LOADING

Define Mobile Menu

European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol. 30 No. 4 (2009), pp. 649-661 © EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2009 http://www. eurojournals. com/ejsr. htm Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School Mohammed Abdullah Mamun Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics & Management Sciences International Islamic University Malaysia E-mail: [email protected] edu. my Ariffin Bin Mohamad Lecturer in Law, School of Business, Curtin University of Technology Sarawak, Malaysia E-mail: ariffin. @curtin. edu. my Abstract Corporations, now a day, face pressures from different stakeholders of the business environment The changes in the environment have created threats to all of today’s organizations. So, the managers have to look for finding the best possible ways of striking the implications brought by the changes. Mostly, it depends on better way of educating their people to convert previous knowledge and experience into today’s competencies required for best possible strategies.

This research is an attempt to understand the changing need of management expertise to face the contemporary challenges of management and the roles of business school in this concern. The business has to know the implications of the changes and accordingly has to prepare the people by their capabilities required to implement the strategies. Today, the corporations want to give a clear message to the business school about their role to play in this regard, means to put all necessary efforts to come with proper set of management skills of the challenges to be faced by the corporations.

The leading business schools of the USA and Asia Pacific have got proven records of maintaining standards in terms of vision, program design and offerings. It implies that the business school has to cope into the needs of changing situations to produce future managers with all the required skills. Keywords: People, Challenge, Management Education, Business School Management education denotes those activities traditionally conducted by colleges and universities that focus on developing a broad range of managerial knowledge and abilities.

Unquestionably, the major issue in management education is the curriculum offered in our business schools and this concern has been labeled the competency movement (Wexley and Baldwin 1986). The traditional management education curriculum, as presently constituted, may not be adequately preparing individuals for the challenges they experience as professional managers (Pfeffer, 1977). Today one fundamental question comes, whether the curriculum of a business school can produce future leader of the corporation with required management skill to meet contemporary challenges.

Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School 650 This research attempts to evaluate today’s management education standard to develop management skill in the paradigm shift of managing business. The first section of the paper evaluates the changing scenario of managing business organizations, the second section explains the reshaping of management education with the emerging needs of the business management, and finally the roles played by leading business school have been analyzed in the context of changing situation.

As such, the research aims at examining the changing need of management education to produce future leaders of the corporation. The research question comes in the study is whether the roles played by leading business schools can be considered as the ones according to expectations of the corporate management generally. Specially, the question is, whether the products of leading business school have got all the required management skills to meet the contemporary challenge of business management. 1. Methodology This research is mostly done on existing literature of management education.

The firs two sections of the research have been done on reviewing the literature of the issues raised in the study. So, a good number of published papers on the issues has been reviewed and examined to get clear idea on major aspects of the research. This exercise gives a clear understanding of the changing scenario of managing business today and the management skills required to face the challenges of management. Then, the research has got today’s situation of management education to meet the needs. This critical review of management education has been used to get the roles played by eading business schools of USA and of Asia Pacific. In selecting the leading business school, the research used the ranking given by different organizations. So, the required information according to the research question have been collected from web sites of ten top ranking business schools of each of the two regions; the USA and Asia Pacific(Table 1). The thoughts on management education according to literature review have been used to analyze the information from MBA brochures of top ten business schools of two regions studied in the research.

Table 1: List of top ten business school in the USA and in Asia Pacific Asia Pacific Top Ten Melbourne Business School Indian Institute of Management, Ahmadabad Asian Institute of Management (Philippines) Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand (School of Management) NUS Business School (National University of Singapore) Chinese University of Hong Kong Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (Graduate School of Management) International University of Japan (Graduate School of Management) China Europe International Business School (China) Nanyang Business School (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)

US Top Ten Harvard Business School Stanford Graduate School of Business University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) Massachusetts Institute of Technology University of Chicago Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth University of California-Berkeley (Haas) Columbia University (NY) – Columbia Business School New York University (Stern) University of Michigan – Ann Arbor (Ross) 2. The Paradigm Shift of Management In today’s rapidly changing business environment, capable managers are crucial to organizations’ success in gaining and sustaining competitive advantage.

