Warrington College of Business Administration
Section 1 Mission and Purpose Pages
Mission ................ .... ..................... ...........1-1
Purpose .............................. .........................1-1
Shared Values ............ ... .... .. ... ..... ......... ......... ............ 1-1
Measures of Success............... ............. ..........................1-1 to 1-2
Section 2 Goals and Expected Outcomes
Teaching ................................................ ............... 2-1 to 2-3
Research ................. ........ .. .......... ..................2-3 to 2-4
Service............................... ............ ....... .......2-4 to 2-5
Diversity ............... ................................ ............... 2-5 to 2-6
Fund Raising ................. .......................... ............ 2-6
Section 3 Strategic Fit
University Plan ........................ ..... ......... ................ 3-1
Board Plan ............ ...... ......... ........ ........... 3-1
Section 4 Core Achievements
Fund Raising............ ................... .................. ......4-1
Program and Research Rankings................................... ................ .4-1 to 4-2
Outreach Programs; Degrees; etc................................... .................4-3
PhD Placement. ........................ ...... ....................... ..4-3
Undergraduate Programs .............. ...... ........... ..4..............4-4
Faculty Retention ............ ............ ...... ........... .. .............4-4
Efficiency and Effectiveness .................. ......... ...... ..................4-5
Accreditation ...................................... ..................... ..... ............ 4-5
Section 5 College's Challenges
Impediments to Success............................ ............... 5-1
Strategies to Deal with Impediments..................................... 5-1
Section 6 Improvement Strategies ................................ .................6-1 to 6-2
Section 7 Academic Culture
M entering of Students.................................................................... .. 7-1
Intellectual Life ................................... ...................... .............. 7-1
Partnerships .................................................. .. .......... 7-1 to 7-2
Service to Academic Discipline .......................................................7-2
Section 8 Budget Request ................... ...................................8-1 to 8-5
Spreadsheet Attachment 1 (excel File) .................................... ................ 8-6
Spreadsheet Attachment 2 (excel File) ................... .............................. 8-7
Strategic Plan (pdf file) ................................................. .............. 8-8
Section 9 Data Tables (pdf file) ................................... ................9-1 to 9-10
1. Mission and Purpose of College and Programs
The Warrington College of Business Administration, located at the University of Florida,
serves students, businesses, alumni, and government by providing educational and
research programs that enhance leadership and competence among business people and
provide solutions for important business problems. We accomplish this mission by
generating new knowledge through our research and disseminating knowledge to our
students and alumni as well as the academic and business communities of the world.
The efficient, effective and ethical combination of scarce resources is an overriding
challenge for the world today. The College's mission and purpose is to contribute to a
solution. The College accomplishes this through excellence and innovation in all aspects
of its activity. The College promotes the understanding and practice of the desired
allocative outcome through its teaching and research programs.
The purpose dimension is reflected in the objectives of continuous improvement in the
value of the research we produce and the degrees we confer. This value is defined by the
following core determinants.
Provide a fair, transparent, and ethical environment that respects intellectual
freedom and the dignity of each person.
Produce important research of relevance to various stakeholder groups.
Provide curriculum and teaching that is renowned for its quality and impact on the
various stakeholder groups.
Provide an environment that facilitates and encourages outreach to the business
Provide the opportunity and incentives to globalize the education programs and
experience of the student.
Provide access to graduate education through a relevant array of high value-
added, quality masters programs.
Provide a stimulating research environment that includes a commitment to train
future scholars through a PhD program of national renown.
Provide the energy and opportunity for stakeholders and interested partners to
contribute the resources needed to implement the continuous improvement vision.
Provide the opportunity and incentive for faculty engagement in the unit mission
with an understanding of and appreciation for the synergies possible in a
Measures of Success:
The College employs many different benchmarks to measure success in carrying out its
mission. Most of these are summarized in the listed set which follows. It should be noted
that even when these macro-measurements are positive, the details must be examined
closely lest some faulty piece of the puzzle causes us to fall short of our potential.
Consistently ranked as comparable to/or better than our peer schools.
* Programs and faculty of the College consistently ranked among the top 10 public
* Faculty and staff subscribe to and actualize continuous quality improvement in
the productive process.
* External support and financial resources continue to improve.
2. Goals and Expected Outcomes
Reference to the Strategic Framework of the College provides guidance as to measures,
goals, and strategies associated with the activity of the College. It is important to note
that these goals must be viewed in the context of the discipline and relevant peers.
Without comparative data, the outcome statements have limited utility and so the metrics
of success must have not only time series information but also cross sectional to attain
and sustain the common goal of excellence.
As we discuss the goal areas specified or those we include beyond the specified set, we
will simultaneously address item (6), the College's improvement strategies. In fact you
can't have a dynamic set of goals without incorporating strategic statements, witness the
College's Strategic Framework.
a.) Enhance access to business education by leveraging existing resources and
incentivizing over load activity.
Increase: 06-07 07-08
Funded SCH 151,335 to 155,000
Unfunded SCH 20,204 to 22,000
Total Degrees 2310 to 2400
Limit growth in on campus undergraduate major enrollment.
Provide increased access to electronic platform courses.
Increased enrollment in online BSBA (funded).
Increased enrollment in Executive MBA programs (unfunded).
b.) Introduce new and emerging demand programs.
World Professional MBA
Technology and Supply Chain Management (Electronic
c.) Quality Control
ETS Field exams Pilot this spring
o Assess with scores over time and against peers.
o Limited pre/post experiment revealed substantial value
added and in the 90%+ for all students.
o Goal -Annual improvement and upper quartile across all
Professional Exams CPA Exams
o Success rate compared with peers (CPA)
o Current pass rate of 52% (4th among peers); Double
national average of 27% maintain upper decile standing.
Placement outcomes in terms of job acquisition, starting salaries,
expectations met, professional school placement.
o Improve overtime and exceed the average peer outcomes
(regionally adjusted) Need better data.
d.) Value Added
Enhance curriculum to include international coursework and
language training for all business graduates.
Percent of graduates with language training
Current 5 Years
Percent of students with international coursework
Current 5 Years
Develop curriculum to include an international study abroad or
study tour as part of every student's requirements.
Percent of graduates with international study abroad
Current 5 Years
U/G 20 % 50 %
G 10% 25 %
Provide curriculum that will enhance and maintain
Percent of graduates who have successfully completed
written and verbal communication courses at the 3000
Current 5 Years
U/G 50W/20S 100W/50S
Provide a co-curriculum structure that promotes leadership
development, peer interaction, College identification.
The formal structure of Warrington Welcome, Florida
Leadership Academy, SIFE Teams
Evidence of the impact of first phase structure in terms of student
leaders, team competency, etc.
Warrington Welcome- 80% of our students; we will get
100% by next year.
Florida Leadership Academy 100 students invite to join;
will build cohort to 150 annually.
SIFE Competitive Teams- trained and participating, finish
in the top three in every competitive event.
a.) Provide research support consistent with an environment that encourages
and sustains the research productivity equivalent to a top ten public
Current: Current 5 Years
Private support dollars for full time faculty 42% 70%
Academically Qualified Faculty (AQ) 85% 90%
Eminent Scholars 10
Chaired Professors 20
Faculty Fellows 5
Program Directors 3
Summer Research Grants for full time AQ
9 Month Faculty
Research Equipment platform for 100% of full
time AQ Faculty [2 computers, printers, scanner,
and appropriate software}.
b.) Funded Research- Provide incentives for conducting funded research
opportunities that can result in publishable output and funding.
Number of faculty involved in funded research and the
total funding sourced through contracts and grants.
Small number (10%) of faculty involved in this type
research which has resulted in a limited ($5.2M)
contribution to the total budget. Improve participation by
increased emphasis and a stronger incentive structure.
Increase percent from 10% to 25% over next five years.
Note current amount in the top decile for peers.
c.) Maintain current productivity of our leading faculty and provide
appropriate incentives and support to enhance productivity of all faculty.
Productivity measures provided by external evaluators.
