Discussion: View Thread

Expand all | Collapse all

Why business ignores the business schools

  • 1.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-10-2008 11:44
    You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business schools" helpful: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
     
    Best wishes,
     
    Kenneth Amaeshi
     
    Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    <st1:place><st1:placename>Cranfield</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>School</st1:placetype></st1:place> of Management
    <st1:place><st1:city>Cranfield University</st1:city>, <st1:country-region>UK</st1:country-region></st1:place>
    <st1:place><st1:country-region> </st1:country-region></st1:place> 
    <st1:place><st1:country-region>Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk</st1:country-region></st1:place>

    Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.


  • 2.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-11-2008 10:43
    Colleagues,

    Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    there are the really interesting questions."

    In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.

    Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)

    Ruth

    Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    > You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    > schools" helpful:
    > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >
    > Best wishes,
    >
    > Kenneth Amaeshi
    >
    > Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    > Cranfield School of Management
    > Cranfield University, UK
    >
    > Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    > <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >
    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    > Search.
    > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >

    --
    Ruth H. Axelrod
    (H/O) 301-593-4938


  • 3.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-16-2008 18:35



    The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has little or no relevance to the real world of business.  One reason, a professor of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of business experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.

    The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of business?

    It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have never conducted surgery.  And the surgeons who teach have themselves been taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a scalpel.  And so it goes on.

    Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other applied fields, business is the exception where the academic world has so little relevance to the real world.  And I daresay, the other way round as well.

    This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.

    I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who have no relevant business experience to obtain the required experience by some means so that there is some element of relevance between what they teach and what they are supposed to teach.  In addition, the nature of research and the incentives for business research need to change so that academics create something of value for their students and for the world of business, so that research efforts go   beyond building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.

    Best regards

    Ananda Mukherji


    Ananda K Mukherji
    Associate Professor
    Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    PH 313H
    Tel. (956) 326-2526
    Fax (956) 326-2479

    As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2 concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this email is a mechanism for official communication of the University. Electronic mail (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic or state business. Official email communications are intended only to meet the academic and administrative needs of the campus community.

    -----------------------

    At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for cross listing.

    I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both worlds--academia and business. Let me share one of my experience as a CEO of a bank. After serving a few years in academia, I was appointed to a CEO of a commercial bank. And after teaching the benefits of participative management, I wanted to delegate some of my decision making authority to my division heads to speed up the decision making  and  develop divisional managers. However, I realized that my division heads did not want to have more decision making authority because it brings along more responsibilities, which they wanted to avoid. Then I had to prepare and convince them the benefits of delegation of authority and change the reward system accordingly to motivate them to assume more responsibilities. After returning to the academia, I felt my business experience was a second PhD for me.
    The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.

    Best wishes for the new year,
    Refik Culpan
    Penn State University at Harrisburg

    On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU> wrote:

      
    Colleagues,   
    Good article!  It  reminds me of a statement by the American   
    psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in   
    psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then   
    there are the really interesting questions."   
    In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is   
    founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs   
    derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in   
    selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners.  It is   
    hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the   
    questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.   
    Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the   
    context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am   
    currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*   
    practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who   
    faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization   
    conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out.  Then,   
    academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe   
    it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not   
    theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models   
    which we often call theories).  Rarely do academics actually innovate.   
    We're not under pressure to do so.  (Rremember that Peter Drucker   
    observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments   
    and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom   
    line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't   
    either.)  What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that   
    has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for   
    the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific   
    method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have   
    been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)   
    Ruth   
    Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:  
    > You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business   
    > schools" helpful:   
    >  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html  
    >    
    > Best wishes,  
    >    
    > Kenneth Amaeshi  
    >    
    > Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance  
    > Cranfield School of Management  
    > Cranfield University, UK  
    >    
    > Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk   
    > < mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>  
    >   
    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!   
    > Search.   
    >  
     < http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping >   
    >    
    --   
    Ruth H. Axelrod  
    (H/O) 301-593-4938
    Prof. Refik Culpan



    Prof. Refik Culpan




    Ananda Mukherji
    __________________________________________
    Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    College of Business Administration
    Texas A & M International University
    Laredo, TX 78041-1900

    Dept:<x-tab>   </x-tab><x-tab>         </x-tab>956-326-2495
    Office:<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab>         </x-tab>956-326-2526
    Fax:<x-tab>    </x-tab><x-tab>         </x-tab> 956-326-2494
    E-mail:<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab>         </x-tab> max@tamiu.edu
    URL:<x-tab>    </x-tab><x-tab>         </x-tab> www.tamiu.edu


  • 4.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-17-2008 22:37
    Dear All, I have often heard this criticism. However, I wonder what examples of published research critics think is irrelevant and what leads them to think these researchers are clueless about the world of business. Perhaps it our emphasis on testing and developing theory rather than an emphasis on discription or application that leads them to this conclusion. I would point out however, that is what we are uniquely qualified to do, test and develop theory. As Kurt Lewin said, nothing is more useful than a good theory. It helps you not only to describe reality, but more importantly predict and in some cases even control the future. In many cases, tests of theory point out their falsehood, limitations, or boundary conditions. The fact that many executives are not trained to personally read and evaluate this research is a limitation to how we educate them. But MDs learn biology. chemistry.physiology from Ph.D.s who do research in these fields and not other MDs. Finally, I would point out that most of these executives and critics were either our students or are our clients. Thus, unless they think what they were taught, or the books they read were worthless, and the advice they pay for is useless, I think this criticism misses the mark.

    Kim Boal


    -----Original Message-----
    From: International Management Division Discussion on behalf of Ananda Mukherji
    Sent: Wed 1/16/2008 5:35 PM
    To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools



    The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has
    little or no relevance to the real world of business. One reason, a
    professor of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of
    business experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.

    The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of business?

    It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have
    never conducted surgery. And the surgeons who teach have themselves
    been taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a
    scalpel. And so it goes on.

    Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other
    applied fields, business is the exception where the academic world
    has so little relevance to the real world. And I daresay, the other
    way round as well.

    This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.

    I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    have no relevant business experience to obtain the required
    experience by some means so that there is some element of relevance
    between what they teach and what they are supposed to teach. In
    addition, the nature of research and the incentives for business
    research need to change so that academics create something of value
    for their students and for the world of business, so that research
    efforts go beyond building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.

    Best regards

    Ananda Mukherji


    Ananda K Mukherji
    Associate Professor
    max@tamiu.edu
    Tel. (956) 326-2526
    Fax (956) 326-2479
    Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    Texas A&M International University
    PH 313H
    ,

    As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2 concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this email is a mechanism for official communication of the University. Electronic mail (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic or state business. Official email communications are intended only to meet the academic and administrative needs of the campus community.-----------------------

    At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >cross listing.
    >
    >I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both
    >worlds--academia and business. Let me share one of my experience as
    >a CEO of a bank. After serving a few years in academia, I was
    >appointed to a CEO of a commercial bank. And after teaching the
    >benefits of participative management, I wanted to delegate some of
    >my decision making authority to my division heads to speed up the
    >decision making and develop divisional managers. However, I
    >realized that my division heads did not want to have more decision
    >making authority because it brings along more responsibilities,
    >which they wanted to avoid. Then I had to prepare and convince them
    >the benefits of delegation of authority and change the reward system
    >accordingly to motivate them to assume more responsibilities. After
    >returning to the academia, I felt my business experience was a
    >second PhD for me.
    >The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.
    >
    >Best wishes for the new year,
    >Refik Culpan
    >Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >
    >On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >Colleagues,
    >
    >
    >Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    >
    >psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >
    >psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >
    >there are the really interesting questions."
    >
    >
    >In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >
    >founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >
    >derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >
    >selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    >
    >hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >
    >questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >
    >
    >Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >
    >context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >
    >currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >
    >practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >
    >faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >
    >conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    >
    >academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    >
    >it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >
    >theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    >
    >which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >
    >We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >
    >observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    >
    >and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >
    >line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >
    >either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >
    >has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    >
    >the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >
    >method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >
    >been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >
    >
    >Ruth
    >
    >
    >Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >
    > > You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >
    > > schools" helpful:
    >
    > > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Best wishes,
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Kenneth Amaeshi
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >
    > > Cranfield School of Management
    >
    > > Cranfield University, UK
    >
    > >
    >
    > > Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >
    > > <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >
    > >
    >
    > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >
    > > Search.
    >
    > >
    >
    ><http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >
    >
    > >
    >
    >
    >--
    >
    >Ruth H. Axelrod
    >
    >(H/O) 301-593-4938
    >
    >
    >Prof. Refik Culpan
    >
    >
    >
    >Prof. Refik Culpan
    >
    >


    Ananda Mukherji
    __________________________________________
    Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    College of Business Administration
    Texas A & M International University
    Laredo, TX 78041-1900

    Dept: 956-326-2495
    Office: 956-326-2526
    Fax: 956-326-2494
    E-mail: max@tamiu.edu
    URL: www.tamiu.edu


  • 5.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-18-2008 09:03
    Like Kim, I also often hear this criticism, but directed at
    industrial/organizational psychology. On one level, I think this is
    rationalization by professionals who know they should keep up on the
    latest developments but fail to do so. Rather than admitting their own
    shortcomings, it is easy to blame the academics for doing stuff that is
    irrelevant. "Why should I try to learn anything that happened after I left
    school because it has to connection to the 'real world'" Much of what we
    do is indeed relevant.

