Accreditation

Chapter 1: Internal Quality Assurance and Management

• Standard 1: Academic Unit Management
• Standard 2: Governance System
• Standard 3: Self-Check/Self-Evaluation
• Standard 4: Staff-Development

The Panel recognizes that the Malaysia Graduate School of Entrepreneurship and Business (MGSEB) has established a functional internal quality assurance (QA) structure aligned with UMK’s institutional governance. The School’s operations demonstrate agility, transparency, and commitment to continuous quality improvement, supported by regular meetings, internal audits, and use of the CosPro system for academic management. Leadership under the Dean and Deputy Deans ensures responsive and consultative decision-making, although the **lean management structure** presents risks to continuity during leadership transitions.
While the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) mechanism is evident through ISO and MQA reviews, its application remains largely informal and inconsistently documented, particularly at the DBA program level. The School is encouraged to institutionalize QA activities by formalizing PDCA-based processes, clearly defining committee roles, and developing documented procedures and reporting lines. Improvement issues discussed in meetings should be systematically translated into written action plans with measurable KPIs, such as enrolment trends, completion rates, and graduate satisfaction indicators.
The School benefits from fiscal stability through centralized UMK financial oversight, though this limits flexibility at the School level. The strategic use of the Trust Fund may enhance autonomy to support staff development, student mobility, and research grants in alignment with PDCA outcomes. Regarding staff development and internationalization, the School shows awareness of the importance of global competence but lacks a structured plan. MGSEB is encouraged to establish an annual staff development framework emphasizing international exposure, digital literacy, data analytics, and quality assurance. Recruitment of staff with multilingual or international backgrounds would further enhance service diversity.
Overall, MGSEB has demonstrated a commendable commitment to quality assurance and governance consistent with ABEST21 standards. The School’s efforts in responding to auditor feedback, maintaining industry linkages, and implementing the CosPro system reflect a solid foundation for systematic quality management. The PRT commends the School’s progress and recommends continued formalization, documentation, and evidence-based evaluation to strengthen the sustainability and maturity of its internal QA system.

• MGSEB has established a functional internal quality assurance (QA) structure aligned with UMK’s university-wide governance. The School’s operations demonstrate agility and commitment to continuous quality, yet the DBA program’s QA system remains largely informal-driven. The School may consider institutionalizing QA activities through documented procedures that define committee responsibilities, reporting lines, and decision-making processes. The PDCA mechanism exists but is applied inconsistently. Course audits, ISO reviews, and management meetings capture elements of “Plan” and “Do,” but “Check” and “Act” stages are not systematically documented. The School has a lean management structure led by the Dean and Deputy Deans, which promotes swift decision-making but poses risks to continuity when key individuals change. While internal reviews demonstrate commitment to quality, evidence of systematic evaluation outcomes remains limited. The School may track trends in enrolment, completion rate, and graduate satisfaction as KPIs to verify system effectiveness. Financial oversight is centralized under UMK, providing fiscal stability, yet flexibility at School level is limited. MGSEB may consider to explore strategic use of its Trust Fund to support research grants, student workshops, and global mobility—ensuring that resource allocation aligns with PDCA outcomes. The School undertakes internal reviews through the ISO and MQA frameworks; however, the School may consider to clearly mapped to the DBA. Improvement issues are discussed in meetings but can be translated into written action plans. The PDCA cycle operates informally; many improvements rely on reactive measures. MGSEB may consider to embed PDCA in the DBA Annual Review Template to demonstrate evidence-based planning, doing, checking, and acting. Self-evaluation outcomes are shared internally but can be widely communicated to external stakeholders. Administrative staff demonstrate dedication but can be provided with more international exposure. Participation in global conferences or exchange with ABEST21 member institutions should be encouraged to strengthen global competence. Training occurs through university HR workshops but lacks a School-specific plan. MGSEB should establish an annual staff development schedule covering international communication, data analytics, and quality assurance. The administrative cohort remains largely local. Recruitment of personnel with multilingual or international backgrounds would enhance service diversity and global responsiveness. Performance appraisal is aligned with university policy but seldom linked to program objectives. Integrating KPIs related to international collaboration and digital literacy will align staff performance with the School’s globalization agenda.
• MGSEB demonstrates a clear internal management and governance structure suitable for its size and mission. The leadership team (Dean, Deputy Dean, and Program Director) functions effectively, ensuring agile and consultative decision-making. Regular meetings, alignment with university-level governance, and use of the CosPro system show commitment to continuous quality assurance.
  The School’s governance and quality mechanisms align broadly with ABEST21 standards, reflecting transparency and internal accountability. However, much of the quality assurance process — including PDCA cycles, external reviews, and stakeholder feedback — remains informal or partially documented. The management system’s strength lies in its responsiveness, but it would benefit from formalization and systematic reporting for consistency, monitoring, and long-term sustainability.

