Discussion: View Thread

Expand all | Collapse all

Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

  • 1.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-01-2009 05:01

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

     



  • 2.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-01-2009 10:06

    It's not fair to blame strategy methods for failure to anticipate these problems.  The future is unknowable, no matter how many "gee whiz" methods we throw at analyzing it.  What looks obvious in retrospect is fuzzy at best in the present.  There are some interesting scenario planning methods, and there's the old standard of systematic analysis of the general environment.  But even if we could somewhat accurately forecast the future, folks don't want to believe it.  They have biases that cause them to discount or ignore suggestions that the gravy train may be coming to an end.  I've found that my students come in with a strong bias toward believing that whatever firms are doing is right, simply because the firms are doing it.  They believe the management reports that downplay the risks that they are legally required to report and overplay the likelihood of future greatness.  They don't recognize that these same firms may go bankrupt the next day, and that most do over time.

     

    I don't think the answer lies in building greater methods for forecasting – I don't know that those will ever exist – but instead lies in encouraging critical thinking in those who interpret whatever insights current methods can generate.  Students must understand that success is impermanent, and that firms often do things that are wrong.  If they start with this critical perspective, they'll be more likely to pick up on problems rather than ignore them.  In the simplest terms, I tell them to envision that there's a "BS bird" on their shoulders, and every time they make a statement, the bird screeches, "That's BS!"  They must then convincingly prove otherwise.  This helps (somewhat) to move them away from "analyzing" a firm by writing a book report that effectively spews back a glossy PR brochure that parrots the firm's greatness, and toward critically analyze where the firm is at and where it needs to.  Still, there's no guarantee that the strategic plans they come up with will work out, but the likelihood increases.  

     

    If it's of any help, I've attached a copy of the guidelines I provide my students for their team reports.  These are undegrads in the capstone strategy course.  I find that they have the hardest time grasping corporate strategy, as distinct from business-level, and they typically want to advertise or market their way out of most problems.

     

    Best,

    Mike

     

    ***********************

    Michael L. Barnett, PhD

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">University of South</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">Florida</st1:state></st1:place>

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Business Administration</st1:placename></st1:place>

    Department of Management & Organization

    <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">4202 E. Fowler Avenue</st1:address></st1:street>, BSN 3213

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Tampa</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">FL</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">33620-5500</st1:postalcode></st1:place>

    Phone: 813-974-1727

    Fax: 813-974-1734

    E-mail: mbarnett@coba.usf.edu

    Webpage: http://www.coba.usf.edu/barnett

     

    View my research on my SSRN Author page:

    <http://ssrn.com/author=414796>

    **************************************************

    From: <st1:personname w:st="on">Business Policy and Strategy List</st1:personname> [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kim Warren
    Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 5:01 AM
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in <st1:place w:st="on">S America</st1:place>, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">London</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Business</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">School</st1:placetype></st1:place>

     



  • 3.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-01-2009 16:22

    This is a very interesting topic to ponder and discuss.
     
    I just ended my MBA Capstone Strategy class this semester with the question:

    "With trillions of dollars of shareholder wealth lost in these unprecedented times, have our notions of what business unit and corporate strategy are and our strategy tools become null and void and to blame or are we just going through a long cycle correction of a standard of living that has gone too high and is unsustainable".
     
    I am reminded of one of the tenents of systems theory - that if you want to understand the problems in the system of interest, you need to understand the "super system(s) that encircle it.
     
    One such super system could be the old notion of "political economy". Michael Porter called for a US national strategy in a recent Business Week article. He posits that the US does not have one - only state and regional strategies if you can even call them coherent strategies. I never thought about this this way and I think he is correct (again).
     
    Hayek in his famous short book titled The Road to Serfdom dispelled the notions of central, top down planned economies and gave rise to our views of business unfettered by much regulation that embraced free market entrepreneurship.
     
