Global Focus, Vol 13 Issue 1 - Haier's philosophy: Personal values first by EFMD Global

The EFMD Business Magazine | Iss1 Vol.13 | www.efmd.org

Haierâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s philosophy:

Personal values first

Impact Why itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s worth more than just talk

New mindset Changing how we develop leaders

Poverty trap The gap between rich and poor keeps growing

Conscious? Time to wake up to what you are doing

Do the maths Business students should know more about technology

Sell-by date Keeping the MBA fresh and relevant

Placing your internaaonal students with companies globally

www.efmdglobal.org/highered Highered - EFMD Global Career Services connects companies, schools and students at an unprecedented level. Highered supports and enhances the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exissng career services by providing unique internaaonal placement opportuniies to students from EFMD company members. Now available - Highered provides the opportunity for Career Services to post relevant jobs from local company partners directly to their students only. Contact us for more details:

highered@efmdglobal.org

In focus | Global Focus

In focus Global Focus Iss.1 Vol.13 | 2019

ur cover story in this edition (page 6) is an interview with one of the world’s most effective and successful managers, Zhang Ruimin, a world-renowned Chinese entrepreneur and founder and CEO of the Haier Group. Zhang is well known for the way he has embraced and developed the digital era and how he sees the future of key sectors such as management education: “Like management,” he says, “management education should also adapt to the changes in the internet age. The internet has led to a transformation from linear into non-linear management and from mass production to mass customisation in businesses. This change has brought new challenges to management education, rendering the type of programmes designed for linear management irrelevant in the context of non-linear management practices. In this new era, management education needs to encourage hands-on engagement in new management practices by students rather than just having them learn about the success stories of the past.” How to make this transition is the subject of a number of articles in this edition, with writers taking up various positions. For example, Professor Edward Byrne AC, one of the most experienced administrators of higher education institutions and currently President and Principal of Kings College London in the UK, argues (page 14) that professional services resources must be “aligned and focused on meeting future strategic needs”. “No matter how good your educators and researchers are, he writes, if you have a dysfunctional, immature professional services base, you certainly will not thrive and are likely over time to decline. And you certainly will not generate the margins you need to reinvest for the long run in your facilities and new academic endeavours.” Other articles that illuminate the subject include: • a Greek business school that has redesigned its executive programmes to react more effectively to today’s changing environment (page 40) • a Spanish school that is exposing students to a new type of “Exponential Organisation” (page 28) • a call for MBA students to be much better trained in technology subjects (page 44) • and, finally, the Conscious Project, consultancy to help individuals and organisations think about what they were doing – and do it better.

More ways to read Global Focus

You can read Global Focus in print, online and on the move, in English, Chinese or Spanish

Go to globalfocusmagazine.com to access the online library of past issues

Or search iTunes for your iPad edition

Your say We are always pleased to hear your thoughts on Global Focus, and ideas on what you would like to see in future issues. Please address comments and ideas to Matthew Wood at EFMD: matthew.wood@efmd.org

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Contents

Global Focus The EFMD Business Magazine Iss.1 Vol.13 | 2019

Executive Editor Matthew Wood / matthew.wood@efmd.org Advisory Board Eric Cornuel Howard Thomas John Peters Consultant Editor George Bickerstaffe / georgebickerstaffe@gmail.com Contributing Editors Kostas Axarloglou Edward Byrne Andrew Crisp Jerry Connor Andrea Cuomo Yves Doz Ben Emmens David Grayson Abi Green Marina Gryllaki Yuwa Hedrick-Wong Michel Kalika Mikko Kosonen Mukul Kumar Ajoy Kumar Dey Mark Lipton Christophe Midler John North Francisco Palao Reines Johan Roos Zhang Ruimin José Santos Gordon Shenton Saumya Sindhwani Claire Sommer Howard Thomas Design & Art Direction Jebens Design / www.jebensdesign.co.uk Photographs & Illustrations © Jebens Design Ltd / EFMD unless otherwise stated Editorial & Advertising Matthew Wood / matthew.wood@efmd.org Telephone: +32 2 629 0810 www.globalfocusmagazine.com www.efmd.org EFMD Rue Gachard 88 – Box 3, 1050 Brussels, Belgium ©

See the future Andrew Crisp outlines how business schools can gain a glimpse of future trends.

Haier’s philosophy: personal values first World-renowned Chinese entrepreneur Zhang Ruimin outlines his unique approach to management, integrating China’s traditional culture with modern western management concepts

Collaborate for success and sustainability David Grayson explains the dramatic growth of the quantity and quality of business collaboration linked to sustainable development

Achieving change in HE professional support Professor Edward Byrne argues that professional services resources must be aligned and focused on meeting future strategic needs and describes how he has approached this issue at three world-class higher-education institutes

An infinite loop It is time for a new, co-ordinated and collaborative approach to management research say Andrea Cuomo, Yves Doz, Mikko Kosonen, Christophe Midler and José Santos

Contents | Global Focus

Impact: is it enough just to talk about it? Michel Kalika and Gordon Shenton explain why business schools not only talk about impact but are learning how to make a better job of assessing it

Exponential Organisations: helping students to build the businesses of the future Francisco Palao Reines describes how business school students are being exposed to a new type of business to match today’s exponential environment, the ‘Exponential Organisation’

Beyond misogyny: our pathologically mean leaders The #MeToo movement has unleashed a maelstrom of reports of inappropriate sexual behaviour. But, says Mark Lipton, what he calls the “Mean Men” syndrome has been responsible for equal, and sometimes even worse, wrongdoings

Enabling models of inclusive growth: addressing the need for financial and social inclusion While poverty is falling, the gap between the rich and poor is getting wider and more and more people are being excluded from the means to better themselves. Yuwa Hedrick-Wong and Howard Thomas look at ways to include them

Disrupting the curriculum Business students should be more knowledgeable about new technologies say Mukul Kumar and Johan Roos

Results Oriented Results from the GRLI Deans and Directors Cohort. Edited by John North and Claire Sommer

‘The missing shifts’ Saumya Sindhwani, Jerry Connor and Howard Thomas argue it is time to change the way we develop leaders -- and tap into the power of mindset

Be conscious! Launched in 2012 by Ben Emmens and Abi Green, the Conscious Project has one clear aim: to help individuals and organisations think about what they were doing, and do it better or, in other words, to be more conscious.

On the right track Ajoy Kumar Dey explains how the MBA curriculum is kept fresh and relevant at a leading Indian institution

Learning for agility, with agility How a leading Greek business school redesigned its executive programmes to reflect and respond to today’s rapidly changing environment. By Kostas Axarloglou and Marina Gryllaki 3

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

See the Future Andrew Crisp outlines how business schools can plan ahead.

ive years is a long time in business education. In February 2013, Professor Clayton Christensen at Harvard Business School stated: "I think higher education is just on the edge of the crevasse. Generally, universities are doing very well financially, so they don’t feel from the data that their world is going to collapse. But I think even five years from now these enterprises are going to be in real trouble”. Christensen’s comments were part of the inspiration behind two studies that CarringtonCrisp and EFMD published in 2013 and 2014 looking at the future of business education from student, faculty and employer perspectives. The See the Future studies were published at a time when it was difficult to read an article about the future without a reference to MOOCs. Coursera had been founded in January 2011 and by October 2013 already had four million sign-ups. At the end of 2012, the New York Times published an article titled “Year of the MOOC”. While the MOOC revolution may not have panned out as some people anticipated, by the end of 2017 Coursera had registered 30 million learners and as a business was reportedly valued at $800 million. The See the Future studies were not just about technology changing the face of business education, although it was much to the fore. Half the prospective students in the study said they would not study a business programme in a MOOC. Yet the Babson Survey Research Group in in its 2017 report found that distance student enrolments in the US have increased for 14 years in a row. A total of 6,359,121 students took at least one distance education course in 2016. Beyond technology, 70% of managers in businesses who responded to the survey agreed that business models need to change to better

See the Future | Andrew Crisp

In 2019, EFMD will again work with CarringtonCrisp to run the See the Future study. The study will be free for schools to take part and all participating schools will receive a copy of the final global report

14yrs 6.4m The Babson Survey Research Group in its 2017 report found that distance student enrolments in the US have increased for 14 years in a row

A total of 6,359,121 students took at least one distance education course in 2016

engage with society. Paul Polman, who recently announced his retirement as Chief Executive at Unilever, has in recent years reflected these findings, arguing that companies should make sustainable development part of their core mission. Larry Fink, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at BlackRock in his 2017 letter to CEOs recognised that “society is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose”. Despite Christensen’s suggestion about business schools finding themselves on the edge of the crevasse, most have avoided taking the plunge. There have been some large-scale failures in the US, especially in the for-profit sector, and mergers continue elsewhere, but there has been no collapse. Some full-time MBA programmes have closed but others thrive, especially in Asia. Around the world there are also many examples of innovation in business education with providers not only surviving but growing significantly. So, what of the next five years? Whether it was Niels Bohr or Yogi Berra who is reported to have said, tongue in cheek, that “it’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future”, it’s even harder to plan the future of a business school without some data to support decision-making. In 2019, EFMD will again work with CarringtonCrisp to run the See the Future study. Online surveys will be run for prospective and current students, faculty, professional staff and employers to gather their views on the future of business education. The study will be free for schools to take part and all participating schools will receive a copy of the final global report. Additional data will be provided online, offering detailed insights for different parts of the world and different audience groups. Further analysis will be delivered at EFMD’s international conferences. Further details of the See the Future study will be available following the EFMD Deans conference at CEIBS in January 2019. The surveys will go live in March 2019. Data will be collected over a one-month period with the findings reported at the EFMD Annual Conference in Lisbon in June 2019. If you want to get a glimpse of the outlook for business education to grow the future of your business school and its impact on students, research and business, all we ask is that you help distribute the online survey link to the key audiences targeted in the survey. Join us to see the future in 2019. 5

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Haierâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s philosophy:

Personal values first

Zhang Ruimin is a world-renowned Chinese entrepreneur, founder of the Haier Group, Chairman of the Board of Directors and CEO of the Haier Group. In recognition of his achievements in management innovation he has received numerous awards in the field of international management. In this interview he outlines his unique approach to management, integrating Chinaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s traditional culture with modern western management concepts

Zhang Ruimin Interview. Haier’s philosophy: personal values first | Global Focus interview

lobal Focus: Can you say a few words about your early experiences in industry and commerce When I first arrived at Haier in 1984, it was a small manufacturer of poor-quality refrigerators on the verge of bankruptcy and with almost no management. Every morning the staff just went to the factory to call the roll and left. I got rid of the old refrigerators and introduced some basic rules for our staff, such as the "management 13 rules" to regulate workers' behaviour. At the same time, we introduced advanced production technology. But high-quality products must be made by high-quality people. So we constantly explore new management methods such as self-management teams and Overall Every Control and Clear (OEC) to stimulate employee creativity. All of our staff became innovators and collaborators focused on the same goal. Soon Haier became the number-one Chinese brand for household appliances. Now Haier has grown to be the world’s largest white goods manufacturer (with a 10.6% retail market share, by volume). GF: As well as great commercial success you have also been very keen to promote the idea of networked organisations. Could you expand on that a little? In 2000 I became fascinated by the imminent arrival of the network era. So in 2005 I put forward the Rendanheyi model to promote the networked transformation of Haier. After nearly 13 years of exploration and practice, Haier has become a networked organisation, moving from a traditional manufacturing business into a win-win ecoenterprise. GF: Is that linked to Haier’s philosophy of personal values? There is a thread running throughout the development of Haier, –"personal values first”. Business is all about people. Management is all about leveraging resources. Rendanheyi is a model that can realise the idea of leveraging global resources while at the same time realising personal values.

Literally, Ren refers to employees; Dan refers to user value; HeYi refers to the integration of employees' value realisation and users’ value creation. Where there is Dan there is Ren. For this reason, in carrying out the transformation of Haier we removed the whole middle management level. Ultimately, the enterprise will become a networked organisation where there are only three kinds of people: the platform owner; the microenterprise owner; and the maker. GF: And how does that impact on employees? People are no longer passive executors but self-motivated individuals who are "self-employed, self-organised and self-driven". This model has been replicated and recognised globally because people all over the world want to realise their own values. Its achievements originate from the stimulation of personal values by the Rendanheyi model. We call it a "salad culture system", which respects the cultures of every country while being unified. It's like a salad in Western food. Vegetables keep their original shape but salad dressing is a unifying factor. GF: Another central philosophical maxim, is that successful companies always move with the times? Haier has always believed that there is no such thing as a successful company; there are only companies that move with the times. Haier adheres to self-critical and self-denial so as to keep pace with prevalent trends Many enterprises have a core competitiveness and have become industry leaders. But times have changed. If you cannot dynamically update the core competence, then extinction will follow. David J. Teece, the renowned US-based organisational theorist, has said that enterprises should have "dynamic capabilities", that is, the ability to update their core competitiveness. Haier's development process embodies Professor Teece’s ideas. Haier constantly changes its internal organisational structure and changes with the times. 7

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

GF: What do you see as the next big technological breakthrough? The “Internet of Things” is the next big economic event after the internet itself. Competition among enterprises will be competition between ecospheres. At present, ecommerce is a platform that hardly meets the personalised needs of users. The ecosystem that Haier is building is in harmony with the social, shared and experiential economies embodied in the Internet of Things. It can meet the all-round personalised needs of users. Haier will no longer be a manufacturer of home appliances but a service provider of solutions for users. For example, our washing machine is no longer just for washing clothes. After becoming a "networked appliance", it can influence brands of detergents, clothes, industry associations and so on, jointly forming a clothing network where all related parties provide users with washing, caring, purchasing and other all-round service experiences. Every player is no longer joining a zero-sum game but is joining a co-creating and win-win ecosystem. With the Internet of Things we will usher in an era of “personalised customisation" or "community manufacturing". We have built an industrial networked platform, COSMOPlat, through which users can participate in the production process through the community, thus achieving “mass customisation”. In international standard organisations such as IEEE, ISO and IEC Haier is taking the lead in the development and establishment of international standard for a mass customisation model. Although Germany and other leading countries 8

71%

Haier has developed a unique and very important standard – a “non-stocking rate”. This standard concerns a product being sent directly to the user without ever entering a warehouse. Haier can currently achieve a product non-stocking rate of 71%.

are also exploring the mass customisation model, Haier has developed a unique and very important standard – a “non-stocking rate”. This standard concerns a product being sent directly to the user without ever entering a warehouse. Haier can currently achieve a product non-stocking rate of 71%. GF: And will management education, a key concern of EFMD, be brought along with this? Like management, management education should also adapt to the changes in the internet age. The internet has led to a transformation from linear into non-linear management and from mass production to mass customisation in businesses. This change has brought new challenges to management education, rendering the type of programmes designed for linear management irrelevant in the context of non-linear management practices. In this new era, management education needs to encourage hands-on engagement in new management practices by students, rather than just having them learn about the success stories of the past.

