To Retrain or Not To Retrain?

 

The New York Times recently posted an article, “Is It Time to Retrain B-Schools?”, questioning the role business schools have played in the current financial crisis—specifically how MBA-toting leaders played a part in the economic meltdown. The article went on to question if the curriculum at schools is still relevant and if it’s time for a change.

One of the things the article specifically mentions is the focus schools place on maximizing shareholder value. It states:

Business schools…never really taught their students that, like doctors and lawyers, they were part of a profession. And in the 1970s…the idea took hold that a company’s stock price was the primary barometer of success…

Also:

Instead of being viewed as long-term economic stewards…managers came to be seen as mainly the agents of the owners — the shareholders — and responsible for maximizing shareholder wealth.

My candid thoughts: I do hear this often in the classroom. As a former HR manager and just someone who inherently values people/people-based initiatives, I’m particularly sensitive to the sentiment when I hear it because it rings very short-sided. But, guess from whom I hear this? My classmates. Classmates with previous work experience and whose views are shaped by what they’ve learned in corporate America to date. So yes, that sentiment exists, but can I say undoubtedly that it originates in business school?

No. I can’t.

Especially not here at Darden.

You see, since we are a case-based school, we have in-depth discussions on the issues. It’s rare that within a class of 67 people, all will agree. Therefore, for every person who has a “maximize stock price” mentality, there’s another person who pushes back and challenges us to consider long-term implications of those behaviors. Similarly, while the professor is there to facilitate the discussion, you will often find them throwing in considerations and stretching us to imagine “what’s possible” outside of the normal business m.o.

Darden values responsibility, integrity, and ethics; this is evident in our curriculum. We have classes on enterprise leadership, strategy, and ethics that get to the heart of these issues in a real and meaningful way. Because we are a case-based school, we are discussing real-life scenarios. While I can’t speak for all business schools (as I’ve only attended one *smile*), I can speak about Darden. Therefore, in response to the article, I would say that Darden’s integrated curriculum is already well positioned to produce future business leaders who understand the value of taking a long-term view.

With respect to the current financial crisis, I was impressed with how quickly Darden adjusted its curriculum to respond. Over the course of two quarters, we completed three formal cases in our Econ class and had a myriad of informal discussions around the topic. The Dean also hosted several “all-hands” discussions and town-halls to both dissect the crisis and discuss the impacts on all of us.

So, do I think business schools are perfect? No.

Do I think there’s room for improvement? Yes.

Within that continuum, do I think that Darden is comparatively evolved and further down that path? Absolutely.

(As an aside: the article also references a study that says 56% of MBA students admitted to cheating regularly. That was astounding to me. We are on the honor system at Darden and it’s taken very seriously. So, again, integrity is weaved through out our community; it’s part and parcel of who we are and what we produce. I’m inclined to believe that this spills over into the professional lives and decisions of the leaders we develop.)

You Might Also Like

• Not So Much
• Post Card from Barcelona
• Still…Waiting…
• The Purpose of Passion
• Just Me: First Day of K