This must be achieved against a background of intensified competition, incessant change, a power shift to the customer, collaborations across organizational and geographical boundaries, and a need to maintain high levels of talent (Tannenbaum, 2002). Business programs across the nation recognize the need to change in response to external pressure from key stakeholders. An important dimension of such change is the redesign of business 651 Mohammed Abdullah Mamun and Ariffin Bin Mohamad curricula. Achieving greater integration across curriculum is often a central focus of such efforts (McCuddy & Pirie 1988).

Business organizations continue to transform themselves in response to the challenges posted by increased competition, the globalization of business, and rapid change in information technology (Hammer & Champy 1993). Pfeffer (1994) argued that because of the accelerating rate of change, the workforce in terms of human and social capital should be seen as one of the critical factors in developing and maintaining competitive advantage, joining traditional factors such as technology and protected market. He also claims that an appropriate development of the workforce is closely related to appropriate management.

Related to this perspective and from a knowledge based view of the firm, Leonard-Barton (1995) saw core capability as comprising managerial activities and systems or what she describes as “the whole system of knowledge management” bound up with a particular competitive advantage. Conger, Spreitzer, and Lawler (1999) argue that intense and global competition, rapid technological change, new complex organizational forms, organizational alliances, and international capital markets are creating an increased demand for change leadership at a time when such leadership is increasingly difficult to find.

Quinn and Snyder (1999) suggests that before expecting others to change, a leader must understand strategies such as those based on confrontation, facilitation, persuasive discourse, and the management of meaning to ensure that their actions are consistent with their vision of the future. These scholars and others are suggesting that individual employees, not just top management, must become leaders who can work with the technological revolution and globalization of business and can continually acquire new knowledge and remain flexible (McDonald 2000).

Therefore the business schools, responsible to educate future leaders of business organizations, need to understand the challenges faced by the organizations. This is how; they can try to bring necessary changes in their curriculum according to the needs of the changing situation of the environment. Which challenges are important to consider is more important to them? The following section of the paper describes the nature of the organizational challenges today. It can be termed as ‘paradigm shift’ of managing today’s businesses.

The management of business organizations has changed in significant ways since early 1990s (Drucker 1995; Naisbitt 1997; Ohame 1995; Rohwer 1996). The sources of these changes include the following (Hallinger and Snidvongs 2008). • Growth and integration of a global, increasingly free market economy has raised standard of competition in all sectors providing goods and services. • Greater openness of political systems among nation states allows grater aces to global information and exchange of cross broader business. Developments in information technologies have fundamentally changed the way in which business is conducted, allowing for less expensive communication, easier sharing of information, and greater efficiencies in production and management of goods and services. Reviewing the literature it is revealed that today’s business management faces tremendous pressures from globalize economy. Against this backdrop of the study the driven forces of globalization can be analyzed to understand the nature of implications.

Globalization is being driven on the one hand by the spread of economic logics centered on freeing, opening, deregulating, and privatizing economies to make them more attractive to investment, and, on the other hand, by the digitization of technologies that is revolutionizing communication (Barkema et. al. 2002). So, opening market increases scope of investment to anywhere in today’s world, and movement of technology, money and people in some place increase to avail of the opportunity of deregulation.

At the same time it poses challenges to existing players of economy and to new entrants as well. Globalization is speeding up industry life cycles by accelerating the pace and the rhythm at which firms must develop new technologies and produce and roll out new products and services on a global scale to stay competitive. So, the new management challenge gets in with managing team of Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School 652 experts from different culture as dispersed worldwide using digitally adopted rganizational structure ((Barkema et. al. 2002). To use the words of Bettis and Hiltt(1995), new competitive landscapes are emerging, marked by increased levels of uncertainty and ambiguity, leading to what is now known as hyper competition (D’Aveni 1994). Management educators may be interested in accompanying these challenges to help managers in shaping organizations in such a way as make them willing and able to respond to complex organizational challenges. In brief, it may be advantageous to expose business students and managers to complication (Cunha et. al. 2004).

The other challenges of managing businesses are created from the need to speedy decision making in resources deployed, managing diversity, searching right direction of knowledge management for the people, timeliness of the process and innovative approaches, synchronization need of process and activities, industry life cycle effects on the firms operations, and finally social responsibility of present generation for future generations (Barkema et. al. 2002). More specifically, global change forces have brought fundamental changes to the way in which business organizations are managed.

