Ms. Axelrod, and others --
Thank you for this valuable perspective.
It strikes me that the management educators in GE's Management Development
Center, Crotonville, did not have these issues, at least when I passed
through long ago.
Woujld it be possible and useful to foster a dialog between academics and
the "corporate university" counterparts?
To what degree is it the subject matter, the educator or the situation that
makes the difference?
Similarly, I note that many of the academics in the field of systems
engineering have most of the same issues.
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:51:17 -0400
> From: "Ruth H. Axelrod" <
raxelrod@gwu.edu>
> Subject: Re: Quick and Dirty--LONG
>
> David and Other Colleagues--
>
> As a former manager and, now, current educator, I have to say that I
> think that much of what managers are seeking is a pipe dream--relief
> from the pressures of overwork (how can I do things more efficiently?),
> from the constant barrage of other people's problems and misbehaviors
> (how can I motivate them?), from the need to play politics (how can I
> deal with my ___ boss?), from accountability without control (how can I
> restructure this crazy organization so that it works?), from the
> uncertainty that is an inextricable element of most of our decisions,
> and so forth. Our society has taught to rely on rationality uber alles
> (with the exception of romantic and mother-love!) and, so, we think that
> we can and must manage the unmanageable. Furthermore, we see other
> managers around us who seem to have it easier going and we wonder why.
> Instead of investigating the accuracy of our attributions, we tend to
> think that they know something that we don't. We don't investigate
> because, at heart, we don't want to know that they feel beleaguered,
> too. We desparately hope that there is a magic bullet out there that
> will make our lives easier. (Why do you think that most CEO's read so
> many management books, and that many of the great ones read philosophy
> and classics instead?) Both the perception and the hope are in vain.
> (Who was it who said that most of us live lives of quiet desparation?)
>
> I think that the sin (arrogant idiocy) is in our thinking, saying and
> acting (insofar as we do) as if what we have to offer in the classroom
> (knowledge and skills) will solve their problems. Certainly, we can
> give them some pointers about ways to think that may be new to them and
> that may help put things into perspective or help them figure out for
> themselves how to work things out. But we don't really have "the
> answers", at least, not the ones that they need (usually the consulting
> firms that they hire for the same reason that they go back to school
> don't either--just look at the staggering rate for recidivism in Big
> Five OD programs). They have to find the answers for and within
> themselves. We don't want to tell them that and they don't want to hear
> it!
>
> So, what we can do to help them? And, are we doing it? How often do we
> ask our students what their issues are, what they want to know, what
> problems are keeping them up at night? And, if we do, how often are we
> willing to revise, or even scrap, our curricula and teach, in the form
> of a joint inquiry, to that? The answer, I think, is "rarely". We--and
> I certainly include myself in this--cling to the notion (tradition) that
> it is our job as professors to define the scope of the inquiry, itemize
> the body of knowledge that it encompass, and hustle students along the
> course of what we call learning. Is that the right thing to do? Are we
> really the "experts"? If not, then what should be our role?
>
> It is axiomatic that we all teach to our own style. In my view, that
> goes beyond what we tend to think of as learning styles to encompass
> content. In short, most academics teach to future academics, not to
> practitioners. We design our courses and their content for the small
> percentage of our students who will go on to another degree. I find
> myself questioning the wisdom of this. People who follow the path of
> getting more degrees have a strong intrinsic drive to learn--they are,
> to use Peter Vaill's term, "learners as a way of being". Some are even
> true scholars. With or without our help they are like sponges: they are
> intrinsically motivated to seek out learning environments and take care
> of their own learning needs. I think that what we should be focusing on
> is helping students who can't/don't make breakthroughs on their own,
> helping them learn to develop a sense of joy and satisfaction in
> inquiry.
>
> No apologies for the polemic. You touched a nerve. I just hope that if
> you've read this far, you don't consider it a complete waste of your
> time! :-]
>
> Ruth
>