• Based on our review of Chapter One: Internal Quality Assurance and Management, MGSEB demonstrates a commendable understanding and implementation of several key standards.
  Standard 1: Academic Unit Management: We note the school’s awareness of its strong industry connections and its efforts to maintain these relationships, which aligns with effective management of an educational and research organization.
  Standard 2: Governance: MGSEB’s proactive approach in incorporating auditor comments from SIRIM MS ISO 9001:2015 showcases a commitment to systematic governance and continuous improvement, indicating a foundational understanding of appropriate management practices.
  Standard 3: Self-Check/Self-Evaluation: The implementation of the CosPro System for centralized academic management is a strong indicator of the school’s systematic approach to self-evaluation.
  Standard 4: Staff Development: The school recognizes the importance of staff development, which is crucial for maintaining a globally competent administrative staff as required by the standard.
  Overall, the school has established systems and processes that generally align with the spirit and intent of the ABEST21 Accreditation Standards within this chapter.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB appreciates the PRT’s positive recognition of its internal governance and quality assurance system. However, PDCA Already Practiced Through UMK’s Quality Mechanisms

• The School operates within UMK’s ISO 9001:2015 and MQA frameworks, both of which are explicitly PDCA-based.
• MGSEB applies the same model through course audits, internal reviews, student evaluations, and CQI (Continuous Quality Improvement) reports recorded in CosPro and PPQ systems.
• Hence, while not separately branded as a “formal PDCA handbook,” the functionality already exists and is actively monitored.

Systematic Reviews and Documentation Exist

• Evidence from your report shows that meeting minutes, audit results, and CQI logs are maintained and verified by UMK’s Quality Unit.
• Improvement issues raised in meetings are already translated into CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) reports which fulfill the “Check” and “Act” phases.

Lean Management ≠ Informality

• The PRT noted that MGSEB’s lean structure “poses risks to continuity.”
  MGSEB believes that lean structure enhances agility and rapid decision-making.
• Continuity is already ensured through documented succession and delegation practices (Dean–Deputy Dean–Program Director roles).

Staff Development and International Exposure Are Underway

• Although the PRT suggested that MGSEB “lacks a structured plan,” our report includes evidence of annual HRD schedules and international collaboration activities (e.g., MGSEB Ambassador Program, academic exchanges, visiting scholar initiatives).

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that the PDCA cycle is already systematically embedded through UMK’s ISO 9001:2015 framework, MQA processes, CosPro audits, PPQ reports, and CAPA documentation, even if not consolidated into a standalone handbook. The School’s evidence of meeting minutes, internal audits, and continuous improvement logs demonstrates that review and action processes are formally practiced and actively monitored. The PRT also notes MGSEB’s explanation that its lean management structure is supported by established delegation and succession mechanisms, ensuring continuity while maintaining agility. To further strengthen visibility and alignment with ABEST21 expectations, the PRT encourages MGSEB to consolidate these existing practices into a more unified documentation framework and continue expanding staff development and international exposure initiatives.

Issues to be improved:

The Malaysia Graduate School of Entrepreneurship and Business (MGSEB) has established a functional internal quality assurance (QA) structure aligned with UMK’s governance and demonstrates strong commitment to continuous improvement. Leadership is agile and responsive, supported by the CosPro system for academic management. However, PDCA cycles, governance reviews, and staff development processes remain informal and fragmented.
To strengthen alignment with ABEST21 standards, MGSEB is encouraged to formalize and document its internal PDCA framework, establish a structured schedule for external reviews with alumni, industry, and academic peers, and develop clear governance SOPs for transparency and continuity. Strengthening stakeholder feedback mechanisms and implementing a structured staff development plan focusing on international competencies are also recommended.
Across the standards, MGSEB shows commendable progress but should elaborate on the academic and strategic relevance of industry engagement (Standard 1), formalize communication channels and reporting mechanisms (Standard 2), detail CosPro’s role in PDCA-based self-evaluation (Standard 3), and establish systematic training and succession planning for staff (Standard 4).
Overall, MGSEB has a strong foundation in governance and QA, and by formalizing, documenting, and embedding PDCA-driven processes, it can further enhance transparency, sustainability, and global competitiveness in its internal quality management.

• PDCA cycles and external review processes are not formalized; documentation of decision-making, governance reviews, and staff development remains fragmented.

• To further strengthen MGSEB’s adherence to the ABEST21 Accreditation Standards and enhance its overall internal quality assurance and management, we suggest addressing the following areas:
  Standard 1: Academic Unit Management: While industry connections are strong, further elaboration on the specific subjects or areas of study in which seminars, webinars, and workshops took place would provide a clearer picture of their direct relevance and strategic impact on the curriculum and research.
  Standard 2: Governance: Formalizing communication channels for management matters is recommended. Establishing a more structured process for disseminating information and addressing issues, rather than relying solely on regular communication, would further enhance fairness, transparency, and traceability within the governance system.
  Standard 3: Self-Check/Self-Evaluation: It would be beneficial to elaborate on the detailed structure, processes, and reporting mechanisms within the CosPro System. Furthermore, a more comprehensive explanation of how the PDCA cycle is specifically integrated and utilized for continuous improvement is needed. Detailing the communication processes for engaging internal stakeholders, alumni, and industry partners, and critically, how the feedback obtained directly informs and leads to tangible improvements, would also be valuable.
  Standard 4: Staff Development: We suggest a more comprehensive explanation of the specific needs analysis conducted for training, and how staff are systematically provided opportunities for skill enhancement, including any platforms for selection. Clarification on how talent is identified and nurtured, with specific details on succession planning’s integration, would be beneficial. Lastly, further insight into strategies for diversifying staff nationality/international background and ensuring transparency in performance evaluation systems like SKT and LNPT is encouraged.