For example, we find the following management trends (Hallinger and Snidvongs 2008): • Organizations are more restructured in response to more open competition (Ohame 1996). • There is an increased emphasis on entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial management as engines of global economic growth (Drucker 1995). • The recognition that ethical crises and environmental problems located in a single nation or organization are magnified in a global society has led to a greater emphasis on moral leadership and corporate social responsibility among business leaders (Csikszentmihalyi 2004). The ability to manage and use information for decision making is now a core competency required of managers throughout business organizations (Drucker 1995). • There is increased emphasis on linking corporate goals with human resource practices, especially through the use of performance management and measurement (Norton an Kaplan 1996). • Knowledge is viewed as a key currency of organizations that requires conscious, proactive management (Buckman 2004; Stewart 1997, 2001). • Capacities for innovation and change are viewed as competencies that distinguish organizations that thrive vs. thers that flounder in a rapidly changing, turbulent environment (Drucker 1995; Kotter 2002; Rohwer 1996). These changes have required a cadre of business leaders who possess a broader set of both leadership and management capacities (Hallinger and Snidvongs 2008). More recently, attention from both academics and practicing managers has focused on the formulation and implementation of strategic initiatives within the realm of human resource management (Beer et. al. 1984; Szilagyi and Schweiger 1984; Foulkes 1986).

Organizational survival, development and prosperity reflect the extent to which an organization is able to obtain, allocate and control its resources to take advantage of changes in its environment perceived as opportunities: and avoid or overcome the threat posed by changes perceived as constraints (Buckley and Kemp 1987). Managerial competency is vital in such responsibility of the organizations. The more dynamic the environment, the more strategically important management development is to the organization (Buckley and Kemp 1987).

There is a growing awareness that survival and future success reflect to a considerable extent the ability of an organization to develop its management resource in appropriate and anticipated ways (Hendry and Pettigrew 1986). In response, educational institutions have made significant adaptations in the curriculum designed for business leaders. The next section of the research describes the dynamics of business school to get a picture of redesigning or reshaping of management education addressing the contemporary challenges of managing business organization. 53 Mohammed Abdullah Mamun and Ariffin Bin Mohamad 3. Reshaping the Management Education Corporate leaders have been placing demands to the business school to redesign the programs while they need management skills to face the challenges described in the previous section of the research. This reshaping of management education goes to the context. So, a critical review of management education has been given first. Then the evolution of management education has been described to know the changes happened with the contemporary challenges.

Finally, the restructured MBA program has been examined to evaluate the roles of business school. 3. 1. Critiques of Management Education Business schools have come under attack in recent years for the poor job they do of providing relevant training and skills for their students (e. g. , Hambrick 1994; Jorgensen 1992; Linder and Smith 1992; Porter and McKibbon 1988; Spender 1995). There is growing corporate demand for pedagogical techniques that focus on their immediate problems rather than on lofty theories or even case studies (Raelin 2000).

Business speakers at a recent international Association for Management Education (AACSB) symposium on continuous learning continued to make this plea as they challenged business schools to “be more proactive and partner with business leaders in their communities…and to make their curricula more relevant” (AACSB 1999). Teaching about uncertainty and increasing environmental turbulence is not new – these concepts have been discussed since the late 1960s (Lawrence and Lorsch 1967). Most teaching model and materials are geared toward enhancing the ability of large organizations to adapt to change.

Those that are more person-centered treat change as necessary evil and present topics such as resistance or coping with change (McDonald and Mansour 2000). Teachers and learners are facing increased uncertainty, paradox, pervasive rapid change, and dramatic challenges to the status quo and traditional mindset. In response, the individual’s ability to adapt to change and embrace ambiguity should be more central in the curriculum (Bickford and Van Vleck 1997). Even the actors in business school mostly tried to accommodate the change issue into their curriculum, there were resistances everywhere.

But three had been pressure from different stakeholders to bring necessary changes into the programs of management education. Change is driven by many other factors as well, including the increasing importance of international rankings, public pressure on teaching performance and the more focused agendas of governmental funding agencies(Huff and Huff 2001). Primarily as a result of the changes in the way business organizations function, colleges of business are subject to pressures form a number of stakeholder groups, including employers, advisory boards, accrediting bodies, alumni, legislators, and students (Forman 1998).

