Business And Management Education For The Future: An Emergent Model for China

by Dajian Zhu and Anders Aspling 

EFMD Global Focus: Volume 09 Issue 03  | 2015   51

In China, MSE is the earliest field of management research and education and includes fundamental theories, management skills and the quantitative methods of management science

The need for renewed approaches to business and management research and teaching has been intensively discussed. Dajian Zhu and Anders Aspling analyse the implications of this for management education in China.

Business education began as an organised and focused activity in the early 19th century, first in France and then, towards the end of that century, in the US.

After the second world war the US model of management development came to influence large parts of the world. Business schools grounded in the US model were founded in many countries.

From the latter part of the 20th century and into the new millennium the dominant model for business schools and management education worldwide was heavily influenced by the US model, itself characterised by the reasoning of the Carnegie and Ford reports commissioned in 1959.

This model largely embraces values aligned with the belief that a strict market capitalism contributes to the welfare of society at large. Europe, with its more interdisciplinary and culturally diverse tradition, has struggled to integrate this model. Europe also represented a different approach to research – more quality oriented and less reliant on quantitative methodology.

Towards the end of the 20th century there were definite signs that the “Americanisation” of European business schools and management education was being questioned and challenged.

China management education 1.0

In the 1980s management education in China began based on the discipline of “management science and engineering” (MSE).

Many US and European academics have found it difficult to understand the discipline of MSE. In China, MSE is the earliest field of management research and education and includes fundamental theories, management skills and the quantitative methods of management science.

The concept of MSE developed from its roots in operations research and industrial engineering. While in the US this discipline is often technology oriented and falls into the schools of engineering or departments of mathematics, in China it is management oriented and related to the core of management education.

The MSE approach developed rapidly to become the major component of management education in China.

In the early 1980s many Chinese universities began establishing management schools or new departments of management science. By 1987 185 universities had established relevant schools or departments. This development built on the dual characteristics of management science research – a combination of technology and technical science (with natural science ingredients) and social sciences.

Unfortunately, it strengthened the orientation towards academic research without providing a sufficient understanding of management practices and practical implications for businesses and other organisations.

Further development of management education in the 1990s introduced the western concept of business administration. In the late 1980s and early 1990s business administration catered to the needs of enterprise management and grew rapidly.

In 1990, nine business schools started to offer MBA education as pilot schemes, extended to 65 schools in 2000. Enrolment increased from 105 students in 1991 to 10,238 in 1999.

The development of MBA education has also been greatly influenced by the MSE tradition – which leads to universities and schools requiring teachers to write academic papers rather than increasing their understanding of business management practice.

Following the introduction of international accreditations at the beginning of the 21st century, China’s management education has continued to follow the American model, which has led to further academic orientation and an enhanced emphasis on academic publication.

The new millennium has also seen public administration emerge as an important dimension of the Chinese management field. Since 2000, social management issues have become of key importance in China’s development. This has led to an urgent need to strengthen research on macro-management and public policies.

In 1999, the Academic Degrees Committee of the State Council approved the setup of Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree programmes in China, with a first batch of 24 pilot institutions. So far, nearly 100 institutions have been authorised to grant MPA degrees.

Over the past 30 years management education in China has basically followed the American model. From a Chinese perspective some of its characteristics are summarised below:

• The model is fundamentally oriented towards economic interests regarding teaching with an emphasis on “doing things right rather than doing the right things”. It stresses the maximisation of shareholders’ interests rather than the balance of stakeholders’ concerns and pays less attention to the direction of management practices and how to promote leadership for sustainable development. It focuses on the technological and economic issues of an enterprise and pays no explicit attention to social and environmental issues or the role of business in society.

• The model is equally US-oriented regarding research and knowledge material. It uses predominately US management issues and cases and shows little interest in accumulating research in management practices of Chinese enterprises.

• The model is oriented towards publishing papers regarding social services with an emphasis on dogmatic scholarship. Modelling, quantitative analysis and number of publications in SCI and SSCI journals are the focus. Added to this there is a lack of engagement in management practices by academic intellectuals. (As an exception, owing to its strong tradition in project management and policy consulting, Tongji University School of Economics and Management (SEM) in Shanghai has developed a pragmatic orientation in its research and places great emphasis on social services based on this approach.)

Upgrading China management education to 2.0

The 2012 Rio+20 conference proposed and presented the “50+20 Agenda” for a management education system oriented towards sustainability.

The Agenda indicated that management education in the world should transform to more of a social market economy model with a global perspective and sustainability as common denominators– “Management Education For the World”.