    On the other hand, the Lewin quote includes the qualifier of "good
    theory". In our obsession to embrace theory, we have gone overboard,
    especially but not exclusively in management journals. Papers that make
    important (and relevant) scientific discoveries without much theory are
    rejected. Papers that test theories but make no independent theoretical
    contribution are marginalized. Thus authors add premature (and often
    irrelevant) theory to articles to make them more publishable. As an active
    researcher, I find much of this required "theory" to be irrelevant--not to
    mention, half the time I don't understand the titles of papers there's so
    much jargon. Simple ideas are made complex to make them publishable, but
    it makes them inaccessible.

    Paul E. Spector
    Department of Psychology
    University of South Florida
    Tampa, FL 33620
    (813) 974-0357 Voice
    (813) 974-4617 Fax
    spector@shell.cas.usf.edu
    website http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Boal, Kim wrote:

    > Dear All, I have often heard this criticism. However, I wonder what
    > examples of published research critics think is irrelevant and what
    > leads them to think these researchers are clueless about the world of
    > business. Perhaps it our emphasis on testing and developing theory
    > rather than an emphasis on discription or application that leads them to
    > this conclusion. I would point out however, that is what we are
    > uniquely qualified to do, test and develop theory. As Kurt Lewin said,
    > nothing is more useful than a good theory. It helps you not only to
    > describe reality, but more importantly predict and in some cases even
    > control the future. In many cases, tests of theory point out their
    > falsehood, limitations, or boundary conditions. The fact that many
    > executives are not trained to personally read and evaluate this research
    > is a limitation to how we educate them. But MDs learn biology.
    > chemistry.physiology from Ph.D.s who do research in these fields and not
    > other MDs. Finally, I would point out that most of these executives and
    > critics were either our students or are our clients. Thus, unless they
    > think what they were taught, or the books they read were worthless, and
    > the advice they pay for is useless, I think this criticism misses the
    > mark.
    >
    > Kim Boal
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: International Management Division Discussion on behalf of Ananda Mukherji
    > Sent: Wed 1/16/2008 5:35 PM
    > To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools
    >
    >
    >
    > The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    > overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has
    > little or no relevance to the real world of business. One reason, a
    > professor of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of
    > business experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >
    > The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    > faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    > they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of business?
    >
    > It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have
    > never conducted surgery. And the surgeons who teach have themselves
    > been taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a
    > scalpel. And so it goes on.
    >
    > Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other
    > applied fields, business is the exception where the academic world
    > has so little relevance to the real world. And I daresay, the other
    > way round as well.
    >
    > This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    > have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >
    > I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    > have no relevant business experience to obtain the required
    > experience by some means so that there is some element of relevance
    > between what they teach and what they are supposed to teach. In
    > addition, the nature of research and the incentives for business
    > research need to change so that academics create something of value
    > for their students and for the world of business, so that research
    > efforts go beyond building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    >
    >
    > Ananda K Mukherji
    > Associate Professor
    > max@tamiu.edu
    > Tel. (956) 326-2526
    > Fax (956) 326-2479
    > Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    > Texas A&M International University
    > PH 313H
    > ,
    >
    > As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2 concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this email is a mechanism for official communication of the University. Electronic mail (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic or state business. Official email communications are intended only to meet the academic and administrative needs of the campus community.-----------------------
    >
    > At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >> cross listing.
    >>
    >> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both
    >> worlds--academia and business. Let me share one of my experience as
    >> a CEO of a bank. After serving a few years in academia, I was
    >> appointed to a CEO of a commercial bank. And after teaching the
    >> benefits of participative management, I wanted to delegate some of
    >> my decision making authority to my division heads to speed up the
    >> decision making and develop divisional managers. However, I
    >> realized that my division heads did not want to have more decision
    >> making authority because it brings along more responsibilities,
    >> which they wanted to avoid. Then I had to prepare and convince them
    >> the benefits of delegation of authority and change the reward system
    >> accordingly to motivate them to assume more responsibilities. After
    >> returning to the academia, I felt my business experience was a
    >> second PhD for me.
    >> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.
    >>
    >> Best wishes for the new year,
    >> Refik Culpan
    >> Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >>
    >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Colleagues,
    >>
    >>
    >> Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>
    >> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>
    >> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>
    >> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>
    >>
    >> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>
    >> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>
    >> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>
    >> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    >>
    >> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>
    >> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>
    >>
    >> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>
    >> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>
    >> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>
    >> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>
    >> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>
    >> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    >>
    >> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    >>
    >> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>
    >> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    >>
    >> which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>
    >> We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>
    >> observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    >>
    >> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>
    >> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>
    >> either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>
    >> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    >>
    >> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>
    >> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>
    >> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Ruth
    >>
    >>
    >> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>
    >>> You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>
    >>> schools" helpful:
    >>
    >>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Best wishes,
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>
    >>> Cranfield School of Management
    >>
    >>> Cranfield University, UK
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>
    >>> <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>
    >>> Search.
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>
    >> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    > __________________________________________
    > Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    > College of Business Administration
    > Texas A & M International University
    > Laredo, TX 78041-1900
    >
    > Dept: 956-326-2495
    > Office: 956-326-2526
    > Fax: 956-326-2494
    > E-mail: max@tamiu.edu
    > URL: www.tamiu.edu
    >


  • 6.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-18-2008 18:13
    Dear All -

    This reminds me of the time when my manager+1 shouted at me (about 8
    expletives deleted for brevity) "Don't give me that academic stuff, I
    just want the principles of the matter!"

    But I agree with the point that business schools suffer from the lack
    of business experience. It was very clear to those in my MBA cohort
    which of our teachers had "walked the talk".


    best regards
    hugh

    MBA (1988), sometime visiting MBA teacher, and two times successful
    very small business creator/manager
    --
    ____________________________________________________________________
    Hugh Browton ghb@clarity.co.uk ////
    CLARITY Consulting Ltd Sun House ALDEBURGH UK IP15 5GY
    tel:+44 1728 454484 fax:+44 7970 674322 mobile: +44 7973 560921


  • 7.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-19-2008 00:01

    Are B-Schools a Blight on the Land?

     

    FYI: In case anyone missed this Business Week article in Nov. 2007.

     

    Another perspective!

     

    (:>)

     

    Lou Carrier

     



  • 8.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-19-2008 09:26
    Dear All, Lou Carrier, would point you to a book critical of B-schools,(really critical of Agency Theory-nothing new here-see Ghosal and Moran and the B-school ranking-same thing-see Gioia). All of the crtics tend to point to certain theories for "proof" that we are not doing a good job of educating managers, but they ignore all the theories that business schools produce that they use without the negative consequences of Agency Theory or TCE. I once was at a meeting were I heard the then head of Universal Studios rail against Harvard MBAs, (specializing in Finance), he had hired because they didn't understand the creative process. Duh. We have our own critics, but as I quoted Lewin previously, nothing is more important than a Good Theory. There is a lot of good research published that is striving to develop Good Theories. But it is a long process and it takes research and time to sort out the boundary conditions, short comings, etc of these theories. In the process, many times managers prematurely jump on the bad wagon and get burned because they don't appreciate the limitations. To the extent we have over promised and tell more than we know, then we should be admonished. But to the extent that they listen to only a few, and ignore the others, they must proceed at their own peril.

    Kim Boal


    -----Original Message-----
    From: International Management Division Discussion on behalf of Lou Carrier
    Sent: Fri 1/18/2008 11:01 PM
    To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools

    Are
    <http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/07_45/b4057106.htm?chan=
    gl> B-Schools a Blight on the Land?



    FYI: In case anyone missed this Business Week article in Nov. 2007.



    Another perspective!



    (:>)



    Lou Carrier


  • 9.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-19-2008 10:34
    I think it is wonderful that we, academics, are uncomfortable with the
    status quo. Money is being "left at the table" when practitioners follow
    their gut instead of well-established scientific findings. Of course, it's
    not always easy to differentiate between a well-established finding that is
    relevant for managers and a "half-baked" theory. At the risk of appearing
    "not-so-academic" (because I'm inviting action instead of more theories), I
    feel compelled to invite all of you that are interested in this topic to a
    PDW (Professional Development Workshop) that will take place Sunday, August
    10, 9-12 at the next Academy of Management meeting in Anaheim, CA:

    Questioning for Relevance: A Dialogue of Scholarship and Practice

    This PDW will provide a space to discuss and critically reflect on the
    recent initiatives to bridge the research-practice gap, and to inspire
    extensions of current efforts to increase the relevance of academic work.
    Presenters have volunteered based on their work, recent experience and
    research interests. We approach the research-practice gap from several
    perspectives, including the roles of researcher, editor, teacher, and
    practitioner. We seek to interactively explore with participants how each
    role contributes to the creation, translation, and dissemination of research
    that achieves relevance. Reports from founding participants in the Evidence
    Based Management Collaborative will be included.

