PROCESS MANUAL

2023

EFMD accreditation
for international
business schools

e f m dg l obal.org COMMUNITY l EXCELLENCE l IMPACT l PURPOSE

 LIST OF ACRONYMS

AB Accreditation Board
CEF Criteria Evaluation Form
DS Datasheet
EC EQUIS Committee
EE Executive Education
EMBA Executive MBA
EOCCS EFMD Online Course Certification System
EQUAL European Quality Link
EQUIS EFMD Quality Improvement System
ERS Ethics, Responsibility and Sustainability
FTE Full-time Equivalent
ILO Intended Learning Outcome
KAM Key Account Manager
MBA Master of Business Administration
OB Online Briefing
ODR Online Document Repository
OX Online Data Collection System
PM Process Manual
PRR Peer Review Report
PRT Peer Review Team
PRV Peer Review Visit
QP Quality Profile
QS Quality Services
R&D Research and Development
S&C Standards & Criteria
SAR Self-Assessment Report

Document Version 2023

 Document Version 2023

CONTENTS

Page

Section 1: INTRODUCTION TO EQUIS ...................................................... 6

Section 2: MANAGEMENT OF EQUIS ....................................................... 8

1. The EFMD Board ..................................................... 8
2. The EQUIS Office at EFMD ..................................... 8
3. The EQUIS Committee (EC) .................................... 9
4. The EQUIS Accreditation Board (AB) ...................... 9
5. Peer Review Teams (PRTs) ..................................... 9
6. EQUIS Advisors ....................................................... 9
7. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest Policy ......... 10

Section 3: THE EQUIS ACCREDITATION PROCESS ............................. 12

Stage 0: Enquiry ................................................................... 13
Stage 1: Formal Application for Entry into the EQUIS
Process. ................................................................. 14
Stage 2: Online Briefing (OB) ............................................... 14
Stage 3: Pre-Eligibility with Advisory Service (optional) ....... 15
Stage 4: Application for EQUIS Eligibility ............................. 16
Stage 5: Eligibility ................................................................. 16
Stage 6: Self-Assessment .................................................... 19
Stage 7: Peer Review Visit (PRV) ........................................ 21
Stage 8: Accreditation ........................................................... 22
Stage 9: Continuous Improvement following Accreditation .. 25
Stage 10: Re-Accreditation ..................................................... 26

Section 4: ONLINE BRIEFING GUIDELINES ............................................ 31

1. The Objectives of the Online Briefing ..................... 31
2. Presentation and explanation of the EQUIS
system… ................................................................ 32
3. Specifying the School’s Advisory Needs ................ 32
4. Organisation of the Online Briefing ........................ 33

Section 5: GUIDANCE FOR SELF-ASSESSMENT ................................... 35

1. The Purpose of Self-Assessment ........................... 35
2. The Self-Assessment Process ............................... 36
3. The Self-Assessment Report ................................. 39

The EQUIS Process Manual 2

 Document Version 2023

Section 6: GUIDANCE FOR PEER REVIEW ............................................ 42

1. Introduction ............................................................. 42
2. Preparation for the Visit .......................................... 44
3. Setting up the Schedule ......................................... 47
4. The Peer Review Visit ............................................ 48
5. Focus of individual meetings during the Visit ......... 49
6. Assessment and Feedback during the Visit ........... 53
7. The EQUIS Peer Review Report (PRR) ................. 58
8. Roles and Responsibilities ..................................... 60

The EQUIS Process Manual 3

 Document Version 2023

Important Notes
1. Privacy
By participating in the EQUIS process, all individuals involved respect the
confidentiality of the information available to them and agree to declare any
potential conflict of interest in accordance with the “Policy on Potential Conflicts of
Interest for EFMD Peer Reviewers and Advisors” (see Annex 18). The only
information in the public domain is the list of EQUIS accredited schools along with
the period of accreditation.

All members of the EQUIS decision-making bodies, Peer Reviewers and Advisors
are required to sign a Confidentiality Agreement (see Annex 17) and confirm that
there is no conflict of interest with the School concerned. The School should inform
the EQUIS Office when it is aware of any conflict of interest for any of the proposed
Advisors or Peer Review Team members.

EQUIS ensures the confidentiality of data provided to EFMD and processed in the
framework of the EQUIS accreditation system. In comparative benchmarking tools,
Schools’ data is only reported in aggregate, such that no individual schools’ data
is identifiable.

Learn more about EFMD privacy policy at https://efmdglobal.org/privacy-policy/.

2. Standards and Criteria Revisions

The EQUIS documents are revised periodically, and it is the responsibility of the
School to always use the latest version of the document. Older versions of the
EQUIS document set are only an acceptable reference with the prior approval from
the EQUIS Office. EQUIS documents are updated annually at the beginning of
each calendar year.

3. Peer Reviews
Between May 2020 and December 2022, all Peer Reviews for EQUIS have taken
place online. Schools and Peer Review Teams, together with the EQUIS Office,
have developed protocols and practices such that there is a strong emulation of
the in-person efficacy of the Peer Review Visit.

Peer to peer review is at its core a social process and the EQUIS team at EFMD
recognises the value of in-person meetings.
Scheduling Peer Reviews requires significant lead times to secure the participation
of the senior reviewers required by the EQUIS standard, and as the pandemic
severely and differentially affected travel regulations and parameters worldwide, it
was decided that for clarity, security and safety, all Peer Review Visits remained
online in 2022.
At the time of writing, Peer Reviews are being scheduled as face-to-face events
again in 2023. If, however, new variants and outbreaks of the Corona virus affect
nations’ and schools’ laws and restrictions are re-imposed, any face to face
meetings can be re-cast as online within a short notice period.

4. The Online Document Repository (ODR)

Taking best practice from the online Peer Review Visits, there is now a requirement
for all supplementary data and information to be included in an ‘Online Document
Repository’. Previously, such information would have been lodged in the Base
Room, where the Peer Review Teams meet to discuss their work privately.
Although a Base Room is still required for the team when visiting the School, the

The EQUIS Process Manual 4

 Document Version 2023

extra data should be provided electronically and made available to the Peer Review
Team members two weeks before the date of the start of the visit.

5. The standard introductory package of EQUIS documents is available for

download on the EFMD website and consists of
1. EQUIS Standards & Criteria
2. EQUIS Process Manual
3. EQUIS Process Manual Annexes

The EQUIS Process Manual 5

 Document Version 2023

Section 1: INTRODUCTION TO EQUIS

EQUIS – the EFMD Quality Improvement System

EQUIS is an international system of strategic review, quality improvement and

accreditation for the assessment of schools1 in widely different national
contexts. Although originally inspired by the special needs imposed by cultural
diversity in Europe, the EQUIS standards for international management
education apply to schools in any cultural environment in any region.

Originally launched in 1997 by EFMD in close collaboration with national

accrediting bodies in management education and the European Quality Link,
the EQUIS scheme continues to evolve as a uniquely international framework
designed to embrace diversity and to offer schools a powerful tool for their
cross-border development of excellence.

Giving diversity a framework

As a truly international quality assessment scheme EQUIS combines the need

for commonly agreed standards with the need to respect the diversity of
national systems. It considers the educational and cultural environment in which
the School operates and relates it to the wider international context. These
EQUIS principles necessitate a more judgemental approach, effectively ruling
out classical, single-context compliance schemes. Most important, EQUIS
places no emphasis placed on any particular model for business schools.
EQUIS accredited schools currently range from private business schools
focusing on postgraduate and executive education to public university faculties
of business and management with a broad portfolio of undergraduate and
postgraduate programmes. An MBA programme is not a pre-condition for entry
into the scheme.

Providing a flexible development tool

EQUIS is much more than an accreditation scheme. It was conceived, as its

name indicates, as a quality improvement system, providing the unique
combination of accreditation as a recognition of high international quality and a
full strategic review regarding a school’s future development. The scheme is
designed to approach quality as an ongoing process in which schools
benchmark each other’s performance and open their doors to evaluation by
peers and professional stakeholders.

The EQUIS assessment framework is organised into ten key interrelated areas
as shown in the figure below. Each of these areas is the subject of a separate
chapter in the document entitled EQUIS Standards and Criteria.

1
Defined as the organisational entity providing business and management education (a Faculty, School
or Department within a university or a free-standing business school). See Introduction to the EQUIS
Standards and Criteria document (paragraph 3) for a full definition.

Section 2: Management of EQUIS 6

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Figure 1: EQUIS Standards and Criteria

The principal features of the EQUIS process can be summarised as follows:

Ø EQUIS evaluates the performance of the School taken as a whole, including

all its programmes.
Ø EQUIS offers an international and intercultural approach to quality
assessment.
Ø EQUIS recognises the importance of Ethics, Responsibility and
Sustainability.
Ø EQUIS places a great emphasis on relevance to the world of practice, both
in the standards themselves and in the assessment processes.
Ø Special attention is paid to Executive Education with a separate chapter
devoted to this area (if the School states that it conducts such activities).
Ø EQUIS stresses the personal development of students with particular
emphasis on the acquisition of entrepreneurial and managerial skills.
Ø EQUIS uses quantitative and qualitative assessments of business school
outcomes.
Ø EQUIS is conceived as a learning process involving international peers from
both academia and the world of practice for defining the relevant quality
criteria.
Ø EQUIS is dynamic and forward-looking with a concern for encouraging and
evaluating innovative approaches to management education.

Section 2: Management of EQUIS 7

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Section 2: MANAGEMENT OF EQUIS

EQUIS is operated by the Quality Services Department of EFMD with the

strategic support of the EQUIS Committee. Final decisions on the granting of
EQUIS accreditation are made by a separate EQUIS Accreditation Board based
on the recommendations of the Peer Review Teams. Members of both the
EQUIS Committee and the EQUIS Accreditation Board are appointed by the
Board of EFMD.

Figure 2: The Management of EQUIS

1. The EFMD Board

The EFMD Board approves EQUIS policies, standards and procedures based
on the proposals submitted by the EQUIS Office after consultation with the
EQUIS Committee.

The EFMD Board appoints the members of the Accreditation Board and the
Committee (see the EFMD website for current membership). It publishes
annually a call for nominations.

The Board is also responsible for handling appeals through an established

Appeals Procedure (see Annex 20).

2. The EQUIS Office at EFMD

The EQUIS Office is part of EFMD Quality Services. Charged with developing
and implementing appropriate quality assurance procedures, the EQUIS Office
manages the EQUIS process and provides the administrative services for the
system.

Section 2: Management of EQUIS 8

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

3. The EQUIS Committee (EC)

The EQUIS Committee, composed of academics and representatives from the

world of practice, advises the EQUIS Director on the strategic development of
EQUIS. All major decisions concerning policies, standards and procedures are
submitted to the EQUIS Committee for consultation.

The EC approves the Eligibility of Schools. Any questions concerning

continuing Eligibility are to be resolved by the EC.

The EC meets at least three times a year at the request of the EQUIS Director,
who chairs the meetings. A detailed description of the Role and Functioning of
the EC and a current Members' list can be consulted on the EFMD website.

4. The EQUIS Accreditation Board (AB)

The EQUIS Accreditation Board is composed of representatives of high-profile

organisations that are stakeholders in the quality improvement of management
education. It evaluates the Peer Review Reports on schools that are seeking
EQUIS (re-)accreditation and, based on their recommendations, makes the
final decision to confer EQUIS accreditation upon those management
education institutions that have demonstrated excellence at an international
level.

The AB meets at least four times a year at the request of the EQUIS Office. A
detailed description of the Role and Functioning of the EQUIS AB and a current
Members' list can be consulted on the EFMD website.

5. Peer Review Teams (PRTs)

Each Peer Review Team is composed of four members (see Section 6 of this
document – paragraph 1.1) holding senior positions in the world of
management education or with substantial experience in this field.

The Peer Reviewers will assess the School based on information provided by
the School in a Self-Assessment Report and in the interviews during their visit
to the School. The PRT will provide their assessment in a Peer Review Report
including a recommendation for accreditation to the EQUIS Accreditation
Board.

Section 6 of this document describes the Peer Review process in greater detail.

6. EQUIS Advisors

Schools seeking initial EQUIS accreditation may receive guidance and support
from EQUIS Advisors. Business schools are often challenged when it comes to
evaluating their readiness to enter the accreditation process or to proceed to

Section 2: Management of EQUIS 9

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

the next process stage; they also may require assistance to interpret and meet
the demanding EQUIS Standards & Criteria. Consequently, they may
encounter difficulties during the accreditation process, which can be mitigated
with more explicit guidance. The Advisory Service is designed to respond to
these needs. Advisors provide support and advice so that Schools can manage
the accreditation process more effectively, produce accreditation documents
with greater clarity, and address development shortfalls in need of being
remedied prior to proceeding with the accreditation process.

The Advisory Service is an integral part of the regular accreditation process and
administered by the EQUIS Office. Advisors are drawn from a pool of experts
comprised of chairs and experienced members of Peer Review Teams as well
as former members of AB and EC. Advisors volunteer their time as a service to
the EQUIS community. A conflict of interest policy ensures that, beyond their
assigned tasks, Advisors play no role in the formal accreditation process.

In each stage, the Advisor’s role consists of:

Ø Scoping the advisory needs of the School in terms of understanding the

accreditation standards and the developmental requirements to manage the
stage of the process successfully.
Ø Providing input based on an on-going interaction with the School’s executive
and accreditation teams as well as its wider community (including on-site
visits).
Ø Submitting a report-based evaluation at the end of the accreditation process
stage.

EQUIS Advisors will support the School during the Pre-Eligibility and Pre-
Review processes, up to an equivalent of maximum four days and six days of
work respectively (normally spread over a period of 2 years in each stage; and
with a minimum duration of 1 year in the Pre-Eligibility stage). It is, however,
possible that the School or the Advisor may wish to change after completing a
stage, in which case the EQUIS Office will assign a different Advisor.

The Advisory Service is managed by the EQUIS Office. This includes the
matching of advisory needs and the Advisor’s experience, the interaction
between the applicant School and the Advisor, and the final reporting. Advisory
is optional – offered upon request by the School.

7. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest Policy

By participating in the EQUIS process, all individuals involved respect the

confidentiality of the information available to them and agree to declare any
potential conflict of interest in accordance with the “Policy on Potential Conflicts
of Interest for EFMD Peer Reviewers and Advisors” (see Annex 18). The only
information in the public domain is the list of EQUIS accredited schools along
with the period of accreditation.

Section 2: Management of EQUIS 10

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

All members of the EQUIS decision-making bodies, Peer Reviewers and

Advisors are required to sign a Confidentiality Agreement (see Annex 17) and
confirm that there is no conflict of interest with the School concerned. The
School should inform the EQUIS Office when it is aware of any conflict of
interest for any of the proposed Advisors or Peer Review Team members.

Section 2: Management of EQUIS 11

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Section 3: THE EQUIS ACCREDITATION PROCESS

The stages of the EQUIS accreditation process are indicated in the flowchart
below.

Figure 3: EQUIS Process Flow Chart

EQUIS is a continuous process combining strategic institutional

development, on-going quality improvement and accreditation. Initial
accreditation will typically require 2-3 years and in the most favourable
circumstances, may be achieved within 15 months of application. For re-
accreditations, this process is shorter.

Key timings for the EQUIS process are summarised in Figure 4 and are
explained in more detail in the following text.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 12

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Figure 4: EQUIS Key Timings

The EQUIS accreditation process is composed of several distinct stages:

Stage 0: Enquiry

This is the first direct contact between the School and the EQUIS Office and
precedes the formal application process.2 It is an informal stage in the process
which may take place at EFMD events and other conferences where EFMD
Quality Services Directors are present, or by videoconference or email. This
Enquiry stage has proven to be extremely important, and schools are
recommended to undertake it before submitting the official application forms.
School representatives should familiarise themselves with the EQUIS process
documents. It is helpful if the School has already attended one of the EQUIS
seminars and information sessions organised by EFMD.

After an initial conversation with a member of the EQUIS Office, which will
clarify any issues or questions about the EQUIS process, the School may be
recommended, if appropriate, to complete a Draft Datasheet, via the online
platform, OX. Login data for OX will be provided by the EQUIS Office upon
request.

The Datasheet is a short questionnaire that asks for sets out factual information
about the School’s programmes, activities and organisation. (see Annex 2 for
the structure of the Datasheet).

The EQUIS Office will analyse the Draft Datasheet for clarity, consistency, and
completeness; this may involve several rounds of feedback. Any comments and

2
The standard introductory package of EQUIS documents is available for download on the EFMD
website (https://efmdglobal.org/accreditations/business-schools/equis/equis-guides-documents/) and
consists of
1. EQUIS Standards & Criteria
2. EQUIS Process Manual
3. EQUIS Process Manual Annexes

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 13

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

views on the Datasheet offered at this stage are to help improve its content and
form.

Once the Datasheet is appropriately completed, the EQUIS Office will offer non-
binding preliminary advice to the management of the School as to the next
stages of the process.

Whatever views are offered by the EQUIS Office, it remains the prerogative of
the School to proceed at any time, if it so chooses.

Stage 1: Formal Application for Entry into the EQUIS Process

To enter the EQUIS process formally, the School must be a member of EFMD
and remain a member during any period of accreditation. The School may start
the formal EFMD membership and EQUIS application processes at the same
time. The EQUIS Committee will, however, only be able to decide upon
Eligibility (see stage 5) after the EFMD Membership Review Committee has
approved membership.

A School that wishes to enter the EQUIS accreditation process sends a formal
email to the EQUIS Office with an Application Form (see Annex 1) in attachment
and updates its Datasheet via the online platform, OX (see Annex 2 for the
structure of the Datasheet).

The Datasheet should be completed in a clear and concise manner and is

limited to 16 pages in length. No additional materials will be accepted. After the
online submission of the EQUIS Datasheet, the EQUIS Office may request
further clarification if this appears necessary.

In applying for Entry, the School is assumed to be familiar with the documents
included in the standard EQUIS introductory package: the EQUIS Standards
and Criteria, the EQUIS Process (as described in this Manual), the EQUIS
Process Manual Annexes and the EQUIS Fee Schedule.
(See https://efmdglobal.org/accreditations/business-schools/equis/equis-
guides-documents/).

Stage 2: Online Briefing (OB)

Upon receipt of the completed application to enter the scheme, the School will
go through a preliminary screening to determine whether there are major
obstacles to eventual accreditation and whether accreditation is probable within
a reasonable period.

This stage allows for a preliminary assessment of the quality of the School
against the EQUIS criteria and is also designed to make sure that schools enter
the EQUIS scheme with a full understanding of both the criteria and the
process.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 14

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

An OB will be organised by the EQUIS Office as soon as possible and usually

not later than three months after receipt of the formal Application for Entry into
the EQUIS process. The OB takes the form of a videoconference between an
EQUIS expert and the School, lasting 2.5-3 hours.

The objectives of this OB are as follows:

Ø To explain the EQUIS criteria and process in detail.

Ø To establish a preliminary assessment of the School’s standing as regards
the EQUIS criteria and to inform the School’s Management Team of
difficulties that may arise or shortcomings that could impact on future
eligibility or accreditation decisions.
Ø To determine whether the School wishes to benefit from pre-eligibility
Advisory Service.
Ø To prepare a Briefing Report summarising the findings of the EQUIS expert.

The Briefing Report serves as a guidance document for Schools and Advisors
in preparation of the Formal Application for EQUIS Eligibility.

For further details on the OB, please refer to Section 4 of this Manual (see also
Annex 4 for the Briefing Form).

An OB may sometimes be suggested by the EQUIS Office to re-applying

Schools (having failed to achieve accreditation previously) – see also Stage 8,
section non-accreditation of this Manual for guidance on re-applications after
non-accreditation.

The application for eligibility should take place within two years of the OB. If
not, an updated Datasheet and Progress Report should be submitted, outlining
the progress made with respect to comments identified in the Briefing Report
relating to the EQUIS eligibility criteria.

Stage 3: Pre-Eligibility with Advisory Service (optional)

After sharing the Briefing Report with the School, the EQUIS Office, upon
request from the School, assigns an Advisor who supports the School during
the stage leading up to the formal Application for Eligibility (Stage 4). Advisory
is an optional feature of EQUIS and will have a minimum duration of one year.
The decision to proceed with Pre-Eligibility Advisory will be made at the latest
at the time of the Online Briefing.

The focus at this stage is to address the developmental needs identified by the
Briefing Expert and to produce an updated Datasheet, which represents the
School comprehensively and with sufficient clarity.

For schools that were denied accreditation or that withdrew from the process,
it will be possible to work with an Advisor – appointed by EQUIS – if they wish
to do so. The previous Peer Review Report will serve as basis for the Advisor.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 15

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

The pre-eligibility period ends with the joint resolution of School and Advisor
that the remainder of the accreditation process can be completed within the
two-year Eligibility period. The School can still proceed with the Application for
EQUIS Eligibility without the explicit support of the Advisor.

Stage 4: Application for EQUIS Eligibility

The School applies for Eligibility by submitting a formal email to the EQUIS
Office indicating its plan for submission to the EQUIS Committee and a final
Datasheet, updated via the online platform, OX, at the latest one month in
advance of the targeted Committee meeting.

If the School has opted for the Advisory Service, the Advisor is asked to
independently submit an Eligibility Evaluation of the School (see Annex 5 for
the Eligibility Evaluation Form). This report follows the general structure of the
Briefing Report and concludes with a discussion of the School’s principal
strengths and risks from an EQUIS perspective. The report will be shared with
the School.

Stage 5: Eligibility

The EQUIS Committee is responsible for examining all applications and for
taking decisions on Eligibility based on the School’s Datasheet, the Briefing
Report or Progress Report, and the Advisor’s Eligibility Evaluation if the School
opted for Pre-Eligibility advisory support

The EQUIS Committee will declare a School Eligible if it is satisfied that the
School meets the criteria set out below:

The Eligibility Criteria

1. Institutional Scope
The School must demonstrate that its activities fall within the scope of
institutions covered by the scheme. It must therefore produce evidence that
it:
a. is an EFMD member in good standing; it needs to maintain this status
while going through the accreditation process as well as during the
entire period of accreditation.
b. is or is part of a degree awarding institution; institutions with the sole
focus on non-degree education cannot be declared eligible, even if
they are attached to a higher education institution.
c. has a mission which is appropriate for a higher education institution.
d. has a primary (and main) focus on management or business
administration; all activities with this focus are considered core
activities. To a limited extent, a School can engage in non-core
activities, which need to complement and support its core activities;
other non-core activities are not subject to EQUIS accreditation.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 16

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

e. has reasonable autonomy in formulating and implementing its

strategy, in the management of its academic staff and budget, and in
the design and delivery of its programmes.
f. has clear boundaries which make it possible to distinguish it from
other units within the wider institutional structure; boundaries refer to
management and academic control as well as external recognition
by stakeholders and the market at large.
g. has academic staff covering the principal management disciplines.

h. has been in operation for at least 10 years, which can involve the
transition from a previous structure to the current one.

i. can demonstrate sufficient institutional stability in cases where major

structural changes have occurred.

2. Excellent National Standing

The School is recognised as an institution having excellent standing in its
home market. The School should produce evidence that it enjoys significant
recognition for excellence in at least two clearly defined areas of activity.

3. International Reputation
The School is recognised outside its own country.

4. Breadth of Activities
The School has reasonable breadth in its programme portfolio as
demonstrated by presence in at least two of the principal segments
(Bachelor, Master, MBA, PhD, Executive Education). The School must also
demonstrate substantial engagement in knowledge generation and
dissemination.

5. Core Faculty
The School has a core faculty of at least 25 FTE qualified academics. In all
cases, the School must demonstrate that the size of its core faculty is
sufficient to support its portfolio of activities and the number of students
enrolled in its programmes, and the faculty must constitute a viable
academic community.

6. EQUIS Standards and Criteria

The School has a reasonable prospect of satisfying the EQUIS criteria within
two years of being declared eligible. The perceived ability to meet the
EQUIS Standards & Criteria is the key factor for the Committee in making
the decision for eligibility.

In this process, the onus is upon the School to present a convincing case that
it does demonstrably satisfy the above Eligibility Criteria.

The Eligibility Decision

The EQUIS Committee normally meets three times a year, approximately every
4 months, to make Eligibility decisions. A School can expect to be presented to

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 17

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

the Committee for Eligibility at the next available date if its Datasheet, Briefing
Report or Progress Report and, in case it worked with an Advisor, the Advisor’s
Eligibility Evaluation is completed and approved by the EQUIS Office not less
than one month in advance of this date.

The EQUIS Office will present the School to the EQUIS Committee for the
decision on Eligibility. The Committee will take the Advisor’s Eligibility
Evaluation into account, if one exists, or alternatively the Briefing Report or
Progress Report but will not be bound by it in making its final decision.

In the case of a positive eligibility decision, the Committee will also select a
specific programme (referred to subsequently as the ‘Selected Programme’) to
be assessed in greater depth during the Peer Review Visit. Finally, the
Committee may determine whether Executive Education should be excluded
from the accreditation. If excluded by the EQUIS Committee, the School should
indicate this in its Self-Assessment Report under Chapter 6 and should still
summarise the current state and, if relevant, plans for the future of Executive
Education activities. The Peer Review Team, during the Peer Review Visit, may
decide based on the description whether to assess or exclude it from the
assessment.

The decision to declare a School “Eligible” will be accompanied by a preliminary

assessment of its situation with respect to the EQUIS standards. This
assessment will reflect the views of the members of the EQUIS Committee,
informed by the report of the EQUIS briefing expert or of the EQUIS Advisor, if
applicable, with respect to areas of concern or difficulties that may be
encountered along the road to the future accreditation (subsequently referred
to as Reservations).

A favourable Eligibility decision is not to be interpreted as a formal prediction of

future success at the end of the accreditation process.

The decision to declare a School “Not Eligible” will be founded on the EQUIS
Committee’s judgement that the School has not made a convincing case that it
satisfies the Eligibility criteria.

The outcome of the Eligibility decision will be reported to the School in an

Eligibility letter within one week of the EQUIS Committee meeting.

A School can present an Appeal against the decision on Eligibility. For details,
see Annex 20.

After the Eligibility Decision

Being declared Eligible signifies that the School can advance to Stage 6 of the
EQUIS process: Self-Assessment.

Important: EQUIS requires that the Eligibility criteria be maintained throughout

the accreditation process and thereafter during the period of accreditation
awarded. If the criteria are no longer met, the School is obliged to inform without

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 18

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

delay the EQUIS Office that will then review the case and, if necessary, consult
the EQUIS Committee.

A School that is declared Eligible is expected to communicate its plans with

respect to the rest of the EQUIS process within two months. This is done in the
form of an email from the Dean to the EQUIS Office, which indicates the period
in which the School is aiming to host the Peer Review Visit and informs if the
School intends to work with an Advisor. Eligibility is normally valid for a
maximum period of two years, within which the Peer Review Visit must take
place and expires once a School is presented to the EQUIS Accreditation Board
for the Accreditation decision. Under exceptional circumstances, the EQUIS
Committee may extend this period to four years.

If the EQUIS Committee has communicated Reservations, then the School

should make tangible progress in the respective areas before receiving the
Peer Review Team.

If a school has been declared Not Eligible, then it can choose to restart Stage
3 immediately or Stage 4 later, however, it cannot reapply for Eligibility within 2
years after the Committee decision.

Schools, re-entering the EQUIS process at stage 3 or 4 between 2 and 5 years

failing to achieve eligibility or after eligibility has expired, should provide a
Progress Report, in addition to the Datasheet. This should show how the School
has overcome the weaknesses outlined in the EQUIS Committee letter and
indicate the progress made in those areas. If more than 5 years have elapsed,
a re-application will be treated as an initial application.

Schools re-applying for eligibility should submit a formal email to the EQUIS
Office indicating its plan for submission to the EQUIS Committee at the latest
one month in advance of the targeted EC meeting. The formal email should
include in attachment an Application Form and the above-mentioned progress
report. An updated Datasheet should be submitted via the online platform, OX.