As institutions of higher education are perceived to exist for the public good, they are increasingly held accountable for the quality of outputs produced (Kearns 1998). The previous section of literature suggested that the business curriculum has to be changed remarkably to address the issues raised as challenges before the organizational management today. The business organizations those have been increasingly trying to cope with the changing demands of the environment looking for managerial expertise with required skills.

So, an emphasis on skill development has transformed the curriculum debate. The discussion has moved away from determining the appropriate balance of content, which is a discussion rooted in traditional functional areas, to a determination of effective methods for developing softer skills, self directed learning, an a holistic understanding of the internal and external environment of organizations(Hamilton, Diane et. al. 2000). Traditional functional curricular approaches often do not address these issues (McCuddy and Pirie 1998).

Hence business curricula are gradually shifting from functionally fragmented to convergent and coherent, with a focus on developing specific competencies (Hyslop and Parsons 1995). The redesigned curricula must cut across traditional boundaries to develop and reinforce the Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School 654 appropriate bundles of technical knowledge as well as social and organizational skills (Hamilton, Diane et. al. 2000). In the 1950s, business schools in the United States were criticized for being overly narrow and vocational in their orientation (Gordon and Howell 1959; Pierson 1959).

To remedy this, they were encouraged to, and did, hire faculty from a variety of acidic disciplines relevant to organizations and management so as to enhance their scholarly legitimacy. Now, however, the faculty who were hired to achieve academic respectability for business schools are being criticized by the corporate community for their lack of experience in business firms, for the perceived irrelevance of their research, and for their unwillingness to provide the kinds of training in practical professional skills the corporate world feels in need (e. g. Behrman and Levin 1984; Hambrick 1994; Porter and McKibbon 1988; Raelin 2000). 3. 2. Evolution in Business School Traditionally, collegiate business education is marked by the founding of the Wharton School of Finance and Economy at the University of Pennsylvania in 1881(Pierson 1959). The initial growth in business schools occurred in the first part of the 20th century in the years prior to World War I. These business schools developed from different roots – some from economics, others from accounting, liberal arts, or secretarial-book keeping trade skills (Pierson 1959).

Despite these differences in origin, the first decade of 20th century saw a decided shift from business schools’ early liberal arts roots to a practical vocational orientation that emphasized specific trade practices an business skills (Cheit 1985: Hugstad 1983; Locke 1988). Then, management of organizations using scientific management thought given by Taylor was introduced in business school, virtually initiated by Harvard Business School (Goodrick 2002). Though some schools directly imitated the Harvard model (e. . , University of Chicago and Dartmouth), the larger effect was to influence the development of a concept of management based on generalized principles, a basic assumption of the scientific model(Nelson 1998). The decades following World War II were filled with many changes affecting both business schools in general and management education in particular. First, there was tremendous growth in both student enrollment and in the sheer number of schools offering business curriculum (Goodrick 2002).

Although there had long been questions about the quality and direction of business education programs, its great size give new urgency to these concerns (Cheit 1975). Second, older returning students put pressures on schools to increase the educational and long term value of a business degree (Gordon and Howell 1959). Third, field level players, such as the Academy of Management and the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), gained in strength and influence. Fourth, business education began to be seen by organizations outside the field as ripe for change (Goodrick 2002).

In the 1940s and 1950s, the state of business education captured the attention of two organizations external to the organizational field management education: the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie Foundation. Working through academic confederates, both foundations aspired to put the study of business on a more serious footing by making business education, including management, scientifically based. Of the two foundations, the Ford Foundation had more extensive involvement in transforming business education.

It spent US$35 million between 1954 and 1966 on interventions designed to improve the academic quality of business education (Schlossman, Sedlak and Wechsler 1998). In the two foundations education and research were tightly coupled because the scientific method was viewed as common to both endeavors. Important reports came out from their efforts to improve the situation. While the two foundations targeted business education in general, their efforts were an important impetus pushing a massive infusion of science into management education (Miles 1996).

There have been at least two broad waves of change in graduate management education. One wave during 1960s was marked by increasing professionalism. A second wave, during the 1990s, was 655 Mohammed Abdullah Mamun and Ariffin Bin Mohamad marked by global competition and featured the emergence of many new MBA programs (D’ Aveni 1996). Fueled largely by increasingly prominent MBA program rankings, a key facet of the second wave of change was a move among MBA programs toward specialization or finding a niche in the marketplace.

