International business specializations of accounting, finance and marketing professors, 1994-2003.
Kamath, Ravi ; Meier, Heidi Hylton ; Tousey, Stephanie L. 等
INTRODUCTION
This paper investigates the teaching and research interests of
professors of accounting, finance and marketing at U.S. colleges and
universities pertaining to their specializations in multinational
business. The stimulus for this study stems from several interconnected
factors. First and foremost, the business environment has exhibited
strong trends toward globalization in almost every aspect in the last 25
years. The internationalization of financial markets and the resulting
24-hour marketplace for numerous financial assets just serves as one
glaring example of business globalization. Even in some fields where one
could not have imagined a global market place and therefore, an
existence of global competition just 5 years ago, such a possibility has
become a reality. The markets for medical care, surgeries as well as
post-operative recovery have also now become worldwide. In a newly
emerging field called "Medical Tourism," patients from all of
over the globe consider India and Thailand, among others, as viable
alternatives to many highly developed and well established medical care
locations.
Second, according to Kedia, Harveston and Bhagat (2001), "As
businesses confront increasing international challenges, the need for
developing managers who can understand and effectively meet the demands
of the global marketplace becomes critical. While the responsibility of
developing such international managers of tomorrow may lie in different
sectors of the economy, we suggest that business schools have a special
role in inculcating appropriate global mindset, knowledge base, and
skills." Indeed, U.S. colleges and universities have accepted the
challenge of training their students to enter and embrace the global
market arena, and accordingly, more and more schools have created
opportunities for students to choose international business as a major
or a minor. By June 2005, of the 430 AACSB accredited U.S. schools, 81
were offering undergraduate degrees in international business (IB) and
48 were offering graduate degrees in IB. Third, presently 28 schools
have been designated as Centers of International Business Education and
Research (CIBERs) (see Scherer, et al., 2003). Fourth, numerous business
administration colleges have created centers or institutes or divisions
of international/multinational/global business to form alliances with
multinational business organizations, or state and local world trade
centers, etc. Fifth, the text books used in most required or core
courses in business schools began addressing the globalization of
business issues in the late 1970s or early 1980s. Now, even the
textbooks of the elective courses, such as risk and insurance for
example, have started integrating "International Perspectives"
in as many chapters as feasible (see Trieschmann, et al., 2005). Given
the issues raised above, it is understandable that business and
government entities expect U.S. educators to play a vital role in
preparing students to function and flourish in a global business
environment. If so, one could logically ask the following two questions:
What percentage of business faculty in the U.S. are willing to
teach courses in the international areas in their disciplines; and
What percentage of business faculty in the U.S. are willing to
conduct research in the international areas of their disciplines.
This study attempts to answer these questions for three business
disciplines, namely, accounting, finance, and marketing. We examine the
data of three academic years, 1994-1995, 2000-2001, and 2002-2003 to
meet the task at hand. To meet these objectives, we investigate the IB
specializations within the teaching and research interests of two groups
of business faculty. The first group consists of all the named or titled
professors, including the endowed professors in each field, during each
academic year as per the Hasselback faculty directories. Named
professors' teaching and research interests are examined because
they are generally the highest ranked academicians, and are considered
to be the most renowned, most accomplished and elite educators in their
fields. Moreover, one could argue that some of them set the tone and the
direction for research in most fields. However, to fully satisfy the
goal of this study, we felt that we should also consider the business
faculty at large and not just the "experts" of each
discipline. Accordingly, the second group is made up of randomly
selected instructors from each field, for each of the academic years
studied. By utilizing a random selection process, we believe that we are
likely to achieve proportions of different academic ranks, different
levels of experiences, different levels expertise, and different age
groups representing the underlying population of faculty. As a result,
we could expect findings to reflect the true levels of IB
specializations of professors in each of the three disciplines within
the margins of sampling errors.
In the next section, the relevant previous research is briefly
reviewed. The methodology and the data underlying this study are
discussed in the third section. The findings of the investigation are
presented in the fourth section. A brief summary makes up the final
section.
PREVIOUS RESEARCH
The body of literature on business globalization and international
business education is extremely large and rich as well as diverse.
Scores of articles have been published on the subjects such as the
internationalization of the business curriculum or even specific courses
(see for example, Aggarwal, 1989; Beamish,1989; Tung and Miller, 1990;
White and Griffith, 1998; Yeoh, 2001; Sanyal, 2004; Zimmer, Koening and
Greene, 2004; Laughton, 2005; and Danford, 2006; among others). White
and Griffith (1998) compared 21 top U.S. graduate level IB programs with
the help of telephone interviews and publicly available secondary data.
They also consulted well-known scholars of IB education to ascertain the
opportunities available for improving the curriculum of graduate level
IB education in the U.S.
