, it does not mean that you keep them necessarily to the future, you have to be entrepreneurial and innovative to keep the accreditations.

SBE is very active in those networks in the sense that our deans visit conferences , do accreditations in other schools, that advances their learning capability, because then they can benchmark. I think that those accreditations are a beautiful learning opportunity, because of exchange of knowledge between institutions.

The management says: “This is important for us”, so it is a strategic choice made by the board, we want to go for it, and that is the reason and from there the pressure is to take care we do it again every time. The management is the dean and the Faculty board. I do not know if you should call this pressure, may be the people do not give enough pressure. The director MBA is involved in AMBA of course.

The MBA is post-graduate education, that is a market, where you have to change fast, in the Faculty, there is some bureaucracy, that is why you could react less fast.

I think that it goes positively, till now we have always had very good results. Accreditations are constantly taken along in the organization. After the recommendations, people think what to do with them, so it is on a strategic level interwoven in the organization. I have the perception that we are a learning organization and we improve something where possible.

I think the influence of accreditations is limited, I do not have the impression that I adjust my professional aspects on the basis of what is told in the accreditations.

I am convinced that accreditations can cause innovations in education. Some aspects, some criteria are used where the innovative level is regarded. In the last AMBA- accreditation we had the question: “ And what do you do in the direction of online education, how innovative are you there?” That induces mental processes, that regard how we can apply that more, because in the next accreditations, they look at that again, so an accreditation can possibly evoke questions in the organization, whereby they innovate.

It can be incremental and radical innovations both. I see radical innovations more on MBA level than in NVAO, because you have fixed structures there. In radical innovation, I think that you bring groups together from different places in the world through online education, video conferencing, and so on. I think it is innovative to bring more groups online together. A task force is working on strengthening the business school in a radical way, we are in the phase of brainstorming.

109

Appendix 14 Results case Faculty of Economics and Management, Hogeschool Utrecht, University of Applied Sciences

Institutional pressures Table 15 Coercive pressures to get accreditations 23 Coercive pressure Quotes about conforming to coercive pressures, regulations

Chair task force quality The pressure from the government is quality, quality, quality. And there is an Faculty accountability issue, we are talking in funded education about tax money of course. Is that spent wisely? It has an social function, responsibility.

NVAO is a must have, you have to do it. EPAS is something different, it is chosen by ourselves. Former team leader IBMS The most obvious external pressure is that without accreditation you do not exist. That is for the NVAO-accreditation. Of course you have the quality check, but that is a sort of internal pressure we should have had without accreditation. Just for the accreditation internal and external pressure converge.

The pressure from the government form the Dutch accreditation is 100 % of course. Without accreditation, you do not exist. Lecturer 1 IBMS I think that the financial means are related to the acquisition of accreditations and may be the permission to offer programmes. So if the accreditation is not required, if the quality cannot be proofed, I think that then the ministry has means to stop that programme at a certain moment. Lecturer 2 IBMS Yes, the school gets accreditations from the motivation to meet the legal obligation. Lecturer 3 IBMS It is very simple, no accreditation, then you are not allowed to teach. The government wants to have the illusion of control, that something is of a certain level. Yes, money is spent from the ministry of education to the different schools. And they want a finger in, they want a moment of gauge.

23 This table is based on answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from the government exist to get accreditation? Which accreditations? 110

Table 16 Mimetic pressures to get accreditations 24 Mimetic pressure Quotes about conforming to mimetic pressures, copy behaviour Chair task force quality You price yourself out of the market, because colleagues in foreign countries have EPAS. Faculty If you do it, that are the topics, that count nowadays for business programmes, and you do it on a certain level, which EPAS sets, and you can proof it, then you get an EPAS stamp and then you join the big boys. Then you play in their league.

The international contacts get more and more diverse, and het closer, you meet each other, and you see in those meetings that more programmes get EPAS accreditations, and, yes, you want to show that you belong to the same league, and then you choose to do it. That is indirect pressure from other business schools. Former team leader IBMS EPAS is our own initiative to play in the international field on a somewhat longer term.

The expectation is that on a certain term all IBMS- programmes or all international English- speaking programmes would like an EPAS. Programme manager As international programme you want of course to join the benchmark with your IBMS colleague international programmes, so an international hallmark is very important and EPAS is at this moment in Europe most usual.

A number of our exchange partners have this as a topic of discourse, that we have no other accreditation apart from the NVAO, which they do not know outside the Netherlands and Flanders. They ask: why don’t you have no other accreditation, that is internationally recognized? Lecturer 2 IBMS Yes, I know that it counts for other IBMS programmes too, they want to join from the same motivation to internationalise, an internationally recognized network of accredited universities.

Table 17 External normative pressures to get accreditations25 External normative Quotes about conforming to external normative pressures, norms pressure Chair task force quality The foreign students, the Dutch students do not know what an accreditation is, they do not Faculty look at NVAO, but recognisability and visibility in the foreign countries are important, that is why IBMS chose to do EPAS.

IBMS wants such an accreditation like EPAS, because the public world, because you search for a way to account for that you get a hallmark from a competent agency. Former team leader IBMS The most important reason to start with EPAS is that we have to do with partner universities and the quality check plays more and more a role. In the future you can only be partner with EPAS – accredited partners, so we have to be accredited ourselves, because otherwise we would not be partner of our current partners. NVAO is of course national, yes, Flemish, Dutch, but that does not play any role in the world. But that is the external pressure, the contact with the partners, the international appearance, the international reputation you do not reach with NVAO accreditation, so therefore is the international accreditation is important. It is informal pressure in mutual contacts, that you may be screw up slowly the expectations, the demands.

24 This table is based on answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from other business schools exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations? Which business school do you have as an example?

25 This table is based on answers on the interview questions: Does pressure come from the rankings to get accreditations? Which rankings? and What kind of pressures from colleagues outside the organization, for example in national and international networks, exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations?

111

I think that we get more attractive for our international students, if we are EPAS- accredited, they know more about it. It is not completely clear to which extent students pay attention to accreditations for a choice for a University for Applied Science. Lecturer 1 IBMS The pressure of colleagues in networks outside the organization is maybe internationally, because it is of course an instrument for partner universities, if for example with new partners, you look at accreditations, are they reliable partners, what can you tell about the quality? Lecturer 2 IBMS Further I know that the international accreditations are regarded more from the motivation that it is good from internationalization policy. Look, what you want is an international recognition of your programme, if you acquire international students, international accreditations can possibly play a role.

Table 18 Internal normative pressures to get accreditations26 Internal normative pressure Quotes about conforming to internal normative pressures, norms Chair task force quality In the NVAO accreditation is the pressure from the groups within the organization there, Faculty because the interests are large. It touches the right to exist for a programme. With EPAS there is less pressure. The pressure is bottom –up, the programme regards it as a rosaceous project to accent the programme, while the management says: “ we are busy enough with NVAO, why is that necessary?” Former team leader IBMS The Faculty management is interested in EPAS, but the executive board is not directly convinced. These type of things do not have priority at Hogeschool Utrecht level, but we think this has priority, because your right to exist on a longer term in the international field is at stake. Programme manager IBMS Not pressure, I feel support from the Faculty board and from international affairs to strive for EPAS-accreditation, I am worried that they are very ambitious in this, which is fine, but not realistic, if I hear from my colleagues in the national IBMS-platform how an awful lot of work the EPAS-accreditation is. Then I think this must be facilitated. Lecturer 3 IBMS If you step in such a process, I experienced the pressure that you look critically at your own way of working. That is not always perfect and through daily practice imperfections sneak in and in such a process it is pointed out to you, that is a certain pressure. Accreditation itself is not so very interesting, because the move you have made already earlier.

26 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from groups within the organization exist to get accreditations? From whom? For example the dean, the programme manager, the lecturers or the students. Which accreditations? 112

Chronological order of pressures

Table 19 chronological order of the pressures to get accreditations27

Chronological order pressures to acquire accreditations Chair task force quality For NVAO: Faculty Pressure from the government For EPAS: pressure from other business schools - pressure from groups within the organization: management, lecturers, international office. Former team leader IBMS For NVAO: Pressure from the government For EPAS: pressure from other business schools + pressure from groups within the organization: international staff. Programme manager IBMS For NVAO: Pressure from groups within the organization - pressure from the government For EPAS: Pressure from the rankings and pressure from other business schools: they can strengthen each other. Lecturer 1 IBMS For NVAO: Pressure from the government – pressure from the rankings- pressure from groups within the organization: Faculty management Lecturer 2 IBMS For NVAO: Pressure from the government International accreditation: pressure from groups within the organization: own intrinsic motivation Lecturer 3 IBMS For NVAO: Pressure from the government – pressure from colleagues in networks – pressure from groups within the organization: programme manager, executive board, director

27 This table is based on answers on the interview questions: Can you recognise a chronological order, a sequence of the pressures to get accreditations? Which accreditations? You can choose between governmental pressures – pressure from the rankings - rival pressures from other business schools – pressure from colleagues (in networks) outside the organization – pressure from groups inside the organization. Can you explain this? Can you give an example? Do pressures strengthen each other?

113

The extent the programme or the business school conforms to accreditations

Table 20 The speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools28

Chair task force quality It is not so that quality is in the genes of the organization. It (accreditation) is Faculty seen as an additional thing and they have to do efforts for and they are so busy. They see joining such processes, that lead to accreditation as something extra, something additional, that distracts attention from the primary process. Former team leader IBMS The recommendations are points we have to work on. The follow-up is varying, because the programme has to do with endless many things from the Faculty, the University of Applied Sciences or other impulses and then you have to set priorities. They are not always the priorities for follow-up of the recommendations of the accreditation.