The School’s Feedback:

While MGSEB accepts most of the PRT’s recommendations as constructive, the School respectfully clarifies the following points:

1. PDCA Framework Already Implemented

• The report already documents that MGSEB applies PDCA principles through ISO 9001:2015, MQA processes, and internal CQI reviews recorded in CosPro and PPQ.
• Hence, while not yet published as a standalone PDCA manual, the cycle is practiced systematically, with evidence such as course audits, minutes, and CAPA actions already included.

2. External Reviews and Stakeholder Feedback

• The School already conducts alumni and industry engagement sessions, including participation in curriculum review committees and industrial advisory panels.
• These serve as functional external review mechanisms, even if not yet formalized into a fixed schedule.
• A structured annual review calendar is being developed to strengthen this process.

3. Governance SOPs

• Governance procedures are documented through UMK’s Quality Manual, ISO audit reports, and Management Committee minutes.
• Thus, while the PRT calls it “fragmented,” the governance structure is already transparent, traceable, and integrated with UMK’s institutional framework.

4. Staff Development

• Every year, all administrative staff are required to complete a training needs analysis form coordinated by UMK’s Human Resource Management Office.
• Based on this, tailored training sessions are organized and scheduled centrally, ensuring all staff receive equitable development opportunities
• MGSEB also identifies its own training priorities in internationalization, digital skills, and quality management.

5. Industry and Curriculum Linkages

• The report already specifies multiple seminars, workshops, and guest lectures linked to DBA courses (e.g., research methodology, entrepreneurship).
• MGSEB emphasizes that industry engagement is not generic. It is integrated directly into teaching and applied research supervision.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that the PDCA cycle is already systematically embedded through ISO 9001:2015 processes, MQA reviews, CosPro monitoring, PPQ documentation, and CAPA actions, even if not yet consolidated into a single manual. The School’s existing industry and alumni engagement activities, governance procedures, and structured staff development processes demonstrate that external review, governance transparency, and administrative capacity-building are already functioning within UMK’s institutional framework. The PRT also notes MGSEB’s emphasis that industry engagement is directly linked to DBA coursework and applied research supervision, reflecting purposeful integration rather than generic activity. To enhance clarity and alignment with ABEST21 expectations, the PRT encourages MGSEB to formalize these existing practices into a unified review calendar and documentation framework, thereby strengthening visibility, consistency, and long-term quality assurance.

Chapter 2: Mission Statement

• Standard 5: Mission Statement
• Standard 6: Financial Strategies

The mission of MGSEB and its DBA program is clearly articulated and strongly aligned with UMK’s vision of “Entrepreneurship is Our Thrust,” reflecting ABEST21’s emphasis on ethical leadership, global competence, and societal contribution. The mission provides a sound foundation for curriculum design, research, and stakeholder engagement.
However, while the mission is well-communicated through various platforms, measurable outcomes and periodic validation mechanisms remain underdeveloped. The School is encouraged to establish mission-aligned performance indicators to assess attainment and create a formal alignment matrix with UMK’s evolving strategic plan. Stakeholder consultation—currently ad hoc—should be systematized through a biennial review survey involving students, alumni, and industry partners.
Furthermore, the mission could be strengthened by explicitly integrating global leadership, sustainability, and cross-cultural competencies within its learning outcomes to reinforce ethical and character development.
Overall, the mission demonstrates strong thematic coherence with UMK’s entrepreneurial mandate and ABEST21’s global standards but requires greater formalization, measurability, and
stakeholder-driven validation to ensure sustained relevance and continuous improvement.

• The DBA mission clearly articulates the development of expert and applied knowledge in entrepreneurship and management. Nonetheless, its measurable outcomes are not defined. The School should develop mission-aligned performance indicators to assess attainment. The mission fully supports UMK’s vision of “Entrepreneurship is Our Thrust.” The linkage is strong, though periodic validation with the University Senate is advised to maintain alignment as UMK’s strategic plan evolves. The program fosters ethical leadership but could better integrate cross-cultural competencies and global perspectives in its learning outcomes. Incorporating global leadership and sustainability themes would reinforce character development. The mission is published on the website and in brochures, yet stakeholder consultation occurs irregularly. A biennial mission-review survey among students, alumni, and industry partners is recommended for evidence-based refinement.
• The mission of MGSEB is well-defined, aligned with Universiti Malaysia Kelantan’s entrepreneurial vision, and consistent with ABEST21’s expectations of global competence, ethical leadership, and knowledge creation. The mission provides a solid foundation for curriculum design, research direction, and stakeholder engagement.
  The mission is effectively communicated through brochures, websites, and public channels. However, while dissemination is strong, the periodic review of the mission’s relevance and alignment with stakeholder expectations is still informal. Feedback collection from students, alumni, and industry is not yet conducted systematically.
• C-15: Mission is clear, entrepreneurship- and society-oriented, and communicates expertise/competence expectations; partially compliant pending measurable targets.
  C-16: Demonstrates thematic alignment with UMK’s mission; compliant (would be stronger with a formal alignment matrix).
  C-17: Explicit emphasis on character building (integrity, leadership, ethical entrepreneurship); compliant.
  C-18: Mission is publicized across media and events; partially compliant—periodic review and stakeholder input are informal.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB appreciates the PRT’s recognition of the School’s strong mission alignment with UMK’s entrepreneurial vision and ABEST21’s focus on ethical and globally competent leadership. However, the School respectfully clarifies several points:

1. Mission Review and Validation Are Practiced

• While the PRT notes that mission validation is “informal,” MGSEB already conducts periodic reviews during strategic planning cycles and Senate submissions to ensure alignment with UMK’s evolving mission.
• The mission has been reaffirmed through multiple documents, including the Strategic Plan 2023–2027 and annual program reviews.

