SMITH SCHOOL OF BUSINESS STRATEGIC PLAN (2009 · PDF fileSMITH SCHOOL OF BUSINESS STRATEGIC...

S M I T H S C H O O L O F B U S I N E S S

S T R A T E G I C P L A N ( 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 4 )

D R A F T: N O V E M B E R 2009

G. “Anand” Anandalingam (Dean)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Smith School has made a remarkable transformation from a very good regional school to a top research and teaching institution offering a wide range of products and services around the world. The capabilities of our faculty, the scale and quality of our facilities, and the quality of our students have soared. The Smith School is now in the process of another transformation. This transformation will carry the school from excellence to greatness with the following mission:

be a world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging global economic and business paradigm, and providing thought leadership to students, corporate executives and policy makers so that they can be agents of both economic prosperity and transformative social change. We want to be counted among the top business schools in this country and the world. We want to be known for superb scholarship, excellent students and flawless operations, not just among those who know us well, but everyone.

The school’s strategy ranges from initiatives aimed at producing research and program greatness to initiatives to improve job placement, build the Smith community, technology, brand, and revenues. Within this strategy the school will accomplish the following:

• Develop a culture of thought leadership around our internationally recognized faculty stars and continue key hires of senior faculty with leading research and teaching records.

• Strengthen MBA curriculum in both the full and part time programs to include entrepreneurial skills sets, corporate responsibility and social value creation.

• Increase career options for all students by broadening career paths to include associations, governments and other unique employers in the greater DC region.

• Continue the expansion of Smith Undergraduate Fellows Program so that all students will be able to participate in at least one Fellows track.

• Strengthen the Smith Community of students, faculty, alumni, and recruiters by integrating activities of student, alumni, career services and mentoring programs.

• Offer intense intercontinental learning through study, travel experiences for every full time MBA student in either Asia, Europe, the middle east and South America

• Continue to leverage technology to facilitate remote learning opportunities across continents.

1

• Position the school’s communications, marketing and branding activities through a focus on reaching significant external constituencies and improving the perception and ranking of our programs

• Improve employee retention and hiring practices to ensure continued improvement in staff and faculty quality

• Align existing assets of the business school to support the execution of these initiatives, and add to these assets when necessary

Is this strategy achievable? We believe it is. International programs in China and Europe, and the numerous student global study trips that have been generated by the Smith School have established the school as a global institution. At home, many of our academic areas have been recognized for excellence in their respective fields.

While the Robert H. Smith School of Business is poised to become the best global business school in the greater Washington DC area, several challenges can hinder progress. For example:

• Faculty salaries continue to escalate with bidding wars taking place among top schools for key faculty. This makes recruiting and retaining top faculty a financial challenge as well as increasing the cost of our programs

• There seem to be significant fiscal challenges on the horizon for the State of Maryland and the region impacting both our budget and the number of students enrolling in our entrepreneurial programs.

• The school continues to make progress in developing its alumni network but additional resources and time must be invested to expand the network to achieve its full potential. Furthermore, external development efforts need to be managed more efficiently to generate the desired results.

• Students need additional preparation to compete for the best initial job placement opportunities thereby attracting broader and more attractive employers .

• As a consequence of dealing with the pressures of creating research and rising in the academic ranks, many faculty members remain absent from community activities.

Even with these challenges, the Robert H. Smith School of Business is led by dedicated faculty and staff and energized by extraordinary students

2

TABEL OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary………………………………………………………… 1

Vision……………………………………………………………………….. 4

Five-Year Objectives………………………………………………………. 5

Strengths and Baseline…………………………………………………… 6

Competitors………………………………………………………………… 9

Financial Strategy…………………………………………………………. 12

Challenges……………………………………………………………….. 13

Strategic Priorities ………………………………………………………… 15

Tactics for the Academic Years 2007- 2012……………………………. 17

Appendix 1: Administrative and Financial………………………………. 23

Appendix 2: Academic Programs………………………………………… 26

Appendix 3: Rankings……………………………………………………… 30

Appendix 4: Research……………………………………………………… 34

3

4

VISION

The Smith School has made a remarkable transformation from a very good regional school to a top research and teaching institution offering a wide range of products and services around the world. The capabilities of our faculty, the scale and quality of our facilities, and the quality of our students have soared. The Smith School is now in the midst of another transformation. This transformation will carry the school forward with the vison:

To be a world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging global economic and business paradigm, and providing thought leadership to students, corporate executives and policy makers so that they can be agents of both economic prosperity and transformative social change. We want to be counted among the top business schools in this country and the world. We want to be known for superb scholarship, excellent students and flawless operations, not just among those who know us well, but everyone.

The stature of the Robert H. Smith School of Business has advanced dramatically over the last decade. Overall, the school’s average of all of its undergraduate and graduate rankings is #15 in the U.S. and when research is taken into account, the Smith School is among the top 10 U.S. business schools.

While in 1998 the school had no programs or departments ranked in the top 25, today there are many such rankings. For example, in 2007/08, the following areas were recognized by one or more surveys as being among the nation’s best programs:

• Information Systems Top 10 • Quantitative Analysis Top 15 • Supply Chain/Logistics Top 10 • Entrepreneurship Top 10 • Management Top 15 • Operations Management Top 20 • Finance Top 15 • Marketing Top 10 • International Business Top 25 • Custom Executive Programs Top 20

We need to take on the mantle of becoming thought leaders in the new business paradigm. Over the next several decades we will see an evolution from pure private sector market capitalism to much deeper and broader private-public partnerships, with a resurgence of focus on business ethics, environmental sustainability, corporate social responsibility, and social value creation. All over the world, governments are going to be working very closely with financial, manufacturing and service companies. We need to

lead the way in helping both business and government define the parameters of this new relationship.

FIVE YEAR OBJECTIVES

By the year 2014, The Smith School will be viewed as one of the best business schools in the world. The Smith School will be known for superb academic programs that integrate traditional business functions with knowledge of the practice and challenges created in the new global digital economy.

The Smith School will have key programs, centers and partnerships located in significant parts of the world. These programs and partnerships will allow the ready and freely flowing exchange of ideas, students, faculty and corporate partners across international boundaries.

The resources available to the Smith School will enable recruiting, developing and retaining world-class students, faculty and staff, ongoing innovation and quality improvement in our programs, and a satisfying and supportive work and learning environment for all members of the Smith School of Business community.

The Smith School’s status in research and recognition will place the school among the top business schools as measured by an average of all external recognition rankings and research metrics.

• At least four of the school’s academic departments will be among the top 10 in research and of these, at least two will be in the top 5. Overall, the school will be among the top five in the world in research.

• The average ranking of school’s full-time MBA program will be consistently in the top-20 based on evaluations at Business Week, Financial Times and US News and World Report. The average ranking of the undergraduate and part-time MBA programs will be in the top-15. The PhD program will be in the top-10.

• Student placement and salaries will be at or above those of our peer institutions. World-class organizations will recruit at the Smith School.

• The School will have a dominant position in the mid-Atlantic region with a broad family of programs and activities, and will have national recognition in the areas of globalization, entrepreneurship and technology.

• The physical facilities will add to the Smith School’s attraction and we will continue to offer state-of-the-art technical capabilities for research, teaching and our engagement with external communities

5

STRENGTHS AND BASELINE

We are well on the way towards achieving this vision. The Smith School has grown from 70 to 150 faculty members over the last nine years. Many new faculty have been recruited from the world’s premier research institutions, each selected for excellence in research, teaching, and their ability to advance the agenda of the school. Many faculty “superstars” are at the pinnacle of their profession and have been awarded endowed chairs or professorships in their respective fields. Sixty-four percent of our full professors have endowed professorships or chairs while about twenty-four of our faculty are assistant professors with tremendous potential in the coming years.

The strength of the faculty is perhaps the school’s most significant strategic advantage. In the last decade, the production of published research in the consensus world’s best research journals has soared. For example, Table 1 shows the year-by-year position with regard to total output in the 24 leading business journals indexed in the University of Texas (UT), Dallas, “Top 100 Business Schools” database. The rise of Smith School faculty research is unparalleled. From a position of #76 in the world in 1995, the Smith School placed #5 in the world in 2005 and #4 in the world in 2006.

Table 1: World Ranking of Annual Research Output in 24 Top Journals (http://citm.utdallas.edu/utdrankings/)

1990-1995: #51

1996-2000: #20

2000-2005: #11

2004-2009: #9

Academic program quality has risen in parallel with our ascent to the top in research. Academic quality continually increases, attracting outstanding students and significant corporate recognition. The school’s undergraduate program attracts spectacular students and external recognition for its programs has extended from the Maryland to the Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern United States. About forty-three percent of the fall 2007 freshman class was out-of-state.