Programme manager The speed of getting accreditations is standard for NVAO. IBMS With EPAS we are significant behind, if we compare ourselves to our direct colleagues from Amsterdam, Rotterdam and the Hague.

Lecturer 1 We are no frontrunner. We are a little behind, we do not think pro-actively how we could prepare for the next accreditation or pass it in a good way. Lecturer 2 I know that at a certain moment we did the NVAO-accreditation with other universities of Applied Science, and we were passed firstly, because we examination and graduation was okay with us. Lecturer 3 The speed of reaction compared to others should be the same, because we have the same cadence, you are in a cluster (NVAO-accreditation), because you are judged in groups. Cluster accreditation and that is every six years. So there is a certain cycle.

Table 21 The level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards Chair task force quality Faculty

Former team leader IBMS To get the accreditation is a minimal objective, but to get it in a good way, you need support from the lectures of the team and the administration. We met the standards abundantly, we had an overall good. Programme manager IBMS We met the standards abundantly. It is the basics op covered and you have to meet the requirements of the NVAO. Lecturer 1 The result of the accreditation was good, no, in between good and sufficient. Lecturer 2 IBMS passed the accreditation good. Lecturer 3 IBMS meets the NVAO- standards abundantly.

28 These tables are based on answers on the interview questions: What is the reaction of the business school to these pressures? Does your business school conform to accreditations? Or over conform or resist? How does the organization react? Is it ahead, a front runner and over-regulated, does it act like the others and does it do what is necessary to meet the accreditation standards, or is it behind, a laggard? How is the fit between external pressures and internal implementation? How is the speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools? How is the level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards?

114

Influence on autonomy

Table 22 The influence of accreditations on the autonomy in teaching29 Effect accreditations on Quotes about influence of accreditations on autonomy autonomy Chair task force quality Autonomy is about freedom of choice, freedom of acting. Faculty Freedom is not unlimited, but freedom exists in dependency. There is always an upper frame, within that you have possibilities. No influence There are activities, but the ways to reach them, can be different, as long as you take care that the students accomplish their tasks. You do not do it alone, you are in a team and you have to deliberate about the procedures.

You know, it is important that you reach your goals and that you coach your students in a good way to the end goal and how you do it, that is up to the professional. Former team leader IBMS The influence of the NVAO-accreditation on autonomy is particularly indirect, because Influence indirect nearly all aspects, that play a role in the accreditation are incorporated in HU or Faculty or programme policy. No influence Influence negative In certain aspects the autonomy is decreased and in certain aspects it does not have an influence. I think that the concept autonomy is difficult, because you regard it always on the level of a team, the individual lecturer works in a team, and he can never determine individually: I do my teaching like this, because you made agreements in a team, so I think that accreditation diminishes the autonomy in certain aspects, because the requirements are tighter, e.g. in examination and graduation, and the element of personnel policy, in case of EPAS, the autonomy is then not diminished, but strongly directed. Programme manager If you are an old-fashioned lecturer, and you think you are a king in your own kingdom, IBMS then you have difficulties, because you have to make an exam matrix for the whole Influence is negative programme then look per course, where your piece fits in. Some lecturers experience that as very restrictive.

Influence is positive Accreditations can have positive effects, because you can organize things with an accreditation judgement or working towards an accreditation. Sometimes you use the accreditation as an excuse to get things done. Lecturer 1 I did not see a link between accreditations and my autonomy. No influence Lecturer 3 You are as free as a bird, I have been course leader of different courses, I can write that No influence course guide, of course in the spirit of the IBMS-platform about a certain subject, but every year you can change the course guide, the exams, and if you follow your own way of working, you are really super free. The question is: do you take that space, because, when you want to change something, you have to request for new positions in Osiris, you have to let it tested by the test committee, you have to make a knowledge matrix, so you can change everything, but consequences are attached.

29 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers? Autonomy in teaching is to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught , and who may be admitted to study. Can you give an example? and if they teach themselves: Is your or their autonomy (in teaching) increased or decreased by accreditations? Is this good or not?

115

Influence on entrepreneurship Table 23 The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship in the business school30 Effect accreditations on Quotes about influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship entrepreneurship Former team leader IBMS I see in EPAS more that accreditations can lead to entrepreneurship, because you are more Influence positive challenged in research and in contacts with business firms than in NVAO, so I could imagine that it plays a role, but I think that the internal factors are more important. Entrepreneurship is anyway important in education, you can stimulate that by giving room, but also means, and that is policy of the programme, Faculty, University of Applied Science.

You show innovation and that they are entrepreneurial, and you are proud, that you score better than the mean, you try to distinguish yourself. I think that accreditations ask for distinctiveness, but you do not do it for the accreditation, you do it, because you want to distinguish yourself nationally or internationally, and with that you what to have a certain role within the competitor group, but also of course to students and to trade and industry, that you say: “ We have something extraordinary, something special”. Programme manager I am sure. For didactical reasons sometimes, also to adjust your curriculum. You can use IBMS accreditation as a flywheel for this. If you know as a lecturer what is needed for an Influence positive accreditation, you can use it as a good flywheel to advance entrepreneurship. Lecturer 1 IBMS I think that lecturers can try to develop a programme pro-actively, because you are more Influence positive conscious of what other lecturers do, you are more conscious of the whole, of the feedback, that you get, you get conscious of what you do wrong, e.g. the internationalization, what we always argue, that we are international, but if you get feedback from the accreditation that it is not enough, then that can have impact on what is developed further or you get ideas. I think that accreditations can realize innovations in education, because the frames of programmes change of course. And why do they change? Because the external environment changes. In an accreditation you have to test if you meet the frames of your programme. Pressure from trade and industry can lead to innovation too. Lecturer 2 IBMS No, I do not think that accreditation has a strong relationship with innovation itself. I see Influence positive and accreditation as something what happens afterwards on a process that happened before or negative that happens, and then at most gives a sort of context in which your innovation can take place. Real radical innovations must happen outside accreditation firstly, because then you can work outside the existing context. And accreditation, typical the limitation of course, the guidelines within you have to move.

Incremental innovation is possible, innovation in little steps and accreditation offers a platform therefore, it invites to go outside and to deliberate with other organizations. Lecturer 3 IBMS I doubt it highly. You are an entrepreneur or not. What is an entrepreneur? Somebody who influence negative takes risks, somebody who is self-confident, somebody, who sees chances in the market, others do not see. Accreditation has absolutely nothing to do with that. I doubt it, it is only an internal quality check and innovation is something different. Innovation is looking at new things, what are the developments, innovation is a general construct. Accreditations and innovations, no, that bites each other.

30 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: Can accreditations lead to entrepreneurship in education? Can you clarify this? and Can accreditations conduct innovations in education? Do you have an example?

116

Appendix 15 Results case Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam Institutional pressures

Table 24 Coercive pressures to get accreditations 31 Coercive pressure Quotes about conforming to coercive pressures, regulations Dean The pressure begins with the ministry of education, because the ministry determines with her policy measures how much we get. Project leader accreditations The first is the legal pressure, to get programmes financed, for the funded programme, you need accreditation. If you are not accredited, you do not get your programme financed.

For the unfunded, programme, it is important that that the current and potential students know that the programme meets the demands of the NVAO, which is recognized by the Dutch government. Lecturer 1 MBA There is a legal pressure in the sense that you need to be an accredited programme to be able to teach, so that is a kind of baseline to have a license to operate as a university, as a business school. That is for the NVAO-accreditation. So that is kind of compulsory, that you need to meet those standards and it is a standard, but it is also a kind of quality check and discussion about how things are going within the university.

Table 25 Mimetic pressures to get accreditations32 Mimetic pressure Quotes about conforming to mimetic pressures, copy behaviour Dean It is the price you have to pay as a school to join the big angry world. It is the price to stay in the business.

Other business schools do unwise to put pressure on me. Why? If you have the accreditation, you must prevent that your neighbour gets it. Programme director MBA These are the most important pressures: the rankings and the other business schools, because they feed my own motivation. If there is one business school with accreditations, there will follow more. People look at each other, o, he also, look, if nobody is AMBA- accredited, than it is not a big deal, but as everybody has it, and you do not, than people regard it and think there must be a reason for that. Programme manager MBA They do not put pressure on us, but you want as the Rotterdam School of Management triple crown accreditation, that is what you want. It is important that you join as business school. Project leader There is international pressure from other business schools to get accreditations, of accreditations course, if you see that your competitors have them all, then you want to get them yourselves. Lecturer 1 MBA So it is more of a kind of a sort of mimicry effect, in the sense that business schools tend to be more rather similar around the world, they typically would like these types of accreditations. If you are the top of the top, you do not really need to care about it. If you are an emerging or a kind of middle level business school, then you usually need to care about it and especially those that doing not so well, they even care more about it.

31 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from the government exist to get accreditation? Which accreditations? 32 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from other business schools exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations? Which business school do you have as an example? 117

In the USA, I was in Stanford University for three years, which is one of the top business schools in the world, and Stanford did not have practically any accreditations. They did not need it and they did not want it. So in essence, they do not want to follow, because they see it as a kind of “iron cage”, limiting your teaching and your research, so they say, we do not want anything. Lecturer 3 MBA Pressure from other business schools in the sense of, if one has it (accreditation L), that the chance is getting larger for the others? It is meaningful for the others to have it. I think so. It is a sort of competition.

