I must respectfully disagree with Chuck Stowe about what AACSB does and
does not count as research.  One of the early adopters of  Boyer's
redefinition of scholarship (in Ernest Boyer, Scholarship Reconsidered
put out by the Carnegie Foundation 1990), AACSB has broken scholarship
into
the following categories with the following outputs:

Basic scholarhip:  The creation of new knowledge
Outputs include pubs. in refereed journals, monographs, papers presented

at academic meetings, and so on.

Applied Scholarship:  The application, transfer and interpretation of
knowledge to improve management practice and teaching.
Outputs include pubs in professional journals, professional
presentations, in-house journals, papers presented at faculty workshops,

etc.

Instructional Development:  The enhancement of the educational value of
instructional efforts of the institution or discipline
Outputs include textbooks, pubs in pedagogical journals, written cases,
instructional software

All of the above is from IC.1 (Intellectual Contributions) of the
standards.

Now if you are thinking that your school doesn't pay any attention to
the scholarship of instructional development or even applied
scholarship, it may be because your school's mission would not value
those kinds of scholarship.  The standards document states that "[t]he
concentration and distribution of faculty intellectual activities should

be consistent with the school's mission statement and documents used by
the school to describe itself to interested constituencies."

We are in our self-study year here at Syracuse.  Each of us had to show
all of our
scholarly activity for the past five years categorized into one of the
three above-described categories. As a doctoral-granting institution, we

couldn't make the case that instructional development and applied
scholarship would be sufficient to satisfy our mission.  However, AACSB
itself suggests a portfolio approach whereby the intellectual
contributions of all faculty at the school are viewed as a portfolio
supporting the school's particular mission.  So our self-study will show

all the various forms of scholarship undertaken by our faculty, and it
will be up to us to make the case that the mix fits with the mission.
It will be up to examiners to say whether we made that case.

What seems like ages ago, I wrote an Editor's Corner about the
redefinition of scholarship that was going on at AACSB and in many
schools, suggesting that legal studies folks had a role to play in the
effort.  Boyer broke scholarship into four categories; AACSB has settled
on three.  If any of this interests you, see 33 Am. Bus. L.J. No. 2
(1995).

All of this is to say that Chuck's proposal nevertheless has merit.
Depending on the article and the reviewing process for its acceptance,
intellectual contributions by submitters
will fit into one of the three categories of scholarship.  The submitter
must decide whether it is a category that will count back home.