Santiago Iniguez - Dean IE Business School

Interview with Journal du Management

Yesterday a recent interview of me was published on the Journal du Management website. Benchmark Group, the company behind this online Management magazine, gets about 4 million visitors per month to three of its main websites. I take this opportunity to reply to any questions you may have on reading this article.  I realise it is in French and a translation may be available on this blog in the near future.

Tags: Journal du Management

Response to Mr. Edelstein: We, The Market

In a previous comment of this blog, Mr. Richard Edelstein makes very interesting and balanced remarks about the Bologna Process and about the future of management education in Europe. He implicitly advocates for a consensual and participative approach as regards the implementation of the Bologna Accord, something not only desirable but even necessary for the viability of the whole process, but that has occurred only partially to date. The only official platform for the participation of education stakeholders is the Bologna Follow-up Group (BFUG), a body not sufficiently representative of the groups affected by reforms in higher education. Indeed, education is a social activity where many diverse and socially active stakeholders meet –professors, university administrators and staff, students, employers, industry associations, just to mention some-  and whose opinions should be taken into account. At the same time, it is well known how difficult is to conduct a process with so many parties and achieve effective results on time. 

In particular, I would like to address two ideas that come to me when reading Mr. Edelstein’s comment, although I believe he plausibly describes the current situation.

The first one is encapsulated in his reference to education as “a domain where national culture and identity are promulgated and insured for future generations”.  I would like to disagree with the whole idea of what is generally expressed by “national culture”. “Nations” and “nationalities” are legal and political constructs, not entities in themselves. Talking about “nations”, and consequently about “natural culture”, as if they were real things, like a person, is a sort of metaphysical recreation that has resulted in very bad historical experiences. We live in times when defenders of extreme nationalism spur the use of a plethora of supposed entities to a supposed “national reality”: “national spirit”, “national values” and the like. I have been always very sceptical about the use of ideas associated to the concept “nation”. I hope you will not get me wrong. I love my country and I respect diversity –regional, linguistic, etc.- but I mistrust the abuse of the expression “nation” in politics for demagogic purposes.

Getting back to Mr. Edelstein’s tenet, I believe that the community values to which he refers are probably acquired in the first stages of education. University is not a place to instil “national values” into students. Fortunately, university students are mature enough to recognise propaganda. In any case, the Bologna Process is about autonomy, liberty and opening universities to competition and I am sure that it will promote the study of regional dialects and history of particular nations. This is the consequence of globalisation: it promotes convergence but at the same time enhances cultural differences.

Mr. Edelstein further states that education is a “public good” –again, a legal construct. I would add that is also a constitutional right since in most European countries the state has a role in controlling the quality of degrees with official recognition and the duty to guaranteeing education, at least until a certain stage. However, I do not see any conflict between accepting this state role and at the same leaving room for autonomy and private education. We need to learn from the American system, where there is a very lively coexistence between private and public universities –the first ones leading the rankings. Let the market work. Universities in Europe have not competed for a very long time and competition is healthy for the quality of education. After all, the market is the sum of all of us, the market is the people, it is “we”, isn’t it?

University Conference in Venice

“Nowadays, the very noble city of the Venetians is the only home of liberty, peace and justice, the only refuge of the good people, the only harbour where the ships of those willing to live well and safely arrive”, wrote Petrarch in a letter dated 1364, at the dawn of European Renaissance. In our times, the “Serenissima” has turned into the destination mainly of tourists, not necessarily looking for the same things as their predecessors.

I am lucky to be in Venice, but not as a tourist this time though. This morning, on my way to San Giorgio Island, I looked like an oddball in my suit surrounded by hundreds of early morning tourists. I am attending the 2nd Workshop on the Process of Reform of University Systems, organised by AIESM, an extremely interesting conference gathering academics who research on university issues. It was a splendid opportunity to learn more about the views of academics and university officers on the Bologna Accord. Naturally, the venue was very seductive too and I would like to thank Professor Carmelo Mazza for his kind invitation.

I was honoured to speak at the opening panel of the conference, on the future of higher education in Europe, moderated by Anthony Hopwood, Dean of the Said Business School, and having Mr. Umberto Paolucci, Senior Chairman of Microsoft Europe, as co-panellist. My presentation focused on the analysis of two following main propositions. First, the management education industry is changing in terms of its business model, not just in terms of cycle or phase. Second, the implementation of the Bologna Process requires, more fundamentally than the harmonisation of higher education systems, comparable information and transparency of university offerings and the creation of financial schemes to foster cross-border mobility of students. You are probably familiarised with these propositions since I have dealt with them earlier in this blog (see Categories section on the left of this blog in "Bologna Process").

