💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 4224.gmi captured on 2023-09-08 at 18:02:38. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)

➡️ Next capture (2024-05-10)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

No longer the place to be

2012-10-09 07:22:50

Data from The Economist s latest ranking of MBA programmes show Europe s charms

waning. A poor economy and Britain s ill-advised visa policy are to blame

Oct 6th 2012 | from the print edition

NOT so long ago business students flocked to Europe. Compared with their

American counterparts, European schools were cheaper and their student bodies

more diverse, both attractive features and the salaries of European MBA

graduates were often higher, too. Some of these attractions remain undimmed.

But they are no longer enough to bring in the punters. Data from The Economist

s latest ranking of full-time MBA programmes (see article) suggest the appeal

of an Old World business education has gone into a rapid decline.

The intakes of many of Europe s flagship full-time MBA programmes have

plummeted (see chart). Enrolment on Aston Business School s MBA, for example,

more than halved in the past academic year, falling from 129 students to 59. By

far the biggest drop was among Asian students. HEC School of Management in

Paris enrolled 181 full-time MBAs in the past academic year compared with 233

the previous one. It is a similar story across Europe. Some smaller schools

have been desperately scrabbling around to find the 30 students that some MBA

rankings see as the minimum for a course in good standing.

One obvious reason why students might stay away is the dire economy. MBAs can

look like a good way to sit out a short downturn. In a longer one they lose

their charm. With no job-producing European recovery in sight, going there for

an MBA seems not so much cleverly counter-cyclical as stubbornly contrarian.

Europe s slide also reflects a problem specific to its most important MBA

market. The average class size of the British MBA programmes ranked by The

Economist has decreased by 11% over the past year. Schools blame Britain s

newly toughened visa requirements for non-EU students. Graduates used to have

an automatic right to stay and work for two years. Now, they must find a

sponsoring company and land a job which pays at least 20,000 ($32,000) a year.

The number of visas available to students wanting to start their own business

is piddling.

There s always Canada

Would-be students are well aware of this. David Simmons, the director of the

full-time MBA programme at Cranfield School of Management, says comments

telling prospective students to forget about coming to Britain are rife on

Indian MBA blogs. The recent debacle at London Metropolitan University (LMU)

has fortified this impression. The government decided that LMU, which has a

business school, was not stringent enough in tracking non-EU students once they

were enrolled and in September stopped automatically granting visas to its

students. 2,600 students who had already begun classes, including some on the

MBA course, were told that they would have to apply again to an alternative

university.

Many business-school administrators think some universities have indeed been

lax in their admissions procedures. But, they argue, this is not a reason to

crack down on business schools. The new regime is enforced without regard to a

university s reputation, the subject being studied, or whether the course is an

under- or postgraduate one. AMBA, a British-based accreditation agency for

business schools, says its members are being badly hurt.

AMBA is lobbying the British government to take a less bludgeon-wielding

approach. Students on the MBA programmes it accredits must have clocked up at

least three years work experience since gaining an undergraduate degree.

These, it thinks, are exactly the bright sparks the country should be wooing.

These are not people coming here just to find work in McDonalds, says Carol

Turner, AMBA s communications director.

The fact that European schools are struggling is particularly galling because

America has also made it more difficult for foreign students to work in the

country after graduation, providing what should be an extra opportunity for the

Europeans. American MBA programmes are typically twice the length of those in

Europe, making both the cost and the opportunity cost of studying there higher.

The salaries earned by American MBA graduates have been stagnant for over a

decade. All this should have spurred students from poorer countries to apply to

European schools.

Instead, the countries doing well out of America s closing doors and high costs

are Canada and Australia. Australia recently ditched its own strict policy on

student visas in favour of a more welcoming approach. And Canada has perhaps

gone further than any country in wooing overseas students. As of 2008, all

students who have completed a two-year master s degree automatically have the

right to stay in the country and work for three years. They do not need to have

a job lined up and are not restricted to working in a field linked to their

studies, as they would be in America.

This is one reason why, over the past two years, Canada has seen a bigger

increase in applications for full-time MBA places than any other region.