Stage 6: Self-Assessment

As soon as a school is declared Eligible, it should initiate an extensive self-

evaluation leading to a Self-Assessment Report (SAR). The report should cover
the ten chapters of the EQUIS Standards and Criteria document in
accordance with the Guidance for Self-Assessment in Section 5 of this Process
Manual.

Upon request, schools seeking initial accreditation are assigned an Advisor,

normally the person who has assisted the School in the pre-eligibility stage. The
Advisor helps the School to address its Reservations (as included in the
Eligibility letter) and provides more general developmental support. The Advisor
further supports and advises the School in creating a coherent, self-critical, and
convincing narrative that sets out how the School meets the EQUIS Standards
and Criteria. This may involve commenting on the draft Self-Assessment

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 19

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Report, as well as providing advice on the process of preparing the Self-

Assessment and Peer Review.

In drafting the Self-Assessment Report, the School should refer constantly to

the EQUIS Standards and Criteria document, which explains in detail what
should be covered for each of the ten areas in the EQUIS framework. The
document also lists the supporting information and materials that should be
included in the SAR or made available to the Peer Review Team in the Online
Document Repository (see also Annexes 8 and 9).

The SAR must be reflective rather than promotional, with critical analysis and
assessment of evidence. The objective of the Self-Assessment process and
SAR is to assist the EQUIS accreditation process, not simply to accumulate a
mass of data.

The self-evaluation process is designed to help the School gain a clearer

understanding of its strategic position by assessing its strengths and
weaknesses, by measuring the principal constraints and opportunities
determined by its environment, and by looking realistically at the coherence
between its ambitions and its resources. The process is also designed to lead
the School to judge the overall effectiveness of its own processes. It should
contribute to the development of the School and provide considerable added
value.

With these objectives in mind, there will constantly be a balance between facts
and their interpretation. On the one hand, all factual and descriptive information
should be interpreted and eventually assessed. On the other hand, all claims,
judgements, and statements should be backed up by the facts necessary to
corroborate them. This process is expected to take a minimum of six to twelve
months. In addition, the School may request guidance from the EQUIS Office
in preparing its Self-Assessment Report.

The SAR must be between 100 and 150 pages in length. The SAR, together
with the Annexes and the Student Report should be sent by email to the EQUIS
Office (each in a separate file in PDF format). Annexes to the SAR should be
limited to materials strictly necessary for a proper understanding of the Report
and should not exceed the length of the SAR. The updated Datasheet should
be submitted as before via OX. SAR, Annexes, Student Report and Datasheet
should also be sent to each of the four Peer Reviewers in electronic copy (PDF);
and in hard copy upon request.

The Self-Assessment Report should be submitted first to the EQUIS Office not
less than eight weeks before the date set for the Peer Review; and upon
approval on completeness, to the Peer Reviewers not less than six weeks
before the start of the Peer Review.

If the School opted for Advisory in the Self-Assessment stage, the EQUIS Office
will independently receive the Advisor’s Assessment Evaluation, at least two
months in advance of the Peer Review Visit, which will be shared with the Peer
Review Team and the School. The Advisor’s report should evaluate the
developmental progress during the eligibility period as well as the principal

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 20

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

strengths and weaknesses of the School from an EQUIS perspective, see

Annex 6 for the Advisor’s Assessment Evaluation Form.

It is important to note that, should a SAR be considered inadequate as a

preparation for the Peer Review or if it is delivered too late, the visit may be
postponed. In this situation, any additional costs incurred, for example the
rescheduling of Peer Reviewer flights, will be at the expense of the School.

Unless otherwise explicitly notified, by entering the process, the School

authorises EFMD to use the submitted documents for research purposes and
aggregate reporting. Anonymity and confidentiality are assured in such cases.

Stage 7: Peer Review Visit (PRV)

A team of Peer Reviewers will visit the School to assess its standing as regards
the EQUIS standards and to draw up recommendations for future progress.

As soon as the School is clear about the time it will need to prepare the Self-
Assessment Report, it should ask the EQUIS Office to schedule the Peer
Review Visit. The date of the visit should be determined at least 9 months in
advance, ideally maximum two months after the EQUIS Committee decision or
for re-accreditations at the time of re-applying. In case of Advisory, the School
should consult the Advisor with respect to the time required to produce the Self-
Assessment Report. In estimating the date for the visit, the School must
consider that the SAR should reach the EQUIS Office at least eight weeks
before the date on which the PRV will start. Upon approval for completeness
by the EQUIS Office, the School can then submit the SAR to the Reviewers as
well, not less than six weeks before the start of the PRV. The School must also
make sure that all its internal approval procedures and requirements are met
before proposing a date. The visit should take place at a time when courses
from the major programmes are taking place within the School. Rescheduling
is only permitted for unforeseeable and major causes, and it will produce a
considerable delay in the accreditation process. The School will have to cover
all expenses incurred by the reviewers (e.g., flight tickets) up to the time of
cancellation/postponement of the visit. In addition, the School will be charged
an EFMD Administration Fee, see Annex 3 for the Fee Schedule.

Two months prior to the Peer Review Visit, the School will send the EQUIS
Office a proposal for the schedule of the visit prepared in accordance with the
model provided in Annex 7, ‘EQUIS Peer Review Visit Schedule – Templates’,
and the Guidance for Peer Review in Section 6 of this Process Manual. This
schedule will be reviewed by the EQUIS Office, in collaboration with the Chair,
and changes to it may be proposed to the School. Schools should not send the
draft schedule directly to the Chair or the members of the Peer Review Team.
The EQUIS Office will send the schedule to the PRT once it has been finalised.

In addition, the EQUIS Office will send to the Peer Reviewers a copy of relevant
EQUIS documents for the visit as well as the Advisor’s Assessment Evaluation,
if one exists.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 21

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

The visit lasts two and a half days during which the EQUIS Peer Reviewers
meet a wide variety of people representing the different activities and interests
of the School. In cases where a School has activities or grants degrees in
different locations, either alone or in collaboration with partner institutions, see
Annexes 15 and 16 for further details. A visit to another School campus may be
added upon the request of the EQUIS Committee or the discretion of the EQUIS
Office.

At the end of the PRV, the Chair presents to the Executive Team of the School
the PRT’s preliminary conclusions and recommendations for quality
improvement during an oral feedback session. It is not appropriate at this point
to divulge the recommendation that the PRT intends to make to the
Accreditation Board. Nor is it appropriate to engage in a discussion of the oral
assessment. The Chair then drafts the Peer Review Report and sends it to the
other reviewers for suggestions and amendments. This normally takes between
two and six weeks.

The Peer Review Report (PRR) sets out the PRT’s final assessment of the
School against the EQUIS quality criteria together with its recommendation to
the EQUIS Accreditation Board regarding accreditation. It should reflect the
consensus opinion of the PRT. The recommendation will be for 5-year
accreditation, 3-year accreditation, or denial of accreditation.

The draft report with the recommendation will be sent to the School for
comment and confirmation of factual accuracy not later than 8 weeks after the
PRV. All factual errors will be corrected by the Chair of the PRT in liaison with
the EQUIS Office. The Chair may, at their discretion, consider the School’s
comments concerning the judgements expressed in the PRR. Issues that
substantially change the assessment of the PRT should be agreed with the
whole team. The final version of the PRR, together with the recommendation,
will be returned to the School. Before the PRR is submitted to the Accreditation
Board (AB), the School must give its formal authorisation to the EQUIS Office.

The final Peer Review Report is normally presented to the next EQUIS
Accreditation Board meeting that takes place at least 10 weeks after the PRV.

When the recommendation of the PRT as regards the application to EQUIS is

for non-accreditation, the School has the option to withdraw its application for
accreditation, in which case no formal decision will be taken by the
Accreditation Board. This option implies that the School discards an appeal
against the AB decision, since no such decision will be made at the School’s
explicit request.

The Peer Review process is described in detail in Section 6 of this Process

Manual, entitled “Guidance for Peer Review”.

Stage 8: Accreditation

With the formal agreement of the School, the PRR is submitted to the
Accreditation Board for the final decision on accreditation. The outcome will be

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 22

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

5-year Accreditation, 3-year Accreditation or Non-Accreditation. The formal

decision will be communicated orally (or through a brief e-mail) to the School
within 48 hours of the meeting of the Accreditation Board. This communication
will be followed up with a formal letter, normally within one week.

A School can present an Appeal against the decision on accreditation. For

details, see Annex 20.

5-year Accreditation

Schools that, in the Accreditation Board’s judgement, meet all the EQUIS
quality standards will be awarded EQUIS accreditation for a period of five years.
This means that these schools are good in all areas and probably excellent in
some of them. However, there is always scope for improvement and evidence
of continuing progress will be expected at the next review.

3-year Accreditation

Schools satisfying all the EQUIS Standards except in one or two of the quality
dimensions that are only partially satisfied are awarded EQUIS accreditation
for a period of three years.

There are two possible situations: a) To maintain accreditation, these schools

must demonstrate tri-annual progress both overall and in the Areas of Required
Improvement set out by the Accreditation Board. B) Schools that satisfy all the
Standards except for one that cannot be expected to be fully satisfied due to
environmental circumstances. In these cases, the School must demonstrate
awareness of this and show significant commitment to strengthen this
dimension in the 3-year period. Until the circumstances change, continuing 3-
year accreditation is possible.

Both the degree to which quality is below the EQUIS standard and the number
of EQUIS criteria affected determine whether the School will achieve 3-year
Accreditation.

The letter communicating the Accreditation Board decision to the School will
normally indicate three Areas of Required Improvement that must be satisfied
during the three-year period if EQUIS accreditation is to be maintained.

Non-Accreditation

Schools that, in the Accreditation Board’s judgement, are below the EQUIS
standards of quality in a set of EQUIS criteria will be denied accreditation. Both
the degree to which quality is below the EQUIS standard and the number of
EQUIS criteria affected will be grounds for the Accreditation Board to reject a
School’s accreditation.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 23

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Sometimes the AB may not follow the recommendation of the Peer Review
Team. This happens for several reasons including the following:

• There is inconsistency within the report between the conclusions set out
in the main body of the text and the EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet (see
Annex 11) or the recommendation regarding accreditation.
• The interpretation of the EQUIS standards by the Peer Review Team
does not fully match that of the Accreditation Board.

A School that has been denied accreditation (or has withdrawn before
presentation to the EQUIS AB) loses its eligibility status. The School can
choose to restart Stage 3 immediately or Stage 4 later. However, it cannot
reapply for Eligibility within 2 years after the Accreditation Board decision (or
date of withdrawal). The School should inform the EQUIS Office by email within
six months maximum of its choice to restart at Stage 3.

Schools re-entering the EQUIS process at stage 3 or 4 between 2 and 5 years

after failing to achieve accreditation or after withdrawal following a negative
Peer Review recommendation, are asked to provide a Progress Report, in
addition to the Datasheet. The report should convincingly demonstrate that the
School has overcome the weaknesses outlined in the AB letter and should
further explain the progress it has made in implementing the recommendations
in the Peer Review Report. Schools having withdrawn from the process should
indicate progress in the areas that led to a negative recommendation by the
Peer Review Team.

Schools re-applying for eligibility after a negative accreditation decision or

withdrawal should submit a formal email to the EQUIS Office indicating its plan
for submission to the EQUIS Committee at the latest one month in advance of
the targeted EC meeting. The formal email should include in attachment an
Application Form and the above-mentioned progress report. An updated
Datasheet should be submitted via the online platform, OX.

Specific policies applying after accreditation

A School that is awarded EQUIS accreditation must abide by the EQUIS

Communication Policy (see Annex 19).

It is important to note that accredited schools must inform the EQUIS Office of
any major changes that take place within the School during the accreditation
period, for example major restructuring or merger activities, see Annex 21 for
the detailed EQUIS Policy on Institutional Change and Restructuring. The
School must also report any changes that might lead to a loss of eligibility (e.g.,
the core faculty number falling below the required minimum). The EQUIS Office
will consult the EQUIS Accreditation Board for advice on whether it would be
appropriate to change the date of the School’s re-accreditation.

Note that the names of all Schools accredited by EQUIS will be published on
the EFMD website and in other documentation along with the period of

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 24

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

accreditation, due to the EU Directive on Freedom of Information. EFMD will

not be held liable for any damage caused by such publication.

Stage 9: Continuous Improvement following Accreditation

The process of institutional development and quality improvement does not end
with the achievement of accreditation. All schools within the EQUIS system will
be required to actively pursue a development plan, agreed with the EQUIS
Office in the case of 5-year accreditation or determined by the Accreditation
Board in the case of 3-year accreditation. The resulting Progress Reports as
well as the Feedback provided by the EQUIS Office are considered important
documents in the re-accreditation process of the School.

Quality improvement is an essential element of the EQUIS process. The

Accreditation Board may deny re-accreditation if the School has provided
insufficient evidence of addressing the Areas of Required Improvement and
inadequate tangible progress has been achieved.

For Schools Accredited for a 5-year period

In the month following the award of 5-year EQUIS Accreditation, the School
should select at least three Development Objectives to be pursued during this
period. The purpose is to ensure that even schools granted 5-year Accreditation
continue to develop in the EQUIS spirit of institutional development and
continuous improvement.

The selection of these objectives should normally be based on the

recommendations provided by the Peer Review Team in its report. The School
may, however, select other objectives which are not based on these
recommendations if a convincing rationale is presented. The selected
objectives will be sent to the EQUIS Office for agreement, based on their
appropriateness and on the degree of challenge they present to the School.

Any school receiving 5-year Accreditation will be expected to submit a 10-15-

page Mid-Term Progress Report to the EQUIS Office 30 months after
accreditation by the Accreditation Board (see Annex 13 for the Mid-Term
Progress Report Form). The report will describe clearly and succinctly the
progress made on the achievement of the objectives selected by the School
and approved by EQUIS.

The EQUIS Office will evaluate the Mid-Term Progress Report and the
feedback will be communicated to the School.