The school is the largest and top ranked supplier of an accredited part-time MBA education in the Washington-Baltimore region, offering part-time MBA tracks in Washington, D.C., Shady Grove and Baltimore, Maryland, serving over 1,200 students in evening and weekend programs. The school is now making significant efforts to integrate placement activities for both full and part time students. This is especially significant because our high quality part time students gives the MBA program substantial size and mass and enhances our ability to attract top recruiters.

6

http://citm.utdallas.edu/utdrankings/

The Executive Masters in Business Administration (EMBA), a program launched in 2003, is offered in College Park; Shanghai, China; and Zurich, Switzerland with over 100 students.

The quality of our undergraduate students is superb, and the innovative Smith Fellows program is creating a fabulous undergraduate experience. The Smith School entering freshman class quality in each of the last six years exceeded that for all other entering freshman classes at the College Park campus. Retention of freshman for last year’s class, at 95 percent, was also at the top as were the school’s graduation rates and student teaching ratings.

Table 2 summarizes some of the pertinent ranking statistics for the Smith School.

Our centers have achieved significant national recognition, attracted external funding, and important corporate partners. Celebrating its twentieth anniversary last year, the Dingman Center for Entrepreneurship is well established, and a leading partner to the technology entrepreneurs of the Washington-Baltimore region. Our research centers such as Excellence in Service, Electronic Markets and Enterprises, Human Capital, Innovation, and Technology, Health Information and Decision Systems, and Supply Chain Management, are bringing added distinction to the school and creating partnerships among the school and the corporate and government communities. A new center for studying Complexity in Business was launched in Spring 2008.

The Netcentric Research Laboratories: Supply Chain Management, Financial Markets, Electronic Markets, and Behavioral Labs are creating an integrated electronic teaching and research environment, with applications to e-commerce, supply chain management, financial markets, auctions, and consumer research. Identified as a special strength by the 2005 AACSB International accreditation review, the laboratories foster demonstration projects and research in these areas, as well as exploring the associated organizational and behavioral implications of these changes. This is the most extensive such operation of its kind in the country, reflecting the vision of converging technology applications across the various functions of business. The school is successfully engaging its large and established alumni base and corporate network, with the prospect of generous private giving and employment opportunities for students.

The school was also the beneficiary of generous gifts to expand its facilities by adding the South Wing in 2002 and the North Wing in 2007 and to increase PhD stipends to the highest in the nation in 2008. The expanded Van Munching Hall will continue to provide the most advanced technological teaching environment among all leading business schools. Additional financial support from Mr. Robert H. Smith, the school’s leading benefactor, has seeded new technology, branding and development initiatives. This funding is now supporting the transformational undergraduate program for undergraduates—“The Smith School Fellows Program” that formally began in Fall 2006.

7

Table 2: Mission Baseline (Academic Year 2007/2008)

Mission: To ascend to one of the top global business schools as measured by the school’s stature in research and teaching, and the quality and placement of its students. We will provide a superb research and teaching environment for our faculty and students as well as give our students a first class return on investment for their time and expense.

Research (World): UTD*

Overall School 9

Decision and Information Technologies: 6

Finance 12

Marketing 10

Management and Organization 3

Average Academic Program Ranking 25

Top Individual Program Rankings

Part-Time MBA 16 (US News)

Full-Time MBA 20 (Financial Times)

Undergraduate 17 (U.S. News)

Graduate Salaries

Part-Time MBA (ROI) 7 (Forbes, 2006)

Full-Time MBA (ROI) 2 (of FT Top 20)

Full-Time MBA (MBA Salary/Pre MBA Salary) 8 (Business Week)

Undergraduate (Starting Salary/Cost) 8 (Business Week)

Faculty Salaries Average/(Median Percentile)**

Full Professor 106.5%/(107.1)

Associate Professor 102.9% /100.5)

Assistant Professor 92.5% /(95.2)

* UT-Dallas (UTD)

**Salary Comparison Group: Berkeley, UCLA, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell, Ga. Tech, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, NYU, UNC-Chapel Hill, Ohio State, Wharton, Texas-Austin, Washington, Wisconsin.

8

COMPETITORS

The Smith School has both public and private business school peers and competitors. We compete with some schools, such as Georgetown, in attracting MBA students but have few other areas of competition with them. Some schools, such as University of Texas at Austin, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) or Carnegie Mellon, have substantial reputations as technology oriented schools. In other cases, individual departments (e.g., Finance) might compete with a specific school (e.g., Northwestern).

We believe that the key to long-term academic success as measured by academic reputation among other business schools is research prominence. The speed of the Smith School’s rise (and similarly, the limited strength of the university’s branding) explains much of its lack of recognition as a great academic institution.

Table 3 provides business school research rankings from the University of Texas, Dallas. We believe that this is a representative indicator of the Smith School’s primary research competitors. As is evident, the Smith School’s competitors are recognized to be among the very best business schools in the United States.

Table 3: Top 10 U.S. Business Schools Research Rankings*

1. Wharton 2. Duke 3. NYU 4. Chicago 5. Michigan 6. Columbia 7. Harvard 8. Stanford 9. Maryland (Smith) 10. Texas - Austin

Trade magazine rankings are summarized in the Appendix at the end of this report.

Table A10 provides the summary research ranking for the business school based on productivity in top-rated journals. The best ranked department is Management and Organization (ranked 3), while Decision and Information Technologies (rank 6), Marketing (rank 10) and Finance (rank 12) are all in the top 15. It should be noted that in many areas, the school’s strengths are much greater than its public recognition. These same Departments are not as highly ranked when Deans and other senior academic administrators are surveyed by US News and World Report. For example, the Marketing Department has been placed in the top 10 by the UT-Dallas research productivity measure, but otherwise appears rarely in top-10 marketing department rankings. We are very well regarded among major finance departments and finance faculty, as * Global rank based on research publications in 24 top academic journals for the five-year period 2004-2008 (University of Texas at Dallas).

9

demonstrated by our success in faculty recruiting, but the Finance Department does not get the recognition it deserves in trade magazine rankings. There is significant work that needs to be done in order to get the research reputation known to people who matter, especially those who fill in rankings surveys.

For the purposes of accreditation by AACSB International, the Smith School’s current peers and aspirant group are given in Table 4. The rankings of most of these programs are in line with normal expectations but programs such as Harvard’s are worse than expected because of the lack of strength of its PhD program compared to the others and some programs such as Virginia’s and Georgetown’s fall far below their branding because of their weak research records when compared to the major research schools. For this reason, neither Georgetown nor Virginia are considered to be other peers or aspirational peers of the Smith School.

Table 4: AACSB Int. Comparable Peers and Aspirant Group*

Smith Brand Recognition – 17, Research Rank – 9, Overall – 25.

Comparable Peers – Average brand recognition, research rank, overall average rank

University of Texas at Austin – 16, 11, 24 University of Michigan – 8, 5, 9

University of Indiana – 21, 27, 20 University of CA – Berkeley – 6, 16, 11

Ohio State University – 38, 17, 44 University of North Carolina – 28, 19, 19

Aspirant Group – Average brand recognition, research rank, overall average rank

Harvard University – 10, 7, 1 New York University – 5, 3, 10

University of Chicago – 3, 4, 4 Stanford – 4, 10, 3

Mass. Institute of Technology – 7, 11, 7 Columbia University – 9, 6, 6

* Research rank based on Table A9 in the Appendix; overall ranking based on Table A7. Brand recognition taken from previous Strategic Plan report.

10

FINANCIAL STRATEGY

While the Smith School is a public business school within the flagship public university of the State of Maryland, the financial position of the school more closely resembles a private institution. About 15 percent of the school’s support is from the State of Maryland. The school, like many other major public business schools does not retain its undergraduate tuition nor the university-specified graduate tuition for its full-time MBA students. In return, the school receives a “base budget.” In the Smith School’s case, we estimate that we generate about $35 million in undergraduate tuitions for the university. The university provides a “base budget” of about $19 million in return. At standard university tuition rates, we estimate that the Smith School provides courses that generate about $25 million of the $35 million tuition gross. In addition, the school receives university services such as university paid employee fringe benefits (social security, employee retirement, and health insurance), some facilities maintenance and personnel, financial and developmental services. (Details in Appendices A1 and A2.)

The school generates additional revenues with activities such as its Executive MBA

Program (EMBA), non-degree executive education and its part-time MBA programs. Various agreements with the university define revenue sharing and tax structures for each program. Total Smith School revenues have grown from approximately $15 million in 1998 to over $60 million in the academic year ending June 2008. When an estimate of university services not in the Smith School’s budget is included, total revenues are now above $70 million per year.

