Follow the leaders? An analysis of convergence and innovation of faculty recruiting practices in US business schools

被引:0
作者
David Finch
David L. Deephouse
Norm O’Reilly
Tyler Massie
Carola Hillenbrand
机构
[1] Mount Royal University,Bissett School of Business
[2] University of Alberta,Alberta School of Business
[3] Ohio University,Richard P. & Joan S. Fox Professor of Business, College of Business
[4] University of Reading,Henley Business School
来源
Higher Education | 2016年 / 71卷
关键词
Business schools; Institutional isomorphism; Institutional logics; Legitimacy; Management education;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The debate associated with the qualifications of business school faculty has raged since the 1959 release of the Gordon–Howell and Pierson reports, which encouraged business schools in the USA to enhance their legitimacy by increasing their faculties’ doctoral qualifications and scholarly rigor. Today, the legitimacy of specific faculty qualifications remains one of the most discussed topics in management education, attracting the interest of administrators, faculty, and accreditation agencies. Based on new institutional theory and the institutional logics perspective, this paper examines convergence and innovation in business schools through an analysis of faculty hiring criteria. The qualifications examined are academic degree, scholarly publications, teaching experience, and professional experience. Three groups of schools are examined based on type of university, position within a media ranking system, and accreditation by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. Data are gathered using a content analysis of 441 faculty postings from business schools based in the USA over two time periods. Contrary to claims of global convergence, we find most qualifications still vary by group, even in the mature US market. Moreover, innovative hiring is more likely to be found in non-elite schools.
引用
收藏
页码:699 / 717
页数:18
相关论文
共 96 条
[1]  
Adler NJ(2009)When knowledge wins: Transcending the sense and nonsense of academic rankings Academy of Management Learning & Education 8 72-95
[2]  
Harzing AW(2014)The legitimacy paradox of business schools: losing by gaining? Academy of Management Learning & Education 3 171-178
[3]  
Alajoutsijärvi K(2000)Branding B-schools: Reputation management for MBA programs Corporate Reputation Review 41 115-136
[4]  
Juusola K(2004)An exploration of corporate recruitment descriptions on Monster.com Journal of Business Communication 40 1181-1201
[5]  
Siltaoja M(2014)Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike the paradoxes of academic–practitioner relationships Journal of Management 83 96-104
[6]  
Argenti P(2005)How business schools lost their way Harvard Business Review 3 41-60
[7]  
Backhaus KB(2001)Assessing knowledge assets: A review of the models used to measure intellectual capital International Journal of Management Reviews 7 99-107
[8]  
Bartunek JM(2008)The tension in business education between academic rigor and real-world relevance: The role of executive professors Academy of Management Learning & Education 3 319-333
[9]  
Rynes SL(2000)The rankings game: Managing business school reputation Corporate Reputation Review 54 61-84
[10]  
Bennis WG(2007)Intensification of university–industry relationships and its impact on academic research Higher Education 20 147-166