For Schools Accredited for a 3-year period

A School receiving 3-year Accreditation will be required to submit an 8-10-page

annual Progress Report to the EQUIS Office at the end of Year 1 and of Year
2 after being awarded the accreditation, i.e. 12 and 24 months from the date of

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 25

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

the EQUIS Accreditation Board decision. The report should describe clearly and
succinctly the progress made on the Areas of Required Improvement
established by the EQUIS AB (see Annex 14 for the Annual Progress Report
Form).

The EQUIS Office will evaluate the Progress Reports and the feedback will be
communicated to the School. A follow-up visit after Year 1 and Year 2 may very
exceptionally take place if deemed necessary after study of the Progress
Report.

When a School fails to provide the annual Progress Report on time or when
EQUIS considers that insufficient achievement is shown, EQUIS may make a
case for the Accreditation Board to withdraw the accreditation in the next
scheduled AB meeting. It should be noted that feedback on Progress Reports
is only for guidance and a complete assessment can only occur at the next
accreditation visit.

In both cases (i.e. 5-year and 3-year Accreditation) the Progress Reports and
feedback are included in the material given to the Peer Review Team when the
School undergoes the next re-accreditation process and form part of the
documentation upon which the assessment is based.

Stage 10: Re-Accreditation

EQUIS accreditation is granted for a limited period, either 5 years or 3 years.

Therefore, a School that wishes to maintain its accreditation must enter a
process of re-accreditation before expiry of the three- or five-year period.

The EQUIS Office will remind the School approximately 15 months in advance
of the expiry of its accreditation about the re-accreditation process.

A School is expected to submit its application for re-accreditation 12 months

before its accreditation expires. The expiry date is 3 or 5 years later from the
date on which the EQUIS accreditation was granted by the Accreditation Board.

Schools that have been EQUIS accredited for at least three consecutive periods
of 5 years can opt for Special Re-accreditation (see Annex 22).

The procedures described below apply to Schools renewing their accreditation

in the regular re-accreditation cycle.

The School sends an application email, which explicitly indicates any proposed
changes in institutional scope, with in attachment an EQUIS Application Form
(see Annex 1) to the EQUIS Office. In addition, an EQUIS Datasheet is
submitted via OX (see Annex 2 for the structure of the Datasheet). The
documents need to be submitted and received at the latest 12 months in
advance of the expiry date of the accreditation.

In its Datasheet, the School nominates three different programmes from its
portfolio such that there is a variety of programme types. The previously

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 26

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

selected programme should normally not be suggested. Schools that hold an

EFMD Programme Accreditation have a choice regarding the assessment of
the Selected Programme (see Annex 23).

The EQUIS Office will select a specific programme to be assessed in greater

depth (referred subsequently to as the Selected Programme) during the Peer
Review Visit among the three programmes suggested by the School. This
Programme should also be described in more detail in chapter two of the
EQUIS SAR. Further detailed, guidance on the content that is expected to be
provided in chapter two of the EQUIS SAR can be found in chapters two to five
of the EFMD Programme Accreditation Standards and Criteria.

The re-accreditation process is substantially the same as that for initial

accreditation following the eligibility decision. The School is expected to
conduct a complete self-evaluation and to produce a comprehensive Self-
Assessment Report covering the ten chapters of the EQUIS Standards and
Criteria document. The SAR should be accompanied by the Annexes and
Student Report (both in separate files), and an updated full Datasheet needs to
be submitted via OX. This will be followed by an onsite two and a half day Peer
Review Visit by a team of four reviewers. The Accreditation Board will make the
final decision on the renewal of accreditation based on the report and
recommendation of the PRT. Similar to initial accreditation, the decision may
be for five years, three years or non-accreditation.

There will, of course, be significant differences of focus in the re-accreditation

visit. It will remain important to establish how well the School continues to
satisfy the full range of EQUIS criteria, but particular emphasis will be placed
on changes that have occurred and progress that has been achieved during the
accreditation period.

The Self-Assessment Report

The Self-Assessment Report itself should be drafted in accordance with the

guidelines established in Section 5 “Guidance for Self-Assessment”. Following
the usual practice, the report is expected to be organised in such a way that
each of the 10 EQUIS areas is covered in a separate chapter. Each chapter
should begin with a section summarising the changes that have occurred since
the previous accreditation and explaining the principal challenges that the
School is now facing.

The SAR should be written with careful reference to the observations and
recommendations contained in the previous Peer Review Report. In the case
of schools granted accreditation for five years, it should also describe the
progress towards achieving the three strategic development objectives chosen
by the School. In the case of an assessment after a three-year accreditation,
the School will be expected to produce convincing evidence that it has made
real progress in the areas specified by the Accreditation Board. Reference
should be made to the Progress Reports that the School has submitted in the
years since the previous Peer Review as well as the feedback provided by the
EQUIS Office.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 27

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

If a school has Executive Education activities (even of negligible size) it should

always summarise the current state and, if relevant, plans for the future of
Executive Education activities in the SAR as indicated in Chapter 6 on
Executive Education of the EQUIS Standards and Criteria Document. The
School can make a case for Executive Education to be excluded at the
beginning of this chapter and should provide an explicit argument for exclusion
of these activities from the assessment. The Peer Review Team will decide
based on this description whether to assess or exclude it from the assessment.

It is important to bear in mind when compiling the SAR that the members of the
PRT will be different from those participating in the initial or earlier visit and they
will not have access to the previous SAR.

The Peer Review Visit

The organisation of the Peer Review Visit will be similar to that of an initial
accreditation in terms of logistical and procedural aspects. Therefore, the PRT
will be composed of three academics and one representative from the world of
practice and the visit itself will last two and a half working days. One of the three
academic members may be familiar with the local educational environment.
After being contacted by the EQUIS Office, the School will be given the option
to make use of this possibility. Schools going through a re-accreditation review
are not obliged to have one of the Peer Reviewers from the local environment.

The schedule of the visit will follow closely that of an initial accreditation.
However, since the focus of the Peer Review Visit will be adapted to the
objectives of re-accreditation as described above, it requires a different balance
in the organisation of the interviews.

For example, the Peer Review Team will usually spend more time with the
School’s Senior Management Team than in an initial accreditation. A single
meeting with a selection of administrative staff may replace the sessions
devoted to support services. In all cases, the visit will be organised in such a
way that priority is given to quality improvement and strategic development
issues.

In a visit following a three-year accreditation, the meetings will reflect the need
to thoroughly check progress in the Areas of Required Improvement specified
by the Accreditation Board. For schools previously granted 5-year
accreditation, the meetings will reflect a focus on reviewing the three
Development Objectives.

Policy on non-renewal of accreditation

This policy is specifically designed to mitigate the effects of negative re-

accreditation decisions by:

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 28

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

a) giving more time for the School to manage the situation rather than being
instantly removed from the list of accredited schools.
b) granting schools an opportunity to state their case again, if they believe
this will be to their benefit.

The following process will apply to the re-accreditation of schools previously

accredited:

1. When a School learns through the Peer Review Report of a

recommendation by the PRT for non-accreditation and the School then
decides to withdraw from the accreditation process, its name will be
removed from the list of accredited schools only 6 months after the date of
the AB meeting to which the report would have otherwise been submitted.
The School can choose to restart Stage 3 immediately or stage 4 later.
However, it cannot reapply for Eligibility within 2 years after the date of
withdrawal.

2. If the AB makes a negative decision, either based on a negative

recommendation or by not supporting a positive recommendation in the
PRR, the School will be automatically placed on Deferral, and it will not be
removed immediately from the list of accredited schools.

3. The Deferral School will be given the option to decide within a maximum of
2 months of the Accreditation Board decision date if it will accept the non-
accreditation or if it will aim for another full Peer Review Visit to take place
within 1 year of the AB decision date. This PRV will require the preparation
of a new Self-Assessment Report by the School and will involve a new PRT.
The date of the new PRV should be fixed as soon as the School decides in
this respect.

4. The offer of a new Peer Review Visit should not be interpreted as

recognition that the previous Peer Review Team, the Accreditation Board or
anyone else involved from EFMD did not perform as required. Should the
School think otherwise, it should appeal the decision rather than opting for
the new PRV. This new visit is just an additional opportunity granted to the
School that faces losing its EQUIS accreditation. The School then must
make sure that its new Self-Assessment Report and the information
provided to the new Peer Review Team persuasively convey the quality of
the School according to the established quality framework (the Selected
Programme remains the same). The School should therefore pay particular
attention to the recommendations made in the latest PRR and in the AB
letter of non-accreditation. Both will be part of the documentation provided
to the new PRT.

5. No Application Fee will be charged for the new review but the Review Fee
applicable in the year of the new review will be charged; subsequent
accreditation fees will follow that same fee schedule . The Accreditation Fee
for the deferral year (i.e. for extension of accreditation) will also be charged,

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 29

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

where the fee schedule of the cycle when the negative AB decision was
taken is applicable. If a School then cancels the PRV during the Deferral
period, a cancellation fee will be charged, and the School will be removed
from the accredited list, allowing the 6-months grace from the date of the
AB decision as indicated below.

6. If the School opts for a new review, it will remain on the list of accredited
schools until the AB decides on the second Peer Review Report. A negative
decision at that time will be final, i.e. it will not be allowed a further deferral
period or appeal, and the School will be removed from the list of accredited
schools.

7. If the School rejects the option of a new review and accepts the non-
accreditation decision, it will remain on the list of accredited schools for a
total of 6 months after the Accreditation Board decision date. The School
can choose to restart Stage 3 immediately or stage 4 later. However, it
cannot reapply for Eligibility within 2 years after the AB decision.

Section 3: The EQUIS Accreditation Process 30

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Section 4: ONLINE BRIEFING GUIDELINES

This section is aimed primarily at those undertaking an Online Briefing but will also be of interest to schools seeking accreditation.

The Online Briefing (OB) is an important part of the EQUIS application process,
scheduled shortly after receipt of the School’s application for entry into the
EQUIS accreditation process. In many cases, this will be the first structured
contact between the School and EQUIS. It is important, therefore, in
establishing confidence and in initiating a constructive relationship between the
School and EQUIS.

1. The Objectives of the Online Briefing

Ø To provide information and to answer questions about EQUIS.

Ø To make sure that the management of the School understands the EQUIS
criteria and procedures.

Ø To undertake a preliminary assessment as to whether the School satisfies

the Eligibility criteria (see Section 3, Stage 5 − The Eligibility Criteria, above).

Ø To conduct a pre-evaluation of the School to identify possible concerns or

major obstacles to future eligibility or accreditation. To achieve this, it may
be necessary to collect information about the School beyond that provided
by the Datasheet.

Ø To advise the School on its apparent standing as compared to the level of

quality expected for EQUIS accreditation, particularly in relation to
difficulties that may be encountered in certain areas.

Ø To perform a preliminary assessment of whether Executive Education

should be excluded from the accreditation.

Ø To discuss the programme portfolio so that the briefing expert may make an
informed recommendation on the Selected Programme.

Ø To help the School’s management to launch the EQUIS process internally

by briefing members of the School and answering questions.

Ø To guide the School’s management in setting up working parties to prepare

the EQUIS Self-Assessment Report and to brief the EQUIS project leader
within the School on how to manage the process effectively.

Ø To provide the basis for a short (maximum 3 pages) Briefing Report

describing the School’s advisory needs if any.

Section 4: Briefing Visit Guidelines 31

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

2. Presentation and explanation of the EQUIS system

The briefing EQUIS expert designated by the EQUIS Office should make sure
that the School has understood the overall EQUIS process and the respective
roles within the process of the EQUIS team, the EQUIS Committee, the
Accreditation Board, and the Peer Review Team. It is particularly important to
explain the founding principles of EQUIS and the criteria framework within
which the assessment is made. The EQUIS expert should explain in detail the
expectations regarding the Self-Assessment Report, and the organisation of
the Peer Review Visit.

The briefing should be seen not just as a technical presentation of the system,
but as an opportunity to motivate members of the School as they enter the
EQUIS process. An important objective is often to support the Dean and the
School’s Management Team in its effort to launch the process internally. From
this perspective, the briefing expert should be able to answer the probable
questions that will arise.

The EQUIS expert should underline that the process is designed to support
institutional development. Schools entering the process should, therefore,
establish clear links between their own internal strategic development
processes and the work done in the self-assessment stage.

The EQUIS office will provide a set of slides for the presentation of the
accreditation process. This material will also be sent to the School before the
EQUIS expert’s briefing, together with links to all the relevant documents.

3. Specifying the School’s Advisory Needs

A further objective of the OB is for the EQUIS expert to assess the School’s
potential advisory needs. The report should, therefore, indicate obvious
shortcomings, potential problems and major risks that may make accreditation
unlikely or uncertain.

Sufficient time must be allowed within the Online Briefing for the EQUIS expert
to cover all relevant issues and to ask for additional information beyond what is
stated in the Datasheet. It may often be necessary to suggest changes and
additions that will improve the Datasheet.

In the discussions that this part of the OB schedule will generate, the EQUIS
expert may often find that they are called upon to take on an advisory role.
While there are obvious limits to this at such an early stage, it should be seen
as the beginning of the development relationship that is at the heart of the
EQUIS process.

The Briefing Report is normally quite short, three pages at most. The template
form (in Annex 4) provides a framework for drafting the report.

Section 4: Briefing Visit Guidelines 32

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

4. Organisation of the Online Briefing (OB)

The Online Briefing lasts 2,5 to 3 hours. The EQUIS Office will contact the
School to organise the OB.

A typical OB schedule would be as follows:

1. Introductory session open to the main representatives and

stakeholders of the School (approx. 55 minutes)

The briefing expert sets out the objectives of the OB and begins with an
introduction to EFMD and Quality Services (10 minutes).

This is followed by a general presentation of the EQUIS process (35

minutes).

The remainder of the session is devoted to questions from the audience

(10 minutes).

Participation is limited to maximum 25 participants, which may include,

besides the School’s senior management, department heads, other
directors, faculty, or staff.

2. Break (10 minutes)

3. Review of the Datasheet and Pre-Evaluation (60 minutes)

This session will be held with the School’s Management Team. Each
person in the Management Team should have the latest version of the
EQUIS Datasheet at hand that will be reviewed during the session. It is
recommended that this group attends the introductory session too.

