Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/59966
"If change in business is more widespread and more rapid, then MBA programs must be designed in a more responsive mode." —John Mather, Tepper School unit is effective only if it answers two questions to the faculty's satisfaction: "Why are we teaching this content?" and "Why should students study this content?" Planning Content.We then considered the most appropriate mix of units for a particular market segment.We appointed a course program leader to head each program and work with an industry champion who provided the market perspective. Bringing It All Together. Because each industry requires differ- ent knowledge requirements, we introduced a unit in the second year as a capstone project to integrate industry-spe- cific knowledge and skills. After the final unit, students should be prepared to be immediately productive in their careers. Lessons Learned Only after we designed our ideal curriculum did we turn our attention to the more political and procedural concerns of the university. With our new curriculum structure in hand, we retroactively mapped it to university regulations, adjusting its timing, format, and presentation as needed. But because we were not blinded by such concerns from the beginning, we were truly able to design a curriculum that was ideal for learning. Throughout the redesign process, we gleaned several valuable lessons: s The dean or head must lead—or at least oversee—the redesign process to give it direction and maintain its momen- tum. s Faculty involvement is critical for the subsequent success of the new curriculum. s Faculty involvement does not guarantee success. Consensus helps achieve "what is feasible," but not necessar- ily "what is desirable." All involved must often subordinate individual concerns to the good of the project as a whole. s A process must be established to ensure that the project continues, even if those responsible for creating it move on. For a curricular redesign to be successful, administrators must commit to the philosophical aspects of curricular change and resist being waylaid by apparent obstacles to change. After all, such a constructive shift in educational philosophy is one that may be crucial to a business school's survival in an increasingly competitive, adaptive, and demanding market. Nimal Jayaratna is former head of Curtin University's School of Information Systems in Perth, Australia. He is now the executive head of the School of Business Information Technology at Manchester Metropolitan University in the United Kingdom. dents do in one class builds directly on the skills they learned in the previous class. Some programs consist, not of distinct courses, but of interconnected courses, in which the lessons learned in one are applied and expanded in another—some- times consecutively, but often simultaneously. In a sense, this "new MBA" may be slowly evolving into a single MBA course that happens to last two years. Perhaps the most significant characteristic of this new breed of MBA is the perpetual state of its redesign. The edu- cators involved in the redesign projects mentioned here emphasize that their work will not end with this year's class or next year's class. Their MBAs will never be "done." Rather, they'll remain works in progress, changing in response to new research, new development, and new demands in the marketplace. "There's now a lot of pressure on business schools to keep their programs changing," says Poston of the University of Washington. "We're always being asked, 'When was your last curriculum revision?' We now must mirror the industries we serve, where product life cycles are very short and must be constantly adapted to meet new needs." "As we continue, we'll fine-tune the program, but we're trying to make the program much more responsive to change," says Mather of the Tepper School. "If change in business is more widespread and more rapid, then MBA programs must be designed in a more responsive mode." Many educators have adopted a completely new view of their business programs. Instead of saying, "Our new MBA will take us into the next two decades," they are saying, "Our new MBA will have the flexibility to change, grow with, and adapt to business indefinitely." In large part, the traditional MBA, in its familiar form, may be singing its swan song. Years of sustained discussion about its value, its ability to innovate, and its relevance to the modern business world have pushed the MBA into a rapid evolution—into a perpetual makeover. But such con- stant evolution isn't necessarily a burden. It can help busi- ness schools stay adaptive to the new business context of each academic year. It will create an environment where educators feel freer to innovate and recreate their education- al delivery. And many hope that continued redesign and improvement of the curriculum will keep the MBA nimble enough to meet—and even surpass—the ongoing demands of business. s z BizEd MAY/JUNE 2005 33