Zhang Ruimin Interview. Haier’s philosophy: personal values first | Global Focus interview

ALL PICTURES COURTESY HAIER GROUP

We need “nodes” to feel users’ emotions and demands. These nodes are people. No matter how the technology develops, people should always be first. But the talents in the future must not only be from enterprises – the world is my human resource department. Come to the internet and integrate the talents we need. All the talents should work together to create the best user experience and user values

GF: Finally, do you have any advice for today’s managers? Haier’s Rendanheyi reverses the traditional concept of the economic person and the social person and redefines employees as selfmotivated people. Rendanheyi thinks that employees can create values for customers by themselves and realise their own value at the same time. I think this is an important reason for the high recognition of this model in the academic world of global management. As I said, the Internet of Things is the next big economic activity following the internet. Many people think that the Internet of Things is artificial intelligence (AI). But actually, we should see AI as not the end but the basis of the Internet of Things. The supportive technology of the Internet of Things will be AI but it doesn’t mean that if we have the Internet of Things we have AI. AI is just the technology supporting it. We need “nodes” to feel users’ emotions and demands. These nodes are people. No matter how the technology develops, people should always be first. But the talents in the future must not only be from enterprises – the world is my human resource department. Come to the internet and integrate the talents we need. All the talents should work together to create the best user experience and user values. As the I Ching (Book of Changes) says, the only constant is change. The only thing we can do is to embrace change and move with the times.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Collaborate for success and sustainability David Grayson explains the dramatic growth of the quantity and quality of business collaboration linked to sustainable development

Collaborate for success and sustainability | David Grayson

ustainability is “the primary moral and economic imperative of the 21st century,” according to Mervyn King, a former governor of the Bank of England. It is also considered to be “one of the most important sources of both opportunities and risks for businesses”. If a business aspires to continue into the indefinite future, it can no longer be hesitant or half-hearted about sustainability: it has to go “All In”. In a book of that title (Grayson D, Coulter C, Lee M, All In – The Future of Business Leadership” – Routledge 2018) I argue together with Chris Coulter and Mark Lee that organisations going All In requires five key interlinking and mutually reinforcing attributes: • purpose: an inspiring, authentic explanation of how a business creates value for itself and for society • plan: a comprehensive strategy and business plan, covering all aspects of the business – and increasingly their value-chains – which minimises negative social, environmental and economic (SEE) impacts and aims to maximise positive SEE impacts. • culture: innovative, engaging and empowering, open and transparent, and ethical and responsible. • collaboration: the skill and the will to partner with a range of other organisations including other businesses, NGOs, social enterprises, public sector agencies, academia and so on to drive sustainability at speed and scale • advocacy: All In businesses speak up and speak out for social justice and sustainable development. Crucially, leadership today requires all five attributes. So, for example, advocacy is only credible and effective if it builds on the other four attributes and so on. The quantity – and critically – the quality of business collaboration linked to sustainable development has grown dramatically in recent decades. Early, pioneering responsible business coalitions such as Philippines Business for Social Progress (founded 1976), Business in the

Community (UK, founded 1981) and Sweden’s Jobs and Society (1985) tended to focus on developing a business case for action, mobilising collective corporate community involvement around particular issues including job-creation, enterprise promotion, urban regeneration and social inclusion. During the 1990s, four “global field-builders” – BSR (Business for Social Responsibility: www. bsr.org ), CSR Europe (www.csreurope.org ), the International Business Leaders Forum (set up by Business in the Community but now defunct) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (www.wbcsd.org ) – encouraged the creation of responsible business coalitions in most of the world’s 100 largest economies. Increasingly, these tended also to identify and disseminate good practice in responsible business and sustainability. They were joined in 2000 by the UN Global Compact (www.unglobalcompact.org ) Over the last two decades, there has been an explosion of industry and issue-specific coalitions and multi-stakeholder initiatives. These include Better Cotton Initiative (https://bettercotton.org ), Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (www. eiti.org ) and the Round-Table on Sustainable Palm Oil. (www.rspo.org ) As Jane Nelson from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government in the US shows in a major 2017 report for the Business and Sustainable Development Commission (itself a limited-life coalition to engage businesses on the Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs) , there are now few significant industries or sustainable development issues that do not have one or more dedicated collaborations. A May 2018 report co-authored by CSR Europe and consultants PwC indicated that some sectoral trade associations, usually prompted by member companies with strong sustainability credentials, are also now becoming more active in helping their general membership to understand the material issues facing their industry. A recent report from BSR and the Rockefeller Foundation provides a useful taxonomy of today’s 11

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

the hands of key decision makers in the apparel and footwear value chain will incentivise them to make better decisions that collectively reduce the environmental impact and increase the social justice of the entire industry”. SAC now has more than 200 members worldwide including major brands and retailers such as M&S, Disney and Burberry and manufacturing, academic, government and NGO affiliates. At the heart of the coalition is the Higg Index – “a suite of tools that enables brands, retailers and facilities of all sizes — at every stage in their sustainability journey — to accurately measure and score a company or product’s sustainability performance”. Early on, Nike was persuaded to donate the Nike Considered Index to the coalition. It became the Materials Sustainability Index, now one of the tools in the Higg Index suite. The creation and early evolution of the SAC is well told in a short article by a leading sustainability commentator, Marc Gunther. Drawing on Gunther’s piece and other materials, it is possible to discern several critical success factors for SAC that are highly relevant to other business collaborations today. • The initial pairing of Walmart and Patagonia was engineered by a trusted intermediary – Jib Ellison, the founder of consultancy BluSkye – who advised Walmart and its CEO, Lee Scott, on sustainability. Ellison is also a long-time friend of Rick Ridgeway • Unlike conventional trade associations, which typically operate at the “lowest common denominator”, SAC focused on a set of companies that they were confident would want to set a high bar and move fast • They established a rule of engagement that companies designate one person to work on the coalition and send that person to all its meetings; this ensured continuity and that individuals had authority to commit • As with most – if not all – of the best coalitions over the years, there was a credible facilitator to hold the ring, cajole and keep moving things forward: John Whalen, a principal at BluSkye • At the outset, Walmart and Patagonia worked hard to attract other sustainability leaders who would make this “a club you wanted to be invited to join”. Nike, for example, had to be convinced that Walmart was serious before it agreed to participate

ALL PICTURES COURTESY CRANFIELD SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

business collaborations. This is based on the scope of change that a collaboration seeks: organisational, market or system change. Using this taxonomy, collaborations might, for example: Organisational • identify and disseminate good practices and encourage more businesses to adopt them • pool R&D efforts to innovate sustainable technological or social solutions to specified problems Market • set and subsequently certify collective, self-regulatory standards • create a “safe space” to explore pressing business or societal and ethical dilemmas System Change • advocate jointly for public policy supportive of sustainable development • tackle the systemic challenges inherent to sustainability BSR and the Rockefeller Foundation also helpfully identify a number of critical components for high-impact collaboration: • a compelling common purpose that brings participants together and enables each to accrue value from the collaboration • the right partners in the right roles that bring the required authority and resources to drive the collaboration forward • good governance that enables efficient, transparent and fair decision making • an organisational design that is fit for purpose – with sufficient resources and staffing to operate • accountability to the objectives the collaboration participants have committed to We can see these components – and more– in one of the examples of industry and issues-specific coalitions that have become more popular in recent years: the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC). (wwww.apparelcoalition.org) This was initiated by retailers Patagonia and Walmart in 2009 to address “the urgent, systemic challenges that are impossible to change alone”. The coalition’s vision is of “an apparel, footwear and textiles industry that produces no unnecessary environmental harm and has a positive impact on the people and communities associated with its activities”. Rick Ridgeway from Patagonia explains that SAC’s theory of change is “straightforward and profound: putting standardised sustainability in

200

The Sustainable Apparel Coalition now has more than 200 members worldwide including major brands and retailers such as M&S, Disney and Burberry and manufacturing, academic, government and NGO affiliates

Collaborate for success and sustainability | David Grayson

Mindset • Humility to realise others may have more appropriate knowledge / resources • Inclination to reach out to work with others • Willingness to give up autonomy of decision-making • (Measured) risk taking

Understanding other sectors

Human relationship skills

Technical partnering knowledge

• Interests

• Ability to look from others’ perspectives

• Understanding the partnering lifecycle

• Motivations and drivers

• Networking and connecting

• Resources and capabilities

• Approaching and engaging potential partners / selling ideas

• Key principles and building blocks of partnerships

• Values and culture

• Systems and processes • Capacity limitations • Legal limitations

• Propensity for innovation • Ability to work for the benefit of the partnership as a whole

• Relationship / trust building • Interest-based negotiation • Facilitation • Communication • Coaching / mentoring • Mediation / conflict resolution / troubleshooting

• Best practice approaches to setup and governance • Ability to assess critically when and when not to partner • The partnering black box of trust, equity and power • Partnership agreements • Reviewing partnerships

Figure 1 MUST-Have Partnering Competencies – The Partnering Initiative

• The initial participants took the time to build trust and to share tangible signs of their commitment • SAC brought in critical external friends such as Michelle Harvey of the NGO Environmental Defense Fund as a member of the SAC’s board • They were willing to build on existing good practice such as the Nike Considered Index Interestingly, a Boston Consulting Group (BCG) / MIT Sloan Management Review study with the UN Global Compact, published in 2015, suggested that the more a company gets involved in collaborations, the more effective and valuable the company rates its collaborations. Practice in this case – if not making perfect – certainly makes more positive. While pre-competitive collaborations are becoming much more commonplace, they are not a panacea. Businesses should approach them like any other potential joint venture. Businesses also need to ensure they are systematically capturing the learning from different collaborations they are involved in, making sure this gets assimilate d by R&D, horizon-scanning, strategy, corporate diplomacy and public affairs, procurement and specialist sustainability functions – and also by teams responsible for top talent learning and development. In her report on Partnerships for Sustainable Development, the Kennedy School’s Nelson emphasises that “effective partnership building, especially across sectors, requires new mindsets and skill sets on the part of individuals and new

capabilities and incentives on the part of institutions”. Another member of Harvard, Professor Joe Nye, has coined the phrase “tri-sector athlete”, which was taken up and popularised by McKinsey’s then Global Managing Partner Dominic Barton and further developed by Nick Lovegrove in his 2016 book The Mosaic Principle, which captures some of the key perspectives required by successful collaborators. (See interview with Lovegrove in Global Focus Vol 12 Issue 1). Certainly, as more businesses recognise the growing importance of collaborations for sustainability and the need for their representatives in partnerships to be effective, they will be rightly expecting management educators and leadership training providers to offer training in collaboration. This training will also be needed by independent directors serving on the boards of sustainability coalitions and coalitions’ staff. The NGO The Partnering Initiative has helpfully defined M.U.S.T – have collaboration skills – see Figure 1. Educating for these M.U.S.T-have skills surely represents an exciting new opportunity for EFMD members.

About the Author Professor David Grayson is an independent commentator on Responsible Business & Sustainability and Emeritus Professor of Corporate Responsibility at Cranfield School of Management in the UK. He will be talking about why and how businesses need to go “All In” for sustainability at EFMD’s conference in Lisbon in June 2019. www.DavidGrayson.net Twitter: @DavidGrayson_.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Achieving change in HE professional support

Professor Edward Byrne argues that professional services resources must be aligned and focused on meeting future strategic needs and describes how he has approached this issue at three world-class higher education institutes

Achieving change in HE professional support | Professor Edward Byrne

The changing context the higher education sector finds itself in demands that universities adapt and strengthen the way in which we work together. Raising our game does not mean “do more of what you’re doing”. It means changing aspects of what we are doing as the world changes around us

t King’s College London our core mission statement is “to make the world a better place”. A grand aim, indeed, and a grand challenge in these troubled times for the world. But universities have enormous potential to make a positive difference; we are intrinsically in the business of shaping the future, through the graduates we prepare and the ideas we produce. Expectations about what universities should deliver are rising, technology is changing, funding is becoming more complex and challenging to secure and the world of work is set to undergo tremendous transformation. The changing context the higher education sector finds itself in demands that universities adapt and strengthen the way in which we work together. Raising our game does not mean “do more of what you’re doing”. It means changing aspects of what we are doing as the world changes around us. Transforming professional support services to adapt to evolving student, academic, partners and societal expectations is a significant part of this change. Change can be an intimidating word in particular contexts – not just for employees but to the leaders charged with being change makers. We must change the way we operate as the growth of higher education continues apace; we must respond to the growing view that universities need to become better at working with industry and less reliant on the public purse in terms of funding world-class research and underpinning the facilities it requires. We are expected not only to advance the frontiers of knowledge but play a role in generating tangible social and economic benefits. In short, we are not going to be left to our own devices. Indeed, I would say we never were. At times people can be slightly rose-tinted about a golden age of university autonomy and unalloyed academic freedom at the individual and institutional levels.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

The utility of a university – its purpose, its value, who accesses it, how it funds its activities and how its performance is evaluated – has become one of the most questioned areas in politics and policy making in the UK and Australia, two countries I am extremely familiar with. Indeed, in these two and in many other countries it is increasingly a subject of prominent public debate. Broadly speaking, modern universities are now large financial concerns and expensive places to run. Institutions such as my own will be at or be nearing the £1 billion annual budget mark within five to 10 years. In England, we also have a big regulatory landscape to comply with and very sizeable human resource footprints covering everything from catering and finance to programme administration, external relations and data analytics. It is crucial that professional services teams are aligned and focused on meeting future strategic needs and are efficiently deployed and evaluated. No matter how good your educators and researchers are if you have a dysfunctional, immature professional services base, you certainly will not thrive and are likely over time to decline. And you certainly will not generate the margins you need to reinvest for the long run in your facilities and new academic endeavours. Much of my time “in the trenches” as a senior leader has been spent preparing universities to be resilient to the changing world around them, both in the UK and my native Australia, by making difficult but essential choices to change how they operate and engage with the opportunities and expectations in their surrounding environments. These experiences, in the context of professional service change programmes, supported broader change agendas during my time as Dean of Health and Medicine at University College London; as Vice-Chancellor at Monash University; and of course my ongoing time as President and Principal at King’s College London.

It is crucial that professional services resources are aligned and focused on meeting future strategic needs and are efficiently deployed and evaluated. No matter how good your educators and researchers are if you have a dysfunctional, immature professional services base, you certainly will not thrive and are likely over time to decline

At all three I have faced different internal situations informed by similar external pressures. I have been privileged to play a part in the evolution of university models that allow universities to play their full role in society. In any organisation, across any sector, there can be scepticism and even distrust of transformation programmes. Higher education is no different, with “management speak” from on-high often the cause of real tension in university communities. Many hurdles exist in change programmes; overcoming them can sometimes be a painful experience. However, I believe it is a fundamentally worthwhile experience and journey, so as well as briefly examining how to overcome these hurdles I want to look at the impact on staff and students that positive change can drive. At UCL, the Faculty of Biomedical Sciences faced structural challenges following the amalgamation of three medical schools and five postgraduate institutes in the early 2000s. My job as Dean was to take a faculty that was a product of many decades of responding to changing incentives and behaviours in a publicsector market and ensure it was a faculty in practice as well as name. It inherited teams across different schools and institutes who handled the same tasks in very different ways and in some cases duplicated activity needlessly.

