The variables related to the five basic processes of strategic management (see Table 5) were then grouped together to measure the correlations. The goal setting variables were significantly (p < .01) related to environmental analysis, implementation, and evaluation. This goal setting group of variables was also related to decision-making (p < .07), but this correlation was not statistically as significant as the three mentioned above. Evaluation, like goal setting, had significant (p < .001) correlations with three of the four processes (i.e., goal setting, environmental analysis, and implementation). All of these correlations are summarized in Table 5. A t test analysis revealed a significant difference between the array of "best" business schools and the others. With respect to the five strategic management processes considered, the "best" business schools were significantly different in relation to goal setting, environmental analysis, and implementation (see Table 6). The total scores for all the variables also revealed a significant difference be-tween the "best" business schools and the remaining array of institutions. These results support the notion that the "best schools" should indeed be more effective Conclusion Educational institutions are increasingly becoming aware of the importance of using formal strategic management systems and techniques in their operations. Changing demographics, uncertain findings, population shifts, and tough competitive climates are making it necessary to leave little to "chance management." The unique demands of the public must be met. In addition, accountability for use of resources is being addressed at state and local levels. The key conclusion of this study is that those institutions considered "the best" are likely participating in the strategic management processes that confirm their special status. The statistical results indicate a significant difference among the AACSB-accredited institutions. Though not directly supported by the statistics of this study, previous studies have shown that low-performing organizations will often be preoccupied with solving internal, day-to-day operations, either ignoring or underestimating the strengths of competitors and other environmental factors. They may not appreciate or understand the dire need to devote equal or more time to formulating, implementing, and evaluating strategies for future growth and development. As C. S. Jones (1986) has stated, the greatest need for improvement in universities is in the area of planning, resource allocation, and monitoring. This study supports that finding.