The literature search on the subject of IB education within
doctoral degree programs identified several published studies in the
last 20 years. Nehrt's survey (1987) of 53 largest U.S. doctoral
programs found that an overwhelming percentage of doctoral students
(85%) were not trained in IB courses. In many respects, Nehrt's
disappointment with the progress of internationalization of U.S.
doctoral programs was also expressed by Kuhne (1990). Kuhne's
survey identified only a handful of doctoral business programs which
offered an opportunity to major or minor in IB. In a 1997 volume edited
by Cavusgil and Horn on internationalizing doctoral education in
business, a survey of doctoral program directors by Myers and Omura was
included. Myers and Omura expressed the view that the doctoral faculty
did not embrace the challenge of blending international aspects and
dimensions of the subjects they were teaching, possibly because of their
lack of international expertise. More recently, Webb and Allen (2005)
reported the findings of their survey of AACSB accredited doctoral
programs. They concluded that "The majority of the doctoral
business programs, for the responding schools, have no specific approach
to internationalizing the curriculum" (2005).
In a 1994 paper, Kwok, Arpan and Folks presented the findings of
their AIB (Academy of International Business) supported global survey to
examine the status and trends in the IB education. The survey attempted
to answer six sets of crucial questions concerning the
internationalization of business education (pp. 607-608). Two of the
questions they addressed are relevant to the present study. In one of
their inquiries, they were trying to ascertain if different functional
areas of business had accomplished different levels of
internationalization. In the other, they were attempting to determine
the level of IB expertise of business faculty. Various issues examined
in their well prepared study and their findings were reported with the
help of ten tables. Their findings are of utmost interest to the subject
at hand. According to these findings, at all three levels
(Bachelor's, Master's and Doctoral) of business degree
programs, accounting courses had the least level of IB content infusion
and marketing had the highest level of IB infusion. They also the
specialized IB courses offered in each business discipline at each of
the three degree level programs. Once again, the accounting discipline
lagged considerably behind marketing and finance. The authors note that
before curriculum internationalization can begin, faculty
internationalization needs to take place. In their words, "Quite
simply, if the faculty has little interest in knowledge about
international business, an internationalized curriculum is not likely to
be implemented" (p. 614). The present study is an attempt to extend
the work of Kwok, Arpan and Folks (1994). The goal of this study is to
measure the level of interest in international business of faculty from
three academic departments of business colleges in the 10-year period
following the publication of the Kwok, Arpan and Folks paper.
Since the present paper investigates the extent of IB
specialization within the teaching and research interests of named
professors as well as randomly selected instructors from the three
business disciplines, the literature concerning named professors was
also reviewed. Of the 3 disciplines, most published papers can be found
related to the named professorships in accounting. Studies by Bloom,
Fuglister and Meier (1996); Tang and Griffith (1997/1998); and Meier and
Kamath (2004) are the recent examples of studies of profiles of and/or
trends in named professorships of accounting. Both published studies of
named marketing chairs are by Kamath, Meier and Rao, one from 2004 and
the other from 2006. In the 2006 paper, they examined the named
marketing professorships from the academic years 1994-1995, 1996-1997,
2000-2001 and 2002-2003. With respect to the finance departments, there
are two published papers; one by Metwalli and Tang (2001); and one by
Kamath and Meier (2006). In the 2006 paper, Kamath and Meier analyzed
the multidimensional characteristics of named professorships in finance
in the U.S. from five academic years. Their study examined the
characteristic profiles of named professors of finance; the
characteristics of colleges and universities which provided the named
professorships; and the trends exhibited in those profiles over the
study period.
METHODOLOGY
Faculty Guides/Directories compiled by Professor James R.
Hasselback were the primary sources of information for this study. For
example, to extract the relevant data of 2002-2003, Prentice Hall
2002-2003 Accounting Faculty Directory, Prentice Hall Finance Faculty
Directory 2002-2003, and Prentice Hall Marketing Faculty Directory
2002-2003 were used for accounting, finance, and marketing,
respectively. As noted earlier, this study examines the international
area specializations over three academic years, namely, 1994-1995,
2000-2001, and 2002-2003. For the academic year1994-1995, the marketing
and finance guides were published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Each of the nine faculty directories which include information on
faculty from over 800 colleges and universities were compiled by
information provided by the faculty themselves or by their department
chairpersons. These directories include all the information provided by
a certain date prior to the academic year covered. For example, only the
information received by April 27, 2002 is included in the 2002-2003
marketing directory. This source included faculty members' names,
their academic/administrative ranks, schools where they were employed
and from when, schools which granted them their highest degrees and
when, their highest degrees, their teaching interests, and their
research interests, among other information. In case of the named
professors, named chairs, or endowed professors, the exact titles of
such designations are also provided. The last academic year data
examined in this investigation is 2002-2003 because that is the latest
year of publication for the marketing discipline.
