Abysses and Bridges between Business and Academia

Some business school’s managers –most, I hope- think that an important part of their institution’s mission is to bridge the business world and academia. Some others –few, I believe- emphasize that business schools are academic institutions and they should search their own identity, separated from the business world. In this and subsequent posts I will refer to the first conception as the “attached approach” and to the second as the “detached approach”. They both describe two alternative, though very generically described, views about the nature and mission of business schools that require further explanation and I will use some examples to illustrate them.

Let me refer to a case of the detached conception by recalling an inspiring and quite recent anecdote when I interviewed a candidate for my school’s faculty. I asked this person for the content and purpose of his research, and at some stage he explained that he was looking forward to teaching at executive programmes because it would provide the opportunity to check if the findings of his research fitted the real business world. I tried not to overreact to his words –my friends say I am too diplomatic- but I can tell that I was very surprised. Could you imagine a scientist whose research was on elephant family habits saying that he would like to watch real elephants in order to test the accuracy of his theories? Are some PhD programmes in management stressing the detached approach too much?

The academic world has always experienced a tension between Theory and Practice, in management as well as in other disciplines. This tension has sometimes resulted in the creation of an abyss between both spheres, characterised as the “ivory tower syndrome”, a phenomenon that, paradoxically, some academics take great delight in. A curious antecedent of this syndrome was when the abbots of Middle Age monasteries, which were the embryo of later universities, prescribed the principle “ora et labora” (pray and work) after their monks were spending too much time in church and abandoning their responsibilities in the orchard or the library.

Immanuel Kant, one of my favourite philosophers, dealt with this question in his opuscule “Theory and Practice”, a must reading for academics, where one of his aims is to overcome the gap between speculative thinking and practical decisions. One of the conclusions of his work is that when theories can not be applied to practice they are just bad theories. For those who seek a further analysis I recommend an essay by Jeffrie G. Murphy.

Another example of the detached approach is the comment posted by Teppo Felin (of orgtheory.net fame) in this same blog, if interpreted in an extreme way, i.e., that academics from a different discipline to management are better candidates for teaching than experienced executives. I agree with Teppof that we should fish beyond management faculties -in areas such as sociology, psychology and social sciences in general- in order to enrich our programmes, as I defended in a previous comment, but I also believe that those practitioners that undergo the necessary preparation for teaching are at least as good potential docents as academics.

Comments

[Enrique Dans]

Great and inspirational post. The "attached vs. detached" approach is great to explain what's going on in business schools, and the tensions generated from a professors' rewarding system clearly inherited from the university and based on the "publish or perish" principle. For me, the discussion is related to the concept of "isomorphism" (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983): institutions tend to progressively resemble their normative environment with time, and thus, business schools tend to progressively resemble their host universities. In some institutions, you can see the business school separated from the university by a river. Was that originally due to real estate reasons, or perhaps trying to escape the influence as much as they can?... :-)

Should business schools look like universities? I seriously doubt it. In my humble opinion, I believe students don't want that. Universities and business schools are different, different species, and originally thought for different moments in life. And last but not least, being a business school professor, I know I have powerful reasons for which I don't want to resemble the average university professor (with all due respect).

[teppof]

Thanks for continuing this conversation.

Let me briefly defend the Ivory Tower. I think 'basic research' even in a fairly applied (a contradiction?) discipline such as management is absolutely critical. It is important for scholars to have a place to detach themselves from daily business/practical concerns and to think about bigger theoretical questions. This process in fact may not readily translate into immediate 'best practices,' thus I was not surprised to read about your encounter with the faculty candidate (though he perhaps chose to frame things rather poorly). The work of theory-building and scientific analysis is a systematic and rigorous approach to questions, quite separate from isolated anecdotal stories of business success and experience (which is what you find in most business bestsellers and in some adjunct teaching). Underlying all of this, there is of course a deeper epistemological question as to how we gain knowledge - your arguments seem to suggest a more 'grounded approach' (which does have its place), while I would emphasize the need for careful and systematic theoretical thinking - something that practical business experience may not give you (but hopefully a PhD does).

I was surprised to see the following in your post:

"I also believe that those practitioners that undergo the necessary preparation for teaching are at least as good potential docents as academics."

I think practitioners bring an important element to b-schools, and often are highly sought-after and successful teachers, but again (http://orgtheory.wordpress.com/2006/06/24/become-a-business-professor-in-five-days/), I think some caution here is warranted. Being sought-after and highly-rated by students does not, by any means, translate into effective teaching. If students are simply relayed war stories and anecdotal experiences, they miss out on understanding theoretical and scientific fundamentals related to management. There is in fact significant suspicion among some adjuncts and experienced business professionals regarding what it specifically is that research faculty do – i.e. research. Thus adjunct and practitioner teaching may also reflect this disdain (nothing theoretical gets taught), and students get short-changed in their education.

Cutting-edge research still is the currency of b-schools, and should continue to be so.

[Richard Edelstein, Principal, Global Learning Networks]

In the real world there is no pure form of the ideal professor in a professional school. Both practice and theory are required elements of successful learning for professional life. Both academics and practitioners have a place assuming they are effective in the classroom. Fortunately there are some individuals who because of a powerful intellect and an ease with people can effective in a variety of contexts. The real problem lies elsewhere. Can business schools and universities create effective "learning communities" which draw on the strengths of a variety of individuals with diverse backgrounds.

[teppof]

Below a few lines in response to Enrique Dans' comment regarding b-schools and universities:

"Should business schools look like universities? I seriously doubt it. In my humble opinion, I believe students don’t want that. Universities and business schools are different, different species, and originally thought for different moments in life. And last but not least, being a business school professor, I know I have powerful reasons for which I don’t want to resemble the average university professor (with all due respect)."

I am not sure why there is a need to differentiate between b-schools and universities. I suppose no one wants to “resemble the average university professor” if something derogatory is meant by that, but on the whole there is brilliant teaching across all the university disciplines. In fact, b-schools should incorporate the best of what universities have to offer - the rigors of engineering, the theoretical grounding of the social sciences, the breadth of the liberal arts, and so forth. If one wants to get away from this, there are of course many technical and vocational schools vying for students and professors.