Goal to have each discipline in the top ten public
business schools. To have at least 90% of tenure track
faculty in each unit AQ.
Five of ten research and instructional units are in the top
ten; and 85% are AQ qualified; maintain and increase
unit number to seven and the faculty number to 90% by
d.) PhD Placement
The quality of PhD programs and subsequent placement viewed as a
surrogate for the research environment of the College.
Placement in RU/RU(V) schools or better.
Currently 5 Years
From both a service and research prospective, it is important that each
faculty be involved in the professional community of the discipline.
Involvement will include annual attendance at professional meetings and
may include editorial responsibilities for important journals and leadership
positions in professional associations.
All faculty attend at least one professional meeting. At least one associate
editorship in each department; at least one association leadership position
in each Department.
Currently 5 Years
80% of AQ faculty attend at least one meeting. 100%
All units have editorships and two journals are
housed in the College. 100%
Four of six units have leadership positions in the
professional associations and the College has a
pre-eminent position in AACSB. 5
b) Life-Long Learning
Provide program and courses that serve the needs of alumni and general
public for graduate degree options in a format that is feasible and a budget
model that is cost recovery based.
Provide steady state graduate degree enrollment of students 1/3 of which
will be online and all of which will be resource self sustaining and
contributory to the basic mission of the College.
We have combined enrollment in our outreach programs of 750 students
which generate about $10 million gross revenues annually. Plan to grow
by 10% in headcount and revenues over the next three years.
c) Community Service
Service learning and community activism receive increasing emphasis in
the undergraduate learning experience. Warrington Welcome course and
Students in Free Enterprise activities include 1400 hours at Habitat for
Humanity and fifteen K-12 classroom lectures on some aspect of business.
Have every graduate give back to the community in some form during
their academic career.
About 45% of our students are involved in some form of community
service. Forecast 100% by 2009.
Provide public access to College experience in innovative and feasible
Developing a pod cast series with limited content within 5 year extensive
electronic access for the community.
The proactive diversity program that the College committed to over the
past several years has led to progress but not goal accomplishment. The
tool set used has varied from year to year including resources, structure,
support and opportunity. Our goals are specific.
U/G 30% minority
Grad 25% minority
Faculty 25% minority
The overall numbers mark two lingering problems:
1. African American representation continues in every set in the 3-5%
range and the College has made little progress toward the 10% goal.
2. Faculty diversity has been static due to lack of hiring.
Our general strategy in this domain will continue to be a mix of
internal support and external recruitment. Specific factors in this
strategy set include:
Incentive funding in the graduate program and increased
scholarship funds at the undergraduate level. The College is
using its own resources to incentivize recruiting at the PhD level
and maintain an active role in the PhD Project.
New platform (on-line BSBA) and early
identification of students (1-BA) will allow the
College to undertake meaningful recruiting at the
high school and community college levels.
Created and staffed a position in the College,
Director of Diversity. This person is responsible
for coordinating current efforts and initiating new
activities to increase the diversity of the College.
We expect to see slow but steady progress toward
the overall goal but African American
representation will continue to be a challenge.
5. Fund Raising
Private funds, either from direct gifts or endowment income represent
approximately 20% of total College expenditures. In the current fiscal
environment, this funding source has become even more critical for
enhancements needed to sustain excellence. The College's current
endowment is approximately $100 million and the goal for the upcoming
capital campaign is $112 million or to double the endowment total by
2012. The College has already raised $45 million in this campaign (40%
of goal) and we expect to reach 120% by the end of the campaign.
3. Strategic Fit of the College's Goals:
The keys to the strategic plans, goals and objectives can be captured in a small set of
words which expand into the narrative of section 2:
Excellence in output;
Efficiency in productivity;
Access to quality business education;
Innovation in sources and uses of funds;
Resulting in recognition as one of the top ten public business schools in the country
and center of influence worldwide.
1. University Strategic Plan
The Strategic Work Plan of the University identifies a number of goals and principles
which are also present in the College's goals set. The overriding goal of "optimizing
allocations of our resources..... in our pursuit of excellence as we respond to the needs
of students and faculty, and in addressing state priorities" is at the heart of the
College's strategic framework and consequently is the major "goal-setter". Most of
the details offered in the Work Plan are University goals that the College agrees with
but cannot effect, i.e., "....increase the number of faculty to achieve parity with top ten
public AAU Universities....." or are goals that do not encompass the College, i.e.,
"Develop faculty resources specifically in the arts and humanities...." or "continue to
expand the University of Florida's activity in space science...."
Certainly the University goals for human capital and infrastructure are necessary
conditions for progress in the College goals and so these are subsumed in the College
set. The one section of the Plan (G-Professional Preparation) that applies directly to
the College articulates two goals which map directly into the College goals.
1. "Strengthen the educational and research facets of professional programs and
colleges." This is obviously fundamental to all aspects of our strategic planning
2. "Provide adequate resources to assist the state and nation to meet their needs for
professionals educated in information technology". The most recent manifestation
of this lies in the College accessibility goal that has developed an on-line Masters
program in Technology and Supply Chain Management to enhance the state's
educational options in this domain.
2. Board Strategic Plan
The goals of the College are also aligned with the Board's goals and in particular
resonate with their stated objectives of:
Highest Student Achievement
Quality and Efficiency
Skilled Workforce and Economic Development
4. College Core Achievements
A. Fund Raising
The College received the largest single gift [$50 million when fully matched] in the
history of the University. It will be used to fund the graduate programs and a graduate
B. Program and Research Rankings
The College has a total of ten Research/Instructional Units and five of these ten are
ranked in the top ten among public Colleges of Business (see table attached). Among the
notable aspects of this matrix of information are the research productivity of the
Marketing faculty (ranked #1) and the instructional success of the MACC programs
(ranked #5). All of the units noted understand the productivity/ranking metrics and
annual reviews focus on progress and plans for success.
As noted in the goals assessment the success of these units are consistent with the world
class faculty we have been able to attract and maintain.
Two faculty recognized as seminal researchers in their field Marketing,
Four faculty elected to preside over discipline, Marketing, Finance, Accounting
and Business Law.
Faculty Chair of national Association (AACSB).
Numerous editorships across all disciplines.
Author of top ten SSRN paper ( K. Cheng, DIS).
One of the ten most highly cited Researcher ( J. Ritter-
Best paper award in Legal Studies ( L. Di Matteo-
Department of Management faculty ranked #1 in research
Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies ranked #8 most
Faculty person #7 in impact on Discipline (David Ling -
Real Estate Studies)
Department 04-05 05-06 Trend Strength Weakness Action
Accounting #25 #24 Programmatic Research Research Focus;
Reputation Productivity; New Hires; New
Decision and #11 #11 Programmatic Field New Hires;
Information Reputation, Coverage; Directed Emphasis
Sciences Research Major Demand
Economics #10 #10 Research Faculty Size, Engage Faculty in
-- Productivity; Demographics University &
Focus College Initiatives;
Finance #8 #9 Research Faculty Attain Financial
Productivity Vulnerable to Flexibility/Enrich
Demographics Environment; New
Management #8 #6 Research Faculty Attain Financial
Productivity Vulnerable to Flexibility/Macro
Market Faculty Hire
Marketing #1 #1 Research Faculty Attain Financial
SProductivity Vulnerable to Flexibility to
Market Retain Faculty
Programs 04-05 05-06 Trend Strength Weakness Action
Undergraduate #13 #12 Accessibility, Headcount, Restrict Growth;
5 of 6 Innovation Too Large, More Support
Disciplines Impersonal Services; Extra-
Ranked in Top curriculum
MACC #5 #5 CPA Pass Rate, Limited Hire where possible
Faculty Systems Focus in Systems Area
MBA #21 #20 Student Funding, Increased Funding,
3 of 6 / Credentials, Facilities, Focused
Disciplines Executive Degree Placement Placement; New
ranked in topl0 Programs Building
PhD #12 #12 Marketing, Funding Increased
Finance, Inconsistent; funding/increased
Placements Placement stipends
*The ranking information is in comparison with U.S. public business colleges. It is compiled from several sources.