4. Break (10 minutes)

5. Process Briefing and Advice (30 minutes)

The briefing expert makes sure that the School has understood the EQUIS
process and answers all questions that arise, summarises strengths and
weaknesses in their eligibility, and advises on how to structure the
accreditation project.

Participants of sessions 3 and 5 should be limited to maximum 5 persons to

allow for productive exchanges and should typically include the School’s Dean
or Director, the EQUIS Project Leader within the School, as well as three
additional members of the School’s Executive. All participants should have their
own camera and headset.

The School is asked to provide a video platform for the OB, using the solution
of their choice, in agreement with the EQUIS Office.

Section 4: Briefing Visit Guidelines 33

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

If the first session is opened to members of the School, using a Waiting Room,
Breakout Rooms, or a different link for sessions 3 and 5 is suggested.

Recording of the sessions is not permitted – this feature should be disabled

when setting up the video link.

Each participant should connect individually from a computer with their own
camera, use a headset and mute the sound when not speaking.

Section 4: Briefing Visit Guidelines 34

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Section 5: GUIDANCE FOR SELF-ASSESSMENT

This section is aimed primarily at schools seeking accreditation but will also be of interest to EQUIS Peer Reviewers.

1. The Purpose of Self-Assessment

Self-Assessment is a key part of the EQUIS accreditation process, but it should

also have wider significance for the School and for the team within the School
that is responsible for EQUIS. It provides an opportunity for the School to gain
greater ownership of the process and to improve its own understanding of the
issues surrounding its development as a high-quality provider of management
education. Within an international context, the School should be seeking
answers to fundamental questions such as ‘Is the School adding value for
participants in line with its stated mission and strategy? Is it serving its different
constituencies well?’

The Self-Assessment process should form an integral part of the School’s

quality system to avoid redundancy of effort and to ensure maximum
contribution towards continuous improvement. An effective Self-Assessment
will link the School’s existing processes in the areas of strategic management,
quality management, and programme management with the processes leading
to EQUIS accreditation. A superficial assessment conducted in isolation from
normal processes will simply divert resources and hinder the ability of the Peer
Review Team to evaluate the School.

The main aims of the EQUIS Self-Assessment process are to:

1.1 Provide an opportunity for the entire institution to take stock of its
situation

This assessment should not be approached as a restricted exercise conducted

by a few key staff in the School. It should be owned by the whole organisation
and implemented as a major review, even if some aspects of the assessment
are challenging and may provoke resistance. It should:

• involve as many people as possible and certainly all the major actors
• provide added value to the School through the processes used
• present a historical perspective, i.e., how the School has developed and how
it sees its future
• be a learning process for the School and provide a chance for everyone to
gain an overall view of its situation
• not be reduced to the mere production of a Self-Assessment Report by an
isolated team.

1.2 Conduct a comprehensive strategic review

The Self-Assessment should provide a review of the strategy process within the
School. It should:

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 35

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

• evaluate the overall appropriateness, consistency, and credibility of the

strategic objectives
• lead to a better understanding of the market and of the environmental
constraints
• help the School achieve a balance between ambition and realism
• lead to the development of a strategic plan which will enable achievement of
the strategic objectives within the envelope of currently available and of
potential future resources.

1.3 Result in an unbiased and critical self-examination

The key objective of the Self-Assessment is to evaluate the School’s

effectiveness in attaining its strategic objectives and in striving towards
continuous improvement in programme, research, and process quality. The
Self-Assessment process should identify its current position against the EQUIS
criteria and establish the basis for future action. The School will need to:

• ask searching questions

• measure its activities against external norms
• identify key strengths and weaknesses
• evaluate the adequacy of resources and identify key limitations
• arrive at a clear understanding of the efforts to be deployed to achieve its
strategic objectives.

1.4 Provide a basis for the Peer Review

The Self-Assessment Report summarises the outcome of the Self-Assessment

process and as such forms the basis for the Peer Review. The needs of the
Peer Review Team must be considered carefully during the Self-Assessment
process and particularly during the writing of the final report. The School has a
responsibility to present information that will:

• establish a starting point and a balanced evaluation to be assessed by the

reviewers
• provide key data and supporting documentation to aid understanding and to
substantiate claims made in the report.

2. The Self-Assessment Process

The overall Self-Assessment process usually takes between six months and
one year. Actual time will depend on the size and complexity of the School and
its experience with accreditation. The School will send copies of the completed
Self-Assessment Report initially to the EQUIS Office at least 8 weeks before
the start of the Peer Review Visit. Upon confirmation by the EQUIS Office, the
School will send it to the members of the Peer Review Team at least 6 weeks
before the start of the Peer Review Visit.

The following actions are recommended in designing and implementing the

Self-Assessment process:

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 36

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

2.1 Responsibilities

EFMD recommends that as soon as possible the School should appoint an

Accreditation Project Leader and an Accreditation Committee to manage the
process and draft the report.

It is obvious that the Project Leader should be suitably qualified and resourced
to conduct the work. Representation on the Accreditation Committee is also a
key issue, and should include representatives from key stakeholder groups.

2.2 Communication

At an early stage, the School’s Senior Management Team will need to provide
a full explanation within the School of the aims of the Self-Assessment exercise,
of its role in the wider accreditation process and of the standards against which
the School is measuring itself in the first instance. The assessment process
should involve all key stakeholders, who will need to understand the process if
they are to contribute fully to the implementation of a rigorous Self-Assessment.
Effective communication with these parties should be maintained throughout the
process.

The Self-Assessment is an ideal opportunity for the School to obtain commitment

from key stakeholders to secure resources and improve quality. Considerable
care must therefore be taken to present the results of the Self-Assessment in a
balanced, realistic, and honest way. The conclusions should state clearly what
will need to be done to continue progress towards the achievement of the School’s
strategic goals. It must also provide the basis for an evaluation by the Peer Review
Team.

2.3 Methodology & Planning

The starting point of a successful Self-Assessment process is the early

development of a detailed plan. This will provide sufficient time to conduct a
quality Self-Assessment and deliver a Self-Assessment Report by the required
date.

The detailed project plan should contain details of the main stages of the
assessment, methods to be employed, key issues to be addressed,
responsibilities and participants, as well as time frames. The key stages of the
assessment process will need to be accompanied by the systematic collection
of data to support the process and address the criteria for EQUIS accreditation.

There is no pre-established format for the approach to be adopted when

conducting the Self-Assessment. Each School should develop a plan that
meets its own specific needs.

However, the following criteria should be applied to the design of the Self-
Assessment process:

• Systematic process- the Self-Assessment should be well-planned, thorough

and comprehensive. The assessment should be driven by a methodology

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 37

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

seeking to answer key questions, rather than simple application of a tick-box

approach.

• Objectivity and balance- the Self-Assessment should produce an objective

statement of current strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats
and a determination of the actions needed to address these issues. The
assessment team should not restrict itself to the EQUIS criteria for guidance
and it should use as many sources of information as possible.

• Participation- in collecting data and evaluating the results of the review, the
School should involve a variety of groups to agree key conclusions and
recommendations. This is not just a way of improving objectivity, but also a
way of incorporating different perspectives, improving communication and
commitment to the findings.

2.4 Reporting

Alongside the formulation of the detailed project plan, the School should also
determine the eventual format of the Self-Assessment Report, considering the
requirements of EQUIS in terms of the content to be covered.

More detailed information on the format, content and preparation of the Self-
Assessment Report is given in Part 3 of this section.

2.5 Data Collection

Having decided the methodology for the Self-Assessment and the general
format of the report, the School will need to determine the information and
documents to be collected.

The collection and analysis of information for the Self-Assessment require

considerable time and effort. It is useful to identify the key sources of
information at an early stage and allocate clear responsibilities for the
collection, organisation, dissemination, and analysis of information. The School
should seek to use as wide a variety of sources as possible to include internal
and external reports (e.g., assessment/accreditation/audit reports, programme
reviews, assessment results, exit surveys), special surveys, interviews and
focus groups.

2.6 Other Considerations

The School must ensure that the national context within which it operates is
clearly explained in the Self-Assessment Report so that the assessment by the
Peer Review Team can consider the constraints and specific quality
expectations of the local environment.

The EQUIS Office will always be available to provide advice.

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 38

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

3. The Self-Assessment Report

The Self-Assessment Report should be based on the EQUIS Standards and

Criteria document which sets out the full range of the EQUIS quality standards
and the criteria against which the quality of the School will be measured. The
standards and the associated criteria are grouped into ten chapters covering
the different areas that will be reviewed:

1. Context, Governance and Strategy

2. Programmes
3. Students
4. Faculty
5. Research and Development
6. Executive Education
7. Resources and Administration
8. Internationalisation
9. Ethics, Responsibility and Sustainability
10. Connections with Practice

The purpose of the EQUIS Standards and Criteria document is twofold: on

the one hand, to provide a comprehensive description of the standards and
criteria against which the School is to be reviewed and on the other hand to
give guidance to Schools in preparing their SAR as indicated in section 3.1.4
below.

The EQUIS Standards and Criteria document can be obtained from the EFMD
website or from the EQUIS Office.

The following comments are relevant in the preparation of the Self-Assessment

Report:

3.1 Main Report

The SAR should lead to a conclusion in which the School makes a case for
EQUIS accreditation. The report should be self-evaluative and self-critical and
should demonstrate how the School has addressed existing weaknesses and
how it will do so in the future. Delivering a promotional document should be
avoided at all costs, as this will force the Peer Review Team to focus on fact
finding rather than on providing qualified advice.

The overall report should be a unified piece of work, rather than a collection of
separate individual reports.

The report must be between 100 and 150 pages long, excluding annexes and
supporting documents (with a font size not smaller than Arial 10).

3.1.1 Cover page

The cover of the Self-Assessment Report should clearly state the full name of
the School, the date of submission to the EQUIS Office and the name of the
individual to contact in case of questions related to the report.

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 39

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

3.1.2 Statement of Accuracy

The first page of the SAR should contain a statement confirming the accuracy
of the report signed by the Head of School and by the most senior
representative of the parent Institution (where appropriate). Their titles must be
made explicit. The statement should also give brief details of the internal review
team and process used to produce the report.

3.1.3 Executive Summary

An Executive Summary of 2 to 5 pages should be included at the beginning of

the report.

3.1.4 Main Content

The Self-Assessment Report should represent an evidence-based narrative

covering the ten chapters of the EQUIS Standards and Criteria document.
The internal organisation of the ten chapters can be determined freely by each
School. There is no requirement to follow the order of the different sections or
the order of the items within the sections. Nor is it expected that the School
should answer every question. The School is expected to provide its own
conclusions from the Self-Assessment process about the dimension being
considered in each chapter, in the way it feels most appropriate. However, it is
expected that the key issues that are relevant for a comprehensive assessment
of the School’s activities be carefully addressed.

The items in the EQUIS Standards and Criteria document are formulated in
qualitative terms. However, the information provided by the School should,
where appropriate, allow an assessment of the quantitative positioning of the
School in relation to each criterion. Schools should pay particular attention to
the indicators or evidence they use to position themselves in relation to the
different EQUIS criteria. Guidance for this is given in each of the chapters in
the document.

3.2 Annexes and Supporting Documents

Annexes to the Self-Assessment Report should be limited to materials strictly

necessary for a proper understanding of the report and should not exceed the
length of the SAR. Detailed information concerning annexes and supporting
materials is provided at the end of each chapter in the EQUIS Standards and
Criteria document and is summarised in Annexes 8 and 9 to this Manual.

More comprehensive documents and less essential material are placed in the
Online Document Repository which should be accessible to the EQUIS Office
and Peer Reviewers at least 14 days before the start of the PRV and until the
EQUIS Accreditation Board has taken its decision. Annex 9 lists further
supporting information that EQUIS expects to be provided in this repository.

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 40

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

3.3 Student Report

The Self-Assessment Report should be accompanied by a report compiled by

a representative group of students. A template is provided (see Annex 10),
based on selected chapters of the EQUIS Standards and Criteria document,
and will be the focus of the discussion with them during the Peer Review Visit.

It must be stressed that the student group should compile the Student Report
independently without involvement of the School’s leadership or other external
guidance. The School should therefore not monitor the discussions leading up
to the writing of the report and should also not be involved in the assembly of
the report, other than initiating the process. If it is apparent that this independent
process has not been strictly followed, the submitted Student Report may be
returned to the School by the EQUIS Office for subsequent resubmission.
Comments on the quality and content of the Student Report will form a specific
section of the Peer Review Report to the EQUIS Accreditation Board.

3.4 Updated Datasheet

The submission should also include an updated version of the Datasheet

ensuring that the information is accurate at the time of the Peer Review Visit.

3.5 Distribution of the Self-Assessment Report

The SAR, the Annexes and the Student Report should initially be sent to the
EQUIS Office in electronic copy at least 8 weeks before the date of the Peer
Review Visit. The Datasheet must also be submitted, via OX, at this time. Upon
confirmation of completeness and adequacy by the EQUIS Office, the School
will send these documents to each of the Peer Reviewers in electronic (PDF)
format and in hard copy upon request (to be checked with each reviewer by the
School) at least 6 weeks before the start of the Peer Review Visit.

Section 5: Guidance for Self-Assessment 41

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Section 6: GUIDANCE FOR PEER REVIEW

This section is aimed primarily at EQUIS Peer Reviewers but will also be of interest to schools seeking accreditation.

1. Introduction

1.1 Composition of the Peer Review Team (PRT)

The Peer Review Team is composed of four members holding senior positions
in the world of management education or with substantial experience in this
field. They will normally have different nationalities or work in different countries.
Each Team includes:

• The Chair of the PRT: an academic (Dean or equivalent) from a different

country from the School being assessed
• An academic representative (Dean or equivalent) familiar with the local
educational environment, whose role is to explain the contextual
background of the School for the benefit of the PRT. Normally they
should speak the language of the country. The above requirement
applies to initial Peer Review Visits and is optional for Re-accreditation
Visits.
• Another academic representative (Dean or equivalent)
• A representative from the world of practice.

While the working language of EQUIS is English, every attempt will be made to
include a local language speaker within the PRT.