    Could it be that forces have been building for quite a while in this super system though (or other one I cannot articlulate) that have such complex ripple effects that conventional tools like strategic and scenario planning, game theory, and other myriad tools for the individual firm could not have been expected to notice? These tools seem to work within a given, current set of mental models about how the world works and normal definitions of risk and uncertainty. But what if:
     
    a. New forms of regulation
    b. New demands on sustainable firm growth tied to sustainable levels of growth in non-renewable resources
    c. Ohers?
     
    have prevented this crisis, if only someone had the vision and courage to enact them long before the crisis?
     
    Could it be that individual firms and decision makers acting as if they were free agents were really inappropriately acting in ways that speeded up the current dilemma? The usual sub-optimizing behavior while in the throws of feeling the pinch of impending but not clearly articulated change is preservation of self interest.
     
    So is there a new order emerging or are we in just perhaps a long overdue correction? Perhaps answers to these super system type questions could shed light on whether our beloved notions of strategy are to blame. I do not think our notions of strategy and strategy tools are to blame, but I could be wrong.
     
    Dr. Bill Bigler
    Director of MBA Programs
    Associate Professor of Strategy
    Louisiana State University Shreveport

     

    This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, and/or EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  If you received this communication in error, please destroy all copies of the message, whether in electronic or hard copy format, as well as attachments and immediately contact the sender by replying to this email.

     

     

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List on behalf of Barnett, Michael
    Sent: Fri 5/1/2009 9:06 AM
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    It's not fair to blame strategy methods for failure to anticipate these problems.  The future is unknowable, no matter how many "gee whiz" methods we throw at analyzing it.  What looks obvious in retrospect is fuzzy at best in the present.  There are some interesting scenario planning methods, and there's the old standard of systematic analysis of the general environment.  But even if we could somewhat accurately forecast the future, folks don't want to believe it.  They have biases that cause them to discount or ignore suggestions that the gravy train may be coming to an end.  I've found that my students come in with a strong bias toward believing that whatever firms are doing is right, simply because the firms are doing it.  They believe the management reports that downplay the risks that they are legally required to report and overplay the likelihood of future greatness.  They don't recognize that these same firms may go bankrupt the next day, and that most do over time.

     

    I don't think the answer lies in building greater methods for forecasting – I don't know that those will ever exist – but instead lies in encouraging critical thinking in those who interpret whatever insights current methods can generate.  Students must understand that success is impermanent, and that firms often do things that are wrong.  If they start with this critical perspective, they'll be more likely to pick up on problems rather than ignore them.  In the simplest terms, I tell them to envision that there's a "BS bird" on their shoulders, and every time they make a statement, the bird screeches, "That's BS!"  They must then convincingly prove otherwise.  This helps (somewhat) to move them away from "analyzing" a firm by writing a book report that effectively spews back a glossy PR brochure that parrots the firm's greatness, and toward critically analyze where the firm is at and where it needs to.  Still, there's no guarantee that the strategic plans they come up with will work out, but the likelihood increases.  

     

    If it's of any help, I've attached a copy of the guidelines I provide my students for their team reports.  These are undegrads in the capstone strategy course.  I find that they have the hardest time grasping corporate strategy, as distinct from business-level, and they typically want to advertise or market their way out of most problems.

     

    Best,

    Mike

     

    ***********************

    Michael L. Barnett, PhD

    University of South Florida

    College of Business Administration

    Department of Management & Organization

    4202 E. Fowler Avenue, BSN 3213

    Tampa, FL 33620-5500

    Phone: 813-974-1727

    Fax: 813-974-1734

    E-mail: mbarnett@coba.usf.edu

    Webpage: http://www.coba.usf.edu/barnett

     

    View my research on my SSRN Author page:

    <http://ssrn.com/author=414796>

    **************************************************

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kim Warren
    Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 5:01 AM
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

     

     

     



  • 4.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-01-2009 17:22
    Perhaps the book I have just written may be of assistance to those concerned about this issue who teach and/or write in the area of business strategy.