For accounting, Hasselback directories include 26 different areas
of teaching/research specializations with international accounting being
one of the choices. Each participant is allowed to list up to four (4)
areas of specializations. In the case of accounting, teaching and
research specializations are not separated. Instead, the specializations
are combined as "teaching/research interests." For finance and
marketing however, the teaching and research interests are separated.
For finance, there are seven (7) different areas of teaching interests,
including one for international finance. To indicate research
specializations, the finance directories offer a total of 28 different
areas. Three of these areas concern international finance, namely,
international corporate finance, international financial markets, and
international investments. Marketing offers nine (9) different choices
to convey teaching interests including one titled
"international/multinational/global marketing." Of the 28
different research specializations for marketing, three are concerned
with international marketing. The three areas are international
marketing strategy, international marketing management, and
international comparative marketing.
To meet our primary goal of investigating the teaching and research
interests of professors at U.S. colleges and universities in the three
business disciplines pertaining to multinational business
specialization, we examine two groups of professors. First, we
investigate the teaching and research interests of named professors in
each discipline over the study period. During 2002-2003, we found 526
named professors of accounting, 375 named professors of finance and 195
named professors of marketing as per the Hasselback directories.
Moreover, we observed that the named professors in all three fields were
primarily senior full professors with an average service of 20-25 years
after receiving their highest degrees. Specifically, in 2002-2003, the
percent of named chairs that held the rank of full professors were 79 in
accounting, 90 in finance, and 88 in marketing.
We firmly believe that one should definitely examine the
international business specializations of the most distinguished faculty
members of each discipline to gauge the trends in those disciplines.
Yet, given the discussion of the previous paragraph, we conjecture that
to fully understand the international focus or specializations of
instructors in any field, we had to expand our study to include
instructors of all ranks, experience levels, ages, etc. in the
particular field. Moreover, we surmised that to get unbiased estimates
of the extent of international specialization, we had to investigate
large random samples of instructors in each field. In accounting, for
example, the alphabetically listed individual faculty member information
in the 2002-2003 Hasselback directory is covered over 164 pages (pp.
209-372). Each page includes the relevant information on about 68 to 76
individuals. From each page we took a random sample of 4 individuals who
teach at U.S. colleges and universities. Thus, our resulting random
sample of accounting instructors for 2002-2003 was 656. In effect, our
random sample was approximately 1 in 18 of the total population of
faculty in each business discipline as per Hasselback guides, for each
study year. The randomness of the sample enables us to investigate the
teaching and research specializations of instructors of all academic
ranks specifically concerning international business. For the three
academic years studied, the randomly selected faculty totaled 1,826 from
accounting, 917 from finance, and 752 from marketing. The comparable
numbers of named professors in this study totaled 1,441 from accounting,
921 from finance, and 496 from marketing.
FINDINGS
Specializations of Named Professors
The findings of this study are presented with the help of 7 tables.
We begin with the teaching and research specializations of named
professors. The teaching/research specializations of named accounting
professors in the U.S. specifically relating to international accounting
are contained in Table 1. The tabulations include three academic years,
starting in 1994 and ending in 2003. Over this period, the number of
named professorships in accounting increased from 443 to 526. However,
the number of named professors specializing in international accounting
barely increased. The exhibit indicates that the percent of accounting
named professors specializing in international accounting has at best
remained around seven (7) over the 10-year period.
One drawback of relying on the Hasselback directories for faculty
data is the incidence of missing data, particularly concerning teaching
and research interests. The non-response bias of the survey methodology
affects the reported information in these guides. In accounting, the
data is unreported for a very small percent of the faculty and
therefore, our findings are not adversely affected. For example, for the
2002-2003 year, out of 526 named professors, the teaching/research
interest data was missing for only eight (8). Yet, we calculate and show
the percentages based on 518 since the teaching/research interests were
available for 518 as shown in Table 1. For finance and marketing, the
number of individuals for whom the relevant data is unreported turns out
to be greater.
The international specializations of named professors of finance
are shown in Table 2. The upper segment of the table contains the
information on teaching specializations in international finance and the
bottom segment contains information on the three different research
specializations in the area of international finance. While the number
of named professors of finance increased by over 60 percent between 1994
and 2002, the number expressing a teaching interest in international
finance increased by only 40 percent. Thus, the percentage of named
professors with teaching interest in international finance shows a
small, yet, a steady and a noticeable drop. It is worth noting that the
percent of named professors of finance expressing a teaching interest in
international finance in each of the three years of this study are more
than double the percent of accounting named professors showing a
teaching interest in international accounting.
The trend observed in all three research specializations involving
international finance are counter intuitive given the overwhelming shift
to globalization of business. For all three sub-areas of international
finance, the table shows declining percentages over the period
investigated. The entries in the third row from the bottom of Table 2
and of Table 3 should be interpreted with caution. Often, those
professors with research interest in one of the three areas noted also
express an interest in one or both of the remaining areas. Therefore, in
2002-2003, 61 distinctly different named professors of finance had not
indicated research specializations in international finance.