If other business schools come in the rankings, that would be the same as your neighbour getting a better car, you look at it and say: “Okay, maybe we need that too.” So the deans look at other schools and are interested to compare their school.

Table 26 External normative pressures to get accreditations33 External normative Quotes about conforming to external normative pressures, norms pressure Dean Business faculties are frontrunners in internationalization. They educate for an international labour market. Internationalization emphasizes differentiation and international quality hallmarks. Therefore the Dutch quality mark is insufficient.

If you have ambition, that is reflected in the rankings and these rankings determine in the international field the choice of potential students.

Rankings of programmes and rankings of business schools and rankings of universities exist. Rankings are important, because they define your reputation and your reputation defines your admissions. When you have a lot of admissions, you can select good. Programme director You need to have the attributes, that potential clients expect from you. I say to my boss: “We MBA cannot permit ourselves, not to go for AMBA.” If you have a status and a reputation, but as long as you don’t have it, you must collect as many attributes as possible, on the basis of which that people can conclude, that you are good.

You know you have something beautiful, you want that it is perceived in the eyes of the external environment and partly you need these rankings to give the people confidence. Project leader For an international accreditation counts, that if you are an international operating Faculty and accreditations you want to attract good students and good staff members, then it is almost necessary that you have an EQUIS-accreditation and an AACSB-accreditation, and for the MBA of course AMBA, because if you have this, you could require easier good foreign students.

The same counts for the attraction of scientists. These scientists will be directed partly by EQUIS or AACSB. That is international pressure.

Look, Rotterdam School of Management has a large reputation, but they feel that their competitors are getting closer. Lecturer 1 MBA MBA programmes are relatively loose in their accreditations around the world, in that sense then for them it is important to be accredited. It is related to reputation, accreditation helps with legitimacy and reputation. So I would say that it is quite important to be recognized as one of the key programmes in Europe or in the world.

The students would do not care, the MBA students might care a little bit more. The foreign students more and the Dutch students especially if they are going to work abroad, then is an internationally recognized accreditation important, because then they could easily say: hey, we have the same accreditation.

33 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: Does pressure come from the rankings to get accreditations? Which rankings? and What kind of pressures from colleagues outside the organization, for example in national and international networks, exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations?

118

The tax payers pay a large part of the education. So through the accreditations they have the right to know what is going on in the university and what kind of quality the education has.

I think the rankings are nowadays more and more important for business schools, especially trying to create a European market, which has not really existed, a competitive European market for business schools. Well, it exists but people do not move not that much from country to country. Okay, they move for the top schools, but the rankings are important and there is a variety of different rankings out there. The Financial Times, Times Higher Education, QS, there are different types of deans lists in terms of how deans rate universities. I think that probably fifty different rankings of business schools exist. I think pressure comes from the rankings especially to the deans. To the particular teachers, they do not necessary care that much. Okay, we care in terms of how the reputation of the school is, but nobody is really that fanatic about getting the school higher in the rankings. The MBAs look at specific, like the Financial Times rankings. The other different types of rankings are more university wide or programme wide, so I think it is good that the university as a whole, UvA or ABS is in a variety of rankings.

Table 27 Internal normative pressures to get accreditations34 Internal normative pressure Quotes about conforming to internal normative pressures, norms

Dean Nobody is calling: “we need accreditations”. No, if somebody does it, it is me.

Programme director MBA The dean has triple accreditation as strategic objective. I do not experience much external pressure. The pressure comes from yourself, you want to show the world or the market, that you meet quality standards, and that you are open to continuous improvement. My boss was rather sceptical if AMBA was necessary. Programme manager MBA Internal pressures come from the executive board, it is a demand for NVAO- accreditations. The dean want triple crown. The director wants it also to distinguish yourself from the other MBA-programmes. Project leader accreditations There is pressure from the University of Amsterdam, the Faculty has to get accredited all programmes by the NVAO for funded programmes. That is prescribed by the executive board. The executive board has developed policy in which the unfunded programmes have to be accredited by the NVAO also.

The University of Amsterdam wants to get the hallmark internationalization in her next institutional accreditation and the UvA agreed with her Faculty that internationalization must be included in accreditations. Lecturer 1 MBA Accreditation is also a quality check and discussion about how things go in the university , so that is understandable.

34 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from groups within the organization exist to get accreditations? From whom? For example the dean, the programme manager, the lecturers or the students. Which accreditations? 119

Chronological order of pressures

Table 28 chronological order of the pressures to get accreditations35

Chronological order of pressures to acquire accreditations Dean For NVAO: pressure from the government For international accreditations: pressure from the rankings - pressure from groups within the organization: executive board, dean Programme director MBA and lecturer 2 pressure from the rankings – pressure from other business schools - from groups within the organization: dean, director, potential students I should mention pressure from the rankings and pressure from other business schools together with potential students: pressure from the market.

Programme manager MBA pressure from groups within the organization: executive board, director, potential students Project leader accreditations For NVAO: pressure from the government – pressure from groups within the organization: executive board, faculties For international accreditations: International developments in the international education field including: pressure from other business schools and pressure from colleagues in networks - pressure from groups within the organization: executive board, dean Lecturer 1 MBA For NVAO: pressure from the government For EQUIS : pressure from other business schools - pressure from the rankings - pressure from groups within the organization: deans, programme director and research director For AACSB and AMBA: pressure from groups within the organization Lecturer 3 MBA no chronological pattern

35 This table is based on answers on the interview questions: Can you recognise a chronological order, a sequence of the pressures to get accreditations? Which accreditations? You can choose between governmental pressures – pressure from the rankings - rival pressures from other business schools – pressure from colleagues (in networks) outside the organization – pressure from groups inside the organization. Can you explain this? Can you give an example? Do pressures strengthen each other?

120

The extent the programme or the business school conforms to accreditations

Table 29 The speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools36

Dean We started the route very fast, but to be honest since my coming. They had EQUIS already, that is a Nice accreditation, but I think we have to get AACSB and AMBA in high tempo. So, AACSB comes in November, and AMBA in the spring, so mission completed. Programme director MBA and Look, some business schools in the Netherlands are triple crown lecturer 2 accredited, so we are no frontrunners. Programme manager MBA I think we were one of the first programmes that were EQUIS- accredited, but with AMBA we are behind of course, because Rotterdam School of Management is AMBA-accredited and we would like that also. Project leader accreditations If you look at the NVAO-accreditation, we are as fast, maybe faster, we have the accreditation files in order and internationally, yes, Rotterdam and Maastricht, Rotterdam was number one, then Maastricht followed, thereafter Tilburg, Groningen, and then us, so we are somewhat behind, but we are on our way to pass everybody. Lecturer 3 It is not so much the speed compared to others, it is about what do you want yourself in the future and when do you start such a process, so it has nothing to do with speed compared to others, you have your own path. What others do has partly an effect on your own plan, but first you have to make up your own plan, that seems the most wise to me.

Table 30 The level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards

Programme director MBA and lecturer 2 One time it went wrong with EQUIS, but for AMBA, abundantly sufficient I would say. Programme manager MBA The 21 standards were judged sufficient for the NVAO- accreditation and a few parts were judged good. For EQUIS we have had a renewal for three years. Project leader accreditations They meet the accreditation standards abundantly.

36 These tables are based on answers on the interview questions: What is the reaction of the business school to these pressures? Does your business school conform to accreditations? Or over conform or resist? How does the organization react? Is it ahead, a front runner and over-regulated, does it act like the others and does it do what is necessary to meet the accreditation standards, or is it behind, a laggard? How is the fit between external pressures and internal implementation? How is the speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools? How is the level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards? 121

Influence on autonomy

Table 31 The influence of accreditations on the autonomy in teaching37 Effect of accreditations on Quotes about influence of accreditations on autonomy autonomy Dean Lecturers of course are in an academic environment considerably Influence negative autonomous. They are a little limited by the conditions, e.g. the lay-out of the class room. If you put or force something in a corset, then the autonomy decreases a little. Programme director MBA and What I define as autonomy is what you do in the class room or in the lecturer 2 MBA lecturer room, how you teach, in that sense nobody tells me that I have to No influence teach in a specific way, not at all, because accreditation bodies want it.

There are rules and limitations. I do not experience that per se as negative, because particularly in Amsterdam, it was ten years ago freedom, happiness, everybody did what he wanted. I experienced it as disordered and a little laziness of lecturers. Programme manager MBA We leave a lot of freedom to the lecturer, because we see the lecturer as the expert in his area. Lecturer 1 MBA I think that it can help the autonomy in terms of if the accreditation says that Positive and negative influence you need more close contact teaching and smaller groups, that can be supportive of those types of autonomy decisions. I think putting emphasis on teaching increases your possibilities as a lecturer to get resources for teaching. You need to structure your aims of a course in a specific way, but I never felt it as too restrictive. Some elements increase the autonomy, some elements decrease the autonomy, but as a whole I would say pretty similar, a limited impact on autonomy. Lecturer 3 MBA You keep the autonomy, in that sense you have complete autonomy in how No influence you set it up, of course you have certain norms to meet, but if you deviate from that, and you do that in a motivated manner, then there is nothing to worry about, if you meet the end qualifications.

37 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers? Autonomy in teaching is to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught , and who may be admitted to study. Can you give an example? and if they teach themselves: Is your or their autonomy (in teaching) increased or decreased by accreditations? Is this good or not?