The primary source for research productivity is Business Research in Eight Disciplines, Robinson and Adler, 2003.
This study examines the publication record in terms of quantity, quality, and citation for fifty-one schools all of
which have been listed by the media as in the top 30 business schools in some publication. The primary source for
programmatic quality is the analysis presented annually by US News and World Report. PhD programs are not ranked
By the media and so this ranking reflects a composite of information with an emphasis on placement records.
C. Outreach Programs; Degree; etc.
The College has developed a robust outreach educational program in response to
the perceived needs for greater access. The on-line BSBA program has grown
from zero enrollment in 2000, to 350 in 2006 and the various MBA programs
[Professional (week-end), Internet, Executive (local and South Florida)] have
more than doubled in enrollment over that same time period [300 to 725]. The
revenues generated by these programs have increased 3 fold from $3.8 M to
$11 M and currently represent 30% of total funding available to the College.
The technological infrastructure for delivery of these programs has recently been
extended to include "pod casting" for several of our MBA programs thus giving
the working Professionals the ability to interact with his/her curriculum anywhere
/anytime. This expertise developed in program delivery is now being leveraged to
invigorate a general outreach responsibility by providing general access to the
expertise of the College. Current downloadable pod casts include:
Tuesday with Tosi
Entrepreneurship Speakers Series
Ring Speakers Series (Real Estate)
D. PhD Placement
Placement of students is an important metric in the PhD program. The College evaluates
placement with the aspiration that all students have the opportunity to place at a Research
University (Very High, Carnegie Classification, RU/VH). Obviously, the qualities of the
graduating students depend not only on value added but also on the attributes of the
students when they begin. The College can attract the better students through reputation
and funding assistance. The College has managed to improve its outcomes by reputation
enhancement alone since funding has been static and stipends are below the mean for our
peers. However, as noted the College has made substantial gains in this metric domain
and 60% of the 94 graduates since 2000 have been placed in RU/VH or RU/H institutes
as compared to less than 50% for our peers during the same period. Marketing placement
(10/14 in RU/VH) was #1 in the discipline and Finance was #5 over the period. Our
placement percent in RU during the period is in the upper quartile of our peers and we
expect, with appropriate funding added to the existing reputation, to be one of the top ten
E. Undergraduate Programs -Co-curriculum Development
1. Now enroll 600 students in Warrington Welcome (75% of class) which sets the
stage for the co-curriculum requirements.
2. Now enlist 100 students in our Florida Leadership Academy which has a strong
service component and is the source of our Warrington Ambassadors (Avg. GPA.
3.7; SAT, 1370).
3. New curricula initiatives. We have hired three writing and one oral
communications specialists and offered 20 sections of Professional Business
Writing and ten sections of Professional Business Speaking in 06-07. Plan to
increase the latter number and are considering making both required. Private
funding acquired for support of the Center for Management Communication.
4. New format for international experience. Last year over 25% (300) of our
graduates had some form of study abroad. This growth and future expansion
enabled by the establishment of WCBA sponsored programs in London, Madrid
and Rome (this summer). Provide local and business course access, internships
(London) and scholarship monies.
F. Faculty Retention
Market Vulnerability/Matching Offers
The Faculty of the College are in demand in the market and in the face of limited annual
increases, the College has had to resort to matching offers to retain this team of highly
reputable, highly productive faculty. [The College follows a rule that it will only match
written offers from peer schools or better.]
On this basis, twenty seven (27) matching offers have been extended over the last seven
(7) years and the College has been successful in all cases but one. The cost of meeting
these offers totaled $810,000 and 95% of this rate came from the College's existing rate
During 2005-2006, we successfully matched offers from University of Southern
California, University of Michigan, Pennsylvania State, Texas A&M, University of
Maryland, University of New Zealand, and made one pre-emptive offer for a total of
G. Efficiency and Effectiveness
We seek to utilize the resources available so as to maximize benefit per resource unit
The College has pioneered efforts to identify platforms and formats consistent with the
high quality and efficiency. The evidence would suggest progress on this road to
excellence and the College continues to produce nationally ranked faculty and programs
with productivity numbers such as SCH/faculty or degrees/faculty in the top decile in the
country. Our goal is to maintain this efficiency through creativity and innovation while
sustaining a research active environment.
The College strives to be an effective agent for educational spending by allocating public
and private support in an evolving and dynamic mix. The Colleges funding source
portfolio has changed drastically over the past ten years and now less than 65% of the
College's expenditures are state funded (85%; ten years ago). These changes have been
strategic and consistent with a growing need for resources and an increasing reluctance or
inability of the state to respond. We believe effective management of fund sources
requires this diversity and our expectation is to be state assisted (50% of total) by 2012.
The on-line BSBA is a rapidly growing program that in partnership with Community
Colleges makes our undergraduate curriculum accessible off-site anywhere in the state.
Currently, we have 350 students enrolled in the program and expect to double that
number within the next three years. If a currently active LBR is successful we will far
exceed that goal. The research output of the College had been moved up the accessibility
ladder by the work of:
Bureau of Business and Economic Research
Public Utility Research Center
Bergstrom Real Estate Research Center
David Miller Retail Research Center
Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Our goal is to increase the intersection between the needs and interest of those we serve
and the teaching and research output of our world class scholars.
The College is accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
International (AACSB). The College has been accredited since 1929 and most recently
was reaccredited in 2003. Reaccreditation is scheduled on a five year cycle and the
College will have its next visit in the Spring, 2009.
5. College's Challenges
A. Impediments to success.
1. The lack of a rational and transparent budget.
a.) Funding disconnected from productivity.
2. Insufficient funding to maintain a highly mobile, competitive faculty.
3. Faculty demographics 25% of faculty are eligible to retire in the next five years;
Rate will support only a 1.5/2.0 to 1 replacement. May be an accreditation issue.
4. University and College understanding of the role of "off-book" programs as part
of the mission and activity of the unit.
5. Enrollment Management in the Undergraduate Program. Shifting management to
the College results in artifacts of GPA and prerequisites which may denigrate the
integrity of the curriculum.
6. PhD programs support has lagged requiring the College to limit program size or
become non competitive in stipends.
7. Space, both in quantity and quality. We are in the lowest quartile of our peer set
and this is a competitive disadvantage in the market for students, faculty, and
B. Strategies in dealing with these impediments.
As noted in previous sections of this narrative, the College's strategic framework
has been developed to accomplish the specified goals and objectives in the context of
challenges and impediments to success. Consequently much of the impediment
response strategy has been articulated.
1. The College continues to be a tireless advocate of a budgeting model which
relates funding to productivity in a rational and transparent way. The acceptance
then recession of such a model within the past few years has increased the need
for a response here.
2. Increased diversity in funding sources such that there is less dependence on the
state source which now represents about 65% of our total expenditures. The
challenge of the "diversified" fund portfolio strategy is the lack of fungibility
across sources. The major budget expenditures of faculty/staff salaries is tightly
bound to state funding rather than the variable and uncertain funding sources of
Contracts and Grants, Private Gifts, and Revenue Programs.
3. The College will continue to use the revenue (offbook/95-5) programs to
contribute tothe rising cost of excellence and access.
4. The College attempts to leverage its limited resources by effective use of
technology thus maintaining access to its programs and efficient use of the
research talents of its faculty.
5. The College has a revenue generating strategy that is designed to provide PhD
program support (DBA).
6. The College has a major fund raising strategy directed toward space and
6. Improvement Strategies
A. The strategy we use to attain progress is to identify goals and reward success. We
gauge progress by:
1. Benchmarking against:
a. Ourselves, overtime;
b. Our peers [example]
c. University Colleges [example]
2. Performance standards consistent with faculty and programs of a Research
a. Research productivity
b. Teaching effectiveness
c. Service to the disciplines and the University
B. We gather internal and external data through the University's Institutional Research,
AACSB's Knowledge Services, and various professional and media evaluative
Activities. We have an affinity group of peer Colleges that freely exchange data and
meet periodically to discuss relevant data and the strategic implications. We use peer
evaluation of at least one program per year through invitation and campus visit
(Entrepreneurship, 2006-07). Beginning in the Fall, 2007, we will integrate the ETS
Field exam into the undergraduate program as an individual student assessment
associated with student learning outcomes.
