Or so says Henry Mintzberg .
To some extent it is true, because most MBA courses focus only on functional areas, and not on true people management or leadership. An ideal MBA course should probably focus on business concepts in the first year, and pure practical management and leadership in the second (possibly through social projects, live consulting projects, startup incubation etc.), culminating with placements.
I suppose one of the main reasons why IIMs, XLRI etc produce successful business leaders could be that the input raw material itself represents the topmost performers on the entrance tests with 10s of thousands of candidates, a group of people who I suspect would succeed anyway.
To some extent it is true, because most MBA courses focus only on functional areas, and not on true people management or leadership. An ideal MBA course should probably focus on business concepts in the first year, and pure practical management and leadership in the second (possibly through social projects, live consulting projects, startup incubation etc.), culminating with placements.
I suppose one of the main reasons why IIMs, XLRI etc produce successful business leaders could be that the input raw material itself represents the topmost performers on the entrance tests with 10s of thousands of candidates, a group of people who I suspect would succeed anyway.
2 comments:
There's at best mixed evidence that US MBAs make good leaders, at least measured by the performance of the firms that they lead. Some studies have shown they're the worst of the lot. Others have shown no worse than others.
There's a lot to what you say about the entrance exam. There's also the Signalling Cost to consider, and the value of the network connections one makes in business school.
I should also confess that a friend is a fellow of IIM and teaches at a biz school in Delhi. He says that Indian bizschool is quite different than what he experienced teaching in America. The American studies may not be relevant.
Post a Comment