122

Influence on entrepreneurship Table 32 The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship in the business school38 Effect of accreditations on Quotes about influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship entrepreneurship Dean There is tension, in the sense that accreditations force everybody in the Influence negative same corset, you could argument that they are a brake on differentiation. It costs a lot of effort to get accreditations, the accreditations must be stable over time, you could argument that accreditations are inherently conservative and that is why we maybe get a brake on innovation. Programme director MBA and I think you get blinkers through accreditations, then you are very focused lecturer 2 MBA on that, what is expected from you, and we do not brainstorm with all of us, Influence positive and negative how we can change things! Accreditation is in the way of radical innovation, because you have to meet requirements, that are invented in the past on the basis of performance in het past.

Maybe accreditations are good for incremental innovations, you get tips and ideas how to do things different, if that is innovative, I don’t know. Project leader accreditations Accreditations can effect innovations in education, absolutely. It is a mirror, Influence positive because the accreditation committee will point at weak spots in a programme and with this you can improve your programme continuously, e.g. the advice to have a second examiner in the bachelor thesis or critic on the end qualifications. Lecturer 1 MBA Probably accreditations would more harm innovations than benefit. Influence for business school I think that accreditations, that, if they are too strictly, can lead to positive entrepreneurship. Influence for field negative Two professors from Stanford left Stanford when they got tired of it. Well, they founded Coursera, which is an interesting online platform for education. The harm is at field level, so in essence if all business schools start looking like each other and have the same objectives and have the same processes, then that would harm innovation, that some business schools are allowed or just want to do something completely different and of course those schools do not necessary need accreditations. I think that innovation is happening else than in accredited business schools. Most likely it will happen in non-profit and for profit types of initiatives in terms of education and new forms of universities.

The positive side is that through accreditations, through experiences, the international staff, who do this a lot, they come and tell ideas of how things are and it can support the development of the school, the benefits are at the individual school level. They could, but they would need to channel funding, it would need to be shown in the performance matrix of individual lecturers, all of the criteria for advancing your career are related to research, so in that sense, if the accreditations can change that and put measurable emphasis and potentially some funding for experimentation on the educational side, than, yes, then there can be all kinds of entrepreneurship.

38 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: Can accreditations lead to entrepreneurship in education? Can you clarify this? and Can accreditations conduct innovations in education? Do you have an example?

123

Appendix 16 Results case School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University Institutional pressures Table 33 Coercive pressures to get accreditations 39 Coercive pressure Quotes about conforming to coercive pressures, regulations

MBA director The pressure from the Ministry is only through the NVAO, I do not think that the Ministry of education forces us to get AACSB and EQUIS. Lecturer 2 The government is only interested in the NVAO, because it gives legitimacy of your diploma's, it gives the validity of those diploma’s also, and you need it. Without accreditation you do not get funding nor certified diploma's. Lecturer 3 I do not know, but I assume that it is appreciated by the government, because the quality of your universities tells something about the knowledge level in your own country, it gives appearance externally, it gives an identity for the Ministry. I think this counts for all accreditations: the national NVAO, the obliged accreditation, and the international accreditations, like EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA, they can add value.

Table 34 Mimetic pressures to get accreditations 40 Mimetic pressure Quotes about conforming to mimetic pressures, copy behaviour Policy advisor I do not experience pressure. The biggest competitor is the Erasmus University. It is troublesome to lose triple crown, it is nice to keep it. MBA director It is in a sense, it begins to get a rat race. At the moment that other business schools in your country or in your market have accreditations, and you not, then a pressure arises to acquire these accreditations yourselves. For the MBA programmes we are a regional player, Maastricht and a radius of 150 kilo meters. I can imagine we are a role model. One of our strengths is that we have a well thought-out education model, based on Problem Based Learning. Other universities look at it. It is for them nearly impossible to copy the model easily. That has to do with the architecture of the building. You need one hundred small rooms. Lecturer 1 The pressure from other business schools to get accreditations is joining the crowd. I think AMBA is the minimum request for MBA programmes. For other programmes, like MSI or bachelor, AACSB is a good choice, EQUIS also. It is about acquisition of students and that is a competition match. We have a good programme, we can distinguish ourselves by offering leaderships skills and personality improvement. Lecturer 2 There is a clear competition, I talked to Groningen, they are EQUIS accredited lately, they were very happy, because they wanted it very much. You see competition, within the Netherlands, within Europe are other schools regarded, that have triple crown, they want to belong to them. I talked with Rotterdam about the internal assurances of learning, in the assurances of learning cycle, how they filled it in, we exchanged information, you learn from that.

39 This table is based on answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from the government exist to get accreditation? Which accreditations? 40 This table is based on answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from other business schools exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations? Which business school do you have as an example?

124

Table 35 External normative pressures to get accreditations41 External normative Quotes about conforming to external normative pressures, norms pressure Policy advisor Other universities are impressed by triple crown. Financial Times asks us which accreditations we have, accreditations do not count in the rankings. MBA director The discussion is: what is more important: accreditations or rankings? If you are very high in the rankings, you do not need accreditations. This does not count for the Netherlands. I did not think, if you look at what rankings are, accreditation are not a part, no criteria of those rankings. You do not want to lose an accreditation. There is competition on institutional level. The new CEO of AMBA was surprises how large the willingness was to exchange and to cooperate between the AMBA directors and deans. Lecturer 1 Yes, many rankings, certain rankings in which accreditations play a role, or direct, but indirectly for sure. Lecturer 2 Rankings and accreditations, that is mixed up. I do not know if the Financial Times ranking if accreditations are in there. I think they are in there. Accreditation puts very clearly emphasis on quality control and you see it back in your rankings. In your rankings, you see the effect of the quality control, so they are two sides of the same coin, I think, accreditation and ranking. Lecturer 3 There is no pressure from the rankings, we put the pressure of the rankings on ourselves, through your ranking and accreditations, you have attraction power to the market, so you can attract better students, they pose a better position, earn better salaries. It is more an indirect effect of accreditations on rankings. For Dutch people Maastricht is in a remote area, like Groningen. Maastricht has had may be the advantage they could attract too little Dutch students to survive, they had to be international in acquisition, that is why the accreditations are important, so may be is has been the context, the peripheral site in the Netherlands that has contributed to building something up from an underdog position, that caused the fast move in the ranking.

41 This table is based on answers on the interview questions: Does pressure come from the rankings to get accreditations? Which rankings? and What kind of pressures from colleagues outside the organization, for example in national and international networks, exist to get accreditations? Which accreditations? 125

Table 36 Internal normative pressures to get accreditations42 Internal normative pressure Quotes about conforming to internal normative pressures, norms Policy advisor We have many German students, they are more interested in the reputation of the business school than Dutch students. From Maastricht University the programmes must be accredited: NVAO or other accreditations. We are the only Faculty with other accreditations. The pressure in the organization comes from the cluster PDQA (Policy Development Quality Assurance). This cluster monitors internal and external signals about quality and gives advice. It is more support than pressure. The board and scientific personnel look how the strategy matches with the accreditation standards and take the advice along. MBA director The pressure is on the dean and the director MBA, I do not think they put pressure. If this school loses an accreditation, then it gets difficult for the dean or the associate dean for education. At the moment you lose an accreditation, you hold the leader responsible of course. Lecturer 1 The pressure from groups within the organization comes from the dean. It comes from the students implicitly. They are the current students, who are proud if the business school acquired accreditations. From the other colleagues I feel no pressure. Lecturer 2 We had a focus group with students and we asked: “why did you come to Maastricht?” And then they said: “because of the accreditations.” Apparently a number thinks it is important that triple crown is there. It is as such accepted, recognized. It is strategic choice from the management to join the accreditations and to invest in them. Lecturers mutually see more the side of the expenses of the accreditations than the strategic interest. Lecturer 3 The management says: “This is important for us”, so it is a strategic choice made by the board, we want to go for it, and that is the reason and from there the pressure is to take care we do it again every time. The management is the dean and the Faculty board. I do not know if you should call this pressure, may be the people do not give enough pressure. The director MBA is involved in AMBA of course.

Chronological order of pressures

Table 37 Chronological order of pressures for NVAO and for international accreditations

Chronological order pressures to acquire accreditations MBA director For NVAO: Pressure from the government For international accreditations: pressure from the rankings - pressure from other business schools Lecturer 1 For international accreditations: pressure from other business schools – pressure from the rankings – pressure from groups within the organization – pressure from colleagues outside the organization Lecturer 2 For NVAO: Pressure from the government For international accreditations: pressure from groups within the organization - Pressure from other business schools – pressure from the rankings – pressure from colleagues outside the organization Lecturer 3 For NVAO: Pressure from the government For international accreditations: pressure from potential students - pressure from the rankings - pressure from groups within the organization

42 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview question: What kind of pressures from groups within the organization exist to get accreditations? From whom? For example the dean, the programme manager, the lecturers or the students. Which accreditations? 126

The extent the programme or the business school conforms to accreditations

Table 38 The speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools43

Policy advisor The initial accreditation is varying, if you are in, you follow the same cycle. EQUIS is the first time for three years and later for three or five years. MBA director We were very fast acquiring accreditation, I think we are frontrunners. In that sense we may be have pressurized the process. Lecturer 1 I think we are just in the front in the way we plan our curriculum. Lecturer 3 The MBA is post-graduate education, that is a market, where you have to change fast, in the Faculty, there is some bureaucracy, that is why you could react less fast.