C. Improvements that have been made as measured by the assessment process.
1. Productivity and output rank among peers
Rank 03-05 Rank 05-06
a.) Endowment value 8 5
b.) Graduate Students (Headcount) 8 5
c.) Undergraduate students (Headcount) 1 2
d.) PhD degrees 10 5
e.) Degree/ Faculty 1 1
Among Colleges (UF)
a.) SCH/Faculty 2 1
b.) Degree/Faculty 3 1
c.) State $/Degree 3 2
2. Research Productivity
Tenure and promotion candidates continue to be successful; increase in
number going up for tenure early. Citation analysis indicates general
improvement in quantity and impact of research. Increase in contract and grant
funds which continues to be in top decile of our peer group.
Continuing dynamic analysis of curriculum resulting in new programs and
the elimination of some non-productive -Hire two instructional designers
with systematic redesign consultation for all faculty (beginning with
electronic platform courses) resulting in improving student evaluations and
expected improvements in individual student assessments.
7. Academic Culture
A. Mentoring of Students
1. The mentoring offered the graduate students of the College is intense and
between dedicated staff and faculty every graduate student has a personal
connection with the College. The support structure for the specialized
masters, MBA and PhD programs are especially dense. The weekend and
Internet program students also have dedicated support although much of
the interaction is electronic.
2. The mentoring available to the undergraduate is diverse, creative and
expanding. The staff support numbers 25, including personnel dedicated to
overseas study, online programs, and professional development. The
College captures most of its freshmen (75%) in a Warrington Welcome
class and uses this to outline the many support features of the College and
the extensive co-curriculum available. The latter is tracked along with
curriculum progress throughout the students program. The student is
encouraged to participate in the Leadership Academy, Overseas Study,
Warrington Ambassadors, University Scholars, National Honoraries or
one of several clubs and organization. The mentoring goal is to get every
student involved in at least one co-curricula activity and to maintain
progress toward successful graduation in a reasonable time. Student
participation has been increasing and student perceptions have been
improving (EBI Survey).
B. Intellectual Life of the Programs and Departments
Can be described as vibrant, powered by world class faculty and exceptional
Faculty are provided with at $6,500 annually to support their research
agenda. Faculty are provided the hardware and technical support required
/requested to develop their research and they are encouraged to attend at
least one professional meeting a year.
Departments provide weekly workshops for research presentations either
by in house faculty or invited academicians. Funding for visiting scholars
and business executives is provided by dedicated private funds.
Centers provide focal point for the application of the basic research
developed by the faculty. The College's ten (10) active centers include
such entities as the Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Public
Utility Research Center, Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies, Center
of International and Business Research and Center for Entrepreneurship
and Innovation, among others.
C. Partnerships Across Campus
The College's desire to be an active cross-disciplinary partner has been limited by
lack of resources. Its faculty and programs have sought out such opportunities and
the result is a diverse but growing set, to include:
Established an undergraduate degree (BABA) with a major or
specialization outside of the College (750 students).
Maintains several joint MBA programs with Law, Medicine, Fine Arts,
Established a joint MBA program with International partners in Europe
Teach with faculty in College of Engineering, Industrial Engineering
Teach with faculty from CALS in Master's Program in Entrepreneurship
Joint appointment with the College of Education; recruiting for a position
that will be a joint appointment with the Center for Latin American
D. Service to the Academic Disciplines
The standards for such service were set by the Dean as he has been involved in
the leadership of the overarching organization for business education (AACSB)
for the last several years during which time he has served in several positions
Faculty are encouraged to be active in their discipline not only from the service
potential but as noted as a catalyst for their research. The results of their
participation are evident in leadership positions bestowed, editorships maintained,
and program presentations. College ranking and reputation is a partial function of
visibility and this is enhanced by full participation and service to the disciplines of
8. Budget Request for New Funding 2007-2008
The College of Business Administration continues on its chosen trajectory to be one of
the ten best public Colleges in the country. In many aspects of its activity, the College
has already achieved this status1, but the challenges of full achievement and maintenance
still remain. The College has maintained its momentum in spite of no real growth in state
support by increasing productivity, establishing alternative funding sources, and creative
utilization of resources available. All of these factors are now present but they are no
longer sufficient to attain the objectives or, indeed, to maintain the current position. We
do not believe additional resources are the answer to every problem and we have pursued
our aspirations successfully without additional state funds for several years. But there is
a limit, and creatively combining a decreasing proportion of state funded resources will
no longer sustain our progress.
I. Recurring Resource Needs
A. Restoration of Operating Budget
The first priority for the College in terms of recurring resources is restoration of
the operating budget to its 2001-02 level. As a result of the 40% reduction in
these funds over the last four years, sustaining the PhD program now absorbs 90%
of the $1.2 million operating budget. There are literally not enough remainder
funds "to keep the lights on" and without private sources and revenue programs,
the College would be forced to place severe restraints on its programs and
To restore to the 01-02 level would require:
The operating budget for the Fisher School of Accounting has received no
increase over the past several years and is woefully inadequate at $137,000. It has
been necessary to use alternative funding sources to meet basic school needs. To
restore the integrity of state funded operations would require:
B. Personnel Funding
The personnel funding needs of the College should be understood in the context
of no available rate and the requirements for continuing accreditation. All
uncommitted rate has been used to sustain College operations and the fund
demands that have been placed on the revenue programs have become so large
SRecent evidence to that effect: 1) Economist Intelligence Unit (UK) UF Business Faculty quality
ranked #5 in World; #3 in US (2005). 2) Duke University Research UF Marketing Faculty ranked #2 in
World in Citations per Capita (1997-2004).
that the reinvestment needed to maintain and refresh these programs has been
compromised. It should be noted that rate that has been made available through
departures and retirements has been absorbed through matching offers or lecturer
hires to deliver service/core classes. The College will have a maintenance
accreditation visit in Spring, 2009, and the question of sufficiency of
academically qualified faculty will be an issue.
1. Critical Needs
The College has identified the number of faculty needed to sustain
appropriate quality and quantity dimensions after the effects of the current
enrollment management strategies are fully realized. The College is now
several faculty below this number and although we have added lecturers,
the number of academically qualified faculty is shrinking. (See Table 1)
The rate specified in the critical category is needed to replace departing or
retiring faculty whose work product must be recaptured or the College's
programs and output must be down-sized.
Amount needed $1,162,500
2. Important Needs
-An Eminent Scholar line (Jim Walter Eminent Scholar Chair) has been
vacant for several years and the rate required to hire is not available. The
College's "unfilled" response to the annual state audit will eventually raise
questions by the donor if not the state about the University's commitment
to the Eminent Scholar program.
Amount needed $270,000
-The University/College were unable to fund a matching offer for a "rising
star" who was recruited by Stanford. The University permitted the
College to use a private source (J. Walter income account) to fund the
match. This temporary funding must be moved to state support to activate
Amount needed $80,000
3. New Initiatives
-In College: There are two new and important fields of study in business
education ethics and entrepreneurship. While both disciplines have been
part of business management from its inception, it is only recently that
they have become critical management and social issues. The College has
captured this rising interest with relevant centers and private funding.
Student interest has outpaced resources available, and this request would
provide a teaching faculty person in each field.
Amount needed $187,500
II. Non-Recurring Resource Requests
The College has a number of new opportunities and/or continuing possibilities that
require non-recurring resource support. These include:
A. Enhanced distance learning and electronic platform delivery systems
The College is the recognized campus leader in the production of on-campus
electronic platform courses and off-campus distance learning programs. We
currently deliver electronic platform courses to 11,000 students a year on campus
and have over 500 students enrolled in intemet MBA and online BSBA programs.
