Recently in MBA Category

The Alt-MBA is:

The Alt-MBA program is a group of motivated and connected learners, leapers and agents of change who want to build better brains with other likeminded people from around the world. The group was originally inspired by the Alternative MBA program created by Seth Godin in December 2008.

A handful of applicants that were not selected to work with him in New York decided to launch their own version of the program. Two of the founding members put the idea out to the pool of unaccepted applicants on December 15th and since that time the group has grown to 100+ members (including Seth Godin).

Having read this, and Seth Godin's original offer I am thinking "I wonder how it might work here in New Zealand".

Recently there has been much debate on the future role of Business School. In the face of rise of corporate universities (Blass, 2005) and consulting firms doing high quality research (e.g. MckKinsey & Co), it is easy to imagine that Business Schools are under threat (Tinker, 2004). As typified by Mintzberg (2003) the problem arises because of the seeming lack of relevance in what Business Schools typically do.

In the face of a "I want it now" generation, something that sounds like an MBA and yet only takes 6 months, with credible mentors must be attractive (to some niche in the market). Much of what has been written has been directed at MBA and MBA-like education. However, one has to consider if the forces at work at that level might also be evident at undergraduate level (which, for the University of Auckland Business School, is the largest part of what it does). The simple answer seems to be yes, these forces are at work. The example I would give are the rumours about NZICA (The New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants); currently NZICA require accountants to do a four year degree followed by two years of professional training (on-the-job training, followed by PAS-Professional Accounting School--then assessed through PCE2--Professional Competence Exam 2). Back to the rumour: the change would move from this 4+2 model to a 3+3 model (i.e. a three-year degree and three years of professional training). No doubt such a move would make a noticeable dent in income stream for universities. Of course some universities or polytechnics would be better off; they do training/coaching for people undertaking PCE2, but overall one can imagine a nett decrease in revenue for the sector.

I'm sure if I spent some time looking I could find more evidence that undergraduate business education is under some threat. Given the vocational nature of much undergraduate business education, one shouldn't be surprised that some students/employers don't necessarily believe that three or four years at university is the only mechanism for delivering greater economic wealth.

References

I seem to have spent msot of the weekend working on the paperwork for our upcoming AMBA review. I've been sending versions of our self-report document backwards and forwards to Sue Laurenson

It really is a time consuming process, but it is really helpful to take stock of the MBA programme this way. It reminds me of what Sarah Kennedy of Healtheries was saying at the MBA Business Breakfast last Wednesday. Talking to the MBA students she talked about how Healtheries had been put up for sale and had to go through vendor diligence. As part of that process they were reviewed by PWC and found the process very helpful in highlighting some of the gradual changes that might have otherwise been unnoticed.

Anyway, for me, and I hope for our MBA programme the AMBA self-review has been very useful.

Last night we held a get together for the current MBA cohorts. Once again we held it at the Northern Club.

It was so nice to see such a large turn out of "MBAers" and their partners. Talking to some of the partners (I didn't manage to talk to everyone), it is apparent how much support they provide to those undertaking the Auckland MBA™. Consequently, I always like to thank the partners because for many of the participants, they wouldn't be successful with out that support. That's congruent with my own experience -- without Lisa's support when I was doing my MBA (class of 1995), I would have found the experience much harder.

That implies that those with out partners have a 'harder time' doing the MBA, and think that is probably true. It is very important to have good support at home and at work.

The choice of using the Northern Club is somewhat controversial. It is clear that for some participants (or more correctly, non-participants in the evening), the values associated with the club, and the way those values are manifested in the dress code, makes it an undesirable venue. I hear that some of the class held their own dinner that evening at another venue. Whatever the 'politics' around that, I think it is a good thing that that they got together in that way.

It is now clear how much impact the orientation activity, The Pursuit, had on the recent (Winter) intake of participants. As a team building exercise, it has worked very well. We (Darl Kolb and I) will have to start planning for the Summer intake. It is also clear that had participants had foreknowledge of The Pursuit, they would have set up things in advance -- which would have been somewhat counter to the goals of the exercise. So, we'll have to keep the exact details of next year's Pursuit a secret.

