Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/61375
Your Turn Shortage of Ph.D.s? We're Turning Them Away institutions truly exploring all possi- ble solutions to the problem? I believe that the crisis is actually being exacerbated by antiquated policies still in place at many busi- ness schools. First, many schools refuse to accept part-time doctoral candidates. And, second, many schools refuse to consider hiring their own graduates to fill faculty positions. As a result, many qualified applicants are being turned away before they even come through the door. 54 schools, our school has been actively recruiting applicants for new faculty positions for our growing pro- grams—and finding fewer qualified applicants to fill them. In our pur- suit of accounting faculty, for instance, we are seeing the same trends that the American Accounting Association highlighted at its national conference. It found that applications to open accounting faculty positions peaked in 1992, with 180 resumes submitted to fill 110 open positions. In 1997, the applicant-to-position ratio evened out, with 117 resumes submitted to fill 120 open positions. In the years that followed, the bottom dropped out: Only 64 resumes were submit- ted to fill the 240 open positions that schools posted in 2002. But are management education Management education is facing a severe shortage of doctorally qualified fac- ulty. To be sure, when it comes to attracting academically qualified fac- ulty, we are deep in a seller's market of pandemic proportions. Like many other business International's proactive stance and the Doctoral Faculty Commission's work, I believe that the two impor- tant alternative solutions to the shortage—accepting part-time Ph.D. students and considering home- grown graduates for faculty posi- tions—are notable by their absence from the Commission's recommen- dations. They are absent because they represent a challenge to institu- tional mores that have long been a aren't trying to address the larger issue—it's just that they're ignoring these two contributing factors. In fact, I read with interest the Doctoral Faculty Commission's 2003 report to AACSB International's Board of Directors, "Sustaining Scholarship in Business Schools." In the report, members of the Commission outline nine specific solutions to solving the faculty shortage. They recommend that schools provide post-graduate busi- ness training for doctoral faculty from other disciplines; encourage less research-intensive doctoral pro- grams for executives; legitimize research and nonresearch dual tracks for business faculty; clarify the defi- nition of "professionally qualified" faculty to reduce the perceived need to hire only Ph.D.-qualified faculty; initiate new funding sources to encourage institutions to sustain or increase doctoral programs; provide reputational incentives to redirect resources as investments in Ph.D. programs; encourage accreditation peer review teams to balance Ph.D. production needs with institutional priorities; promote Ph.D. programs to prospective students; and foster innovation in lower-cost education delivery methods. While I applaud AACSB It's not that many in the field BizEd JULY/AUGUST 2004 by Gilbert W. (Joe) Joseph barrier to change. But AACSB International could play an impor- tant role by encouraging change in the policies of those institutions offering business doctoral degrees and advocating these two alternative solutions to the doctoral shortage. Alternative No. 1: Abandon policies that forbid part-time Ph.D. candidates. The Commission's report indicated that reduced income was one of the most important factors in a student's decision to pursue (or not to pur- sue) a doctoral degree. And yet, many Ph.D. programs in business admit only full-time candidates. But by not permitting part-time Ph.D. candidates, these programs miss out on potential students in an academi- cally and intellectually qualified pool of talent, who simply may not be able afford leaving their jobs to pur- sue full-time candidacy. In my experience, part-time Ph.D. candidates can succeed in and support doctoral programs as well as those who study full-time. I myself was a part-time doctoral student, along with two of my peers. While in the program, we "part-timers" attended all seminars and guest speaker events. We were involved in all the activities expected of full- time candidates. There were only two differences. While full-time Ph.D. students took three courses, we took two (we were essentially "two-third-time" candidates). And unlike full-time students, we did not teach courses. As I neared completion of the program, another student was accepted as a part-time candidate. Soon after, the university changed its policy, and that student was instructed to begin attending full-