£1bn

Broadly speaking, modern universities are now large financial concerns and expensive places to run. Institutions will be at or be nearing the £1 billion annual budget mark within five to 10 years

Achieving change in HE professional support | Professor Edward Byrne

ALL PICTURES COURTESY OF KING'S COLLEGE LONDON

The process succeeded for four main reasons: First, its aims were clear (and clearly communicated) and it tackled a range of real, commonly identified problems. Second, it had the clear, unambiguous and active support of the Faculty Dean and the UCL Chief Operating Officer, who personally sat on the review management group, assuaged concerns of colleagues in the central support services directorates and marshalled support for the change there. Third the overseeing process struck the right balance between staff ownership and senior management ownership. It was made clear from the outset that the review was not a job-cutting exercise but neither did it guarantee the retention of all roles in their current form.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

33%

In staff number control, new rigorous controls and central tracking, combined with senior function leadership signing off all contract adjustments, led to a 33% reduction in normalised operations cost between 2012 and 2017

Achieving change in HE professional support | Professor Edward Byrne

Fourth, and arguably the key to its success, was a project structure that included and respected the input of all interested staff without relinquishing senior management control of the process and outcomes. It was made clear that all staff would have the opportunity to input their thoughts, ideas and criticisms and that that input would be taken seriously by the Working Parties and Management Group. Above all, in my view, it also vastly improved relations between Faculty and central support services staff – the us v them mentality that had been such a wall to collaboration came down. In 2009 I returned to Australia as ViceChancellor at Monash University, the country’s largest university. And not only that, it was an increasingly global university, with campuses and major research and teaching outposts in China, India and Italy. The scale of change required here was on a different level to UCL. Monash was a university new to prominence that had only ever known growth – however, growth had been messy and built unevenly. Our service transformation at Monash was broad and encompassed seven main areas – student services; finance; HR; function-based staff number controls; general administration; marketing; and IT. In staff number control, for example, new rigorous controls and central tracking combined with senior function leadership signing off all contract adjustments led to a 33% reduction in normalised operations cost between 2012 and 2017. Staff job satisfaction improved and the use of agency staff and contractors, as well as churn and the need for constant recruitment, decreased as a result. Our changes had a direct impact on students. Student services were combined to create a single, multi-channel contact model – “Monash Connect” – for all current students. Within Monash administration, an internal industry had emerged to arrange the many course transfers. This was not good for staff or students. So we revamped our undergraduate portfolio, reducing it to 35 courses.

At King’s our change is ongoing. We have focused on creating functional networks and embedding communities that work closely, not transactionally, with one another. Professional strengthening is our clear priority

Crucially, though, and to maintain student choice but prevent it having to be made as young as 18, we retained the degree classifications associated with each course. This allowed students a choice of final degree title based on their composition of modules to sit alongside their course title. They could decide up until two weeks prior to graduation which to choose and make that decision at a more mature age and based on their ambitions in the job market. At King’s our change is ongoing. We have focused on creating professional networks and embedding communities that work closely, not transactionally, with one another. Professional strengthening is our clear priority. Four and a half years into service transformation, there is significant progress in many individual areas of professional services and a much greater acceptance of the need for change and in particular the need to support a larger and growing student and staff population with a lesser rate of growth in the overall cost of professional services. Today we are one of the pace setters within the Russell Group of leading UK universities in terms of student population growth and student income growth and one of the largest recruiters of international students in the UK. That said, we still have higher than average cost factors to get under control and there is still a long way to go on our functional alignment journey.

About the Author Professor Edward Byrne AC has been President and Principal (the chief academic and administrative officer) of King's College London in the UK since 2014. Previously he was Vice-Chancellor at Monash University, Australia, from 2009 to 2014, and Dean of the Faculty of Biomedical Sciences at University College London, UK, from 2007 to 2009

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Management and research-in-action It is time for a new, co-ordinated and collaborative approach to management research say Andrea Cuomo, Yves Doz, Mikko Kosonen, Christophe Midler and JosĂŠ Santos

An infinite loop | Andrea Cuomo, Yves Doz, Mikko Kosonen, Christophe Midler and José Santos

ichael Porter and Nitin Nohria, respectively University Professor and Dean of the Harvard Business School, after years of survey research into the role of CEOs, state unequivocally: “surprisingly little is known about this unique role”. We could not agree more. But it is anything but surprising. General management as a field for study was first hacked by “Strategy” and then by “Leadership”. It has still not recovered. Current prescriptions point to CEOs being a hybrid between formulators and cheerleaders, a sort of attractive alchemist. Management research, not just on CEOs but also on managers in general, has been scant of late, to say the least. Furthermore, whatever management research is published it is rarely focused on managers in action. One century later, we now witness a revival of classicism and a longing for “scientific management” – now with the added magic of digital tools. Management researchers have been data bingers for quite a while so it is only natural that they now prescribe the same for managers. But is this the right way to go? When was the last time you discovered a new piece of academic research that you found both original and relevant to managers in action? There is an ongoing debate among academics about how tenure-track careers impose tight limits on management research (such as regularly publishing in “A” Journals) and how the canons of received scientific methodologies make such research difficult. CK Prahalad at the University of Michigan and more recently Mats Alvesson of Sweden’s Lund University and a few other academics have greatly contributed to this debate, stressing the widening gap between academic research and management practice and its causes. We approached the matter keenly, given the opportunity for us to open last June’s EURAM Conference in Reykjavik, Iceland, the theme of which was “Research in Action”. But we also decided to take a different route into the issues. This is a summary of the contributions of the five members of the opening plenary panel of the EURAM conference (above, in alphabetic order).

Our two major propositions are: Management itself is research-in-action and therefore; Research-in-action is required to research management. Management as research-in-action Presentism aside, managing in a complex world, crowded with interdependencies and bursting with problematic discontinuities is not a trivial responsibility. For one, using past experience and accumulated knowledge is often the source of failure. Uncertainty looms large. In such situations, managerial action is tantamount to building and testing a (new) theory in the marketplace. Business strategies and the business models they aim for become unproven theories. As with academic theories, managers’ theory development under new circumstances requires mastering contextual framing (say understanding boundary conditions and systemic interdependencies around the firm) as well as the domain of a specific new strategic language to make sense of new and often more complex circumstances. (Think traditional telecom equipment suppliers such as Nokia having to master the understanding of digital platform ecosystems). The managers of a previously successful incumbent may lack both. The implication is that management itself is research-in-action. What this means is that effective management is not about knowing the off-the-shelf managerial solution to a particular problem, but rather about discovering a managerial solution. It therefore follows that in attempting to understand management process researchers should aim to describe and explain how managers discover solutions and not what solutions they apply. In turn managers can then be taught discovery and analysis methods instead of being given mere recipes for a “solution”. 21

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Research-in-action in management To aspire to analyse, illuminate, theorise and enlighten management practice, research must focus on managers in action in context. This calls for fieldwork, preferably performed while managerial action unfolds. Yet performing management research-in-action faces its own challenges beyond the tyranny of “A” journals and a questionable emphasis on methods borrowed from hard sciences. The research sites must be chosen in a space defined by the central research question and researching outliers or emblematic situations where the phenomena of interest may find their starkest manifestations often makes sense. In terms of access, it is usually more effective if this is negotiated by an academic institution rather than by an individual. Research-in-action is time consuming and needs to be performed over time. As it may appear overwhelming for newcomers and so dissuade them from such work, support and guidance by experienced researchers will be helpful. Researching managers in action calls for an open-ended, adventurous and interactive intellectual journey rather than for rigid pre-set research designs. The research questions must echo managers’ action interrogations not researchers’ abstract questions. In management research that produces knowledge-for-action, we need to focus on the dynamics of interactions as they unfold over time more than we focus on the elements (people and their cognition and emotions) that interact. The unit of analysis thus is the interactive activities managers undertake and the relationship they develop more than managers themselves. The “why” and the “how” of action matter as much as the “what” we can more easily observe (and impose our explanatory rationality on). This calls for sufficient closeness and legitimacy 22

with the managers involved to understand their own learning and evolution and to study collective action as a likely outcome of competing perspectives, conflicting priorities and adversarial positions. Action emerges from a social and political process. To study action the research needs to follow a phenomenological, systemic approach. With few exceptions (such as Robert Burgelman at Stanford) such research needs to be part of a collective endeavour, by a community of learning, with one or two shared central research questions focusing individual learning efforts toward a collective agenda. Specific research work may be individual but it requires frequent conversations with other researchers in the community addressing similar questions, before, during, and after performing fieldwork. And not just for the sake of discussing findings or edits to the original research questions but also for bringing differentiated disciplinary perspectives and complementary research experience.

An infinite loop | Andrea Cuomo, Yves Doz, Mikko Kosonen, Christophe Midler and JosĂŠ Santos

To aspire to analyse, illuminate, theorise and enlighten management practice, research must focus on managers in action in context

As the research proceeds, regular interactions with managers are required to seek feedback on preliminary findings and alternative paths to follow. Research quality control by academic peers must be assured from the outset, both on method and output and at various milestones in the research project. Reductionism, simplification, and equilibrium are incompatible with management research. We need to embrace complexity as method, not complexity as solution. If we follow Edgar Morin, a French philosopher and sociologist, we accept his assertion that we learn how to learn by learning; method is the beginning of each of our journeys as researchers but is also the end of each journey. Research output is as much about the method with which to uncover the solution as it is about answering the research question itself. And we need to embrace the irreversibility of time in the unfolding of action. Embracing the infinite loop Although research in action is relevant to both managers and researchers, this does not mean that the two roles are the same: managers are dedicated to implement such discovery methods, in their various different contexts, with their own action skills; researchers are dedicated to test, validate and formalise such tacit emergent knowledge into transferable theories of generalisable applicability. We will only improve our research-in-action if we accept promoting and celebrating research about research in management and consider that management itself is about research-in-action.

About the Authors Andrea Cuomo, Executive Vice President, STMicroelectronics International; Yves Doz, Solvay Chaired Professor of Technological Innovation, INSEAD; Mikko Kosonen, President, Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra; Christophe Midler, Research Director, CRG I3 Ecole Polytechnique; JosĂŠ Santos, Professor of Practice in Global Management, INSEAD

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Impact: is it enough just to talk about it? Michel Kalika and Gordon Shenton explain why business schools not only talk about impact but are learning how to make a better job of assessing it

Impact: is it enough just to talk about it? | Michel Kalika and Gordon Shenton

usiness schools refer more and more frequently to the issue of impact when defining their mission/vision/strategy. In 2018, out of the 55 schools to which AACSB and EFMD board members belong, 42 (76%) use the terms “impact” or “influence” in defining their core purpose. Why is the concept of impact so present in business schools’ current discourse? We can put forward two major reasons. The first is the recurrent criticism that business schools are subjected to with regard to their legitimacy, particularly since the 2008 crisis. Giving prominence to their impact is one way of responding to this criticism. The second corresponds to a paradigm change for business schools. For two long decades they had thrown themselves into a frantic race for international accreditation, which was the means for them to respond to the globalisation of the higher-education market and, of course, to improve the quality of their operations. Since the accreditation processes were aimed essentially at the way schools operate, on the organisation of their programmes and on the qualification of their faculty, the focus was primarily internal. At present we are experiencing a paradigm shift for those schools, whose operations are now governed by international quality standards and by a growing concern for their contribution to external stakeholders in their home territory and in their home country. The preoccupation with impact leads them to shift from a self-centred internal paradigm to a paradigm centred on business schools’ externalities. Moreover, the accreditation bodies have taken this change on board, AACSB having established impact as one of the three pillars of its system and EQUIS having included the concepts of impact and influence in its standards and criteria framework. This being the case, the business schools cannot allow themselves to merely mention their impact in passing. They must clearly identify it, justify it and measure it. But it is here that a delicate problem appears: the concept of impact is multifaceted and multidimensional, while interpretations are diverse and measurement is complex. Faced with this complexity we believe that, for a business school, talking about impact

entails answering three preliminary questions without which it will be hard to put something concrete behind the word and to get beyond the “impact washing” stage. Q1 The first question is “the impact of what?” Of course, we are talking about the business school as an undifferentiated whole that we need to define in terms of overall scope. But we must also determine for which of a school’s activities we want to assess the impact. Is it the impact of the educational process on young students, the impact of executive education on practising managers or the impact of research?

76%

Out of the 55 business schools to which AACSB and EFMD board members belong, 42 (76%) use the terms “impact” or “influence” in defining their core purpose

Q2 The next question is “the impact on who?” Is it on people (young students or managers), on companies or more generally on organisations? Or are we looking at the impact of a school on society at large? Q3 Finally, when we talk about impact it is important to specify the impact zone involved: “the impact where?” Is it the local environment (a city or a region)? Or is it a national territory or even a transnational area? By answering these three questions we clarify the business school impact that is under consideration. If we combine the three questions, which each have three non-exclusive response modes, we have a three-dimensional matrix (see Figure 1).

Impact where? International Impact on who? Society

National

Organisations

Local

People Impact of what? Education

Exec Ed

Research

Figure 1

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

From our experience with BSIS on close to 40 campuses on three continents we can assert that the question of impact is far from being a simple question of communication (“impact washing”) but is above all a strategic issue

Now let’s take three examples of tools that can help us to better understand a school’s impact. • BSIS, which was created by the FNEGE in France and developed by the EFMD as an international service for its members, is a tool for evaluating a business school’s impact on its home territory within a framework of seven dimensions (financial, educational, business development, intellectual, network, CSR, image). BSIS is concerned with educational activities at the pre- and post-experience levels and with research mainly for companies and organisations. Its scope is mostly local or regional. The system has been used on more that 35 campuses. • The M Index was designed to assess the intellectual impact of a research centre and aims at measuring the impact of its research output (Q1) on companies (Q2) within a national territory (Q3). The assessment grid is made up of 20 criteria that cover the four stages of a research process: 1) The initial definition of the research project; 2) the execution of the research project; 3) the dissemination of the outcomes; and 4) the practical implementation of the outcomes in companies and organisations. • The impact of courses on CSR on young students (Q1) would also be worth evaluating in terms of opinions and behaviour. In order to measure the impact of these courses one could imagine a survey tool addressed to students when they enter the business school, when they leave it and three years after their entry into the world of work, regardless of their geographical origin (Q3). It is clear from these examples that the “discourse only” stage can be left behind and that business schools can equip themselves with tools to measure or better identify their impact. 26

Finally, from our experience with BSIS on close to 40 campuses on three continents we can assert that the question of impact is far from being a simple question of communication (“impact washing”) but is above all a strategic issue. Today many business schools are faced with two challenges of a strategic nature relating to impact. The first challenge concerns the balance between local and global positioning. Many schools were created by and on a given territory in order to serve its need for trained managers to run its companies. In recent decades these same schools have centred their strategy on international development because of the globalisation of markets and accreditations. The question of the balance between local impact and global impact is therefore squarely on the table and without any doubt business schools have an interest in showing their stakeholders that local impact is not opposed to global impact and that the latter often generates impact they were unaware of or had underestimated. The second challenge lies in the balance between the academic and the managerial impact of research. Here the need to establish the recognition of management research alongside other scientific disciplines and the need to conform to accreditation criteria have pushed business schools to give preference to research that can be measured quantitatively by journal rankings, by their Impact Factor or by the H Index of the researchers. These publications certainly have an academic impact on the scientific community but their managerial impact on companies and organisations is limited. We know that academic journals are not much read by managers. Moreover, since the incentives to publish rarely bear on the dissemination of their work, authors tend to direct their efforts towards

Impact: is it enough just to talk about it? | Michel Kalika and Gordon Shenton

As we have just seen, measuring impact leads business schools to ask strategic questions regarding the positioning of their institution. It is important also to underline that the effort to better identify the external impact on companies and managers has an impact inside the business school itself. Asking questions about impact is, of course, a good way to communicate with stakeholders, but it is also a way to create an impact culture among all staff whether they be in an administrative or a teaching and research function. BSIS has shown time and time again that it can be both a management tool and an instrument of change for business schools. The authors would like to thank Martina Ticha for her help in the collection of data for the preparation of this article. References Parker, M. (2018). Shut Down the Business School. University of Chicago Press Economics Books. https://www.aacsb.edu/blog/2018/august/ the-power-of-global-business-school-networksinnovation-engagement-and-impact-at-work. https://www.efmd.org/images/stories/efmd/ EQUIS/2018/EQUIS_Standards_and_Criteria.pdf. the production of research output rather than on the communication of their findings. However, rising research costs cause stakeholders to question business school managers about the usefulness and managerial impact of this research. This being said, we do not believe that academic impact and managerial impact are mutually exclusive. An increase in the managerial impact of research upon managers can be achieved in two ways. On the one hand greater efforts must be made to translate research outcomes (by which we mean make scientific publications comprehensible) and to communicate these outcomes (newsletters, conferences, articles in professional journals, videos and so on.). On the other hand, the managerial impact can be increased by encouraging action research or intervention research that have an immediate impact upon companies.

