Discussion: View Thread

Hi:

I would be delighted to work in two ways: to build sessions that have
appeal to a practictioner audience in our division and maybe across
the academy (all academy sessions); and then to target market these
sessions and the value of attending the academy to key executives in
HR etc. Rather than try for a HUGE number, I think the key point is
to find the right group who would be interested.

For example, Tony Rucci VP HR for Sears who will be our speaker for
Boston '97 has a PhD and is thinking seriously about a mid career
switch back to academia perhaps in a Dean's role or higher. I hit him
up at just the right time in his career; there should be others who
fit this model....

I do think we want executives and not ASTD folks. If you think of
some topics for invited sessions or symposia, I can go to work and
think of people who might put them together. Onward.....

Judi


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: What might MG-ED-DV's niche be?
Author: Management Education and Development Discussion
<MG-ED-DV@SJUVM.STJOHNS.EDU> at Internet
Date: 10/15/96 1:21 PM


This link to practitioners always sounds like such a great idea until we
try to implement it. I think MED does a better job than most divisions in
attracting and appealing to practitioners, but once we get them to a
meeting and they attend other sessions devoted to a bunch of esoteric
stuff they don't understand or care about, we lose them. Perhaps what
we need is to expand the role of Practitioner Liaison to work in that
area. I tried to do that when I held that position, but with little
success. My experience was that ASTD was such a leader in the MD area that
there was little we could do to complement their efforts. Maybe we need to
sharpen our focus and hone in on specific areas such as executive MBA
programs and executive education in general, and leave the broader MD area
to ASTD.

On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Charles Wankel wrote:

> MG-ED-DV can provide a place for practitioners to ask about research on
> management education and training. There are already established lists
> such as TRDEV-L where practitioners already try to find leads on academic
> research on training and development. However, the general level of such
> lists is probably much lower than a management professor centered list
> might be.
>

Hi: I am interested in working to build the practictioner attendance
if we find topics and sessions that are of real value. A pilot would
be useful and then get feedback; I would work to build a small group
of sessions and then put together a marketing piece from either our
division or the academy as a whole. Maybe we can take the lead and do
this for 1997 and see how it works. The time is now to set up topics
and get practictioner/academic pairs to talk--maybe even someone who
has done consulting with their corporate executive-in the area of
education and management development.

I will not be here at the end of this week. You can e mail me at home
at: jstrauss@theramp.net and I will reply early Monday.

Judi


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: What might MG-ED-DV's niche be?
Author: Management Education and Development Discussion
<MG-ED-DV@SJUVM.STJOHNS.EDU> at Internet
Date: 10/16/96 1:38 PM


Bill, sounds like an excellent idea to take it Academy wide at the annual
meeting. Then it would be an empirical question on its overall draw at the
Academy. I do believe it would also reinforce the commitment to actually
address real world concerns in management. Perhaps coordination across the
Divisions could occur informally if formal approval is not granted. A
guerilla movement in the Academy I love it........ Tom Kolenko

At 01:21 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote:
>The idea of having a practitioner track at the Academy within MED is
>interesting. Does anyone have any idea what percentage of MED registrants
>at Academy tend to be practitioners? IT might be that we could suggest a
>practitioner's track throughout the entire meeting, crossing division lines.
>To do this would take some serious coordination, though. On the other hand,
>I'm not sure MED has enough practitioner-oriented programming to make a MED
>track. Add in Mgmt Consulting, HRM, OD, and a few other
>practitioner-oriented divisions (at least in part) and we could have a
>track. Anyway, what do people think??
>
>
>--
>Bill Ferris
>Management Department
>School of Business
>Western New England College
>Springfield, MA 01119
>Tel: 413-782-1629
>FAX: 413-796-2068
>INTERNET: BFERRIS@WNEC.EDU
>
>

Hi everyone!

I have been following the discussion about "practictioner" with
interest and am doing a little "research" on my own. It appears that
there are a lot of managers who hold PhD's and might be quite
interested in not only coming to our meetings and giving talks, but
also doing some important collaborative research-good for us and them.
The most recent is the VP HR of Victoria's Secret...I won't say how I
met him. We might attempt to uncover these individuals and then create
a list of sessions or create new sessions for them as an enticement to
come to the Boston meeting. Each of us might "mentor" a new
professional in the norms of the Academy---and give us some hype in
the process.

Let me know what you think.

Also, Kathy, when will our newsletter be mailed out? Our Corporate
corner writer is anxious to see herself in print. Ben Franklin just
announced its first profitable quarter is two years so she is excited
about us and them....and plans to stay the course so long as there is
some sort of salary guarantee.

Judi


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: What might MG-ED-DV's niche be?
Author: Management Education and Development Discussion
<MG-ED-DV@SJUVM.STJOHNS.EDU> at Internet
Date: 10/26/96 12:49 AM


hi Gang! I think I support Kathleen's view - we need to welcome all who
profess to be managers whether they are professors or no!

New subject. I've been giving a little thought to the session evaluation
process. One thing that has bothered me, despite MED's justifiable pride in
saying that all of its sessions are evaluated, is for what real purpose do we
do it? in my view the only truly useful purpose is for immediate feedback to
those presenting. As far as I can tell, except for the pre-conference stuff,
the subject area's preference or "usefulness to MED" has not played much of a
role in selecting/designing future presentation sessions. I'm leaning toward
a recommendation to do just that...have the sesion evaluated by the audience
and then provide the feedback to the presenters forthwith. Of course some
form redesign would be necessary but thta's what I'm here for! Thoughts,
please? Jackbyrne@msn.com

----------
From: Management Education and Development Discussion on behalf of Powers
That Be
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 1996 3:01 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list MG-ED-DV
Subject: Re: What might MG-ED-DV's niche be?

Wee I guess it's about time for me to add my 2 cents also to this
practitioner/executive/corporate/whatever discussion.

I've read with GREAT interest all of the various viewpoints regarding
"those who do rather than teach" involvement in the Academy. I guess my
basic question is does anyone want their involvement other than us? Oh
sure, the AOM executive board says they do but then continue to restrict
membership at the student level to only Ph.D. students (i.e., MBA and BBA
students are not allowed or welcome). How then do we embrace the
executive group? From my view this sounds like we speak (as a collective
whole) with forked tongue? Doesn't this bother anyone else? Bottom line
for me: until we open membership anything we attempt (as a division or a
collective whole) will prove ineffectual. Comments?

------------------
Kathleen J. Powers
Associate Professor of Human Resource Management
campus: phone 503-370-6111; fax 503-370-3011
home: phone 503-588-0591; fax 503-585-3350