    STRATEGIC FORESIGHT
    A New Look at Scenarios
    Alfred Marcus 
    From Palgrave Macmillan
    Pub date: Jun 2009
    228 pages

    http://www.palgrave-usa.com/catalog/product.aspx?isbn=0230611729

    Though reflecting on how today's conditions become tomorrow's realities is vital, anticipating what is to come next is not easy. This book is about foresight – that is the principles, methods, and techniques businesses can use for looking into the future and trying to influence what is to come next. Given uncertain outcomes, what strategies should businesses adopt? The book provides guidance on how to think systematically about constructing scenarios in a number of important areas including demography, security, politics, macro-economics, energy, the environment, and technology. 

    "Strategic Foresight deserves to be widely read and discussed. The book holds that decision makers should imagine multiple possibilities and that predicting futures is less useful than shaping better futures. This constructive approach can have beneficial impacts for our feelings about our futures, our ability to mold our futures, and the futures we achieve."--William H Starbuck, Professor in Residence, University of <st1:state><st1:place>Oregon</st1:place></st1:state>

    "In this timely and practical book, Alfred Marcus draws on his extensive knowledge of strategy, business, and society to show companies and their members how to systematically read the future, unlock its mysteries, and indeed take part in writing it."--Moshe Farjoun, The Schulich <st1:place><st1:city>School of Business</st1:city>, <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region></st1:place>.

    Alfie Marcus Professor and Spencer Chair in Strategy and Technological Leadership  Strategic Management and Organization Dept. Carlson School of Management University of Minnesota Mpls,MN 55455 (612)624-2812


    Kim Warren wrote:
    9E1465F9BB6B4546A7BA1753DD3CB48E1D6DB1@sbsserver.GSD.local" type="cite">

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

      


     Please note new email address amarcus@umn.edu


  • 5.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-02-2009 11:25

    It seems to me that rather than short-term business focus it is the opportunism of strategy that is to be blamed, if there really is one factor/development that can be blamed. The rise of shareholder thinking and the agency model, so dominant in economics and top-ranked business schools, may have contributed to creating an environment in which the measure of success was the measure of your purse. Equally possible: theory and learning adapted themselves to what was going on in society, equipping scholars and students with the same instruments that were cherished in the economy. Looks pretty much like a case of Myrdalian circular causality. In any event, like with mergers, if everybody is focusing on opportunistic goals, you cannot withdraw, at least not in an economy where everything is for sale. Mike Dietrich and I developed the minimax regret model for such behaviour. It demonstrates that in industries with competition among the few-thus most industries-strategic imitation is the optimal strategy provided you can share the blame with your peers if things go wrong-or provided you can make others bear your risk.

     

    Thus, we do not require our firms to be led by crooks to arrive in a severe economic crisis. Minimax regret behaviour will do the trick. For those interested, the mechanisms of such behaviour are further explained in my contribution to Charles Wankel's 21st Century Management Reference Handbook, published last year by Sage (The Merger Paradox. Determinants and Effects; pp. 345-354). A copy of a more extensive and formal discussion can be sent upon request (mail to E.J.J.Schenk@uu.nl).

     

    Hans Schenk D.Etat (Econ) MBA | Professor of Economics | Dept. of Economics (USE) | Utrecht University | Mail and office: 12 Janskerkhof, 3512 BL Utrecht, The Netherlands | Secretary: Monica Donders +31 30 253 9800 | GSM +31 651 80 90 94 |

     

     

    Kim Warren wrote:

    Sorry for cross-posting.