All production and delivery is done in-house. The primary production facility
(Bryan 130) was renovated and equipped in 1990. We are currently limited in our
ability to use the latest technology to expand and enhance extra-classroom
delivery of course content by the inherent weakness of the existing analog
equipment. The use of digital recording and broadcasting with the 16:9 aspect
ratio will enhance our video production suite and position us to provide a richer
feature set for our students.
The requested upgrading is particularly important as the College's distribution
network takes on more global dimensions. Currently the College has students
each term (50-100) enrolled in webcasts of UF courses while involved in our
overseas programs and residing in France, Spain or England. This international
demand for a robust system will be further intensified if the current negotiations
with three schools in China and India for web delivery of content prove fruitful.
The funds required to provide the upgrading and renovation needed include:
Install digital video production in Bryan 130 $120,000
Space renovation, reconfiguration to accommodate
the new production process $40,000
B. On-Line Testing
The use of the electronic platform and course management systems has resulted in
increased instructor demand for facilities and technology where online testing can
be conducted in a proctored environment. We propose to offer a portable
electronic testing option through the use of self contained notebook computer
carts. The model proposed would allow the College to use rooms available and
equipped for mobile testing.
This configuration with the requisite software provides individual questions and
answer ordering, locked out access to references or downloading, and instant
feedback with questions specificity.
A secondary benefit of this inventory is the option of turning any classroom into a
hands-on teaching lab. The resources needed to accomplish these purposes
Mobile Computing Carts, Notebook $115,000
Computers, Exam Security Software
C. Undergraduate Student Services
In Spring 2006 the College opened the Undergraduate Student Center. This
facility, located in Bryan Hall, was most recently used as a University computing
lab. The University transferred usage of the space to the College in Spring 2005.
The transfer was on a "bare wall" basis and any renovation, reconfiguration,
furnishing, etc. was to come from existing College resources.
In order to bring this space on line as soon as possible, the College borrowed
against its future online BSBA cash flows. The space now provides:
-an undergraduate student area for individuals and small groups
-three classrooms (25 seat capacity ea.)
-space for corporate presentations (with CRC)
-College level functions (Advisory Board meetings, VIP Speakers, etc.)
-University events (Admissions, Honors Programs etc.)
This development is a major initiative to "enhance our educational services and
opportunities" for undergraduates. The resources required include:
Physical Renovations $320,000
AV Equipment & Wiring 29,749
Classroom Partitions 9,462
Copier, Telephones, Telephone Lines 8870
D. Development Officer
The College's Development effort has been understaffed for several years. A
review of peer staffing revealed up to 9 Development Officers with the average
being 4+. The College must play an important role in the University's Capital
Campaign. It has committed to a 50% increase in the current endowment and this
is a doable goal with adequate personnel. The College now has 3 funded
Development Officers and will need at least 5 to assure success in this activity.
Some early year funding assistance is being provided by the Foundation, but the
absence of any available rate in the College means a diversion of operating funds
until the new officers become self-supporting.
The support needed would be:
2 officers @ $70,000 + fringes; /2 covered by Foundation
Summary (Reference: Spreadsheet, Attachment 1 & 2)
The Warrington College
of Business Administration
The Warrington College of Business Administration, located at the University
of Florida, serves students, businesses, alumni, and government by providing
educational and research programs that enhance leadership and competence
among business people and provide solutions for important business problems.
We accomplish this mission by generating new knowledge through our
research and disseminating knowledge to our students and alumni as well as the
academic and business communities of the world.
The efficient, effective, and ethical combination of scarce resources is
an overriding challenge for the world today. The College's mission
and purpose is to contribute to a solution. The College accomplishes
this through excellence and innovation in all aspects of its activity.
The College promotes the understanding and practice of the desired
allocative outcome through its teaching and research programs.
The purpose dimension is reflected in the objectives of continuous improvement in
the value of the research we produce and the degrees we confer. This value is
defined by the following core determinants.
SProvide a fair, transparent, and ethical environment that respects intellectual free-
dom and the dignity of each person.
SProduce important research of relevance to various stakeholder groups.
SProvide curriculum and teaching that is renowned for its quality and impact on
the various stakeholder groups.
SProvide an environment that facilitates and encourages outreach to the business
SProvide the opportunity and incentives to globalize the education programs and
experience of the student.
SProvide access to graduate education through a relevant array of high value-
added, quality master's programs.
SProvide a stimulating research environment that includes a commitment
to train future scholars through a PhD program of national renown.
SProvide the energy and opportunity for stakeholders and interested partners to
contribute the resources needed to implement the continuous improvement
SProvide the opportunity and incentive for faculty engagement in the unit mission
with an understanding of and appreciation for the synergies possible in a
MEASURES OF SUCCESS
The College employs many different benchmarks to measure success in carrying out
its mission. Most of these are summarized in the listed set which follows. It should
be noted that even when these macro-measurements are positive, the details must
be examined closely lest some faulty piece of the puzzle causes us to fall short of
SConsistently ranked as comparable to or better than our peer schools.
SPrograms and faculty of the College consistently ranked among the top 10 public
SFaculty and staff subscribe to and actualize continuous quality improvement in the
SExternal support and financial resources continue to improve.
(Core competencies required
to fulfill our mission)
To have the most qualified, most productive, most dedicat-
ed scholars attainable. Committed to the proposition of
intellectual excellence in ourselves, our students, and the
academic community. The size of the faculty should be
appropriate to the mission of the College.
The people, structure and facilities needed to contribute
effectively and efficiently to our mission.
Programs and other educational units that are relevant to
the needs of a diverse student population and are noted for
their excellence and innovation.
Programs and Curriculum attract excellent students. The
educational experience is of the highest quality and the value
added is significant and improving. Program portfolio is
diversified to provide access to multiple student types.
Articulation of product attributes to increase quantity and
quality of external relationships. Through excellent products
and institutional loyalty build a strong relationship with a
diverse set of external constituents.
