ARTICLE 4 PART 1 OF MY SERIES ON –BUSINESS SCHOOL – HOW TO MANAGE .. IS THE BUSINESS SCHOOL A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE FIRM? LESSONS LEARNT - sudhanshu

ARTICLE 4 PART 1 OF MY SERIES OF WRITUPS ON – “ BUSINESS SCHOOL – HOW TO MANAGE ??!!

?

IS THE BUSINESS SCHOOL A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE FIRM? LESSONS LEARNED

?

This article examines the proposition that business schools have simpler characteristics than professional service firms (PSFs). There are two useful reasons for doing so. First, the process of analyzing business schools through a professional services lens sheds new light on the management and leadership challenges for business school deans. Second, the process broadens the range of studies of PSFs that exist outside of the ‘core professions’ (law, accountancy, medicine and so on;), enabling closer scrutiny of the characteristics of PSFs.

?

Business schools, like most higher education institutions and PSFs, are ‘loosely coupled’ organizations that exhibit a set of distinctive traits and characteristics which lead to a unique organizational form and setting. This presents particular challenges for business school deans since leading a business school is not the same as leading a corporation. In a growing literature that examines business schools and their various constituents, there is only limited coverage of the practice and role of deans.

?

A closer inspection of the literature on knowledge-intensive firms (KIFs) and PSFs reveals ambiguity surrounding the term PSF and too narrow an empirical focus on so-called core professions. In response to this ambiguity in the field and a lack of studies beyond the core professions we assess here the case for business

?

I am extremely grateful to Alexander Ramsay my friend in Montreal – Concordia University now in Mcgill University ( where I went for my academic sojourn in 1993-94) ?for many of the insights in this article, which are drawn from current and continuing joint research with Howard Thomas on management education. I have also contributed strongly to work on PSFs. schools to be considered as a type of PSF. To guide this process we examine the following set of interrelated issues.

?

?? What is a professional service firm?

?? What are the key characteristics of PSFs?

?? Are business schools a type of PSF?

?

?

The following sections in this article ?address jointly the first and second issues by drawing on the available literature on PSFs and focusing on the interplay between their distinctive characteristics and organizational opportunities and challenges. Building on this foundation, we then examine cases of managing business schools together with evidence from business school deans to assess whether their actions are consistent with existing theoretical models of PSFs.

?

Business schools have established themselves as relevant, renowned academic institutions whether as part of prestigious universities or as stand-alone management education providers.

INTRODUCTION

The history of business schools has been short but significant. They have established themselves as relevant, renowned academic institutions whether as part of prestigious universities or as stand- alone management education providers. The pursuit of their initial purpose of professionalizing management and in the process building up its own body of knowledge, rules and values has shifted from a combination of individual insights shared by savvy veteran managers and practical advice to a more scientific approach that now encompasses several academic disciplines.

?

In parallel, the study of professional service and knowledge-intensive firms has made significant contributions to the way we study and manage organisations. Specifically, the research on PSFs and KIFs reflects the presence of increasingly complex systems of knowledge underpinning organisations and enriches our theoretical capacity to study contemporary organisations. However, scholars in this area have tended to concentrate on a core set of professions – for example, law, accountancy or medicine - and, where comparisons are made, they tend to be with non-professional organisations.

?

Therefore, my ?aim in this article is twofold. First, by adopting a definition of PSFs that (a) extends the classification beyond core professions and (b) differentiates between types of PSF our analysis demonstrates that the particular characteristics of business school organisations are consistent with many features of PSFs. Second, if business schools are a type of PSF, there are specific and far-reaching consequences for the leadership, strategic management and competitiveness of business schools. The associated leadership challenges of managing a PSF (business school) should be identified and commonly reflected in the close examination of the accounts and managerial experiences of business school deans.

CONTEXT, CONTROVERSY AND BUSINESS SCHOOLS

?

Many scholars have identified the pivotal role knowledge plays as the backbone of value creation; and competitive advantage. Knowledge is essential in post-industrial economies as the crucial conduit that bonds the network society ?and as the vital ally of informatised society.

?

The central importance of professionals and the knowledge they hold has undoubtedly shaped and repositioned management debate away from control of resources to include the exercise and application of specialist knowledge and competencies. In this environment of ‘headwork’ over ‘handwork’; the practice of knowledge management entails the accumulation, storage and leverage of knowledge.

?