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

    Kim Warren: London Business School



  • 6.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-15-2009 06:14

    By which method do you attempt to teach strategy. Can your students pass your course without applying the content to the real world? Traditional teaching is deductive, the lecturer teaches theory and models, then moves to textbook exercises, and eventually – maybe – to real-world applications. Students are given a vague promise or an emphatic unsupported statement that this will be important later in the curriculum or in their careers. Failure to connect course content to the real world contributes to student non-attendance and withdrawals. From Prince  & Felder (2007), studies show that relative to conventional lecture-discussion teaching, case-based teaching improves student outcomes for:

    ·         Student retention

    ·         Reasoning and problem-solving skills

    ·         Higher order skills on Bloom's taxonomy

    ·         The ability to make objective judgements

    ·         The ability to identify relevant issues

    ·         The ability to recognise multiple perspectives

    ·         Awareness of ethical issues

     

    Michael Prince & Richard Felder. (2007). The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.



    Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.
    -Samuel Johnson
    Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell

    --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> wrote:

    From: Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM>
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 9:01 PM

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

     




  • 7.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-22-2009 11:38

    Thanks for this Romie, but I thought case-based teaching had replaced abstract lecturing in virtually all B School strategy classes over 40 years ago?

    Now I love inspiring cases as much as anyone, but have we swung off the other end of the scale, towards gee-wizz cases devoid of any theoretically sound and practically robust underlying principles. Would we I wonder teach musicians to play well by taking them to lots of great concerts, teach engineers to build bridges by having them visit the most impressive ones, or teach new surgeons solely by having them watch an expert? Though I appreciate this may be the Mintzbergian view, I have my doubts!

    Kim

     

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    Sent: 15 May 2009 13:45
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    By which method do you attempt to teach strategy. Can your students pass your course without applying the content to the real world? Traditional teaching is deductive, the lecturer teaches theory and models, then moves to textbook exercises, and eventually – maybe – to real-world applications. Students are given a vague promise or an emphatic unsupported statement that this will be important later in the curriculum or in their careers. Failure to connect course content to the real world contributes to student non-attendance and withdrawals. From Prince  & Felder (2007), studies show that relative to conventional lecture-discussion teaching, case-based teaching improves student outcomes for:

    ·         Student retention

    ·         Reasoning and problem-solving skills

    ·         Higher order skills on Bloom's taxonomy

    ·         The ability to make objective judgements

    ·         The ability to identify relevant issues

    ·         The ability to recognise multiple perspectives

    ·         Awareness of ethical issues

     

    Michael Prince & Richard Felder. (2007). The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.

     

    Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.

    -Samuel Johnson

    Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell

    --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> wrote:


    From: Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM>
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 9:01 PM

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

     

     



  • 8.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-22-2009 12:35
    It looks Like You are starting to discover THE difference between social Science and science. No offense

    Carlos Garcia Pont


    El 22/05/2009, a las 17:41, "Kim Warren" <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> escribió:

    Thanks for this Romie, but I thought case-based teaching had replaced abstract lecturing in virtually all B School strategy classes over 40 years ago?

    Now I love inspiring cases as much as anyone, but have we swung off the other end of the scale, towards gee-wizz cases devoid of any theoretically sound and practically robust underlying principles. Would we I wonder teach musicians to play well by taking them to lots of great concerts, teach engineers to build bridges by having them visit the most impressive ones, or teach new surgeons solely by having them watch an expert? Though I appreciate this may be the Mintzbergian view, I have my doubts!

    Kim

     

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    Sent: 15 May 2009 13:45
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    By which method do you attempt to teach strategy. Can your students pass your course without applying the content to the real world? Traditional teaching is deductive, the lecturer teaches theory and models, then moves to textbook exercises, and eventually – maybe – to real-world applications. Students are given a vague promise or an emphatic unsupported statement that this will be important later in the curriculum or in their careers. Failure to connect course content to the real world contributes to student non-attendance and withdrawals. From Prince  & Felder (2007), studies show that relative to conventional lecture-discussion teaching, case-based teaching improves student outcomes for:

    ·         Student retention

    ·         Reasoning and problem-solving skills

    ·         Higher order skills on Bloom's taxonomy

    ·         The ability to make objective judgements

    ·         The ability to identify relevant issues

    ·         The ability to recognise multiple perspectives

    ·         Awareness of ethical issues

     

    Michael Prince & Richard Felder. (2007). The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.