Consequently business schools differentiate their offerings by emphasizing a functional strength with a high quality faculty in that functional area. For example Wharton and University of Toronto have historically emphasized finance, whereas Northwestern has emphasized its strength in marketing (Latham et. al. 2004). Business schools, however, are continuously criticized by industry for failing to produce graduates who have mastered business administration (Neelankavil 1994; O’ Reilly 1994).

Functionalism in the MBA curriculum has unintended consequences for MBA graduates and the organizations that hired them. Witness the anger and frustration in industry with MBAs who understand mathematical equations, excel in finance, and are analytically sound but are not team players and do not understand customer driven strategies or consider the needs of the people who they assume will implement them (Elliott, Goodwin and Goodwin 1994; Leith, Kovacheff and Price 1994). 3. 3.

The Restructured MBA Program Most MBA students fail to grasp the interrelationships among the knowledge, skills and abilities they are acquiring in one discipline and those that they are acquiring in another. MBA students merely perceive that numbers are numbers and people are people. That numbers are interpreted and acted on by people indifferent ways often escapes them (Barker et. al. 1998). Thus recruiting companies complain that MBA graduates fare linear thinkers who lack flexibility (Bickerstaffe 1994). Business schools need to reposition themselves to leverage the present wave of change in business.

The first step in redesigning MBA programs is to establish a vision or purpose. Such a vision must be worthy of the faculty’s commitment. For example, a vision that would get faculty commitment is as follows “An internationally recognized business school that prepares high potential individuals to manage, build, and lead value creating, globally competitive organizations primarily by providing integrated management education”(Lathem et. al. 2004). So, the vision of MBA program should be to create talented future leaders of successful entities.

A second step in the redesign process is to develop a structure for the business school that will enable it to function effectively while focusing on current and emerging market demands. From this perspective functionalism in an MBA program appears to be dysfunctional. Whether growing leaders are for profit or non profit organizations, the organizational challenges are similar. First, one must understand the environmental influences that affect the organization and the dynamic nature of those influences. Second, an organization needs to develop strategies for competing effectively within its environment.

Third, managers must understand the key financial drives of an organization, because it is difficult to implement a strategy unless the firm has the financial strength to do so. Finally, the organizations must have the leadership capabilities to put a team in place that can implement the strategy indifferent environments in ways that allow the organization to prosper (Yukl 1998). Teaching students the leadership, strategic, and financial skills necessary to successfully compete globally must be fully integrated.

To master one aspect of this challenge and not the others condemns MBA graduates of the 21st century to a career marked by frustration, ineffectiveness, and inefficiency (Latham 2004) If business schools are to survive and prosper in the future, they will need to be structured around five core integrated subject areas: (a) leadership skills that capitalize on knowledge of (b) strategy, (c) finance and (d) information technology (IT) within the context of and influenced by a (e) global economy.

To understand the financial drives of a business, one must have a command of basic accounting principles (Brealey and Myres 1996); to craft a business strategy, one must understand market dynamics (Porter 1998); to meet market imperatives for high quality as low cost with minimal delay, IT competencies is crucial (Mitchell and Zmud 1999); to exercise leadership, one must be aware of global and cultural influences (Yukl 1998).

It follows from this reasoning that the core competencies Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School 656 delivered by a leading business school should be fivefold, namely, the (1) leadership capability to build a team that will implement (2) competitive strategies that will enable an organization to be (3) financially healthy in a (4) global market place, through effective use of (5) information technology (Lathem et. al. 2004).

McDonald and Mansour (2000) emphasized on the academics’ role to ensure that organizational change and transformation is at the core of the program’s curriculum. To ensure that the new MBA program has got the competencies described above, the curriculum goals and objectives are to include functional knowledge, problem solving, global perspective, leadership, ethical judgment and decision making, adaptability, communication, managing information technology and finally management competency (Hallinger and Snidvongs 2008). 4. The Leading Business School

In the context of today’s changing need of management education, and the way an MBA program has to be designed, as these issues discussed in the research, the leading business school’s performance standard has been examined. The following section of the research gives a contrasting picture of leading business schools of the US and of Asia Pacific. The evolution in management education and the subsequent changes in MBA program suggest a framework to understand the performance standard of leading business in the USA and in Asia-Pacific region.

