Discussion: View Thread

Probably much like you, I have been thinking a lot about the global financial crisis.  I got my retirement fund report last week.  So when was I planning to retire?

It seems to me that the global financial crisis involves institutions who rather than operate a sustainable system created a house of cards the fall of which we will all likely suffer for years to come.  Instead of hard work financial institutions have operated a gimmick packed shell game they thought they were smart enough to control.  They thought they could borrow money from people who did not have it to lend and lend money to people who could not afford to pay it back.  Experience proved them wrong. 

The wisdom of these actions is questionable from a variety of perspectives.  Certainly the financial experts, regulators, politicians and the news media are busy pointing fingers.  But how do we avoid these situations in the future?

As an educator, it seems a common denominator in all this is the education both those who work in the financial industry and our politicians on both sides of the aisle received at university.  Indeed, one might well question the training of those who run the financial institutions.  These institutions aggressively recruited graduates of the best universities.  Graduates have often been encouraged to believe that the goal is to ensure their bonuses by increasing earnings by these institutions as much as possible regardless of the means.  Alumni working for these institutions have also used their financial contributions to influence their alma mater's policies and practices.

In order to avoid these crises in future we might ask ourselves, how many of our graduates work in these institutions?

What is it that they were taught or not taught?

What is it that they learned or failed to learn?

What lessons do universities, faculty need to learn from this crisis to help future graduates learn not to let this happen again?

What is the role of agencies accrediting universities and academic programs?

What is the role of our teaching, research, and service?

Faculty have the opportunity to apply their scholarly activities to help solve problems that face the larger community beyond the boundaries of campus, to integrate student learning with the scholarship of engagement, to advance the pedagogy, as well as, to investigate issues of interest within and across academic disciplines. 

How might that scholarship better prepare our graduates to ensure that playing with cards is understood as a game and not a way to manage financial institutions?

What do you think?

Cheers,

Chris

THE WCU College of Business is Economic Transformation.

Dr. Christopher Pratt

Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

Professor of Business Administration

Senior Policy Fellow, Institute for the Economy and the Future

College of Business Western Carolina University http://www.wcu.edu/2517.asp

282 Belk Building Cullowhee, NC 28723 cgpratt@wcu.edu

Office: +828-227-3498  Fax: +828-227-7075              

Cell: +828-450-5692  BB Mobile: +828-545-7028

THE Western College of Business graduates BUSINESS READY.

Hire BUSINESS READY graduates from THE Western COB.

Chris asks serious questions about  the professionalism of senior executives and the contribution of the management education we claim to provide, both at MBA and executive levels. The public could reasonably ask what the *** we have been doing if the people we train turn out to be so grossly unprofessional in their behaviour. Such incompetence in medicine or engineering would get people struck off, prosecuted or both.

I don't understand much about the high-finance issues involved here, but even at the simplest low level of sub-prime lending the incompetent strategic management directly cost hundreds of millions of dollars – plus of course abject misery for millions of ordinary folk. As Chris asks – who are these people, where were they trained, and are they going to come back to our classes and explain for the sake of future generations of managers just why they messed up as they did?

Meanwhile, we might ask ourselves what we think we taught them – or should have done - that might have prevented such foolishness.

Kim Warren: London Business School

Probably much like you, I have been thinking a lot about the global financial crisis.  I got my retirement fund report last week.  So when was I planning to retire?

It seems to me that the global financial crisis involves institutions who rather than operate a sustainable system created a house of cards the fall of which we will all likely suffer for years to come.  Instead of hard work financial institutions have operated a gimmick packed shell game they thought they were smart enough to control.  They thought they could borrow money from people who did not have it to lend and lend money to people who could not afford to pay it back.  Experience proved them wrong. 

The wisdom of these actions is questionable from a variety of perspectives.  Certainly the financial experts, regulators, politicians and the news media are busy pointing fingers.  But how do we avoid these situations in the future?

As an educator, it seems a common denominator in all this is the education both those who work in the financial industry and our politicians on both sides of the aisle received at university.  Indeed, one might well question the training of those who run the financial institutions.  These institutions aggressively recruited graduates of the best universities.  Graduates have often been encouraged to believe that the goal is to ensure their bonuses by increasing earnings by these institutions as much as possible regardless of the means.  Alumni working for these institutions have also used their financial contributions to influence their alma mater's policies and practices.

In order to avoid these crises in future we might ask ourselves, how many of our graduates work in these institutions?

What is it that they were taught or not taught?