    Keywords: Evidence-Based Management, Relevance, Research-Practice Gap.
    Names: Denyer, Blancero, Cohen, Beatty, Smith, Mclaughlin and Olivas-Lujan.

    I know this is early, but the PDW has already been approved and hopefully we
    will be able to theorize in ways that may guide our actions to increase the
    practical relevance of our work.

    If you cannot join us in Anaheim, SIOP will have at least one similar event
    in San Francisco (April 10-12). Keywords: Evidence-Based Management.
    Names: Rousseau, Latham, Bartunek, Rynes, among others.

    Miguel
    ____________________________________________________________
    Miguel R. Olivas-Lujan, PhD
    Administrative Science Dept.
    Clarion U. of Pennsylvania / Tec de Monterrey
    840 Wood St
    Clarion, PA 16214
    Tel: +1 (814) 393.2641
    Fax: +1 (814) 393.1910
    E-mail: molivas@clarion.edu
    WWW: http://www.drolivas.org
    Member of Mexico's National Researchers System; Liaison to Practice,
    Management in Education Division http://www.aom.pace.edu/med

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Spector (PSY) [mailto:spector@SHELL.CAS.USF.EDU]
    Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 9:03 AM
    Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools

    Like Kim, I also often hear this criticism, but directed at
    industrial/organizational psychology. On one level, I think this is
    rationalization by professionals who know they should keep up on the
    latest developments but fail to do so. Rather than admitting their own
    shortcomings, it is easy to blame the academics for doing stuff that is
    irrelevant. "Why should I try to learn anything that happened after I left
    school because it has to connection to the 'real world'" Much of what we
    do is indeed relevant.

    On the other hand, the Lewin quote includes the qualifier of "good
    theory". In our obsession to embrace theory, we have gone overboard,
    especially but not exclusively in management journals. Papers that make
    important (and relevant) scientific discoveries without much theory are
    rejected. Papers that test theories but make no independent theoretical
    contribution are marginalized. Thus authors add premature (and often
    irrelevant) theory to articles to make them more publishable. As an active
    researcher, I find much of this required "theory" to be irrelevant--not to
    mention, half the time I don't understand the titles of papers there's so
    much jargon. Simple ideas are made complex to make them publishable, but
    it makes them inaccessible.

    Paul E. Spector
    Department of Psychology
    University of South Florida
    Tampa, FL 33620
    (813) 974-0357 Voice
    (813) 974-4617 Fax
    spector@shell.cas.usf.edu
    website http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Boal, Kim wrote:

    > Dear All, I have often heard this criticism. However, I wonder what
    > examples of published research critics think is irrelevant and what
    > leads them to think these researchers are clueless about the world of
    > business. Perhaps it our emphasis on testing and developing theory
    > rather than an emphasis on discription or application that leads them to
    > this conclusion. I would point out however, that is what we are
    > uniquely qualified to do, test and develop theory. As Kurt Lewin said,
    > nothing is more useful than a good theory. It helps you not only to
    > describe reality, but more importantly predict and in some cases even
    > control the future. In many cases, tests of theory point out their
    > falsehood, limitations, or boundary conditions. The fact that many
    > executives are not trained to personally read and evaluate this research
    > is a limitation to how we educate them. But MDs learn biology.
    > chemistry.physiology from Ph.D.s who do research in these fields and not
    > other MDs. Finally, I would point out that most of these executives and
    > critics were either our students or are our clients. Thus, unless they
    > think what they were taught, or the books they read were worthless, and
    > the advice they pay for is useless, I think this criticism misses the
    > mark.
    >
    > Kim Boal
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: International Management Division Discussion on behalf of Ananda
    Mukherji
    > Sent: Wed 1/16/2008 5:35 PM
    > To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools
    >
    >
    >
    > The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    > overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has
    > little or no relevance to the real world of business. One reason, a
    > professor of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of
    > business experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >
    > The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    > faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    > they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of business?
    >
    > It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have
    > never conducted surgery. And the surgeons who teach have themselves
    > been taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a
    > scalpel. And so it goes on.
    >
    > Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other
    > applied fields, business is the exception where the academic world
    > has so little relevance to the real world. And I daresay, the other
    > way round as well.
    >
    > This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    > have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >
    > I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    > have no relevant business experience to obtain the required
    > experience by some means so that there is some element of relevance
    > between what they teach and what they are supposed to teach. In
    > addition, the nature of research and the incentives for business
    > research need to change so that academics create something of value
    > for their students and for the world of business, so that research
    > efforts go beyond building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    >
    >
    > Ananda K Mukherji
    > Associate Professor
    > max@tamiu.edu
    > Tel. (956) 326-2526
    > Fax (956) 326-2479
    > Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    > Texas A&M International University
    > PH 313H
    > ,
    >
    > As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2
    concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this email
    is a mechanism for official communication of the University. Electronic mail
    (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic or state business.
    Official email communications are intended only to meet the academic and
    administrative needs of the campus community.-----------------------
    >
    > At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >> cross listing.
    >>
    >> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both
    >> worlds--academia and business. Let me share one of my experience as
    >> a CEO of a bank. After serving a few years in academia, I was
    >> appointed to a CEO of a commercial bank. And after teaching the
    >> benefits of participative management, I wanted to delegate some of
    >> my decision making authority to my division heads to speed up the
    >> decision making and develop divisional managers. However, I
    >> realized that my division heads did not want to have more decision
    >> making authority because it brings along more responsibilities,
    >> which they wanted to avoid. Then I had to prepare and convince them
    >> the benefits of delegation of authority and change the reward system
    >> accordingly to motivate them to assume more responsibilities. After
    >> returning to the academia, I felt my business experience was a
    >> second PhD for me.
    >> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.
    >>
    >> Best wishes for the new year,
    >> Refik Culpan
    >> Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >>
    >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU>
    wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Colleagues,
    >>
    >>
    >> Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>
    >> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>
    >> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>
    >> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>
    >>
    >> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>
    >> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>
    >> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>
    >> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    >>
    >> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>
    >> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>
    >>
    >> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>
    >> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>
    >> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>
    >> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>
    >> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>
    >> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    >>
    >> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    >>
    >> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>
    >> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    >>
    >> which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>
    >> We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>
    >> observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    >>
    >> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>
    >> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>
    >> either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>
    >> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    >>
    >> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>
    >> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>
    >> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Ruth
    >>
    >>
    >> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>
    >>> You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>
    >>> schools" helpful:
    >>
    >>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Best wishes,
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>
    >>> Cranfield School of Management
    >>
    >>> Cranfield University, UK
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>
    >>> <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>
    >>> Search.
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/c
    ategory.php?category=shopping>
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>
    >> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    > __________________________________________
    > Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    > College of Business Administration
    > Texas A & M International University
    > Laredo, TX 78041-1900
    >
    > Dept: 956-326-2495
    > Office: 956-326-2526
    > Fax: 956-326-2494
    > E-mail: max@tamiu.edu
    > URL: www.tamiu.edu
    >


  • 10.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-19-2008 11:30
    Dear Dr. Olivas-Lujan,

    I am interested in this topic. For attending your PDW, what do I have to do? Do I need to send in a paper?

    Regards,

    Manikutty

    On 1/19/08, Miguel R. Olivas-Lujan <molivas@clarion.edu> wrote:
    I think it is wonderful that we, academics, are uncomfortable with the
    status quo.  Money is being "left at the table" when practitioners follow
    their gut instead of well-established scientific findings.  Of course, it's
    not always easy to differentiate between a well-established finding that is
    relevant for managers and a "half-baked" theory.  At the risk of appearing
    "not-so-academic" (because I'm inviting action instead of more theories), I
    feel compelled to invite all of you that are interested in this topic to a
    PDW (Professional Development Workshop) that will take place Sunday, August
    10, 9-12 at the next Academy of Management meeting in Anaheim, CA:

    Questioning for Relevance: A Dialogue of Scholarship and Practice

    This PDW will provide a space to discuss and critically reflect on the
    recent initiatives to bridge the research-practice gap, and to inspire
    extensions of current efforts to increase the relevance of academic work.
    Presenters have volunteered based on their work, recent experience and
    research interests. We approach the research-practice gap from several
    perspectives, including the roles of researcher, editor, teacher, and
    practitioner. We seek to interactively explore with participants how each
    role contributes to the creation, translation, and dissemination of research
    that achieves relevance.  Reports from founding participants in the Evidence
    Based Management Collaborative will be included.