The school uses a five-year forecasting model to report and project revenues by category, product line and location. This model augments an operational budget reporting system that interfaces with the university’s accounting systems. The forecasting system enables the Smith School to investigate various tuition/cost scenarios as well as to incorporate hiring, operational and facilities investments. Figure 1 shows the historical distribution of the school’s revenues as well as the actual revenues for academic years up to 2007/2008 (FY 2008) as well as forecasts for 2008/09 (FY 2009.) The portion marked “University Paid Benefits” is a crude estimate of the value of the employee benefits and other services paid by the university on behalf of the Smith School.

Private contributions are a very important part of the school’s financial plan.

However, significant revenue growth is also required for the school to meet its ambitious goals. Similar to previous years, the Smith School plans to add 15-20 faculty members in the next three years. The school would like to double its marketing and communications budget over the next five years, invest in expanding executive education, and increase its information technology support, and alumni and development activities. In each case, we expect the departmental budgets to grow anywhere from 30 to 100%. Another significant challenge is to grow funding for the Smith Undergraduate Fellows program from a very small base to well over $1.5 million per year.

11

Figure 1: Robert H. Smith Actual and Projected Revenues

(As of June 2008:1998-2008 actual, 2009 projected).

CHALLENGES

North Wing

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

1998 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Private Revenues andGifts

B-School RetainedTuitions/Fees

Univ Funded Projects

Base Budget

University PaidBenefits

Faculty Issues

Several challenges can hinder continuing progress toward realizing our vision. Our endowment is significantly smaller than the major private institutions in our aspirant group. Faculty will be attracted and retained only if we can continue to compete with other top schools by offering endowed chairs and research professorships. As the school has grown in stature, our faculty has become raiding targets of other top business schools. The school has achieved a very competitive salary profile but will require additional resources and endowed positions to compete with the academically elite private business schools for future top level recruiting. Faculty salaries are becoming an increasing concern because of the escalation of salaries by competing schools for a relatively small group of the very top faculty. Retention and recruiting packages are creating compression salary issues as well as unrealistic expectations for many faculty members and may limit growth of the tenure track.

Another weakness of the school has been the relative absence of many of our faculty in activities related to building the Smith community. There are strong pressures on faculty for world-class research and teaching. In addition, assistant professors are

12

sheltered from most service activities so that the bulk of such activities have fallen on the tenured faculty. Part of this problem is self-correcting as assistant professors are promoted to higher ranks but steps to correct this weakness and transform the faculty culture to a more balanced one involving greater service is a long-term process and sustained efforts are essential.

Rankings

The overall quality of the Smith School is greater than some of the major external rankings. One contributor to this deficiency is the time required to build academic reputation. However, it is not clear how far the Smith School’s brand recognition can climb without comparable increases in the brand recognition of the university. What is clear is that a number of business schools whose universities have stronger brands than Maryland’s are rated above the Smith School’s even though objective comparisons do not show them to be superior.

In addition, the Smith School does not do too well in the following important rankings factors: placement indicators—starting salaries and student job acceptance rates, and the reputation of the Smith School with corporate recruiters. There has been a historic weakness in the office of career management at the Smith School, and this has to be attended to. As yet, many top companies do not recruit at the Smith School. Student mentoring, job placement and development efforts are only now approaching the level required for a fine business school but many companies that should have been recruiting at the Smith School have only recently started this process. In addition, bringing additional top companies to recruit on campus is a long, time-consuming process.

Two other points can be made with respect to ranking. One is that many magazines rely on self-reported business school data that is frequently inconsistent and suggestive of reporting errors or exaggerated data. Second is that while the school has made steady, year-to-year, progress in faculty and student quality, specific magazine rankings have fluctuated wildly because of relatively small changes in measured parameters, often caused by flaws in the rankings methodologies, creates much concern among students and alumni.

Alumni Network

The school is catching up in the development of its alumni network but still lags behind its major competitors. We have many very successful and well-placed alumni but more must be brought into active partnerships with the school. In fact, even though the Smith School has over 45 thousand alumni worldwide, less than 5 percent are active in any way. The University of Maryland has historically had a very indifferent attitude towards alumni and this feeling is mutual. Over the past 15 years or so, many initiatives have started at both the Smith School and the University to engage our alumni many different ways. We need to expand the scope of our alumni relations operations by improving date integrity, enhancing the activities and events for alumni, engaging alumni in current Smith School operations including student mentoring, speaking engagements and student placement.

13

Resources

The greatest challenge for the Smith School of Business is the availability of consistent and increasing resources. The University provides less than 20% of the budget, and the school needs to generate the rest by being very entrepreneurial. Much of the revenue comes from the part-time MBA program that is subject to the risk of the well-being of the global and regional economy. In fact, we expect budget cuts due to the downturn of the economy of the U.S. and the State of Maryland. The recessionary pressures will also adversely affect the number of students enrolling in our revenue producing endeavors.

As mentioned above, our endowment is also very small, less than $50 million, and the participation of our alumni in philanthropy is also limited. Thus the income from private sources can also not match many of our regional and national competitors and aspirants.

On the other side, the school has increased the financial support to attract top quality Masters and PhD students but additional resources will be needed. While PhD stipends have are now at the top, substantial additional resources are needed for undergraduate and MBA scholarships. Further, recruiting and retaining top faculty and staff also requires a significant infusion of funds.

The fundraising objectives for the Smith School of Business reflect these goals. Endowment funds for faculty chairs and professorships, student scholarships and financial aid are central to realizing the vision for the Robert H. Smith School of Business. Our fundraising objectives include additional resources to maintain the competitive edge of the technological infrastructure of Van Munching Hall and to improve operations at our part-time locations.

Strategic Differentiators

Although we have relied on “technology” being the main differentiator for the Smith School of Business and pride ourselves in being a pioneer in incorporating technology at the core of our teaching and overall educational missions, over the past two years we have moved on to consider our strategic differentiation as being on the nexus of globalization, entrepreneurship and technology. We call it the “GET Strategy.” We believe that a leading business school in the 21st century has to be global in its outlook and mission. However, being a business school that is “global” does not differentiate us in a strategic manner. We continue to excel in both research and teaching as it pertains to technology, especially information systems and technology. We expend a considerable amount of time on entrepreneurship, in research, teaching, and also in experiential learning for our graduate and undergraduate students. In fact, we are the premier business school with a focus on entrepreneurship in the mid-Atlantic region, from New Jersey to South Carolina.

We have a number of programs on the interface of globalization, entrepreneurship and technology. Every year we conduct a business plan competition in Beijing, China which

14

is very successful with more than 200 companies competing for start-up or bridge funds. We have a number of global study trips to different parts of the world where the students, both undergraduate and MBA, learn about the entrepreneurial landscape in the countries they visit. Further, we have revamped the MBA curriculum to ensure that all students, full-time and part-time, take required courses in globalization, entrepreneurship and technology. We plan to extend this curriculum requirement to the undergraduate program in future years.

In addition to the GET strategy, we also believe that a key strategic differentiator for the Smith School of Business is its proximity to Washington DC. Given the location, and the fact that over the next several decades we will see an evolution from pure private sector market capitalism to much deeper and broader private-public partnerships we believe that we have the opportunity to lead the way in helping both business and government define the parameters of this new relationship. We are planning to extend our strategy to include programs on business ethics, environmental sustainability, corporate social responsibility, and social value creation. Competitors

A short-term threat to enrollments the part time program is the increased activity of Georgetown in building its part time program. A longer- term threat is the creation of the Cary School of Business at Johns Hopkins University. This program is not accredited by the AACSB, but now has a greater potential than the previous Hopkins Continuing Education MBA Program to draw students from the Smith part time program and therefore affect our revenues. In addition, Johns Hopkins University’s superior branding to the University of Maryland increases this threat.

15

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES

The school has attracted world-class faculty, enhanced the distinctiveness and caliber of its programs and centers, and improved the financial and administrative elements of its infrastructure. It has also achieved recognition nationally and internationally for several competencies such as the technology focus of the school and our activities in entrepreneurship. However, we have not yet reached the status to which we aspire.

In our continued campaign toward attaining our strategic goals and correcting areas of weakness, we continue our focus on several strategic priorities:

• Maintaining research greatness throughout the school.

• Transforming academic programs from excellent to great.

• Building the Smith community to create a dynamic faculty, staff, student, and alumni network.

• Marketing the distinctions of the school.

• Increasing resources and infrastructure support for the school.

The next section outlines, the tactics underlying each of these strategic priorities.

16

Research Greatness Maintain research greatness throughout the school.

• Continue “signature” hires of senior faculty with major international reputations and leading research records throughout the school.

• Aggressively recruit mature junior faculty with the potential to be “stars” in their fields

• Continue to build department research reputations by promoting existing capabilities and accomplishments including bringing to Smith high-visibility research seminars and national conferences with the goal of one major event per month.

• Exploit and improve synergies across departments in joint leading edge research Centers.

• Support and increase faculty research grant activities and develop additional summer research funding opportunities for tenured faculty.

