Members of AACSB's Board of Directors are hoping the third time's a charm when a new Board restructuring proposal goes to the membership for approval in June. The proposal, which was circulated to members in November, is the latest in an attempt to adopt a more flexible Board appointment process that would allow the organization to respond more rapidly to emerging issues. Two earlier proposals did not draw widespread member support.

In developing the most recent version, based in large part on member feedback at the last Annual Meeting and at regional meetings in early fall, Board members reiterated that the need for Board flexibility remains and will not be lessened in the future. They also acknowledged that there is an understandable reluctance on the part of the membership to do anything that appears to alter control of Board composition. "Related to this, given all the changes we are facing as an industry, there simply is a need to ensure a sense that traditional segments of the association will have strong representation in Board activities even as we provide for more flexibility," said Joseph A. Alutto, AACSB president. There also is a reluctance to move too dramatically, given the difficulties that the organization is having adapting to environmental changes with the resulting fractionalization of member interests, he said.

"The reality is that AACSB still is the only meaningful group to deal with the problems of business school deans, whether they are from public, private, large, small, international or domestic programs," said Alutto. "We should not be giving up a sense of belonging that is so essential to our organizational success." Alutto said it was clear to Board members that some of their colleagues worry that the Board may not be as responsive to direct member concerns as might be preferred. "The proposal to restructure the Board seems to be the focal point for expressing this concern," he said.

Listed below is the latest proposal with notes in parentheses about how it appears to address concerns the Board has heard from members:

Proposed Board Structure:

7 Members Accredited Schools - contested elections (one more than current)

4 Members Non-Accredited Schools - contested elections (one more than current)

2 Corporate - non-contested elections (one less than current)

2 International - contested elections (remains the same)

1 BGS (remains the same)

1 President, AACSB - non-contested election (remains the same)

4 Officers (remains the same)

4 Appointed Members (appointed by Board; could be as few as zero or as many as four people, with no more than two new appointments in any one year)

21 to 25 Total (If 25, five more than current; could be 21 if no Appointed Members)

Under the proposal, at no point could the total of non-contested and appointed members exceed the number of elected members, providing a clear sense of control by elected members; two candidates still would be provided for every contested elected position, eliminating a sense that choices are being constrained unnecessarily. "The Board size could be slightly larger than believed ideal but remains at a reasonable level," said Alutto. "There are guarantees of representation by corporate, international and Beta Gamma Sigma members, thereby eliminating concerns that the Board would be without formal input from traditional segments of the association; and, through the appointed positions, the Board has some flexibility to respond to emerging needs," he said.

The Board next meets in April, at which time it will decide the form of the proposal to send the membership in advance of the June 14 AACSB Annual Meeting. AACSB member representatives will have an opportunity to comment on the proposal in the interim and will vote on the final version in June. Comments should be sent to Joe Alutto or to Bill Laidlaw, AACSB executive vice president, in care of the AACSB office.