    Keywords: Evidence-Based Management, Relevance, Research-Practice Gap.
    Names: Denyer, Blancero, Cohen, Beatty, Smith, Mclaughlin and Olivas-Lujan.

    I know this is early, but the PDW has already been approved and hopefully we
    will be able to theorize in ways that may guide our actions to increase the
    practical relevance of our work.

    If you cannot join us in Anaheim, SIOP will have at least one similar event
    in San Francisco (April 10-12).  Keywords: Evidence-Based Management.
    Names: Rousseau, Latham, Bartunek, Rynes, among others.

    Miguel
    ____________________________________________________________
    Miguel R. Olivas-Lujan, PhD
    Administrative Science Dept.
    Clarion U. of Pennsylvania / Tec de Monterrey
    840 Wood St
    Clarion, PA 16214
    Tel: +1 (814) 393.2641
    Fax: +1 (814) 393.1910
    E-mail: molivas@clarion.edu
    WWW: http://www.drolivas.org
    Member of Mexico's National Researchers System; Liaison to Practice,
         Management in Education Division http://www.aom.pace.edu/med

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Spector (PSY) [mailto:spector@SHELL.CAS.USF.EDU]
    Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 9:03 AM
    Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools

    Like Kim, I also often hear this criticism, but directed at
    industrial/organizational psychology. On one level, I think this is
    rationalization by professionals who know they should keep up on the
    latest developments but fail to do so. Rather than admitting their own
    shortcomings, it is easy to blame the academics for doing stuff that is
    irrelevant. "Why should I try to learn anything that happened after I left
    school because it has to connection to the 'real world'" Much of what we
    do is indeed relevant.

    On the other hand, the Lewin quote includes the qualifier of "good
    theory". In our obsession to embrace theory, we have gone overboard,
    especially but not exclusively in management journals. Papers that make
    important (and relevant) scientific discoveries without much theory are
    rejected. Papers that test theories but make no independent theoretical
    contribution are marginalized. Thus authors add premature (and often
    irrelevant) theory to articles to make them more publishable. As an active
    researcher, I find much of this required "theory" to be irrelevant--not to
    mention, half the time I don't understand the titles of papers there's so
    much jargon. Simple ideas are made complex to make them publishable, but
    it makes them inaccessible.

    Paul E. Spector
    Department of Psychology
    University of South Florida
    Tampa, FL 33620
    (813) 974-0357 Voice
    (813) 974-4617 Fax
    spector@shell.cas.usf.edu
    website http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Boal, Kim wrote:

    > Dear All, I have often heard this criticism.  However, I wonder what
    > examples of published research critics think is irrelevant and what
    > leads them to think these researchers are clueless about the world of
    > business.  Perhaps it our emphasis on testing and developing theory
    > rather than an emphasis on discription or application that leads them to
    > this conclusion.  I would point out however, that is what we are
    > uniquely qualified to do, test and develop theory.  As Kurt Lewin said,
    > nothing is more useful than a good theory.  It helps you not only to
    > describe reality, but more importantly predict and in some cases even
    > control the future.  In many cases, tests of theory point out their
    > falsehood, limitations, or boundary conditions.  The fact that many
    > executives are not trained to personally read and evaluate this research
    > is a limitation to how we educate them.  But MDs learn biology.
    > chemistry.physiology from Ph.D.s who do research in these fields and not
    > other MDs.  Finally, I would point out that most of these executives and
    > critics were either our students or are our clients.  Thus, unless they
    > think what they were taught, or the books they read were worthless, and
    > the advice they pay for is useless, I think this criticism misses the
    > mark.
    >
    > Kim Boal
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: International Management Division Discussion on behalf of Ananda
    Mukherji
    > Sent: Wed 1/16/2008 5:35 PM
    > To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools
    >
    >
    >
    > The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    > overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has
    > little or no relevance to the real world of business.  One reason, a
    > professor of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of
    > business experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >
    > The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    > faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    > they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of business?
    >
    > It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have
    > never conducted surgery.  And the surgeons who teach have themselves
    > been taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a
    > scalpel.  And so it goes on.
    >
    > Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other
    > applied fields, business is the exception where the academic world
    > has so little relevance to the real world.  And I daresay, the other
    > way round as well.
    >
    > This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    > have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >
    > I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    > have no relevant business experience to obtain the required
    > experience by some means so that there is some element of relevance
    > between what they teach and what they are supposed to teach.  In
    > addition, the nature of research and the incentives for business
    > research need to change so that academics create something of value
    > for their students and for the world of business, so that research
    > efforts go   beyond building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    >
    >
    > Ananda K Mukherji
    > Associate Professor
    > max@tamiu.edu
    > Tel. (956) 326-2526
    > Fax (956) 326-2479
    > Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    > Texas A&M International University
    > PH 313H
    > ,
    >
    > As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2
    concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this email
    is a mechanism for official communication of the University. Electronic mail
    (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic or state business.
    Official email communications are intended only to meet the academic and
    administrative needs of the campus community.-----------------------
    >
    > At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >> cross listing.
    >>
    >> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both
    >> worlds--academia and business. Let me share one of my experience as
    >> a CEO of a bank. After serving a few years in academia, I was
    >> appointed to a CEO of a commercial bank. And after teaching the
    >> benefits of participative management, I wanted to delegate some of
    >> my decision making authority to my division heads to speed up the
    >> decision making  and  develop divisional managers. However, I
    >> realized that my division heads did not want to have more decision
    >> making authority because it brings along more responsibilities,
    >> which they wanted to avoid. Then I had to prepare and convince them
    >> the benefits of delegation of authority and change the reward system
    >> accordingly to motivate them to assume more responsibilities. After
    >> returning to the academia, I felt my business experience was a
    >> second PhD for me.
    >> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.
    >>
    >> Best wishes for the new year,
    >> Refik Culpan
    >> Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >>
    >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU>
    wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Colleagues,
    >>
    >>
    >> Good article!  It  reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>
    >> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>
    >> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>
    >> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>
    >>
    >> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>
    >> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>
    >> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>
    >> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners.  It is
    >>
    >> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>
    >> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>
    >>
    >> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>
    >> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>
    >> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>
    >> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>
    >> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>
    >> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out.  Then,
    >>
    >> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    >>
    >> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>
    >> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    >>
    >> which we often call theories).  Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>
    >> We're not under pressure to do so.  (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>
    >> observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    >>
    >> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>
    >> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>
    >> either.)  What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>
    >> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    >>
    >> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>
    >> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>
    >> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Ruth
    >>
    >>
    >> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>
    >>> You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>
    >>> schools" helpful:
    >>
    >>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Best wishes,
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>
    >>> Cranfield School of Management
    >>
    >>> Cranfield University, UK
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>
    >>> <mailto: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>
    >>> Search.
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    < http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/c
    ategory.php?category=shopping>
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>
    >> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    > __________________________________________
    > Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    > College of Business Administration
    > Texas A & M International University
    > Laredo, TX 78041-1900
    >
    > Dept:           956-326-2495
    > Office:         956-326-2526
    > Fax:             956-326-2494
    > E-mail:         max@tamiu.edu
    > URL:             www.tamiu.edu
    >



    --
    Prof. S. Manikutty
    Business Policy Area
    Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India 380015.
    Phones: (O) +91 79 26324807
    (Res) +91 79 26306503; +91 79 2632 5304
    (Mobile): 9898123115; 9427071566


  • 11.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-19-2008 11:41
    May I present a different perspective (with the caveat that, as a budding
    academic with business experience, I agree with much of what has been said).

    Is the disconnect between businesses and business schools that the academics
    are out of touch or that we aren't training MBAs to be "in touch" with what
    is cutting edge in research? Let me put it this way. I had the same attitude
    in my MBA that I only wanted to be taught by those who had work experience
    and that research follows practice. But now that I'm familiar with the
    research I believe that we know so much more from research and yet
    businesses are still relying on trial and error and learning the hard way
    (taking much longer than necessary). So, perhaps we need to rethink how MBAs
    are taught. From the FT article, analogies were drawn to lawyers and
    doctors, who go through their academic experiences learning to read the very
    articles that academics are writing. We don't do this in business schools,
    so if we want business people to stay current, maybe we should. I guess my
    simple point is that so much of the relevance debate falls on what research
    we do and how we present it. Perhaps we need to consider another side and
    that is how we teach it. What exactly are we preparing MBAs for?

    At the end of the day, my MBA classes that were based on the research of the
    professors were the most insightful, as many researchers are conducting
    studies in organizations. This gives them plenty of insight into the
    realities of the business (when conducted rigorously).