My presentation provoked some criticisms at the Q&A turn, the part of conferences that I enjoy most. In sum, my ideas were seen by some attendees to be too liberal, too market-oriented to be applicable to universities. I replied that universities, and business schools, should feel committed to many different stakeholders, not only academia, including their students, business, society, benefactors and many other incumbent agents. In fact, the Bologna Process is about opening up universities to the world and making them more competitive, isn’t it? The idea of universities competing among themselves –for the good- sometimes raises suspicions among academics –few, I hope- who believe that the academic status quo should be preserved and that non-competitive universities are an endangered species that should be protected. I am afraid I do not agree with this. The fact is that universities have not competed for seven hundred years and many academics fear rivalry to attract the best students and professors, capital and other resources.   

I was also asked to express my view on what is “the” function of universities. I believe that this question should be reformulated unless we want to embark in a metaphysical debate. There is a wide typology of universities. Should we formulate the same strategic mission or function for universities as different as the Open University or the University of Oxford? There is no panacea when discussing the function of universities. Indeed, it is desirable that the Bologna Process promotes the autonomy and the diversity of educational institutions.

Which Countries Will Be Favoured by Post-Bologna Students?

Santiago Iniguez, Dean of Instituto de Empresa    

One of the most  exciting consequences of the Bologna Accord is  the increase of cross-border movements of students inside Europe  and,  expectedly, the higher number of students from other continents  that  will come to study in Europe. What will be the countries with  more  appeal to attract those prospective students?

Recently, the  European Commission published the latest stats on the Erasmus  Programme that throw interesting conclusions about this. As you know, ERASMUS is   the scholarship programme run by the EU that promotes the cross-border   exchange of university students in Europe.

Table 1. Number  of Outgoing ERASMUS Students by Home Country (top six countries)

Country	2003/04	2004/05
Germany	20,688	22,427
France	20,981	21,561
Spain	20,034	20,819
Italy	16,829	16,440
Poland	6,276	8,390
UK	7,539	7,214

Table 2. Number  of Incoming ERASMUS Students by Host Country (top six countries)

Country	2003/04	2004/05
Spain	24,049	25,511
France	20,260	20,519
Germany	16,863	17,273
UK	16,621	16,266
Ireland	12,713	13,370
Netherlands	6,724	6,842

 

Let me comment some interesting evidences from those numbers:

First, Spain has become for the first time this year- the first country in terms of reception of foreign students.

Second, Language is a key factor in selecting the country where to study and English is the preferred “lingua franca”. Interestingly, Ireland is the most remarkable net receiver of foreign students, with only 1,572 outgoing students in 2005 but receiving almost nine times that same amount of students from overseas. In the Netherlands English is widely spoken there, a fact that attracts a high number of foreign students there too.

Of course, since ERASMUS students benefit from scholarships, the above included numbers do not include the fee-paying students segment that move across European borders, a segment that is particularly important for management education in particular.

However, what other conclusions would you derive from the tables?

American schools unsure about Bologna Accord

There is no consensus among American schools about whether to admit applicants who will hold the three-year bachelor’s degrees from European universities that implement the Bologna Accord, according to a survey published by the American Council of Graduate Schools.

Tags(clickable): Santiago Iñiguez,  American Council of Graduate , Bologna Accord, Bologna Process

Less university students in the future?

One of the major changes in European higher education, following the Bologna Accord, will almost surely be the shortening of the total length of the studies. At present, in most continental countries -from Spain to Russia- it takes from 5 to 7 years average to get a university degree. After the implementation of the Bologna accord by 2010, there will be three consecutive degrees, following what, for example, already exists in the UK and Ireland: bachelor (3 or 4 years), master (1 or 2 years) and PhD or doctorate (at least 3 years).

A worrying question for many educational institutions in Europe is whether this segmentation of higher education degrees will prompt students to leave university after obtaining their first degree (bachelor), instead of continuing until they get their masters degree.

Tags(clickable): Santiago Iñiguez,  Instituto de Empresa, Bologna Process, Bologna Accord

English, the “lingua franca” of future European education

The 13th century saw the establishment of the first universities in the Western World. At that time, the language used for communication was Latin. This provided the opportunity for both professors and scholars to teach and study at different universities across Europe. Manuscripts were also written in Latin, thus allowing the sharing and the rapid distribution of knowledge. It was the beginnings of a common Western academic world.

Seven centuries later, we find ourselves in analogous circumstances. Globalisation has turned English into the "lingua franca", the language mostly used worldwide in business and academia. According to September 2005 figures published by "Internet World Stats", the four main languages used worldwide in internet are, respectively, English (31,7% of users), Chinese (13%), Japanese (8,1%) and Spanish (6,4%).