The basic criteria used in such framework are; a) vision to create talented leaders of the corporation, b) curriculum fitting to understand the environmental dynamics, and c) quality management of the program. Against this backdrop of the study, the vision statement of leading business schools have been structured in the following table (Table 2) Table 2: Vision Statement of Ten Leading US Business School Remark Quality Committed Confident for quality Holistic Approach Committed for quality Committed for skill Coping to fit for challenge Innovative leadership orientation Quality in leadership Innovation in leadership

Vision Statement To prepare students for a lifetime of leadership To help the students to be the best leader To equip students how to make decisions, reason strategically, and Wharton understand all the dimensions of a business problem Empowers students as leaders who can create innovative strategies and MIT execute them in the market. To examine ideas, evaluate problems and opportunities and handling Chicago uncertainty To prepare students to think on their feet and act decisively in any Tuck business environment.

To educate students broadly on the topic of leadership, with a particular Haas focus on teaching students how to lead the process of innovation within an organization. To give students the edge for success in a world that demands smart, Columbia flexible and effective business leaders. To prepare students to lead globally diverse teams, consider the role of Michigan business in society, and build organizational cultures that foster innovation. Source: MBA Brochure shown on the web site of the school Business School Harvard Stanford

The vision statements of leading business schools given in the Table 1 give clear message to the corporations that all of the nine leading business schools in the USA have got useful vision or purpose satisfying the needs of today’s challenges of business management. It is found that such a vision statement can be perceived as proper role played by a business school to produce talented leaders with necessary skills to fulfill the need s of today’s contemporary challenges in business management. At least the remark column of the table corresponding to the vision statement of each business school 57 Mohammed Abdullah Mamun and Ariffin Bin Mohamad reveals that the schools are playing the role effectively in this concern. The vision statements of Asia Pacific business school can be examined to find the contrast. Table 3: Vision Statement of Ten Leading Asia Pacific Business School Remark Build professionalism Management skill as strength Skill Variety development Build Management skills Produce talented leaders Focus on system development Commitment for future business leadership Unique features for confidence

Vision Statement To equip professionals with fundamental business knowledge and Melbourne analytical skills required for management roles The program nurtures world-class managers by exposing them to real IIM, Ahmadabad life unstructured situations along with analytical tools and business philosophies To provide rigorous training, conceptual foundations, up-to-date AIM, Philippines knowledge, analytical tools and people management and leadership skills.

To develop skills and attitudes of listening and understanding others, SOM, AIT, Thailand holistic thinking, collective decision making, leading by example, communicating, negotiating, being sensitive to societal concerns etc. Vision for the NUS MBA Program is for it to become a top provider of NUS Business School effective and responsible business leaders.

Korean Graduate KAIST is the best model that leads a globalize with the accumulated School of capability in education and research, and the graduate school-oriented Management educational system China Europe To prepare talented young people with career aspiration, managerial International potential, and international orientation for a career of global business Business School leaders in the future organizations. • To provide opportunities to conduct analysis of companies under the auspices of The Nanyang MBA. Nanyang Business School, Singapore • To take advantage of this rare opportunity to build regional business networks.

Source: MBA Brochure shown on the web site of the school Business School From the above table it is revealed that the leading business in Asia Pacific have got right set of vision statements for MBA programs. The statements are committed to produce future corporate leaders with required set of skills necessary to face the challenges of today’s management. The remarks of the statements give the nature of the visions of the schools. Basically in term of focus of MBA program of both the regions schools, they have good standing to play proper roles to produce talented leaders as it is reflected from the vision statement.

The next question is related to curriculum designing and integration so that the vision can be implemented using deserving set of curriculum of offerings and the way the program can be imparted. So, the two other issues are; curriculum integration designing and the mode of offerings. From the brochures studied here the curriculum integration according to today’s management need and the features of program management of the schools are summarized in the following table. Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School Table 4: Aspect 658

Summary of Curriculum Integration & Program Management US Business School • Aim at developing student’s necessary capacities • Diverse range of electives are offered • Core courses for foundation Participant has found flexibility Asia Pacific Business School • Combination of core and specialized requirements • Lead to develop required skill level • Covers all the areas required to address the changes in business management • Skill level help to achieve professional development • Scope of getting knowledge of interdependencies and interrelationships • • • • • • • • • Curriculum Integration • •