C. Lejeune & al., The impact of business schools: Increasing the range of strategic choices, Management International, Vol. 23 nÂ°3, 2018. https://efmdglobal.org/assessments/bsis/ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 328134022_The_Assessment_of_the_ Managerial_Impact_of_Research_the_M_Index

About the Authors Michel Kalika is Co-Director BSIS, EFMD Global Network Gordon Shenton is Co-director BSIS and Senior Advisor, Quality Services, EFMD

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Francisco Palao Reines describes how business school students are being exposed to a new type of business to match todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exponential environment, the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Exponential Organisation'

Exponential Organisations: Helping students to build the businesses of the future

Exponential Organisations: helping students to build the businesses of the future | Francisco Palao

New technologies are fusing the digital, physical and biological together, and there is an intersection of several exponential technologies (AI, 3D printing, genetics, drones and so on) that are disrupting (or will do so very soon) every single industry

eople often say that beginners are lucky. I believe this was exactly my case when I launched my first start-up at the age of 19. I was in my second year of university studying computer science when I teamed up with two friends to start BuscarAmigos, a dating website we successfully sold three years later. We built this first company with no money (we were so young we had nothing to invest), with no experience (it was our first job), with no knowledge (we learned how to code websites by researching on Google); yet, even so, the company prospered. We loved the challenge and the success but the highpoint came for us when we began to receive pictures of people who had met on our dating website and gone on to marry each other. The first picture we received was from a couple in Mexico. We had changed the lives of people on the other side of the planet in a country I had never even been to. This was when I learned that nowadays anyone could change the world and the only thing you needed to have was the passion and commitment to do so. The thing about luck though, is you don’t realise you’ve been lucky until life teaches you otherwise. I continued to study and finished a PhD on Artificial Intelligence (AI). With this background I launched a new start-up focused on AI. During the early years we were quite successful with a service-based business model. But as this was very difficult to scale we decided to evolve the company into a product-based business model, which would be easier to scale if it worked. We hired an experienced team (keep in mind I was only 24 at the time), raised €3million and spent two years developing the product. During this time I also completed an MBA at IE Business School in Spain to complement my technical background (we’ll come back to IE later). I was a good student, I applied all the things I had learned at university with what I learned at business school. I was excited about the future.

What happened when we launched the product? We failed spectacularly. We didn’t sell a single product license. I learned a new lesson: how to pick yourself up when everything has gone wrong and convert failure into learning. I applied to Singularity University, a Silicon Valley think tank that offers educational programmes and a business incubator, and was lucky (again) to be accepted. There I would be introduced to exponential technologies and innovation methodologies. I learned about lean start-ups, design thinking and many other new ways of managing innovative projects. I began to apply everything I was learning to the new business initiatives I was working on and saw that it worked really well. We began to launch new products and companies that were successful. We even sold two of these companies. I began to understand that new types of technologies and environments require new ways of doing things. Today you don’t need luck to understand the changes taking place in industries and the business world nor to understand how to move forward with these new changes. Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum describes our current period as part of the early stages of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. New technologies are fusing the digital, physical and biological together, and there is an intersection of several exponential technologies (AI, 3D printing, genetics, drones and so on) that are disrupting (or will do so very soon) every single industry. 29

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

This means businesses need to operate in a different way than they have in the past. In the same way that technologies are growing exponentially, there’s a new type of businesses able to scale in an exponential environment, the Exponential Organisation (ExO). I believe ExOs are the businesses of the future. The ExO Model was introduced by Salim Ismail, Yuri Van Geest and Michael Malone in their bestselling book Exponential Organizations in 2014. They didn’t invent a new type of organisation out of nothing. They researched and analysed the business landscape for four years and determined there are 11 key elements that allow successful businesses to scale 10 times faster than their competitors. These key elements, “ExO Attributes”, include: • identifying and connecting with a massive transformative purpose • accessing staff on demand • connecting with the community and crowd • using algorithms • making use of leveraged assets • using engagement • working with interfaces • working with dashboards • experimenting 30

• fostering autonomy • activity with social technologies Companies that effectively manage ExO Attributes are able to operate exponentially. Examples of ExOs include AirBnB (which is currently the world’s biggest hotel chain even though it does not own a single hotel) , Uber and Netflix. The ExO Model is not only about using technology, actually only three out of the 11 ExO Attributes are focused on technology (algorithms, interfaces and dashboards). The main focus of ExOs is a new way to set up organisations that connects with the abundance produced in digital environments and to manage it to scale exponentially. One of the most important ExO Attributes is the creation of a massive transformative purpose. This asks companies to focus their purpose beyond just making money but also on changing the world for the better. The biggest business opportunities are also the world’s biggest challenges. A few years ago Salim Ismail, who was also my advisor at the last company I sold, called me to ask whether I wanted to join him to help organisations around the world to implement the ExO Model. Salim was aware of my passion and experience with innovation methodologies.

Four years of research and analysis of the business landscape determined there are 11 key elements that allow successful businesses to scale 10 times faster than their competitors

Exponential Organisations: helping students to build the businesses of the future | Francisco Palao

One of the most important ExO Attributes is the creation of a massive transformative purpose. This asks companies to focus their purpose beyond just making money but also on changing the world for the better. The biggest business opportunities are also the world’s biggest challenges

Of course I said yes. I really believed that the ExO Model could be the next big thing in terms of innovation methodologies. However, applying the ExO Attributes is not easy to do, so we decided to create a process to help companies to implement them. We came up with a 10-week process called the ExO Sprint, which helps companies to evolve their business models in order to navigate industry disruption and to achieve exponential growth. In other words, the ExO Sprint helps companies to come up with the next version of their business adapting to the new exponential context we are living in. For the past three years, we have been running the ExO Sprint in companies all around the world in almost every industry. However, we wanted to go one step further to really help any organisation in the world to transform for the better. We decided to open source the ExO Sprint methodology by writing a book that details every part of the process. A few months ago we released the book, Exponential Transformation, focusing the title on the exponential as it is clear that organisations need to become more than merely digital (it’s not only about technology) but also to evolve in a way that they can become an ExO or at least be able to navigate the exponential technologies wave. Nowadays, organisations and entrepreneurs do not only have access to exponential technologies that allow anyone to change the world, they also have access to innovation methodologies that work. Building successful organisations is not a matter of luck anymore. How does all this apply to business schools and executive education?

Almost two years ago Marc Smelik, associate dean at IE University, asked me to share my experience with the IE Business School students. I told them how my business studies had helped me to better understand industries and my clients but how difficult it was to create the businesses of the future by looking at the past. Most MBAs are focused on case methods where you analyse real stories of different companies from the past. I shared my view on the impact that exponential technologies are having in different industries and the fact that most of these disruptions cannot be foreseen due to the impossibility of predicting their impact. This is why business plans and other traditional business tools do not work for innovative businesses although they may work for traditional ones. Marc suggested that we apply the 10-week ExO Sprint methodology to one of IE’s courses where students would not look to the past but to the future. Groups of students would work as ExO Sprint participants emulating the work they would do for a specific organisation and building the future version of it. I thought it was a brilliant plan. As Abraham Lincoln said, “The best way to predict the future is by creating it”. IE University has implemented this process now for two years and the results have been amazing. Students are learning how to create the businesses of the future. To do this, they are learning to build businesses using new types of innovation methodologies that work and about the importance of purpose in businesses and for themselves. I believe that business schools should not only teach students how to work in a more efficient way or to get a better job; they should also support students in finding their purpose. That’s the key to success, to happiness and to building a better world.

About the Author Dr Francisco Palao (PhD, MBA) is an award-winning innovator passionate about building a better world by leveraging technology, social change and positive values. IE University – Case Study With the support of Marc Smelik (Associate Dean at IE Business School), in September of 2017 Soledad Llorente (professor at IE Business School and an ExO Ecosystem member) started a course based on the ExO Sprint methodology with the BBA students.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Beyond misogyny Our pathologically mean leaders

The #MeToo movement has unleashed a maelstrom of reports of inappropriate sexual behaviour. But, says Mark Lipton, what he calls the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Mean Menâ&#x20AC;? syndrome has been responsible for equal, and sometimes even worse, wrongdoings

Beyond misogyny: our pathologically mean leaders | Mark Lipton

Exhibiting a variety of aberrant behaviours beyond sexual misconduct, they are deceptive and ruthless. They have explosive tempers and abusive personalities. They may victimise women disproportionately but they can also be racist and bigoted

ith the arrest of Harvey Weinstein and monthly firings of so many organisational leaders, we are witnessing a day of reckoning, a defining moment where society is willing to admit to a disorder we’ve been sweeping under the rug for decades. Drowning in reports of inappropriate sexual behaviour and assault, we are no longer giving a free pass to those leaders who have abused their power and preyed on those less powerful. Our tendency, and that of our co-workers, has been —consciously or not—to aid, protect and cover up for these individuals. But with the number of victims now speaking up and telling their stories, these men are finding it harder to hide. By October 2018, the running tally of men publicly accused of sexual misconduct—people at the top of entertainment, media, finance, government and politics, and other fields—reached 425. This figure has only risen, to the point where, as of this writing, it’s become the new normal to learn of someone in the public eye once universally respected and then witness them taken down in the media, quickly, before our eyes. Beyond the evident misogyny exposed by the #MeToo movement, there is an additional dark side to many of these talented individuals. These “leaders” are often just out for themselves. They step on others to get ahead. Exhibiting a variety of aberrant behaviours beyond sexual misconduct, they are deceptive and ruthless. They have explosive tempers and abusive personalities. They may victimise women disproportionately but they can also be racist and bigoted. And while they are not all white men, they are men with a penchant to abuse power. In a word, they are mean. 33

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

You’ll see their faces on magazine covers, television and news websites. They are America’s so-called winners: the tech entrepreneur; the politician; the beloved actor; the driven athlete. Social media eats them up—they’re the darlings (and demons) of Twitter. And while they are universal, unbounded by geographical borders, they are disproportionately huddled in America. In fact, a disproportionate number of these men share characteristics that compel people to behave badly even as it drives them to create and excel. I call this the “Mean Men” syndrome. These behaviours seem to run rampant in all fields where individual talent and ambition reign —whether sports, politics, entertainment, megachurches or tech start-ups. Those same men who flourish in challenging circumstances can also exhibit one or more behavioural facets of the Mean Men syndrome: they are abusive to employees or colleagues, unprincipled in their pursuit of success and devoid of empathy. They are pathological liars, unable to feel remorse and incapable of taking responsibility when they fail. Arrogant and prone to see others strictly as tools for their own advancement, they may seem to be monsters. Many are. Does this constellation of traits sound familiar? In 2016, a self-proclaimed winner slash reality TV host slash real estate mogul was accused by multiple women of sexual assault and subsequently won the US presidency. A convicted serial rapist and child molester, Jerry Sandusky, retired as football coach at Penn State University; elsewhere in sports, Lance Armstrong had all seven of his Tour de France wins voided after lying about drug use—and had no remorse about it whatsoever. Weinstein’s alleged rapes resulted in his arrest but he was also known for his adult tantrums and sudden violent public displays of hostility. One noted film reviewer commented: “He can be cruel and abusive…but look at the great works of culture he’s given us”. His helpers appeared to have known what was happening in those hotel rooms. Similarly, the Elders in Mars Hill Church of Seattle, Washington, knew of Mark Driscoll’s 34

damaging abuses of power, misogynistic interpretations of the Bible and unscrupulous methods of expanding his flock—and did nothing to stop him. Entrepreneurs from Steve Jobs to the hedge fund and pharma CEO Martin Shkreli (who is now in prison) have reportedly acted as though their “genius” and success absolved them from needing to act like decent human beings. Many of these men do not rise up through the ranks—between the internet, technology and the abundance of venture capital funding, they’ve been able to start billion-dollar businesses without paying any real dues. And, at least in America, we are guilty of idolising them. Why am I so interested in the study of mean men? I’ve seen them and their dark action up close in board rooms and C-suites and after observing the enormous damage they inflict on people and organisations, I undertook a study of their psychologies. Their behaviour is appalling and it’s wrong— and has much wider-reaching implications than I could ever have imagined. My research led to the realisation these men presented a particular – and rather scary – personality disorder.

425

By October 2018, the running tally of men publicly accused of sexual misconduct—people at the top of entertainment, media, finance, government and politics, and other fields—reached 425

Beyond misogyny: our pathologically mean leaders | Mark Lipton

Contrary to popular wisdom, mean does not “get results” and it does not “work”. In fact, a growing body of compelling research shows just the opposite. Rather, it is the leaders who support and empower people, act with authentic leadership and inspire trust who get the best results in the long term

Can anything be done about them? I believe it can. While we may not be able to “cure” them, we can move them out of power, as we have seen with great acceleration since #MeToo and other movements called many to action. Contrary to popular wisdom, mean does not “get results” and it does not “work”. In fact, a growing body of compelling research shows just the opposite. Rather, it is the leaders who support and empower people, act with authentic leadership and inspire trust who get the best results in the long term. This is true across the board—in business as well as in social and political realms. We need to create awareness of the extent of this problem and stop getting behind mean men —instead, we must follow the example of leaders who walk the talk of gender equity and social justice and hold institutions accountable for the behaviour of their leadership.