Eric Beerkens, a regular commentator in our blog, raises the question about whether multilingualism is a threat to the implementation of the Bologna process in Europe. I do not believe so. It is foreseeable that those European universities that aim at attracting foreign students will offer courses in English. But part of the richness of European educational offerings will consist of learning a second or a third language and a different culture.

Given the pre-eminence of English in academia, I believe that the first beneficiaries of the flow of students after Bologna will be universities based in English-speaking countries. However, the first European Masters in Management Rankings recently published by the Financial Times include only 6 universities from the UK and Ireland out of the top 25. Is this evidence that the language spoken in a country will not be a critical factor for choosing a university, provided that the teachings are run in English?

Need of comparable information to implement Bologna

The Bologna Process will create a much more efficient and competitive European university market, similar to the American. The objective is that students could choose any university in Europe according to their preferences and personal merits. In turn, universities will compete to attract the best students and will have to fully exploit their resources to become the reference in their areas of excellence.

The creation of this university market requires the fulfilling of at least two requirements, which to date have not been developed nor contemplated in discussions by the Bologna stakeholders: 1) The creation of a transparent “information market”, where students have access to all relevant knowledge about existing offerings;. And, 2) the development of financial means that guarantee the efficient distribution of resources, e.g., grants and loan schemes.

I will now focus on the first of those requirements: the information market that will make more transparent the range of educational offerings across Europe. Economists say that for a market to be efficient, consumer information needs to be readily available, including their differential features and prices. Certainly, perfect information does not exist, but the more transparent markets are, the more efficient they will be. Nowadays, comparative information regarding university offerings on a European scale is incomplete and very fragmented. In the Bologna future, candidates will need to know, for example, which are the best schools in any given area of speciality, the average salaries of graduates from different schools, the quality of the support services, tuition and average costs of living in a particular city etc.

To generate this information flow, two means exist that can bring added-value to the consumer if produced rigorously: accreditation systems and school rankings. The international accreditation agencies give a guarantee of quality and in the context of business schools the most important are AACSB, AMBA and EQUIS (see the left side-bar of this blog). As regards rankings, this topic in itself warrants its own debate.

The EU style

At the end of his latest post, Dean Danos rightly identifies the crux of the matter about Bologna when he says that it does not address the fundamental issue of adequately funding education.  The problem has not even been raised yet in the discussions of the Bologna Follow-up Group (BFUG), i.e. the group of different stakeholders responsible for pushing the Bologna process beyond national governments. The BFUG  is working well taking into account the diversity and different agendas of its members and the complexity of its mission. It is currently focused on identifying the key stakeholders and defining quality processes.

However, the key issue is how to finance the implementation of Bologna. There is no calculation of its estimated cost nor knowledge about whether financial support will come from the public, the private sectors, or from both. Strangely enough, there was no item in the 2004 EU (big as it was: 109 billion Euros) devoted to education nor any provision for the implementation of Bologna. You probably know that the major portion of the EU budget is dedicated to agriculture. Imagine what could be done by assigning just a little chunk of it to education!

Every reform in the European Union happens in a gradual and sequential fashion. Take the example of the started accession negotiations with Turkey, approved by the EU yesterday; something we should celebrate. The road to this decision involved many years of intense analysis and negotiations and it will still take a further decade to culminate. It is the EU style of development and institution- building. It is a detailed and intricate, sometimes tortuous, system, but once it is completed, there will be no way back. Some people accuse the system of being too bureaucratic, but in fact in the long run it works better than other systems of multilateral integration. The same will happen with Bologna. The first stages now are centered on harmonizing the different exisiting systems in Europe, establishing procedural norms and quality-assement frameworks. Once this stage is completed, the players will progressively confront more complicated issues, leaving for dessert the crucial matter of financing.

To follow an inspirational pragmatist.

The implementation of the Bologna process needs political leadership and determination. The style of leadership required for multilateral initiatives, such as this one, was exemplified in Jean Monnet (1888-1979), considered as one of the fathers of the European Union (EU). It is a leadership model that may inspire other multinational projects where the interests of many different parties, each with its own agenda, have to be combined to produce a win-win situation.

Mark Leonard, Director of Foreign Policy at the London-based Centre for European Reform, refers to Jean Monnet, in his book “Why Europe Will Run the 21st Century”, as the model of leadership to imitate in multinational institutions. Monnet had a very different profile to that of war heroes such as Churchill or De Gaulle and could have almost been described as a civil servant due to the low profile he tended to keep on the political scene. He was intelligent, a great team builder, a tireless worker and a consensus maker. However, with his distinctive style of leadership, he played a decisive role in the construction of the EU. The great insight of Monnet was to understand that a diverse community of nations, with both common and divergent interests, could not be accomplished in just one go according to a general plan, but rather through consecutive and concrete achievements that could create a solidarity among the members. Paradoxically, his vision was to avoid a great vision. Pragmatism and gradual change were the key elements for the success of the project, implying iterative stages of integration and cooperation until the creation of the admirable EU of today.