Table 39 The level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards Policy advisor For AACSB and EQUIS we meet the standards abundantly. MBA director I think we are an example school for AACSB and EQUIS. AACSB has the assurances of quality of learning, they say, we are one of the schools that have mastered best. We do not go for a re accreditation process with the fear we could lose it, we are relatively good compared to others. Lecturer 1 I think we meet the accreditation, if we meet it abundantly, I do not think so, I think we have work to do. It is not finished for sure, there is work to do, the requests get more demanding, so, but I think we satisfy the requests of the accreditations well. The level gets higher, students expect more. The feedback we get is generally almost positive and some critical points. Lecturer 2 As organization I think we score reasonably good, if I compare us with other schools in the EFMD accreditations Lecturer 3 I think that it goes positively, till now we have always had very good results. Accreditations are constantly taken along in the organization. After the recommendations, people think what to do with them, so it is on a strategic level interwoven in the organization. I have the perception that we are a learning organization and we improve something where possible.

43 These tables are based on answers on the interview questions: What is the reaction of the business school to these pressures? Does your business school conform to accreditations? Or over conform or resist? How does the organization react? Is it ahead, a front runner and over-regulated, does it act like the others and does it do what is necessary to meet the accreditation standards, or is it behind, a laggard? How is the fit between external pressures and internal implementation? How is the speed of getting accreditations compared to other business schools? How is the level of achievement in meeting the accreditation standards? 127

Influence on autonomy

Table 40 The influence of accreditations on the autonomy in teaching44 Effect of accreditations on Quotes about influence of accreditations on autonomy autonomy Policy advisor The assurances of learning are important for AACSB and NVAO. Some lecturers see it as a Influence is negative bureaucratic process. Some people have to do things, they do not want. That decreases the autonomy. MBA director I think there is no influence of accreditations on autonomy of lecturers. That has to do No influence with that, accreditations are not about the content. Lecturer 1 If a lecturer says autonomously: “I am going to make the exam like this, I am going to No influence evaluate the students in this way”, if the rules of the game are clear, then it is okay. There is no influence on the autonomy, but it needs to be collectively coordinated. The autonomy of lecturers still exists, but it must be teamwork. We have to document more things, but it has no influence on the autonomy. Lecturer 2 The accreditation determines partly that corset, you get in, you are responsible, that Influence is negative comes in through those accreditations in those assurances of learning. An exam matrix must be made, you have to set up learning objectives, and you have to look where you cover them and where you test them. The assurances of learning issue of the AACSB has implications for you as lecturer, because you have to do it all. The autonomy is decreased. Lecturer 3 I think the influence of accreditations is limited, I do not have the impression that I adjust No influence my professional aspects on the basis of what is told in the accreditations.

44 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of lecturers? Autonomy in teaching is to decide itself who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught , and who may be admitted to study. Can you give an example? and if they teach themselves: Is your or their autonomy (in teaching) increased or decreased by accreditations? Is this good or not?

128

Influence on entrepreneurship

Table 41 The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship in the business school45

Effect of accreditations on Quotes about influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship entrepreneurship Policy advisor Accreditations can lead to incremental, not radical innovations, e.g. adjustment if the Influence positive curriculum after NVAO, not after EQUIS or AACSB. MBA director On one side you have to meet the quality standards, but how can you innovate in addition, Influence negative and that is still a conflict. positive Accreditations can prevent or can cause innovations in the sense they show what is wrong, and therefore give reason to think how we could solve it. Accreditations deliver a stimulus, but they do not create, but they encourage people in universities to think about it and then they have a solution, but the solution itself arises not from the accreditation, it is more a trigger, there is something wrong, people have to handle it different. I think that every business school, that begins in the accreditation process, especially in the beginning, that it leads to a change. Accreditations achieve that you become accountable for performance in education, if you look at the whole assurances of learning, it can lead to considerable changes in your organization. Lecturer 1 Accreditations give a trigger to innovations, they give feedback, they lead, if there is a Influence positive risk that some things are not good, or at the moment that you do not get an accreditation, then they lead to improvement and that is mostly related to innovations. They are incremental innovations. Lecturer 2 Accreditations can cause changes, especially in quality, quality control of the whole Influence negative and education system, I think that is a clear effect of those accreditations. positive If you mean innovations to begin something complete new, a compete new programme, a new teaching method, to experiment with, then I think that accreditations can be somewhat limiting, if they are handled strictly. I do not believe that bothered us, but theoretically seen, you could suffer from it. Incremental innovations, limiting for radical innovations. Lecturer 3 I am convinced that accreditations can cause innovations in education. Some aspects, some Influence positive criteria are used where the innovative level is regarded. In the last AMBA- accreditation we had the question: “ And what do you do in the direction of online education, how innovative are you there?” That induces mental processes, that regard how we can apply that more, because in the next accreditations, they look at that again, so an accreditation can possibly evoke questions in the organization, whereby they innovate. It can be incremental and radical innovations both. I see radical innovations more on MBA level than in NVAO, because you have fixed structures there. In radical innovation, I think that you bring groups together from different places in the world through online education, video conferencing, and so on. I think it is innovative to bring more groups online together. A task force is working on strengthening the business school in a radical way, we are in the phase of brainstorming.

45 This table is based on quotes in answers on the interview questions: Can accreditations lead to entrepreneurship in education? Can you clarify this? and Can accreditations conduct innovations in education? Do you have an example?

129

Appendix 17 Results cross-case

Institutional pressures

Table 42 Institutional pressures to acquire accreditations for three business schools

Pressures IBMS FEM HU MBA ABS UvA MBA SBE UM coercive pressures NVAO-accreditation, the Coercive pressures are Coercive pressures exist for accreditations national accreditation is a compulsory for the NVAO- especially for the NVAO legal obligation from the accreditations for funded accreditation. May be all

government. Without this programmes. They are not accreditations, both national accreditation the IBMS- present for unfunded and international ones, are programme cannot exist. So programmes, like MBA. appreciated by the for NVAO-accreditation the government.

coercive pressure is very important. EPAS is a voluntary accreditation. Therefore no coercive pressure is present. mimetic pressures Mimetic pressure exists for International and national Mimetic pressures for for accreditations the international programme pressure from other business international accreditations accreditation EPAS, schools exist, e.g. from are present. It begins to get a

colleagues in foreign Rotterdam School of rat race. There is a clear countries have EPAS, other Management. If there is one competition according to IBMS programmes start to business school with lecturers. Other schools want acquire EPAS-accreditation. accreditations, there will follow to belong to triple crown NVAO is not known more. It is a mimicry effect. For universities also. internationally. To play in the top business schools in the same league as they do, it is world it is not necessary, in the necessary to acquire EPAS- Netherlands business schools accreditation. For NVAO- acquire accreditations. Rankings accreditation mimetic is mentioned as important. pressure does not exist,

because all the programmes must get an NVAO- accreditation. external normative External normative pressures Rankings are important, because The role of accreditations in pressures for come from potential foreign they define the reputation and rankings is unclear. Financial accreditations students and from partner the reputation defines your Times calls SBE, but does not universities, who acquire admissions. When a business include it in the ranking. If EPAS-accreditation. school has a lot of admissions, the business school is very International students and it can select good students. If the high in the rankings, it does partners are familiar with business school has a status and not need accreditations. This EPAS, NVAO is not known. a reputation, but as long as the does not count for the business school does not have it, Netherlands. There are

it must collect as many attributes certain rankings in which as possible, e.g. accreditations, accreditations play a role, on the basis of which that direct or indirect. people can conclude, that the Accreditation puts very school are good. For an clearly emphasis on quality international accreditation control and you see it back in counts, that if you are an the rankings. There is no international operating Faculty pressure from the rankings, and you want to attract good they put the pressure of the

130

students and good staff rankings on themselves. It is members, then it is almost more an indirect effect of necessary that you have accreditations on rankings. international accreditations, like EQUIS, AACSB, and AMBA. That is international pressure. internal normative Internal normative pressures The executive board prescribes Internal normative pressures pressures for from groups within the that all programmes must get come from the management, accreditations organization for NVAO- NVAO-accreditations and that the cluster PDQA (Policy accreditation are strong, internationalization must be Development Quality

because the interests are included in accreditations. Assurance). From Maastricht important, it is about the The dean puts pressure on the University the programmes right to exist. For EPAS- programme director MBA. The must be accredited: NVAO or accreditation the Faculty programme director has intrinsic other accreditations. They board and international motivation to get the are the only Faculty with affairs support acquisition of international accreditation other accreditations. EPAS, the executive board of AMBA and he puts pressure on Students give implicitly Hogeschool Utrecht is not the programme manager MBA to pressure, current students, convinced yet. acquire international they are proud on acquired accreditations. The boss of the accreditations and potential programme director was not students also, because it convinced if AMBA was influenced their choice for the necessary. university.

131

Chronological order of pressures Table 43 Chronological order of institutional pressures to get accreditations in three business schools

The chronological order of institutional pressures for getting accreditations Pressures for NVAO in IBMS, Pressures for NVAO in MBA, Pressures for NVAO in MBA, FEM, HU ABS, UvA SBE, UM

Coercive pressure is the most Coercive pressure initiates the For NVAO accreditation, important and this pressure is the acquisition of the NVAO- coercive pressure from the starter for getting NVAO- accreditation. After this pressure government is clearly mentioned. accreditation. After this some internal normative pressures from interviewees see external the executive board, the faculties, normative pressures from the programme directors, and the rankings and colleagues in the potential students come. network. The pressure that

follows is the pressure from within the organization from Faculty management, the directors of the institutes, and the programme manager IBMS.