For many contemporary organisations the expertise of their workers is at the forefront of value creation. We regard business school academics as professional experts who create value and are actively involved in management training, development and research as part of the management community. We also observe that business schools have diverse models and philosophies. This is reflected in terms of their approaches to management education and research. I think I should contrast the US and European models of management education in business schools, the former exhibiting wide-scale standardisation of programmes and research and the latter adopting more distinctive identities. In addition, we observe differences in the institutional arrangement of business schools where ownership and funding is a continuum ranging from wholly private to fully state-dependent schools. This adds further to the diversity among the global population of schools.

?

However, business schools face an array of complex and often conflicting demands, perhaps best captured by the tensions between research into management that is academic and rigorous but largely theoretical, and research that promises practical relevance to the management community.

?

Lively debate surrounds the role of the business school. Critics question the competitive environment of business schools, key stakeholders and the legitimacy of management education and research. In short, there is intense questioning of the role and purpose of business schools and management education.

?

As we have noted, this has led some commentators to brand business schools as ‘schizophrenic’ organisations and an increased questioning of their role and purpose in relation to the needs of the management community, their academic legitimacy as part of a modern university and, in the wake of recent business scandals, their societal value. Lively debate surrounds the role of the business school. Critics question the competitive environment of business schools. In short, there is intense questioning of the role and purpose of business schools and management education.

?

For example, it has been argued that management education needs a system of learning, formal training, an overarching professional body and a code of conduct to produce a model of occupational professionalism comparable to the core professions. Despite frequent comparisons to established professions, management practice is not strictly the sole domain of professional managers (this is one possible contributory factor impeding the emergence of management as a true profession). Management consultancy roles and MBA qualifications are often undertaken by members of other professions; for example, engineers who are also practising managers. Consequently, it is difficult to identify management as a profession in the same sense that law, accountancy or medicine are professions.

?

?

Compared to law and medical schools, business schools occupy a controversial space. They lack a legally sanctioned professional body and grapple with the twin forces of academic rigour and practical relevance. For some commentators business schools have helped to create a rift that prevents management becoming a ‘true’ profession. It is claimed that business schools have abandoned the pursuit of rigorous relevant knowledge in favour of chasing profit and have shunned managerial competencies in favour of technocracy.

?

In confronting these criticisms, some argue that business schools should direct their future development towards the unfinished project of professionalisation I would suggest a ‘public interest school of management’ that parallels the role of the medical school. They propose the development of a strong professional identity based on an ethical and societal orientation for managers that fosters an accumulation of knowledge founded on social science and engagement with practice.

?

It is within this context of controversy and ‘schizophrenic’ demands that the business school dean undertakes his/her leadership role.

?

As ‘first among equals’, deans are expected to act as ‘integrators’ who reconcile short-term financial needs and long-term academic goals while keeping in sight corporate and private customers’ requirements as well as the school’s relevant offerings. The dean must attend to the balance of rigour and relevance and the values associated with academic and professional practice. To reconcile these demands, deans must create a persona based on the combination of their scholarly and professional reputations.

?

Therefore, deans must learn to champion both the academic values of the university/academy and the professional values of their external management constituency without appearing duplicitous ?This has led several deans to compare themselves to partners in PSFs. They argue that they are promoted on the basis of expertise, knowledge and intellectual capital to leadership/management positions where their subsequent accumulation of political and social capital ?combines in a virtuous circle to generate economic and reputational – that is, cultural – capital for the business school.

?

Business school deans are confronted with leading not only complex organisational forms but also reconciling diverse stakeholder interests in an era of ‘hyper competition’.

?

In this context, deans need to be able to build consensus and share their vision of strategy. However, they cannot overlook their responsibility to secure the necessary resources to attract the best faculty members, funding adequate compensation schemes and facilitating their research agendas. In this setting, deans have little power to drive change or to introduce bold strategic initiatives that may challenge their schools’ status quo. Consequently, business school deans are confronted with leading not only complex organisational forms but also reconciling diverse stakeholder interests in an era of ‘hyper competition’. This forms the context of the leadership challenge for business school deans within which we position business schools as PSFs.

?

If business schools are faced with these growing social and ideological tensions coupled with mounting global competition then there is an imperative for change. This raises two interrelated concerns for business school deans: what needs to be changed and how can they instigate change? Undoubtedly, the former is of great importance in the development and future position of business schools as both academic and social institutions. Indeed, the discussion above shows that many of the scholars who highlight the controversies surrounding business schools also propose alternative models for their operation and organisation. However, the central focus of this article is on the unique and challenging issues that relate to the latter processes of how business school deans lead their (professional service) organisations.

?