Scope of getting competitive advantage • Courses required to improve management skills • Interdisciplinary approach • Community Experience • Other initiatives to be professional • Capstone Experience • Seminar & Workshop Program Management • Case study Method • Exposed to realities through Experience • International Exchange Program • Action Based Learning Source: MBA brochure downloaded from the website of the school Exposed to diverse environment Summer Internship Exchange Program The Case Method Internship Program Business Project Elite Mentoring Program Industry Linkage Career Development

The above table shows that the curriculum integration of the top ranking business schools of the USA and of the Asia Pacific has got necessary emphasis to ensure the skills required to face the challenges. While it is found that in both the regions business schools have included required courses with diverse range of options. So, the business schools in the regions can play role of building management skill in the MBA program as the candidates have got scope of getting knowledge build up in a competitive way.

This sort of combination in curriculum designing, as it is revealed in both regions schools, gives scope of professional skill fulfillments of the future leaders. In case of program offerings it is found from the table that the US business schools are more professional to use modern effective approaches, whereas the Asia Pacific business schools are not far behind while they use effective set of offering techniques. The study perceived that, top ranking business school, considered as the best intuitions of providing deserving candidates for managerial positions, should play proper role in this concern.

It is revealed from the study that these business schools of both the regions; USA and Asia Pacific, have been trying to play effective role in producing right set of management talent for the corporations. This is how they are considered as the best business schools in the regions to produce future business leaders. The study further reveals that the business school should have vision of producing leadership quality of prospective managers which has to be reflected in curriculum integration process and in program management.

The curriculum integration process should address all the management skills required to face the contemporary challenges as it is found in case of leading business schools examined in the research. Finally, the program management has to be most effective approaches leading to ensure professional build up among the candidates. 5. Conclusion The study reveals that business organizations have been giving pressures to universities to fit their professional mode. It becomes crucial for their successful survival in creating knowledgeable people to face the challenges of the environment. The management education has to be shaped into the needs of 59 Mohammed Abdullah Mamun and Ariffin Bin Mohamad the industries today. But in today’s situation survival of business school is questionable due to lack of professionalism in its management. The issues from the literature review of the study can be considered as proper set of guidelines to business school. The study shows that top ranking business schools have been playing proper roles in all the concerns addressed in this study. As a matter of fact the ranking status of the business school of the USA and Asia Pacific is given due to their roles played in producing management experts of the corporations.

In the changing scenario of managing, each business has to depend on such a business school to fulfill the required management skill. The study reveals that top ranking business in the regions have responded rightly to build the skills of future managers. The business schools those who have poor standing in case of setting right vision statement, have got drawbacks curriculum integration process accordingly and finally, do not have exposure to effective approaches to offer the programs have been treated as inefficient institutions to the corporate leaders. References 1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] AACSB (The International Association for Management Education). (1999). Continuous improvement symposium continues to draw a crowd. Newsline, 30(1), 10-13. Asian Institute of Management (Philippines) http:// www. aim. edu/ Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand (School of Management) http:// www. ait. ac. th/ Behrman, J. N. and Levin, R. (1984). Are business schools doing their job? Harvard Business Review, January/February, 140-147. Bettis, R. A. & Hitt, M. A. (1995). The new competitive landscape.

Strategic Management Journal, 16, 7-19, Buckley, John and Kemp, Nigel (1987). The Strategic Role of Management Development. Management Education and Development, 18(3),158-159. China Europe International Business School (China) http:// www. ceibs. edu/. Chinese University of Hong Kong http:// www. cuhk. edu. hk/ Conger, J. A. , Spreitzer, G. M. & Lawler, E. E. (1999). Introduction: The challenges of effective change leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Columbia University (NY) – Columbia Business School http:// www. columbia. edu/ Cunha, Miguel Pina. et. al. (2004).

Looking for Complication: Four approaches to Management Education. Journal of Management Education, 28(1), 89. D’Aveni, R. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the dynamic of strategic maneuvering. New York Free Press. Forman, S. (1998, February). Undergraduate education reform. Paper presented at the AACSB undergraduate Program Seminar Charlottesville, VA. Goodrick, Elizabeth (2002). From Management as a Vocation to Management as a Scientific Activity: An Institutional Account of a Paradigm Shift. Journal of Management, 28(5), 651655. Gordon, R. A. and Howell, J. E. (1959). Higher education for business.