Particular attention is given to the selection of the “local” reviewer. The School
will be consulted on the choice before a person is invited to participate in the
review. Once an agreement is reached on potential candidates, the EQUIS
Office appoints the local reviewer. This requirement applies to initial Peer
Review Visits and is optional for Re-accreditation Visits.

The final composition of the PRT will be communicated to the School. At this
time, the School will have the opportunity to veto a member of the team for
reasons of conflict of interest, for example if they are or were recently working
with an institution that is a close competitor. The School should inform the
EQUIS Office immediately.

In the event of a reviewer being unable to attend at the last minute, the EQUIS
Office will endeavour to find an appropriate replacement. However, if this is not
possible, the School will be asked to approve a PRT with only 3 members.
There will never be a PRT with less than 3 members.

The roles and responsibilities of the various PRT members are set out in detail
at the end of this Guidance for Peer Review.

In accepting an invitation to participate in a Peer Review, each team member

commits to being present throughout the entire visit. Each member will also be
asked to declare any potential conflict of interest, according to the Conflict of
Interest Policy (see Annex 18).

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 42

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Each reviewer will have signed a confidentiality agreement with respect to the
information provided to them in the context of the reviews, also stating their
agreement to conform to the Conflict of Interest Policy (see Annex 17).

It should be noted that the Peer Reviewers volunteer their time and are unpaid
for their role in the Peer Review process but will claim reimbursement from the
reviewed institution for travel and accommodation costs related to the review.
The School should settle reimbursement claims within four weeks after receipt
from reviewers.

It is considered inappropriate for individual Peer Reviewers, once assigned to

a School’s visit, or for the School itself, to suggest or imply mutual areas of
collaboration before a final decision on accreditation or re-accreditation has
been reached by the Accreditation Board. Prudence suggests that such
collaborations should not take place until at least 1,5 years after the
accreditation.

1.2 Objectives of the Peer Review within the EQUIS process

The fundamental goal of the Peer Review Visit is to assess the quality of the
School’s activities against the EQUIS criteria and to make a recommendation
for consideration by the Accreditation Board with respect to the accreditation
decision. A secondary objective is to fulfil an advisory role leading to
suggestions for quality improvement and to offer the School the benefits of a
strategic review.

To achieve these objectives, the Peer Review will seek to confirm the claims
made within the Self-Assessment Report and to secure on-site information
sufficient to build up a comprehensive profile of the School.

The balance between the role of the Peer Review process in providing sufficient
information to the AB to arrive at a decision on accreditation and the wider,
strategic and quality improvement role of the PRV is delicate. In conducting
EQUIS Peer Reviews, it is important that all parties begin the process with a
clear idea of what the Peer Review is designed to achieve. The success of the
visit rests on several conditions being met by all those involved in the process,
for example:

• Thorough preparation by the School through the production of a SAR

and accompanying materials.
• Comprehensive ODR materials supporting the SAR
• Careful reading of the SAR by the Peer Reviewers.
• Clear relationships and expectations on the part of all involved.
• Open discussions free of excessive formalism between the Peer Review
Team and the key stakeholders within the School.
• Confidential treatment of facts and figures
• The presentation of confidential feedback and recommendations for
accreditation in a professional manner, combining the requirements of
the Accreditation Board with an approach that respects the needs of the
School as a client.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 43

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

2. Preparation for the Visit

2.1 Reading materials for the Peer Reviewers

The following documents will be emailed to each member of the Peer Review
Team by the EQUIS Office, except 4, 5, and 6, which will be sent by the School
directly (see section 5, paragraph 3.5):

General Documents:
1. Names and addresses of the members of the PRT
2. EQUIS Standards and Criteria
3. EQUIS Process Manual and Annexes

Documents Specific to the School under review:

4. Self-Assessment Report and Annexes

5. The Student Report
6. An updated Datasheet

In the case of initial accreditation visits:

7. Eligibility Letter, highlighting any reservations that the EQUIS Committee felt
appropriate to the application, the application Datasheet
8. The Advisor’s Eligibility Evaluation, in case the School opted for Advisory
during Pre-Eligibility
9. The Advisor’s Assessment Evaluation, in case the School opted for Advisory
during the Self-Assessment phase

In the case of re-accreditation visits:

10. The report of the PRT from the previous Peer Review Visit, as presented to
the Accreditation Board
11. The letter setting out the AB decision
12. The Progress Report(s) of the School from the previous accreditation
period, as well as the feedback of the EQUIS Office

2.2 Study of the Self-Assessment Report by the Peer Reviewers

The School will send electronic copies of the completed Self-Assessment

Report (including annexes, Student Report and Datasheet) initially to the
EQUIS Office at least 8 weeks before the start of the Peer Review Visit. Upon
confirmation of completeness and adequacy by the EQUIS Office, the School
will send it to the members of the PRT at least 6 weeks before the start of the
PRV in electronic (PDF) format and in hard copy upon request (to be checked
with each reviewer by the School).

Each PRT member will study the SAR carefully before attending the Briefing
Meeting called by the Chair prior to the Peer Review Visit. As an important
starting point for discussion during this preliminary meeting, each member
should attempt to answer the questions listed below:

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 44

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Ø Are all the areas covered by the EQUIS framework adequately addressed
in the report?
Ø What further information is required?
Ø Is the report sufficiently self-critical and analytical?
Ø Is the School’s local context clearly explained?
Ø Are the School’s mission and strategy clear?
Ø Are the strategic aims satisfactorily translated into practice?
Ø Are the mechanisms for the strategic management of the School clearly
visible from the report?
Ø Are the problems facing the School clearly formulated?
Ø Does the School clearly sketch out how it plans to deal with these problems?
Ø What preliminary assessment can be formulated against the main EQUIS
criteria?
Ø What are the key issues that will require careful analysis during the visit?

By answering these questions, each team member is not tied to a final

judgement but is simply forming a first impression based on the written
information supplied. The programme of the Peer Review Visit is put together
in such a way that there will be many opportunities to investigate further these
initial findings and consequently to confirm or refute them.

2.3 General Logistics

The School is expected to make all necessary arrangements for

accommodation and the local transport for the PRT members. The Project
Leader should therefore consult directly with the EQUIS Office to confirm the
travel arrangements for the members of the team.

The members of the PRT arrange their own travel according to the general
guideline that flights should be booked in economy class, but business class
tickets are allowed in the following circumstances:
1. in a trip involving at least one flight that lasts more than 5 hours, business
class can be chosen for this flight and all its connecting flights.
2. A trip involving several flights, all of them lasting less than 5 hours, if the
time between the scheduled departure of the first flight and the
scheduled arrival of the last flight to the final destination takes more than
8 consecutive hours including time spent in connecting airports.
Peer Reviewers are advised to book their flights at the earliest opportunity to
minimise the costs to the School. Peer Reviewers should ask approval from the
School before ticket purchase, copying the EQUIS Office, and should
endeavour to keep the costs as low as possible (a maximum of 6000€ is
envisaged but cannot be considered as the norm – nor can be two economy
tickets). Schools under review are expected to cover the travel insurance of
Peer Reviewers, where they are not covered by an insurance of their home
institution. It is recommended that reviewers always buy flights with travel
insurance. Travel expenses should be claimed from the School, copying
additionally the EQUIS Office. If Peer Reviewers combine a visit to the School
with other professional activities, then the reviewer should agree on a fair cost
splitting arrangement with the School.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 45

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Hotel accommodation should be of reasonable standard keeping in mind the

travel schedule of the PRT members and should be close to the School. Unless
exceptional circumstances exist (for example infrequent flights), schools should
expect to cover the costs of 4-nights hotel accommodation for Peer Reviewers
travelling for under 5 hours and 5 nights for those travelling for longer than 5
hours. In the latter case, Peer Reviewers are advised to arrive two nights before
the start of the Peer Review Visit to overcome jetlag effects, if necessary. All
extra expenses not related to the participation of the reviewers in the EQUIS
Peer Review Visit will not be covered by the School.

Lunches should be rapid, involving a minimum of disturbance. There is a

definite preference for on-site buffet lunches in the Base Room.

The schedule for the visit of two and a half days involving four team members
will be very tight, so maximum use of the time is essential. Formal presentations
and social events are to be avoided.

Table nameplates should be prepared for every participant in each meeting.

Should the School decide to cancel or postpone the Peer Review Visit, the
School will be liable for any non-refundable costs incurred by the Peer
Reviewers at that time. The School will also be charged a fee to cover the
administrative expenses for cancelling or re-scheduling the visit (see EQUIS
Fee Schedule).

In some cases, one or two members of the PRT will be asked to perform an
assessment of another campus of the School, to take place prior to the visit of
the main campus. If necessary, this will be arranged separately by the EQUIS
Office.

2.4 The Base Room

The School should make available a Base Room for the duration of the visit.
This is the PRT’s meeting room where they will hold their discussions before,
between and after the sessions. The room provided should:

Ø be spacious
Ø include a table for meetings
Ø possess a large table for laying out documents
Ø be equipped with a flip chart
Ø provide a telephone connection and, for each individual PRT member, a
computer with internet access
Ø be free from disturbance
Ø be near the room where meetings are held.

Conversations in the Base Room are confidential to the Peer Review Team.
For this reason, Schools should not send representatives into the Base Room
while the Peer Review Team is meeting there. Confidentiality must always be
respected.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 46

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

The Base Room, if sufficiently spacious, should only exceptionally serve as the
main meeting room of the Peer Review Team for conducting meetings. A
second meeting room should be made available for the interviews at parallel
timings (see the Peer Review Visit Schedule Template for guidance).

2.5 The Online Document Repository

All documents for the visit, e.g., faculty management handbook, course
documents, examples of students’ work, case studies, research output,
brochures etc. should be available electronically in the School’s Online
Document Repository. This Repository needs to be accessible to the PRT at
least 14 days before the start of the PRV and until the EQUIS AB has taken its
decision. Guidance on which documents to provide in the Repository can be
found at the end of each section in the EQUIS Standards and Criteria
document (see also Annex 9 to this Manual).

Schools are advised to structure the documents organised according to the ten
Chapters of the EQUIS Standards & Criteria document and therefore that of the
Self-Assessment Report.

3. Setting up the Schedule

3.1 General structure of the visit

The School being visited will be asked to submit to the EQUIS Office a proposed
schedule for the visit at least 2 months before the date of the visit. The
proposed schedule must clearly indicate the timing and subject of each meeting
as well as the names and titles of the participants so that the EQUIS Office can
evaluate the appropriateness of their inclusion. It is important that the Head of
School (Dean/CEO/President/Director) be present on the first morning of the
visit (09:00-10:30) – and in the case of a re-accreditation visit (10:45-11:45 as
well) and the last morning of the visit (12:00-12:45).

This schedule will be reviewed by the EQUIS Office, in collaboration with the
Chair and changes to it may be expected from the School. Schools should not
send the draft schedule directly to the Chair or the members of the Peer Review
Team. The EQUIS Office will send the schedule to the PRT once it has been
finalised. As a matter of general policy, Schools should not communicate with
the Review Team directly prior to the visit except when dealing with logistical
matters, e.g., pick-up arrangements at the airport, hotel information, dietary
requirements etc.

The following guidance notes should assist Schools when planning their PRV.

3.2 Detailed guidelines for drafting the visit schedule

The visit should be scheduled from 9:00 to no later than 18:30 on days 1 and
2, and from 9:00 to no later than 14:00 on Day 3. The PRT should be allowed
sufficient time alone throughout each day to debrief after a series of meetings
and to prepare for the forthcoming sessions.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 47

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

For some meetings, the main panel can be broken up into two sub-teams to
optimise coverage during the visit. Where this is possible, it is indicated in the
list below by an asterisk (*).

As a general principle, the PRT expects to see individuals only once unless
they have more than one functional role. The sessions should not include too
many participants to allow for meaningful discussions − a maximum number
of 10 participants per session. The School must respect the confidentiality of
the different meetings. Therefore, only the participants that are indicated in the
agreed visit schedule are allowed to be in the meeting. Serving coffee or
snacks, taking photos or video, should be done either before or after meetings.
Audio or video recording of the meetings and feedback session is strictly
forbidden.

The visit schedule should include sessions on the listed topics and the meetings
are normally scheduled in the order indicated in the template below (see also
annex 7).

Deviations from this template may be proposed by the School to consider its
specific circumstances or in cases of unusual scheduling difficulties. Deviations
should be explicitly justified when submitting the draft schedule and will only be
accepted in exceptional circumstances. In all cases, the School should propose
a draft schedule to be reviewed and agreed by the EQUIS Office. Schools
should not send the draft schedule to the members of the Peer Review Team.
The EQUIS Office will send them the final schedule once it has been agreed.

4. The Peer Review Visit

4.1 Conduct of Meetings

All meetings and discussions should be conducted in English without the use
of simultaneous translation. Participants to the meetings are expected to be
physically present as telephone or video conferences are normally not
acceptable.

Preparation for meetings

It is obvious that the total time available for the visit is extremely limited and that
the team should make effective use of its time. Team members need to be
conscious throughout of the role of a particular session in the total process for
the assessment, e.g.

Ø Team members need to prepare for meetings and must therefore allow
adequate preparation time.

Ø Having read the Self-Assessment Report, the Peer Review Team should
request additional written information, when necessary, in advance of the
meetings to facilitate their evaluation.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 48

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Ø Throughout the meetings, individual team members should be working

towards the overall assessment and need to crosscheck facts and complete
the EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form (see Annex 12). This form is intended
to make the work much easier when summarising their findings and drafting
the final report.

4.2 Periodic Debriefing Sessions

At the end of each major session, it is essential that the members of the PRT
allow themselves enough time to consolidate their findings and to complete all
relevant notes. Therefore, it is important to arrange a schedule that allocates
regular breaks throughout the visit. These meetings are also necessary to
check that the PRT is on track towards the complete coverage of all the EQUIS
standards and is working steadily towards its final assessment.

5. Focus of individual meetings during the Visit

5.1 Briefing meeting of the Peer Review Team

The work of the PRT will begin with an online meeting to get acquainted and to
discuss first impressions from the materials and the ODR. This online meeting
normally takes place at least one week before the review and will be initiated
by the Chair. Any additional needs for data and information will be collected
and communicated to the School. Then, the evening before the first day of the
visit, the PRT will meet again to make final arrangements for the visit. It is
essential that the team be alone for this meeting.