2. Measurable Indicators Are Embedded

• The report already outlines measurable outcomes—such as graduate employability, student diversity, and publication outputs—that directly reflect mission attainment.
• These indicators are tracked annually via CosPro analytics and reported in school-level KPIs.

3. Stakeholder Consultation Exists in Practice

• MGSEB engages students, alumni, and industry representatives through advisory panels, surveys, and events like Meet & Greet and Alumni Dialogue Sessions.
• While not yet institutionalized as a biennial survey, these engagements already provide ongoing mission feedback and input.

4. Global and Ethical Values Are Integrated

• The School clarifies that courses such as Business Ethics, Entrepreneurial Leadership, and Global Business Environment already embed sustainability, cross-cultural competence, and ethical decision-making—reflecting ABEST21’s globalized learning emphasis.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that mission review and validation are already embedded within UMK’s strategic planning processes, Senate submissions, and annual program reviews, ensuring continued alignment with the university’s entrepreneurial vision. The School’s measurable indicators—such as employability, diversity, and research outputs—demonstrate that mission attainment is actively monitored through CosPro analytics and school-level KPIs. The PRT also notes that ongoing stakeholder engagement through advisory panels, surveys, and alumni–industry dialogues provide meaningful input on mission relevance, even if not yet formalized into a scheduled biennial review. To further strengthen alignment with ABEST21 expectations, the PRT encourages MGSEB to consolidate these existing practices into a structured mission-review framework and continue enhancing the visibility of global and ethical elements already embedded in the curriculum.

Issues to be improved:

The MGSEB mission is clear, entrepreneurship-oriented, and aligned with UMK’s vision of “Entrepreneurship is Our Thrust.” It reflects ABEST21’s principles of ethical leadership, societal contribution, and global competence. However, stakeholder engagement in mission review is limited, and outcome measures are not yet defined.
To strengthen alignment and accountability, the School should establish a formal Mission Review Framework with clear Terms of Reference, a defined review cycle (every 3–5 years), and systematic stakeholder input from students, alumni, employers, and partners. The mission should be translated into key performance indicators (KPIs) linked to graduate outcomes, innovation, industry linkages, and internationalization, with progress reported in annual quality reviews.
MGSEB is also encouraged to prepare a Mission–UMK alignment matrix showing how the mission is operationalized across curriculum, research, and community engagement. Consistency of mission statements across platforms (in bilingual form, where relevant) should be maintained with clear ownership, approval dates, and dissemination evidence.
Overall, the mission remains strategically sound and well-communicated, but stronger formalization, measurement, and stakeholder validation are needed to ensure continued relevance, impact, and global competitiveness.

• Stakeholder engagement in mission review is minimal, and outcome measures are not defined. A biennial mission-review workshop and performance-indicator mapping are recommended.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB agrees with the spirit of the PRT’s recommendations but clarifies that the mechanisms requested already exist in practice and are being formalized for greater visibility and traceability

1. Mission Validation Already Occurs Formally

• The mission is reviewed through Senate endorsement and MGSEB Strategic Plan (2023 – 2027) updates, ensuring continuing alignment with UMK’s direction.
• Evidence of this periodic validation appears in management-meeting minutes and in the Strategic Action Plan Matrix within the SCR itself

2. Stakeholder Consultation Is Practiced Informally but Regularly

• MGSEB engages students, alumni, and industry via Meet & Greet, Alumni Dialogue, and Industrial Advisory Panel sessions, where feedback on the mission and program relevance is discussed
• These sessions already function as biennial-type reviews, though the documentation will be formalized.

3. Outcome Indicators Already Exist

• The SCR specifies graduate employability, enrolment mix, research outputs, and industry collaborations as mission-driven KPIs monitored through CosPro analytics and annual quality reviews
• Thus, measurable outcomes are defined and tracked, even if not labeled as a “Mission KPI Framework.”

4. Global and Ethical Values Embedded in Curriculum

• Courses such as Entrepreneurial Leadership, Business Ethics, and Global Business Environment integrate sustainability, ethics, and cross-cultural leadership, meeting ABEST21’s expectations for character and global competence.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that mission validation is already conducted through Senate endorsement, strategic plan updates, and documented management reviews, ensuring continued alignment with UMK’s institutional direction. The School’s ongoing engagement with students, alumni, and industry stakeholders through dialogues and advisory sessions demonstrates that mission-related feedback is regularly obtained, even if documentation is still being formalized. The PRT also notes that mission-driven KPIs—such as graduate employability, enrolment diversity, research outputs, and industry collaboration—are already monitored through CosPro analytics and annual quality reviews. To further enhance transparency and compliance with ABEST21 expectations, the PRT encourages MGSEB to consolidate these existing practices into a structured mission-review framework that makes global, ethical, and leadership elements more explicitly visible.