What is it that they learned or failed to learn?

What lessons do universities, faculty need to learn from this crisis to help future graduates learn not to let this happen again?

What is the role of agencies accrediting universities and academic programs?

What is the role of our teaching, research, and service?

Faculty have the opportunity to apply their scholarly activities to help solve problems that face the larger community beyond the boundaries of campus, to integrate student learning with the scholarship of engagement, to advance the pedagogy, as well as, to investigate issues of interest within and across academic disciplines. 

How might that scholarship better prepare our graduates to ensure that playing with cards is understood as a game and not a way to manage financial institutions?

What do you think?

Cheers,

Chris

THE WCU College of Business is Economic Transformation.

Dr. Christopher Pratt

Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

Professor of Business Administration

Senior Policy Fellow, Institute for the Economy and the Future

College of Business Western Carolina University http://www.wcu.edu/2517.asp

282 Belk Building Cullowhee, NC 28723 cgpratt@wcu.edu

Office: +828-227-3498  Fax: +828-227-7075              

Cell: +828-450-5692  BB Mobile: +828-545-7028

THE Western College of Business graduates BUSINESS READY.

Hire BUSINESS READY graduates from THE Western COB.

Dear Colleagues,

I love this debate, and yes, good questions, Chris.  Obviously, they are complex and difficult questions.  I think we teach too much at what I will call Level Two, conscious thought, and not enough at Level Three, values, assumptions, beliefs, and expectations about the way the world is or should be.  I worry that if we did that though, the discussions in classrooms and faculty meetings would heat up exponentially-so we stay away from it.  For example, Peter Senge visited our school yesterday and we had a delightful day long set of discussions about systems theory, nested systems, sustainability and the implications for management education.  During the discussions, by chance, I had a side conversation with a colleague who seemed to be saying that all was well.  I asked out of the blue if he was a pre-determinist.  Of course, he said.  It's all already been decided and our job is just to walk along the pre-determined path.  I was flabbergasted.  If PhDs in social science are teaching ethics and finance and sustainability with an underlying foundational set of beliefs that all is in god's hands (whichever one you believe in), planned for, and safe, and we should not worry, how can we encourage students to rethink their theory of business?

Another colleague (ethics) argued recently that our theory of business is broken-that success should NOT be maximizing short term profits-that real business is when we deliver real goods and services to real people at the end of a value chain and in the process respect and value all of the relevant stakeholders including employees, vendors, customers, and local citizens as WELL as shareholders.  Anyone who answers "what's the purpose of business?" with, "You dummy, to make money!" is leaving school with a "broken theory" of what a business is in mind.  And yet many if not MOST of us in multiple disciplines perpetuate this thought under the rubric of "all of that's included in the share price" and "free market capitalism". 

Paul Lawrence and Nitin Nohria's book Driven suggests that homo sapiens are hard-wired with a desire to have a little more, no matter how much they have.  It seems to me that if that's the case, we need to teach systems that hold that instinctive drive in check and provide for a long term survivability.  But most people don't look at the long run.  I remember being taught in my MBA program, by the economics professor, "if there's no short run, there's no long run."  Ouch.  Didn't Herb Simon win a Nobel Prize for the concept of "satisficing" instead of "maximizing?"  (Yes.)  Where's the theory of satisficing today?

I believe we need to emphasize in greater numbers in our global business schools and management programs that the quality of life, individually or socially, is NOT represented by the numbers, by the amounts one has accumulated.  And secondly, that a totally free market, or any unregulated sub-market (like CDS or CDO swaps or ...) is a formula for disaster and implosion.  No organization can grow forever.  Senge reported that the average life span of Fortune 500 firms is just 34 years-HALF the human life span.  And that we need to realize that nature does not work for industry, industry is contained in and subsumed by nature.  Predators who over-feed their range, die off.  Even in the financial markets.  WHAT did we THINK would happen when we repealed Glass-Steagal in 1999?  Have people changed that much?  Not. 

Those who argue that "the smaller the government the better" don't realize that we all are paying the "penalty tax" when the unregulated human greed house of cards caves in.  And I'm NOT a socialist.  The taxes I'm "paying" now on my retirement are MUCH higher than if we'd paid some people to oversee the huge unregulated 60 trillion dollar swap casino we have built on top of the global economy.  (By the way, the US economy is only 12-14 trillion depending on the day this week, and we carry a 10 trillion USD debt-a ratio no family would carry.)   I'm not saying government should run everything-I do think that human nature needs to be monitored and monitored carefully.