• Continue to reduce workload for PhD students to support top talent. Increase placement opportunities for Ph.D. students with earlier and more stringent research paper requirements.

• Expand the Smith Undergraduate Research Fellow Program and provide research fellowships for undergraduate students to assist faculty in faculty research.

• Achieve placement goals for PhD students in top 50 business schools and research universities.

17

Academic Program Transform Smith academic programs from Distinctions excellent to great.

Maintain high teaching quality across all levels of the undergraduate programs and all locations of the MBA program. Improve teaching support for faculty and begin the development of a series of expanded teaching quality enhancements. Improve the partnership between adjunct faculty and the school by increasingly integrating adjuncts into the intellectual life of the school. .

Improve the measurement of student teaching satisfaction by developing and implementing a “customer service” oriented series of satisfaction surveys and integrate them into the university’s new on-line course satisfaction system.

• Continue implementing the Smith Undergraduate Fellows Program. Implement additional Junior/Senior Fellows tracks so that all students have the opportunity to participate in at least one Fellows track.

• Implement the second year of the new MBA program (both core and electives) for all full and part time students. Find mechanisms to integrate the Smith brand into the curriculum and improve job placement for all MBA students.

• Continue enhancing the part-time MBA program with additional student services, teaching quality improvements, technology advances and physical infrastructure improvements.

• Enhance the quality of students and teaching in our successful MS in Accounting program.

• Assess the market and develop specialized EMBA and Master of Science programs such as finance and information systems, and supply chain management.

• Intensify the effort to enhance the quality of the PhD Program through all phases of admission, coursework, research and placement.

• Offer global opportunities in Asia, Europe and the United States for undergraduate, MBA and EMBA students.

18

Building the Smith Community Build the Smith community to create a dynamic faculty, staff, student, and alumni network.

• Continue building the Smith community of students, faculty, alumni and recruiters—integrating activities of student, alumni and mentoring programs with special effort on building the part-time/full-time MBA student/alumni network.

• Expand the scope of our alumni relations operations by improving date integrity, enhancing the activities and events for alumni, engaging alumni in current Smith School operations including student mentoring, speaking engagements and student placement.

• Establish regionally-based alumni-relations with operations in New York as a starting point.

• Continue to improve placement opportunities for full and part-time students with enhanced emphasis in developing employment relationships with top companies.

• Improve the school’s governance system, accountability and reporting systems, and committee and organizational structures to stimulate the development of the Smith community, marketing efforts, program delivery and operational efficiencies in line with the Smith School’s emergence as a mature top research institution.

• Refine faculty service standards and metrics to reflect the importance of faculty collaboration in building a strong Smith community culture.

• Execute coordinated strategies to build and strengthen corporate partnerships that will lead to increased student career opportunities, research, sponsorship and philanthropic support of key Smith School initiatives.

• Extend the mentoring program to part time MBA and undergraduate students.

• Integrate center, academic and external relations event programming and sponsorship into a unified strategy for corporate sponsorship and fund raising.

19

Marketing the Smith School :

Market the distinctions of the school with special emphasis on the school’s global activities, leading edge application of technology and entrepreneurship.

• Expand the school’s branding activities through increased promotion and advertising using traditional, video and web-based media and also expand departmental functional branding efforts.

• Continue to develop branding materials that help students, alumni and recruiters translate the Smith School strategy into clearly understood career benefits.

• Support the school’s research centers to advance faculty expertise while serving as a focal point for external recognition and business partnerships.

• Expand advisory board activities to advance business partnerships, research opportunities, financial support, and student placement

• Maintain the number of high-visibility research symposia with at least one major symposium per department per year and overall, hold at least one significant public symposium, conference or event at the Smith School each month during the academic year.

20

Resources and Infrastructure Increase resources and infrastructure support for the school.

• Secure major commitments from alumni, friends and corporations to reach the campaign goal of $90 million range by December 2011.

• Expand the non-degree executive education program to $5 million by FY 2011

• Continue revenue generating entrepreneurial activities aimed at sustaining Smith School revenue growth at a pace sufficient to continue expansion of tenured and tenure-track faculty to 125 and total faculty to 160 by 2011, maintain salaries at the median of the top 10 research business schools, maintain our technological lead, build the Smith brand and fuel our global expansion.

• Develop and launch a series of revenue-generating, high-value Executive Master of Science degree programs for executive students in Maryland and abroad.

• Increase overall revenues for the school so that by 2012, the school has total revenues among the top three public business schools.

• Create a space plan for future business school expansion.

• Continue improving operational processes within administrative and program offices including automating the back office operations of the business school as an element of the school’s major IT initiatives.

• Provide the best possible work climate for all staff including professional skills development for all levels of staff.

21

APPENDIX

FIGURE A1: ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

22

FIGURE A2: STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS

The Smith School operates a continuous improvement model spearheaded by its strategic planning process. This process began in the 1997/98 academic year. Under this model, annual and five-year objectives and tactics are set in six areas: research, academic programs, the Smith community, information technology, marketing, and resources and infrastructure. Each department (academic and administrative) participates in the strategic plan, sets strategic objectives for itself as well as collaborating in the statement of objectives for the school. The school’s department chairs and senior staff (assistant, associate deans and department directors) led by the Dean’s Office, insure the implementation of the objectives.

The strategic planning process operates on the following time-table.

• June - Finalize Faculty Recruiting Plan • September - Satisfaction Surveys Completed for Baseline

Faculty Satisfaction Undergraduate Student Satisfaction MBA Student Satisfaction External Rankings

• November – Management Strategy Retreat • February – Department Strategic Plans and research metrics • March – April Integration of strategies, plans, and financial forecasts • May – Strategic Plan Presented at School Assembly and to MBA Students • May – Draft Plan Published for Review and Feedback • April – May Strategic PRD Objectives for next year • June – Plan Published • August – Planning Cycle Begins Again

June June

Publish Plan

Plan Presentatio

Department Plan

Management Retreat

Baseline Data

Goals and Objectives

23

Table A1. Smith School Pro Forma Actuals and Financial Forecast ($000) (as of June 2009)

Revenues 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Forecast

Base Budget 13,764 14,769 15,834 17,162 18,559 19,535

Other Univ. 776 1,403 1,953 1,937 1,911 2,434

Tuition/Fees 20,732 23,923 25,904 29,144 32,466 30,801

Private 6,568 8,787 11,763 11,973 9,308 10,621

Subtotal 41,849 48,880 55,454 60,216 62,244 63,391

North Wing 0 0 1,230 7,500 7,724 613

Total Revenues 41,840 48,882 56,684 67,716 69,968 64,005

Table A2. Smith School Selected Key Expenditure Forecast ($000)

(as of June 2009)

2008 2009 (Forecast)

D e b t S e rv ic e 1 ,9 8 3 2 ,4 3 6F a c u lty H i re s 2 ,6 3 4 3 ,2 1 5S u m m e r R e s e a rc h F u n d 5 3 3 6 7 5C a re e r S e rv i c e s 1 9 6 2 1 ,9 5 0S tra te g ic M a rk e ti n g 2 ,2 3 6 2 ,0 4 8P h . D . S tu d e n t S u p p o r t 1 ,4 8 9 1 ,5 8 9M B A S t u d e n t S u p p o r t 1 ,1 9 7 1 ,4 7 7S m ith F e ll o w s P ro g ra m 4 9 7 5 7 0A lu m n i /D e v e lo p m e n t 1 ,5 1 7 1 ,6 9 1I T T e c h n o lo g y /L a b s 3 ,2 1 0 2 ,9 9 6

24

Table A3: Academic Programs at Smith:

2008 Graduates with Bachelor of Science Degree programs with majors in: 1,044*

- Accounting 256

- Information Systems 54

- Finance 335

- General Business and Management 73

- International Business 121

- Logistics, Transportation & Supply Chain Management 70

- Marketing 224

- Operations Management 53

2007-08 MBA GRADUATES 414

MS Degree Graduates 21

Ph.D. Graduates 14

* Sum of individual undergraduates in majors may not equal total number of graduates because of graduates with dual majors.

• Approximately 2,900 undergraduates ranging from freshman to seniors majoring in business at College Park and Shady Grove, Md.

• 257 full-time MBA students in College Park, Md., from 32 countries.

• 1,073 part-time MBA students attending weekend and evening programs in Washington, D.C., Shady Grove, and Baltimore, Md.