    Just some food for thought

    On 1/18/08 5:13 PM, "Hugh Browton" <ghb@CLARITY.CO.UK> wrote:

    > Dear All -
    >
    > This reminds me of the time when my manager+1 shouted at me (about 8
    > expletives deleted for brevity) "Don't give me that academic stuff, I
    > just want the principles of the matter!"
    >
    > But I agree with the point that business schools suffer from the lack
    > of business experience. It was very clear to those in my MBA cohort
    > which of our teachers had "walked the talk".
    >
    >
    > best regards
    > hugh
    >
    > MBA (1988), sometime visiting MBA teacher, and two times successful
    > very small business creator/manager


  • 12.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-20-2008 23:02
    I believe that the problem might be related to the maturity level of the science of management - like with other sciences, it takes time to align theory with practice and vice versa. As others wrote here, it might be that too much attention is spent on scientific appearance (scientism?) rather than the essence of the phenomena under investigation. Instead of deriving a theory directly from the phenomenon, as Newton suggested in his Principia, and then testing it, scholars sometimes intuite hypotheses and theories in Hegelian fashion. Even in areas where such idealism has a right to exist ( i.e., ethics, social responsibility, &c&c), it seems like academy lags behind the events and not leading them (e.g., the total number of CSR-related publications between 1970-1995 is about the same as the number of CSR publications in 2003...).  I am not sure if the problem is that managers cannot read texts with statistical inference -- most of them use statistics as a common tool ( e.g., 6Sigma, Lean, CMMI, etc.) -- the issue might be the construction of concepts and the inferential methods that are used. Building partial constructs that do not correspond with real-world problems (remember what Hayek said about the oversimplification of models in economics!) seems to be the wrong way. Some common statistical procedures ( e.g., Null Hypothesis Significance Testing...) are known to be conceptually problematic but are still conveniently used. Bottom line: scholars might want to conduct more field studies than surveys -- it might help.

    --

    Ronnen I. Paytan
    O: (817)-234-6909
    C: (817) 454-7576

    "Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way.
    When it isn't, don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery,
    or simple bad luck" (Joseph Heller, 1994).

    On Jan 11, 2008 9:42 AM, Ruth H. Axelrod <RAxelrod@gwu.edu> wrote:
    Colleagues,

    Good article!  It  reminds me of a statement by the American
    psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    there are the really interesting questions."

    In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners.  It is
    hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.

    Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out.  Then,
    academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    which we often call theories).  Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    We're not under pressure to do so.  (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    either.)  What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)

    Ruth

    Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    > You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    > schools" helpful:
    > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >
    > Best wishes,
    >
    > Kenneth Amaeshi
    >
    > Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    > Cranfield School of Management
    > Cranfield University, UK
    >
    > Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    > <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk >
    >
    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    > Search.
    > < http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >

    --
    Ruth H. Axelrod
    (H/O) 301-593-4938



    --

    Ronnen I. Paytan, BSc (EE), MSc (BME), MSc (MGT)
    Doctoral Student (ABD), Business Administration
    School of Advanced Studies, University of Phoenix
    O: (817)-234-6909 | C: (817) 454-7576 | paytan@email.phoenix.edu

    "Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way.
    When it isn't, don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery,
    or simple bad luck" (Joseph Heller, 1994).


  • 13.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-21-2008 10:40

    Thank you for your interest in the PDW, Prof. Manikutty.  I had not realized that the reply had gone to the entire IMD list, so, I repeat my response for other colleagues who might be interested:

     

    No paper is required to participate in this event.  We are interested in starting a dialogue that might lead to action –of academic and other natures.  If you have been giving thought to the larger issue of relevance and/or have suggestions or experiences to share, please come and help us identify the crucial problems and the courses of action through which we can help practitioners use our findings more effectively.  One potential outcome from this PDW is articles (authored by some of the PDW participants) on those issues, but I hope that this is not the only one or even the most important!

     

    At this point, the PDW has been approved by the Academy and scheduled for Sunday at 9 o'clock.  As soon as a location is assigned, I will let you know.  Best regards from a very cold <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Pennsylvania</st1:place></st1:state>!

     

    Miguel

    Clarion <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">U.</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Pennsylvania</st1:placename></st1:place> / Tec de Monterrey

     

    From: Prof. S. Manikutty [mailto:manikuti@IIMAHD.ERNET.IN]
    Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 11:30 AM
    Subject: Re: Why business ignores the business schools

     

    Dear Dr. Olivas-Lujan,

    I am interested in this topic. For attending your PDW, what do I have to do? Do I need to send in a paper?

    Regards,

    Manikutty

    On 1/19/08, Miguel R. Olivas-Lujan <molivas@clarion.edu> wrote:

    I think it is wonderful that we, academics, are uncomfortable with the
    status quo.  Money is being "left at the table" when practitioners follow
    their gut instead of well-established scientific findings.  Of course, it's
    not always easy to differentiate between a well-established finding that is
    relevant for managers and a "half-baked" theory.  At the risk of appearing
    "not-so-academic" (because I'm inviting action instead of more theories), I
    feel compelled to invite all of you that are interested in this topic to a
    PDW (Professional Development Workshop) that will take place Sunday, August
    10, 9-12 at the next <st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename> meeting in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Anaheim</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">CA</st1:state></st1:place>:

    Questioning for Relevance: A Dialogue of Scholarship and Practice

    This PDW will provide a space to discuss and critically reflect on the
    recent initiatives to bridge the research-practice gap, and to inspire
    extensions of current efforts to increase the relevance of academic work.
    Presenters have volunteered based on their work, recent experience and
    research interests. We approach the research-practice gap from several
    perspectives, including the roles of researcher, editor, teacher, and
    practitioner. We seek to interactively explore with participants how each
    role contributes to the creation, translation, and dissemination of research
    that achieves relevance.  Reports from founding participants in the Evidence
    Based Management Collaborative will be included.

    Keywords: Evidence-Based Management, Relevance, Research-Practice Gap.
    Names: Denyer, Blancero, Cohen, Beatty, Smith, Mclaughlin and Olivas-Lujan.

    I know this is early, but the PDW has already been approved and hopefully we
    will be able to theorize in ways that may guide our actions to increase the
    practical relevance of our work.

    If you cannot join us in <st1:city w:st="on">Anaheim</st1:city>, SIOP will have at least one similar event
    in <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">San Francisco</st1:place></st1:city> (April 10-12).  Keywords: Evidence-Based Management.
    Names: Rousseau, Latham, Bartunek, Rynes, among others.

    Miguel
    ____________________________________________________________
    Miguel R. Olivas-Lujan, PhD
    Administrative Science Dept.
    Clarion <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">U.</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Pennsylvania</st1:placename></st1:place> / Tec de Monterrey
    <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">840 Wood St</st1:address></st1:street>
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Clarion</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">PA</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">16214</st1:postalcode></st1:place>
    Tel: +1 (814) 393.2641
    Fax: +1 (814) 393.1910
    E-mail: molivas@clarion.edu
    WWW: http://www.drolivas.org
    Member of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Mexico</st1:place></st1:country-region>'s National Researchers System; Liaison to Practice,
         Management in Education Division http://www.aom.pace.edu/med

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paul Spector (PSY) [mailto:spector@SHELL.CAS.USF.EDU]
    Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 9:03 AM
    Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools

    Like Kim, I also often hear this criticism, but directed at
    industrial/organizational psychology. On one level, I think this is
    rationalization by professionals who know they should keep up on the
    latest developments but fail to do so. Rather than admitting their own
    shortcomings, it is easy to blame the academics for doing stuff that is
    irrelevant. "Why should I try to learn anything that happened after I left
    school because it has to connection to the 'real world'" Much of what we
    do is indeed relevant.

    On the other hand, the Lewin quote includes the qualifier of "good
    theory". In our obsession to embrace theory, we have gone overboard,
    especially but not exclusively in management journals. Papers that make
    important (and relevant) scientific discoveries without much theory are
    rejected. Papers that test theories but make no independent theoretical
    contribution are marginalized. Thus authors add premature (and often
    irrelevant) theory to articles to make them more publishable. As an active
    researcher, I find much of this required "theory" to be irrelevant--not to
    mention, half the time I don't understand the titles of papers there's so
    much jargon. Simple ideas are made complex to make them publishable, but
    it makes them inaccessible.

