Search News


Browse Archives

News

Rethinking the MBA Curriculum

March 24, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The world economy has changed quite a bit since the 1950s, but many MBA programs still have traditional core curriculums, with wholly separate courses in accounting, finance, and economics. Yale University's business school has decided to take a new approach that will replace such courses in the first year of a program with interdisciplinary offerings that reflect the fluid nature of business.

Senior faculty members in the School of Management voted unanimously Wednesday to begin redesigning the curriculum. Dean Joel Podolny, who is in his first year, and a committee of senior faculty members regularly solicited information from alumni, recruiters, business leaders, students, and what they learned is that students aren't necessarily ready for the interdisciplinary nature of the workplace.

"We can see connections between what we do and all kinds of applications, because we're steeped in it," said Sharon M. Oster, a professor of management and entrepreneurship. "We thought our students would, but it seems not to be true. We need to work harder to help them make those connections earlier in their careers, not just seven years down the road."

Officials from the School of Management were careful to point out that all the faculty voted on concretely was to make change, not any specific changes. But senior faculty members said there is already an outline to start things off with what would significantly change the first year -- and which will start right away.

Up until now, students have taken discipline specific theory courses in their first year, like financial accounting, operations management, and economic analysis. The new structure would consist of three main segments: "Orientation to Management," "Organizational Perspectives" and "Integrated Leadership Perspective."

Orientation to Management, the first segment would be about six weeks long and would include basic economics and accounting.

The Organizational Perspectives segment, which would be about three months long and include around eight courses, is where much of the serious interdisciplinary coursework could occur, with a focus on seeing things from different constituent's points of view. Academic groups ("groups" in the management school are akin to small departments) would be asked to develop teaching material, or a "module," for a particular theme. For instance, "somebody can talk about things from an investor's point of view, and the politics group can talk about how, say, the governor or attorney general of New York thinks about a question," said Jacob Thomas, a professor of accounting and finance who helped develop the plan outline.

One of the major questions that remains is, once modules addressing various topics from multiple perspectives are developed, how will they be integrated into single courses. Thomas said one of two options are likely: either a professor teaching a course will learn the relevant material from his colleagues and present it in class, or the professor will regularly schedule guest teachers.

The third segment, "Integrated Leadership Perspective," could be six-weeks, and may include examination of interdisciplinary case-studies. Somewhere in the mix, faculty members said, there's likely to be a required international trip lasting a few weeks.

Arthur J. Swersey, a professor of operations research, said he thinks that the business school's relatively small size makes a complete overhaul realistic. "We have groups of people, we don't have departments," he said.

And the school will get smaller still. In order to free up faculty members for course development, next year's class -- the first under the new system -- will be down from 220 students to 180.

Those 180 students won't be the only ones jumping into the interdisciplinary pool. One bonus that faculty members identified is that they'll get a chance to learn more about what their colleagues do. Oster said she's "excited" to interact more with her colleagues, and that the process of curriculum review has produced a "rejuvenating feeling."

Oster said she looks forward to ensuring that students are thinking about applications during their first year, not just theory. "When I go to New York on the weekends, I notice that the price of a hot dog in Central Park is more expensive than two blocks away, outside the park," she said. "What is preventing the vendor outside from coming in? I'm not sure my students are wondering the same thing. These are the kinds of things economists think of right away."

Spencer Hutchins, president of the business school's student government, won't be directly affected by most of the changes, but said that students are generally excited, and that administrators met with students weekly to hear their thoughts and keep them up to date.

Swersey added that, the one thing the vote definitely means is that it will be a busy summer for faculty members. "It's a huge change that could change the way recruiters view students," he said. "If it's not done right, people could be confused about what it means."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Rethinking the MBA Curriculum

  • Posted by Jane Robbins, PhD on March 24, 2006 at 8:15am EST
  • Fifteen years ago, in a master's thesis on restructuring the MBA curriculum for leadership development, I argued (in part from my analysis of and observations at Yale SOM and others)that the MBA curriculum was "upside-down" and that it should begin with a series of short, interdisciplinary courses aimed at developing a framework for understanding the real world of management, to be followed later by narrower courses. Needless to say, I think Yale is on the right track and congradulate the SOM for making the hard decision to restructure rather than tweak. If it can do the additional hard work of aligning its student recruitment and teaching skills/qualifications to the curriculum, it has a real chance of shaping a new model for MBA education.

  • Hold the phone!
  • Posted by J. Swift on March 24, 2006 at 12:50pm EST
  • Before anyone accepts this at face value --
    " .. In order to free up faculty members for course development, next year’s class .. will be down from 220 students to 180 .."