So, I believe we need to teach more than how or why.  We need to teach the consequences of the unexamined habitual beliefs that people hold on to dearly and that are irrational, emotionally charged, and collectively destructive.  We should not ALLOW citizens to gamble with other people's mortgages OR with their own retirement funds.  Because if it collapses, as it always has, WE all will have to bear the brunt.  It's MORE than ethical analysis-it's understanding the emotion laden set of conscious, semi-conscious, and sub-conscious beliefs that people hold that keep us in the Paleolithic age while our society rockets forward on unexamined assumptions of growth, wealth, and society killing materialism.  We need to teach the systems dynamics perspective that points out that you/we cannot ignore the consequences of our decisions and "freedoms."  Especially when your freedoms create huge "taxes" for others.

Isn't this fun?  Until you look at your 401K or the chart of CO2 in the air or the habituality of our species in focusing on the short run. 

...........................................

Gary Lundquist

Director@InnoSearchColorado.com

Colorado Resources for Innovation

303-840-9929 

...........................................

GaryL@Market-Engineering.com

  Innovation of Business and

the Business of Innovation™

-----Original Message-----
From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Christopher Pratt
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:47 AM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis

Probably much like you, I have been thinking a lot about the global financial crisis.  I got my retirement fund report last week.  So when was I planning to retire?

 

It seems to me that the global financial crisis involves institutions who rather than operate a sustainable system created a house of cards the fall of which we will all likely suffer for years to come.  Instead of hard work financial institutions have operated a gimmick packed shell game they thought they were smart enough to control.  They thought they could borrow money from people who did not have it to lend and lend money to people who could not afford to pay it back.  Experience proved them wrong. 

 

The wisdom of these actions is questionable from a variety of perspectives.  Certainly the financial experts, regulators, politicians and the news media are busy pointing fingers.  But how do we avoid these situations in the future?

 

As an educator, it seems a common denominator in all this is the education both those who work in the financial industry and our politicians on both sides of the aisle received at university.  Indeed, one might well question the training of those who run the financial institutions.  These institutions aggressively recruited graduates of the best universities.  Graduates have often been encouraged to believe that the goal is to ensure their bonuses by increasing earnings by these institutions as much as possible regardless of the means.  Alumni working for these institutions have also used their financial contributions to influence their alma mater's policies and practices.

 

In order to avoid these crises in future we might ask ourselves, how many of our graduates work in these institutions?

 

What is it that they were taught or not taught?

 

What is it that they learned or failed to learn?

 

What lessons do universities, faculty need to learn from this crisis to help future graduates learn not to let this happen again?

 

What is the role of agencies accrediting universities and academic programs?

 

What is the role of our teaching, research, and service?

 

Faculty have the opportunity to apply their scholarly activities to help solve problems that face the larger community beyond the boundaries of campus, to integrate student learning with the scholarship of engagement, to advance the pedagogy, as well as, to investigate issues of interest within and across academic disciplines. 

 

How might that scholarship better prepare our graduates to ensure that playing with cards is understood as a game and not a way to manage financial institutions?

 

What do you think?

 

Cheers,

Chris

 

THE WCU College of Business is Economic Transformation.

 

Dr. Christopher Pratt

Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

Professor of Business Administration

Senior Policy Fellow, Institute for the Economy and the Future

College of Business Western Carolina University http://www.wcu.edu/2517.asp

282 Belk Building Cullowhee, NC 28723 cgpratt@wcu.edu

Office: +828-227-3498  Fax: +828-227-7075              

Cell: +828-450-5692  BB Mobile: +828-545-7028

 

THE Western College of Business graduates BUSINESS READY.

 

Hire BUSINESS READY graduates from THE Western COB.

 

Hi Jim:

Your thoughts on this topic are very, very interesting. Should you have the energy to develop them into an AMLE essay submission that would be great. As you know from your service on the AMLE editorial board, essays are strongly argued, provocative original commentaries or critiques. I think your ideas below are quite provocative and potentially very helpful as we wrangle through this mess.

Best regards,
Myrtle

Myrtle P. Bell, Ph.D.
Associate Editor, Academy of Management Learning & Education
Professional Insights Editor, Equal Opportunities International
University of Texas at Arlington
Box 19467
Arlington TX 76019-0467
Ph:  817 272-3857
E-mail: mpbell@uta.edu
http://management.uta.edu/Dr.Bell/main.htm <https://owa.uta.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://management.uta.edu/Dr.Bell/main.htm>

Each of us must find our work and do it.  Audre Lorde, in Sister Outsider.

