The Dean quit few days ago.
Should these types of schools be allowed to keep their accreditation.
Would AACSB allow these profit institutions to be accredited
Emlyon business school has become a Limited Company
-
A for-profit company, really? There are some operating in France already. Their main characteristic is that they are a cash-cow for the investments funds which hold their actions, so these kinds of schools will reduce investments at the service of students and for the sake of increasing the dividends distributed to shareholders. In short, they are a trap for students and their families.
In point of fact, EMLyon was already showing signs of decadence, with a scandal involving one of its professors, Alain Fayolle. This is what happens when a school pushes too hard for publications (CNRS stars). Professors will use any means available to get them, at the expense of quality research and ethical considerations. This is also happening at, for instance, IPAG and EMLV (Leonard de Vinci Business School).
See: Scandal at EMLyon and Audencia in France
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/scandal-at-emlyon-and-audencia-in-france -
You should be, but the same happens with EQUIS and AMBA.
The problem with these accreditations is that they only care about the metrics the schools show at the end of the year, irrespective of the procedures and strategies they use to reach such objectives. What we're seeing in France and other European countries is that several accredited schools are gaming the system (e.g., publication rings, paying to corrupt editors to get published, large networks of authors that peddle large numbers of papers across many journals until they find loopholes to get published, etc.) motivated by the desire to remain accredited and unscrupulous deans who like to play this game. Nothing better than a for-profit firm to fake it.
As a consequence, students and families are getting very little value for the money they pay.
I am worrying that AACSB allows limited liability companies with profit maximizing objective to be accredited.
-
You should be, but the same happens with EQUIS and AMBA.
The problem with these accreditations is that they only care about the metrics the schools show at the end of the year, irrespective of the procedures and strategies they use to reach such objectives. What we're seeing in France and other European countries is that several accredited schools are gaming the system (e.g., publication rings, paying to corrupt editors to get published, large networks of authors that peddle large numbers of papers across many journals until they find loopholes to get published, etc.) motivated by the desire to remain accredited and unscrupulous deans who like to play this game. Nothing better than a for-profit firm to fake it.
As a consequence, students and families are getting very little value for the money they pay.I am worrying that AACSB allows limited liability companies with profit maximizing objective to be accredited.
Hilarious, so US universities don't do this?
-
I'm sure they do, particularly those for-profit. But this is a European thread moron!
You should be, but the same happens with EQUIS and AMBA.
The problem with these accreditations is that they only care about the metrics the schools show at the end of the year, irrespective of the procedures and strategies they use to reach such objectives. What we're seeing in France and other European countries is that several accredited schools are gaming the system (e.g., publication rings, paying to corrupt editors to get published, large networks of authors that peddle large numbers of papers across many journals until they find loopholes to get published, etc.) motivated by the desire to remain accredited and unscrupulous deans who like to play this game. Nothing better than a for-profit firm to fake it.
As a consequence, students and families are getting very little value for the money they pay.I am worrying that AACSB allows limited liability companies with profit maximizing objective to be accredited.
Hilarious, so US universities don't do this?
-
What is the problem with schools becoming market players? They compete to attract students, they will product-differentiate, innovate etc.
This should become the case everywhere.
The only problem is that those institutions who provide rankings for these schools might get captured or become monopolists. That market needs a bit more competition.
Students should know what service they are buying.
-
That's why in the US, where most and best universities are private NON-PROFIT, there isn't competition between universities, right?
What is the problem with schools becoming market players? They compete to attract students, they will product-differentiate, innovate etc.
This should become the case everywhere.
The only problem is that those institutions who provide rankings for these schools might get captured or become monopolists. That market needs a bit more competition.
Students should know what service they are buying. -
"Serial resignations, strategic errors ... The fiasco of the EMLyon: the EMLyon has grown by force to open its capital to investment funds. The resignations are linked and the strategy is questioned. An unprecedented crisis."
https://www.challenges.fr/education/evenement-grandes-ecoles-les-limites-d-un-modele_700863
-
I always say emlyon as a respectable third place behind HEC and INSEAD (and that is not a terrible place to be) as a business school. this situation is one that they have to unwind or they risk losing every good person
A respectable 3rd place? uh? this is your assessment? or in the different rankings? in research? more broadly, as a BS?
It's hard to defend this. HEC is certainly top in France, maybe the only B school in the world where the "grande ecole" programme (the 3 year master in management) has both a fairly low admission rate (S GSB/HBS like) and, the lucky french candidates accept the offer.. by a whopping 99%. Because in the somewhat archaic french competitive examinations system, admission to this program (beware, not to the other masters) is a signal of academic excellence. And so, every year, the young crowds that enter the grande ecole programs follow this ranking: 1/ HEC, 2/ESSEC, 3/ESCP europe. The 3 are in the greater paris area, the latest, the oldest but not the best BS in the world, being the only one that is actually in the city center + many satellite campuses (London, Berlin, etc) since they merge with EAP, a "european" business school, decades ago. I've been teaching classes in 2 of them - Berlin and London. Then come 4/ EM Lyon and 5/ Edhec. Interestingly, last year in 2019, almost a third of the candidates who where admitted to both chose EDHEC which clearly shows, in this very static system, that candidates somewhat felt that something was going on at EM Lyon. Actually, they had decided to increase the intake in the selective grande ecole program.. which obviously makes it slighty less selective.
when it comes to MBA, it is reasonable to put INSEAD first. This school was founded in France by several french businessmen and civil servants but it's less frenchy in spirit than HEC, the flagship program is their MBA and their branding "the business school of the world" is justified if you consider that from the beginning the french could not represent more than 5% of the students, and they were the first to open a second campus in Asia, in Singapore, that is becoming at least as important as their Fontainebleau campus. But the quality of the research in this top school is clearly not on a par with its status in the international MBA rankings. There is no way it can be a world number one in that respect, in the league of HBS or S GSB.
EM Lyon has some pretty good faculties, and yes the system of competitive examinations provide them with a feed of smart kids + because of the reputation of french BS as a whole they get crowds of good european students, plus many asians attracted by the good standing in various rankings. But for decades it has been ranked 5th if you add INSEAD to the usual top 3 french roster, and more or less on a par with EDHEC, with an edge over it but things are already changing fast. They might overcome the crisis but my guess is that they will slide a bit, not to the bottom obviously (decent alumni network, etc etc) but they clearly made an awful mistake. Turning a venerable and highly regarded business school with a good brand into a for profit was a miserable move.