(Benchmarks; indication of progress towards achieving the attributes
identified as distinctive capabilities)
SRecruiting Effectiveness yield on faculty job offers maximize; 70%; over time progress
STurnover minimize; 10%; over time
SAwards, Grants, Recognitions maximize; 75%; progress over time
SEditorships and National Offices control; 25%; change over time
Peer Evaluation of Research and Programs enhance; top ten among publics; change over time
SStudent and Teacher Evaluation of Teaching maximize; > 4.0; maintain at or above bench-
STeaching Loads/Overloads control; 2 to 5 per academic year, depending on job assignment;
manage over time
SSalarylTotal Compensation maximize; > peer average; change over time
Promotion/Tenure Success maximize; 95%; maintain over time
3 Year Review
SStaff Numbers changes; per faculty; per student; control; 1.5/ faculty; progress over time
SStaff Compensation maximize; > peer schools; change over time
SRetention History maximize; 90%; change over time
SAwards and Recognitions maximize; 25%; change over time
SStaff Attributes change to needs; more student services, research & instruction, support
technologies; change over time
SOrganizational Structure most effective; decentralized; progress
Facilities new; renovations; maintenance and maximize; life 20; funded at point in time; future
STechnology presence; use maximize; 100% faculty, students, change over time
Electronic Platforms efficient utilization of content delivery control; where appropriate and/or
access is critical; change over time
SEvidence of Quantity and Quality -
-media standing among top 10 public schools; 100% of departments; over time
peer evaluation leadership; editorial positions, invitations to speak or visit; maximize; 75% of faculty;
SFaculty Productivity maximize quality and quantity; average 5 publications per 5 years, at least
half major venues; citation analysis; equal to or better than peers; over time
SRewards and Recognitions maximize; depends on availability; ideal one per department; over time
SGrants/Contracts appropriate level; average I per department at any one time; peer comparabilty;
SResearch Center appropriate level; per department active and developing; over time
* Program/Curriculum Demand control/maximize; enrollment management; converge on desired
attributes over time
* Innovations and Extensions of Programs access; control/maximize; responsive to perceived
demands; changes over time
* International and Cross Disciplinary Content optimal level; increase with undefined finite
limit; change over time
* Student Evaluations control/maximize; > 4.0; survey feedback; improve over time; > peers
* External Constituent Evaluations placement; survey; control/maximize; good/excellent; feed-
back; improvement over time
* Value-Added Perspective control/maximize; > 50% increase; measurement; overtime
* Revenue Generating Programs variety; headcount; delivery
* Input Quality maximize; average SATs; AP, IB credits, preprofessional GPA; improving over time;
average > 66% university level
SPerformance maximize; average GPA; retention; graduate school; improve over time; top 1/3 of
SPlacement best possible; starting salaries, successful job acquisition over time; > peers
SStudent Evaluations maximize; termly evaluations; periodic focus groups
Awards and Recognitions maximize; honors students and individual awards; top 1/3 of university;
increasing over time
SExtracurricular Activity maximize; > 50%; change over time
Alumni Base maximize within graduation numbers, active participation; 50% minimum; over time
Government and Business Consumers Appropriate numbers of contracts and grants;
programmatic centers; at least I per department; over time
* Alumni and Business Evaluations maximize; survey appropriate base once every three years;
improve over time
* Alumni and Public Evaluation through Private Giving maximize; endowment value > peers;
* External Student and Business Demand for Instructional Units attain and maintain capacity;
headcount, program numbers, revenues generated over time; development of lifelong learning
opportunities; increasing number over time
(Planned actions to achieve our distinctive
capabilities by optimizing our measurements)
SDevelop and Maintain a Faculty "Friendly" and Supportive
Environment tools: staff, technology, library, software, support money
SSizelDiversity Synergy Possibilities develop and promote
STeaching/Instructional Units teaching load policy; instructional design and
delivery support; optimal assignment packages
* Salary, Cash Flow Policy merit based; overload opportunities; eminent
scholars; chairs and fellows; summer support
* Growth Cycle hiring strategy; defined path and facilitating job assignments
* Research Environment much of the above plus visitors with research
credentials; seminars with research focus; visitation with research opportunities
* Staff Development education program; skills acquisition; retention
* Compensation rational policy attuned to retaining productive staff; overload
and bonus options
SManage Organizational Structure to Maintain the Agility to Contribute
to Evolving Mission engage a "friendly" productive environment; provide
rewards and recognition
* Physical Plant 5 year plan; square footage utilization; maintenance funding;
interesting additions or renovations
* Technology continuous review and improvement; support commensurate
with technology available; utilization and facilitation thereof
* Periodic Review of Production Process Including Mission Statement
* Resource Expansion
* Rewards Linked to Research Output chairs, eminent scholars,
distinguished professors, UFRF professors, faculty, fellows, salary adjustments to
include PEP and STEP
* Doctoral Program improve, enhance, to provide research energy and
support to the production of research output
* Research Center focal point of a research domain; intersection of the
customer and producer that leads to more research support
* Production Process Organized to Stimulate Research Output teaching
load; research grants; modular and other curricula processes; technical and
SProvide awards and recognition for excellence in teaching
SInstructional Design personnel for course improvement and development
SActive faculty programmatic committees to provide oversight and promote
development and innovations
SExternal reviewers periodically review programs
*Promote intersection with general education and skills courses
SAttain and maintain leadership in the use of electronic platform delivery of
SUse course development grants to support and encourage
Active management of the quality and quantity of the student population
Provide convincing evidence of value-added potential
Attract significant reservoir of scholarship funds
Proactive affirmative action plan to enhance the diversity of the student
* Promote the engagement of extracurricular activity as a vehicle for leadership
development and maturation
* Provide opportunities for international experience and the engagement of a
* Provide opportunities for the student to personally interact with faculty-
undergraduate research and honors papers
SThrough speakers series and seminars, provide the student with a systematic
way to interact with business and government leaders
* Provide student with knowledge base and skill set that is valued by the market
* Develop aggressive, proactive information program to align perceptions and
reality when there is a negative difference; alumni outreach
* Development and best use of advisory boards; build linkages that can enhance
input quality, placement possibilities and all forms of support
* Find packaging possibilities for the College's output that are feasible and
* Develop further and articulate the College's life-long learning opportunities
* Provide access to formative input in regard to the output and productive
process of the College
* Provide appealing opportunities for this constituent base to contribute
resources to the College's activities
Research output is recognized as among the leaders in both
quantity and quality. The research function has national
renown for its density and contribution attributes and the
research skills of the faculty are valued by the various stake-
1. Peer Schools
a.) BSQ Survey Results Peer Schools, 2005-06
b.) University Survey Results, 2003-04
a.) Affinity Group Survey, 2006-07
b.) University Survey, 2006-07
4. University Waiver Survey, 2007
5. College Financial Information, 1994-1995 to 2005-06
6. Suggested Reputation and Outcome Metrics with Recent Results
7. Metrics for 2007-08 Budget Request Cycle
Warrington College of Business Administration
University of Florida
1. Ohio State University
2. Purdue University
3. University of California Berkeley
4. University of Illinois
5. University of Indiana
6. University of Michigan Ann Arbor
7. University of Minnesota Twin Cities