Pressures for EPAS in IBMS, Pressures for EQUIS, AACSB and Pressures for EQUIS, AACSB FEM, HU AMBA in MBA, ABS, UvA and AMBA in MBA, SBE, UM External normative pressure come For international accreditations, Mimetic pressures are mentioned from rankings. Mimetic pressure external and internal normative in three interviews, because other from other business schools with pressures are mentioned. business schools have it, more accreditations challenge the As external normative pressure exchange partners or other IBMS business school to acquire them they recognise as important: programmes in the Netherlands, it also. After this pressure internal pressure from the rankings. is important to get EPAS- normative pressure from the groups Pressure from colleagues outside accreditation also. deans and programme director, and the organization was the weakest. Internal normative pressures the executive board follows. There is competition on come from the international institutional level, so not so much office in the first place and from on an individual level. Mimetic the programme manager. pressure derives from other business schools. The internal normative pressures come from groups within the organization: management and students.

132

Table 44 Summary of the chronological order of pressures for NVAO and for international accreditations in three business schools

Chronological order of pressures for NVAO Chronological order of pressures for

accreditation international accreditations

IBMS, FEM, HU Coercive pressure →(external normative Mimetic pressure → internal

pressure) → internal normative pressure normative pressure

MBA, ABS, UvA Coercive pressure → internal normative pressure External normative pressure → mimetic pressure → internal normative pressure

MBA, SBE, UM Coercive pressure External normative pressure + mimetic pressure → internal normative pressure

Influence on autonomy Table 45 Relation between accreditations and autonomy in three business schools

The relation between accreditations and autonomy

IBMS FEM HU MBA ABS UvA MBA SBE UM The relationship between The interviewees see no influence The effects of accreditations on accreditations and autonomy is a of accreditations on autonomy or a autonomy are no influence or complex one, in certain aspects little decrease in autonomy. negative influence. the autonomy is decreased and in There is no influence of No influence was motivated by certain aspects it does not have an accreditations on autonomy A the statements, that influence. lecturer keeps his autonomy in accreditations are not about the Some people think it has no how he and what he teaches, he has content and that lecturers have influence. So they do not see a certain norms to meet, but if he to document more things, but it relationship, and how you teach is deviates from that, and he does that has no influence on the to the lecturer and the standards of in a motivated manner, then there autonomy. NVAO-accreditation are included is nothing to worry about, if he The negative relation is in the policy. meets the end qualifications. motivated by the argument that And some people think the A little decrease in autonomy is assurances of learning issue of autonomy is a little restricted. argued: If you put or force the AACSB implications has for Especially examination and something in a corset, then the lecturers, and some people have graduation are subjects in which autonomy decreases a little. to do things, they do not want. requirements are increased and That decreases the autonomy. autonomy is decreased. Team work is mentioned as one of the reasons why the individual lecturers do not determine individually what they do, they make agreements in a team.

133

Influence on entrepreneurship Table 46 Relation between accreditations and entrepreneurship in three business schools

The relation between

accreditations and entrepreneurship IBMS, FEM, HU MBA ABS, UvA MBA, SBE, MU The influence of accreditations The answers of the interviewees All interviewees saw a positive relation on entrepreneurship gives give mixed results about the between accreditations and mixed results: it can be influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship. Most people positive or negative according entrepreneurship in the business mentioned incremental innovations. to the interviewees. school. Some see positive and or Accreditations deliver a stimulus or a negative influences. trigger and through feedback the On the positive side, The positive influence of business school changes and improves. accreditations can be used as a accreditations is that accreditations Two interviewees saw possibilities for flywheel for entrepreneurship can cause incremental innovations, radical innovation, it is innovative to to adjust the curriculum or for through the feedback from the bring more groups online together, and didactical reasons, the accreditation committee the the whole assurances of learning can international programme programme is developed further. lead to considerable changes in your accreditation EPAS can This can benefit the individual organization. induce entrepreneurship in business school. Two interviewees saw besides positive contact with businesses. In an From the accreditations you can effects, negative effects of accreditation is tested if you get blinkers to focus on the accreditations: you have to meet the meet the frames of the accreditation standards, so there is quality standards, but how can you programme. The frames no entrepreneurship. innovate in addition, that is still a change under influence of the Accreditations can have a negative conflict and innovations to begin external environment, trade influence on innovation, something complete new, a compete and industry e.g.. Incremental accreditations force everybody in new programme, a new teaching innovation is possible, because the same corset and are method, to experiment with, then accreditation enhances that you conservative, then they are a brake accreditations can be somewhat discuss your programme with on differentiation and on limiting, if they are handled strictly. other organizations. innovation. Accreditation is in the Strict standards of accreditations could way of radical innovation, because not give enough space for innovations It is more that you show the business school has to meet and experiments. entrepreneurship during requirements, that are invented in accreditations than the other the past on the basis of way around. Accreditations set performance in het past. The harm lecturers in a mindset of the is at field level, if all business whole programme and by schools start looking like each giving feedback they stimulate other and have the same objectives to develop the programme and have the same processes, then further. that would harm innovation, that some business schools are allowed On the negative side, or just want to do something accreditations happen completely different and of course afterwards on a process that those schools do not necessary has happened before. Radical need accreditations. So innovations happen outside accreditations force business accreditations, without schools to meet the standards and guidelines and limitations. there is no room for Accreditation is only an experimentation, radical internal quality check and innovation. All business schools innovations is something new. look like each other.

134

Appendix 18 Accreditations of business schools

The most common accreditations for programmes, business schools, and universities are mentioned:

NVAO, EQUIS, EPAS, AACSB, and AMBA.

NVAO is the Dutch-Flemish accreditation organization in Netherlands and Belgium. This is a nationally obliged accreditation. Every university and programme in the Netherlands and in the Dutch speaking part of Belgium must be accredited every six years to get a license. Universities can be accredited as a whole and programmes can be accredited.

The EFMD (European Foundation for Management Development) is an international membership organization, based in Brussels, Belgium. Over 800 member organizations from academia, business, public service and consultancy in 81 countries. The EFMD was set up as an European counterpart of the North-American AASCB (see the next accreditation). It is an accreditation body of quality in management education with accreditation services for business schools, like EQUIS for ABS and

SBE, and business school programmes, like EPAS for IBMS, FEM, HU. EPAS is an international programme accreditation system operated by EFMD. EQUIS is an European accreditation: the

European Quality Improvement Scheme, globally active since 1990s. EQUIS is a voluntary accreditation for whole business schools. EQUIS provides accreditations for three or five years.

EQUIS’ objective is to raise the standard of management education worldwide. EQUIS covers all management education programmes offered by an institution. EQUIS finds important a balance between high academic quality and professional relevance. High academic quality is linked to high quality research. The professional relevance is developed in collaboration with corporations.

Institutions that are accredited by EQUIS must demonstrate not only high general quality in all dimensions of their activities, but also a high degree of internationalization. 46

AACSB is originally an North-American accrediting organization. AACSB , the Association to

Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, is a voluntary accreditation, that accredits whole

46 http://www.efmd.org/accreditation-main/equis, retrieved at 5-1- 2015 135 universities. The organisation has existed since 1916 and has granted accreditations since then. In

1995 AACSB began to expand its accreditation programme internationally. The reviews are held every five years. They are voluntary. Universities that opted for this accreditation make a public statement that they chose to be held accountable. (Trapnell, 2007) In 2003 the standards were renewed. They reacted to the criticism that they did not know what the real business world needed, that they were too market driven , and that they viewed students as customers. (Day & Peluchette,

2009) AACSB accreditation standards address three key areas: strategic management, business school participants, and assurance of learning. (Trapnell, 2007) There are 736 member institutions that hold

AACSB Accreditation. Overall, 48 countries and territories are represented by AACSB-accredited schools.47

The Association of MBAs (AMBA) is established in 1967 in the United Kingdom. AMBA’s accreditation for MBA programmes has been running since 1983. Accreditation can be provided for three years or five years. Re-Accreditation is possible for one year, two years, three years, and five years.48 AMBA accredits MBA, DBA and MBM programmes at over 200 business schools in over

80 countries.49

The accreditation process includes: the self-evaluating process, the external peer review process, and the accreditation decision. In the self-evaluating process the business school evaluates itself critically.

The peer review process complements the self-evaluating process and evaluates the quality of business schools and the environment of continuous improvement. The accreditation decision is valid over a limited period of time of several years (Trapnell, 2007; Helmig et al., 2010).