The purpose of these briefing meetings is to allow:

Ø briefing of the Peer Review Team by the Chair

Ø review of the Self-Assessment Report and identification of the key issues
Ø identification of any supplementary information to be requested
Ø agreement on the working methods and allocation of responsibilities within
the PRT, in particular, specific writing assignments for the Peer Review
Report to match interest and expertise; the Chair may also invite fellow team
members to lead the discussion for some meetings
Ø review of the visit schedule and preparation for the meetings, e.g., allocation
of team members in the case of parallel meetings.

The School will be required to book a suitable place for this meeting, for
example a quiet and isolated table in the hotel restaurant or, preferably, a
separate meeting room in the hotel, where they can have dinner and work
undisturbed. The team will have confidential discussions which the School may
not wish being overheard by outsiders.

The Chair should seek to establish the impressions of the other team members
to identify further information that should be supplied by the School and to
prepare the focus of the interviews.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 49

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

5.2 Initial meeting with the School’s Executive Committee

The visit should start with a meeting with the Executive Committee (i.e., Senior
Management Team) of the host School.

This is the opportunity for introductions, confirmation of the schedule and

arrangements for the visit. The PRT can put on the table before the key
representatives of the School their main concerns after reading the Self-
Assessment Report and any requirements for additional information.

This initial session is also an opportunity for the School to present its current
situation and explain how it sees the future. It would be quite appropriate to list
the key difficulties facing the School to guide the PRT. This session should also
cover how the School approaches issues concerned with Ethics, Responsibility
and Sustainability.

However, it is also important to stress that it is not helpful to use the time as a
kind of marketing presentation. Moreover, the formal presentation should not
exceed 15 minutes and should not replicate content of the SAR.

5.3 Development Objectives – with the School’s Executive Committee.

For Schools previously granted 5-year accreditation this session is to review

the Development Objectives previously set.

For Schools previously granted 3-year accreditation, this session is to review

progress made in relation to the Areas of Required Improvement (AoRIs).
For Schools undergoing Initial Accreditation, this session is not applicable.

5.4 Meeting for External Governance

This meeting will involve representatives of the School’s Governing Body,

including for example members of the University leadership or Board of
Trustees. As the purpose of the meeting is to provide assurance of oversight of
the School’s leadership, however that is organised, the participants should not
be the same people as for the initial meeting.

5.5 Meeting for Programme Evaluation

There will be two sessions on programme management. The first on Day 1 will
examine the overall Programme Portfolio. This will be followed on Day 2 by an
in-depth session on the Selected Programme. The Selected Programme will be
chosen by EQUIS from a list of three programmes proposed by the School
(typically major programmes) from the programme portfolio listed in the
Datasheet. Schools that hold an EFMD Programme Accreditation have a choice
regarding the assessment of the Selected Programme (see Annex 23).

The interview listed under Overall Programme Portfolio will normally be with
senior faculty responsible for Learning and Teaching, e.g., Associate Dean and
Directors of Studies for Undergraduate and Postgraduate programmes plus

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 50

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

relevant senior administrators. The interviews under Selected Programme

should be with the individual programme management team, e.g., Programme
Director, year group tutors and programme administrators.

For the Selected Programme, some specific documents should be made

available in the Online Document Repository, see Annex 9.

5.6 Faculty Management Meeting (Dean, Deputy Dean or Associate

Dean of Faculty, Department or Subject Area Heads)

The purpose of the session is to allow the Peer Review Team to reflect on how
faculty resources are managed in the context of the School under review. The
participants in this session are usually senior academics but should not be the
same persons present in the Faculty session (see below). The participants may
include senior colleagues with responsibility for Faculty, for example, a Deputy
or Associate Dean. EQUIS does not use a standard list of main subject areas;
these areas depend on the School under review.

5.7 Meeting for Research

This meeting may include members of the School’s research committee, or

research centre leads and individuals with leadership responsibility for research
such as a Deputy or Associate Dean.

5.8 Meeting with Students

Students are a rich source of information. Interviews with students provide an

important insight into workload, the professionalism of faculty, the coherency of
programmes, the clarity of aims and objectives, the organisation of the
curricula, and the facilities. The interviews with the students are held in the
absence of faculty members, so they can speak freely. To interview a
sufficiently representative number of students, they may be divided into two
groups to be interviewed in parallel. A suitable size for each group of students
is between ten and fifteen. Students from vastly different programmes should
not be mixed. The groups should involve students from the Selected
Programme chosen for more in-depth assessment.

5.9 Meeting with Faculty

Interviews with faculty members are conducted to discuss issues surrounding

research, the design and delivery of programmes, and the overall management
of the faculty. Confirmation of issues raised by students can also occur. The
interview groups should number between eight and ten faculty, possibly
interviewed in parallel. Groups should be divided by seniority or by length of
service in the School.

5.10 Meeting for Finances, Resources and Control

This purpose of this meeting is to evaluate the financial performance, viability,

and management of the school in addition to reviewing the professional

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 51

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

resources (administration, marketing, facilities management) required for the

School to meet its objectives.

5.11 Meeting with Representatives from the World of Practice

The purpose of this meeting is to give further evidence of the institution’s

connections with the business and management world and to assess the impact
of such links on the School under review. Those attending the meeting should
not be restricted to individuals holding management or governance roles within
the School.

Academic or administrative staff members from the Institution will not be

participating in this session.

5.12 Meeting with Alumni

The purpose of meeting alumni is to obtain evidence from these stakeholders

that the School met their needs, and that the institution offers appropriate
support to alumni activities for the benefit of both. Some of the alumni
participating in this session may have graduated recently but others should be
alumni that are now employed and may be at various stages of their
professional careers.

There will be no academic or administrative staff members from the Institution

attending this session.

5.13 Final Team Meeting

The team will work in a separate meeting room in the hotel before, during and
after dinner at the end of the second full day of meetings to formulate its
preliminary assessment and recommendation for accreditation. These will be
complemented with information obtained during the last morning.

5.14 Final Debriefing Meeting with the School

The visit finishes with a second meeting with the Executive Committee at the
end of the third morning. This session closes the Peer Review and enables the
Chair to make a provisional summary of the team’s conclusions without
disclosing the recommendation on accreditation. A minimum of 45 minutes
should be allowed for this meeting. It should be understood, however, that the
final debriefing is not the occasion for renewed debate.

5.15 Other Interactions with the Peer Review Team

It is inappropriate for the School to communicate with individual reviewers on

review-related matters before, during, or after the Peer Review Visit until the
Accreditation Board has taken the final decision. At no point shall reviewers
divulge the content of their deliberations to School representatives or third
parties.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 52

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

In exceptional circumstances, PRTs need to schedule ad hoc meetings during

the visit, e.g., meeting with the Dean to communicate team concerns. Any such
meeting should be attended by at least two PRT members to maintain
transparency of the process.

5.16 Entertaining the Peer Review Team

The School is not expected to entertain the PRT during their visit and any
decision to do so will not influence the outcome of the review. However, the
optional reception and buffet at the end of Day 1 could be an opportunity to
introduce the School’s external partners, connections with practice or alumni to
the members of the PRT.

6. Assessment and Feedback during the Visit

The framework for the EQUIS Peer Review Visit is the EQUIS Standards and
Criteria document, which all members of the Peer Review Team should use
during the visit. All the chapters should be covered, and the schedule of
interviews should ensure full coverage of these topics. To assist the PRT with
this task, an EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form is provided (see Annex 12). Team
members should attempt to answer all the summary questions listed.

Throughout the visit, the PRT should be working through a controlled process
for refining their assessment of overall institutional quality and coming to a
consensus decision on the recommendation to be made to the Accreditation
Board.

The stages involved in this process will be as follows:

1. Individual assessment and completion of documentation, using the EQUIS

Quality Profile Sheet and the Criteria Evaluation Form described in sections
6.2.1 and 6.2.2 and shown in full in Annexes 11 and 12.

2. Consolidation of findings in the final team debriefing meeting(s)

Ø Agreement on the EQUIS Quality Profile scoring

Ø Development of a consensus view on the School’s performance with
respect to the different criteria, as outlined in the EQUIS Criteria
Evaluation Form, particularly where performance is rated Above or
Below Standard or there is no obvious consensus
Ø Agreement on the PRT’s final recommendation on accreditation
Ø Preparation for the debriefing of the School (oral report).

3. The debriefing of the School

4. Preparation of the EQUIS Peer Review Report

Each of these stages is discussed in more detail below.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 53

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

6.1 Individual assessment and completion of documents

This will be an on-going process from the beginning of Day 1, but the Quality
Profile Sheet should be largely completed before the team meets on the
evening of Day 2 for the final team meeting. The Chair may need to set aside
time for individual team members to complete the EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet
immediately before this meeting in which it will be an essential tool.

6.2 Consolidation of findings in the final team debriefing meeting

The Peer Review Team will need to meet alone, normally for several hours, to
complete the documentation and to formulate their assessment and
accompanying recommendations. This is best done on the evening of the
second day.

There are many different approaches adopted by different teams and individual
Chairs, but experience shows that the use of a rigorous procedure for collecting
perceptions facilitates consensus building.

6.2.1 The EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form (CEF)

This is a working document that will help Peer Reviewers to build up their own
personal assessment of the School. The items listed follow the order in which
they appear in the corresponding chapter of the EQUIS Standards and
Criteria document where a fuller explanation of the criterion will be found. Peer
Reviewers should refer to this document in case of doubt as to what is meant.

Peer Reviewers will normally fill in their comments on the EQUIS CEF (see
Annex 12) as the review progresses through the first two days. It is especially
important that this process is conducted rigorously, since the final report will be
in large part a synthesis of the documents filled in by the different members of
the Peer Review Team. Reviewers are, therefore, asked to write in each of the
boxes a full commentary describing what they have observed. It is not sufficient
in building up a profile of the School just to respond with single adjectives or
yes/no.

The EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form, duly filled in, should be given to the Chair
at the end of the visit.

1. CONTEXT, GOVERNANCE AND STRATEGY

COMMENTS
1.1 Environment
• Understanding by the School of the
environment in which it operates

• Legitimacy within the national

environment

• Response of the School to an education

market being reshaped by digital
technologies

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 54

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

1.2 Institutional status

• Clarity of the School’s legal and
institutional status

Section of the EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form

6.2.2 The EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet (QP)

Each of the key items in the EQUIS CEF should not only be described
qualitatively but also benchmarked against the EQUIS criteria. This is the role
of the EQUIS QP, which helps the team to arrive at a balanced assessment,
but also fulfils the School’s need for feedback.

The EQUIS QP (see Annex 11) is used to summarise the team’s overall
conclusions and is in the form shown below:

Overall Quality Evaluation

ABOVE MEETS BELOW N/A
standard standard standard

Chap 1 Context, Governance and Strategy

1.1 Environment
1.2 Institutional status
1.3 External governance
Section of the EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet

The EQUIS QP summarises the key criteria for each chapter of the EQUIS
Standards and Criteria. The items listed in the document correspond exactly
to those listed in the EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form, except that they are
shorter in formulation.

The form requires the team to agree one of four evaluations for each criterion,
i.e.

o Meets Standard
The School satisfies the EQUIS standard in this area as defined in the
EQUIS Criteria Framework (see page 6). Most positive assessments are
expected to fall in this broad category. It is not to be interpreted as meaning
that the School is mediocre or that it barely qualifies at a minimum level.

o Above Standard
The School demonstrates outstanding quality, well above the level required
to satisfy the EQUIS standard in this area, where it can be considered as
example of “best practice.”

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 55

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

o Below Standard
The School is judged to be below the threshold of the EQUIS standard in
this area.

o N/A
Not considered applicable or relevant to the School concerned.

Although reviewers may naturally be reluctant to do something that looks like

‘ticking boxes,’ the rationale for this approach has nothing to do with
mechanising the assessment. Its main justification is that it encourages the
reviewers to implement a process for arriving at a consensus opinion while
identifying discrepancies between the perceptions of different team members,
as will be described next.

The EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet is used first to structure the work of the Peer
Review Team when it meets at the end of the second day of meetings to reach
agreement on its assessment.

At the beginning of this meeting, or immediately before, the Chair will invite the
members of the team to make a personal evaluation by checking “Above
Standard,” “Meets Standard,” “Below Standard” or “Not Applicable” for each
assessment criterion. The normal procedure is for each member of the review
team to complete the document alone before any discussion has taken place
on the assessment of the different items. It is only when each member has
committed themselves to an initial judgement that the Chair opens the debate
to work towards a common position that will be entered onto a consolidated
version of the QP. This procedure will rapidly indicate where complete
agreement exists among the team members and will also clearly reveal the
areas that require careful discussion.

Once the Peer Review Team has reached a final agreement, a consolidated
version of the EQUIS QP will be produced. This will not be modified unless
there are exceptional reasons for doing so. Any change will then require the
explicit agreement of all members of the team. The document will be attached
to the Peer Review Report and will be submitted to the Accreditation Board.
This will be considered as the team’s interpretation of overall compliance with
the EQUIS standards.

6.2.3 Formulation of the Peer Review Team’s Assessment and

Recommendations

Once the EQUIS QP has been completed, the PRT should then be able to
agree the final recommendation as to whether the School has met the
standards for EQUIS Accreditation. If they do not believe these have been met,
then obviously the shortfall must be fully defined together with a clear statement
as to the action necessary to meet the shortfall.

The PRT may recommend five-year accreditation, three-year accreditation, or

non-accreditation. These recommendations must be clearly substantiated with
reference to observations made in the EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form and to
the assessment set out in the consolidated EQUIS QP.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 56

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

The PRT should base its judgement on its interpretation of the EQUIS
standards as set out in the document entitled EQUIS Standards and Criteria.
This judgement should not be based on simple comparison with other
institutions.

6.2.4 Preparation for the debriefing of the School (oral report)

After arriving at a consensus, the Chair should make an inventory of the topics
to be treated in the oral presentation. A distinction can be made between a) the
main findings that will form the basis of the written report and b) any critical
comments that can be brought forward in the oral presentation because the
subject matter is best communicated informally.

