MANAGERS & MBA s: AN INTERVIEW WITH HENRY MINTZBERG BY RICK GOOSSEN EXECUTIVE EDITOR JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY OCTOBER 2004

Transcription

1 MANAGERS & MBA s: AN INTERVIEW WITH HENRY MINTZBERG BY RICK GOOSSEN EXECUTIVE EDITOR JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STRATEGY OCTOBER 2004 Introduction Prof. Henry Mintzberg of McGill University in Montreal has generated a lot of attention over the years for notable books such as Mintzberg on Management and The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. His most recent book titled Managers, Not MBAs[:] A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development, has been widely reviewed in academic publications and mainstream media. He focuses on management education in the form of the MBA degree, which he calls the ostensibly sparkling degree. [2] I interviewed Prof. Mintzberg by phone on September 29, 2004 to elaborate on some of his comments in his latest book. In this article, I incorporate the comments from my interview which are in quotation marks, along with relevant quotes from his book with the cited page in brackets. Managers, Not MBAs Mintzberg s book is critical of the training of MBAs, which may appear to come at an odd time in the sense that there is a seemingly endless marketing of MBA programs. According to Mintzberg, People aren t crowding into MBA programs because they love the education. I think they are crowding in because they can get good jobs that pay a lot of money. And as long as they get good jobs that pay a lot of money they are going to keep coming into the programs. But, getting into, say, an Ivy League school is not easy. Thus, to some extent the hiring companies are buying the credentials [of students]. This criticism is not to imply that nothing is learned in a two year MBA program. Obviously not. You are learning a lot of good things about business functions in a business school but don t pretend its management. This is one of the critical distinctions in Mintzberg s critique of MBA programs the difference between technical training and the development of managerial expertise. Management is a practice. My argument is that you can t learn it in an educational institution but you can improve it if you are given the chance to share your experience with other managers in the light of interesting concepts. 1

2 As an extension of his view, the learning of management is facilitated and enhanced by those with experience. We have interesting things we can do in business schools, but we have to respect the experience of managers and what they bring to the classroom. Thus, the instructor adopts the role of skilful facilitator. This role could be particularly helpful in the context of executive MBA programs that are targeted towards experienced and full-time employed individuals. Consequently, I find it amusing that Executive MBA programs take people with experience and try to teach them like they have no experience. The outcome is that we don t take advantage of their experience I think it is a travesty when we don t. The challenge is that there is a difference between teaching a set of discreet technical skills and producing some one who is a competent manager. Perhaps many institutions should recognize that they are providing training in many technical skills, such as accounting, finance and marketing. And this training can be offered in many contexts. This type of approach may be more aptly named a Masters of Technical Skills. Over time there will be a greater bifurcation between management education and technical training. Technical skills can be offered in a variety of formats, including online and blended learning. These are valuable skills that need to be taught. On the other hand, managerial leadership requires a different delivery approach, which relies on more face-to-face interaction, collaboration and discussion. The Role of the University? Universities have long debated whether their professional schools, such as law or business, even belong on their campuses. If an MBA program places a greater emphasis on the practice of management, rather than theory, this will place it at greater odds with the university environment. Thus, a key question to ask, is whether business schools even belong at a university? Yes, absolutely. I think that what goes on in our IMPM [International Masters of Practicing Management] program--and I think anyone who has participated would agree is that it has a level of energy and of learning that will match any other place in the university whether it is philosophy, theatre, physics, anything. I would stand what we are doing up to anything. I think the level of discussion, the amount of learning that is going on, the energy is wonderful. The IMPM program consists of a series of two-week modules spread over 16 months and five countries. The participating universities include McGill in Montreal, Lancaster in the UK, INSEAD in France, Bangalore in India and a consortium of three universities in Japan. The modules include Managing Self, the reflective mind set; Managing Relationships, the collaborative mind-set; Managing Organizations, the analytic mind-set; Managing Context, the worldly mind-set; and Managing Change, the action mind-set. 2

3 In Managers, Not MBAs, Mintzberg advances seven propositions for developing management education: management education should be restricted to practicing managers; the classroom should leverage the managers experience in their education; insightful theories help managers make sense of their experience; thoughtful reflection on experience in the light of conceptual ideas is the key to managerial learning; sharing their competencies raises the managers consciousness about their practice; beyond reflection in the classroom comes learning from impact on the organization; and all of the above should be blended into a process of experienced reflection. As a result, the university while adopting some elements of practical orientation still provides an oasis of reflection. What managers desperately need today is to step back from the hectic nature of managerial work and be able to reflect in a thoughtful atmosphere and nobody can create as thoughtful an atmosphere as universities when they are attuned to what these managers need. That is why I think the idea of coming to university and doing workbook learning is so laughable. These people have to slow down and not be kept at the same pace [as their work environment]. The university, through its own track record of advanced learning, can attract to it the right kind of people interested in serious learning. The kind of stuff we are doing is not trivial kind of trade school things. When you get together a group of serious, intelligent managers because obviously you want to screen for intelligence--you are going to get quite a high level of discussion. We don t spend our time trying to figure out how you can market your deodorant. We spend out time talking about the fundamental notions of business, including some marketing issues, but on a rather high plane. Can Universities Adapt? Are established universities, such as McGill or Harvard, too deeply entrenched in their existing programs to be innovative in offering cutting-edge programs? Mintzberg has been involved in the practical process of implementing his theories: The IMPM does run within the confines of five rather conventional business schools. He points out that, we are able to do that kind of teaching in an established business school even though the other things going on may be more conventional. He points out that, McGill did run the McGill-McConnell Program for the voluntary sector which was a 100% IMPM-type program. His ideas are permitted to co-exist with other viewpoints at his own business school. Mintzberg explains that, McGill does not apologize to me. They do what they do and very well. Interestingly enough, the IMPM program does not have a partner school in the US, the birthplace and bastion of the MBA culture. Would a Harvard ever adopt 3