Chapter 3: Curriculum

• Standard 7: Learning Goals
• Standard 8: Curriculum Policy and Management of Curriculum
• Standard 9: Quality Improvement of Curriculum
• Standard 10: Online Education
• Standard 11: Diploma Policy and Learning Outcomes
• Standard 12: Globalization of Curriculum

The MGSEB curriculum is systematically structured and compliant with the Malaysian Qualifications Framework (MQF, 2024) and the Program Standards for Business Studies (2021). It effectively integrates theoretical, applied, and ethical dimensions, reflecting ABEST21’s vision of developing globally competent and socially responsible entrepreneurial leaders.
Curriculum design and review processes are established, supported by the eCampus LMS and CosPro systems, which ensure transparency, documentation, and quality monitoring. Stakeholder involvement—including faculty, alumni, and industry—is evident but remains periodic and informal. MGSEB is encouraged to institutionalize a structured curriculum review cycle (every three years) and to systematically capture and analyze stakeholder feedback for curriculum enhancement.
Mapping of learning goals across courses and documentation of review outcomes should be strengthened to ensure clear alignment between program objectives, course outcomes, and stakeholder expectations. Additionally, expanding cross-disciplinary, industry co-designed, and global learning opportunities would enhance the curriculum’s relevance and competitiveness.
Overall, the curriculum meets national and ABEST21 standards and demonstrates sound academic coherence. Continued emphasis on formalized review cycles, stakeholder engagement, and international integration will further advance MGSEB’s educational quality and global orientation.

• Curriculum design meets MQF Level 8 standards and links theory with practice, fulfilling ABEST21 expectations.
• MGSEB’s curriculum is systematically developed and complies with the Malaysian Qualifications Framework (MQF, 2024) and Program Standards for Business Studies (2021). It successfully integrates theoretical foundations with applied and ethical dimensions, supporting ABEST21’s goals of nurturing global, entrepreneurial, and socially responsible professionals.
  Curriculum review processes are in place, and stakeholder engagement (faculty, alumni, industry) occurs periodically. The LMS (eCampus) and CosPro systems provide strong support for quality monitoring and course documentation. However, curriculum updates tend to follow a longer review cycle, and feedback from external stakeholders (industry, alumni) could be more frequent and systematically analyzed. Cross-disciplinary and global learning opportunities remain limited.
• Std.7 (C-22–C-24): Learning goals align with MQF/Program Standards and are shared via LMS; academic advising and communication channels exist. Compliant overall, with partial compliance on documenting a School-level process that maps learning goals across courses and records periodic review with stakeholder input.
  Std.8 (C-25–C-29): Curriculum policy and UMK flowcharts are documented; core→specialized sequencing is coherent; specialized subjects address contemporary themes; review uses enrolment/credit/progression data. Compliant, while the evidence for cross-faculty options, industry co-design, and regular (≤3-year) review cadence is partial.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB appreciates the PRT’s acknowledgment of The School structured, compliant, and outcome-based curriculum aligned with the MQF (2024), Program Standards for Business Studies (2021), and ABEST21 Standards particularly in terms of program design, delivery, and continuous quality enhancement mechanisms.
Quality assurance is systematically managed through eCampus and CosPro, ensuring transparency, documentation, and continuous improvement. Curriculum review and stakeholder engagement are conducted regularly, with a formal three-year review cycle established for ongoing relevance and quality.
Internationalization and industry collaboration remain core priorities, reflected in joint modules, alumni and industry dialogues, and mobility initiatives. These measures demonstrate MGSEB’s continued commitment to educational excellence, accountability, and global relevance in accordance with ABEST21 principles.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that its curriculum is fully aligned with MQF (2024), Program Standards for Business Studies (2021), and ABEST21 expectations, supported by structured design, delivery, and continuous quality assurance mechanisms. The School’s use of eCampus and CosPro demonstrates systematic monitoring, documentation, and enhancement of curriculum implementation. The PRT also notes MGSEB’s consistent engagement with stakeholders and its formal three-year curriculum review cycle, which ensures ongoing relevance and responsiveness to academic and industry developments. To further strengthen global competitiveness, the PRT encourages MGSEB to continue expanding its internationalization activities and industry-linked initiatives, reinforcing the program’s quality, accountability, and global orientation.

Issues to be improved:

The MGSEB curriculum is well-aligned with the Malaysian Qualifications Framework (2024) and ABEST21 standards, integrating theoretical, applied, and ethical learning to develop entrepreneurial and socially responsible leaders. The structure demonstrates coherence and alignment with program objectives, supported by the eCampus and CosPro systems for course management and quality monitoring.
However, global integration, stakeholder engagement, and PDCA-based course reviews require further strengthening. The School is advised to increase curriculum review frequency to every 2–3 years, supported by a Curriculum and Learning Goals Committee with documented actions. A curriculum matrix mapping Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs), assessment rubrics, and I–R–M sequencing should be developed to ensure transparency and alignment.
MGSEB is encouraged to expand interdisciplinary and international learning opportunities, such as joint modules, online exchanges, or consulting clinics, and to embed emerging themes—digital transformation, sustainability, and innovation—across core courses.
To enhance evidence-based improvement, the School should adopt structured stakeholder feedback mechanisms, maintain review minutes, and document how feedback leads to course enhancement. Overall, the curriculum meets core standards but will benefit from formalized PDCA processes, stronger global orientation, and systematic benchmarking to reinforce relevance and continuous improvement.