    Paul E. Spector
    Department of Psychology
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">University of South</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">Florida</st1:state></st1:place>
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Tampa</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">FL</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">33620</st1:postalcode></st1:place>
    (813) 974-0357 Voice
    (813) 974-4617 Fax
    spector@shell.cas.usf.edu
    website http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Boal, Kim wrote:

    > Dear All, I have often heard this criticism.  However, I wonder what
    > examples of published research critics think is irrelevant and what
    > leads them to think these researchers are clueless about the world of
    > business.  Perhaps it our emphasis on testing and developing theory
    > rather than an emphasis on discription or application that leads them to
    > this conclusion.  I would point out however, that is what we are
    > uniquely qualified to do, test and develop theory.  As Kurt Lewin said,
    > nothing is more useful than a good theory.  It helps you not only to
    > describe reality, but more importantly predict and in some cases even
    > control the future.  In many cases, tests of theory point out their
    > falsehood, limitations, or boundary conditions.  The fact that many
    > executives are not trained to personally read and evaluate this research
    > is a limitation to how we educate them.  But MDs learn biology.
    > chemistry.physiology from Ph.D.s who do research in these fields and not
    > other MDs.  Finally, I would point out that most of these executives and
    > critics were either our students or are our clients.  Thus, unless they
    > think what they were taught, or the books they read were worthless, and
    > the advice they pay for is useless, I think this criticism misses the
    > mark.
    >
    > Kim Boal
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: <st1:personname w:st="on">International Management Division Discussion</st1:personname> on behalf of Ananda
    Mukherji
    > Sent: Wed 1/16/2008 5:35 PM
    > To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools
    >
    >
    >
    > The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    > overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has
    > little or no relevance to the real world of business.  One reason, a
    > professor of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of
    > business experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >
    > The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    > faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    > they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of business?
    >
    > It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have
    > never conducted surgery.  And the surgeons who teach have themselves
    > been taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a
    > scalpel.  And so it goes on.
    >
    > Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other
    > applied fields, business is the exception where the academic world
    > has so little relevance to the real world.  And I daresay, the other
    > way round as well.
    >
    > This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    > have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >
    > I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    > have no relevant business experience to obtain the required
    > experience by some means so that there is some element of relevance
    > between what they teach and what they are supposed to teach.  In
    > addition, the nature of research and the incentives for business
    > research need to change so that academics create something of value
    > for their students and for the world of business, so that research
    > efforts go   beyond building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    >
    >
    > Ananda K Mukherji
    > Associate Professor
    > max@tamiu.edu
    > Tel. (956) 326-2526
    > Fax (956) 326-2479
    > Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    > <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Texas</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">A&M</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">International</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
    > PH 313H
    > ,
    >
    > As pursuant to <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Texas</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">A&M</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">International</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place> rule 33.04.99.L2
    concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this email
    is a mechanism for official communication of the University. Electronic mail
    (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic or state business.
    Official email communications are intended only to meet the academic and
    administrative needs of the campus community.-----------------------
    >
    > At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >> cross listing.
    >>
    >> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both
    >> worlds--academia and business. Let me share one of my experience as
    >> a CEO of a bank. After serving a few years in academia, I was
    >> appointed to a CEO of a commercial bank. And after teaching the
    >> benefits of participative management, I wanted to delegate some of
    >> my decision making authority to my division heads to speed up the
    >> decision making  and  develop divisional managers. However, I
    >> realized that my division heads did not want to have more decision
    >> making authority because it brings along more responsibilities,
    >> which they wanted to avoid. Then I had to prepare and convince them
    >> the benefits of delegation of authority and change the reward system
    >> accordingly to motivate them to assume more responsibilities. After
    >> returning to the academia, I felt my business experience was a
    >> second PhD for me.
    >> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.
    >>
    >> Best wishes for the new year,
    >> Refik Culpan
    >> <st1:placename w:st="on">Penn</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">State</st1:placetype> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> at <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Harrisburg</st1:place></st1:city>
    >>
    >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU>
    wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Colleagues,
    >>
    >>
    >> Good article!  It  reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>
    >> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>
    >> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>
    >> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>
    >>
    >> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>
    >> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>
    >> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>
    >> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners.  It is
    >>
    >> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>
    >> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>
    >>
    >> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>
    >> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>
    >> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>
    >> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>
    >> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>
    >> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out.  Then,
    >>
    >> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    >>
    >> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>
    >> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    >>
    >> which we often call theories).  Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>
    >> We're not under pressure to do so.  (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>
    >> observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    >>
    >> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>
    >> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>
    >> either.)  What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>
    >> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    >>
    >> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>
    >> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>
    >> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Ruth
    >>
    >>
    >> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>
    >>> You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>
    >>> schools" helpful:
    >>
    >>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Best wishes,
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>
    >>> Cranfield School of Management
    >>
    >>> <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Cranfield University</st1:city>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>
    >>> <mailto: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>
    >>> Search.
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    < http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/c
    ategory.php?category=shopping>
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>
    >> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    > __________________________________________
    > Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    > <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Business Administration</st1:placename></st1:place>
    > <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Texas</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">A & M</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">International</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
    > <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Laredo</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">TX</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">78041-1900</st1:postalcode></st1:place>
    >
    > Dept:           956-326-2495
    > Office:         956-326-2526
    > Fax:             956-326-2494
    > E-mail:         max@tamiu.edu
    > URL:             www.tamiu.edu
    >




    --
    Prof. S. Manikutty
    Business Policy Area
    Indian <st1:placetype w:st="on">Institute</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename>, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Ahmedabad</st1:city>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region></st1:place> 380015.
    Phones: (O) +91 79 26324807
    (Res) +91 79 26306503; +91 79 2632 5304
    (Mobile): 9898123115; 9427071566



  • 14.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-22-2008 04:21
    Dear all:

    In my career I was director of a non-profit, non-university research
    institute, member of the board of two firms, CEO of a small consulting
    firm, and university professor of international management. My
    perception is that university professors deliver a public good.
    Efficient research and teaching is quickly spreading new knowledge and
    improving that public good. As the quality of that public good develops
    managers are forced to invent firm specific practices which are more
    efficient than the public good.
    In that way, research and teaching has the same function as a knowledge
    market.
    Organizations can survive if they are better than what is readily
    available on the market.

    Kind regards
    Gerhard Fink



    Ananda Mukherji schrieb:

    >
    >
    > The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    > overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has little
    > or no relevance to the real world of business. One reason, a professor
    > of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of business
    > experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >
    > The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    > faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    > they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of
    > business?
    >
    > It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have never
    > conducted surgery. And the surgeons who teach have themselves been
    > taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a scalpel.
    > And so it goes on.
    >
    > Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other applied
    > fields, business is the exception where the academic world has so
    > little relevance to the real world. And I daresay, the other way round
    > as well.
    >
    > This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    > have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >
    > I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    > have no relevant business experience to obtain the required experience
    > by some means so that there is some element of relevance between what
    > they teach and what they are supposed to teach. In addition, the
    > nature of research and the incentives for business research need to
    > change so that academics create something of value for their students
    > and for the world of business, so that research efforts go beyond
    > building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    >
    >
    > Ananda K Mukherji
    > Associate Professor
    > max@tamiu.edu
    > Tel. (956) 326-2526
    > Fax (956) 326-2479
    > Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    > Texas A&M International University
    > PH 313H
    > ,
    > As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2
    > concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this
    > email is a mechanism for official communication of the University.
    > Electronic mail (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic
    > or state business. Official email communications are intended only to
    > meet the academic and administrative needs of the campus
    > community.-----------------------
    >
    > At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >
    >> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >> cross listing.
    >>
    >> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both worlds--academia
    >> and business. Let me share one of my experience as a CEO of a bank.
    >> After serving a few years in academia, I was appointed to a CEO of a
    >> commercial bank. And after teaching the benefits of participative
    >> management, I wanted to delegate some of my decision making authority
    >> to my division heads to speed up the decision making and develop
    >> divisional managers. However, I realized that my division heads did
    >> not want to have more decision making authority because it brings
    >> along more responsibilities, which they wanted to avoid. Then I had
    >> to prepare and convince them the benefits of delegation of authority
    >> and change the reward system accordingly to motivate them to assume
    >> more responsibilities. After returning to the academia, I felt my
    >> business experience was a second PhD for me.
    >> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools' curriculum.
    >>
    >> Best wishes for the new year,
    >> Refik Culpan
    >> Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >>
    >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Colleagues,
    >>
    >>
    >> Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>
    >> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>
    >> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>
    >> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>
    >>
    >> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>
    >> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>
    >> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>
    >> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    >>
    >> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>
    >> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>
    >>
    >> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>
    >> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>
    >> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>
    >> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>
    >> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>
    >> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    >>
    >> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to describe
    >>
    >> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>
    >> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive models
    >>
    >> which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>
    >> We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>
    >> observed that the organizations that most need out help are governments
    >>
    >> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>
    >> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>
    >> either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>
    >> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields and--for
    >>
    >> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>
    >> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>
    >> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Ruth
    >>
    >>
    >> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>
    >> > You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>
    >> > schools" helpful:
    >>
    >> > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Best wishes,
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>
    >> > Cranfield School of Management
    >>
    >> > Cranfield University, UK
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>
    >> > <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> >
    >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>
    >> > Search.
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >>
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>
    >> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    > __________________________________________
    > Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    > College of Business Administration
    > Texas A & M International University
    > Laredo, TX 78041-1900
    >
    > Dept: 956-326-2495
    > Office: 956-326-2526
    > Fax: 956-326-2494
    > E-mail: max@tamiu.edu
    > URL: www.tamiu.edu
    >

    --
    Univ.-Prof. Dkfm. Dr. Gerhard Fink
    Jean Monnet Professor
    EuropaInstitut
    (Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence)
    Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien
    Althanstrasse 39-45
    A- 1090 Wien
    http://www.wu-wien.ac.at/europainstitut
    Tel.: (+43 1) 31336-4137
    Fax.: (+43 1) 31336-758
    E-Mail: gerhard.fink@wu-wien.ac.at
    and
    Director of Doctoral Studies
    E-mail: pd_doktorat@wu-wien.ac.at




    CALL for Papers 2008 Conference at Poznan
    International Association of Cross-Cultural Competence & Management
    Rotterdam School of Management RSM/EUR
    Poznan University College of Business and Foreign Languages

    Please find the Call for papers at:
    http://iaccm.wu-wien.ac.at/conference_en.html

    "Management of Meanings in Organizations" Poznan (Poland), June 25-26, 2008
    and
    “3 x IN = Inventing + Innovating + Interpreting” Poznan (Poland), June 27, 2008


  • 15.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-22-2008 08:51
    Hi all,

    I am a PhD student and thus, new to this debate. But I wonder if in our
    efforts to distinguish ourselves from other disciplines (i.e. social
    psychology, economics, etc.) and justify our higher salaries, we have
    rewarded very esoteric theories. When such articles are reviewed,
    reviewers who are academics may approve them because they are
    intellectually stimulating and interesting, regardless of whether they
    can be useful or applied.