• 237 Executive MBA participants in the U.S., China and Zurich

• 104 PhD students from 22 countries

25

Table A4: 2008-09 Teaching Statistics/Faculty

Department Courses UG MBA PhD # StudentsStudent Rating

Tenure/ Tenure Track

Tyser Teaching Fellows

FT Lect-urers

Hires 2008-2009

Total Faculty

AIA 144 104 37 3 1856 4.25 7 5 1 2 15 DO&IT 144 74 55 15 1997 4.33 28 8 1 0 37 Finance 138 72 57 9 1709 4.18 18 3 2 2 25 LBPP 147 96 47 4 1949 4.25 13 4 5 0 22 M&O 163 71 81 11 2705 4.27 21 7 4 0 32 Marketing 114 67 42 5 1174 4.41 18 3 3 1 25 FT Faculty 105 30 16 4 156

Area Student Teaching Rating

Overall Smith School 4.23

CP UG Lower 4.19

CP UG Upper 4.27

Shady Grove UG 4.20

CP MBA 4.24

DC MBA 4.18

Shady Grove MBA 4.16

Baltimore MBA 4.18

26

Table A5: Average Student Evaluations- 2007-08

(5.0 maximum)

Fall 2007 Spring 2008

Department # of Sections Average # of Sections Average

ACCT 48 4.28 49 4.19

DIT 68 4.32 55 4.24

FIN 51 4.04 55 4.17

LBPP 55 4.22 58 4.17

MKTG 47 4.26 53 4.25

M&O 62 4.36 69 4.39

OCM (BMGT 367) 4 4.12 6 4.15

Smith School 334 4.27 339 4.24

Area

CP UG Lower 12 4.18 21 4.16

CP UG Upper 148 4.29 167 4.23

Shady Grove UG 26 4.41 24 4.38

CP MBA 43 4.21 50 4.19

DC MBA 49 4.19 45 4.19

Shady Grove MBA 14 4.34 14 4.30

Baltimore MBA 9 4.15 11 4.14

27

TABLE A6: ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

Program Sizes for Top 25 U.S. Schools in 2009 Financial Times MBA Rankings*

Rank School name Undergrad FT MBA PT MBA EMBA PhD

1 University of Pennsylvania: Wharton 2528 1611 2466 407 1842 Harvard Business School 0 1801 0 0 313 Columbia Business School 0 1234 0 767 924 Stanford University GSB 0 733 0 56 995 MIT: Sloan 225 788 0 0 806 New York University: Stern 2305 841 2137 209 1007 University of Chicago: Booth 0 1144 1589 183 1148 Dartmouth College: Tuck 0 498 0 0 09 Yale School of Management 0 382 0 0 27

10 Northwestern University: Kellogg 0 1254 1150 559 12411 Duke University: Fuqua 0 782 0 378 8212 University of Michigan: Ross 1051 877 682 147 10013 Emory University: Goizueta 582 373 313 177 4114 University of Virginia: Darden 0 765 0 60 915 UCLA: Anderson 0 731 772 214 6516 University of California at Berkeley: Haas 613 500 753 144 7817 Cornell University: Johnson 0 591 0 312 3918 Georgetown University: McDonough 1353 522 283 312 019 University of Arizona: Eller 5382 316 108 61 13620 University of Maryland: Smith 2882 257 1073 237 104

21 University of North Carolina: Kenan-Flagler 638 559 0 316 57

22 University of Rochester: Simon 0 185 75 118 3923 University of Texas at Austin: McCombs 4380 1062 0 152 9424 Carnegie Mellon: Tepper 435 392 358 0 9325 Rice University: Jones 0 473 0 132 025 University of Pittsburgh: Katz 1960 215 526 83 57

* Note: Virginia has a separate Undergraduate School of Business (McIntire); Georgetown and Dartmouth have no PhD Programs

28

TABLE A7: MBA RANKINGS (BY AVERAGE)

Top 50 MBA Rankings Arranged in Rank Order of Average (2009)

Rank Business School University USN 2009

BW 2008

FT 2009

1 Harvard Business School Harvard University 1 2 4 2 The Wharton School University of Pennsylvania 3 4 1 3 Stanford Graduate School of Business Stanford University 2 6 3 3 University of Chicago (Booth) University of Chicago 5 1 6 5 Kellogg School of Management Northwestern University 3 3 10 6 Columbia Business School Columbia University 9 7 2

6 Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5 9 5

8 Tuck School of Business Dartmouth College 8 12 8

8 Ross School of Business University of Michigan 13 5 10 10 Stern School of Business New York University 11 13 7

11 Haas School of Business University of California, Berkeley 7 10 15

11 Fuqua School of Business Duke University 12 8 14

13 UCLA Anderson School of Management University of California, Los Angeles 14 14 11

14 Yale School of Management Yale University 10 24 9

15 S.C. Johnson Graduate School of Management Cornell University 17 11 17

16 Darden Graduate School of Business Administration University of Virginia 15 16 16

17 Tepper School of Business Carnegie Mellon University 15 19 23

17 Goizueta Business School Emory University 22 23 12

17 Kenan-Flagler Business School University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 20 17 20

20 Kelley School of Business Indiana University 22 15 31

21 Foster School of Business University of Washington 26 27 21

21 Marshall School of Business University of Southern California 20 25 30

23 McDonough School of Business Georgetown University 19 40+ 18

24 McCombs School of Business University of Texas, Austin 18 21 43

29

Top-50 MBA Ranking (Continued)

25 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland, College Park 40 26 18

26 Olin School of Business Washington University 22 28 39 26 Simon School of Business University of Rochester 29 40+ 22 28 Mendoza College of Business University of Notre Dame 33 20 45

28 Marriott School of Management Brigham Young University 29 22 48

30 Georgia Tech College of Management Georgia Institute of Technology 22 29 50+

30 Eli Broad School of Business Michigan State University 33 40+ 34 32 Mays Business School Texas A&M University 33 40+ 31

32 Krannert School of Management Purdue University 32 40+ 34 34 Owen Graduate School of Management Vanderbilt University 33 30 43 35 Eller College of Management University of Arizona 40+ 40+ 27

35 Smeal College of Business Pennsylvania State University 40 40+ 28

35 UC Davis Graduate School of Management

University of California, Davis 40 40+ 28

35 Tippie College of Business University of Iowa 44 40+ 25

39 Thunderbird School Thunderbird School of Global Management 40+ 40+ 31

39 Warrington College of Business University of Florida 37 40+ 34

39 Jessie H. Jones Graduate School of Management Rice University 38 40+ 34

39 UIUC College of Business University of Illinois 38 40+ 34

43 Cox School of Business Southern Methodist University 47 18 50+

44 Fisher College of Business Ohio State University 26 40+ 52

44 Moore School of Business University of South Carolina 53 40+ 25

46 Wisconsin School of Business University of Wisconsin, Madison 28 40+ 53

47 Carlson School of Management University of Minnesota 33 40+ 49 47 Carey School of Management Arizona State University 29 40+ 53 47 Carroll School of Management Boston College 44 40+ 40+

50 Merage School of Business University of California, Irvine 51 40+ 38

30

TABLE A8 – UNDEGRADUATE RANKINGS (BY AVERAGE)

2009 Top 50 Undergraduate Rankings Arranged in Rank Order of Average

Rank School BW 2009

USN 2009

1 Pennsylvania (Wharton) 3 1 2 Virginia (McIntire) 1 6 2 Michigan (Ross) 4 3 4 UC‐Berkeley (Haas) 6 3 4 MIT (Sloan) 7 2 6 Texas (McCombs) 10 6 7 Notre Dame (Mendoza) 2 17 7 Cornell 8 11 7 North Carolina (Kenan‐Flagler) 13 6 10 NYU (Stern) 15 5 11 Emory (Goizueta) 9 13 12 Carnegie Mellon (Tepper) 19 6 13 Washington U. (Olin) 16 13 14 Indiana (Kelley) 20 11 14 USC (Marshall) 21 10 16 Illinois 22 13 17 Brigham Young (Marriott) 5 35 18 Boston College (Carroll) 17 25 19 Wake Forest (Calloway) 14 30 20 Georgetown (McDonough) 24 21 21 U. of Washington (Foster) 25 21 22 Babson 23 25 23 Maryland (Smith) 35 17 24 Wisconsin 40 13 25 Penn State (Smeal) 38 21 25 Ohio State (Fisher) 42 17 27 Texas A&M (Mays) 37 30 28 Case Western (Weatherhead) 39 30 29 Miami U. (Farmer) 18 52 29 SMU (Cox) 31 39 31 William & Mary (Mason) 30 43 32 Villanova 11 65

31

Top‐50 Undergraduate Business Ranking

32 Bentley 33 43 34 Rensselaer Polytech (Lally) 36 43 35 Boston U. 43 39 36 Santa Clara (Leavey) 32 52 37 Richmond (Robins) 12 74 37 Georgia Tech 51 35 39 Syracuse (Whitman) 49 39 40 Northeastern 27 65 41 Baylor (Hankamer) 45 52 42 American (Kogod) 28 74 43 San Diego 29 74 44 Fordham 41 74 45 Lehigh 26 95 46 U. of Miami 50 74 47 Texas Christian (Neeley) 34 95 48 James Madison 44 95 49 Ohio 47 95 50 Binghamton 48 121

Note: Schools that were not ranked in both publications were not included.