8. University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
9. University of Texas Austin
10. University of Wisconsin Madison
1. Michigan State University
2. Pennsylvania State University
3. University of Arizona
4. University of Iowa
5. University of Washington
The ten programs listed have characteristics similar to our programs. All the programs
are American Association of Universities and Research 1 Universities, i.e., they offer
undergraduate, masters, and PhD programs. The Universities listed have the same
research and institutional missions as the University of Florida.
Note: There are other high quality programs with which we compete for faculty and
students. Those schools are not included because they may be private and or they may
not have missions as comprehensive as ours, i.e., they may not have an undergraduate
AACSB Custom Key Data Report, data from 05-06 BSQ
Operating Full Time U/G Grad Total BA/BS MBA Mast PhD Total Budget Degree
School Budget Rank Endow t Rank Faculty Rank Students Rank Students Rank Students Rank Deg Rank Degre Ran k Degree Rank Degre Rank Degree Rank Degre Rank Faculty Rank
Florida, Univ of 45,427,120 8 84,915,733 6 104 7 5,069 2 1,440 5 6,509 1 1,295 2 331 7 402 1 16 5 2,044 2 22,225 15 20 1
Arizona, Univof 42,233,636 12 43,918,595 13 109 6 4,564 5 590 13 5,154 6 925 9 95 13 133 5 22 2 1,175 9 35,944 7 11 8
CA, Berkeley, Univ of 47,434,788 7 133,470,269 3 116 5 733 13 1,453 3 2,186 12 397 13 479 5 59 11 12 8 947 12 50,090 5 8 10
CALA, Univ of 62,552,612 3 69,306,471 7 87 13 1,443 4 1,443 15 577 2 13 7 590 15 106,021 1 7 11
Illinois, Univ of 44,046,900 10 61,065,738 10 90 12 2,981 8 701 11 3,682 10 1,101 6 188 11 374 2 7 10 1,670 4 26,375 13 19 2
IndianaUniv 73,584,168 1 65,064,689 9 136 2 3,671 7 743 10 4,414 7 1,195 4 256 9 99 9 17 4 1,567 6 46,959 6 12 7
Maryland, Univ of 44,406,958 9 41,252,866 14 116 5 2,882 9 1,387 6 4,269 8 974 8 508 4 15 6 1,497 7 29,664 10 13 6
Michigan State 31,880,775 14 69,224,275 8 92 10 4,799 3 767 9 5,566 5 1,031 7 94 14 144 4 13 7 1,282 8 24,868 14 14 5
Minn, Univ of 65,115,000 2 156,303,555 2 129 3 1,751 11 2,390 1 4,141 9 432 12 524 3 115 8 17 4 1,088 10 59,848 2 8 10
NC Chapel Hill, Univ of 47,500,000 6 102,900 15 90 12 639 14 984 7 1,623 14 326 14 406 6 117 7 18 3 867 13 54,787 3 10 9
Ohio State 48,970,094 5 114,111,106 4 93 9 4,690 4 884 8 5,574 4 1,272 3 281 8 126 6 8 9 1,687 3 29,028 11 18 3
Penn State 44,015,690 11 54,444,924 12 121 4 5,386 1 297 15 5,683 3 1,581 1 19 15 32 12 8 9 1,640 5 26,839 12 14 5
PurdueUniv 31,542,843 15 58,671,482 11 94 8 2,563 10 666 12 3,229 11 684 10 220 10 74 10 27 1 1,005 11 31,386 8 11 8
Texas, Univof 61,500,092 4 179,971,081 1 140 1 4,273 6 1,707 2 5,980 2 1,117 5 624 1 296 3 13 7 2,050 1 30,000 9 15 4
Wisconsin, Univ of 36,732,800 13 104,794,500 5 91 11 1,312 12 447 14 1,759 13 525 11 168 12 15 6 708 14 51,882 4 8 10
Averages 48,462,898 82,441,212 107 3,237 1,060 4,081 918 318 164 15 1,270 41,728 12
i_ 1994-95 1999-00 2003-04
Ranked faculty ranked faculty ranked faculty
College SCH # of Dergees Budget(I/R) person year SCH # of Dergees Budget(l/R) person year SCH# of Dergees Budget(/R) person year
Ag&LifeSci 54,403 602 10,993,532 556.62 84,089 1,046 18,988,143 549.74 100,385 966 24,655,829 506.45
Business 91,892/ 1,157: 15,515,877 91.78 149,264, 2,088 20,011,879 79.20 148,385 2,636 22,327,106 75.08
Dentistry _77 11,125,612 104.831 965 87 14,613,503 116.53 1,022 86 15,468,782 125.03
Des. Cons & Plann 33,572 339 6,594,337 66.64 38,695' 3581 8,099,794 63.68 38355 372 8,482,092 61.89
Education 52,783 675 8,293,295 83.96 61,317 724 10,830,373 80.93 58,307 678 12,936,706 83.57
Engineering 98,585 1,139 29,871,759 235.52 115,198 1,228 43,225,367 243.02 124,926 1,750 54,818,532 253.88
Fine Arts 47,3561 169 6,849,045 65.19 48,277 238 9,526,628 65.64 45,640 323 11,579,231 64.50
Health&Hum.Perf. 52,587 421 3,984,673 31.17 68,796 593 6,240,304 41.53 69,626 582 7,339,372 44.85
Journalism 31,4671 680 4,951,835 40.63 37,753 717 7,061,747 43.33 41,541 913 7,477,039 46.39
Latin Am. Studies 814 16 740,395 6.08 628 12 1,032,791 5.64 857 10 1,227,737 4.75
Law 35,250 450 11,699,860 49.82 36,503 461 13,780,106 44.71 37,422 512 16,144,331 51.26
LAS 458,046 2,242 57,537,284 465.29 449,840 2,651 73,566,344 487.00 496,476 3,090 88,495,940 522.75
Nursing 15,722 221 4,429,740 55.51 15,679 256 5,851,113 53.14 15,558 231 6,655,030 58.20
Pharmacy 13,354 125 5,923,163 53.37 15,711 183 7,604,840 52.58 28,512 284 10,049,774 54.81
Pub.Hlth. & Hlth. P 10,3211 161 5,602,411 43.53 14,779 292 7,280,980 52.70 20,818 477 8,727,590 73.83
Vet. Medicine 814 89 10,713,333 91.91 1,331 88 16,876,621 97.14 1,354 113 22,436,569 101.04
PRODICTIVITY MEASURES 1994-95 1999-00 2003-04
S SCH/ranked Degrees/ranked SCH/ranked Degrees/ranked SCH/ranked ranked
faculty faculty $/SCH $/degree faculty faculty $/SCH $/degree faculty faculty $/SCH $/degree
Ag.&Life Sci 97.74 1.08 202.08 18,261.68 152.96 1.90 225.81 18,153.10 198.21 1.91 245.61 25,523.63
Business 1001.22 12.61 168.85 13,410.44 1884.65 26.36 134.07 9,584.23 1976.36 35.11 150.47 8,470.07
Dentistry 0.73 144,488.47 8.28 0.75 15,143.53 167,971.30 8.17 0.69 15,135.79 179,869.56
Des. Cons & Planning 503.78 5.09 196.42 19,452.32 607.65 5.62 209.32 22,625.12 619.73 6.01 221.15 22,801.32
Education 628.67 8.04 157.12 12,286.36 757.65 8.95 176.63 14,959.08 697.70 8.11 22187 19,080.69
Engineering 418.58 4.84 303.01 26,226.30 474.03 5.05 375.23 35,199.81 492.07| 6.89 438.81 31,324.88
Fine Arts 726.43 2.59 144.63 40,526.89 735.48 3.63 197.33 40,027.85 707.60! 5.01 253.71 35,849.01
Health&Hum.Perf. 1687.10 13.51 75.77 9,464.78 1656.54 14.28 90.71 10,523.28 1552.42 12.98 105.41 12,610.60
Journalism 774.48! 16.74 157.37 7,282.11 871.29 16.55 187.05 9,849.02 895.47 19.68 179.99 8,189.53
Latin Am. Studies 133.88! 2.63 909.58 46,274.69 111.35 2.13 1,644.57 86,065.92 180.42 2.11 1,432.60 122,773.70
Law 707.55! 9.03 331.91 25,999.691 816.44 10.31 377.51j 29,891.771 730.04, 9.99 431.41 31,531.90
LAS 984.43 4.82 125.61! 25.663.37 923.70 5.44 163.54 27,750.411 949.74 5.91 178.25 28,639.46
Nursing 283.23 3.98 281.75; 20,044.07 295.05! 4.82| 373.181 22,855.91 267.32 3.97' 427.76' 28,809.65
Pub Hith. & Hlth. Prof 237.10i 2.34 443.55] 47,385.30 298.80! 3.481 484.051 41,556.501 520.20F 5.181 352.481 35,386.53
Vet. Medicine 8.86 3.70 542.82i 34,797.58 280.44 5541 492.661 24,934.86! 281.971 646 419.23 18,296.83
V Medic i n i e. 88370 54827
Su 8,19305 91.72 4040.46 491,564.07 9,874.30 114.811 20,275.18' 561,948.17J 10,077.42 130.00 20,194.54 609,15737
Sum-(dent+Latin Am) 8,059.17 88.36 3,130.891 300,800.911 9,754.671 111.93 3,487.081 307.910.951 9,888.83 127.211 3,626.14 306,514.11
Average 619.94 6.807 240.84 23,138.53 i 750.361 8.61! 268.24 23,685.461 760.681 9.79 278.93 23,578.01
Affinity Group Square Footage Survey
Net Sq. ft/
Affinity Group Schools Gross Net Degrees dereeComments
Arizona 204,689 110,166 1,175 93.76
California (UCLA) 279,980 149,510 590 253.41
Florida 204,551 100,530 2,044 49.18
Illinois 356,000 196,400 1,670 117.60 With new building (to open in Fall 2008)
Indiana 410,000 230,000 1,567 146.78
Iowa 231,100 139,800 1,107 126.29
Maryland 290,000 1,497 Net not included
Michigan State 113,535 1,282 88.56
Minnesota 169,693 1,088 155.97 1. Gross not included; 2.Includes building under construction
Ohio State 390,030 183,519 1,687 108.78
Penn State 210,000 130,000 1,640 79.39
Purdue 266,476 153,476 1,005 152.71
Texas 383,514 219,739 2,050 107.18
1. Net not included; 2. 5,000 is aasignable off campus space;
Washington 215,000 1166 3. Expanded Space in 2010-2012 making it 310,000 GSF
1 .Fluno Center not included in Gross; 2.Net includes some
Wisconsin343,016 264,774 708 378.21 space under construction
Square Credit Sq. Ft per 2005 Sq. Ft per 2004-05 Sq Ft per
Feet Hours SCH Enrollment Enrollment Degrees Degrees
Agricultural & Life Sciences 852,821 109,030 7.821893 4,487 190.06485 1,062 803.03296
Business Administartion 94,489 149,794 0.630793 6,419 14.720206 2,521 37.480762
Design, Construction & Planning 89,671 38,587 2.323866 1,668 53.759592 373 240.40483
Education 85,773 58,873 1.456916 1,898 45.191254 689 124.48911
Engineering 591,917 112,825 5.246328 6,635 89.211304 1,534 385.86506
Fine Arts 204,880 46,068 4.447339 1,230 166.56911 258 794.10853
Health & Human Performance 86,769 75,516 1.149015 2,028.33 42.778542 603.33 143.81682
Journalism & Communications 69,210 36,812 1.880093 2,973 23.279516 810 85.444444
Liberal Arts & Sciences 644,739 511,123 1.261417 14,495.50 44.478562 3,239 199.05496
Public Health & Health Professions 76,877 24,362 3.155611 1,604.83 47.903516 428.33 179.48077
Total 2,797,146 1,162,990 43438.66 11517.66
Average 2.405133 64.393008 242.85714
2007 Waiver Authority
AII Operating Expenses $ 13,996,724.43
College Amount Percent of Total
Design Construction / Plan.
