這一期的短波有一點冗長，希望各位能耐心的看下去，細細咀嚼，應該有助於更了解 Impact 究竟是什麼，以及如何呈現。
AACSB官方文件對於Impact有以下的說明：
Impact: In an environment of increasing accountability, it is important that AACSB accreditation focus on appropriate high-quality inputs (human, financial, physical, etc.) and the outcomes of those inputs within the context of the business school’s mission and supporting strategies. That is, in the accreditation process, business schools must document how they are making a difference and having impact. This means that AACSB will continue to emphasize that business schools integrate assurance of learning into their curriculum management processes and produce intellectual contributions that make a positive impact on business theory, teaching, or practice. Impact also has a broader meaning in that the business school, through the articulation and execution of its mission, should make a difference in business and society as well as in the global community of business schools and management educators.
簡單的來說，Impact 著重於商管學院在院訂的 Mission 下投入學術、教學、社會、產業實現、國家/世界社群等不同面向的活動，所獲致可以質性描述或量化的具體貢獻。
因此管院AACSB工作小組經院主管會議報告，請各系所 (包括企研所與商管學院) 在11月中 (暫定11/14; W3) 以前提出二個 Impact 亮點 - 可以在未來2-3年蒐集、彙整資料，並在2021-2022持續認證訪視前可以呈現。所提出的 Impact 請參考以下三個重點：
1.與管院 Mission 的契合 (可以從 Mission 一脈下來道出其中的邏輯性)
2.有亮點的背景、創新、或投入 (可以說故事的 Impact )
3.自訂質性或量化的評量指標 (可以跟別人說 we are making a difference)
以下有兩篇文章要與大家分享：首先是在AACSB Forum上一位來自南非 Stellenbosch University Business School 的 Heidi le Sueur 博士有關於 Impact的分享 (posted Mar. 26th, 2018)；其次是AACSB官方建議可做為 Impact 指標/量測/評量標準的範例。
*** 1 ***
USB-Stellenbosch University (South Africa) has successfully been re-accredited last year in December for 5 years. So, I can share from that experience.
Using the Mission of the School is a key starting point for unpacking the Impact story. We identified three key constructs from our Mission statement and put these into a matrix against the three core pillars of our activities (teaching, research, engagement). During a series of workshops with staff members from across the School we were able to identify activities and expressed the impact created in each section. The Impact measures were both quantifiable and qualitative. We had about 12 impact indicators (but these could be narrowed down to include only the most relevant) - which correspond to our Strategic goals and success indicators from our Strategy Map. We integrated these Impact indicators with (brief) supporting evidence in Chapter 1 in the CIR, but also provided a graphic for an overview. For further evidence we compiled an impact portfolio whit Narratives from various stakeholder groups - this was an annexure to the report.
While Impact received some attention in the visit, it was more important that we could illustrate its embeddedness in our thinking, actions and planning. For example: research is part of our Mission statement.
This meant we had to demonstrate a range of bibliometric impact measures and narratives. It was then further investigated by the PRT whether the supporting structures, processes and policies are in place to achieve the Mission and the underlying impact aspirations of the School. A logic threat, the coherence in your report, annexure and verbal presentation during the visit are important.
My personal experience is that our Faculty members and the Management team enjoyed unpacking the Impact which we are making in the USB ecosystem - I facilitated the Impact workshops. It assisted us to be proud members of the School but also to reflect critically whether we are making the Impact we strive for. From there we self-identified improvement activities - essentially a key principle of accreditation and we shared those thoughts with the PRT team too. It was good to tap into the extensive experience of the PRT during the visit.
Best wishes for your visit!
Heidi
------------------------------
Dr Heidi le Sueur
Head Accreditation and Quality Assurance
Stellenbosch University Business School - South Africa
Heidi.lesueur@usb.ac.za
------------------------------
*** 2 ***
Examples of Impact Metrics in Support of Documentation
Examples of metrics that schools might use to assess the impact of their activities, including scholarship and the creation of intellectual contributions, are provided below. Some activities, including scholarship, may have multiple impacts, while others have limited or no impact. Sometimes the impact of an activity or intellectual contribution may not be known or identifiable for a number of years. It is also important to note that evidence that intellectual contribution outcomes have “made a difference” may result from a single outcome produced by one or more faculty members and/or students, a series or compilations of works, or collaborative work with colleagues at other institutions or in practice. The list of categories and examples provided in this appendix is not intended to be limiting or exhaustive. Schools may identify and report other examples not included below, including impact on constituencies, such as society, community, business practitioners, students, alumni, etc.
MISSION ALIGNMENT IMPACT
•Alignment of intellectual contribution outcomes with themes or focus areas valued by the
business school’s mission (e.g., global development, entrepreneurship, innovation)
•Percentage of intellectual contribution outcomes that align with one or more “mission-
related” focus areas for research
•Percentage of faculty with one or more intellectual contribution outcomes that align with one or more mission-related focus areas
•Research awards and recognition that document alignment with one or more “mission-
related” focus areas for research
•Substantive impact and carry-forward of mission as stated in Standard 1 and as referenced throughout the remaining accreditation standards
•Linkage between mission as stated in Standard 1 and financial history and strategies as stated in Standard 3
ACADEMIC IMPACT
•Publications in highly recognized, leading peer-review journals (journals in a designated journal list, Top 3, Top 10, etc.)