32

Table A9: Summary of Smith School External Rankings, 2008-2009

School-wide

#17 Undergraduate Program (USNews, 2008) #35 Undergraduate Program (Business Week, 2009) #6 Public Business School, U.S. (Financial Times, 2009) #20 MBA Program, U.S. (Financial Times 2009) #26 MBA Program, U.S. (Business Week, 2009) #40 MBA Program (USNews, 2009) #16 Part-time MBA Program (USNews, 2009) #3 Intellectual Capital (Business Week, 2009) #12 in Research, World (Financial Times, 2009)

Undergraduate Programs

#5 Management Information Systems #8 Supply Chain Management/Logistics #9 Entrepreneurship #11 Quantitative Analysis #14 Management #16 Production/Operations Management #15 Finance #16 Marketing #14 International Business -- U.S. News & World Report, 2008

Graduate Programs

#6 MBA Information Systems #13 MBA Supply Chain/Logistics #22 MBA Entrepreneurship #20 MBA Management #23 MBA Production/Operations -- U.S. News & World Report, 2009

33

Table A10: TOP RESEARCH BUSINESS SCHOOLS (By Scholarly Productivity)

Source: UT Dallas, Top 100 Business Schools, 2004-2008 http://citm.utdallas.edu/utdrankings/rankingbydate.aspx

Top 10 Research Schools (World)

Rank University Articles Score Country

1 University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 298 160.38 USA

2 Duke University (Fuqua) 235 124.14 USA

3 New York University (Stern) 237 119.22 USA

4 University of Chicago (Booth) 182 108.04 USA

5 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross) 202 107.20 USA

6 Columbia University (Graduate School of Business) 199 105.25 USA

7 Harvard University (Harvard Business School) 172 104.77 USA

8 Stanford University (Graduate School of Business) 179 96.54 USA

9 University of Maryland at College Park (Smith) 177 96.40 USA

10 University of Texas (McCombs School of Business) 177 91.10 USA

11 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan) 170 91.03 USA

12 INSEAD 151 81.65 FRANCE

13 University of Southern California (Marshall) 146 81.41 USA

14 Pennsylvania State University (Smeal) 149 80.76 USA

15 Northwestern University (Kellogg) 144 79.32 USA

34

Table A10.1 - Top 15 Finance Departments (U.S.)


1 University of Chicago (Booth) 54 31.64 USA

2 New York University (Stern) 65 30.37 USA


4 Duke University (Fuqua) 48 23.77 USA

5 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross) 44 23.73 USA

6 University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 43 22.64 USA

7 University of California at Los Angeles (Anderson) 41 19.51 USA


9 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan ) 36 17.67 USA

10 University of Texas (McCombs) 34 17.03 USA


12 University of Maryland at College Park (Smith) 30 16.50 USA

13 University of California at Berkeley (Haas) 27 15.29 USA

14 Washington University at St. Louis (Olin) 29 13.68 USA

15 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (College of Business) 24 13.14 USA

35

Table A10.2 - Top 15 Marketing Departments (U. S.)


1 University of Pennsylvania (The Wharton School) 78 41.33 USA

2 Duke University (The Fuqua School of Business) 64 32.46 USA

3 University of Chicago (Graduate School of Business) 54 30.66 USA

4 Northwestern University (Kellogg School of Management) 51 28.63 USA

5 University of Florida (Warrington College of Business) 43 26.06 USA


7 University of Southern California (Marshall School of Business) 44 24.16 USA

8 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross School of Business) 45 23.95 USA

9 New York University (Leonard N. Stern School of Business) 47 23.91 USA

10 University of Maryland at College Park (Robert H. Smith School of Business) 32 18.06 USA

11 University of Minnesota at Twin Cities (Carlson School of Management) 37 17.58 USA

12 University of California at Los Angeles (Anderson School of Management) 34 16.91 USA



15 Pennsylvania State University at University Park (Smeal College of Business) 28 15.26 USA

36

Table A10.3 - Top 15 Decision and Information Technologies Departments (Also Information Systems, Operations and Production): U. S.


1 University of Texas at Dallas (School of Management) 51 31.08 USA




5 University of Minnesota at Twin Cities (Carlson School of Management) 40 22.60 USA


7 Michigan State University (The Eli Broad College of Business) 35 20.58 USA



10 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan School of Management) 35 17.37 USA

11 Carnegie Mellon University (Tepper School of Business) 30 16.11 USA

12 Georgia Institute of Technology (College of Management) 31 15.05 USA

13 Indiana University at Bloomington (Kelley School of Business) 29 14.85 USA


15 University of British Columbia (Sauder School of Business) 24 11.95 Canada

37

Table A10.4 - Top 15 Management and Organization Departments (Also Strategy, Organization and Human Resources): U. S.





4 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (Ross School of Business) 64 36.50 USA

5 Pennsylvania State University at University Park (Smeal College of Business) 65 33.91 USA






11 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (College of Business) 47 26.75 USA

12 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sloan School of Management) 46 25.03 USA

13 University of Southern California (Marshall School of Business) 44 24.05 USA

14 Northwestern University (Kellogg School of Management) 43 22.86 USA

15 Washington University at St. Louis (Olin School of Business) 40 21.65 USA

38

Table A11 - UT Dallas Journal List for Ranking

Name Since

The Accounting Review

1990

Journal of Accounting and Economics

1990

Journal of Accounting Research

1990

Journal of Finance

1990

Journal of Financial Economics

1990

The Review of Financial Studies

1990

Information Systems Research

1990

Journal on Computing

1990

MIS Quarterly

1990

Journal of Consumer Research

1990

Journal of Marketing

1990

Journal of Marketing Research

1990

Marketing Science

1990

Management Science

1990

Operations Research

1990

Journal of Operations Management

1990

Manufacturing and Service Operations Management

1999

Production and Operations Management

1992

Academy of Management Journal

1990

Academy of Management Review

1990

Administrative Science Quarterly

1990

Organization Science

1990

Journal of International Business Studies

1990

Strategic Management Journal

1990

39

http://www.atypon-link.com/AAA/loi/accr

http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/505556/description#description

http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-8456&site=1

http://www.afajof.org/


http://rfs.oxfordjournals.org/

http://www.informs.org/site/ISR

http://joc.pubs.informs.org/

http://www.misq.org/index.html

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/jcr/current

http://www.ama.org/pubs/jm/index.asp

http://www.ama.org/pubs/jmr/index.html

http://www.informs.org/site/MarSci/

http://mansci.pubs.informs.org/

http://iol-a.informs.org/site/OperationsResearch/


http://msom.journal.informs.org/

http://www.poms.org/

http://journals.aomonline.org/amj/

http://aom.pace.edu/amr/

http://www.johnson.cornell.edu/publications/asq/

http://www.informs.org/site/Organization_Science/

http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jibs/index.html

http://www.jstor.org/journals/01432095.html

TABLE A12 : SMITH SCHOOL CONSENSUS TOP BUSINESS JOURNALS BY AREA

Accounting & Information Assurance • The Accounting Review • The Journal of Accounting Research • The Journal of Accounting and Economics • Journal of Accounting and Public Policy

Information Systems

• Information Systems Research • Management Science • Management Information Systems Quarterly

Management Science/Operations Research

• Management Science • INFORMS Journal on Computing • Operations Research • Transportation Science

Operations Management

• Management Science • Manufacturing & Service Operations Management • Operations Research • Production and Operations Management

Business Statistics • Journal of the American Statistical Association • Journal of the Royal Statistical Society • Technometrics • Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics • Journal of Business and Economic Statistics

Finance

• Journal of Finance • Journal of Financial Economics • Review of Financial Studies • American Economic Review • Journal of Economic Theory • Rand Journal • Journal of Business

40

41

Business Law

• The American Business Law Journal • Law journals published by the top law schools

International Business

• The Journal of International Business Studies • Also top economic journals and top management journals

Logistics and Transportation

• Transportation Research • The Journal of Business Logistics • The Transportation Journal • Transportation Science

Management & Organization

• Management Science • Organization Science • Journal of Applied Psychology • Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes • Academy of Management Review • Academy of Management Review • Strategic Management Journal

Marketing

• Journal of Marketing • Journal of Marketing Research • Marketing Science • Journal of Consumer Research

Transforming the University of Maryland –The Smith School As A Leading Edge

G. “Anand” AnandalingamDean Smith School of BusinessDean, Smith School of Business

May 2009

Goals of the PresentationProvide Other Deans and even the Provost (!) knowledge of the Smith School of Businessknowledge of the Smith School of Business

Summarize the Strategic Goals of the Smith School to Align with University Strategyto Align with University Strategy• Faculty and Research• PhD Program • Masters Program• Masters Program• Undergraduate Program• Executive Programs

If Time Permits If Time Permits

The Smith School of Business TodayToday

~ 151 Faculty111 T d T T k• ~111 Tenured or Tenure-Track

3000 Undergraduates1400 MBA Students1400 MBA Students• 250 Full-time• 1150 Part-time

h d106 PhD Students

Strategic Planning at the Smith School of BusinessSmith School of Business

Annual eventA d i D t t • Academic Departments

• Administrative Departments

Basis of Resource AllocationRequirement by AACSB• Best practice among all business schools

lBelieve in continuous improvement• Easy to set Goals• Implementation is the Keyp y

Our VisionOur vision is for the Smith School of Business to be a world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging global economic and business paradigm, and providing thought leadership to students, corporate executives and policy makers so that they can be agents of both economic prosperity and transformative social change.