The Chair will then formulate the content of the oral debriefing, usually in the
first part of the morning while the other members of the Review Team conduct
the scheduled interviews. The Chair should go through this presentation with
the whole team before delivering the final version to the School in the debriefing
meeting.

6.3 The debriefing

The oral presentation at the end of the Peer Review Visit plays a special role in
the assessment process. With a great deal of time and energy having been
invested by the staff of the School over a period of months, it is important that
the feedback provides real value and ‘closes down’ the visit in the right way.
Giving feedback is a skilled task, both for individuals and institutions. The rules
for good practice that apply to feedback given to individuals are just as valid
when applied to institutional feedback:

Ø Adoption of a positive, supportive, and constructive approach

Ø concentration on the key messages that need to be delivered, not on the
fine detail
Ø enumeration of the strengths as well as the weaknesses
Ø early stressing of positive feedback to create the right climate
Ø delivery of key points in a clear and concise manner
Ø presenting more negative feedback in a constructive form that can be
accepted
Ø confirming understanding and acceptance of key development needs
Ø suggesting alternatives for the way to deal with specific problems
Ø allowing the recipients to identify the solutions
Ø providing clear guidance on the necessary action for quality
improvement where appropriate.

The debriefing also allows teams to distinguish between feedback provided

informally and that contained in a more formal report. There are sometimes
findings and conclusions that may not really be suitable for a more public report,
yet the panel would like to make more critical statements about a particular
aspect of institutional management. In these cases, the oral feedback can be
used to formulate strongly worded recommendations to the right audience and
in the right place, e.g., the School’s main management committee.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 57

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

The Chair should stress that the feedback represents a form of interim report,
since some conclusions may be modified following a full consultation with their
colleagues, including referral of some points to the School’s Director. It is not
appropriate at this point to divulge any recommendation that the Peer
Review Team intends to make to the Accreditation Board. Nor is it
appropriate to engage in a discussion of the oral assessment. The School will
have an opportunity to respond in writing once the written report is submitted
for comment.

7. The EQUIS Peer Review Report (PRR)

The report is the culmination of the assessment process and is an extremely

important document not only for the Accreditation Board but also for the
School’s Management Team. The report will have considerable impact within
the School so great care should be taken with the wording of key sections,
especially where the comments are critical.

7.1 Procedure for the Peer Review Report

1. The Chair consolidates comments from the team, using the written
summaries in the EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form and the minutes of the
oral presentation.
2. The Chair writes up a first draft of the report and
3. Circulates it to the team for comment where each member is expected to
provide input and comment on the draft.
4. The Chair amends the report, considering the comments received from the
other members of the Peer Review Team, and sends the revised draft,
including the consolidated EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet (in a separate file),
to the EQUIS Office.
5. The revised version which includes the PRT’s recommendation on
accreditation is edited, formatted, and proofread by the EQUIS Office and
submitted to the School. The editing process is to ensure that the report’s
documents are complete and coherent and that arguments are well made
to lead to the recommendation on accreditation and the areas for
improvement. Sometimes the editing process leads to the draft report being
returned to the PRT Chair for clarification or amendment before it is sent to
the Institution for comment.
6. The School responds to any factual inconsistencies or misunderstandings
and returns it to the EQUIS Office normally within 10 working days.
7. Following receipt of comments from the School, changes may be made,
and the final report will be completed by the Chair.
8. The final version is sent to the School (normally within 8 weeks from the
date of the Peer Review Visit), which is requested to give its written
authorisation for the report to be submitted to the Accreditation Board.
9. Once this authorisation has been obtained, the final report is submitted to
the Accreditation Board together with the EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet, the
most recent Datasheet and, in case of re-accreditation, the EQUIS
Accreditation Board letter with the latest accreditation decision.
10. The PRT members receive the final version of the PRR after the
Accreditation decision.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 58

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

7.2 Formulating the report

The Chair writes the PRR setting out the team’s assessment of the School
against the EQUIS quality criteria and its recommendation regarding
accreditation. Great care should be taken to ensure consistency between the
three parts of the PRR: the conclusions written in the main body of the report,
the assessment set out in the EQUIS QP, and the recommendation regarding
accreditation. For instance, the report should fully explain why a particular area
has been rated Above Standard or Below Standard. The report must also fully
explain the reasons that led the team to make its recommendation on
accreditation.

The Peer Review Report should also provide suggestions that will be helpful to
the School in planning its future development.

The report should be sufficiently extensive to provide enough evaluation of the

School for the Accreditation Board to be able to make a well-informed and
rational decision and for the School to receive useful guidance on potential
improvements.

7.3 Recommended Format

(a different format exists for schools going through Special Re-accreditation or holding EFMD Programme
Accreditation)

Length: minimum 15 pages and maximum 25 pages

Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Composition of the Peer Review Team
• name, position, and country of each reviewer
• any additional comments on the PRT

1.2 EQUIS related Background

• background on the visit: initial or re-accreditation, delay, eligibility
reservations, etc.

1.3 Institutional Scope

• institutional focus of the accreditation: limitations and exclusions

1.4 Acknowledgements
• organisation of the visit and flexibility of the School
• acknowledgements
• any general comments on the visit

1.5 Comments on the SAR and Document Repository Materials

1.6 Comments on the Student Report

2. General Assessment
2.1 Executive summary of the report (1-2 pages)
2.2 Assessment of progress − in case of re-accreditations (1 page)
• Development Objectives (for schools with 5-year accreditation)
• Areas of Required Improvement (for schools with 3-year accreditation)

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 59

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

• Other recommendations and suggestions in previous report or Accreditation

Board letter
2.3 Area(s) of Excellence − optional (1/2 page)
• Description of any aspect of outstanding quality

3. Recommendation to the Accreditation Board

• for a period of 5 years, indicating areas where the School excels;
• for a period of 3 years, describing the Areas of Required Improvement where the
School has not yet fully complied with the EQUIS standards of quality;
• for non-accreditation, giving a detailed justification for this recommendation.

4. Detailed analysis following the EQUIS Standards & Criteria Framework (10
pages)
• based on the feedback of the Peer Reviewers following the visit and summarised
in the consolidated EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form
• succinct information to support the judgement of the PRT, particularly for issues
rated “above” or “below” standard in the EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet

Appendix 1 EQUIS Quality Profile Sheet

Appendix 2: Datasheet
Appendix 3: EQUIS AB letter with the latest accreditation decision (in case of re-
accreditation)

8. Roles and Responsibilities

8.1 Responsibilities of the EQUIS Office

Ø to consult with the School throughout the process

Ø to advise and assist in the Self-Assessment process
Ø to fix the timetable for the EQUIS assessment and to set the date of the
Peer Review Visit
Ø to establish the schedule for the Peer Review in liaison with the School
Ø to ensure there is adequate time between receipt of the Self-Assessment
Report and the date of the PRV
Ø to designate the members of the PRT and to secure the necessary
agreement from the School
Ø to brief the PRT on the requirements of the EQUIS assessment and to
confirm receipt of all necessary supporting materials
Ø to make the necessary logistic arrangements with the School for travel,
accommodation, and special requests
Ø to arrange for the dispatch of materials produced by the School to the
members of the PRT
Ø to co-ordinate the compilation and finalisation of the PRR, in liaison with the
Chair of the PRT and the Dean of the School, and its presentation to the
EQUIS AB
Ø to ensure that the EQUIS Process Evaluation Forms from the school and
the Peer Reviewers are completed
Ø to arrange for the safe disposal of all sensitive materials following
acceptance of the report by the School.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 60

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

8.2 Responsibilities of the EQUIS Project Leader within the School

Ø to coordinate the Self-Assessment process and the preparation of the SAR

Ø to ensure the timely production of the materials for the SAR, including
annexes and supporting documentation to the main report
Ø to distribute the final SAR to the EQUIS Office at least 8 weeks before the
date of the visit and to the members of the PRT at least 6 weeks before the
date of the visit
Ø to ensure the accessibility of the ODR and the availability of all required
documents 2 weeks before the date of the visit and until the AB have taken
their decision (see Annex 9)
Ø to consult with the EQUIS Office
Ø to establish a programme for the Peer Review Visit in collaboration with the
EQUIS Office
Ø to reimburse all travel and accommodation fees for the Peer Review Team
within 6 weeks from the date of the visit
Ø to make the necessary practical logistic arrangements for the visit, including
local travel and accommodation
Ø to ensure adequate access to key stakeholders during the visit of the PRT
Ø to check the final Peer Review Report for factual inconsistencies
Ø to complete an EQUIS Process Evaluation Form for Schools and return it
online to EQUIS Office.

Important: Formal communication between the Peer Review Team and the
School should always be via the EQUIS Office or with the EQUIS Office in copy,
both before and after the PRV.

8.3 Responsibilities of the Individual Peer Review Team members

Before the visit

Ø to consult with the EQUIS Office and Chair of the PRT on the requirements
of the EQUIS PRV
Ø to prepare themselves about the objectives of the assessment and the
criteria used by a careful reading of the EQUIS documents
Ø to read the SAR carefully and conduct a preliminary SWOT analysis against
the EQUIS criteria
Ø to make appropriate and timely travel arrangements in accordance with the
guidelines given by the EQUIS Office
Ø to convey to the School and the EQUIS Office details of their travel
arrangements and any specific requirements they may have regarding
travel and accommodation
Ø to arrive the evening before the PRV earlier than 19:00 to participate in the
team briefing.

During the visit

Ø to ensure adequate preparation for all meetings

Ø to be present throughout the entire Peer Review
Ø to fulfil specified and agreed responsibilities within the team, such as the
provision of specialist expertise

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 61

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Ø to be the main spokesperson for some sessions, as agreed with the Chair
Ø to document their own findings clearly enough to support the work of the
Chair
Ø to operate in the spirit of consensus. If a Peer Reviewer disagrees with a
decision arrived at by the team, they must nonetheless abide by the majority
opinion, while being free to express an opposing view in the report
Ø to hand in to the Chair all relevant documentation relating to their personal
assessment (notably the EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form).

Following the visit

Ø to liaise, if necessary, with the Chair and other Peer Review Team members
to confirm the final decision on accreditation
Ø to contribute to the drafting of the final report
Ø to provide all requested documentation required for reimbursement of travel
and accommodation to the School
Ø to complete an EQUIS Process Evaluation Form for Peer Reviewers and
return it online to the EQUIS office
Ø to destruct all sensitive materials relating to the visit following acceptance of
the final report
Ø to avoid expressing any opinion or communicating the results of the
assessment to any third parties

8.4 Responsibilities of the Chair of the Peer Review Team

Before the visit

Ø to check, upon receipt of the Self-Assessment Report (including annexes),

Student Report and Datasheet, if all documents are adequate and inform
immediately the EQUIS Office of any inconsistencies or problem areas in
the reports.
Ø to approve the Peer Review schedule.
Ø to organise the online briefing meeting with the other PRT members -
minimum one week prior to the PRV - to prepare the review and discuss first
impressions from the materials and the ODR

During the visit

Ø to brief the members of the team on the Peer Review process at the initial
Briefing Meeting
Ø to be the main spokesperson for the PRT
Ø to ensure adequate preparation for meetings
Ø to determine the delegation of lead responsibilities within the team
Ø to divide up sessions and responsibilities to individuals
Ø to lead the PRT towards a set of conclusions during the visit
Ø to ensure that the members of the team complete the assessment
documents before the end of the visit
Ø to hold a meeting of the PRT, usually on the evening of the second day,
during which the team agrees on its conclusions and recommendation
Ø to run the debriefing for the School during the final meeting

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 62

The EQUIS Process Manual
 Document Version 2023

Ø to inform urgently the EQUIS Office of any unusual incident that may disrupt
the visit.

Following the visit

Ø to collect documentation made by the Peer Review Team relating to the

satisfaction of the core criteria, the EQUIS Quality Profile sheet and the
EQUIS Criteria Evaluation Form
Ø to draft a first version of the report and circulate it to the other members of
the team for comment
Ø to send the revised report within 3 weeks of the visit to the EQUIS Office,
which will then forward it to the School and invite their comments on the
factual accuracy of the text
Ø to accommodate changes to the report where necessary, in consultation
with the other members of the PRT, if appropriate
Ø to issue the final report to the EQUIS Office for submission to the School
and the Accreditation Board
Ø to complete an EQUIS Process Evaluation Form for Peer Reviewers and
return it online to the EQUIS Office.

8.5 Role of Reviewers from the World of Practice

The practitioner dimension is afforded special importance in the EQUIS

assessment, as reflected in the creation of two special chapters in the EQUIS
Standards and Criteria document devoted to Connections with Practice
(Chapter 10) and Executive Education (Chapter 6). This dimension is not simply
one of the criteria to be covered within an EQUIS assessment. In just the same
way as Internationalisation, it is seen as an overarching framework for all the
other chapters. Practitioner presence is also seen as an essential feature of the
EQUIS accreditation process, through representation on the EQUIS
Committee, Accreditation Board, and participation in the PRTs.

The Reviewer representing the world of practice plays a significant role in the
PRT and provides a practitioner perspective within the process by paying
special attention to the value of all processes and outcomes to the international
business and management community.

8.6 Role of Local Reviewers

The local reviewer (initial accreditations) is familiar with the local educational
environment and can explain the contextual background of the School for the
benefit of the PRT. They are selected in agreement with the School.

The local reviewer or another member of the team will normally speak the
language of the country.

Section 6: Guidance for Peer Review 63

The EQUIS Process Manual
Further Information and Contacts

If you have any questions concerning the EQUIS accreditation system, or would
like to receive more information, please consult the EFMD website where all
documentation is available for download:
https://efmdglobal.org/accreditations/business-schools/equis/

Alternatively, you can contact the EFMD Quality Services Office:

[email protected]

For questions regarding OX, contact:

[email protected].
EFMD Global
88 Rue Gachard box 3
1050 Brussels, BELGIUM
P +32 2 629 08 10
F +32 2 629 08 11
VAT BE 411 610 491

efmdglobal.org
[email protected]

EFMD is an international
not-for-profit association (aisbl)