About the Author Professor Mark Lipton is a graduate professor of management at The New School in New York and author of Mean Men. For more than 40 years, he has advised Fortune 500 corporations, think tanks, philanthropies, not-for-profits, NGOs and start-ups. In May 2018 Mark led a webinar based on Mean Men for AHRMIO – Association for Human Resources Management in International Organizations.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.3 Vol.12 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

While poverty is falling, the gap between the rich and poor is getting wider and more and more people are being excluded from the means to better themselves. Yuwa Hedrick-Wong and Howard Thomas look at ways to include them

Enabling models of inclusive growth: Addressing the need for financial and social inclusion

he widening gap To advance inclusive and sustainable growth, we need to address the puzzle of a simultaneous increase in wealth disparity and a decline in poverty. Why are so many people in the world steadily getting ahead while others are being left farther and farther behind? Why do market forces seem to be working well in some places but not so well elsewhere? And why are different countries in the same region (and indeed different regions in the same countries) experiencing dramatically diverse trajectories in economic growth and poverty reduction, often in spite of similar macroeconomic policies, institutions, and regulatory regimes? This economic growth puzzle has compelled a deep re-evaluation of many conventional theories and approaches. And, in so doing, it has stimulated a rethinking of fundamental constructs of economic growth itself. 36

Economic complexity, productivity and economic growth At the heart of the puzzle is the challenge of understanding productivity. The standard economic models traditionally treated productivity as somehow 'external' to the economic system, something that just happens as a result of technological changes. Before long, however, even the most pig-headed economists came to realize that sound economic analysis is needed to account for technology and productivity. What evolved next is the so-called endogenous growth models that explicitly incorporate technological progress as part of the economic system. There are two main variants: The first is to tie the rate of technological progress to certain macroeconomic conditions, such as investment in human capital, research and development expenditures, and indicators related to macroeconomic stability and so on.

Enabling models of inclusive growth | Yuwa Hedrick-Wong and Howard Thomas

At the most basic level, we need to be connected to networks that supply us with clean water and power, and affordable transportation networks that move us efficiently and affordably before we can even participate meaningfully in the economy

A second variant focuses on entrepreneurial behavior and conditions under which market competition is intense, which can lead to further creative destruction. While representing a major improvement over their predecessors, the endogenous growth models remain inadequate, being very top-down and they can take us only so far in decoding the dynamics of productivity growth. In the past decade, advances in a new field of research known as economic complexity, led by Ricardo Hausmann and his team at the Center for International Development at Harvard University in the US, has made it possible to understand better how technology and productivity interact and drive economic development. The research on economic complexity highlights a key feature in today’s economic process – the need for economic agents, be they individuals, firms, or even countries, to collaborate in order to be productive. Such collaboration typically takes the form of being connected to a range of vital networks that are powerful enablers for raising productivity. The fact is that modern economic production requires a very large set of complementary inputs. For example, Figure 1 p38 illustrates how full access to complementary assets should enable individuals to gain financial and social inclusion and increase their productivity. At the most basic level, we need to be connected to networks that supply us with clean water and power, and affordable transportation networks that move us efficiently and affordably before we can even participate meaningfully in the economy. Then there are the critical networks for accessing information and for obtaining important services such as health, education, banking, and finance. There are also the more intangible, but no less critical, social and professional networks for accessing skills and the knowhow that reside in people’s minds. How well an economic agent is connected to these vital networks determines fundamentally how productive it can be. These networks can also be understood as the conduits through which knowledge is transmitted and shared. Depending on the nature of that knowledge, the network characteristics themselves will also differ as will conditions affecting access to these networks.

We can think of knowledge in three different dimensions: embodied knowledge in the form of tools; codified knowledge in the form of information, blueprints, recipes, and manuals; and tacit knowledge, which takes the form of collective knowhow (See Figure 2 p39). This decomposition of knowledge allows us to examine systematically how, in regard to each of these dimensions at the grass roots level, individuals are able or unable to access the knowledge they need in order to reach their full productive potential Such an approach in turn opens up a whole new way of thinking about inclusive growth. In the dimension of embodied knowledge, which includes all tools, machinery, and physical infrastructure, it is easy to see how many people in poor countries are simply not able to access these networks. Simply, there may not be enough of them or they may even be non-existent. A lot of the networks of physical infrastructure are also interdependent: without roads, it is difficult to connect a village to electricity (even allowing for sufficient electricity supply, which is typically not the case) and without electricity all sorts of labor-saving devices and tools will not work. The exclusion from accessing better tools and more efficient infrastructure is a primary reason that the poor are kept at a very low level of productivity. In other words, they are stuck in a poverty trap. In the dimension of codified knowledge, which includes essential services such as finance, health care, and public services that are made possible by having effective institutions, many networks for service delivery typically have very high fixed costs and low variable costs. For example, in financial services based on the conventional banking business model, a relatively high fixed cost is incurred in serving a new customer. And the poor being poor, they are unlikely to generate sufficient business volumes to justify the high fixed cost incurred in serving them. So, they are excluded. The third dimension – knowhow – is even more problematic. Knowhow is everything that we know how to do but cannot explain. Skiing is |a knowhow. We learn how to ski by skiing not by studying the physics of skiing. A ski instructor cannot download his/her skills directly to a student skier. 37

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Consequently, the diffusion of collective knowhow is far more difficult than the diffusion of embodied and codified knowledge. Yet more sophisticated and higher value-added economic activities typically require many more inputs in terms of knowhow. Lack of access to knowhow is a serious constraint of productivity growth and economic development. In modern economic production, the more complicated the task, the more important is the dimension of knowhow relative to embodied and codified knowledge. Exclusion from accessing networks of complementary inputs in the form of knowhow is therefore particularly detrimental to productivity. Because the networks of complementary inputs in the dimensions of tacit knowledge are made up of people, not machinery or electricity supply, discrimination on the basis of gender, class, caste, region, dialect, religion, and so on can play a big role in suppressing productivity. Whether it is poor infrastructure, labour market rigidity, monopolistic practices, restricted access to finance, collusion of vested interests, or stifling regulations (most likely some combinations of them), it is clear that innovative microentrepreneurs and successful firms alike in many poor countries are prevented from expanding, which reduces their potential growth of productive employment, thereby leading to lower productivity in the overall economy. Through the lens of economic complexity, we can now re-interpret poverty as people being trapped in low-productivity activities due to a lack of access to any number of the vital networks that are powerful enablers for raising productivity. We can also address the puzzle of why there has been a simultaneous increase in income disparity and reduction in poverty. The dramatic reduction in poverty that the world has seen in the last half century came about because hundreds of millions of people who used to live in poverty were connected to many of the vital networks that enabled them to raise their productivity. China is a prime example where rapid improvement in infrastructure, the movement of tens of millions of migrant workers from rural areas to cities, and massive influx of knowhow and the often mandatory knowledge transfer, that arrived with foreign direct investment created endless opportunities for poor peasants to connect to such networks, which then dramatically increased their productivity. 38

Inclusive Growth means Full Access to

Networks of Basic Inputs

Networks of Enabling Inputs

Networks of Complementary Inputs

e.g. transportation networks; electricity/water supplies; logistics systems; health and education systems

e.g. ICI â&#x20AC;&#x201C; information and communication networks; financial services networks; legal and property rights

e.g. social networks; professional and training networks; knowledge

Figure 1 Inclusive Growth and Access and Eliminating Barriers to Inclusion. Source: Y. Hedrick- Wong and H. Thomas, 2018

At the same time, however, many countries, and segments of population within countries, continue to fail to access many of these vital networks so poor people are stuck in low-productivity traps. As a result, the distance between the richest and the poorest has continued to grow despite a massive reduction in poverty. Inclusive growth and democratising productivity From this perspective, inclusive growth is all about overcoming barriers of exclusion. Some exclusion is due to the nature of the network itself, providing banking and financial services as mentioned above, for example, though the fixed cost could be lowered, or made variable, through the increasing adoption of Fintech solutions. In this context, we can conceptualize inclusive and sustainable growth as a process of democratising productivity. Just as citizens in a democracy have a set of participatory rights in choosing their leaders and setting parameters for public policies so inclusive growth means extending basic rights for all to access and participate in the vital networks of infrastructure, services and knowhow. And in order to democratise productivity, we may need to work with governments under certain conditions but amplify market forces in other contexts. In fact, governments and markets need to function as complements in order for inclusive growth to succeed. Government regulations are

Enabling models of inclusive growth | Yuwa Hedrick-Wong and Howard Thomas

Increase Knowledge and its Applications

Barriers Blocking Access to Productivity Enhancing Networks

Embodied Knowledge

• Machinery • Tools • Physical • Infrastructure • Schools • Hospitals

Codified Knowledge

Tacit Knowledge

• Instructions • Manuals • Computer Codes • Blueprints • Legal Documents • Systems that endorse/ disseminate codified knowledge

Know-how – knowledge that resides in our heads, including everything that we know how to do but cannot explain

Basic Inputs

Enabling Inputs

Complementary Inputs

•U nderinvestment in infrastructure and essential services • Unaffordable services and/or limited access • Social exclusion and discrimination • Inadequate/absence of property and associated personal rights • Poor information and communication capacity • Monopolistic market structure and rent-seeking vested interests

Figure 2 Dimensions of Knowledge.

Figure 3 Inclusive Growth and Barriers to Inclusion.

Source: Y. Hedrick-Wong and H. Thomas, 2018

needed to create standards, protect property rights, and enforce the rule of law so that markets can operate efficiently. And governments play a major role in the production and protection of what is referred to as public goods: infrastructure, health, education, safety of consumers, and the environment. The bottom line is that markets and governments are complements in inclusive growth, not opposing substitutes. The focus on democratising productivity also means that we need to be flexible and pragmatic, deploying different development models in specific circumstances in order to raise productivity for all. In other words, what works well in China may not be appropriate in Africa; and, indeed, what has worked well in China in the past may become counter-productive in the future. Ultimately, seeing inclusive growth as democratising productivity allows us to focus on driving growth through higher productivity across the widest possible spectrum of economic agents in a society. Hence improving income equality is a welcome result not some sacrosanct priority to be realised even at the expense of economic growth. Finally, democratising productivity is not the same as enforcing an artificially equal distribution of all the necessary inputs and connectivity to every economic agent, even though that may appear more 'democratic' on the surface. Just as voters do not have perfectly equal influence on the outcome of the democratic process, democratising productivity does not mean guaranteeing an outcome of equal productivity for everyone.

Instead, democratising productivity means dismantling barriers of exclusion to create equal opportunities of access and connectivity (see Figure 3), even though it is inevitable that some economic agents who are more energetic and enterprising will be able to accumulate more resources and become connected faster and better and become more productive than the rest. However, under conditions of inclusive and sustainable growth (absence of barriers of exclusion), when some parts of the society are enjoying faster growth in productivity than others, it results in a 'win-win' situation. The more productive segments of the society would generate new opportunities for more productive activities that would benefit even those who are slower moving and less successful, pulling the entire society along. In this regard, democratising productivity is also the most productive way of improving income equality. This article is an edited extract from Inclusive Growth; Addressing the Global Challenge of Social Inequality and Financial Inclusion (Emerald Publishing 2019) by Yuwa HedrickWong and Howard Thomas.

About the Authors Howard Thomas is Mastercard Chair of Financial and Social Inclusion, Singapore Management University, Ahmass Fakahany Distinguished Professor of 'Global' Leadership, Questrom School of Business, Boston University and Extraordinary Professor, GIBS, University of Pretoria, South Africa). Yuwa Hedrick-Wong is Visiting Scholar and Senior Fellow, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at National University of Singapore.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Learning for agility, with agility How a leading Greek business school redesigned its executive programmes to reflect and respond to todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rapidly changing environment. By Kostas Axarloglou and Marina Gryllaki

Learning for agility, with agility | Kostas Axarloglou and Marina Gryllaki

n a disruptive and non-linear world, where the present is drastically different from the past, what is important or meaningful or valuable today will not be so tomorrow. Companies need to develop competencies in order to be adaptive to this continuously evolving environment and management tactics and insights can help business leaders to lead their organisations into new and uncharted territories. At the same time, executives need to comprehend -- fast and effectively – complex economic and social patterns. They need the skills and competencies that allow them to learn something in one situation and apply it in a different one; to gather patterns from one context and use them in another to make sense of something they have not seen or done before. “Learning agility” is pivotal. Learning should be dynamic and continuous and learners need to develop a mindset and attitude for "perpetual” learning. Managing with agility leads successful companies through the era of disruption; and learning how to manage with agility becomes a focal point of business school curricula and executive development offerings, not only as a theme but also as a competence and a learning imperative. In response to these challenges and building on a blend of academic excellence and business relevance, ALBA has developed a portfolio of disruption-centred programmes. In particular, ALBA Executive Development has created a series of agility-related programmes with a focus on organisational, management and leadership competencies. Over the last few years, ALBA has effectively been disrupting its own learning models and approaches by developing a “Learning Agility Map” that addresses learning agility in a multifaceted and multi-dimensional approach that assists learners to develop a new mindset and a key capability in order to navigate through disruption. The Learning Agility Map conceptualizes a learning programme as a “learning journey” that consists of different milestones combined with diverse venues, stimuli and landmarks. Exploration, Discovery, Design, Appreciation, Reflection and

Learning Agility Map Form

T r a n s f o r m

explore discover design appreciate reflect

R e f o r m

integrate Perform

Figure 1: Alba Executive Development

Integration are key milestones in the learning agility journey (See Figure 1). • Exploration: the active engagement with new data, new information and new elements of knowledge. • Discovery: the observation and immersion into divergent stimuli, the construction of meaning and the capture of new connections • Design: the generation of content, the experimentation with new methods and the iteration of ideas in order to co-create the roadmaps to achieve unique expectations • Appreciation: the seeking of new values, the perception of novel approaches and the inspiration to create something new • Reflection and Integration: the integration of the learning mosaic, the sharing of the new knowledge and the exploration of ways that the new knowledge can ignite learners to form new meaning in order to transform themselves and their organisation. The learning milestones are combined in order to guide learners to co-develop a unique learning mosaic with their co-learners, their professors and the stakeholders of the programme. The learning venues and landmarks are carefully selected and blended in order to provide a fertile context within which learners have the opportunity to synthesise their learning elements into an interactive and interdependent learning entity. In other words, each learning journey is designed as a learning entity in which content, context, learners, instructors and contributors fuse into a continuous learning approach, where learning in action is paired with learning in motion. 41

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

A key milestone of the learning journey is to integrate learning into ways that empower executive participants to explore new forms in order to transform and reform their organisations Naturally, the underlying risk is that fusion may often lead to repetition, generic approaches and confusion. Thus, the focus and the challenge in each programme is to ignite learning through an Extensive Learning Ecosystem developed specifically for each learning journey. The notion of a “Learning Ecosystem” is not new to the area of learning and development since it is linked to strategic learning and it refers to the collection of people, programmes, tools and processes that support learning within an organisation or provide learning offerings to other organisations. Each learning journey within an “Extensive Learning Ecosystem” evolves in innovative, non-linear ways by building the learning milestones of the programme in collaboration with academics, experts, professionals and stakeholders from diverse industries, sectors and functions interconnecting different venues and landmarks and encouraging the learners to interact with experts and to navigate along different dimensions of learning. Finally, a key milestone of the learning journey is to integrate learning into ways that empower executive participants to explore new forms in order to transform and reform their organisations. The design and development of each Extensive Learning Ecosystem is a complex process since it includes an exploration for the programmespecific learning stimuli and venues, intensive experimentation, a solid understanding of diverse functions, and an elaboration on the creation and customisation of a learning entity that will offer valuable connections. In a context of non-linearity, the above includes a capacity to connect rather than align the different dots and stages of the learning journey and to provide a meaningful and coherent flow. This also entails a portfolio of alternative learning options, since the learning ecosystem is a live ecosystem where disruption and distraction may occur. 42