     

    Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.

    -Samuel Johnson

    Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell

    --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> wrote:


    From: Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM>
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 9:01 PM

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

     

     



  • 9.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-22-2009 13:55
    here's a wonderful cartoon passed along to me by Phil Bromiley.

    Thanks,
    Isaac Fox
     
     
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Kim Warren
    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:37 AM
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Thanks for this Romie, but I thought case-based teaching had replaced abstract lecturing in virtually all B School strategy classes over 40 years ago?

    Now I love inspiring cases as much as anyone, but have we swung off the other end of the scale, towards gee-wizz cases devoid of any theoretically sound and practically robust underlying principles. Would we I wonder teach musicians to play well by taking them to lots of great concerts, teach engineers to build bridges by having them visit the most impressive ones, or teach new surgeons solely by having them watch an expert? Though I appreciate this may be the Mintzbergian view, I have my doubts!

    Kim

     

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    Sent: 15 May 2009 13:45
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    By which method do you attempt to teach strategy. Can your students pass your course without applying the content to the real world? Traditional teaching is deductive, the lecturer teaches theory and models, then moves to textbook exercises, and eventually – maybe – to real-world applications. Students are given a vague promise or an emphatic unsupported statement that this will be important later in the curriculum or in their careers. Failure to connect course content to the real world contributes to student non-attendance and withdrawals. From Prince  & Felder (2007), studies show that relative to conventional lecture-discussion teaching, case-based teaching improves student outcomes for:

    ·         Student retention

    ·         Reasoning and problem-solving skills

    ·         Higher order skills on Bloom's taxonomy

    ·         The ability to make objective judgements

    ·         The ability to identify relevant issues

    ·         The ability to recognise multiple perspectives

    ·         Awareness of ethical issues

     

    Michael Prince & Richard Felder. (2007). The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.

     

    Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.

    -Samuel Johnson

    Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell

    --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> wrote:


    From: Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM>
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 9:01 PM

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School

     

     



  • 10.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-22-2009 15:40

    Thanks for the cartoon, Isaac.  You can always count on Dilbert.

     

    It seems that we're coming back around to a debate of the type that was published in Academy of Management Learning and Education in 2005 (Vol. 4, #2).  In this issue, several folks, including me, provided in-depth analysis of Henry Mintzberg's Managers not MBAs book.  Should you be interested, you can find my essay on the topic here:

     

    http://ssrn.com/abstract=880446

     

    (sorry for the link, but the list bounced the message back when I attached the file)

     

    In a nutshell, while there are definitely shortcomings in the current system of MBA education, it is not as problematic as some portray.

     

    Best,

    Mike

     

     

    ***********************

    Michael L. Barnett, PhD

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">University of South</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">Florida</st1:state></st1:place>

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Business Administration</st1:placename></st1:place>

    Department of Management & Organization

    <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">4202 E. Fowler Avenue</st1:address></st1:street>, BSN 3213

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Tampa</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">FL</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">33620-5500</st1:postalcode></st1:place>

    Phone: 813-974-1727

    Fax: 813-974-1734

    E-mail: mbarnett@coba.usf.edu

    Webpage: http://www.coba.usf.edu/barnett

     

    View my research on my SSRN Author page:

    <http://ssrn.com/author=414796>

    **************************************************

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Isaac Fox
    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 1:55 PM
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    here's a wonderful cartoon passed along to me by Phil Bromiley.


    Thanks,
    Isaac Fox

     

     

    ----- Original Message -----

    From: Kim Warren

    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:37 AM

    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    Thanks for this Romie, but I thought case-based teaching had replaced abstract lecturing in virtually all B School strategy classes over 40 years ago?