Table 3 presents the international specializations of named
professors of marketing. Once again, the information on teaching
specializations is exhibited in the upper portion of the table. In
marketing, there is no evidence of a clear trend with respect to
teaching interest in global marketing. On average, about one in nine
named professors of marketing had an interest in teaching global
marketing. This average percentage of preference for marketing is higher
than that expressed by accounting named professors and lower than that
expressed by finance named professors. The research interests of
marketing named professors in the three international marketing areas
also do not exhibit a clear trend over the study period.
The Best and the Brightest
Each year, Business Week magazine publishes a report on business
schools highlighting its list of the top 30 business schools. In this
detailed report, Business Week also includes a list of top 10 schools
for developing specialized skills, such as, finance skills, marketing
skills, global scope, technology and general management. Since the
present study has so far focused on international specializations of
named professors in three disciplines of business, we now turn our
attention to the elite list which Business Week describes as the
rankings of the schools according to recruiters which turn out the
"best and brightest." In this paper, we examine the schools
where the named professors of accounting, finance and marketing were
employed in 2002-2003 to determine how many of the named professors were
at schools which were deemed to be graduating the best of future
business men and women with global business credentials as per Business
Week (2002). Our findings are presented in Table 4. The table reveals
that the largest number of named professors at the ten elite schools was
in finance, but the largest percentage of named professors at these
schools belonged to marketing.
Specializations of Randomly Selected Professors
Next, we turn our focus on international specializations of
randomly selected samples of professors from three business disciplines.
Our findings are summarized in Tables 5, 6, and 7. As explained in the
methodology section, the random sample in each discipline is about 1 in
18 full time instructors for each year of study. By and large, the
tabulated findings contain the same kind of information presented in
Tables 1, 2, and 3 for named professors. The only additional information
in Tables 5 through 7 concerns the academic ranks of the randomly
selected professors.
In Table 5, the international specializations of randomly selected
accounting professors at U.S. schools are reported. The random selection
does give rise to a more balanced distribution of different rank
professors than the named professor population as evident from the Table
5 data. In all three years, full professors make up less than 30 percent
of the sample. The teaching/research interests of the randomly selected
professors of accounting are however, not markedly different from those
of named professors of accounting. Once again, less than seven (7)
percent of these professors had expressed an interest in teaching and/or
conducting research in international accounting. While no trend is
apparent from the tabulated results, it is clear that the percentage of
accounting professors wanting to teach or conduct research in
international accounting did not increase over the 10-year study period.
International specializations of randomly selected finance
professors are summarized in Table 6. The academic rank distribution of
our samples indicates a more balanced pattern. This table shows that
about 40 percent of the finance educators were full professors as
compared to the 90 percent full professors in the case of the named
professors of finance. With respect to the teaching interest in
international finance, once again a clear trend cannot be detected. Yet,
two important conclusions emerge from a thorough examination of the
results. First, the average percentage of randomly selected finance
professors expressing a teaching interest in international finance is
15.78 which is almost identical to the average of 15.71 percentage
observed for named professors of finance over the study period. Second,
our findings for the randomly selected finance professors do not exhibit
the clearly noticeable declining trend observed in the teaching
interests of named professors of finance regarding international
finance.
With respect to the research interests in international finance,
our random samples do not exhibit clear patterns. We do not know if the
lower percentages obtained in 2000-2001 for both the teaching as well as
the research interests are sample specific. What is clear is that the
largest percentages reported for teaching interest or for that matter,
research interest in any of the three areas of international finance are
in the latest year of the study. Moreover, the latest year information
on randomly selected professors of finance displays higher percentages
than named professors of finance regarding international
specializations.
The evidence concerning the international specializations of
randomly selected marketing professors is summarized in Table 7. On
average, the marketing sample constituencies are 40 percent full
professors, 29 percent associate professors and 27.5 percent assistant
professors. With respect to the teaching interest in global marketing,
an unmistakable downward trend can be detected over the period examined.
And yet, the percentages of randomly selected professors of marketing
expressing an interest in teaching global marketing are found to be
significantly higher than the corresponding percentages for the named
professors of marketing. The findings concerning the sampled marketing
professors' research interests in the three international marketing
subjects do not reveal a clear pattern. The most distinguishing aspect
of the findings in Table 7 is that the highest percentages of professors
with research interests in all three fields of international marketing
are found in the earliest year of the study. Thus, the randomly sampled
marketing educators were more inclined to teach international marketing
courses as well as engage in research in that area in 1994-1995 than
they were in 2002-2003.