We need a similar approach and leadership style in the implementation of the Bologna process, where initiative is delegated to the member countries with the participation of a wide panoply of stakeholders: representatives from universities, quality-assessment agencies, teachers, students, employers and administrations, amongst others. Given the need of several Monnets to orchestrate the implementation of Bologna, I took the opportunity of a recent visit of Klaus Schwab to Instituto de Empresa (IE) to suggest to him that at the next Davos summit he should organise a panel to discuss Bologna Process issues.

(Klaus Schwab (left), President of Davos World Economic Forum, speaking with Diego Alcázar (right), President of IE)

A catalyst for Globalisation

The Bologna Process will not only transform the European university landscape. It will contribute decisively to the globalisation of higher education worldwide. The current list of signatories of the Bologna Process includes 45 countries, which goes much beyond the membership of EU, and the number is growing. The harmonisation of educational systems among the signing countries will probably precede ulterior forms of integration–-social, economic and cultural--including future membership to EU.

I know that many other universities outside of Europe are preparing themselves for the Bologna future. North American institutions are looking at our continent as a promising future market, which explains the recent disembarking of some in Europe. Ironically, the institution that has developed the best study on the consequences of the Bologna Process in management education has been GMAC, an American company.

The interest in Bologna is also spreading quickly in Latin America. From my recent conversations with fellow deans of that continent, I detect a strong interest in anticipating the effects of Bologna in their region. In fact, some universities in Latin America are already adapting their higher degrees structure –from the typical 5 years “licenciatura” to bachelor+master- in order to get ready for the global effects of Bologna

Certainly, Bologna is a major topic at dean’s meetings. Today I was lucky to be the host at IE of Prof. Haifa Reda Jamal Al-Lail, Dean of Effat College in Saudi Arabia, an impressive person with a strong entrepreneurial drive and also a nominee for a 2005 Nobel Peace Prize.

The subject of Bologna came out over our conversation and we both agreed that it may provide many opportunities of collaboration and understanding between European and Middle East communities. We should resolutely support the Bologna process because it will extend many bridges among civilisations.

(Prof. Haifa Reda Jamal Al-Lail, Dean of Effat College, second from left)

Looking at the map, I wonder why Belarus has not joined the Bologna agreement; it seems it’s the only exception in Eastern Europe.

Bologna

You may be familiar with the hit movie of a few years ago, L'Auberge Espagnole , which recounts the story of a European student who leaves home and studies in a foreign country. He wins his independence, expands his horizons and makes long-lasting friends from all around Europe on the same program as himself. The Erasmus program has changed how we view ourselves as Europeans and our knowledge of our neighbours.

However, this is nothing compared to the veritable revolution that is planned to occur by 2010 that bears the name “The Bologna Process”. Effectively the EU will become the United States of Europe, well at least in what refers to education. Imagine a Greek computer science graduate who heads to Ireland to finish their studies and gets accepted to do a Master in Computer Science receiving teaching from a Polish professor, all of them voluntarily there due to the reputation of the university that they attend. This example will be greatly amplified in number and will have enormous ramifications in terms of mobility and dynamism, creating the healthy situation where each university has to differentiate itself from every other comparable one in Europe. This transformation is the equivalent in higher education to what happened in the European economy with the adoption of the Euro.

Bologna is an Italian city famous for its University, the oldest in the Western World. But since 1998 the name Bologna has been associated with a transcendental process initiated by the European Union education ministers that formulated the European Higher Education Space (EHEA). According to this agreement, university studies must have the same structure in Europe by 2010. The main purpose of the Bologna Process is to foster cross movements of students, academics and knowledge, in turn improving the quality of teaching and research, ultimately increasing economic productivity in Europe.

Certainly, the creation of EHEA will transform the university landscape in Europe. Currently, university studies across Europe vary widely, both in terms of duration, contents and degrees, among other important issues. The Bologna Process will harmonise the current divergence into two major degrees: bachelor (three years) and masters (two years) degree programmes, in line with the prevalent model in the US or UK. The implementation is mainly delegated to national governments, in line with the standard way that most legislation is developed in the European Union. Most member countries have approved this legislation.

More information can be found at the EFMD website among many others. It might be beneficial to discuss the implications in terms of the necessary financial schemes that would need to be put in place as well as the extent of the IT system needed to keep track of that movement.

Economist and OECD.