We want to be counted among the top 15 business schoolsin this country and the world, both graduate and undergraduate. undergraduate.

We want to be known for superb scholarship, excellent students and flawless operations, not just among those p , j gwho know us well, but especially those who do not.

Faculty and Research Reputation of the Smith School of Businessthe Smith School of Business

The best thing about the Smith School is the research reputation• #3 in “Intellectual Capital” (Business Week, 2009)• #11 in “Research Productivity” (Financial Times, 2008)

#5 in 2007• Almost every area in the top 12 in 2009 in research ost e e y a ea t e top 009 esea c

productivityMarketing - #11Finance - #9Management and Organization - #5g gDecision and Information Technologies - #2

Research Recognition• INFORMS Fellows• Academy of Management Fellows• Academy of Management Fellows• Multiple Best Paper Awards Every Year

5-Year Goals on Faculty and Research ReputationFaculty and Research Reputation

Research Productivity ranked by Financial Times• Consistently in the Top-5• How?

Reward faculty for productivity and publishing in FT-50Hire faculty who are productive and publish in FT-50

Every Area ranked by US NewsEvery Area ranked by US News• Consistently in Top-10• How?

We are a hidden secretWe are a hidden secretBetter Marketing campaign to other Business Deans, Associate Deans and Senior FacultyThoughtLeadership@Smith Incentives for being more visible among policy makers Incentives for being more visible among policy makers and captains of industryImprove PhD Program Placement (Later)

Challenges for Maintaining Research ReputationResearch Reputation

1. Faculty RetentionWe cannot do worse than our peers and in fact need to e ca ot do o se t a ou pee s a d act eed todo better

Salary, Teaching Load, Summer Funding, Research Budget, Service Expectations

2 Hiring Better Faculty2. Hiring Better FacultyAlways hire better faculty than one already hasFuture – Strategic Hiring

3 Higher standards for promotion and tenure without 3. Higher standards for promotion and tenure without disrupting faculty morale

Impact and influence rather than productivityStrategic rather than meeting initial expectations

Controversial but the University has to set standards and expectations

Research Funding at the Smith School of Businessat the Smith School of Business

Most research characterized as “quantitative social science”• Exceptions – Management Science, Finance External Research p g ,• Sources of external funding are limited

How is research funded at a business school?• Within the School Budget!

External Research Funding:

FY08: $2,551,780FY07: $4,133,520FY06: $4,753,856

• Our CompetitionALL faculty on tenure track receive 2 months summer support until they receive tenureALL productive tenured faculty receive 2 months summer ALL productive tenured faculty receive 2 months summer supportALL faculty receive some summer support based on research proposals to internal committee

• FURTHER – All PhD students supported by school budget

New Research DirectionsOur vision is for the Smith School of Business to be a world leader in generating new knowledge in the emerging global economic and business paradigmbusiness paradigm• Center on Financial Policy and Corporate Governance• Center on Social Value Creation• Center on Health Information and Decision Systems

Center on Global Health (Business)• Center on Leadership, Innovation and Change• Center on Digital Thought and Strategy• Center on Complexity in BusinessCenter on Complexity in Business

All of these offer opportunities for external research funding and development of philanthropy

5 Y G l $10 Milli i N i O t iti• 5 Year Goal - $10 Million in Naming Opportunities• 5 Year Goal - $10 Million in Research Grants

Other Challenges Viz Faculty at Smith

Insufficient Diversity of Faculty• 5-Year Goal: 3-5% of faculty from under represented minorities• 5 Year Goal: 3 5% of faculty from under represented minorities• 10-Year Goal: 6-7% of faculty from under represented

minorities

More tenured and tenure-track faculty to teach More tenured and tenure track faculty to teach undergraduate courses• 5-Year Goal: 30% • 10-Year Goal: 50%10 Year Goal: 50%

Biggest challenge• Changing Mind Set• Need to act and operate like a top-tier business school rather • Need to act and operate like a top-tier business school rather

than a second-tier oneSame challenge at the University

Highlights of the Smith PhD Programg g gProgram reviewed every year Ranking by Financial Times• #13 in 2009 (#9 in 2008)• #13 in 2009 (#9 in 2008)

Recent Placements (2006-08)• UCLA, Michigan, Minnesota, Notre Dame,

Michigan State VA Tech Georgetown (2) Michigan State, VA Tech, Georgetown (2), Southern Methodist, RPI, McGill, Instituto de Empresa, National Taiwan University, Nanyang Technological University (2)

15 in top 50 FT among 40 PhD graduates15 in top-50 FT among 40 PhD graduatesBest Funded PhD Students• Second only to Harvard• Bob Smith Initiative Hopefully “game changing”• Bob Smith Initiative - Hopefully “game changing”

Too early to tell

Smith School PhD Program Statistics (Meeting University Goals)

Recruitment and Enrollment Matriculation Date Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Applications 543 473 631 Number Admitted 36 39 30Number Admitted 36 39 30Number Admitted Who Enrolled 24 23 18 Percentage Admitted 6.62% 8.25% 4.75% Percentage Admitted Who Enrolled 66.67% 59.00% 60.0% Average Undergrad GPA 3.61 3.86 3.50 Average Graduate GPA 3.69 3.70 3.67 Average GRE V: 570/Q:779 V:580/Q:771 V:602/Q:776 Average GMAT 704 703 723 Graduation Graduation Year

Very competitive to get in; best time to graduation at University

2006 2007 2008 Average Time to Graduation (Years) 4.82 4.89 5.00 Percentage Graduating in 6 years 93% 100% 83%

Plans for the PhD ProgramThe PhD Program is a Reflection of future “peer assessment”The PhD Program is a Reflection of future peer assessment

Already Working On• Improving the quality of in-take• More rigorous evaluation of PhD student progressg p g• Better Mentoring

CAPS – Career and Professionalism SeminarMain Goal

I th l t i t 30 US b i h l• Improve the placement in top-30 US business schools5-Year Goal

– Over a 3-year period, place 33% of PhD graduates in top-50 FT business schools

10-Year Goal10 Year Goal– Over a 3-year period, place 50% of PhD graduates in top-50 business

schools• How?

Reward Individual Faculty and Department for Reaching GoalsImprove PhD Program as described above

• ChallengeChange of Mind Set for faculty

The MBA Program -Smith School of BusinessSmith School of Business

The MBA Program is the flagship program in a Business School• Very unlike other schools and departments

Our reputation depends in a significant way on the ranking of the MBA program• Our reputation among peers faculty future MBA • Our reputation among peers, faculty, future MBA

students, even future PhD studentsOur financials depend in a significant way on the MBA ProgramsM BIGGEST h llMy BIGGEST challenge• The best way to hurt the business school in a

significant way is to hurt the MASTERS program• Given our precarious reputational position, Given our precarious reputational position,

hurting the MBA program at the Smith School will ensure that many of the best faculty, and students will leave for greener pastures

Precarious Smith MBA Program RankingRanking is Inconsistent• Financial Times

20 Overall (#6 Public)• Business Week• Business Week

26 Overall (#8 Public)• US News

40 Overall (#17 Public)L t b l dLesson to be learned• We really compete with Private University Business Schools

Many of whom do not have undergraduate programs• We are ranked on

Placement of students and salariesStudent SatisfactionRecruiter satisfaction

Our 5-Year GoalOur 5 Year Goal• Consistently in top-15 (Full-Time MBA)• Consistently in top-15 (Part-Time MBA)

SWAT Analysis of The MBA Program StrengthsStrengths• Ideally located in a large metropolis• Local Competition does not have faculty strength in numbers

and reputationWeaknessesWeaknesses• Reputation of Maryland - Continue to lose the very top students

to Georgetown• Inconsistent rankings - #20 in Financial Times, #26 in Business

Week #40 in US NewsWeek, #40 in US NewsOpportunities• New leadership and mind set at the Smith School• Improvements to be made are not difficult to implement• Many untapped markets and companies• Many untapped markets and companies• New alumni partnerships