    They should read this about how other MBA programs are coping with the large drop in GMAT test-takers.

    http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/aug2005/bs2005089_9256_bs001.htm?campaign_id=search

  • I Vote For Jane Robbins ... And More ...
  • Posted by RWH on March 24, 2006 at 3:05pm EST
  • Almost a year ago I saw this awful mess (GM, Ford, Delphi, Visteon, and their suppliers falling very close to rock bottom) in Detroit but, unlike most observers, I was unwilling to blame it on all the standard flat world, globalization excuses the great majority of economic and business experts attributed it to.

    In any event, I was inspired to personalize my thoughts in a letter to my youngest son, a senior in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at the University of Michigan, and I later revised my letter and submitted it to IHE as a possible Views article. They weren’t interested. So, skipping the first part of my letter, here’s the conclusion:

    “... This system worked well enough for those of my generation, but, if I were you, I would not count on the long-term viability of companies like Microsoft or IBM or Hewlett-Packard or even Google thirty years from now. Hmmm ... and where are those ‘can’t-miss’ companies like Gateway and Compaq even as we speak? Oh sure, they’re still around ... but for how long? ... how viable are they?

    I know, I know ... I can already hear you muttering, ‘Hey Dad ... it's the computer industry and computers will be right there in the thick of things forever.’ Right ... and that's precisely what millions of automobile industry employees were saying about cars between 1915 and 1990.

    In truth, there are lots of reasons for this sorry state of affairs in American industry, and if you query the CEOs, presidents and senior vice presidents, they’ll provide you with a substantial list of explanations (supported by any number of graphs of correlated statistics) of the external factors (outsourcing, globalization, cheap labor in third-world countries, installation of fiber-optic cable and growth of the Internet, etc.) that caused this unfortunate state of affairs. In the process of losing our manufacturing and assembly industries, we’ve become a nest of finance dorks, making money by moving money around ... and that’s a worrisome prospect.

    I don’t want to trivialize a very complex situation -- and don’t get me off on what GM and Ford did to both the quality of their vehicles and the well-being of their employees by spinning off Delphi and Visteon – but here’s my ‘in-a-nutshell’ explanation:

    GM, Ford, and Chrysler are hurting ---> Because they can’t sell vehicles at a profit ---> Because the vehicles are (1) poorly designed, (2) of mediocre quality, and (3) more often than not inconsistent with what customers want (or need) ---> Because the companies are poorly managed.

    Believe me, that explanation works for many more companies than those in the automobile industry ... and I have left off the critical last arrow.

    The standard response to business decline is to blame our problems on a multitude of symptoms – i.e., on someone else -- but when it comes right down to it, when we burrow down to the root cause, it’s poor management.

    So, dear son, I’m very strongly recommending that you never, ever put yourself in a position of having to count on the competence (not to mention the ethical standards or social conscience) of managers trained in American business schools. It’s not that the individuals (the BBAs and the MBAs) are either incompetent or unethical to begin with. It’s just that, when it comes to theories of business management (i.e., what you would wish to call a management paradigm), Gertrude Stein’s famous remark fits: ‘there is no there there.’ So-called ‘management science’ – and isn’t that an oxymoron? -- is simply ‘the fad of the year’ followed five years later by the next ‘fad of the year.’ So after n ≤ 5 years of business school followed by m ≤ 5 years of business practice – and especially at companies like GM, Ford, and Chrysler -- these talented, energetic, and ambitious young people find themselves embedded in organizational cultures so mediocre (even dysfunctional) they never recover. They learn to go with the flow.

    As undergraduates and MBA students they take their required courses in ‘business ethics’ – whatever you do, don’t outsource those courses to the philosophy department – but the actual content of their core management education courses evolves in a manner that has absolutely nothing to do with science or the scientific method or even good business practice. It is – and please forgive me Son -- b.s. at it’s best.

    Of course the business schools know what they’re doing ... or at least the small number who have more than a few faculty with successful business experience know (and I’m not talking about the Jack Welsh types). Some B-schools even have concentrations for ‘turnaround specialists.’ Think about it ... training turnaround specialists is like saying, ‘Okay, we really screwed up ... but trust us, you can hire someone else we’ve trained to repair the damage the first guy created ... and, oh yes, it won’t cost YOU a dime ... your employees will gladly bear the brut of the turnaround by working for a pittance and giving up their benefits (including healthcare, which won’t be provided by their government, and retirement, which, if conservative legislators have their way, will be privatized and will be unaffordable for most of your employees). And by the way, be sure to give your CEO an enormous raise ... how else can you expect to attract and retain such a well-trained, remarkably talented ‘leader?’’