The reported findings answer the set of questions underlying this
inquiry. Now we attempt to evaluate whether these findings could be
supported by evidence presented by previous studies. The Kwok, Arpan and
Folks survey of IB education in the early 1990s noted that the
internationalization of business faculty is essential before the
curriculum of business schools can be internationalized (1994). They
present evidence on the extent of the IB content infusion into the core
areas and specialized IB courses offered in each area and clearly
pointed out that accounting lagged far behind finance and marketing. For
example, they reported that 81 percent of the respondents were offering
specialized international functional courses in marketing at the
bachelors level. The comparable figures for accounting and finance were
28 percent and 72 percent, respectively. At the doctoral level, the
comparable percentages were 65, 25, and 76 for marketing, accounting and
finance, respectively. In this respect, our findings concerning the
international specializations of both groups of accounting faculty being
considerably lower than finance and marketing faculty are consistent. It
should also be pointed out that the academic accounting field depends
largely on the accounting guidelines and standards as well as corporate,
tax and security laws which tend to be nationally based rather than
internationally. This might partially help explain why the globalization
of business has not impacted the international specializations of
accounting faculty.
Our findings for the marketing named professors do not exhibit any
clear trend. However, the findings on randomly selected marketing
professors suggest that both the teaching as well as the research
interests in international marketing had peaked in 1994-1995. Kwok,
Arpan and Folks (1994) report that by the early 1990s, marketing was the
discipline "that had the greatest infusion of international
material" at all levels of business education. It is plausible that
the academic marketing departments began their efforts to
internationalize their courses and offerings much before other
departments and consequently, reached their intended goals sometime
during the 1990s. This conjecture can help explain our findings reported
in Tables 3 and 7.
The functional area of finance had not quite achieved what
marketing had by the early 1990s in terms of the internationalization
(see Kwok, Arpan, and Folks, 1994). However, it is important to note
that further integration of global financial markets has continued from
the early 1990s to today. Moreover, worldwide crisis of almost any
nature often tend to translate into international financial crisis. Such
crisis in turn can reshape the research interests of finance faculty to
a large extent and teaching interests to a smaller extent.
Finally, since the globalization of business has progressed at a
rapid pace over the last 10 to 15 years, one could have expected to
witness an upward trend in the international specializations of business
faculty. The evidence uncovered in this study is at odds with such an
expectation. We believe that the teaching and research interests of
university professors are rather fluid and therefore they may not
exactly follow business trends. The business trends lead academic
research in certain areas of business disciplines but lag in some
others. These complexities make it very difficult to predict the
directions of teaching and research interests of faculty from one year
to another in one specific area.
SUMMARY
The objective of this study was to examine the extent of the
international business specializations of accounting, finance, and
marketing professors in U.S. colleges and universities within their
teaching and research interests. Specifically, this paper presented the
findings of an investigation aimed at ascertaining the percentage of
business faculty who wanted to either teach or conduct research in the
international areas of their disciplines. The primary sources of
information were the Hasselback faculty directories for the academic
years 1994-1995, 2000-2001, and 2002-2003. For each of the three years,
the study focused on two samples of professors. The first sample
consisted of all the named professors in each field as per the
Hasselback guides. The study included 1,441 accounting, 921 finance, and
496marketing named professors over the three years examined. The second
group consisted of randomly selected instructors in each of the three
fields. The overall sample sizes of randomly selected instructors were
1,826 from accounting, 917 from finance, and 752 from marketing. These
samples represented about 5.55 percent of the faculty populations in the
three academic years as per the Hasselback guides.
Even though, the globalization of business has taken place at a
rapid pace over the last 10 to 15 years, this investigation did not find
evidence of clear upward trends in the international business
specializations within teaching and research interests of either group
of faculty in any of the three disciplines over the period under
consideration. The study revealed that the percentage of accounting
faculty, whether named professors or randomly selected professors, with
an interest in the international accounting area for teaching or for
conducting research remained more or less steady at or below 7 percent.
This percentage of accounting faculty wanting to specialize in
international accounting was found to be considerably lower than the
comparable percentages found for finance as well as marketing. The
evidence clearly demonstrates that the named finance professors'
interests in both teaching as well as for conducting research in the
international finance area declined over the 10- year study period.
Comparable declining patterns were also evident in the international
marketing specializations of randomly selected marketing professors. In
the case of randomly selected finance educators, this study found that
their teaching as well as research interests in the international
finance area peaked in 2002-2003.
REFERENCES
Andrews, E. (2006). Fed Chief Gives Seminar on History of
Globalization. The New York Times, August 26, B3.
Aggarwal, R. (1989). Strategies for Internationalizing the Business
School: Educating for the Global Economy. Journal of Marketing
Education, 59-64.
Beamish, P. and J. Calof. (1989). International Business Education:
A Corporate View. Journal of International Business Studies, 20,
553-564.