    Now I love inspiring cases as much as anyone, but have we swung off the other end of the scale, towards gee-wizz cases devoid of any theoretically sound and practically robust underlying principles. Would we I wonder teach musicians to play well by taking them to lots of great concerts, teach engineers to build bridges by having them visit the most impressive ones, or teach new surgeons solely by having them watch an expert? Though I appreciate this may be the Mintzbergian view, I have my doubts!

    Kim

     

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    Sent: 15 May 2009 13:45
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    By which method do you attempt to teach strategy. Can your students pass your course without applying the content to the real world? Traditional teaching is deductive, the lecturer teaches theory and models, then moves to textbook exercises, and eventually – maybe – to real-world applications. Students are given a vague promise or an emphatic unsupported statement that this will be important later in the curriculum or in their careers. Failure to connect course content to the real world contributes to student non-attendance and withdrawals. From Prince  & Felder (2007), studies show that relative to conventional lecture-discussion teaching, case-based teaching improves student outcomes for:

    ·         Student retention

    ·         Reasoning and problem-solving skills

    ·         Higher order skills on Bloom's taxonomy

    ·         The ability to make objective judgements

    ·         The ability to identify relevant issues

    ·         The ability to recognise multiple perspectives

    ·         Awareness of ethical issues

     

    Michael Prince & Richard Felder. (2007). The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.

     

    Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.

    -Samuel Johnson

    Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell

    --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> wrote:


    From: Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM>
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 9:01 PM

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in <st1:place w:st="on">S America</st1:place>, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">London</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Business</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">School</st1:placetype></st1:place>

     

     



  • 11.  Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Posted 05-22-2009 17:26

    Hi all:

     
    Since Michael mentioned AMLE, Clay Christensen and Paul Carlile have an excellent piece in the forthcoming (June) issue of AMLE that lays out a process for building theory through cased-based teaching.  As the Associate Editor of the Exemplary Contributions section of AMLE in which this article appears, I prepared a short introduction that surveys some of the background and issues raised here regarding the potential of - and challenges in -  integrating theory and practice.  Look for the issue in a few weeks time.
     
    Best regards,
     
    Jonathan
     
     

    Jonathan P. Doh

    Herbert G. Rammrath Endowed Chair in International Business

    Director, Center for Global Leadership

    Professor of Management

    Associate Editor, Academy of Management Learning and Education

    Associate Editor, Business & Society

    Villanova University School of Business

    800 Lancaster Ave, Villanova, PA 19085

    610-519-7798 (phone)  

    610-519-6566 (fax)

    jonathan.doh@villanova.edu

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Barnett, Michael [mbarnett@COBA.USF.EDU]
    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 3:39 PM
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

    Thanks for the cartoon, Isaac.  You can always count on Dilbert.

     

    It seems that we're coming back around to a debate of the type that was published in Academy of Management Learning and Education in 2005 (Vol. 4, #2).  In this issue, several folks, including me, provided in-depth analysis of Henry Mintzberg's Managers not MBAs book.  Should you be interested, you can find my essay on the topic here:

     

    http://ssrn.com/abstract=880446

     

    (sorry for the link, but the list bounced the message back when I attached the file)

     

    In a nutshell, while there are definitely shortcomings in the current system of MBA education, it is not as problematic as some portray.

     

    Best,

    Mike

     

     

    ***********************

    Michael L. Barnett, PhD

    University of South Florida

    College of Business Administration

    Department of Management & Organization

    4202 E. Fowler Avenue, BSN 3213

    Tampa, FL 33620-5500

    Phone: 813-974-1727

    Fax: 813-974-1734

    E-mail: mbarnett@coba.usf.edu

    Webpage: http://www.coba.usf.edu/barnett

     

    View my research on my SSRN Author page:

    <http://ssrn.com/author=414796>

    **************************************************

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Isaac Fox
    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 1:55 PM
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    here's a wonderful cartoon passed along to me by Phil Bromiley.