________________________________

From: Management Education and Development Discussion on behalf of Clawson, Jim
Sent: Wed 10/15/2008 7:56 PM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis



Dear Colleagues,



I love this debate, and yes, good questions, Chris.  Obviously, they are complex and difficult questions.  I think we teach too much at what I will call Level Two, conscious thought, and not enough at Level Three, values, assumptions, beliefs, and expectations about the way the world is or should be.  I worry that if we did that though, the discussions in classrooms and faculty meetings would heat up exponentially-so we stay away from it.  For example, Peter Senge visited our school yesterday and we had a delightful day long set of discussions about systems theory, nested systems, sustainability and the implications for management education.  During the discussions, by chance, I had a side conversation with a colleague who seemed to be saying that all was well.  I asked out of the blue if he was a pre-determinist.  Of course, he said.  It's all already been decided and our job is just to walk along the pre-determined path.  I was flabbergasted.  If PhDs in social science are teaching ethics and finance and sustainability with an underlying foundational set of beliefs that all is in god's hands (whichever one you believe in), planned for, and safe, and we should not worry, how can we encourage students to rethink their theory of business?



Another colleague (ethics) argued recently that our theory of business is broken-that success should NOT be maximizing short term profits-that real business is when we deliver real goods and services to real people at the end of a value chain and in the process respect and value all of the relevant stakeholders including employees, vendors, customers, and local citizens as WELL as shareholders.  Anyone who answers "what's the purpose of business?" with, "You dummy, to make money!" is leaving school with a "broken theory" of what a business is in mind.  And yet many if not MOST of us in multiple disciplines perpetuate this thought under the rubric of "all of that's included in the share price" and "free market capitalism". 



Paul Lawrence and Nitin Nohria's book Driven suggests that homo sapiens are hard-wired with a desire to have a little more, no matter how much they have.  It seems to me that if that's the case, we need to teach systems that hold that instinctive drive in check and provide for a long term survivability.  But most people don't look at the long run.  I remember being taught in my MBA program, by the economics professor, "if there's no short run, there's no long run."  Ouch.  Didn't Herb Simon win a Nobel Prize for the concept of "satisficing" instead of "maximizing?"  (Yes.)  Where's the theory of satisficing today?



I believe we need to emphasize in greater numbers in our global business schools and management programs that the quality of life, individually or socially, is NOT represented by the numbers, by the amounts one has accumulated.  And secondly, that a totally free market, or any unregulated sub-market (like CDS or CDO swaps or ...) is a formula for disaster and implosion.  No organization can grow forever.  Senge reported that the average life span of Fortune 500 firms is just 34 years-HALF the human life span.  And that we need to realize that nature does not work for industry, industry is contained in and subsumed by nature.  Predators who over-feed their range, die off.  Even in the financial markets.  WHAT did we THINK would happen when we repealed Glass-Steagal in 1999?  Have people changed that much?  Not. 



Those who argue that "the smaller the government the better" don't realize that we all are paying the "penalty tax" when the unregulated human greed house of cards caves in.  And I'm NOT a socialist.  The taxes I'm "paying" now on my retirement are MUCH higher than if we'd paid some people to oversee the huge unregulated 60 trillion dollar swap casino we have built on top of the global economy.  (By the way, the US economy is only 12-14 trillion depending on the day this week, and we carry a 10 trillion USD debt-a ratio no family would carry.)   I'm not saying government should run everything-I do think that human nature needs to be monitored and monitored carefully.



So, I believe we need to teach more than how or why.  We need to teach the consequences of the unexamined habitual beliefs that people hold on to dearly and that are irrational, emotionally charged, and collectively destructive.  We should not ALLOW citizens to gamble with other people's mortgages OR with their own retirement funds.  Because if it collapses, as it always has, WE all will have to bear the brunt.  It's MORE than ethical analysis-it's understanding the emotion laden set of conscious, semi-conscious, and sub-conscious beliefs that people hold that keep us in the Paleolithic age while our society rockets forward on unexamined assumptions of growth, wealth, and society killing materialism.  We need to teach the systems dynamics perspective that points out that you/we cannot ignore the consequences of our decisions and "freedoms."  Especially when your freedoms create huge "taxes" for others.



Isn't this fun?  Until you look at your 401K or the chart of CO2 in the air or the habituality of our species in focusing on the short run. 