•Citation counts
•Evidence of impact on stakeholders and society such as changes in business practices, professional standards, or public policy
•Case studies that document the impact of intellectual contributions on stakeholders and society
•Download counts for electronic journals
•Editorships, associate editorships, editorial board memberships, and/or invitations to act as journal reviewers for recognized, leading peer-review journals
•Elections or appointments to leadership positions in academic and/or professional associations, standards setting bodies and professional societies
•Recognitions for research (e.g., Best Paper Award), Fellow Status in an academic society, and other recognition by professional and/or academic societies for intellectual
contribution outcomes
•Invitations to participate in research conferences, scholarly programs, and/or international, national, or regional research forums
•Inclusion of academic work in the syllabi of other professors’ courses
•Use of academic work in doctoral seminars
•Competitive grants awarded by major national and international agencies (e.g., NSF and NIH) or third-party funding for research projects
•Patents awarded
•Appointments as visiting professors or scholars in other schools or a set of schools
TEACHING/INSTRUCTIONAL IMPACT
•Grants for research that influence teaching/pedagogical practices, materials, etc.
•Case studies of research leading to the adoption of new teaching/learning practices
•Textbooks, teaching manuals, etc., that are widely adopted (by number of editions, number of downloads, number of views, use in teaching, sales volume, etc.)
•Publications that focus on research methods and teaching
•Research-based learning projects with companies, institutions, and/or non-profit organizations
•Instructional software (by number of programs developed, number of users, etc.)
•Case study development (by number of studies developed, number of users, etc.)
BACHELOR’S/MASTER’S LEVEL EDUCATION IMPACT
•Mentorship of student research reflected in the number of student papers produced under faculty supervision that lead to publications or formal presentations at academic or professional conferences
•Documented improvements in learning outcomes that result from teaching innovations that incorporate research methods from learning/pedagogical research projects
•Results from engagement of students in consulting or business based projects
•Increased recruitment, retention, graduation, placement of under-represented student populations
•New venture formation
•Hiring/placement of students
•Career success of graduates beyond initial placement
•Placement of students in research-based graduate programs
•Direct input from organizations that hire graduates regarding graduates' preparedness for jobs and the roles they play in advancing the organization
•Movement of graduates into positions of leadership in for-profit, non-profit, and professional and service organizations
DOCTORAL EDUCATION IMPACT
•Hiring/placement of doctoral students, junior faculty, and post-doctoral research assistants
•Publications of doctoral students and graduates
•Invited conference attendance, as well as awards/nominations for doctoral students/graduates
•Research fellowships awarded to doctoral students/graduates
•Funding awards for students engaged in activities related to doctoral research
•Case studies that document the results of doctoral research training activities, such as the transfer of knowledge to industry and impact on corporate or community practices
•Research outputs of junior faculty members (including post-doctoral junior professors, assistant professors, doctoral research assistants, and doctoral students) that have been influenced by their mentors/supervisors
PRACTICE /COMMUNITY IMPACT
•Media citations (e.g., number, distribution, and effect)
•Requests from the practice community to utilize faculty expertise for consulting projects, broadcast forums, professional development activities, researcher-practitioner meetings, faculty/student consulting projects, etc.
•Publications in practitioner journals or other venues aimed directly at improving management expertise and practice
•Consulting reports resulting from the engagement of faculty and students
•Research income from various external sources, such as industry and community/governmental agencies to support individual and collaborative research activities
•Community enhancement outcomes resulting from the engagement of faculty and students in community issues
•Case studies based on research that has led to solutions to business problems
•Adoption of new practices or operational approaches as a result of faculty scholarship
•Presentations and workshops for business professionals
•Invitations for faculty to serve as experts on policy formulation, witnesses at legislative hearings, members of special interest groups/roundtables, etc.
•Tools/methods developed for companies
•Memberships on boards of directors of corporate and non-profit organizations
•Memberships on professional standards setting bodies or policy-making bodies
EXECUTIVE EDUCATION IMPACT
•Sustained and consistent involvement of research-active faculty in executive education programs
•Sustained success of executive education programs based on demand, level of participation, and repeat business
•Market research confirming value of executive education programs delivered by research-active faculty
•Consulting activities of research active faculty that stem from participation in executive education activities
•Inclusion of cases and other materials in degree programs that can be identified as resulting from executive education activity
•Partnerships between the school and organizations that participate in executive education programs, which benefit the school's teaching, research, and other activities and programs
•Involvement of executive education participants and their organizations in the teaching mission of the school (e.g., executive-in-residence program)
•Linkage between organizations participating in executive education and student internships, as well as placement of graduates in entry-level positions
RESEARCH CENTER IMPACT
•Invitations by governmental or other agencies/organizations for center representatives to serve on policy-making bodies
•Center research projects funded by external governmental, business, or non-profit agencies
•Continued funding (e.g., number of donors, scale of donations)
•Number of web visits to research center website (e.g., tracking data from Google Analytics)
•Number of attendees (representing academics, practitioners, policymakers, etc.) at center-sponsored events
•Sustained research center publications that are funded by external sources or that are highly recognized as authoritative sources of analysis and perspectives related to the center’s core focus
