Report of meeting of BAM College of Fellows, 20th November 2014

Policy makers continue to show a high level of interest in the role of business schools in promoting economic growth. The All Party Parliamentary Group’s Commission on Management report - ‘Management 2020 – leadership to unlock long-term growth’ – was published over the summer and at much the same time a working group made up of representatives from the QAA, CMI and ABS produced a report entitled ‘21st Century Leaders’. The open Fellows’ session at the Belfast conference was one response to these reports and the Fellows continued discussions on some of the issues arising from them at a meeting in Londonon 20th November.

A significant portion of each report includes recommendations for changes to undergraduate business and management education and training. This stimulated the dean of fellows to develop five theses and five questions for discussion on the20th November.

Five theses

1)The UK’s poor economic performance is in part due to the use of less developed management practices,

2)Britain’s 150 year lag behind France and 100 year lag behind the US and Germany in the provision of university level business education is partly responsible for poor management practices,

3)It is undergraduate programmes, not the MBA, that matter in this context,

4)The French grande ecole programme is the undergraduate gold standard course, internationally,

5)And the possibility of radical change to undergraduate education in the UK is hampered by its institutional arrangements (no over-arching Council for the management profession; split between practitioners and academics; the relative power and influence of the industry association (ABS) compared to the learned society (BAM), and the complex accreditation arrangements (QAA,AMBA,EQUIS,AACSB).

Five questions and fellows’ responses:

1)Would we wish to give advice, and if so what would that advice be,about what should be taught about leadership, and how it should be taught, on undergraduate and Masters business and management courses?

Responses: Gerry Johnson, in leading the discussion on this, noted that although the word leadership was used 72 times by Michael Heseltine in his recent report on the economy, nowhere did the report indicate what was meant by it. To the extent that it matters that we define our terms (one view was that in the context in which Heseltine was writing tight definitions were les important than sweeping visions) there was general agreement that fellows, and BAM generally should be influencing policy, teaching and research on leadership. Could we reach an agreed statement on the subject? How can we contribute to the debate? Can we provide support to BAM more generally as it seeks to engage in these discussions? More generally it was felt that some of the key discussions relating to management are not taking place within BAM or with BAM’s involvement and fellows are keen to help change this.

2)a) How far does the fellowship support either the view that introductory undergraduate courses are the professor’s course because they lay the foundations, or that it is a waste of precious resource for research-intensive professors to provide basic tuition? b) Depending on our answer to 2a) does the fellowship have an interest in shaping undergraduate education?

Responses: Cathy Cassell led on this question, noting that both the role of professor and the number of undergraduate students had changed dramatically within one generation. Perhaps it is not a question of professors laying the foundations but they should surely have undergraduate teaching in their portfolio and take an interest in management education. It was noted that the QAA had partnered with the industry association (ABS) and not with the learned society (BAM) in drawing up the C21 Leaders report. There was considerable support for the view that professors should be involved in all aspects of undergraduate education, including teaching, and for BAM to have greater involvement in curriculum matters. However the number of the BAM office staff,compared to ABS for example, and the lack of a post designated CEO, was thought to put BAM at a disadvantage and needs to be addressed if BAM is to play a fuller role in discussions with such as the CMI and QAA.

3) To what extent do we agree that the French grande ecole programme sets the standard for undergraduate business education, with its strong linkages to practice, its built-in internship, its opportunity to study abroad, and its 5 year duration?

`Responses: Ken Starkey led this discussion, beginning with a summary of the grande ecole pattern, which is a highly selective five year programmecombining a bachelor and master (in Bologna terms) for students with the highest grades. The first 2 years of the programme are at classes preparatoire in which considerable time is spent on base disciplines including philosophy, maths and the social sciences. The next three years include extensive internships and, usually, some study abroad. Quite a lot of the teaching is delivered by practitioners, often alumni of the school. Fellows, though not attracted to the elitism of the French programme, supported the programme’s design, particularly the foundation years and the internship.

4)What is our view of the recommendations insofar as they relate to management training of the C21 Leader and Management 2020 reports, and do we have anything to add about the curriculum content of (undergraduate) business and management courses?

Responses: the main recommendations of the two reports regarding management training were concerned with greater industry engagement including more students taking a year, or shorter, out on placement (internship) ; the reports make no mentionof foundational courses, which the fellows support. Within a five year programme there might be enough contact time to include these and the industry focused elements already proposed.

Discussion moved on to the question of whether there should be an explicit commitment to evidence-based management, mirroring the doctors’ relatively recent support of evidence-based medicine. This provoked considerable discussion and the expression of a number of different views. This topic might be worthy of a day conference either of the fellows or within BAM more generally.

5)Bearing in mind the growing influence of AACSB and EFMD on the shape of management education, the marginal influence of BAM on Management 2020, the complete absence of BAM from the C21st Leaders report and that the Journal Quality List belongs to ABS and not BAM, how far do we consider there is an institutional problem in management education and research in the UK? Do the Fellows have a role in addressing this? Are there other models, e.g. medicine, law, engineering, from which we can learn?

Responses: Abby Ghobadian led this discussion which ranged widely over issues such as whether BAM has an agenda relating to theseissues; how fellows might foster collaboration between BAM,ACSS, ABS and CMI, and the potential for a small group of fellows writing ‘white’ (or ‘green’) papers. It was noted that any such activity would need to be done in consultation with BAM Council. Arthur Francis and Robin Wensley agreed to write a paper for the next fellows’ meeting (19th March 2015) setting out how they saw the issues regarding institutional arrangements, which would include consideration of the arrangements used by the engineers, among other professional groups.

Actions

Dean’s group to decide on themes to be pursued and developed (perhaps into green papers)at subsequent meetings. Possible t topicsinclude leadership and evidence-based management.

Ken Starkey is to meet with Simon Collinson about BAM’s relations with ESRC and ABS.

Cathy and Arthur will, after consultation with the BAM President, make contact with ABS as a first step in collaboration, such a meeting to include discussion of the C21st Leaders report and its recommendations for changes to undergraduate management education and also the implications of ABS obtaining chartered status.

Arthur and Robin to produce paper for March meeting setting out their understanding of the institutional issues influencing the design and delivery of management education in the UK.

Doctoral symposium for Conference to be on the agenda of the March meeting.

Arthur Francis

9/12/14