    So, dear Son, the next time you see Michael Moore using Flint, Michigan as the backdrop for one of his documentaries, pay special attention. You may well be catching a glimpse of what Redmond, Washington will look like in 2040.

  • (Mis)managing change ... and for who's sake?
  • Posted by SOM GRAD , Org Change Manager on March 24, 2006 at 3:05pm EST
  • Oster says the faculty are "steeped" in connections between what faculty do and applications of what they do. But that's not interdisciplinary. There is no evidence that the school is ready for truly interdisciplinary collaboration across the power/political and cultural chasms between disciplines. Some will recall that this was the school that, in 1988, unceremoniously severed all ties to six of eight organizational behavior faculty in one abrupt action. Prior to that time, the school had a reputation of encouraging a participatory and dynamic group laboratory learning environment. (For an insider’s perspective on this event, see Murphy, F. (1989). Editorial: Old politics in New Haven, Interfaces, 19, 13-19.) Since that time, the school has lost most of its credibility in the OB field. Enormous investments have been made at the school to bolster the finance and economics faculty and their resources, while OB has floundered despite valiant efforts by its small, underappreciated, and talented faculty. Interdisciplinary collaboration is notoriously difficult to pull off in even ideal conditions. I fear that this effort at the Yale School of Management will be suffused with the same culturally oppressive machinations that motivated the 1988 coup. The skeptic in me suspects this “rethinking” of the MBA curriculum is actually part of a continued effort on behalf of what Oster and her economics and finance faculty cronies have intended for awhile: the cooptation of OB with the tacit understanding of who really rules the roost.

  • Posted by Dr. Pam Shay , Program Chair, MBA at Franklin University on March 24, 2006 at 5:00pm EST
  • We read your March 24 editorial entitled “Rethinking the MBA Curriculum” and were delighted to see that other MBA programs recognize the value of offering an MBA in a non-traditional format. Franklin University in Columbus, Ohio, has presented its MBA Program using the interdisciplinary approach since its initial offering 13 years ago.

    As a leading educator of working professionals, Franklin serves nontraditional students seeking to advance their education. Over a decade ago we set out to deliver an MBA program that was designed specifically for adult learners. Educational research supported our belief that this is best accomplished when the interrelatedness of topics is apparent to the learner.

    Franklin’s curriculum development model promotes interdisciplinary work at all times. Faculty members, from multiple disciplines, work together to develop and update curriculum on a regular basis. Instructional designers are included to provide appropriate pedagogy suited to the adult learners of the MBA program. And, content experts—practitioners in the appropriate discipline/field of study—are consulted to ensure the relevancy of our materials to today’s and tomorrow’s business environment. This approach to curriculum delivery allows Franklin to focus on the needs of today's employers and their desire for high-level employees with a well-rounded business education.

    Since students learn differently, we believe they should have the choice to learn in the format that best suits their individual learning styles. Franklin responds to the need for different learning preferences by presenting its core concepts in two different curriculum formats.

    The Life Cycle Format is based on the stages of the business life cycle. This is a dramatically different format—using the same business sequence in which students would encounter issues and scenarios in the operation of a business project or venture. This natural progression approach to the Program’s core courses allows the student to not only attain the knowledge provided by all the “pieces” (business discipline content) of an MBA program, but also to see clearly how the pieces fit together, developing both a micro and macro understanding of the business experiences. The Program has an emphasis on leadership and dealing with uncertainty and change. Integration is achieved through use of real-world applications and multiple business simulations throughout the core courses.

    The discipline-Based Format helps business professionals develop whole-brained thinking skills that enable them to grasp and lead change. Traditional business disciplines are taught one class at a time and brought together at the end of the Program in a capstone course.

    As more and more institutions of higher learning recognize the importance of structuring MBA programs to reflect the needs of their students and the business world, we at Franklin University are pleased to see that the format we instituted over a decade ago is experiencing such proven success.

  • Get better students
  • Posted by Scott McQuade , Director at United Nations University Press on March 27, 2006 at 4:30am EST
  • Changing course design is a no-brainer: business evolves, needs evolve, and education evolves.
    What's missing here is the conclusion that if well-educated students are unprepared for business life, perhaps it's not entirely the fault of the educational courses: freshly-minted MBAs of US origin are notoriously green.
    In my experience the bulk are best suited to becoming foot soldiers for consultancies that pump out formulaic 'solutions'.
    I suggest educators consider the European model of taking students with more real-world work experience: their input into classes is a valuable source of content, and the result is graduates with a nuanced education.