4 this [IMPM] type of program? It depends what their clientele are asking for. Clearly, the Harvard Business School is not going to run into any problem trying to fill its MBA class. Although it may get some flak from some MBA students that read this book. And clearly I think anybody in an EMBA program who reads this book has to go back to their school and say, Hey, wait a minute, what are you guys doing? If universities are not providing the type of training of managers that may be best, then will those organizations with sufficient resources be more inclined to train their own in-house people? Larger hi-tech companies, for example, have their own campuses. I ve met a lot of companies that are enthusiastic about the book and they will take the ideas into account when designing their own programs. It doesn t necessarily drive them in-house, though. The British Aerospace program was inspired by the IMPM and with a lot of involvement of academics and academic institutions. There are those kinds of things happening in-house, but I also make the case [in the Book] that it is critical to have a very thoughtful atmosphere. And you can have a thoughtful atmosphere in a company, of course, but you can also do some very interesting things [at a university]. So I think any university that is smart about it can offer tremendously interesting stuff. Is this happening in the U.S.? There are several programs I have seen in the UK that are quite creative in how they do things but I don t see any in the States. But the impetus for change may be on the horizon in the US. At Harvard with the Advanced Management Program, they may run into troubles when companies start to say there are different ways of doing this. An Arts Degree for the Art of Management? One of the issues related to the training of managers is the types of qualifications they should have coming into the MBA programs. According to Mintzberg, One of the key elements training managers is to bring the nuances of practice into the classroom. The program needs to emphasize the art and craft of management practice. This is not easy, however. You can observe art. You can be voyeuristic about art. You can bring it into the classroom. [On the other hand] craft is experience. Craft is only something you can bring into class in the heads of experienced people. I worry more about the craft than the art. Further, How do you bring in creativity? There are plenty of people in business schools who are creative. But those people are overwhelmed by all the technocrats. In light of this approach, what about the emphasis on undergraduate degrees in the sciences and engineering that are math oriented. Again the distinction between providing the development of managerial practice as opposed to purely technical skills is important. Most MBA schools have a significant math component required for entry. Mintzberg states in his book that, The 4

5 assumption behind this that one cannot be a proper manager without mathematical ability would come as a great surprise to the legions of managers who have succeeded without that ability. [40] But, this math component will not be as important in the art and craft of managerial practice. Although, it may be useful in determining some measures of intelligence, which are relevant to gathering skilled, intelligent practitioners for facilitating management practice. Thus, the importance of an undergraduate degree in the arts rather than in science. An arts undergraduate degree may be better than one is a technical area, such as science or engineering, since it teaches a lot of nuance. What has been the response to Mintzberg s Ideas? Mintzberg has advanced interesting ideas in his book but are they just that? Or, are his concepts going mainstream? If you look at the reviews of the book, you have to say that it s probably not the case [that it is non-mainstream]. The book has been reviewed in The Economist, Business Week and in many newspapers. On the academic front, the response has been mixed as one would expect with a new approach that, if adopted, would have serious ramifications for a particular school and faculty. There are so many faculty who are so fed up teaching MBAs they know it s true. They may not be able to speak out given their position. Institutions, however, may have to defend their status quo. The other people I am getting critical comments from are deans that have to defend their programs; but I haven t seen much from faculty people criticizing me. Then, there is the reaction of MBA students themselves those in the throes of paying for the coveted MBA degree. The greatest outrage I have had on the book is coming from MBAs themselves. I don t mean graduates, I mean people who are in the programs. I m investing $100,000 and this guy comes along and says this! But the best accolades for the book are those letters received [from those unhappy with the Book]. Some of them are monumentally inarticulate! They speak for themselves. What about those in the workplace who work with MBAs? I often start my speeches by saying that I get many letters from people saying, Don t get me started when talking about the bosses with MBAs. I haven t gotten a single one that says, My boss is an MBA and let me tell you he or she is great Not that there aren t those people, but nobody is writing those letters. 5

6 Conclusion: The Future of Management Education Perhaps the most fitting way to end this article is with a quote from Mintzberg s recent book, sounding out the call for change: It is time to renew the business schools time for the agents of change to change. They may be at the height of their success, attracting high-paying students who in turn have been getting highpaying jobs. And business schools produce enormous quantities of research. Yet they are failing in their fundamental purpose, which is to enhance the quality of leadership in society. [377] While we cannot predict the outcome of the discussion around the ideas advanced in Managers, Not MBAs, important issues surrounding management education have become the focus of discussion by educators and their students. 6