PRESIDENT'S LETTER

RESPONDING TO THE EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT

In the last issue of I discussed my views regarding þInternationalizing the Instituteþ and stated that my vision is that we can become a worldwide organization. Furthermore, I stated that to accomplish this objective we must focus on our membership. We must also identify specific needs and develop products and services to meet those needs.

One step towards accomplishing these goals is to be aware of and recognize the ever changing "educational environment" and how such changes impact the needs of the organization. And, as we note such changes and their impact we need to be cognizant that the changes and impact may vary from region to region and at the Institute level, particularly if the region is the Asia-Pacific or one of the other international regions that may form in the near future (i.e., Latin-American, European, etc.).

Here in the U.S., Larry Ritzman in the September/October 1993 issue of identified some of the "changing winds in the educational environment" as:

• The Porter-McKibben and the Graduate Management Admission Council reports, calling for:
  1. students better versed in the role that the environment, ethics, global competition, technological change and the workplace play in practice;
  2. more emphasis on leadership, communication and the relationship between functional areas;
  3. more attention given to relevance þ more of the real world environment in our classrooms and research work.
• The continuing of tight university budgets, lower enrollments, and tight job markets for new Ph.D. graduates, resulting from:
  1. changing demographics of the number of students entering universities;
  2. continuing tight economic conditions;
  3. declining federal and state monies;
  4. escalating costs at universities;
  5. downsizing of middle management positions; in industry and government; and
  6. the somewhat tarnished image of business, in general.
• The changing of the AACSB standards and accreditation process such that:
  1. more diversity and customization in business schools is acceptable;
  2. a lockstep evaluation process is no longer used whereby each school must satisfy the same standards;
  3. the focus is now on having each school improve their respective quality, distinctiveness, and competitiveness; and
  4. business schools are being charged with clearly defining their desired mission and niche and tracking how well such goals are being accomplished in terms of measurable objectives.

To respond to these changes, universities have begun restructuring their MBA programs, with more attention being given to the linkages between particular specialities and disciplines. The emphasis is on looking across the boundaries of functional disciplines and demonstrating how accounting, finance, marketing, operations, and other specialities are connected. The thrust is to emphasize how the resources of a firm must be integrated and to have students understand how to accomplish this integration in practice. Robert A. Leavey captures the essence of this desired integration process (from an industry perspective) in the foreword of the (American Production and Inventory Control Society, 1991),

Pursuing a path of integrated resource management (IRM) holds the key to competitiveness and profitability for the future of a world-class enterprise in this decade and into the twenty-first century. Today, companies organized into functional departments are trying to manage by using cross functional teams. Management is trying to steer the ship by implementing programs such as total quality management (TQM), market driven quality (MDQ), time-based measurements, and others, which themselves are good but do little to bring the diverse functional areas of the enterprise together. . . .

Integrated resource management is the knowledge that enables individuals to excel in cross functional teams and employee empowerment programs and adds value to the organization in which they work. . . . The initial step of IRM is to break down the silos of functional departments. This includes not only understanding the functional areas and the major impacts of decisions in one functional area on all others, but understanding how to achieve this integration in the enterprise.

Undergraduate programs in business schools in general, and in small schools in particular, have also begun responding to the "changing educational environment," particularly to those factors relating to the AACSB standards and accreditation processes. Specifically, some schools have elected to move away from some of the traditional structures found in business curriculums and have begun to build specialty programs that better meet the needs of "their students and faculty." For example, while remaining within the basis AACSB guidelines, some schools have begun placing heavier emphasis on "practitioner involvement in the classroom," providing/requiring practical internships as part of degree requirements, recognizing and accepting the writing of certain teaching based material as contribution to research, and recognizing and rewarding involvement in professional associations. While such changes may not be desirable for all universities, indeed the changes in the AACSB guidelines allow schools to focus on distinctive characteristic that set their programs apart from others while meeting the needs of their niche marketplace.

How can the Institute respond to the "changing educational environment?" First, as I stated earlier, we must be aware of the changes, and we must determine what impact they may have on existing programs and activities of the Institute. To assist in this process, the 1994-95 Development Committee for Excellence in the Decision Sciences was charged with the following tasks:

• Identify the likely changes in business education and research during the next decade, such as called for by the Porter-McKibben report, the new AACSB accreditation standards, and the report by the Graduate Management Admissions Council report. Also consider the future requirements, and the possible changing "market share" of business programs in higher education.
• Based on the changes identified, recommend what the Institute should do to take advantage of the changes, taking into account the distinctive competencies of DSI such as a multidisciplinary character, an interest in good teaching, strong regional groups, good representation of faculty from smaller schools and a concern for excellence and realism in its research. Should the Institute be doing something different in terms of workshop, tutorials, consortia, or publications? Should the marketing plan, as given by the Policies and Procedures manual be updated? Is internationalization of the Institute the primary source of future growth?
• Recommend other innovative new programs that might be instituted to further foster excellence in decision sciences.

A second way in which the Institute can respond to the changes that are occurring in the educational environment is to recognize and accept that the programs and activities of the regions do not have to be "mirror images" of the Institute-level annual meeting and activities. To the contrary, each region should have its own distinctive character. For example, some regions have found that paper presentations in the formal part of the program is a viable way to get graduate students involved in the meeting, while other regions have focused on using the Graduate Student Workshop as the vehicle to accomplish this objective. Some regions have a heavy pedagogy emphasis in the makeup of their annual meeting, whereas others have a mix of pedagogy, applied research, as well as basic research. The Southwest Region holds its annual meeting in conjunction with the Southwest Federation of Administrative Disciplines (SW/FAD), which appears to work well for that particular region, and provides another format for interdisciplinary activities with colleagues in other disciplines.

As we grow and change, and internationalize, indeed we need to respond to change, but as the new AACSB guidelines suggest, we should have each region, as well as the Institute itself, focus on "improving their respective quality, distinctiveness, and competitiveness."

Both the Porter-McKibben report and the Graduate Management Admissions Council report also stress the importance of business schools being involved in the global marketplace. The Institute is "becoming involved" simply by growth in international regions, but international growth is not the focus of this recommendation from these reports. The focus is on identifying and understanding those processes that are common, regardless of the country where it is employed, and understanding those processes which are unique to a particular country. Because we are an association of professionals committed to the understanding and improvement of decision making, the Institute is in a unique position to provide leadership in the global marketplace. How we respond to this challenge will depend on how adaptive we are to change. Hopefully some of the recommendations from the Development Committee for Excellence in the Decision Sciences and recommendations from the Strategic Planning for International Affairs Committee will move us in the proper direction.

Your input and ideas on programs and activities for the Institute are welcomed. Please share your comments with me or another Board member. Hope to see you in Hawaii.