   Jim

James G. S. Clawson

Johnson & Higgins Professor of Business Administration

Darden GSB, University of Virginia

Box 6550, Charlottesville, VA 22906  

100 Darden Boulevard, Charlottesville, VA 22903  USA

Tel:  434 924 7488              Fax:  434 243 7680

Web:  http://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj



From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Gary Lundquist
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 11:19 AM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis



Colleagues,



You pose marvelous questions Chris.  Love your wording of the problem.

My perspective on education is jaded. 

Our schools teach "How?"  Not "Why?"  How to read, how to do algebra, how to solve the wave equation in seven coordinate systems.  How to program software.  How to manage a business.  Not "Why?" in the sense of teaching critical thinking.  Not "Why?" in the sense of understanding the purpose and value of learning.

Most test questions either evaluate ability to remember or ability to perform a process (knowing how).

Chris Dedee, a professor in Houston years ago, said that, "The purpose of education is to create conforming citizens."  Not ones who challenge the status quo.

Employers hire bright graduates to implement existing systems, not to remake the company or the industry. The military wants educated soldiers, but recruits don't question drill sergeants.  Soldiers don't question officers.

Bennis, said that "Leadership is doing the right things.  Managing is doing things right."  In my language, leaders ask, "Why?" in order to discover the right things to do.  Managers ask, "How?" in order to do things right.  Both are essential; neither is wrong, yet all too often, we forget leadership and settle for managing.

Do you teach why-ing in your leadership courses?  My own process doesn't... except for two areas.
    Goal setting / strategizing
    Needs analysis for business / product design



In science, hypotheses challenge dogma, yet the processes taught are all "How?".



In short, "Why?" is essential, but the vast body of education only teaches "How?".  We aren't taught to challenge the way things are done.  Or even to think about it.



Best to all,



Gary



...........................................

Gary Lundquist

Director@InnoSearchColorado.com

Colorado Resources for Innovation

303-840-9929 

...........................................

GaryL@Market-Engineering.com

  Innovation of Business and

the Business of Innovation(tm)

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Christopher Pratt
        Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:47 AM
        To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
        Subject: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis

        Probably much like you, I have been thinking a lot about the global financial crisis.  I got my retirement fund report last week.  So when was I planning to retire?

        

        It seems to me that the global financial crisis involves institutions who rather than operate a sustainable system created a house of cards the fall of which we will all likely suffer for years to come.  Instead of hard work financial institutions have operated a gimmick packed shell game they thought they were smart enough to control.  They thought they could borrow money from people who did not have it to lend and lend money to people who could not afford to pay it back.  Experience proved them wrong. 

        

        The wisdom of these actions is questionable from a variety of perspectives.  Certainly the financial experts, regulators, politicians and the news media are busy pointing fingers.  But how do we avoid these situations in the future?

        

        As an educator, it seems a common denominator in all this is the education both those who work in the financial industry and our politicians on both sides of the aisle received at university.  Indeed, one might well question the training of those who run the financial institutions.  These institutions aggressively recruited graduates of the best universities.  Graduates have often been encouraged to believe that the goal is to ensure their bonuses by increasing earnings by these institutions as much as possible regardless of the means.  Alumni working for these institutions have also used their financial contributions to influence their alma mater's policies and practices.

        

        In order to avoid these crises in future we might ask ourselves, how many of our graduates work in these institutions?

        

        What is it that they were taught or not taught?

        

        What is it that they learned or failed to learn?

        

        What lessons do universities, faculty need to learn from this crisis to help future graduates learn not to let this happen again?

        

        What is the role of agencies accrediting universities and academic programs?

        

        What is the role of our teaching, research, and service?

        

        Faculty have the opportunity to apply their scholarly activities to help solve problems that face the larger community beyond the boundaries of campus, to integrate student learning with the scholarship of engagement, to advance the pedagogy, as well as, to investigate issues of interest within and across academic disciplines. 

        

        How might that scholarship better prepare our graduates to ensure that playing with cards is understood as a game and not a way to manage financial institutions?

        

        What do you think?

        

        Cheers,

        Chris

        

        THE WCU College of Business is Economic Transformation.

        

        Dr. Christopher Pratt

        Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

        Professor of Business Administration

        Senior Policy Fellow, Institute for the Economy and the Future

        College of Business Western Carolina University http://www.wcu.edu/2517.asp

        282 Belk Building Cullowhee, NC 28723 cgpratt@wcu.edu

        Office: +828-227-3498  Fax: +828-227-7075              

        Cell: +828-450-5692  BB Mobile: +828-545-7028

        

        THE Western College of Business graduates BUSINESS READY.