• Need for stronger global integration, periodic benchmarking, and evidence of PDCA-based course review. Implementation of a curriculum matrix and colloquium series is advised.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB has no objection to the PRT’s comments under issues to be improved for Chapter Three: Curriculum. The School appreciates the constructive feedback provided and acknowledges that the recommendations align with its ongoing curriculum enhancement initiatives particularly in strengthening the PDCA review cycle, stakeholder engagement, and global integration.

PRT Response:

The PRT appreciates MGSEB’s positive reception of the recommendations for Chapter Three and acknowledges the School’s commitment to ongoing curriculum enhancement. The alignment between the PRT’s observations and MGSEB’s existing initiatives demonstrates a strong quality culture and readiness for continuous improvement. The PRT commends the School’s proactive efforts to strengthen the PDCA review cycle, deepen stakeholder engagement, and expand global integration within the curriculum. These continued enhancements will further reinforce the program’s relevance, academic rigor, and alignment with ABEST21 standards.

Chapter 4: Students

• Standard 13: Admission Policy and Student Selection
• Standard 14: Student Encouragement and Support
• Standard 15: Student Body Diversity

MGSEB’s admission policy and student support framework aligns with ABEST21 and MQF standards, targeting experienced professionals and maintaining a growing degree of diversity. Entry criteria and procedures are clearly documented, and student services—such as academic advising, orientation, and centralized financial support—are accessible and effective.
However, marketing and international outreach remain limited, and student engagement in governance and feedback mechanisms is not yet systematic. The School is encouraged to implement a targeted digital marketing and branding strategy, balance enrolment with supervisory capacity, and standardize admission assessments for consistency. A structured alumni tracer and career development framework should be introduced to evaluate graduate outcomes and strengthen lifelong engagement.
MGSEB may also institutionalize doctoral writing and statistics workshops, recognize community and entrepreneurial engagement, and expand executive placement and incubation support. Internationalization should be advanced through scholarship collaborations, academic exchanges, and mentorship for international candidates.
Overall, MGSEB meets the key ABEST21 expectations in student admission and support but would benefit from greater formalization, data-driven tracking, and global engagement initiatives to enhance student diversity, experience, and post-graduation impact.

• Admission policy targets experienced professionals, yet marketing remains passive. A targeted marketing and branding strategy using digital campaigns can be launched. Admissions documentation is clear, but selection ratios fluctuate; the School can consider to balance enrolment targets with supervisory capacity and periodically review admission tests and interviews for consistency. Reward systems for academic excellence exist, but recognition of community engagement is minimal. Financial and academic support services are adequate; however, doctoral writing and statistics workshops can be institutionalised. Career services should extend to executive placement and entrepreneurial incubation guidance. Student diversity is improving but still dominated by local enrolments. International outreach through scholarship collaboration and exchange with partner universities can be pursued. Cultural and academic support mechanisms for international candidates may require strengthening through mentorship and peer networks.
• MGSEB maintains a diverse student body, including professionals and international learners, reflecting ABEST21’s emphasis on global engagement. The school provides student support through academic advising, the eCampus system, and regular orientation sessions. Course evaluation and satisfaction surveys demonstrate commitment to continuous improvement.
  However, student engagement in academic governance and curriculum feedback remains limited. There is no systematic alumni tracer or structured career development framework to evaluate student outcomes post-graduation. Academic advising is available but not yet standardized across all cohorts. Overall, student welfare and feedback systems meet ABEST21 expectations but would benefit from greater formalization and tracking.
• Std.13 (C-45–C-49: Admission & Selection): Target segments are defined; entry criteria (incl. English and APEL) are published across website/brochures; selection follows UMK/MQF rules and capacity. Compliant overall, with partial compliance on diversified assessment tools and data-driven enrollment management.
  Std.14 (C-50–C-54: Student Encouragement & Support): Celebratory culture (graduation/hooding), orientation (Meet & Greet), and access to centralized services (scholarships, counselling, disability, international) are evident. Compliant, while School-level coordination, reward policy transparency, and career support could be stronger.
  Std.15 (C-55–C-58: Student Diversity & Mobility): Inclusive admissions, multilingual promotion, collaboration with UMKI, and initial supports for international students. Partially compliant—clear diversity targets/KPIs and postgraduate-friendly mobility options are not yet systematic.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB acknowledges and appreciates the PRT’s constructive feedback. The School confirms that its admission policy, student support system, and diversity initiatives align with ABEST21. The School has no objection to the PRT’s comments and appreciates the recommendations, which are consistent with its ongoing efforts to strengthen student experience, diversity, and global engagement.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s affirmation that its admission policy, student support system, and diversity initiatives are aligned with ABEST21 standards. The School’s acceptance of the recommendations reflects a strong commitment to enhancing student experience, inclusivity, and global engagement.