Bloom, R., J. Fuglister and H. Meier.(1996). Trends in Named
Professorships in Accounting. Accounting Educators' Journal, 8,
80-90.
Cavusgil, T. and N. Horn (Editors). (1997). Internationalizing
Doctoral Education in Business. East Lansing, MI: Michigan University
Press.
Danford, G. (2006). Project Based Learning and International
Business Education. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 18,
7-25.
Hasselback, J. (1995). Wiley Guide to Finance Faculty 1995. New
York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Hasselback, J. (2001, 2003). Prentice Hall Finance Faculty
Directory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hasselback, J. (1995, 2001, 2003). Prentice Hall Accounting Faculty
Directory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hasselback, J. (1995). Wiley Guide to Marketing Faculty 1995. New
York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Hasselback, J. (2001, 2003). Prentice Hall Marketing Faculty
Directory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kamath, R., H. Meier, and S. Rao (2004). A Comprehensive Study of
Named Marketing Chairs at Colleges and Universities in 2002. Marketing
Education Review, 14, 69-78.
Kamath, R., H. Meier, and S. Rao (2006). Examining a Decade of
Named Marketing Chairs in the U.S. Journal of Business and Economics
Research, 4, 17-28.
Kamath, R. and H. Meier (2006). Titled Positions in Finance in the
U.S.: An Examination of the 1994-2003 Developments. Journal of Applied
Finance, 16, 115-124.
Kedia, B., P. Harveston, and R. Bhagat (2001). Orienting Curricula
and Teaching to Produce International Managers for Global Competition.
Journal of Teaching in International Business, 13, 1-22.
Kuhne, R. (1990). Comparative Analysis of U.S. Doctoral Programs in
International Business. Journal of Teaching in International Business,
1, 85-99.
Kwock, C., J. Arpan, and W. Folks, (1994). A Global Survey of
International Business Education in the 1990s. Journal of International
Business Studies, Third Quarter, 605-623.
Laughton, D. (2005). The Development of International Business as
an Academic Discipline: Some Implications for Teachers and Students.
Journal of Teaching in International Business, 16, 47-70.
Meier, H. and R. Kamath (2005). A Multidimensional Investigation of
Named Professorships in Accounting: 2002-2003. Journal of Education for
Business, 80, 295-301.
Metwalli, A. and R. Tang (2001). Finance Chair Professorships in
the United States. Journal of Financial Education, 27, 64-71.
Nehrt L. (1987). The Internationalization of the Curriculum.
Journal of International Business Studies, 18, 83-90.
Sanyal, R. (2004). The Capstone Course in Business Programs:
Teaching the Application of International Business Research Skills.
Journal of Teaching in International Business, 15, 53-64.
Scherer, R., S. Beaten, M. Ainina, and J. Meyer (Editors) (2003).
Internationalizing The Business Curriculum: A Field Guide, Williams
Custom Publishing, Euclid, Ohio.
Tang, R. and D. Griffith (1997/1998). Accounting Chair
Professorships in 1997. Journal of Applied Business Research, 14,
137-147.
Teuke, M.(2006). Global Goals: It's a Big World.
Somebody's Got to Teach it. Continental, 10, 81-86.
Trieschmann, J., R. Hoyt, and D. Sommer (2005). Risk Management
andInsurance, Thomson Business and Professional Publishing, Mason, Ohio.
Tung, R.and E. Miller (1990). Managing in the Twenty-first Century:
The Need for Global Orientation. Management International Review, 30,
5-18.
Webb, M. and L. Allen (2005). A Global Survey of AACSB Accredited
Doctoral Programs--2004. Journal ofTeaching International Business, 16,
29-46.
White, D. and D. Griffith (1998). Graduate International Business
Education in the United States--Comparisons and Suggestions. Journal of
Education for Business, 73,103-115.
Yeoh, P. (2001).International Business Education: Identifying the
Emergent Topics in International Business and Their Relevance to
Knowledge Development. Journal of Teaching in International Business,
13, 7-27.
Zimmer, R., S. Koening, and S. Greene (2004). Teaching of the
International Component in the Introductory Marketing Course: A
Replication Study. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 16,
25-49.
