I am a practitioner who was made a visiting, adjunct professor in a leading business school in the PHL
However, I am amazed at the age of the curriculum and/or syllabus. Some are circa 80s and when we submitted new syllabi, they were rejected. Several proposals for new course were asked but nothing came out of them. Maybe they are not popular, no takers, so no use introducing or wasting resources. But all new products undergo growth or birthing pains or even failures. How can the university be a leading edge if it lacks courage to innovate?
But knowledge and practice do change and evolve for the better. If we are left behind?
Says Warren Buffet, " If the rate of change outside exceeds the rate of change inside, the end is in sight"
In the business school, the predominant thought is still the competitive advantage of business by Michael Porter. But Michael Porter shifted all ready to CSV and coopetition.
Or Strategy. But the business model by Alex Osterwalder is the dominant thinking now. And maybe the school is slow to adapt.
We are teaching entrepreneurship and innovation is the key to survival and must be taught to colleagues and its leadership? For it to be dominant in the industry?
This post may get me into trouble?
No comments:
Post a Comment