Below: Figures by George Lappas (1950-2016) The three dimensional constructions can be rearranged in different ways in order to render a sense of motion and volatility. The figures are constructed in order to be able to reshape constantly and manifest their extensive potential for transformation. Source: Contemporary Greek Art Institute

Learning for agility, with agility | Kostas Axarloglou and Marina Gryllaki

PICTURES COURTESY OF ALBA GRADUATE BUSINESS SCHOOL

Learning Agility in action / The FinTech Trek Addressed to senior executives of a large Greek bank, this programme was delivered in London, the international FinTech capital. Based on a specifically developed Extensive Learning Ecosystem, the learning itinerary included open and digital banking masterclasses with ALBA visiting faculty, visits and lectures at FinTech hubs and innovation spaces, Bank masterclasses and field visits. The learning mosaic extended from basic knowledge to cutting- edge theory, latest trends, and experts’ insights on the challenges and the future of FinTech and discussions on the bank’s FinTech challenges. Feedback, evaluations, discussions and post learning assessments with the executive participants, HR partners, and organisational stakeholders indicate that the learning programmes had a beyond ordinary influence, impact and learning outcomes. The blend of the learning milestones that unfolded within carefully selected contexts and gave new forms to the learning landmarks, led participants to navigate across the Learning Agility Map to interact with the diverse learning elements and to develop the mindset and the mind tools for learning agility. But what differentiates these learning journeys from a typical experiential trip and an ordinary learning ecosystem? What does the transition to extra-ordinary learning entail for executive education? And what does the design of the extensive learning ecosystem entail for the role of Executive Development? • The depth of content of academic knowledge is of key importance. Each learning programme is directed by an academic co-ordinator/expert who, in designing the Extensive Learning Ecosystem, is actively involved in the selection of venues, partners and experts and who is able to attract top contributors due to his/her academic expertise. Upon completion of the preparation stage, the academic co-ordinator is able to connect and integrate all learning elements and to assist executive participants make reflections and take actions. • The breadth of context is of significant importance and is the result of a co-creation between the academic co-ordinator, the

executive development unit and the customer organisation. However, breadth does not refer merely to a variety of context. It refers to richness and quality of context that needs to interact with the content and often creates new elements of learning. • Disruption related methods and approaches: Adopting design thinking approaches and agile /scrum methods assist the executive education unit to understand the customer’s needs, to experiment and iterate learning offerings and services, and to deliver the programmes with teamwork, empathy, agility and resilience. • Interdisciplinarity: When orchestrated masterfully, interdisciplinarity offers a unique, fertile ground for learning agility, intellectual curiosity and convergence of learning. • Authenticity, originality and a genuine passion for learning: When these key elements of learning agility are shared by stakeholders and contributors, they are diffused across the learning community and learning is transformed and elevated into a value that drives participants to explore, exploit and deploy learning in the digital era. The value of the Extensive Learning Ecosystem lies in the ability of the Business School to attract, combine and connect excellence. Renowned academics, industry experts and professionals are artfully united to contribute to an extra-ordinary learning offering. “Knowledge is power”, Francis Bacon’s famous Enlightenment maxim, is always relevant. In a connected, digital and disruptive world, as knowledge exceeds itself in unexpected and unpredictable ways, learning agility evolves into an imperative competence for learners, business executives and business schools as well. In the digital Enlightenment era, learning is timely but also timeless: “Learning is power”.

About the Authors Professor Kostas Axarloglou is Dean, Professor of International Business and Strategy, Alba Graduate Business School, The American College of Greece, Athens, Greece Marina Gryllaki is Executive Development Director, Alba Graduate Business School, The American College of Greece, Athens, Greece

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Disrupting the curriculum

Business students should be more knowledgeable about new technologies say Mukul Kumar and Johan Roos. Business schools need to accelerate how they enable students to partner with engineers and scientists, bring tech-driven innovations to market in responsible ways, and understand the evolving applications of disruptive technologies in society

Disrupting the curriculum | Mukul Kumar and Johan Roos

TEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) technologies are driving new products, services and business models and doing so at an accelerating pace. Consequently, companies seek business graduates with knowledge, skills, and mindsets about data analytics, machine learning and other so called “exponential” technologies. Three years ago in this magazine one of your current writers (Johan Roos) called for business schools to help students become more aware of advances in artificial intelligence, biomedicine, neuroscience, nano-enabled engineering and other rapidly advancing STEM fields. He argued then that “business students need to be ‘conversant’ in STEM if they are to have the intellectual capacity and skills to survive in the technology-driven organisations of the future”. Yet it is our impression that many businesses school still do not sufficiently shape either the educational experience nor the mindsets of graduates for the technological developments that will dominate their careers. Over the last two years, Hult International Business School has initiated and implemented an initiative to change this. We are transforming the curriculum and the learning experience so that Hult students, primarily our specialised masters students, will have the required future mindset and skills. We have tackled these future-oriented challenges – understanding technologies, exploring business model components and developing a future mindset – by way of a new set of courses and curricular enhancements. We have already created and deployed a core course to build The Future Mindset plus a portfolio of nine short Exponential Technology Nano Courses to inspire curiosity and creativity in the business application of disruptive technologies. We decided early in our design process to model this future mindset ourselves by approaching our curricular innovations using agile building methods and randomised experiments with variants (A/B testing) as well as leveraging new learning technologies and experimenting with new delivery models.

Our future-oriented programme has been deployed to nearly one thousand master of international business students based in our Dubai, London, Boston and San Francisco campuses. Overall, students and faculty alike have welcomed this innovation, as evidenced in student evaluations exceeding an average of 4.6/5.0 and faculty focus groups. The programme is currently being adapted to the Hult undergraduate programme in international business offered in London, Boston and San Francisco. Developing a future mindset To develop a future mindset ready to leverage disruptive technologies and new business models, we set out to address a key question: “How are you transforming your mindset in an ever-changing, hyper-connected world?” Crucial inspiration for shaping this future mindset came from a renowned investor letter from Jeff Bezos at Amazon: “…what does day two look like? Day two is stasis. Followed by irrelevance. Followed by excruciating, painful decline. Followed by death. And that is why it is always day one”. The Future Mindset course design focuses on giving students a dynamic experience in a large-scale creation, using the central theme of “Designing the City of the Future”. It taps into the five major business cities in which we have Hult campuses (San Francisco, Boston, London, Dubai and Shanghai) as the core “playground” for the student experience. Instructional topics covered include design thinking, data analytics, innovation approaches, platform economics and agile management. The course concludes with a team contest in which students present their innovative ideas for the city of their campus, along with the requirement that they pivot based on new stimulus provided half-way through the course.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Exposure to disruptive technologies In the programme, the exposure to disruptive technologies has been achieved by designing a set of innovative “Nano courses” to teach students the business implications of the disruptive technologies dramatically influencing tomorrow’s landscape. Each Nano course is built in conjunction with a world-renowned industry expert and structured in eight modules covering the basics of how the technology works, potential applications, major players driving the technology, the likely development/maturity timeline, legal and regulatory issues, and the key challenges that need to be overcome for the full potential to be realised. Three virtual live sessions invite industry experts and facilitators to share their experiences and reallife cases while also enabling students to brainstorm live cases for their final presentations. Currently nine Nano courses are on offer to students: • Blockchain • Autonomous vehicles • Robotics • Internet of things • Energy of the future • Artificial intelligence • Cybersecurity • Augmented/virtual reality • Genome editing

Global testing Last academic year we ran multiple experiments with students across the world to refine the format, content and interactivity of the courses in order to achieve the highest quality of learning. Positive feedback from students was that the flow of the content (including videos, readings, lectures, polls, discussions and quizzes) was intuitive and that the diversity of media was highly engaging. Students placed particular value on the flexibility, self-paced learning and support in preparing properly for the interactive live webinars. During the development of the courses, a range of innovative new tools were tested for polling, discussion, interactive videos, virtual presentations, peer feedback and group member evaluation. These tools created a sense of class cohesion and community, making the course interactive and engaging. All these tools are integrated with our LMS system (Canvas) and are now being requested for wider deployment across our faculty.

PICTURES COURTESY OF HULT BUSINESS SCHOOL

Developing and testing the courses Hult does not use any textbooks for these future-oriented topics. Instead, we developed a new approach to create The Future Mindset and Nano courses and to deploy them simultaneously on all our campuses. The courses use a wide range of sources and perspectives to provide a balanced view of the opportunities and risks, including ethical considerations, and to encourage convergent thinking in terms of developing new business models. They are taught in a blended format with a mix of in-person facilitated sessions, in-person group activities and individual online learning. We have found that offering blended learning is challenging. There is a clear onus on the learner to manage his or her learning and adequately prepare for the face-to-face sessions. It is vital that the lead professor guides and supports students through the various blended modalities and that the right tools for learning are provided at the right times. It is equally vital to provide sufficient space and support for faculty to experiment and gain comfort with new topics and pedagogies.

Disrupting the curriculum | Mukul Kumar and Johan Roos

Tracking engagement and measuring results To evaluate the student satisfaction of the Nano courses after completion, we used metrics from student course evaluations as well as pre- and post-course surveys. We monitored student engagement by extracting real-time module progression data from Canvas and Google Analytics. This data provided us with information to spot trends, do A/B tests, track behaviour and identify improvement areas. Moreover, we built tools to identify individual students who were struggling and offer them appropriate support (such as additional videos and coaching/TA support) These courses delivered the highest student evaluations we have seen for any set of new courses widely deployed in our curriculum and the written commentary has been inspiring. As a result, we are rapidly incorporating adjustments and deploying these curricular enhancements to a range of other degree programmes including undergraduate, MBA and Executive MBA.

Conclusion Some argue persuasively that business schools ought to be reaching out aggressively to attract STEM students and pull them into business programmes. That may be a new and exciting market segment for many deans. In Hult, however, we take another approach. We believe it is first the responsibility of business schools to prepare all their students, no matter the undergraduate background, for a rapidly changing future where technology plays a central role in the development of both business and society. Business schools should simply be part of the STEM conversation as soon as possible. Our Future Mindset and Nano courses mark a major step forward for our school in developing an innovative approach to teaching students about STEM technologies and the ways in which they can be leveraged to provide sustainable solutions for the businesses of tomorrow. We have begun the journey to bring Hult and our students into the STEM age and while we have much to learn, we in Hult are thrilled about the results so far.

In Hult, however, we believe it is first the responsibility of business schools to prepare all their students, no matter the undergraduate background, for a rapidly changing future where technology plays a central role in the development of both business and society

About the Authors Professor Mukul Kumar is Chief Innovation Officer at Hult International Business School. He was Chief Academic Officer of Hult 2011-2014 and re-joined the school in 2017 after serving as President of UWC USA in Santa Fe, New Mexico in the US. He has also been Director of Executive Education at the University of Maryland also in the US. Professor Johan Roos has been Chief Academic Officer of Hult since 2016. Prior to joining Hult he worked in six other business schools and a non-profit organisation in five countries. Most recently, he was CEO and Dean of Jรถnkรถping International Business School in Sweden.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Results Oriented

Pioneering the learning and leadership that meets the urgency of our times â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Results from the GRLI Deans and Directors Cohort. Collated by John North and Claire Sommer

The opportunity to apply whole-systems thinking and action has already bridged institutional and disciplinary boundaries, opened new research avenues, the start of new centres and programmes and a number of collective impact initiatives aimed at transforming management education

Results Oriented | John North and Claire Sommer

To achieve the kind of world we consider human, some people had to dare to break the thrall of tradition. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Hungarian psychologist and author of Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention 1996

he idea for a “Deans roundtable”, suggested by Julia Christensen during the 2016 AGM of the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (GRLI) held at Kemmy Business School in Limerick, Ireland, has led to a growing participant-driven co-learning initiative that “dares to break the thrall of tradition”. Inspired by the 50+20 vision (2012) of “Management Education for the World” and the urgency our times require, our GRLI Deans and Directors Cohort operates like a “collaboratory” for deans and directors acting as catalysts of change. Two years on the cohort is gathering momentum for our third face-to-face event, which will be held at University of Vermont, USA, on March 21-24, 2019. Global Focus invited participants to share some of their reflections on the initiative, including “learnings from the learning” about how the cohort works and the impact it has had within and beyond their institutions and organisations. The opportunity to apply whole-systems thinking and action has already bridged institutional and disciplinary boundaries, opened new research avenues, the start of new centres and programmes and a number of collective impact initiatives aimed at transforming management education.

Rashmi Prasad, Dean at the College of Business of Western Governors University, an online university headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, comments: Stories told by colleagues from around the world painted a familiar picture: the obstacles to creating and sustaining new forms of business education for a sustainable future are many, including the mimicry of big brand schools, the power of rankings, narrow disciplines, conventional teaching and faculty models, a crowded field of stakeholders, some of whom wield a veto. One valuable takeaway for me was to build alliances with other professional schools (at one’s own university or even at other universities) by finding areas of common value. I discovered the ‘inter-professional’ movement which is having a real impact in improving healthcare quality outcomes by fostering collaboration among diverse health professionals. These insights have driven university-wide collaboration in areas such as social and emotional learning. Wayne Visser, Academic Director and Professor in Sustainable Transformation at Antwerp Management School (AMS Belgium, says: We’re looking at collaborating with the University of Vermont to develop a multi-continent executive programme on sustainable transformation. In addition, GRLI’s focus on ‘whole person engagement’ has been an inspiration as I continue to develop our work around the ‘values dividend, and ‘integrated value’. Rather than being another content-laden or deliverables-driven meeting, GRLI serves as a supportive community of deans and directors where collaboration can emerge, ideas can be stimulated and personal leadership can be affirmed.” 49

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Dayle M Smith, Dean at Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, USA, describes the next chapter for the College of Business Administration (CBA) as one “that was influenced by the thoughtful work of the GRLI. The CBA, coupled with a Jesuit mission of men and women for others, is redesigning curriculum and working across boundaries in the university to bring together disciplines, building creative confidence in the students and using ‘global imagination’ to make a difference in the world.

Olayinka David-West, Academic Director, and Dean Enase Okonede of Lagos Business School, Nigeria, describe how a whole-person and whole-system approach to learning transformation is leading to tangible progress: Since the cohort we have embarked on articulating a vision of what the faculty of a leading business school operating out of an emerging market should look like and articulating key attributes of the faculty body.”

PICTURES COURTESY GRLI

The CBA focuses on business as a force for good where we look at business education as an enabler that develops future business leaders as having an important voice at the table for addressing, in transdisciplinary and entrepreneurial ways, the most significant issues affecting the global community. Sharing ideas and coming together with the GRLI community has been a wonderful professional development opportunity, helping us drive strategy in our respective institutions.

David Allen, Pro-Vice Chancellor and Executive Dean at the University of Exeter Business School, UK, and Ilke Inceoglu, Research Director in the Department of Management, has run a workshop in which the Exeter Centre of Leadership and the Centre for Circular Economy explored the question of what it means to lead in a circular economy.

Charles Areni, Executive Dean, Faculty of Business, University of Wollongong in Australia shares.

Julia Christensen Hughes, Dean of the College of Business and Economics (CBE) at the University of Guelph, Canada, was inspired to "ground and grow" CBE's commitment to sustainability. Following the inaugural cohort meeting in Guelph, she appointed Rumina Dhalla, CBE Sustainability Coordinator. Together, Rumina and Julia attended the second cohort meeting in Marseilles, France, which gave them the opportunity to crystallise a plan of action. Rumina is now in the process of forming a college-wide sustainability coalition as well as developing a proposal for an Institute for Sustainability and a new ten-course minor (that will soon be available campus-wide).