    One possibility is that this type of theory building has already
    justified our higher salaries, but now we are a point where we need to
    justify our existence in business schools. Is it possible that students
    may benefit equally from a philosophy degree than from a business
    degree? I think in many cases the answer is yes. If it weren't for the
    connections that students can make and the recruiters that they can
    access through the business school, their degrees may not be any more
    relevant than a degree in a different discipline.

    I suspect that the answer may lie in using Evidence Based Teaching.


    Laura Guerrero
    PhD Candidate
    Richard Ivey School of Business
    University of Western Ontario
    lguerrero@ivey.uwo.ca




    -----Original Message-----
    From: International Management Division Discussion
    [mailto:IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Gerhard Fink
    Sent: January 22, 2008 4:21 AM
    To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools

    Dear all:

    In my career I was director of a non-profit, non-university research
    institute, member of the board of two firms, CEO of a small consulting
    firm, and university professor of international management. My
    perception is that university professors deliver a public good.
    Efficient research and teaching is quickly spreading new knowledge and
    improving that public good. As the quality of that public good develops
    managers are forced to invent firm specific practices which are more
    efficient than the public good.
    In that way, research and teaching has the same function as a knowledge
    market.
    Organizations can survive if they are better than what is readily
    available on the market.

    Kind regards
    Gerhard Fink



    Ananda Mukherji schrieb:

    >
    >
    > The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    > overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has little

    > or no relevance to the real world of business. One reason, a professor

    > of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of business
    > experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >
    > The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    > faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    > they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of
    > business?
    >
    > It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have never

    > conducted surgery. And the surgeons who teach have themselves been
    > taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a scalpel.
    > And so it goes on.
    >
    > Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other applied

    > fields, business is the exception where the academic world has so
    > little relevance to the real world. And I daresay, the other way round

    > as well.
    >
    > This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    > have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >
    > I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    > have no relevant business experience to obtain the required experience

    > by some means so that there is some element of relevance between what
    > they teach and what they are supposed to teach. In addition, the
    > nature of research and the incentives for business research need to
    > change so that academics create something of value for their students
    > and for the world of business, so that research efforts go beyond
    > building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >
    > Best regards
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    >
    >
    > Ananda K Mukherji
    > Associate Professor
    > max@tamiu.edu
    > Tel. (956) 326-2526
    > Fax (956) 326-2479
    > Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    > Texas A&M International University
    > PH 313H
    > ,
    > As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2
    > concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this
    > email is a mechanism for official communication of the University.
    > Electronic mail (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic
    > or state business. Official email communications are intended only to
    > meet the academic and administrative needs of the campus
    > community.-----------------------
    >
    > At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >
    >> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >> cross listing.
    >>
    >> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both worlds--academia

    >> and business. Let me share one of my experience as a CEO of a bank.
    >> After serving a few years in academia, I was appointed to a CEO of a
    >> commercial bank. And after teaching the benefits of participative
    >> management, I wanted to delegate some of my decision making authority

    >> to my division heads to speed up the decision making and develop
    >> divisional managers. However, I realized that my division heads did
    >> not want to have more decision making authority because it brings
    >> along more responsibilities, which they wanted to avoid. Then I had
    >> to prepare and convince them the benefits of delegation of authority
    >> and change the reward system accordingly to motivate them to assume
    >> more responsibilities. After returning to the academia, I felt my
    >> business experience was a second PhD for me.
    >> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools'
    curriculum.
    >>
    >> Best wishes for the new year,
    >> Refik Culpan
    >> Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >>
    >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Colleagues,
    >>
    >>
    >> Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>
    >> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>
    >> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>
    >> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>
    >>
    >> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>
    >> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>
    >> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>
    >> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    >>
    >> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>
    >> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>
    >>
    >> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>
    >> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>
    >> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>
    >> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>
    >> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>
    >> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    >>
    >> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to
    describe
    >>
    >> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>
    >> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive
    models
    >>
    >> which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>
    >> We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>
    >> observed that the organizations that most need out help are
    governments
    >>
    >> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>
    >> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>
    >> either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>
    >> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields
    and--for
    >>
    >> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>
    >> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>
    >> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>
    >>
    >> Ruth
    >>
    >>
    >> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>
    >> > You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>
    >> > schools" helpful:
    >>
    >> > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Best wishes,
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>
    >> > Cranfield School of Management
    >>
    >> > Cranfield University, UK
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> > Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>
    >> > <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>
    >> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>
    >> > Search.
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >>
    <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsear
    ch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >>
    >>
    >> >
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>
    >> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji
    > __________________________________________
    > Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    > College of Business Administration
    > Texas A & M International University
    > Laredo, TX 78041-1900
    >
    > Dept: 956-326-2495
    > Office: 956-326-2526
    > Fax: 956-326-2494
    > E-mail: max@tamiu.edu
    > URL: www.tamiu.edu
    >

    --
    Univ.-Prof. Dkfm. Dr. Gerhard Fink
    Jean Monnet Professor
    EuropaInstitut
    (Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence)
    Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien
    Althanstrasse 39-45
    A- 1090 Wien
    http://www.wu-wien.ac.at/europainstitut
    Tel.: (+43 1) 31336-4137
    Fax.: (+43 1) 31336-758
    E-Mail: gerhard.fink@wu-wien.ac.at
    and
    Director of Doctoral Studies
    E-mail: pd_doktorat@wu-wien.ac.at




    CALL for Papers 2008 Conference at Poznan
    International Association of Cross-Cultural Competence & Management
    Rotterdam School of Management RSM/EUR
    Poznan University College of Business and Foreign Languages

    Please find the Call for papers at:
    http://iaccm.wu-wien.ac.at/conference_en.html

    "Management of Meanings in Organizations" Poznan (Poland), June 25-26,
    2008
    and
    "3 x IN = Inventing + Innovating + Interpreting" Poznan (Poland), June
    27, 2008


  • 16.  Why business ignores the business schools

    Posted 01-22-2008 09:34
    Is it really the case that our research and writing is irrelevant and has
    no impact on organizations? I would argue that there is impact, although
    often impact is diffuse and indirect. What business students learn in
    school, which is based in large part on the academic literature, does help
    mold the views they take with them into the work world. And organizational
    scholars are hired as consultants who apply findings from the literature
    to organizations. And our PhDs who take applied jobs, apply the
    research-based stuff they learned in grad school every day. Maybe my
    perspective is different coming from I/O psychology, but I see application
    and relevance all around.