At this stage some suggested that Chinese management education could leapfrog incremental shifts to a sustainable development model and step directly into the sustainable management education model.

However, this implies at least three major transformations:

• from an efficiency-based management skills education to a benefit-based leadership education

• from US-contextual academic research to China-contextual research

• from academic intellectuals to socially engaged public intellectuals

A new China management education model

China’s management education is in need of transforming from an imitation of the American model to a sustainable development model. We propose the ideology and path of the transformation from three aspects:

Object analysis

• Most Chinese business schools still follow the American model and they will not transform themselves until external conditions have radically changed

• Some independent business schools such as CEIBS should have higher potential and opportunities for rapid transformation

• In 1999, the Academic Degrees Committee of the State Council approved the setup of Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree programmes in China, with a first batch of 24 pilot institutions. So far, nearly 100 institutions have been authorised to grant MPA degrees

• A small number of business schools are taking on a parallel strategy, organising some forces to develop the sustainable development model while at the same time following the example of the American model. Chinese universities with strong European connections and all major disciplines of management education available, such as Tongji, will have the potential for such a development in terms of both academic research, teaching and social engagement

• Initiatives taken for new innovative programmes or for establishing totally new business schools could be based on the sustainable management education model and a social market economy approach. (The provision of management education at NYU Shanghai may represent an interesting example.)

Subject analysis.

The transformation of China’s management education is dependent on the influence of stakeholders, including government, enterprises and accreditation bodies as well as faculty and administrators inside business schools.

Generally, innovators are driven by internal motives while followers are driven by external pressures.

As China’s business schools are mostly funded by the government, they are also obliged to undertake academic research. Their transformation is affected by government policies and discipline ranking. Only a few business schools are able to sponsor actively the movement towards a new model.

Tongji’s orientation toward sustainable development has created a favourable environment for such a move by offering postgraduate programmes and courses on sustainable development and management; proposing the “China-model”, which distinguishes China from the western world especially in terms of context-oriented research. Tongji SEM’s CSR or sustainable business courses discuss in detail common issues and differences between China and the West.

Tongji also encourages and rewards academic influence and social influence in terms of services and carrying out joint projects on sustainable development with overseas institutions through exchange and collaboration. SEM sets up indicators and reward instruments not only on academic impact but also social impact. Many faculty and departments have a clear social service orientation such as urban mega-project management and sustainable business development in their curricula and research.

Process analysis

Systematic transformation depends to a large extent on how the “50+20 Agenda” and similar initiatives influence major international accreditations. It is only possible to “push” China’s management education to change direction after the accreditation systems have changed their focus.

Therefore, the transformation will go forward in three stages:

• A minority of business schools take the initiative to make sporadic explorations under the drive of internal stakeholders

• Driven by external stakeholders, they systematically explore the sustainable management education model under renewed accreditation systems – and leading practitioners will appear

• Business schools will change direction on a large scale under the combined forces of external pressure and internal motives, which could be estimated to be another 30 to 40 year project (2015-2050).

China also has the opportunity of introducing an alternative accreditation model, fully integrating social services and sustainability dimensions, or adding new elements to CAMEA (China Advanced Management Education Accreditation – which started in 2013 with Tongji SEM as one of the first five schools to go through it). This could be pioneered by a group of leading Chinese schools in collaboration with their partners from the US, Europe and other parts of the world.

Conclusion

This short article has aimed to address the importance of contextualisation when looking at the future of business and management education. Contextualization is important to secure the richness of a continuously developing and quality guaranteed global diversity. It is important to enable learning across cultures. And, it is crucial to the importance of honouring differentiation.

This is one way of presenting a Chinese perspective on the future of business and management education. Context-based presentations also from other parts of the world would be welcome, as well as supplementary comments on the China development.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Professor Dajian Zhu is Distinguished Professor at the Tongji University School of Economics and Management (Tongji SEM), Shangahi, China; Director of the Institute of Governance for Sustainable Development at Tongji University;and vice chairman of the Academic Committee of Tongji University.

Professor Anders Aspling is Founding Secretary-General of the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative ; Professor at Tongji SEM; Affiliated Professor at CENTRUM Católica Graduate Business School of the Pontificia Universidad Católica , Lima, Peru; and Chairman of the International Advisory Board of Turku School of Economics at Turku University, Turku, Finland. 

原文链接：https://globalfocusmagazine.com/business-and-management-education-for-the-future-an-emergent-model-for-china/