Ravi Kamath, Cleveland State University
Heidi Hylton Meier, Cleveland State University
Stephanie L. Tousey, American Greetings
Table 1. International Specializations of Named Professors of
Accounting, 1994-2003
Item 1994-1995 2000-2001
Number % of 433 Number
Total Named Professors 443 -- 472
Professors Expressing their 31 7.16 32
Teaching/Research Interest
in International Accounting
Teaching/Research Interest 10 -- 10
not noted
Teaching/Research Interests 433 100 462
noted
Item 2002-2003
% of 462 Number % of 518
Total Named Professors -- 526 --
Professors Expressing their 6.92 35 6.76
Teaching/Research Interest
in International Accounting
Teaching/Research Interest -- 8 --
not noted
Teaching/Research Interests 100 518 100
Noted
Table 2. International Specializations of Named Professors of
Finance, 1994-2003
Item 1994-1995 2000-2001
Number % of 169 Number % of 247
Total Named Professors 234 -- 312 --
Professors Expressing 30 17.75 38 15.38
Teaching Interest in
International Finance
Teaching Interests 65 -- 65 --
not noted
Teaching Interests 169 100 247 100
noted
Number % of 148 Number % of 215
Professors Expressing 14 9.46 16 7.44
Research Interest in
International
Corporate Finance
Professors Expressing 22 14.86 26 12.09
Research Interest
in International
Financial Markets
Professors Expressing 12 8.11 17 7.91
Research Interest
in International
Investments
Total Number of 48 32.43 59 27.44
Professors with
Research Interests in
any of the above
three areas
Research Interests not 86 -- 97 --
noted
Research Interests 148 100 215 100
noted
Item 2002-2003
Number % of 300
Total Named Professors 375 --
Professors Expressing 42 14
Teaching Interest in
International Finance
Teaching Interests 75 --
not noted
Teaching Interests 300 100
noted
Number % of 255
Professors Expressing 14 5.49
Research Interest in
International
Corporate Finance
Professors Expressing 28 10.98
Research Interest
in International
Financial Markets
Professors Expressing 19 7.45
Research Interest
in International
Investments
Total Number of 61 23.92
Professors with
Research Interests in
any of the above
three areas
Research Interests not 120 --
noted
Research Interests 255 100
Noted
Table 3. International Specializations of Named Professors of
Marketing, 1994-2003
Item 1994-1995 2000-2001
Number % of 95 Number % of 116
Total Named Professors 143 -- 158 --
Professors Expressing 9 9.47 13 11.21
Teaching Interest in
International/
Multinational/Global
Marketing
Teaching Interests 48 -- 42 --
not noted
Teaching Interests noted 95 100 116 100
Number % of 84 Number % of 108
Professors Expressing 12 14.29 13 12.04
Research Interest in
International Marketing
Strategy
Professors Expressing 8 9.52 9 8.33
Research Interest in
International Marketing
Management
Professors Expressing 1 1.19 4 3.7
Research Interest in
International
Comparative Marketing
Total Number of 21 25 26 24.07
Professors with Research
Interests in any
of the above three areas
Research Interests not 59 -- 50 --
noted
Research Interests noted 84 100 108 100
Item 2002-2003
Number % of 144
Total Named Professors 195 --
Professors Expressing 16 11.11
Teaching Interest in
International/
Multinational/Global
Marketing
Teaching Interests 51 --
not noted
Teaching Interests noted 144 100
Number % of 136
Professors Expressing 17 12.5
Research Interest in
International Marketing
Strategy
Professors Expressing 11 8.09
Research Interest in
International Marketing
Management
Professors Expressing 6 4.41
Research Interest in
International
Comparative Marketing
Total Number of 34 25
Professors with Research
Interests in any
of the above three areas
Research Interests not 59 --
noted
Research Interests noted 136 100
Table 4. Named Professors at Schools Listed by Business Week (2002)
which Turn Out the Best and the Brightest in Global Scope 2002-2003
Accounting Finance
1 Total Named Professors 526 375
During the 2002-2003
Academic Year
2 Number of Named Professors 33 71
at Schools in the Business
Week Top 10 List
3 2 as a % of 1 6.27% 18.93%
Marketing
1 195
2 49
3 25.13%
Table 5. International Specializations of Randomly Selected Sample of
Accounting Professors, 1994-2003
Item 1994-1995
Number % of 558
Total Professors selected 558 100
for random sample
Full Professors 150 26.88
Associate Professors 176 31.54
Assistant Professors 156 27.96
Other Rank (a) 76 13.62
Professors Expressing 36 6.74
their Teaching/Research
Interest in International
Accounting
(% of 534)
Teaching/Research 24 --
Interest not noted
Teaching/Research 534 100
Item 2000-2001
Number % of 612
Total Professors selected 612 100
for random sample
Full Professors 179 29.25
Associate Professors 200 32.68
Assistant Professors 170 27.78
Other Rank (a) 63 10.29
Professors Expressing 34 5.69
their Teaching/Research
Interest in International
Accounting
(%of 598)
Teaching/Research 14 --
Interest not noted
Teaching/Research 598 100
Item 2002-2003
Number % of 660
Total Professors selected 656 100
for random sample
Full Professors 194 29.57
Associate Professors 216 32.93
Assistant Professors 166 25.3
Other Rank (a) 80 12.2
Professors Expressing 39
their Teaching/Research
Interest in International
Accounting
(% of 637)
Teaching/Research 23 --
Interest not noted
Teaching/Research 637 100
(a) : Other rank includes instructors, lecturers, senior lecturers,
term professors, visiting professors, and visiting scholars.