We are starting a ‘trans-faculty’ master degree in sustainable growth with Engineering and Information Sciences (Materials Engineering) and Law, Humanities and Arts (Environmental Law), and perhaps Social Sciences (Geography) for delivery in 2020”.

As I prepare to step down as Dean next year, I am confident that CBE's commitment to sustainability has become well-enshrined in our culture and our programmes.

Participating in this cohort allowed me to put in perspective what we’re doing at Católica Porto Business School, Portugal, and emphasised the need to give it greater visibility”, says Dean Sofia Salgado. “Examples include initiatives such as coaching the individual bachelor student in his/her specific development needs and redesigning the executive MBA programme with increased focused on organisational needs and professional development, with a commitment to the accountability and responsibility of future leaders.

Hanna-Leena Pesonen, Dean and Professor in Corporate Environmental Management at University of Jyväskylä, Finland, took inspiration from her participation in the inaugural cohort meeting in 2017 and at the 2018 event announced the steps they have taken to establish a world-first Centre for Resource Wisdom.

GRLI participants are from 14 countries and a mix of specialisations ranging from well-established institutions from the developed world to fast-rising and ambitious players in developing economies

Results Oriented | John North and Claire Sommer

Other participants have taken their learning into new fields and roles. Following her participation at the inaugural meeting in October 2017, Dima Jamali, Kamal Shair Endowed Chair in Responsible Leadership at American University of Beirut, is taking a year off to fully adjust and comprehend her new role as a member of the Lebanese parliament where she will work on improving the education sector, especially the public schools. Steven Murphy joined the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT), Canada, as its new President and Vice Chancellor in March 2018, where he will champion diversity in all forms. Sanjay Sharma, Dean of the Grossman School of Business (GSB) looks forward to welcoming the Cohort for the next full gathering on 21-24 March, 2019 at University of Vermont. At GSB, sustainability is the core driver for faculty and the business ecosystem. As part of the gathering in Vermont, GSB will offer a live case study that involves perspectives from Faculty, Students, Alumnus, corporates partners and other stakeholders, thus bringing to life their School’s inspiring journey towards fully integrating sustainability into each course, topic, and program. As a whole, the cohort seems poised to make an impact at the organisational and systemic level not because of their unique qualifications or knowledge but rather as result of a process which convenes committed, dedicated and empowered individuals that are willing to bringing a ‘whole person’ approach to their work and to their lives. These are Deans and Directors that are daring to break the thrall of tradition – Deans and Directors as agents of change. The small sampling of feedback shared here is meant to provide a taste of the Cohort’s exploration of learning and leadership for Global Responsibility. The group looks ahead to building on their shared experience and insight and also to involve other voices and perspectives in upcoming meetings.

Deans and Directors Cohort 2017 / 2018 We are like-hearted and like-minded participants from 14 countries and a mix of specialisations; representing well-established institutions in the developed world as well as fast rising and ambitious organisations in developing economies. • American University of Beirut — Lebanon • Antwerp Management School — Belgium • Católica Porto Business School — Portugal • Colegio Universitario de Estudios Financieros (CUNEF)—Spain • Corvinus University of Budapest—Hungary • ESADE Business School—Spain • George Mason University School of Business — USA • Grossman School of Business, University of Vermont — USA • Kent State University College of Business Administration — USA • Lagos Business School—Nigeria • Lahore University of Management Sciences —Pakistan • Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School at Universiti Utara Malaysia — Malaysia • School of Business, Clarkson University, Potsdam, New York — USA • School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg — Sweden • Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University — Canada • University of Exeter Business School —United Kingdom • University of Guelph, College of Business and Economics—Canada • University of Jyväskylä School of Business and Economics—Finland • University of Portsmouth—United Kingdom • University of Wollongong—Australia • Weatherhead School of Management — Case Western Reserve University — USA • Western Governors University — USA Visit www.grli.org to learn more about participation in the cohort or contact John North at john.north@grli.org to discuss applications.

About the Authors Collated by John North and Claire Sommer on behalf of the GRLI Deans and Directors Cohort

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Saumya Sindhwani, Jerry Connor and Howard Thomas argue it is time to change the way we develop leaders â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and tap into the power of mindset

The missing shifts | Saumya Sindhwani, Jerry Connor and Howard Thomas

600

This research was done analysing Coach in a Box’s unique leadership data set of one-to-one conversations between over 600 individuals and their coaches

63%

Our data suggests 63% of first line leaders are struggling with the two basic mindset shifts and, perhaps more worryingly, these are still the biggest challenges when they become middle leaders

very year hundreds of books are written on leadership; business schools turn out thousands of graduates; and businesses spend millions on leadership development. But are we focusing on the right things? • What do leaders themselves really struggle with? • What are the changes they find the hardest to make? • And what is it that would really help them? Probably the best perspective on this comes from managers themselves though not in a set of interview questions but instead in one-to-one coaching sessions. These are times when a manager’s guard is down and we get to hear what is really on their minds. The outcomes are surprising. The issues they are grappling with are not always the focus of our business schools. The managers are emotional rather than intellectual and personal rather than theoretical. Overwhelmingly the needs they speak of fit into two broad categories ( “empathy” and “resourcefulness”) and both are fundamentally “changes in mindset”. By that we mean a change in attitude or world view. And changing mindset enables leaders to unlock changes in behaviour they have been struggling with, which in turn creates new results. It is these issues and the ability to make these two shifts that seem, in their own words, to be the most critical in helping leaders progress. This is clearly understood by the managers in our data. They are not struggling to understand the importance of these issues. But something is missing. Knowing what to do is not enough. Managers are struggling with how to change and the key is mindset. As a result, our data suggests 63% of first line leaders are struggling with the two basic mindset shifts and, perhaps more worryingly, these are still the biggest challenges when they become middle leaders In this article we argue that both leaders and educators should focus more time and energy on the areas leaders are really struggling with -- and explicitly examine managerial mindset. Without this we are simply not giving leaders what they need to develop.

In this article we argue that both leaders and educators should focus more time and energy on the areas leaders are really struggling with – and explicitly examine managerial mindset. Without this we are simply not giving leaders what they need to develop

As stated, this article draws on a revealing set of data into what managers really think. The research was done analysing Coach in a Box’s unique leadership data set of one-to-one conversations between over 600 individuals and their coaches. The data set was anonymised, but features employees working in multinational companies from Asia, Europe and North America. For each individual we have looked at four anonymised coach-coachee interactions over the period of a leadership programme. In each the coachee is talking to his or her coach about what they are struggling with and what they feel they need to change. Focusing on inter and intra-personal concerns we have identified “shifts” (changes in mindset or attitude) that the managers themselves see as being most critical. We have then analysed this data by levels. So what do leaders really say they are struggling with? Two fundamental challenges occur again and again in the data for junior and middle managers (new challenges begin to emerge with the senior manager group). The first and most common is all about finding ways to engage or influence different people. We call this the “empathy” shift. The interesting thing is that the coaching conversations on this issue inevitably follow a similar course. In order to make the change the coachee needs to challenge the way they are seeing the other person and the situation. To change their mindset. They need to become curious about the other individual and what makes him or her tick. They then need to adapt their response accordingly. 53

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

In conversation after conversation, we have noticed this is because leaders are not seeing others as diverse individuals with different ways of seeing the world. They have a fixed mindset about others. As a result they are tending to use too narrow a set of approaches in dealing with the issues. The second most common challenge we find in the data is less about other people and more about the leader themselves. We classify this as the resourcefulness shift. These are examples where leaders want help in changing their own behaviour. All these leaders have the self-awareness to have identified times when they are not at their best and know the cost of it. They know what they want to change. In fact many of them have gone through a number of diagnostics and assessment tools. But awareness is not enough. These leaders are showing they understand the challenge but are asking for help in how to change it. Again, all of these conversations follow a similar pattern. The coachee first learns to identify the situation and how he or she is reacting to it. Concepts such as trigger event are helpful here. They then uncover the internal dialogue that is driving their behaviour. In other words, they understand why they are reacting the way they are. They then work with the coach to challenge this self-talk and change their response. Interestingly, in going through this kind of process we see coachees not only learning to overcome the original challenge but also repeated evidence that this gives them the confidence to change their response to other situations. In other words, they’ve built a new mindset that enables them to stay resourceful, learn and adapt in future stressful situations. Moving to the next level: The openness and authenticity shifts Our data, further suggests that as leaders mature, two new shifts become critical. We are calling these the openness and the authenticity shifts. These occur more often as leaders become more senior. There is also evidence that these shifts follow the earlier ones. In other words in the intra-personal territory leaders seem to need to 54

have already mastered the resourcefulness shift to need to work on the authenticity shift. Equally in the interpersonal arena, those focusing on the openness shift seem to have already made the empathy shift in their approach to relationships. There is effectively a second level of shift in each area. The third shift, the openness shift is seen within the data when we see leaders facing issues that require more than simply the flexibility to adapt to others described in the empathy shift. For example dealing with difficult or controversial issues – especially between teams or functions, developing others leaders and inspiring others to show initiative or helping others change behaviour. In all these situations the leader is searching for a way to develop a new level of openness and trust and for ways to use this to change the response others have to them or to a situation. They are less about flexibility and more about connection. A fourth shift is also apparent within the data. This appears to be a development of the resourcefulness shift. In this data we see leaders not merely wanting to change the way they respond to a situation but looking more broadly at themselves and the way they want to be as a leader. They recognise that others do not simply follow leaders who conform to a standard definition of a leader but that leadership is something that is more personal and each leader needs to find their own way to express it. At a practical level this means we see them looking more deeply into their personality and its drivers and attempting deeper changes. Another word that appears frequently in the data is “presence”. Leaders are wanting to have greater presence in the organisation and to be more involved with their teams. For example, one leader explores how easy it is for them to neglect their team unless there is a crisis looming. They define their leadership by the activities that are required and neglect the power others experience from the leader simply “being there” for others. And to be more involved each leader needs to worry less about what they should be doing and become more comfortable in their own skin. In his famous work on emotional intelligence Daniel Goleman produces some remarkable statistics. For example, in professional services he found that leaders with social skills made 110%

The missing shifts | Saumya Sindhwani, Jerry Connor and Howard Thomas

more profit than those without. And those with self-management (those also mastering shifts like the resourcefulness shift) a massive 390%. It is clear that our data supports this. But it is also clear that most leaders do not need telling this. They know the importance of emotional intelligence. But they don’t know how to build it. And what they are missing is insight into how to their change mindsets. So what does this mean? The first and most obvious lesson is that as a leader – and as a developer of leaders – emotional intelligence is paramount. The inter and intra personal challenges contained within the “resourcefulness”, “empathy”, “openness” and “authenticity” shifts are at the heart of the future success of leaders. Any leadership development programme that spends less than 50% of its time on these subjects is missing the target. But the insight from our data is that just helping others become aware of the importance of these capabilities is not enough. Our data shows that leaders no longer need to be told this is important. And there are almost no examples of leaders seeking advice on what to do. And yet the vast majority of the literature and advice we give leaders is exactly of this nature. We give them advice on what to do, which – according to our data – is not needed. What leaders need is help on how. On how to change mindset. And this means identifying which of the four shifts is right for them and helping them make it. The how itself is also rooted in the data. The conversations associated with each shift follow four different but clear patterns. If we can replicate these we can help leaders make the shifts they need.

110% 390% In his famous work on emotional intelligence Daniel Goleman found that in professional services leaders with social skills made 110% more profit than those without...

... and those with self-management (those also mastering shifts like the resourcefulness shift) a massive 390%

About the Authors Professor Saumya Sindhwani is Clinical Assistant Professor of Strategy, Indian School of Business, Hyderabad, Telangana, and Mohali, Punjab Jerry Corner is Global Practice Head, BTS coach Howard Thomas is Mastercard Chair of Financial and Social Inclusion, Singapore Management University, Ahmass Fakahany Distinguished Professor of 'Global' Leadership, Questrom School of Business, Boston University and Extraordinary Professor, GIBS, University of Pretoria, South Africa)

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Be conscious! Launched in 2012 by Ben Emmens and Abi Green, the Conscious Project has one clear aim: to help individuals and organisations think about what they are doing, and do it better or, in other words, to be more conscious

he Conscious Project works with organisations that seek to be more conscious, those who want to engage and bring their people with them, those who strive for impact. As a result, our client base is predominantly non-profit – whether the Red Cross, United Nations or non-government agencies such as the International Rescue Committee, ActionAid, Habitat for Humanity – or organisations with a clear social purpose such as Airbnb. The Conscious Project has a substantial coaching portfolio and supports senior executives and leaders in countries all over the world. Our consultancy portfolio includes current and recent projects such as: facilitating a people strategy for UNICEF; supporting organisational change and implementation for Habitat for Humanity; designing and establishing a pilot training and development programme for the British Red Cross; and designing and delivering management and leadership programmes for frontline humanitarians in the International Rescue Committee, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), International Medical Corps Worldwide and the Organisation for Islamic Co-operation. How does the business model work? Configured in a way that befits a 21st century organisation, the Conscious Project is essentially a values-based platform supporting a virtual guild of “master craftspeople”. The highly agile, networked team of individuals based all over the world functions as a boutique consultancy, occupying a space between established global players such as Mckinsey and Accenture and the countless independent experts and consultants who do excellent work in their respective geographic markets.