Issues to be improved:

MGSEB’s student admission and support systems are clearly structured and aligned with UMK and ABEST21 requirements, targeting experienced professionals and fostering an inclusive learning environment. The School provides accessible academic advising, financial aid, and orientation support. However, student enrolment remains modest, and risk-monitoring, feedback, and alumni engagement systems require further development.
To enhance quality and outcomes, MGSEB is encouraged to formalize a comprehensive student feedback and tracking framework, integrating course evaluations, program reviews, and alumni employability data. Establishing a Selection and Admissions Committee with structured rubrics and employer/alumni input would ensure transparency and data-driven recruitment.
A centralized student support hub—covering academic, financial, wellbeing, and career services—should be developed, alongside modular orientation programs and clear recognition policies for excellence and community engagement. The School is advised to expand internationalization and diversity initiatives, such as scholarships, short exchanges, and peer mentorship, supported by a Student Diversity Plan with measurable KPIs.
Institutionalizing academic writing, research, and professional development workshops will further strengthen student competencies. Overall, MGSEB meets ABEST21 expectations but should focus on formalizing feedback loops, alumni tracking, and diversity mechanisms to enhance student experience, global exposure, and program impact.

• Student enrolment is modest; risk-monitoring and alumni engagement systems can be strengthened.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB acknowledges and appreciates the constructive feedback, which aligns with the School’s ongoing initiatives. The School agrees with the recommended improvements, including the formalization of a comprehensive student feedback and alumni tracking framework, enhancement of advisory and career development systems, and establishment of a centralized support hub for academic, financial, and wellbeing services.
Overall, MGSEB has no objection and appreciates the PRT’s recommendations, which are consistent with its continuous improvement framework to enhance student experience, global exposure, and program impact.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s acceptance of the recommendations and appreciates that the School’s ongoing initiatives already align with the proposed enhancements, particularly in strengthening student feedback mechanisms, alumni tracking, and advisory support. The School’s commitment to formalizing a centralized support hub and expanding career development services reflects a proactive approach to elevating student experience and program impact. The PRT encourages continued consolidation of these improvements to further reinforce alignment with ABEST21 expectations and enhance overall institutional effectiveness.

Chapter 5: Faculty

• Standard 16: Faculty Structure
• Standard 17: Faculty Qualifications
• Standard 18: Maintenance of Education and Research Environment
• Standard 19: Faculty Development
• Standard 20: Faculty Diversity

MGSEB’s faculty composition meets MQA and ABEST21 standards in qualifications, professionalism, and engagement. The School maintains an appropriate full-time to part-time ratio, and most faculty members hold doctoral degrees, reflecting a solid academic base. However, supervision load distribution, diversity, and research engagement require further enhancement.
The School is encouraged to implement a workload allocation system to ensure fairness and transparency in teaching, supervision, and research responsibilities. A Faculty Development Plan should be institutionalized, focusing on applied research, case writing, publication in indexed journals, and supervision ethics. Faculty evaluation and promotion criteria may incorporate rewards for industry collaboration, research productivity, and supervision quality.
Internationalization remains limited; thus, recruitment of international adjuncts, visiting scholars, and faculty exchanges with ABEST21 member institutions is recommended to enhance diversity and global perspectives. The School should revitalize underutilized sabbatical and research-grant systems, establish an internal research fund, and encourage integration of faculty research outputs into teaching.
To support continuous improvement, biannual PDCA-driven development workshops on pedagogy, research methods, and supervision ethics should be formalized. Overall, MGSEB demonstrates a committed and capable faculty base, but systematic workload management, structured development, and greater international engagement will further elevate its academic excellence and global standing.

• The faculty complement meets MQA requirements but supervision distribution is uneven. Introducing a workload allocation system will ensure fairness. Diversity in nationality and gender is limited; recruitment of international adjuncts should be prioritised. Faculty are academically qualified, though some lack recent industry exposure. A structured Faculty Development Plan focusing on applied research, case writing, and publication in indexed journals is recommended. Promotion and evaluation criteria should reward research supervision success and industry collaboration. Teaching loads are manageable; however, sabbatical and research-grant systems are underutilised. Establishing an internal research fund and clear policy on study leave will encourage scholarship. Faculty should be encouraged to integrate their research outputs into teaching materials. Faculty development workshops are sporadic. A biannual program aligned with PDCA findings and student evaluations should be formalised, covering pedagogy, supervision ethics, and research methods. The School shows modest faculty diversity. Introducing a Visiting Scholar Scheme and encouraging exchange with ABEST21 institutions would enrich academic culture and international perspectives.
• MGSEB’s faculty profile aligns with ABEST21 standards in qualifications, professionalism, and engagement. Many faculty have international backgrounds, and participation in university-led training and accreditation activities is evident. The faculty’s commitment to research, entrepreneurship, and consultancy supports the school’s mission.
  Despite these strengths, faculty development and international exposure are uneven. Research productivity and collaboration with international institutions or industry can be strengthened. While performance appraisals follow UMK guidelines, MGSEB lacks a dedicated strategy for faculty succession planning, research capacity building, and workload balance.

The School’s Feedback:

MGSEB appreciates the PRT’s recognition that its faculty composition meets MQA and ABEST21 standards in qualifications, professionalism, and engagement. The School agrees with the recommendations to enhance workload governance, faculty development, and international exposure, but offers the following clarifications:

1. Workload Allocation System Already Practiced

• While the PRT suggests introducing a workload allocation system, MGSEB already follows the UMK Academic Workload Distribution Guidelines and STEPS, which govern equitable allocation for teaching, supervision, research, and administrative duties.
• This system is applied annually through the university’s Performance Management (SKT/LNPT) process and reviewed by the Dean for transparency and fairness.