Table 6. International Specializations of Randomly Selected Sample of
Finance Professors, 1994-2003
Item 1994-1995
Number % of 254
Total Random Professors 254 100
Full Professors 99 38.98
Associate Professors 73 28.74
Assistant Professors 77 30.32
Other Rank (a) 7 2.76
Professors Expressing Teaching 23 15.44
Interest in International
Finance
(% of 149)
Teaching Interests not noted 107 --
Teaching Interests noted 149 100
Number % of 127
Professors Expressing Research 10 7.87
Interest in International
Corporate Finance
Professors Expressing Research 15 11.81
Interest in International
Financial Markets
Professors Expressing Research 8 6.3
Interest in International
Investments
Total Number of Professors 33 25.98
with Research Interests in any
of the above three areas
Research Interests not noted 129 --
Research Interests noted 127 100
Item 2000-2001
Number % of 323
Total Random Professors 323 100
Full Professors 132 40.87
Associate Professors 88 27.24
Assistant Professors 92 28.48
Other Rank (a) 11 3.41
Professors Expressing Teaching 31 13.96
Interest in International
Finance
(% of 222)
Teaching Interests not noted 101 --
Teaching Interests noted 222 100
Number % of 189
Professors Expressing Research 8 4.23
Interest in International
Corporate Finance
Professors Expressing Research 18 9.52
Interest in International
Financial Markets
Professors Expressing Research 11 5.82
Interest in International
Investments
Total Number of Professors 37 19.58
with Research Interests in any
of the above three areas
Research Interests not noted 134 --
Research Interests noted 189 100
Item 2002-2003
Number % of 340
Total Random Professors 340 100
Full Professors 132 38.52
Associate Professors 99 29.12
Assistant Professors 92 27.06
Other Rank (a) 17 5
Professors Expressing Teaching 45 17.93
Interest in International
Finance
(% of 251)
Teaching Interests not noted 89 --
Teaching Interests noted 251 100
Number % of 219
Professors Expressing Research 28 12.79
Interest in International
Corporate Finance
Professors Expressing Research 33 15.07
Interest in International
Financial Markets
Professors Expressing Research 24 10.96
Interest in International
Investments
Total Number of Professors 85 38.81
with Research Interests in any
of the above three areas
Research Interests not noted 121 --
Research Interests noted 219 100
(a): Other rank includes instructors, lecturers, senior lecturers,
term professors, visiting professors, and visiting scholars.
Table 7. International Specializations of Randomly Selected Sample of
Marketing Professors, 1994-2003
Item 1994-1995
Number % of 224
Total Random Professors 224 100
Full Professors 83 37.05
Associate Professors 67 29.91
Assistant Professors 64 28.57
Other Rank (a) 10 4.47
Professors Expressing Teaching 32 22.07
Interest in International/
Multinational/Global
Marketing
(% of 145)
Teaching Interests not noted 79 --
Teaching Interests noted 145 100
Number % of 115
Professors Expressing Research 23 20
Interest in International
Marketing Strategy
Professors Expressing Research 27 23.48
Interest in International
Marketing Management
Professors Expressing Research 11 9.56
Interest in International
Comparative Marketing
Research Interests not noted 109 --
Research Interests noted 115 100
Item 2000-2001
Number % of 256
Total Random Professors 256 100
Full Professors 102 39.84
Associate Professors 82 32.03
Assistant Professors 68 26.57
Other Rank (a) 4 1.56
Professors Expressing Teaching 37 19.07
Interest in International/
Multinational/Global
Marketing
(% of 194)
Teaching Interests not noted 62 --
Teaching Interests noted 194 100
Number % of 178
Professors Expressing Research 23 12.92
Interest in International
Marketing Strategy
Professors Expressing Research 13 7.3
Interest in International
Marketing Management
Professors Expressing Research 12 6.74
Interest in International
Comparative Marketing
Research Interests not noted 78 --
Research Interests noted 178 100
Item 2002-2003
Number % of 272
Total Random Professors 272 100
Full Professors 118 43.38
Associate Professors 68 25
Assistant Professors 75 27.57
Other Rank (a) 11 4.05
Professors Expressing Teaching 30 15.08
Interest in International/
Multinational/Global
Marketing
(% of 199)
Teaching Interests not noted 73 --
Teaching Interests noted 199 100
Number % of 189
Professors Expressing Research 29 15.34
Interest in International
Marketing Strategy
Professors Expressing Research 15 7.94
Interest in International
Marketing Management
Professors Expressing Research 7 3.7
Interest in International
Comparative Marketing
Research Interests not noted 83 --
Research Interests noted 189 100
(a) Other rank includes instructors, lecturers, senior lecturers,
term professors, visiting professors, and visiting
scholars.