Technology and virtual working spaces replace costly real estate, which in turn enables a competitive pricing philosophy appropriate to an organisation whose clients are largely non-profits. Consultancy teams are brought together under the Conscious consulting banner according to the knowledge, skills and expertise required by a project. Whether in Amman or Atlanta, Bangkok or Bangui, Vanuatu or Vienna, or anywhere else, Conscious Project consultants can be found accompanying leaders and managers, walking alongside them and asking questions, giving support, sharing insight, offering guidance. Values based work… From the outset, we have relentlessly applied our core values (generosity, humility, accompaniment and stewardship) to our work. Of particular interest to all those that the organisation works with are the combination of generosity and humility, which are at the heart of the effort to shift power. These values may seem counter-intuitive in an age of individualism and egotism and without doubt they are risky - perhaps at face value they seem to imply naïveté and invite exploitation – but the Conscious Project is reclaiming and re-applying them since they underpin our commitment to achieving impact and our focus on enabling positive social change. Generosity It’s no coincidence that one of our core values at the Conscious Project is generosity and this is how it is described to clients and partners: “We think generously, listen generously and live generously. Whether leading, doing or facilitating,

Be conscious! | Ben Emmens and Abi Green

Whether in Amman or Atlanta, Bangkok or Bangui, Vanuatu or Vienna, or anywhere else, Conscious Project consultants can be found accompanying leaders and managers, walking alongside them and asking questions, giving support, sharing insight, offering guidance

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

our work is rooted in appreciative inquiry and positive psychology; we believe people realise their potential when they are inspired to be all they can be. We nurture a growth mindset in one another and those we work with.” How much does generosity cost? Certainly generosity takes time and is an investment of thinking and energy: it requires us to give or release something we may not want to let go of. So what can we give that costs us relatively little? Is it possible to apply the principle of generosity to our thinking and to the words we use? Thinking generously “Thinking generously” is a discipline that can be nurtured and it costs relatively little. It entails choosing a starting point where we assume the best [in or of the other] and continue to assume the best until proven otherwise. “Assuming the best” means crediting an individual or organisation with honest intentions or motives unless we have very good evidence to suggest that is completely foolish! Thinking generously also means resisting being drawn into the cul-de-sac of cynicism in which motives are continually questioned or time is spent looking for evidence that an action is self-serving. Thinking generously requires us to make judgements based on fact and behaviour not on prejudices and preconceptions. Humility Arguably even less popular than generosity, humility tends to be associated with ancient prophets or gurus and is the preserve of certain leadership models. Attitudes differ around the world but in the West, humility does not generally seem to be a value or state that people aspire to. Certainly an initial reaction to the mention of humility is one of incredulity bordering on disbelief. Understanding humility in the context of collaboration. Humility is generally taken to mean “having a modest or low view of one’s importance” and this is a helpful starting point. In a collaboration, the vision and outcome are the important driving forces. After that, it is the individuals that participate, what they bring, and how they work together that really matter. When we say that humility is important, we don’t mean the false modesty or tedious self-deprecation that is often confused with genuine humility and which can poison collaborative relationships. 58

Above:Ben Emmens and Abi Green

Be conscious! | Ben Emmens and Abi Green

Time and again we have seen humility unsettle the assumed power dynamics in a group, allowing quiet voices to be heard, insights to be shared, and enabling teams to be more mindful and make better decisions. At the Conscious Project, humility is a core value. Here’s what the team says: “We don’t put ourselves on a pedestal or come with one-size-fits-all shiny solutions! We are human and when it comes to society we are part of the problem as well as part of the solution. Our work is not about ‘us’ as experts, or reinforcing inequality or vested interest; rather, it is gently disruptive and about the ‘collective us’ and a connected world. We each have a part to play and our methodologies unlock your own expertise, insight and experience, so that together we can craft the best possible outcomes.” (www.theconsciousproject.org)

False modesty and self-deprecation can be passive aggressive behaviours or associated with the mantle of victimhood; they are to be avoided. On the other hand, it is essential to understand our place in the world and in our working relationships, remain aware of our limitations and blind-spots as much as our assets and skills, and keep foremost in mind what our work is ultimately in service to. Humility re-balances power In working relationships and particularly in any collaboration, when individuals put to one side any preconceptions or ideas about how important or powerful they are, they play an important role in the re-balancing of power. When one individual considers theirs to be the better idea or a more important contribution than anyone else’s, they slowly quench the collaborative spirit and trust begins to break down. A spirit of humility involves a conscious relinquishing of power: not an impetuous discarding or jettisoning of power but a conscious releasing of the grip in order that the power that exists elsewhere in the collaboration has its voice and its moment to influence direction.

Humility and ‘gentle disruption’ In a culture of genuine humility, questions are permitted, even encouraged, and as we know questions and constructive challenge are essential for organisations and collaborative work to thrive. Gentle disruption is not the noisy, aggressive questioning approach in which individuals show how clever they are but rather it is about respectful and incisive questions that constructively challenge and momentarily disrupt thinking, leading to more questions that refine understanding and a conscious re-engagement with the vision and clarification of the desired outcome. Theory into action? Perhaps your curiosity has been piqued by the work of the Conscious Project and you are challenged by the way we try to apply our values of generosity and humility? If so, why not take a few moments to reflect on: • How do you act generously as a leader and/ or as a business? • Where can you identify new opportunities to demonstrate generosity? • When have you demonstrated humility as a business leader? • How could humility serve your organisation?

About the Authors Some of the ideas and concepts in this article are drawn from the book Conscious Collaboration by Ben Emmens, co-founder with Abi Green of the Conscious Project www.theconsciousproject.org

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

On the right track Developing an innovative and evolving MBA curriculum Ajoy Kumar Dey explains how the MBA curriculum is kept fresh and relevant at a leading Indian institution

On the right track | Ajoy Kumar Dey

n their renowned article “How business schools lost their way” in the Harvard Business Review (May, 2005) the authors Warren Bennis and James O’Toole warned that business schools are on the wrong track. Even if the admission processes are getting more selective and pay packages glitzier, schools are facing criticism for failing to impart requisite skills, failing to prepare leaders, failing to instil norms of ethical behaviour and even failing to prepare good corporate citizens. Professor Henry Mintzberg of McGill University in Montreal, Canada, has squarely blamed a not-so-relevant curriculum as the main culprit. Due to ever-growing diversity among students of management in terms of their educational, social and economic backgrounds, skill set possessed, and career goals and aspirations, curricula reforms remain elusive. The two major components of MBA education are knowledge and skills. Under the influence of ever-changing external forces knowledge and skill sets become obsolete at a rapid rate. In the next five years about one third of the competencies currently required in an MBA graduate will be replaced by newer skill sets. By 2020, the Fourth Industrial Revolution will have brought us advanced robotics and autonomous transport, artificial intelligence and machine learning, advanced materials, biotechnology and genomics. These developments will transform the way we live and the way we work. Some jobs will disappear, others will grow and jobs that do not even exist today will become commonplace. What is certain is that the future workforce will need to upgrade knowledge and realign its skill set to keep pace. Among the various aspects of management education, the most important is curriculum design. Critics point out that poor design of curriculum is the prime reason that graduates display disregard towards ethics, demonstrate poor levels of interpersonal, teamwork and leadership skills, have limited awareness of as well as concerns about global issues, and display high levels of materialism

and abysmally low concern for others. How do MBA programmes/business schools ensure that they evolve continuously and remain relevant to the ever-changing needs of students, business and society? How to maintain a curriculum current and relevant? How to evolve continuously in tandem with a dynamic environment? How to meet changing expectations of students, recruiters, businesses, society and all stakeholders? How to communicate the distinctive feature of a programme? Framework for curriculum design For design and development of curriculum, my own institute, the Birla Institute of Management Technology (BIMTECH) in Greater Noida, India, follows a six-layered framework based on the inside-out approach (see Figure 1 on p63). The six layers are: General Business Management Knowledge, Master Degree level Knowledge, Skills, Values, Innovative and Evolving processes, and Unique Design of curriculum. At the core of the framework is the student and his or her learning approach. Depending on the need, capability and motivation, and facilitated by the pedagogy, a student adopts one of the approaches - surface or deep – for a course. A deep approach to learning is considered an appropriate approach as students gain understanding, derive enjoyment from the learning task and apply the acquired knowledge to the real world. On the other hand, a surface approach to learning is inappropriate as students rely on rote learning and memorisation, avoid personal understanding and are unreflective about their learning experience. A life-long learner follows the path of deep learning. Next is the desired business management knowledge, divided in two stages: general graduate level and specialised for a master’s degree. An institute may follow the modules of management knowledge as devised by AACSB or develop its own. A similar list can be arrived at by benchmarking with competing institutes supported by a literature review. 61

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

The bouquet of courses to be covered in MBA programmes (Post Graduate Diploma in Management – PGDM – for institutes not holding the status of a university) is guided by these knowledge components. Appropriate pedagogy is selected to maintain a proper mix of knowing, doing and being. The next level in Figure 1 displays skill sets. Through regular interactions with industry experts and academia at large, BIMTECH keeps track of desired skill sets. Many organisations such as GMAC and Bloomberg carry out yearly recruiters’ surveys and capture the skill set desired in a management graduate. In the Figure 1 the skill set as identified by AACSB for master-level management programmes are shown. Conscious attempts are made to provide students with ample opportunities to hone their skills through co-operative and extracurricular activities. Apart from knowledge and skills, BIMTECH also wishes to inculcate values among students. Our slogan is “excellence with values”. The set of values that we stress are: ethics and integrity; sustainability and transparency; innovativeness and entrepreneurship. Concerns in redesigning a curriculum Redesigning a curriculum raises three major concerns: programme structure; course content; and pedagogical approach. Programme structure deals with the total class contact hours, number of courses to be covered (split between core and elective courses), distribution of total class hours between various knowledge domains such as economics, quantitative, marketing, finance, OB/HR, operations, communication and information technology, duration of summer internship projects and similar components of the programme. The content of each course must be spelt out in detailed course outlines that should also contain course learning outcomes, duration of the course, assessment method, cases to be covered and other aspects of course delivery. Pedagogical approach covers the mix of lectures and cases, components of experiential learnings, self-paced learning modules, flipped classes, synchronous and asynchronous remote delivery of course content and other issues. BIMTECH believes that improving graduate management education requires creating 62

specialised management knowledge to match the demands of a more context-specific and technologically advanced knowledge economy. Experience guides BIMTECH to believe that rather than converting knowledge experts into managers, making managers more effective at managing technologically advanced organisations and personnel may create greater economic value. To create customised and unique graduate management education, the best option is to use stackable educational units and certificates. Quality audit In 2017 BIMTECH conducted a quality audit to check whether the teaching/ learning processes along with the admissions and placement processes are actually taking place as they are planned. To execute the initiative the starting point of reference was the curriculum development framework as displayed as Figure 1. Audit firm KPMG was invited to conduct a process audit of admission and placement departments. On its recommendation student evaluation was also included in the scope of the audit. Policy and procedure documents, process flow charts and a list of files maintained by the departments were made available. The managers in the respective departments were asked to describe the process of information flow and decision making. This was compared with the policy and procedure documents. Mismatches were detected and corrective actions were planned. Challenges faced during implementation were: updating and preparing comprehensive policy and procedure documents; designing rubrics to measure outcome (assurance of learning); and finding time slots to schedule meetings. Impact, uniqueness and applicability Impacts produced by the continuous effort in upgrading the curriculum were manifested by BIMTECH securing the highest level of accreditations from two of the national bodies, National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) and National Board of Accreditation (NBA), and satisfactory progress towards AACSB accreditation. Curriculum-related unique steps adopted by BIMTECH are reflected in the admission process by conducting a written ability test (WAT) and personal interview to assess traits such as openness,

On the right track | Ajoy Kumar Dey

Unique Design Innovating and Evolving

Differentiated curriculum and Lean delivery

Eco, Political, Regulatory, Legal, Tech, Social context in global

Student characteristics, Learning styles, Surface and deep

Ethic and integrity, Sustainability and transparency

General Bus Mgmt Knowledge

Leading, Global, Creative, Decision making, Judgment under uncertainty, Integrative Kknowledge

General Master's Degree

Communication, Ethics, Analytical, Use of IT, Inter-personal, Multicultural, Application orientation

Skills

Benchmark, Academia – Industry, connect and Strategy intent

Values

Figure 1

learnability, creativity and communication. The processes followed in BIMTECH are applicable to any management institute. They are easy to adopt in a faculty- and studentdriven environment focused on openness and experimentation and follow a systematic and participative approach to problem solving. BIMTECH is lucky to have created a culture that encourages self-audit and constructive criticism. Aligning with input variety While the structure and outlines of courses, text books, cases discussed, topics covered and evaluation methods followed are virtually the same in various institutes, there exists high degree of diversity among different institutes in terms of their ability to attract students, faculty, recruiters and deployment of resources, which are largely influenced by the brand and positioning of the institute. In order to cater to this diversity among the institutes, we propose to add a dimension to MBA/PGDM curriculum design: creating three levels based on the presence of components “knowing, doing and being” and rigour in delivery and assessment BIMTECH suggests differentiated characteristics of three types of curricula: Immersive, Experiential and Innovative and Evolving.

While the Immersive type of curriculum – that places more stress on “knowing” - may suit an institute that is resource starved and struggling to fill seats, the more resourceful institutes enjoying well-established brands can adopt Innovative and Evolving type of curriculum – that places equal stress on “knowing, doing and being”. The institutes lying in between may design a curriculum that is high on both “knowing” and “doing” and low on “being”. Such a modular structure of curriculum retains its freshness and relevance and flourishes with the progress of the institute. There are three pillars of building a curriculum that is innovative and evolving: benchmarking with competing institutes; academia-industry connections; and alignment with the strategic intent of the institute. Finally, differentiation is achieved by focusing on content, delivery, evaluation and feedback. Further, the supply chain of knowledge delivery, skill set building and inculcating values can be made lean by gradual removal of wasteful activities.

About the Author Professor Ajoy K Dey is a professor in the supply chain and operations management area at the Birla Institute of Management Technology in Greater Noida, India. He is the chairperson of the Centre for Management Case Development and editor of the South Asian Journal of Business & Management Cases.

EFMD Global Focus_Iss.1 Vol.13 www.globalfocusmagazine.com

Upcoming events Global Focus Iss.1 Vol.13 | 2019

February 2019

March 2019

April 2019

May 2019

June 2019

Event

Excellence in Practice Award â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Information Session

2019 EFMD HUMANE Winter School

EFMD â&#x20AC;&#x201C; EURAM Research Leadership Programme

EFMD Doctoral Programmes Conference

2019 EFMD Annual Conference

Dates / Venue

10-15 Mar / Barcelona, Spain

Dates / Venue

7-11 Apr / Lisbon, Portugal

13-15 May / Lancaster, United Kingdom

5-7 Jun / Carcavelos (Lisbon), Portugal

05 Feb / web-based Host

EFMD

Dates / Venue

Host

UPF Universitat Pompeu Fabra Barcelona

Host

NOVA School of Business and Economics

Event

2019 EFMD MBA Conference Dates / Venue

17-19 Mar / Budapest, Hungary Host

Corvinus University of Budapest Event

EQUIS & EPAS Accreditation Seminars

Host

Lancaster University Management School

Dates / Venue

Host

NOVA School of Businessand Economics

Event

2019 EFMD Marcom, External & Alumni Relations Conference Dates / Venue

24-26 Apr / Montreal, Canada Host

McGill University, Desautels Faculty of Management

Dates / Venue

18-20 Mar / Miami, United States Host

Babson College Miami Event

CLIP SBP Workshop Dates / Venue

21-22 Mar / Nanterre, France Host

Faurecia

More information For more information, visit our website: www.efmd.org or email info@efmd.org

International Teachers Programme 2020 Making good teaching great Taking place at London Business School / academic year 2019-2020

Module 1 5-10 January 2020

Module 2 22-26 June 2020

The ITP programme – delivered by world-class teachers, for teachers – is dedicated to helping you, as a business school faculty member, enhance your skills, capabilities and mind-set. To book your place visit: www.itp-schools.com/programmes Or for more information email: ITPatLBS@london.edu

“ ITP is one of the most valuable academic experiences that I have had as a university professor. Learning with and from your peers from different management schools around the world is a rewarding and effective strategy. I am very grateful for this opportunity!” ITP Participant

EFMD aisbl Rue Gachard 88 – Box 3 1050 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 2 629 08 10 Fax: +32 2 629 08 11 Email: info@efmd.org

Recruit the best talent from around the world

• Search from a global database of over 500,000 highly qualified leads. • Save time and money by recruiting globally from your office. • Enhance your recruitment efforts with robust demographic information.

gmac.com/getmorestudents

© 2018 Graduate Management Admission Council® (GMAC®). All rights reserved. GMAC logo is a trademark and GMAC®, GMASS®, GMAT®, Graduate Management Admission Council®, and Graduate Management Admission Search Service® are registered trademarks of the Graduate Management Admission Council in the United States and other countries.