Charmaine Courtis, executive director of student services at York University s

Schulich School of Business in Toronto, says that around 80% of foreign MBAs at

the school now choose to stay and work in Canada immediately after graduation.

After that, she adds, most tend to return home, taking their newly honed skills

with them.

It helps that both countries have economies considerably more vibrant than most

of Europe s. It also helps that high-paying mining and energy firms have begun

to recruit managers straight from their MBA programmes, rather than rely on

promoting engineers from within. This has helped make Australia s MBAs the

highest-paid in the world. Recent graduates at Curtin Business School, in

Western Australia, earned an average of $150,000 in their first job out of

business school, easily outstripping peers from Harvard, London or Chicago.

With the banks, brokers and investment houses which used to recruit a lot of

Europe s MBAs still pulling their horns in, it will be a while before European

schools can top that. Some Canadian schools are also taking advantage of the

mining boom; Schulich now has a mining MBA.

European schools must now compete for brains not only with other rich countries

but also with emerging markets. As the quality of Asian universities improves,

many Asian students will prefer to stay at home. While countries such as India

and China once boasted only a few internationally recognised schools, this is

changing fast. AMBA, which ten years ago had not accredited a single school in

China, now accredits 20; it gave its seal of approval to five of those in the

past six months. Accredited Chinese schools enrolled, on average, 40% more

students in 2011 than in 2010. If rich countries do not lay out welcome mats

soon, they may find the queues outside their doors have disappeared.

from the print edition | Briefing

----

Would you say that Agile Project Management (PM) has failed somehow? No, in

fact it's like a wave of cool, clear water over the parched landscape of

Waterfall PM. There's a reason why Agile/Scrum is so successful, besides its

natural fit to tech product development. You say "High-flyers forced to work in

teams may be undervalued and free-riders empowered.” Successful people should

be accountable for the people in their company, and especially their team

members. The age of the individual "rockstar" professional is over. Empowerment

and accountability are the changes which Agile "team" work ushers in and this

article failed to grasp that. Afterall, a company itself is absolutely a

"team", so don't give up on the concept prematurely.

----

Agile is junk.

Just another heap of stinking buzzwords.......epic, user story, scrum, scrum of

scrums, waves...on and on.

Its just tailor made for management to hide their incompetence behind a

blizzard of 'alignments' and meetings.

Bottom line has always been the same. You want quality you have to pay the

premium for it.

Organise long term organisations with permanent employees who have an incentive

to perform, promote from within and keep rapacious MBAs at arms length.

----

Teams often dilute good ideas and focus on process rather than results. In most

teams, the person who can keep talking the longest, regardless of the quality

of their ideas, rises to the top.

----

Seen it all before.

Agile is just an excuse for middle management to blame others for failure while

gathering bonuses for skipping the low management.

The bottom line is a group needs a leader.

Bozos is an idiot - there are tasks that require bigger group of people working

together. How you divide them is up to leader, the task and the people that

work there. People must talk with each other but above all other things - there

must be a leader or leadership group. It can change depending on task but it

must be there to lead as if 3 people are given choice they will want to go in 5

different directions and consider people thinking differently as dangerous

anarchists.

----

Decision making is faster when authority is taken out of the hierarchy and

given to the people closest to the production of goods and services and to the

people in direct contact with customers. At one time the hierarchy served the

purpose of facilitating communication between those different people; today we

have multiple communication tools that can replace the communication function

of the hierarchy. But creating a 'team' and having a bunch of team meetings is

not actually necessary. The necessary executive function no longer includes

communication or most decision making; what is left is coordination

(introducing people to the other people they need to work with to get things

done), people management (hiring/firing/mentoring/training) and mediation of

internal disputes. That executive function can be taken on by a team, but is

most often best done by an executive capable of managing lightly, serving his

workers' needs rather than being served by his workers. In other words, teams

organize themselves as needed when a humble executive intent on delegating as

much power as possible is put in charge. Cobbling together teams for the sake

of teamwork is not the same thing at all.

----

managing-them-hard-businesses-are-embracing-idea-working-teams