47 http://www.aacsb.edu/, studied at 16-6-2015 48http://www.mbaworld.com/en/Accreditation.aspx, retrieved at 17-1-2015 49 http://www.mbaworld.com/en/Accreditation/What-is-accreditation.aspx, studied at 16-6-2015 136

Table 47 Articles about accreditations in business schools

Author(s), Qualitative or Research method Results year quantitative and focus research Antunes & Qualitative and Desk research and There is no one, widely-accepted European model for a Thomas quantitative secondary data business school. National elites have emerged in Europe. They (2007) research analysis are a combination of national and cultural characteristics and some US characteristics . Zheng & Ao- Qualitative Desk research New AACSB standards arose in 2007. Sun (2009) research AACSB Standards are: A strategic management standards, B participants standards, C the standards of assurance of learning. The international higher education assurance pattern transfers from school condition and recruitment of students to teaching process, the knowledge and the abilities students learned. Bell & Taylor Qualitative Multiple case The emerging discourse of quality in UK business schools (2006) research study in 4 relies on elitism and masculinity which are used to support English business the institutionalization of quality frameworks, and to influence schools the social construction of academic and administrative identities. Bryant (2013) Qualitative Case study in a Evaluations and assessments of business school quality need research French business to be based on interactive processes that involve stakeholders school from diverse constituencies to ensure support and acceptance. AACSB and AACSB and EQUIS support open, peer-driven processes EQUIS which include assessments based on peer-review team visits. Elliott & Goh Qualitative Multiple case AACSB accreditation facilitated organizational learning in (2013) research study in three of the four schools. Accreditation promoted strategic 4 Canadian alignment, a re-assessment of the school’s mission, and an business emphasis on performance management; others identified an universities increased focus on quality and/or research. Accreditation also AACSB served as a catalyst for change, it motivated program improvement. As contextual factors, leadership and resource dependence had influence on organizational learning effects. Harvey & Qualitative Desk research Throughout the 15 years there has been a tension between Williams research Overview article assurance as a bureaucratic and administrative task and the (2010) improvement of the quality of and the growing pressure of academic endeavors. This has led to problems of engaging academics. Conceptions of quality assurance from North West Europe and the US are accepted globally. There is little variation in the methods adopted by quality assurance agencies. Helmig et Quantitative Survey H1 which stated that the perceived importance of accreditation al.(2010) research AACSB and for the choice of a program is higher for students than it is for EQUIS alumni is supported. Students H2 which stated that the perceived importance of accreditation perspective has an influence on the choice of a program depending on its accreditation status (accredited or not accredited) is also supported. The perceived standard of knowledge on accreditation is high, but the knowledge on accrediting institutions is low. Lock (1999) Qualitative Desk research There is an expansion of the number of MBA programmes research AACSB and throughout Europe and the entry of providers into the market AMBA and attracted by the demand for MBA programmes. The range of EQUIS quality of programmes and course participants is very wide. The leading providers establish or collaborate with external service quality certifications mark agencies which will distinguish them and their graduates.

137

Miles et al. Qualitative Desk research New AACSB standards arose in 2003. The experimental (2010) research AACSB accreditation maintenance process is designed to achieve three outcomes: quality, continuous improvement, and better stakeholder management. Scherer et al. Qualitative Desk research A strategic analysis of the internal and external drivers must (2005) research be done. Identify the human, financial, and physical resources necessary to successfully meet the accreditation standards. Then identify peer institutions already accredited that can be used as benchmarks for making decisions. At the end other institution specific challenges must be identified. Porterfield et Qualitative Case study in U.S. Describe decision filters to develop policy. al. (2014) research business school First filter- should the business school partner only with AACSB international business schools accredited by AACSB? Second filter – international partner schools national accreditation activities Third filter – international business school accreditation ? Nigsch & Quantitative Survey International accreditations are positively related to research Schenker- research AACSB and performance, while quality management systems do not Wicki (2013) EQUIS exhibit any significant relationship to ranking positions. Thompson Qualitative Interview New AACSB standards were developed in 2003. A key (2004) research Director AACSB success would be that the school has done a very careful and thoughtful job of developing learning goals. The test is the achievement of learning. Trapnell Qualitative Desk research AACSB accreditation is global brand delivering external (2007) research AACSB validation of high-quality business schools providing key stakeholders, students, faculty and employers, with a decision criterion for selecting institutions with which to be associated. It can be a major differentiating attribute for global competition in a market of management education. Delgado- Quantitative Survey Results reveal that internationalisation positively influences a Marquez et research university’s reputation but also moderates the relationship al. (2013) between an institution’s reputation and its institutional performance in research and teaching quality and graduate employability. Urgel (2007) Qualitative Desk research The added value from accreditation systems stems from three research Director EFMD areas: assessment of the quality of the school, enhanced brand recognition through the accreditation label, and the contributions to the improvement of the school. Lewis et al. Qualitative and Case study By linking performance management, strategic planning, and (2007) quantitative U.S. university an internal resource allocation model, all stakeholders can research make better-informed decisions about the allocation of resources. Harvey (2007) Qualitative Email Accreditations processes represent a struggle for power that research correspondence influences academic freedom. Academics and directors Scheele Qualitative Desk research Although the Bologna Declaration aims at quality assurance (2007) Opinion of convergence, divergence is the main trend. research inspector of higher education Julian & Qualitative Desk research Current accreditation standards increase the chance on poor Ofori-Dankwa strategic decision making in turbulent environments. research (2006)

138

An overview of accreditations achieved by public business schools in the Netherlands

1. NVAO Nearly all programmes of business schools in the Netherlands are accredited by the NVAO agency.

2. EQUIS In the Netherlands several business schools gained EQUIS accreditations: Amsterdam Business School, University van Amsterdam, and Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, have an accreditation for 3 years. School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University and Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, gained an accreditation for 5 years.50

3. AACSB In the Netherlands, Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Tilburg School of Economics and Management, Tilburg University, and Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, are AACSB accredited.51

4. AMBA School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, and Maastricht School of Management have AMBA accreditations. 52

50 http://www.efmd.org/accreditation-main/equis/accredited-schools, retrieved at 5-1-2015 51 http://www.aacsb.edu/~/media/AACSB/Publications/fact-sheets/standards-comparison.ashxEQUIS, retrieved at 5-1-2015 52 http://www.mbaworld.com/en/Accreditation.aspx, retrieved at 17-1-2015 139

Table 48 Multiple accreditations of Dutch business schools53

NVAO EQUIS AACSB AMBA Amsterdam Business X X 3 years School, University van Amsterdam Faculty of X X 3 years X Economics and Business, University of Groningen School of Business X X 5 years X X Also present in and Economics, Euro MBA Maastricht Consortium54 University Rotterdam School of X X 5 years X X Management, Erasmus University Tilburg School of X X Economics and Management, Tilburg University Maastricht School of X X Management

The competitive field of public business schools in initial international accreditations

Table 49 Achievement of the first international accreditations of Dutch business schools55

Accreditations Rotterdam School of Faculty of Tilburg Maastricht Amsterdam School of Business Economics School of School of Business Management, and and Economics Management, School, Erasmus Economics, Business, and Maastricht University University Maastricht University Management, University van University of Tilburg Amsterdam Groningen University EQUIS 1998 2005 2014 2007 AACSB 1998 2002 2011 2002 AMBA 1996 2007 2006

53 Based on the websites of the accreditation agencies, retrieved at 5-1-2015 for EQUIS and AACSB and at 17- 1-2015 for AMBA 54 The Euro MBA Consortium members: Audencia Nantes School of Management, France, IAE Universite Paul Cezanne Aix-Marseille, France, HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management, Germany, EADA Escuela de Alta Direccion y Administracion, Barcelona Spain, Kozminski University Warsaw, Poland, Maastricht University School of Business and Economics, the Netherlands

55 Based on websites of the business schools and checked by websites of the accreditation organizations. 140

Appendix 19 Preliminary propositions into propositions

Table 10 Preliminary propositions into propositions

P1 Coercive pressures force business schools to → P1 new: Coercive pressures force business acquire accreditations schools to acquire national accreditations for funded programmes, not international accreditations. P2 Mimetic pressures force business schools to → P2 new: Mimetic pressures force business schools acquire accreditations. to acquire international accreditations, not national accreditations except unfunded programmes. P3 Normative pressures force business schools to →P3a new: Internal normative pressures force acquire accreditations. business schools to acquire accreditations, for national and international accreditations both. → P3b new: External normative pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations, for national and international accreditations both. P4 The order of institutional pressures for getting → P4a new: The order of institutional pressures for accreditations is: coercive – mimetic – normative. getting the national accreditations is: coercive – (external normative) – internal normative pressures. → P4b new: The order of institutional pressures for getting the international accreditations is: external normative - mimetic – internal normative pressures. P5 A negative relation exists between accreditations → P5 new: A neutral or a (slightly) negative relation and autonomy of employees. exists between accreditations and autonomy of lecturers. P6 Accreditations create entrepreneurship in →P6a new: Accreditations can decrease business schools. entrepreneurship in business schools. →P6b new: Accreditations can create entrepreneurship in the form of incremental innovations in Dutch business schools. →P6c new: Accreditations can create entrepreneurship in the form of radical innovations in Dutch business schools.

141

The preliminary propositions in the table are explained on the basis of the cross case analysis as follows:

P1 Coercive pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations.

Coercive pressures are compulsory for the NVAO-accreditations for funded programmes, like IBMS.

Coercive pressures from the government, specifically the Ministry of Education, exist to ensure that accreditations for institutes and programmes are in place (institutional quality assurance assessments and limited programme assessments). They are not present for unfunded programmes, like MBA, neither for international accreditations, so I change the first preliminary proposition into a more specific one:

→ P1 new: Coercive pressures force business schools to acquire national accreditations for funded programmes.

P2 Mimetic pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations.

International and national pressure from other business schools exist to acquire international accreditations. This is not applicable on NVAO-accreditation, because every funded programme has to do the NVAO-accreditation. For the non-funded programmes it can count., so I change the second preliminary proposition into a more specific one:

→ P2 new: Mimetic pressures force business schools to acquire national accreditations for unfunded programmes and international accreditations.

P3 Normative pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations.

Internal and external normative pressures exist for acquisition of the NVAO-accreditation and for the international accreditations like EPAS, EQUIS, AACSB and AMBA. The normative pressures are internal and external pressures, so:

→P3a new: Internal normative pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations, for national and international accreditations both.

142

→ P3b new: External normative pressures force business schools to acquire accreditations, for national and international accreditations both

P4 The order of institutional pressures for getting accreditations is: coercive – mimetic – normative.

Both business schools, FEM, HU and ABS, UvA, see coercive pressures and internal normative pressures to acquire NVAO-accreditation. Some people from IBMS see external normative pressures in between those pressures from rankings and colleagues in the network. Interviewees from MBA,

SBE, only see coercive pressures for NVAO. They do not have NVAO-accreditation. Mimetic pressure is absent, because all (funded) programmes have to be NVAO-accredited.

