The MBA at a Crossroads
Book Points the Way to Business Education Reform
It’s not often that a speech by an academic generates optimism in a room full of educational leaders facing significant challenges. But that’s what happened back in February when HBS professor Srikant Datar addressed business school deans assembled in Tampa, Florida, for their annual conference organized by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). Datar, senior asso-ciate dean, director of research, discussed his experience recently when I sat down with him and Professor David Garvin to talk about their much-anticipated new book, Rethinking the MBA: Business Education at a Crossroads. (Read the Q&A)
The deans had reason to be concerned. The business of business education is in the midst of dramatic change. There are clear trends away from two-year, full-time programs; increased questioning of the value-added by the MBA degree; and a rise in employers hiring students straight from undergraduate programs and promoting internally without requiring an MBA. The global economic crisis only added to the chorus of concerns about the MBA degree.
The Carnegie Corporation and Ford Foundation reports in 1959 had an enormous impact on business education. Those reports criticized business schools for serving up largely vocational training lacking in the analytical rigor deemed necessary to lay claim to academic respectability. Spurred on by the reports, business schools forged an analytical path that in recent years has itself become the object of criticism and calls for a new wave of reforms. But what reforms?
Based on extensive surveys of executives and business school deans, Datar, Garvin, and coauthor Patrick Cullen concluded that MBA students need to balance the time spent honing analytical skills with time spent developing critical, integrative, and innovative thinking skills; working on global experiential projects; and engaging in reflective exercises that underpin effective leadership. They also identified eight “unmet needs,” ranging from gaining a global perspective to understanding the role, responsibilities, and purpose of business. For every unmet need, the authors described how one or more business schools had already responded with innovative programmatic changes.
The AACSB plenary presentation by Datar, followed by a question-and-answer session, helped clarify that the problems each school faced were not unique but widely shared. Moreover, the deans had reason to be optimistic because the leading edge of change was already under way, and program changes like the ones described in the book, despite being challenging, could be achieved through individual and collective action.
Walking back to my office after the interview with Datar and Garvin, I couldn’t help but wonder what lasting impact Rethinking the MBA might have. Judging from the deans’ reception, the budding reform process described in the book is only just beginning.
Roger Thompson