    Thanks,
    Isaac Fox

     

     

    ----- Original Message -----

    From: Kim Warren

    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:37 AM

    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    Thanks for this Romie, but I thought case-based teaching had replaced abstract lecturing in virtually all B School strategy classes over 40 years ago?

    Now I love inspiring cases as much as anyone, but have we swung off the other end of the scale, towards gee-wizz cases devoid of any theoretically sound and practically robust underlying principles. Would we I wonder teach musicians to play well by taking them to lots of great concerts, teach engineers to build bridges by having them visit the most impressive ones, or teach new surgeons solely by having them watch an expert? Though I appreciate this may be the Mintzbergian view, I have my doubts!

    Kim

     

    From: Business Policy and Strategy List [mailto:BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    Sent: 15 May 2009 13:45
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management

     

    By which method do you attempt to teach strategy. Can your students pass your course without applying the content to the real world? Traditional teaching is deductive, the lecturer teaches theory and models, then moves to textbook exercises, and eventually – maybe – to real-world applications. Students are given a vague promise or an emphatic unsupported statement that this will be important later in the curriculum or in their careers. Failure to connect course content to the real world contributes to student non-attendance and withdrawals. From Prince  & Felder (2007), studies show that relative to conventional lecture-discussion teaching, case-based teaching improves student outcomes for:

    ·         Student retention

    ·         Reasoning and problem-solving skills

    ·         Higher order skills on Bloom's taxonomy

    ·         The ability to make objective judgements

    ·         The ability to identify relevant issues

    ·         The ability to recognise multiple perspectives

    ·         Awareness of ethical issues

     

    Michael Prince & Richard Felder. (2007). The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.

     

    Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.

    -Samuel Johnson

    Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell

    --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM> wrote:


    From: Kim Warren <Kim@STRATEGYDYNAMICS.COM>
    Subject: Further concern arising from the crisis and implications for strategic management
    To: BPS-NET@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 9:01 PM

    Sorry for cross-posting.

     

    It seems that concern arising from the crisis about the contribution of business schools, the MBA and strategy methods has not gone away. Amongst a continuing stream of similar items, Harvard Business Publishing reports a survey by NetImpact - MBA Students Aren't Learning to Avoid Future Crises in which 90% of grad-students blame short-term business focus [which sounds like the exact antithesis of 'strategic' management] for the crisis, and fewer than a quarter think their MBA courses would help them avoid future crises. We continue to get questions from management, their consultant advisors, the media, and the business school community, about why it was possible for such a major crisis to develop, given the sophistication of our strategy concepts and processes – but unless I have missed something, few suggested answers. One common claim is that it was all down to a lack of ethics, but that hardly explains the widespread failure – surely not all our corporations have been led by crooks?

     

    I would very much value further suggestions – specifically about the principles and tools of strategic management, rather than other topics -  from anyone who has been giving thought to the issue.

    ·         What is anyone doing in their class-room teaching, for MBAs or executives, to explain how good strategic management would have helped companies anticipate, prepare for, and cope with the crisis?

    ·         What are you telling folk they should do differently in future, and on what underlying theories or principles are those suggestions based? [links to books, articles or web-sites would be especially helpful]

    ·         And are these new ideas being embedded in changes to your core strategy syllabus? How is that being received?

     

    All I can offer so far is in a presentation given recently at business schools in S America, looking at the kinds of error companies made, both leading up to the downturn and after, and asking how existing strategy tools might have helped avoid those errors. [ These findings encouraged the re-write for the opening of my textbook, at smd-new-start, posted on before. ]

     

    If the links don't work, the URLs are ...

    NetImpact - http://hbsp.ed10.net/r/CIZ4/Y6430/EW3FLK/V0YZT/Z2T90/AZ/h

    Presentation - www.strategydynamics.com/strategy-lessons

    Book chapter - www.strategydynamics.com/smd-new-start  

     

     

    Kim Warren: London Business School