        

        Hire BUSINESS READY graduates from THE Western COB.

        

Hi John – being from the UK I may be wrong, but my understanding is that a very large fraction of US executives actually do  go through MBA programs of some kind [and others in banking etc go through university finance programs]? Is this impression not correct? If so, how else did these people get to lead major corporations?

Kim Warren: London Business School.

Dear Gary,

Let's not get over the top here. The qualities that you associate with men and women can all be seen as good in some aspects and bad in others.

And if you associate women with a peacemaker nature, then you may never have heard of lady Macbeth or watched Desperate Housewives.

There is something to be said to associate women with a more nourishing mentality, which may be seen as constructive to the development of civilization, but what men contribute is not so bad either and rather balances out the female perspective.

Do you really think that greed is a male characteristic, not to be found in women? Does Ivana Trump ring a bell?

Best regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: <st1:personname w:st="on">Management Education and Development Discussion</st1:personname> [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Bell</st1:place></st1:city>, Myrtle P
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:37 PM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis

Hi All:

I see my post went to the entire division, fortunately, or unfortunately! These thoughts are indeed quite interesting and provocative, if appropriately developed, potentially suitable for submissions to the Essays, Dialogues and Interviews section of AMLE. Keep us in mind.

 

An additional thought that I had in response to one post--not below--about our evolutionary tendencies is that I don't believe for a minute that everyone has them. I think greed, racism, nationalism, and some other descriptors are not at all natural, nor held by everyone. It's unfortunate that so many people with so much power exhibited them, and that we're all paying the price, as Jim suggests, in one way or another.

 

I think these thoughts bear further exploration.

 

Best,

Myrtle

 

Myrtle P. Bell, Ph.D.

Associate Editor, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename></st1:place> Learning & Education

Professional Insights Editor, Equal Opportunities International

<st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Texas</st1:placename> at <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Arlington</st1:place></st1:city>

<st1:address w:st="on"><st1:street w:st="on">Box</st1:street> 19467</st1:address>

<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Arlington</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">TX</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">76019-0467</st1:postalcode></st1:place>

Ph:  817 272-3857

E-mail: mpbell@uta.edu

http://management.uta.edu/Dr.Bell/main.htm

 

Each of us must find our work and do it.  Audre Lorde, in Sister Outsider.

 

---

From: <st1:personname w:st="on">Management Education and Development Discussion</st1:personname> on behalf of Bell, Myrtle P
Sent: Thu 10/16/2008 4:41 PM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis

Hi Jim:

Your thoughts on this topic are very, very interesting. Should you have the energy to develop them into an AMLE essay submission that would be great. As you know from your service on the AMLE editorial board, essays are strongly argued, provocative original commentaries or critiques. I think your ideas below are quite provocative and potentially very helpful as we wrangle through this mess.

Best regards,
Myrtle

Myrtle P. Bell, Ph.D.
Associate Editor, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename></st1:place> Learning & Education
Professional Insights Editor, Equal Opportunities International
<st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Texas</st1:placename> at <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Arlington</st1:place></st1:city>
<st1:address w:st="on"><st1:street w:st="on">Box</st1:street> 19467</st1:address>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Arlington</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">TX</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">76019-0467</st1:postalcode></st1:place>
Ph:  817 272-3857
E-mail: mpbell@uta.edu
http://management.uta.edu/Dr.Bell/main.htm <https://owa.uta.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://management.uta.edu/Dr.Bell/main.htm>

Each of us must find our work and do it.  Audre Lorde, in Sister Outsider.

________________________________

From: <st1:personname w:st="on">Management Education and Development Discussion</st1:personname> on behalf of Clawson, Jim
Sent: Wed 10/15/2008 7:56 PM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis



Dear Colleagues,



I love this debate, and yes, good questions, Chris.  Obviously, they are complex and difficult questions.  I think we teach too much at what I will call Level Two, conscious thought, and not enough at Level Three, values, assumptions, beliefs, and expectations about the way the world is or should be.  I worry that if we did that though, the discussions in classrooms and faculty meetings would heat up exponentially-so we stay away from it.  For example, Peter Senge visited our school yesterday and we had a delightful day long set of discussions about systems theory, nested systems, sustainability and the implications for management education.  During the discussions, by chance, I had a side conversation with a colleague who seemed to be saying that all was well.  I asked out of the blue if he was a pre-determinist.  Of course, he said.  It's all already been decided and our job is just to walk along the pre-determined path.  I was flabbergasted.  If PhDs in social science are teaching ethics and finance and sustainability with an underlying foundational set of beliefs that all is in god's hands (whichever one you believe in), planned for, and safe, and we should not worry, how can we encourage students to rethink their theory of business?