    Paul E. Spector
    Department of Psychology
    University of South Florida
    Tampa, FL 33620
    (813) 974-0357 Voice
    (813) 974-4617 Fax
    spector@shell.cas.usf.edu
    website http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector

    On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Guerrero, Laura wrote:

    > Hi all,
    >
    > I am a PhD student and thus, new to this debate. But I wonder if in our
    > efforts to distinguish ourselves from other disciplines (i.e. social
    > psychology, economics, etc.) and justify our higher salaries, we have
    > rewarded very esoteric theories. When such articles are reviewed,
    > reviewers who are academics may approve them because they are
    > intellectually stimulating and interesting, regardless of whether they
    > can be useful or applied.
    >
    > One possibility is that this type of theory building has already
    > justified our higher salaries, but now we are a point where we need to
    > justify our existence in business schools. Is it possible that students
    > may benefit equally from a philosophy degree than from a business
    > degree? I think in many cases the answer is yes. If it weren't for the
    > connections that students can make and the recruiters that they can
    > access through the business school, their degrees may not be any more
    > relevant than a degree in a different discipline.
    >
    > I suspect that the answer may lie in using Evidence Based Teaching.
    >
    >
    > Laura Guerrero
    > PhD Candidate
    > Richard Ivey School of Business
    > University of Western Ontario
    > lguerrero@ivey.uwo.ca
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: International Management Division Discussion
    > [mailto:IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Gerhard Fink
    > Sent: January 22, 2008 4:21 AM
    > To: IMD-L@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: Re: FW: Re: Why business ignores the business schools
    >
    > Dear all:
    >
    > In my career I was director of a non-profit, non-university research
    > institute, member of the board of two firms, CEO of a small consulting
    > firm, and university professor of international management. My
    > perception is that university professors deliver a public good.
    > Efficient research and teaching is quickly spreading new knowledge and
    > improving that public good. As the quality of that public good develops
    > managers are forced to invent firm specific practices which are more
    > efficient than the public good.
    > In that way, research and teaching has the same function as a knowledge
    > market.
    > Organizations can survive if they are better than what is readily
    > available on the market.
    >
    > Kind regards
    > Gerhard Fink
    >
    >
    >
    > Ananda Mukherji schrieb:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> The Financial Times article raises good questions as to why an
    >> overwhelming part of the research done by business scholars has little
    >
    >> or no relevance to the real world of business. One reason, a professor
    >
    >> of mine suggested and I see his point, is the lack of business
    >> experience of most faculty who teach in business schools.
    >>
    >> The next question, and a worrisome one at that, is what do these
    >> faculty members bring to their MBA and other business classes when
    >> they are largely unfamiliar, if not clueless, about the world of
    >> business?
    >>
    >> It is like students of surgery being taught by surgeons who have never
    >
    >> conducted surgery. And the surgeons who teach have themselves been
    >> taught by an earlier generation of surgeons who never held a scalpel.
    >> And so it goes on.
    >>
    >> Unlike research in medicine, engineering, and law, among other applied
    >
    >> fields, business is the exception where the academic world has so
    >> little relevance to the real world. And I daresay, the other way round
    >
    >> as well.
    >>
    >> This of course creates additional training costs for businesses who
    >> have to either rectify the deficiencies or retrain the new hires.
    >>
    >> I don't see an easy solution other than having faculty members who
    >> have no relevant business experience to obtain the required experience
    >
    >> by some means so that there is some element of relevance between what
    >> they teach and what they are supposed to teach. In addition, the
    >> nature of research and the incentives for business research need to
    >> change so that academics create something of value for their students
    >> and for the world of business, so that research efforts go beyond
    >> building an academic career, tenure, or promotion.
    >>
    >> Best regards
    >>
    >> Ananda Mukherji
    >>
    >>
    >> Ananda K Mukherji
    >> Associate Professor
    >> max@tamiu.edu
    >> Tel. (956) 326-2526
    >> Fax (956) 326-2479
    >> Division of International Business and Technology Studies
    >> Texas A&M International University
    >> PH 313H
    >> ,
    >> As pursuant to Texas A&M International University rule 33.04.99.L2
    >> concerning the Use and Disposition of Electronic Communications, this
    >> email is a mechanism for official communication of the University.
    >> Electronic mail (e-mail) should be used only for legitimate academic
    >> or state business. Official email communications are intended only to
    >> meet the academic and administrative needs of the campus
    >> community.-----------------------
    >>
    >> At 09:08 AM 1/12/2008, REFIK CULPAN wrote:
    >>
    >>> Sorry earlier I posted this message to the wrong list and sorry for
    >>> cross listing.
    >>>
    >>> I can relate to this discussion. I have been in both worlds--academia
    >
    >>> and business. Let me share one of my experience as a CEO of a bank.
    >>> After serving a few years in academia, I was appointed to a CEO of a
    >>> commercial bank. And after teaching the benefits of participative
    >>> management, I wanted to delegate some of my decision making authority
    >
    >>> to my division heads to speed up the decision making and develop
    >>> divisional managers. However, I realized that my division heads did
    >>> not want to have more decision making authority because it brings
    >>> along more responsibilities, which they wanted to avoid. Then I had
    >>> to prepare and convince them the benefits of delegation of authority
    >>> and change the reward system accordingly to motivate them to assume
    >>> more responsibilities. After returning to the academia, I felt my
    >>> business experience was a second PhD for me.
    >>> The bottom of the story is that it will be useful to have our
    >>> doctoral students have some sort of practical business/management
    >>> experience to bridge the gap between academia and business world. I
    >>> think such a practicum should be be a part of the schools'
    > curriculum.
    >>>
    >>> Best wishes for the new year,
    >>> Refik Culpan
    >>> Penn State University at Harrisburg
    >>>
    >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 10:42 AM, "Ruth H. Axelrod" <RAxelrod@GWU.EDU>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Colleagues,
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Good article! It reminds me of a statement by the American
    >>>
    >>> psychologist, Harold Kelly, who lamented in the 1950's that, in
    >>>
    >>> psychology, "there are the questions that one can research and then
    >>>
    >>> there are the really interesting questions."
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> In my experience, most academic research in organizational studies is
    >>>
    >>> founded on the issues that we can research using experimental designs
    >>>
    >>> derived from the hard sciences, so that isi the driving force in
    >>>
    >>> selecting research questions, *not* the needs of practitioners. It is
    >>>
    >>> hardly surprising, then, that our work often does not address the
    >>>
    >>> questions and problems that *really* plague practitioners.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Furthermore, if you look at the history of management theory in the
    >>>
    >>> context of social changes in a wide variety of domains (which I am
    >>>
    >>> currently working on), what you see is that theory *follows*
    >>>
    >>> practice--that is, in the vast majority of cases, a practitioner who
    >>>
    >>> faces real problems that threaten his/her job and/or organization
    >>>
    >>> conceives of a new way of doing things and tries it out. Then,
    >>>
    >>> academics come along and study it, create an abstract model to
    > describe
    >>>
    >>> it, and publish the model (note, IMO, most of what we publish is not
    >>>
    >>> theory--which explains the why of things--but simply descriptive
    > models
    >>>
    >>> which we often call theories). Rarely do academics actually innovate.
    >>>
    >>> We're not under pressure to do so. (Rremember that Peter Drucker
    >>>
    >>> observed that the organizations that most need out help are
    > governments
    >>>
    >>> and nonprofits because they don't have "the discipline of the bottom
    >>>
    >>> line," which drives innovation in businesses; we academics don't
    >>>
    >>> either.) What we are under pressure to do is to publish research that
    >>>
    >>> has been conducted within the current paradigms of our fields
    > and--for
    >>>
    >>> the most part--according to the restrictive tenets of "the scientific
    >>>
    >>> method" (as opposed to qualitative methods which, historically, have
    >>>
    >>> been responsible for almost all of the break-through thinking.)
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Ruth
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Kenneth Amaeshi wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> You may find this FT article on "why business ignores the business
    >>>
    >>>> schools" helpful:
    >>>
    >>>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/215022b8-bd2c-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>> Best wishes,
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>> Kenneth Amaeshi
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>> Lecturer, CSR & Sustainable Finance
    >>>
    >>>> Cranfield School of Management
    >>>
    >>>> Cranfield University, UK
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>> Email: kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk
    >>>
    >>>> <mailto:kenneth.amaeshi@cranfield.ac.uk>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>>
    >>>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
    >>>
    >>>> Search.
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsear
    > ch/category.php?category=shopping>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>>
    >>> Ruth H. Axelrod
    >>>
    >>> (H/O) 301-593-4938
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Prof. Refik Culpan
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> Ananda Mukherji
    >> __________________________________________
    >> Division of International Business & Technology Studies
    >> College of Business Administration
    >> Texas A & M International University
    >> Laredo, TX 78041-1900
    >>
    >> Dept: 956-326-2495
    >> Office: 956-326-2526
    >> Fax: 956-326-2494
    >> E-mail: max@tamiu.edu
    >> URL: www.tamiu.edu
    >>
    >
    > --
    > Univ.-Prof. Dkfm. Dr. Gerhard Fink
    > Jean Monnet Professor
    > EuropaInstitut
    > (Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence)
    > Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien
    > Althanstrasse 39-45
    > A- 1090 Wien
    > http://www.wu-wien.ac.at/europainstitut
    > Tel.: (+43 1) 31336-4137
    > Fax.: (+43 1) 31336-758
    > E-Mail: gerhard.fink@wu-wien.ac.at
    > and
    > Director of Doctoral Studies
    > E-mail: pd_doktorat@wu-wien.ac.at
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > CALL for Papers 2008 Conference at Poznan
    > International Association of Cross-Cultural Competence & Management
    > Rotterdam School of Management RSM/EUR
    > Poznan University College of Business and Foreign Languages
    >
    > Please find the Call for papers at:
    > http://iaccm.wu-wien.ac.at/conference_en.html
    >
    > "Management of Meanings in Organizations" Poznan (Poland), June 25-26,
    > 2008
    > and
    > "3 x IN = Inventing + Innovating + Interpreting" Poznan (Poland), June
    > 27, 2008
    >