Liberal Arts / Sciences
Journalism / Communication
Health / Human Performance
Public Health / Health Professionals
Agricultural / Natural Resources
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
FY 1994/1995- 2005-06
CBA facul) alanes
FSOA faculty salaries
Summer Teaching Budget
Frin son Salary(26%)
CBA operating expenses
CBA Other Expenses
Salanesi & 0erloads
Summer Research Grants
CBA other expense"
FD END MARKET VALUES
*Rules for residency requireme
**Rules for residency requireme
(*Totals (All totals
estimated) estimated]_ ;
1994-95 I 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 T 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
73,i202 7J35,831 7,094,582 8,196 159 8,819,264 9,748,707 10674,478 12,302,357 13,119 267 12,990,52 1,546, 13,913,183
568,187 592,893 6428 558,905 129,148 302,866 85881 141,790 0 53,644 170,425 0
1,466,194 1,704,898 1,655,986 564078 1781,185 1,848209 1,794,209 1,979,858 1 970 783 1,988,661 2,159,423 1,890,546
1,322,714 1,331,618 1,384,418 ,1,442,710 1g811,650 2.111,757 2,395,995 2,511,859 2,521,629 2,540,648 2,935,279 i 2,607,4960
400,092 44.5,596 484,636 498,111 f 511,958 733,913 743,098 752,263 709040 766,428 788,802 817,199
2,784,649 2,914,817 2,924,493 3,239,590 3,393,833 3,833,818 4,080,352 4,598,913 4,683,502 4,754428 4,437,264 4,999390
13,894,928 14125653 14,172,543 15,69955 16,447,039 18,579,270 9,774,013 22,287,040 23,024,221 23,094,335 23,037,424 24,227,814
1,332296 1,488668 1,831,564 1,873,307 i 2,091,882 2,659203 2,354,598 2,281,228 1,854,569 2,167,05 2476, 37'T 397,239
288,652 254,339 306,967 300,028 8 268,900 278,966 387,269 215,265 291,109 204,305 182,703 137,434
i 380,712 434,622 588,873 728,833 868,920 868,920 898,873 827,517 262,660 ** 356,705
....-~ )- -;-_
15,515,876 15,868,660 16,691,786 18,307,510 19,396,694 22246,272 23,384,800 24,306,556 26,068,772 26,293,212 ; 25,959,162 26,119,192
101 93 84 85 87 87 87 91 94 __92 93 90
7 6 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 6 9 9
693,184 640,0p 731,074 628,743 647,882 1,017,448 1,226,412 1,360,599 1,360,567 1, 254249 I ,1,138,384
622,171 625,000 1,096,572 1,507,058 1,511723 2,450,056 2,861,629 2979323 2,155,817 2,526,583 2,602380 2,680451
1,315,355 1,265,000 1,827,646 2,135,801 2,159,605 3,467,504 4 8,041 339922 3,516,384 3780832 39425 4,018,835
2.48,.37 345,J468 454,57 6110,567 812 000 93 86 1,254,85 ,I 86,460 2,059,05i 2,67),409 .,107,551 4J080 591
1 400,000 525,000 575,000 850,000 917,842 1,075,000 1,125,000 1,125,000
S 222,957 329,267 577,608 99 1, 97 1,550,787 1,578,919 1,230,391 1,769,783' 2,974,273 4,667,464j 3,972,165
471,333 674,735 1,032,175 1,591,257 2,635,097 3,009,573 3,408,204 3,566,851 4,746,678 6,728,68 8850,015 9,177,756
1,204,846 982,464 1,189,410 1,251,177 1,234,417 772,635 956,234 1,200,219 1,43346 1,105,236 1,138,393 1,179,375
1,1390,932 1,520,526 1 I 092,411 1 311,63 1,544,203 2,173.768 2.372,832 2,791,321 3,976,842 4,811,980 4,956,339 5,105,029
2.i95.778 2.502.990 2 281.821 2 562.807 778.60 2.946.403 3,329.066 3991 540 5.120.188 5,917 216 6.094,712 6.284,404
19,898,41 20,311,85 21 33428 24,7,37 26,970,016 31,669752 34,210,111 36,204,869 39,452,022 ; 42,719,942 44,798,165 45,600,187
S 25,71011 29,079,654 46,205,098 55,000,000 72,372,198 84,204,955 91,024,615 93,376,487 73,004,526 74,518,905 84,915,733 85,764,890
nts changed Fall 04 for students supported on state funded assistantships and fellowships.
Reputation and Outcome Metrics
1. National Rankings for Programs
A. Undergraduate Programs US News and World Report (2007, Publics)
Quantitative Analysis #7
Real Estate #8
B. Undergraduate Programs Business Week (2007, Publics
C. MBA Programs US News and World Report (2007, Publics)
D. MBA Programs Financial Times (2006, Publics)
PhD Program #12
E. MBA Program Wall Street Journal (2006, Regional Publics)
F. MBA Program The Economist (2006, US Publics)
G. MBA Programs The Princeton Review (2006, Overall Academic
2. National Rankings for Faculty Research
A. Management Department, (2006 Study, Texas A&M, AAU Universities)
Research Productivity #1
B. Real Estate Research, (2006, Real Estate Economist, All Faculty)
David Ling #7
C. Marketing Department (2005, Duke University, All Faculty, World)
D. MBA Faculty, (2006, Financial Times, Publics)
E. MBA Programs, (2006, The Economist, US Publics)
Faculty Quality #4
F. Business Law, (2006, Academy of Legal Studies in Business)
Best Research Paper Larry DiMatteo
3. Efficiency /Effectiveness Measures
UF (03-04) #1
UF (03-04) #1
Peer Schools (05-06) #1
C. State Budget/SCH
UF (03-04) #14 [2nd lowest]
4. PhD Placement See Narrative page 4-3
5. Professional/Academic Test Scores- See Narrative page 2-1
6. Recognition and Awards
A. Research, (2006, SSRN)
Top Ten Papers Referenced Download Cheng and Bandyopadhyay
B. Service/Research, (2006, National Retailing Federation)
Outstanding Educator Award Bart Weitz (MKG)
C. Research, (2006, Thompson ISI)
List of Most Highly Cited Researchers Jay Ritter (FIN)
D. Research (2006, Real Estate Economics)
Most Influential Group
Bergstrom Real Estate Research Center #8
7. Student Recognitions
1. Personal Finance Competition (USC) -#1
2. Business Leadership Conference (Emory) #2
3. Marketing Summit (Wake Forest) #2
4. Emerging Leaders (UT, Austin) #2
5. Johnson & Johnson (Rutgers) #3
6. Two Truman Scholars
1. Sustainable Opportunity (Thunderbird, MBA) Finalist
2. Outstanding Dissertation (AAA, 2006) Mark Chechinis (ATG)
3. Fellowship recipient (KPMG, 2006) Carlos Jiminez (ATG)