Another colleague (ethics) argued recently that our theory of business is broken-that success should NOT be maximizing short term profits-that real business is when we deliver real goods and services to real people at the end of a value chain and in the process respect and value all of the relevant stakeholders including employees, vendors, customers, and local citizens as WELL as shareholders.  Anyone who answers "what's the purpose of business?" with, "You dummy, to make money!" is leaving school with a "broken theory" of what a business is in mind.  And yet many if not MOST of us in multiple disciplines perpetuate this thought under the rubric of "all of that's included in the share price" and "free market capitalism". 



Paul Lawrence and Nitin Nohria's book Driven suggests that homo sapiens are hard-wired with a desire to have a little more, no matter how much they have.  It seems to me that if that's the case, we need to teach systems that hold that instinctive drive in check and provide for a long term survivability.  But most people don't look at the long run.  I remember being taught in my MBA program, by the economics professor, "if there's no short run, there's no long run."  Ouch.  Didn't Herb Simon win a Nobel Prize for the concept of "satisficing" instead of "maximizing?"  (Yes.)  Where's the theory of satisficing today?



I believe we need to emphasize in greater numbers in our global business schools and management programs that the quality of life, individually or socially, is NOT represented by the numbers, by the amounts one has accumulated.  And secondly, that a totally free market, or any unregulated sub-market (like CDS or CDO swaps or ...) is a formula for disaster and implosion.  No organization can grow forever.  Senge reported that the average life span of Fortune 500 firms is just 34 years-HALF the human life span.  And that we need to realize that nature does not work for industry, industry is contained in and subsumed by nature.  Predators who over-feed their range, die off.  Even in the financial markets.  WHAT did we THINK would happen when we repealed Glass-Steagal in 1999?  Have people changed that much?  Not. 



Those who argue that "the smaller the government the better" don't realize that we all are paying the "penalty tax" when the unregulated human greed house of cards caves in.  And I'm NOT a socialist.  The taxes I'm "paying" now on my retirement are MUCH higher than if we'd paid some people to oversee the huge unregulated 60 trillion dollar swap casino we have built on top of the global economy.  (By the way, the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> economy is only 12-14 trillion depending on the day this week, and we carry a 10 trillion USD debt-a ratio no family would carry.)   I'm not saying government should run everything-I do think that human nature needs to be monitored and monitored carefully.



So, I believe we need to teach more than how or why.  We need to teach the consequences of the unexamined habitual beliefs that people hold on to dearly and that are irrational, emotionally charged, and collectively destructive.  We should not ALLOW citizens to gamble with other people's mortgages OR with their own retirement funds.  Because if it collapses, as it always has, WE all will have to bear the brunt.  It's MORE than ethical analysis-it's understanding the emotion laden set of conscious, semi-conscious, and sub-conscious beliefs that people hold that keep us in the Paleolithic age while our society rockets forward on unexamined assumptions of growth, wealth, and society killing materialism.  We need to teach the systems dynamics perspective that points out that you/we cannot ignore the consequences of our decisions and "freedoms."  Especially when your freedoms create huge "taxes" for others.



Isn't this fun?  Until you look at your 401K or the chart of CO2 in the air or the habituality of our species in focusing on the short run. 



   Jim

James G. S. Clawson

Johnson & Higgins Professor of Business Administration

Darden GSB, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Virginia</st1:placename></st1:place>

Box 6550, <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Charlottesville</st1:place></st1:city>, VA <st1:address w:st="on"><st1:street w:st="on">22906  

100 Darden Boulevard</st1:street>, <st1:city w:st="on">Charlottesville</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">VA</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">22903</st1:postalcode>  <st1:country-region w:st="on">USA</st1:country-region></st1:address>

Tel:  434 924 7488              Fax:  434 243 7680

Web:  http://faculty.darden.virginia.edu/clawsonj



From: <st1:personname w:st="on">Management Education and Development Discussion</st1:personname> [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Gary Lundquist
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 11:19 AM
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis



Colleagues,



You pose marvelous questions Chris.  Love your wording of the problem.

My perspective on education is jaded. 