2. Faculty Development Is Systematic

• MGSEB conducts ongoing development through university-organized PRD and BAKAT training, including sessions on research methods, supervision ethics, and case writing.
• Faculty members also actively participate in CMI and ABEST21-related training, journal publication workshops, and industry-linked events. The School is formalizing a Faculty Development Framework (2026–2028) to align with PDCA improvement cycles.

3. Research and Industry Engagement Are Active

• MGSEB faculty are engaged in SME-focused consultancy, MyGRANTS projects, Erasmus+ collaborations, and Swiss Innovation Challenge ASEAN (SIC) activities, integrating real-world insights into teaching and supervision.
• Research outputs and case studies are embedded into courses, demonstrating applied learning in practice.

4. Internationalization Is Expanding

• Several faculty members hold international qualifications, and the School has begun collaborations with Henan University (China) and Universitas Ciputra (Indonesia) through staff exchange, guest lectures, and academic mobility programs.
• Plans for Visiting Scholar and Adjunct Professor schemes are underway under the ABEST21 international engagement initiative.

5. Succession Planning and Diversity

• Faculty succession and recruitment follow UMK’s STEPS policy, ensuring quality and academic continuity. MGSEB is gradually diversifying its faculty profile, focusing on regional representation and gender balance.

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that workload allocation, faculty development, and performance monitoring are already governed through UMK’s established systems, including STEPS, SKT/LNPT, and structured training under PRD and BAKAT. The School’s active engagement in consultancy, international collaborations, applied research, and expanding global partnerships demonstrates a strong foundation that aligns well with ABEST21 expectations. The PRT encourages MGSEB to continue formalizing these existing practices—particularly the Faculty Development Framework and international engagement schemes—to enhance visibility, coherence, and long-term faculty capacity building.

Issues to be improved:

MGSEB’s faculty meets MQA and ABEST21 requirements in qualifications, ratio, and academic competence, demonstrating strong commitment to teaching and research. However, supervision workload imbalance, limited international exposure, and absence of a formal faculty development framework remain key areas for improvement.
The School is advised to develop a 3–5 year Faculty Development and Succession Plan that sets clear targets for academic qualifications, field coverage, and international recruitment. A workload governance system should be introduced, detailing teaching and supervision norms, caps, and transparent allocation procedures to ensure balance and equity.
Faculty development should focus on enhancing research quality, publication impact, and global collaboration, supported by incentives such as grants, awards, and workload adjustments. The establishment of a School-level Research Support Unit or coordinator would facilitate proposal development, grant tracking, and integration of research outputs into teaching.
To elevate global and practice relevance, MGSEB should increase faculty exchanges, joint research, and adjunct appointments, while formalizing AQ/PQ policies and practice-based evaluations. Mentoring and succession systems for junior faculty should also be institutionalized.
Overall, MGSEB demonstrates a capable academic team; by formalizing development plans, managing workloads, and expanding international engagement, the School can further strengthen academic excellence and sustainability.

• Supervision workload imbalance, limited international exposure, and lack of formal development plans.

The School’s Feedback:

Workload Allocation and Supervision Governance

MGSEB already applies UMK’s STEPS Academic Workload Distribution Guidelines to allocate teaching, supervision, research, and administrative duties.
Evidence in the SCR shows SKT/LNPT workload records and dean-level endorsement
SCR-APAS-Format-2-2 (1).
Hence, workload management exists, though it will be formalized in a dedicated Faculty Workload Framework for clarity.

Faculty Development and Succession Planning

The SCR lists university-organized PRD and BAKAT training plus participation in CMI, ABEST21, and research-method workshops, indicating that a development system already functions, albeit at the university level.
MGSEB’s forthcoming Faculty Development Plan (2026-2028) will consolidate these activities and add mentoring for junior faculty.

Research and Industry Engagement

Faculty are active in SME consultancy, Erasmus+ projects, and Swiss Innovation Challenge ASEAN initiatives, integrating applied research into teaching. The School will enhance tracking through a light Research Support Desk rather than a new unit.

Internationalization

International collaboration is underway through Henan University (China) and Universitas Ciputra (Indonesia) exchanges and visiting lectures. Plans for a Visiting Scholar/Adjunct Scheme are already endorsed internally, which addresses the PRT’s recommendation.

AQ/PQ and Diversity Policies

UMK’s STEPS recruitment and promotion policy defines AQ/PQ criteria. MGSEB will document annual updates on professional practice currency and expand faculty diversity via regional appointment

PRT Response:

The PRT acknowledges MGSEB’s clarification that workload allocation, supervision governance, and faculty qualification criteria are already practiced through UMK’s STEPS policy, SKT/LNPT monitoring, and documented workload records in the SCR, with plans underway to consolidate these into a clearer Faculty Workload Framework. The School’s ongoing faculty development efforts, active research–industry engagement, and expanding international collaborations—alongside forthcoming initiatives such as the Faculty Development Plan (2026–2028) and Visiting Scholar/Adjunct Scheme—demonstrate strong alignment with ABEST21 expectations. To strengthen visibility and long-term capacity building, the PRT encourages MGSEB to continue formalizing these existing practices, including documentation of AQ/PQ currency and efforts to diversify faculty profiles.