Threats• Misunderstanding of Masters Program Importance by Campus

B d i i• Budget crisis• New competition from Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, Wharton

and Michigan

Plans for Improving the MBA ProgramStrategic Initiatives• “Build Community – Build Brand”• “Raising Our Game”

Grow the ProgramGrow the Program• 5-Year Goal

Increase to 240 students per year in full-time programMaintain 1000 students in part-time programIncrease MS Enrollment to 150

– Accounting, Finance, Information Systems, Supply Chain Management

Recruit Better Students• 5-Year Goal

Median GMAT Score F/T – 680 (Currently 660; Wharton 712, MIT 705)Median GMAT Score P/T 625 (Currently 605)Median GMAT Score P/T – 625 (Currently 605)

Increase Diversity• 5-Year Goal – 15% under represented minorities (10-Year Goal –

20%)Better Placement and Career ManagementBetter Placement and Career Management• 5-Year Goal

98% Placement 3-months after graduation (currently 91.5%)90% Placement at Graduation (currently 69.5%)

Detailed Plans for Improving the MBA Program (Read Later)(Read Later)

Grow the Program• Market in newer locations domestically and internationally• Target international students from family owned businessesg y

Recruiting Better Students• More Resources for Recruiting• More targeted international recruiting

Better Placement and Career ManagementBetter Placement and Career Management• Revamp entire office of career management• Develop a better process for student engagement with career

management services• Develop better relationship with recruitersp p

Engagement of Faculty Outside the Classroom• Thought leadership outside the classroom• Better mentoring of students• Development of an intellectual communityDevelopment of an intellectual community

Although seemingly straightforward, success in all these will be “game changing”

The Undergraduate Program at the Smith School –We have already met or exceeded University GoalsWe have already met or exceeded University Goals

Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Applications 1 792 1 932 2 174Applications 1,792 1,932 2,174Number Admitted 1,008 1,122 1,176Number Admitted Who Enrolled 371 428 404 Percentage Admitted 56.30% 58.10% 54.10%Percentage Admitted Who Enrolled 36.80% 38.10% 34.40% Average High School GPA 3.987 4.028 3.965SAT (Math & Reading) – 75th Percentile 1,395 1,400 1,390SAT (Math & Reading) – 25th Percentile 1,310 1,320 1,320SAT (Math & Reading) - Median 1,360 1,360 1,358

Ranked #17 in US News (Up from #21 in 2008); #9 Public

Undergrad Retention and Graduation Statistics

Admission Date Fall 2002 Fall 2003 Fall 2004 Fall 2005 ALL Retained/Graduated – After 1 year 92.7% 93.8% 95.8% 95.5% Retained or Graduated – 2 years 89 7% 91 7% 93 6% 92 3%At or near the

t t th Retained or Graduated 2 years 89.7% 91.7% 93.6% 92.3%Retained or Graduated – 3 years 87.4% 91.3% 92.6% 92.0% Graduated – After 4 years 76.5% 75.8% 76.7% - Graduated – After 5 years 85.8% 90.0% Graduated – After 6 years 86.8% AFRICAN AMERICAN

top at the University

AFRICAN-AMERICANRetained/Graduated – After 1 year 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Retained or Graduated – 2 years 100.0% 100.0% 87.5% 81.8% Retained or Graduated – 3 years 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 81.8% Graduated – After 4 years 66.7% 80.0% 62.5% G d t d Aft 5 66 7% 100 0%Graduated – After 5 years 66.7% 100.0%Graduated – After 6 years 66.7% HISPANIC-AMERICAN Retained/Graduated – After 1 year 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Retained or Graduated – 2 years 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 88.9% Retained or Graduated – 3 years 100.0% 100.0% 87.5% 88.9%Graduated – After 4 years 83.3% 72.7% 87.5% Graduated – After 5 years 83.3% 100.0% Graduated – After 6 years 83.3%

Initiatives for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Business Educationof Undergraduate Business Education

NOTE: Smith School just completed a review of the undergraduate programg p g

Increasing the depth and breadth of education on ethics and corporate social responsibilitySmall community in large programSmall community in large program• Innovative Fellows Program (next slide)

Education through experiences outside the lclassroom• Co-Curricular Activities in all programs• Lemma Senbet Fund We pursue our vision • Global Study Trips

Creating Global Citizens of the Future (two slides later)

pwith the GET Strategy

Smith School Fellows Program(Creating A Small Program Experience)( g g p )

Accounting Teaching ScholarsBusiness Honors FellowsBusiness Process Fellows

Logistics and Supply Chain Management FellowsMusic Management FellowsQuantitative Finance Fellows

Design in Marketing FellowsEmerging CFO FellowsEntrepreneurship FellowsInternational Business Fellows

Quantitative Finance FellowsQUEST FellowsSmith Technology FellowsSports Management FellowsSTARS F ll

Lemma Senbet Investment Fund Fellows

STARS Fellows

Issue: Even with all of these Fellows programs only 1/3rdIssue: Even with all of these Fellows programs, only 1/3rd

of undergraduates in these specialized programs5-Year Goal: Expand the involvement of Undergrads in Fellows programs to 67%How:• Add Resources and Marketing to Fellows Program

Creating Global Citizens of the FutureWhat is a “Global Experience”?What is a Global Experience ?• Semester or Year long semester abroad• Global study trips (2 to 3 weeks)• Consulting Project with Company head quartered g j p y q

outside the U.S.Goals• 5-Year Goal:

“We will enable every student who wants a global We will enable every student who wants a global experience to have one”50% of MBA students and 33% of Undergraduates

• 10-Year Goal“Every student should have a global experience “Every student should have a global experience before leaving the Smith School of Business”100% of all students, MBA and Undergraduate

• How?Add resources to Smith Office of Global ProgramsExpand global partnerships with UniversitiesExpand partnerships with international organizations

Entrepreneurship and Technology

Entrepreneurship• Expand course offerings in entrepreneurship• Expand course offerings in entrepreneurship• Capstone course in developing business plans

Brings together all the functional areas

S i l t i j t• Social venturing projectsTechnology• Explore new multi-media technologies as teaching

tools5-Year Goal – 100%

• Expand the involvement in social networks

Further Plans for Undergraduate EducationM d d k f l i h lMore tenured and tenure-track faculty in the classroom• 2-Year Goal: 40%• 5-Year Goal: 50%

More diversityM t d t f d t d i iti• More students from under represented minorities

5-Year Goal – 20% of undergraduates• More international freshmen

5-Year Goal – 10% international freshmenUNIVERSITY ENGAGEMENT IS CRITICALUNIVERSITY ENGAGEMENT IS CRITICAL

More proactive faculty involvement in attracting better pool of studentsBetter handle on scholarships for needy students• Need University policy and practices• Need University policy and practices

Incentives to develop new engaging and interactive instructional methodsReduction in size of classes and the size of the undergraduate programundergraduate program• The best business schools do not have undergraduate programs• Not possible to retain best research faculty and have larger

percentage of undergrad courses taught by T&TT faculty

Last but Not Least –We believe in Partnerships Across CampusWe believe in Partnerships Across Campus

Partnering with Engineering• QUEST• MS in Telecommunications• Entrepreneurship

Partnering with University• “Smith Edge”• Smith Edge

new business program for non business students• University Honors Program (Finally!)

Many global partnerships• New – Peking University, KAIST, Chulalongkorn,

Thammasat• Old – Many

Many Local partnershipsMany Local partnerships• SAIC, LMI, Black and Decker, MedChi etc. etc.

Through Custom Executive Programs

Proposed New Partnerships That Will Help the University and Take Help the University and Take Advantage of Our Location

h l lTechnology Policy• Business, Public Policy, and Engineering (Life

Sciences, Computer Science)

Market Design• Business, Economics and Computer Science

Gl b l H lth The Smith School of Business will be Global Health• Business, Public Health

Technology Transfer

The Smith School of Business will be happy to take the lead role in each of these provided that the University has a commitment to each

Technology Transfer• Business, Engineering

5-Year Goal – Have all of these entities established with a budget of at least $500K each

Executive Programs (Optional)N b l h i b i h lNecessary to be a player among the top-tier business schoolsBest way to touch senior executives in companiesImportant source of revenuesExecutive MBA ProgramsExecutive MBA Programs• Cohort #10 in College Park• Cohort #6 in China (awaiting renewal)• Cohort #5 in Switzerland (being closed down)( g )

Non-degree executive programs• Small compared to our peers (~ $1.25 million)

Many new initiatives in non-degree executive programs G l G t $5 illi i 3 • Goal – Grow exec programs to $5 million in 3 years

• Industry focused certificate programsBusiness of Medicine, Business of Law

• Life-long learning for alumnig g• Global expansion

Any Questions?Any Questions?