Our schools teach "How?"  Not "Why?"  How to read, how to do algebra, how to solve the wave equation in seven coordinate systems.  How to program software.  How to manage a business.  Not "Why?" in the sense of teaching critical thinking.  Not "Why?" in the sense of understanding the purpose and value of learning.

Most test questions either evaluate ability to remember or ability to perform a process (knowing how).

Chris Dedee, a professor in <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Houston</st1:place></st1:city> years ago, said that, "The purpose of education is to create conforming citizens."  Not ones who challenge the status quo.

Employers hire bright graduates to implement existing systems, not to remake the company or the industry. The military wants educated soldiers, but recruits don't question drill sergeants.  Soldiers don't question officers.

Bennis, said that "Leadership is doing the right things.  Managing is doing things right."  In my language, leaders ask, "Why?" in order to discover the right things to do.  Managers ask, "How?" in order to do things right.  Both are essential; neither is wrong, yet all too often, we forget leadership and settle for managing.

Do you teach why-ing in your leadership courses?  My own process doesn't... except for two areas.
    Goal setting / strategizing
    Needs analysis for business / product design



In science, hypotheses challenge dogma, yet the processes taught are all "How?".



In short, "Why?" is essential, but the vast body of education only teaches "How?".  We aren't taught to challenge the way things are done.  Or even to think about it.



Best to all,



<st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Gary</st1:place></st1:city>



...........................................

Gary Lundquist

Director@InnoSearchColorado.com

<st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Colorado</st1:place></st1:state> Resources for Innovation

303-840-9929 

...........................................

GaryL@Market-Engineering.com

  Innovation of Business and

the Business of Innovation(tm)

        -----Original Message-----
        From: <st1:personname w:st="on">Management Education and Development Discussion</st1:personname> [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Christopher Pratt
        Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:47 AM
        To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
        Subject: thinking a lot about the global financial crisis

        Probably much like you, I have been thinking a lot about the global financial crisis.  I got my retirement fund report last week.  So when was I planning to retire?

        

        It seems to me that the global financial crisis involves institutions who rather than operate a sustainable system created a house of cards the fall of which we will all likely suffer for years to come.  Instead of hard work financial institutions have operated a gimmick packed shell game they thought they were smart enough to control.  They thought they could borrow money from people who did not have it to lend and lend money to people who could not afford to pay it back.  Experience proved them wrong. 

        

        The wisdom of these actions is questionable from a variety of perspectives.  Certainly the financial experts, regulators, politicians and the news media are busy pointing fingers.  But how do we avoid these situations in the future?

        

        As an educator, it seems a common denominator in all this is the education both those who work in the financial industry and our politicians on both sides of the aisle received at university.  Indeed, one might well question the training of those who run the financial institutions.  These institutions aggressively recruited graduates of the best universities.  Graduates have often been encouraged to believe that the goal is to ensure their bonuses by increasing earnings by these institutions as much as possible regardless of the means.  Alumni working for these institutions have also used their financial contributions to influence their alma mater's policies and practices.

        

        In order to avoid these crises in future we might ask ourselves, how many of our graduates work in these institutions?

        

        What is it that they were taught or not taught?

        

        What is it that they learned or failed to learn?

        

        What lessons do universities, faculty need to learn from this crisis to help future graduates learn not to let this happen again?

        

        What is the role of agencies accrediting universities and academic programs?

        

        What is the role of our teaching, research, and service?

        

        Faculty have the opportunity to apply their scholarly activities to help solve problems that face the larger community beyond the boundaries of campus, to integrate student learning with the scholarship of engagement, to advance the pedagogy, as well as, to investigate issues of interest within and across academic disciplines. 

        

        How might that scholarship better prepare our graduates to ensure that playing with cards is understood as a game and not a way to manage financial institutions?

        

        What do you think?

        

        Cheers,

        Chris

        

        THE WCU College of Business is Economic Transformation.

        

        Dr. Christopher Pratt

        Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

        Professor of Business Administration

        Senior Policy Fellow, Institute for the Economy and the Future

        <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Business Western Carolina</st1:placename></st1:place> University http://www.wcu.edu/2517.asp

        282 Belk Building <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Cullowhee</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">NC</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">28723</st1:postalcode></st1:place> cgpratt@wcu.edu

        Office: +828-227-3498  Fax: +828-227-7075              

        Cell: +828-450-5692  BB <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Mobile</st1:place></st1:city>: +828-545-7028

        

        THE Western College of Business graduates BUSINESS READY.

        

        Hire BUSINESS READY graduates from THE Western COB.