Someone else's shoes

I'm not sure you can ever actually walk in someone else's shoes and have long thought that what you learn from the experience of others is most valuable when you consider it within your own unique circumstances.

Our research through 33 semi-structured interviews across 14 countries with those leading MBA programmes globally identified five main barriers to reviews being initiated or completed successfully. By understanding these barriers, you might not always be able to avoid them but you can anticipate and reduce their impact.

Discussed in Chapter Two of our complimentary report 'Being the Changemaker: Successfully Navigating MBA Design Improvements and Innovation' sponsored by Graduate Business Curriculum Roundtable, these barriers are:

BEING REACTIVE: leading to decisions taken under pressure without proper evaluation. Action is often only taken after multiple signals are received: drop in rankings, accreditation feedback, reduced number or quality of applications...

AVERSION TO RISK: Is there appetite to be ‘first mover’? Are you changing the flagship programme that is inextricably linked to the business school reputation?

INTERNAL POLITICS: culture, politics, power structure all need to be understood. Senior leadership support and stakeholder engagement can make or break a review.

COST: cost implications of changes and impact on programme P&L, particularly when building in greater choice and flexibility. 

LACKING SPEED: multiple layers of cross-departmental and committee approvals required. 

“I’m aware of everything I ask and how it contributes to the extent we’re in the red or not. We made the conscious decision that we were not going to try to run the program to be profitable because it was going to force us to do some very odd things that I don’t think would have benefited our flagship program.”

We found that to limit the impact of such barriers you need to:

• design a process to regularly consider the need for programme review and pay attention to weak signals.

  
  

• -understand the appetite for risk associated with the specific programme, the cost and other constraints and plan for the approval/committee structures

  
  

• cultivate senior leadership and the support of key stakeholder influencers

  
  

• clearly define the objectives of the review

  
  

• agree objectives and parameters with key stakeholders before having conversations about content and structure

  
  

• make sure decisions are evidence-based and communicated as such

  
  

• look for synergies across the school/university, particularly when introducing new content.

  
  

• design programme structure for future easy flexibility. Use co-curricular, extra-curricular and electives to test potential new content.