I had an interesting and thought provoking email from a student regarding the choice of Argentina as the destination for the trip that takes place as part of the International Business (IB) course. He said:

Sorry if I sounded dismissive of your enthusiasm for South America. I am sure that you have a good plan in place. But I do believe strongly That the plan should surely be based on what to do first, rather than where to do it ...

I personally would be very excited to visit South America ... But I would be somewhat uneasy that you perhaps cited some exceptions of trade there proving the rule that NZ's isolation really places its trade base first in the Pacific Rim (which of course includes quite a bit of S America before you say it).

I hope to make links throughout the MBA course within and beyond NZ in the hope of using them into the future for careers, business, etc. I kind of figured that the natural 'address' of such links would be closer to SE Asia, China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, or the US before Argentina. Perhaps you are performing the function of broadening my horizons.

Not that I am anti your plan - as I say, I am sure there are good things to do and good bases for the trip. ...

The student is asking an excellent question, "What is the purpose behind choosing Argentina?"

I think the "what to do" is well understood; but within that framework there is considerable flexibility as to "where to do it". That doesn't mean that the two parts, are independent of one another; they are also interlinked. As I outline my thinking, I hope that this becomes apparent.

I may be being defensive, but my use of examples in Chile and Argentina were intended show the plausibility and practicality of having a relationship with those countries, whether it be through trade or FDI, etc., rather than to say they were a natural choice. Perhaps, I could have said more that that, and so I welcome the student's email as a chance to expound the choice of Argentina.

Let's begin by looking at the "the natural address" for such a trip. That is to say, on the basis of trade, where are the links between NZ and the rest of world. Grabbing the first set of figures I could find (2004), the pattern looks like this:

Exports: Australia 21%, US 14.4%, Japan 11.3%, China 5.7%, UK 4.7%
Imports: Australia 22.4%, US 11.3%, Japan 11.2%, China 9.7%, Germany 5.2%

On that crude basis it would seem that the natural address would be Australia or maybe the US. But, when you look at individual industries (let alone individual firms) the pattern is quite different. I'm sure if we were to consider each student's firm and their probable strategies, there wouldn't be an overall natural choice of destination. (And so, maybe going for the 'aggregate' natural address isn't a bad idea.)

Given a specific firm's unique situation, to load the dice by saying that there is a 'natural linkage' may lead to problems. Albeit based on anecdotal evidence, I feel that too often New Zealand firms move into Australia because "that's what everyone one else does", rather than having a clear strategic purpose in doing business with that country. CER and other free-trade deals are great if there is a strategic advantage in trying to build a strategy around them¹. For example, yesterday, I was talking to a CEO who is in exactly this predicament, and is the process of unwinding a decision his predecessor made to enter Australia. Even though Australia is our largest trading partner (and probably will be for some time) it behoves a strategist to consider other alternatives too².

But before looking in any more depth at the 'natural addresses' for the IB trip, I wonder:

• To what extent should the IB trip mirror that pattern of export/import activities?
• What allowance should be made for the anticipated future trends in trade relationships?
• Should we help students to consider other "non-traditional" areas where NZ might be able to exploit an advantage?
• To what extent are the experiences and learning from the IB trip/project transferable to other international contexts?

Taking such questions into consideration seems to expand the option set rather than narrowing it down.

But, the last point is probably the most important. I would hope that the IB course gives the student ways to understand the wider implications of doing business international; rather than a narrower, for example, "How do I trade with China".

Pragmatically, I know that the preference for some of the class is to go to China, others to the US, and so on. I also know that, unsurprisingly, the educational objectives behind our choice of destination, and students (sometimes focusing on the more immediate needs of their firm) result in different "answers".

¹ Perhaps a discussion of macro strategy, as pursued at a state to state level, might be useful here.

² Remember Ken Simmond's comment that 4 out of 5 firms have value destroying strategies.