|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
I am not expecting this to be a high traffic topic, but there seems to have been an unusual level of interest in curricular redesign in recent years. There has been considerable buzz surrounding Yale SOM's new design, Western Ontario/Ivey's move to a one year program, and even electives being offered in the first year at UVA/Darden.
The dominant theme for many of these redesigns is of "cross functional leadership" or "education beyond the disciplinary silo system" or some broadly similar notion.
Here is one expression of this idea:
https://www.ivey.uwo.ca/mba/whyivey/cel_advantage.htm
The cross-fuctional movement seems logical enough- if real business problems present themselves as combinations of (say) finance, HR, and technology issues, why not have courses that encourage multifaceted solutions?
The first-level rebuttal is that foundation courses are supposed to focus on mastering the basics of a given subject before combining that knowledge with other subjects to address a complex problem.
In some ways this gets back to the classic question that has been stalking graduate business education for decades- Is an MBA program intended to train someone how to be a manager/leader or is it intended to provide a set of analytical tools that that s/he can apply on her own when presented with management problems? The cross-fuctional idea is related to this first concept and often views this type of learning environment as more conducive to training managers because it forces students to solve more complex problems. On the other hand, the "tool box" method is far less concerned by the concept of "academic silos" since each silo can impart valuable methods that students can combine on their own to fit the problems they actually encounter in their careers.
The dominant theme for many of these redesigns is of "cross functional leadership" or "education beyond the disciplinary silo system" or some broadly similar notion.
Here is one expression of this idea:
https://www.ivey.uwo.ca/mba/whyivey/cel_advantage.htm
The cross-fuctional movement seems logical enough- if real business problems present themselves as combinations of (say) finance, HR, and technology issues, why not have courses that encourage multifaceted solutions?
The first-level rebuttal is that foundation courses are supposed to focus on mastering the basics of a given subject before combining that knowledge with other subjects to address a complex problem.
In some ways this gets back to the classic question that has been stalking graduate business education for decades- Is an MBA program intended to train someone how to be a manager/leader or is it intended to provide a set of analytical tools that that s/he can apply on her own when presented with management problems? The cross-fuctional idea is related to this first concept and often views this type of learning environment as more conducive to training managers because it forces students to solve more complex problems. On the other hand, the "tool box" method is far less concerned by the concept of "academic silos" since each silo can impart valuable methods that students can combine on their own to fit the problems they actually encounter in their careers.
25 Nov 2006, 19:10
Kudos
Bookmarks
Another recent innovation is Toronto/Rotman's use of Integrative Thinking which stresses the ability of students to develop and refine models.
"At Rotman, our goal is to teach students to become skilled consumers and shapers of models. Our students learn how to audit a model’s logic in order to decide whether to use it, and if necessary, how to refine it. We teach them that when models clash, it is an opportunity to build new, more powerful models for understanding the messy world that we face. Equipped with skills in model building, our graduates are better positioned than their counterparts to diagnose the implicit models behind decisions and strategies; to assess the validity of models; to identify the ways in which the model in question conflicts with their own; and to build new, more powerful models."
https://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/integrati ... nition.htm
"At Rotman, our goal is to teach students to become skilled consumers and shapers of models. Our students learn how to audit a model’s logic in order to decide whether to use it, and if necessary, how to refine it. We teach them that when models clash, it is an opportunity to build new, more powerful models for understanding the messy world that we face. Equipped with skills in model building, our graduates are better positioned than their counterparts to diagnose the implicit models behind decisions and strategies; to assess the validity of models; to identify the ways in which the model in question conflicts with their own; and to build new, more powerful models."
https://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/integrati ... nition.htm