So for NVAO, the order of institutional pressures is: coercive pressure – (external normative pressure) - internal normative pressure.

All three business schools see mimetic pressures from other business schools to acquire international accreditations and internal normative pressures from people within the organization: management and students. For MBA, ABS and for MBA, SBE external normative pressures in the form of rankings are the starting point before mimetic and internal normative pressure. Coercive pressure is absent, because the Dutch government puts no pressure on business schools to acquire international accreditations. So for international accreditations, the order of institutional pressures is: external normative pressure - mimetic pressure - internal normative pressure.

Because the pressures for acquisition of NVAO and international accreditations differ, I change the fourth preliminary proposition into a two more specific ones:

→ P4a new: The order of institutional pressures for getting the national accreditations is: coercive –

(external normative) – internal normative pressures.

→ P4b new: The order of institutional pressures for getting the international accreditations is: external normative - mimetic – internal normative pressures.

P5 A negative relation exists between accreditations and autonomy of employees.

The relationship between accreditations and autonomy is a complex one, in certain aspects the autonomy is decreased and in certain aspects it does not have an influence in both business schools.

143

Examinations and graduation are subjects in which requirements are increased and autonomy is decreased in IBMS, FEM, HU. Standards of the NVAO were included in the policy of this school.

In MBA, SBE, UvA, the assurances of learning of AACSB accreditation had an impact on lecturers and decreased their autonomy.

No influence was seen also, because lecturers have complete autonomy in developing a course, and when they deviate from that in a motivated manner, then it is alright, as long as they meet the end qualifications. This reason was told in all three business schools, so I change the fifth preliminary proposition into:

→ P5 new: A neutral or a (slightly) negative relation exists between accreditations and autonomy of employees.

P6 Accreditations create entrepreneurship in business schools.

The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship gives mixed results: it can be positive or negative or there is no influence according to the interviewees.

Incremental innovations are possible, like adjusting the curriculum or for didactical reasons. It is a mirror, because through the feedback of the accreditation committee can the business school improve its programme continuously. Accreditation enhances that you discuss your programme with other organizations. The benefit is at the business school level.

On the other side, the interviewees from IBMS, FEM, HU, and from MBA, ABS, UvA, saw no radical innovations. Accreditations are conservative and happen afterwards on a process that has happened before. Radical innovations happen outside accreditations, without guidelines and limitations. Accreditation is only an internal quality check and innovations are something new. The harm could be at the business school field level, when all business schools comply to the standards, every school looks like each other. This can lead to entrepreneurship outside business schools. , that,

If accreditations are too strictly, can lead to entrepreneurship. Two professors from Stanford left

Stanford when they got tired of it. Well, they founded Coursera, which is an interesting online platform for education.

144

Two interviewees from MBA, SBE, UM possibly saw a radical innovation as a consequence of the assurances of learning cycle of AACSB. In the AMBA accreditation the committee asked how innovative the MBA was in online education. This was a trigger to challenge the business school to be innovative and bring groups online together, e.g. so I change the seventh preliminary proposition into different effects on entrepreneurship: decrease or create entrepreneurship, and when they create entrepreneurship, I distinguish between two types of innovations: incremental and radical. It is dependent of the type of accreditation which effect is the consequence.

→P6a new: Accreditations can decrease entrepreneurship in business schools.

→P6b new: Accreditations can create entrepreneurship in the form of incremental innovations in

Dutch business schools.

→P6c new: Accreditations cannot create entrepreneurship in the form of radical innovations in

Dutch business schools.

145

Appendix 20 Answers on sub questions

Q1. What kind of coercive or regulative pressures from the government exist to get accreditations?

Coercive pressures from the government, the Ministry of Education, exist to get accreditations for institutes and programmes (institutional quality assurance assessments and limited programme accreditations). This counts only for the national accreditation, the NVAO.

Coercive pressures do not exist for the international accreditations.

The MBA programme is an unprotected programme, not funded by the Dutch government, so for this programme there are no direct coercive pressures.

Q2. What kind of mimetic or cultural cognitive pressures from other business schools exist to get accreditations?

Mimetic pressures exist for business schools to get accreditations. Mimetic pressures come from other business schools. It is indirectly, business schools see that other business schools get accredited and they take this along in their consideration to acquire them too. This is more or less an indirect pressure. Especially triple crown accreditation for universities is an objective to acquire. Rotterdam

School of Management is mentioned a lot as an example for ABS, UvA. Mimetic pressures are not seen for the national accreditation, because all funded programmes must be accredited, except for the unfunded programmes.

Q3. What kind of normative pressures (external and internal) exist to get accreditations?

Normative pressures exist for business schools to get accreditations.

External normative pressures come from colleagues in the national and international networks. This is not felt very strongly, this is more or less indirectly. Pressure from the rankings is felt, for IBMS

Elsevier ranking is mentioned and for MBA, ABS, and MBA, SBE the Financial Times is mentioned.

The topic rankings is complicated, because there are rankings for programmes, rankings for business schools, and rankings for whole universities and rankings are based on different criteria, such as the salary of graduated MBA students e.g..

146

Internal normative pressures come from the managers of the different business schools.

For the IBMS programme, pressure for the international programme accreditation EPAS comes from the international staff and from the Faculty Management. The executive board is not convinced yet.

For the MBA programme, at the Amsterdam Business School the executive board put pressure on the dean, the dean put pressure on the MBA director, and the MBA director put pressure on the programme manager MBA for international accreditations. The manager who manages all the executive programmes in between the dean and the MBA director is not convinced why the ABS would get international accreditations.

In the ABS the policy of the executive board is that all master programmes get NVAO-accreditations.

In SBE the policy of the university is that all programmes get accreditations. The pressure coms from the management.

Q4. To what extent do business schools conform to accreditations?

Business schools which want to get accreditations, national or international accreditations, have to conform to the accreditations standards. A few exceptions exist, e.g. some business schools do not want to get accreditations and are so good, have such good reputation, that it is not necessary to get accreditations. Lecturers from all business schools mention international examples, like Stanford and

Harvard University . This is not the case for Dutch business schools.

Business schools are frontrunners in getting and conforming to international accreditations. That is because they have international alliances and relationships, and they educate students for an international labour market. Potential students look at the international accreditations, because they are not familiar with the Dutch accreditation, the NVAO.

The status quo about business schools and their accreditations is: The business schools with multiple accreditations are: Amsterdam Business School, University van Amsterdam, Tilburg School of

Economics and Management, Tilburg University, and Maastricht School of Management, with double accreditations; Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, and Rotterdam

School of Management, Erasmus University, with triple accreditations; School of Business and

Economics, Maastricht University, has fivefold accreditations.

147

Rotterdam School of Management is the frontrunner in getting international accreditations, followed by the School of Business and Economics in Maastricht. They have both triple crown accreditations.

Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen follows as the third, with EQUIS and

AACSB. After that follow business schools with one international accreditation each.

A lecturer of MBA, SBA, MU had a possible explanation for getting international accreditations in

Maastricht and Groningen: “For Dutch people, Maastricht is in a remote area, like Groningen.

Maastricht has had may be the advantage they could attract too little Dutch students to survive, they had to be international in acquisition, that is why the accreditations are important, so may be is has been the context, the peripheral site in the Netherlands that has contributed to building something up from an underdog position, that caused the fast move in the ranking.”

Q5. What is the influence of accreditations on the autonomy of employees in teaching?

Regarding teaching autonomy in teaching in general, it was stated that the degree of autonomy is large in the Amsterdam Business School. This is supported by the NVAO report in 2013. The autonomy is also large in the IBMS programme (FEM, HU), and in the MBA (SBE) programme. In IBMS (FEM,

HU) and in MBA (ABS, UvA) was argued that they saw examples that showed that too much autonomy is not always positive. They concluded that what a lecturer does with his autonomy determines whether it is good or not. In the past, they witnessed very subjective and deviating examples. Moreover, at MBA (SBE, MU) a potential danger was perceived in extensive teaching autonomy, so too much autonomy is not always good.

The relationship between accreditations and autonomy is a complex one, in certain aspects the autonomy is decreased and in certain aspects it does not have an influence in both business schools.

Especially examination and graduation are subjects in which requirements are increased and autonomy is decreased in IBMS, FEM, HU. No influence was seen, because lecturers have complete autonomy in developing a course, and when they deviate from that in a motivated manner, then it is alright, as long as they meet the end qualifications. In the MBA programme of SBE, UM, a radical innovation was regarded as a consequence of the assurances of learning cycle of AACSB. In the

148

AMBA accreditation the committee asked how innovative the MBA was in online education. This was a trigger to challenge the business school to be innovative and bring groups online together.

Q6. What is the influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship in business schools?

The influence of accreditations on entrepreneurship gives mixed results: it can be positive or negative or there is no influence according to the interviewees. On one side, incremental innovations are possible, like adjusting the curriculum or for didactical reasons. It is a mirror, because the accreditation committee will point at weak spots in a programme and with this you can improve your programme continuously. Accreditation enhances that you discuss your programme with other organizations. The benefit is at the business school level.

On the other side, the interviewees saw no radical innovations. Accreditations are conservative and happen afterwards on a process that has happened before. Radical innovations happen outside accreditations, without guidelines and limitations. Accreditation is only an internal quality check and innovations are something new. The harm can be at the business school field level, when all business schools comply to the standards, every school looks like each other. This can lead to entrepreneurship outside business schools.

149