New York: Columbia University Press. Hallinger, Philip and Snidvongs, Kamontip (2008). Education Leaders: Is There Anything to Learn from Business Management? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(1), 11-12. Hambrick, D. C. (1994). 1993 Presidential address: What if the Academy actually mattered? Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 11-16. Hamilton, Diane et. al. (2000). A decision model for integration across the Business Curriculum in the 21st Century. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 103. Hammer, M & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation.

New York: Harper Collins. Harvard Business School http://www. hbs. edu/ [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] Management Education for Contemporary Challenges: The Role of Business School [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] 660 [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] Huff, Anne Sigismund and Huff, James Oran (2001). Re-Focusing the Business School Agenda. British Journal of Management, 12, S49. Indian Institute of Management, Ahmadabad http:// www. iipm. edu International University of Japan (Graduate School of Management) http:// www. uj. ac. jp/ Jorgensen, B. (1992). Industry to B. Schools: Smarten up on TQM or else. Electronic Business, 18, 85-90. Kearns, K. P. (1998). Institutional accountability in higher education: A strategic approach. Public Productivity and Management Review. 22(2), 140-156. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (Graduate School of Management) http:// www. kaist. edu/ Latham, Gary et. al. (2004). Fostering integrative thinking: Adapting the executive education model to the MBA program. Journal of Management Education 28(1), 3-9. Leonard-Barton, D. 1995). Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and sustaining the source of innovation, Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Linder, J. C. and Smith, H. J. (1992). The complex case of management education. Harvard Business Review, 70(5), 16-33. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://www. web. mit. edu/ McCuddy, M. K. & Pirie, W. L. (1998, February). Contributing to a skilled workforce: Val-paraiso University’s Approach. Paper presented at the AACSB undergraduate Program seminar, Charlottesville, VA. McDonald, Kimberly S. and Mansour-Cole, Dina (2000).

Change requires intensive care: An experiential exercise for learners in university and corporate settings. Journal Of Management Education, 24(1), 128. Melbourne Business School http:// www. mbs. unimelb. edu. au/ Nanyang Business School (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore) http:// www. nbs. ntu. edu. sg/ New York University (Stern) http:// www. stern. nyu. edu/ NUS Business School (National University of Singapore) http:// www. bschool. nus. edu/ Pfeffer, j. (1977). Effects of an MBA and socioeconomic origins on business school graduates’ salaries. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 62, 698-705.

Peffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through people unleashing the power of the workforce. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Pierson, F. C. (1959). The education of American businessmen. New York: McGraw-Hill. Porter, L. W. and McKibbon, L. E. (1988). Management education and Development: Drift or thrust into the 21st century? New York: Mc-Graw Hill. Quinn, R. E. & Snyder, N. T. (1999). Advanced change theory: Culture change at Whirlpool Corporation. In J. Conger, G. M. Spreitzer, & E. E. Lawler (Eds), The leader’s change handbook (pp. 162-194), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Raelin, J.

A. (2000). Work based learning: The new frontier of management development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Spender, J. C. (1995). Underlying antinomies: An historical analysis of US graduate business education and its problems. Available: http://www. iris. nyit. edu/~spender Stanford Graduate School of Business http://www. gsb. stanford. edu/ Tannenbaum, S. I. (2002). ‘A strategic view of training and learning’, in K. Kraignr (ed. ), Creating, Implementing, and Managing Effective Training and Development: State-of-the-Art Lessons for Practice (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass), pp. 0-52. Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth http:// www. tuck. dartmouth. edu/ University of California-Berkeley (Haas) http:// www. haas. berkeley. edu/ University of Chicago http://www. uchicago. edu/ University of Michigan – Ann Arbor (Ross) http:// www. bus. umich. edu/ University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) http://www. wharton. upenn. edu/ 661 [50] Mohammed Abdullah Mamun and Ariffin Bin Mohamad Wexley, Kenneth N. and Baldwin, Timothy T. (1986) Management Development. Journal of Management, 12(2), 278.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

close

HAVEN’T FOUND ESSAY YOU WANT?

Get your custom essay sample

FOR ONLY $13.90/PAGE

Nora
Tucker

Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out