business horizons

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached

copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research

and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution

and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or

licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party

websites are prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the

article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or

institutional repository. Authors requiring further information

regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are

encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Author's personal copy

What are business schools doing for business today?

Fred R. David a,*, Meredith E. David b, Forest R. David a

a School of Business, Francis Marion University, Florence, SC 29501, U.S.A.bCollege of Business, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, U.S.A.

1. Are business students learning whatemployers need?

More than two decades ago, Dickinson, Herbst, andO’Shaughnessy (1983) wrote a Business Horizonsarticle titled ‘‘What Are Business Schools Doingfor Business?’’ In this piece, the authors stated that

‘‘communication between business academics andthe business community appears to be minimal, andperhaps even threatening to both parties; academ-ics have little interest in practitioners and theirideas’’ (p. 51). We revisit this important issue,assess whether business schools today are offeringstudents what it takes to get a job, and develop amatching of job description-derived skill sets withacademic tracks that are feeders for such positions.

Since Gordon and Howell’s (1959) Ford and Car-negie Foundation Report, business schools havebeen widely criticized for being too academic. Inthe 1990s, Mintzberg (1996) and others outspokenly

Business Horizons (2011) 54, 51—62

www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor

KEYWORDSBusiness schoolcurricula;Business theory vs.practice;Business academiciansvs. practitioners;Business licenses,certifications,and skills

Abstract This article examines disparity between business school focus and businesscommunity needs. A content analysis of 200 corporate job descriptions collected in Fall2009 revealed 140 specific license/certification/skills commonly cited as required forcandidates applying for business jobs. A detailed matching of these post-graduationproficiencies with pre-graduation business major tracks is provided herein to assistschools in better aligning curricula with job requirements. This matching and aligningprocess is proposed as a key means for reducing disparity between post-graduationlicenses/certification/skills required and the academic tracks that are feeders for suchpositions. Examination of 200 resumes of business students nearing graduation revealedlow to no proficiency on the job description-derived skill sets. This finding suggests thatdisparity between school of business focus and practitioner needs is ongoing andpotentially problematic, at least at the institutions sampled. A content analysis of100 school of business course syllabi and 20 textbooks supported this conclusion. Thisarticle provides suggestions for closing the gap between business school curricula andcorporate needs. The old business school is compared to our vision of the new businessschool, where close alignment of pre-graduation training with post-graduation jobrequirements serves both students and practitioners well.# 2010 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. All rights reserved.

* Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F.R. David),

[email protected] (M.E. David), [email protected](F.R. David).

0007-6813/$ — see front matter # 2010 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2010.09.001


criticized business school curricula (Mintzberg &Gosling, 2002; Mintzberg & Lampel, 2001). The term‘ivory tower’ came to symbolize the failure of busi-ness schools to adequately provide what the busi-ness world needs. Bennis and O’Toole (2005, p. 96)said ‘‘business programs face intense criticism forfailing to impart useful skills, failing to prepareleaders, and even failing to lead graduates to goodcorporate jobs.’’ More recently, Reibstein, Day, andWind (2009) discuss how and why business academiahas lost its way. Ellson (2009, p. 162) concluded that‘‘whilst there may be exhortation of the benefits ofpractitioner learning, few institutions can obviouslyand straightforwardly claim teaching staffs thateither offer wide experience of business practiceor a pedagogy that reflects authentic and legitimatepractitioner learning.’’ Thus, after decades of busi-ness research, there appears to remain a dividebetween the training provided at some businessschools and the needs of business jobs. This situationhurts business students, business schools, businessfirms, and society.

We endorse, acknowledge, and recognize theoutstanding work that hundreds of academics havedone and continue to do in advancing the body ofknowledge in their respective business discipline.Many business professors over many years havemaintained an excellent dialogue with the businesscommunity through their consulting, writing, work-shops, continuing education, and teaching. Similar-ly, many business schools are doing an excellent jobbridging the gap between theory and practice fortheir students. Various publications such as BusinessWeek, U.S. News & World Report, The Wall StreetJournal, and Financial Times annually publish bestpractice rankings of business schools. For example,Business Week in 2009 ranked business schools ac-cording to the percentage of graduating studentsthat had completed internships; more than 90% ofstudents graduating from five business schools hadcompleted internships: Northeastern, Universityof Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, New YorkUniversity, and University of Virginia. Internshipsgenerally provide practical knowledge to students.Another 19 business schools in that ranking had 80%-89% of their graduating seniors completing intern-ships, led by Syracuse, Villanova, Cornell, CarnegieMellon, Lehigh, and Georgetown.

The primary purpose of our research was toidentify, categorize, and match specific businesslicenses, certifications, and technical skills citedin corporate job descriptions (as required forentry-level business jobs) with feasible academictracks within various business majors. Businessstudents likely need proficiency in one or moreof these license, certification, or skill areas to

compete for business jobs, especially in this eraof high unemployment. Our matching of skill setswith proposed academic tracks could benefit anybusiness school striving to more closely align aca-demic focus with corporate job needs.

The secondary purpose of our research was toassess the level of disconnect–—or gap–—betweenbusiness school focus and business communityneeds, and to suggest some specific ways to meetthe needs of both students and the business com-munity. A close alignment of business school focuswith business community needs should greatly ben-efit all stakeholders, especially business school stu-dents seeking full-time employment.

It is notable that large companies generally scanincoming resumes by key words, such as the exactlicenses, certifications, and technical skills cited injob descriptions. If a graduating senior in businessadministration, for example, does not have exper-tise in a particular skill area and thus does notreflect this competence on their resume, then of-tentimes their resume does not make the first cutfor consideration. Such graduates arguably wouldhave difficulty competing with persons laid offwho have proficiency in areas cited in posted jobdescriptions.

Some recruiters, particularly in non-technicalareas, assert that they do not recruit students asmuch for their specific skill sets as they do for thefact that they have essentially been ‘certified’ viagraduating from a top business school program.These recruiters firmly believe that they can providethe in-house technical education students mightrequire. What they seek are students who have beensocialized in a top business school program. Theserecruiters, then, would not necessarily screen ap-plicants on the basis of their holding special licensesor certifications as much as they would screen on thebasis of the school from which the applicant gradu-ated. Some faculty do not view their role as pro-viders of licenses and certifications, and somerecruiters do not hold faculty to this standard.Many critical certifications (e.g., CPA) occur post-graduation, not prior to graduation. Yet, studentswho do graduate with a specific skill set have acompetitive advantage over those who do not.

2. The old business school

Perhaps the time has come to realign business schoolcurricula with corporate needs. Pfeffer and Long(2002, p. 80) conclude ‘‘there is little evidence thatmastery of the knowledge acquired in businessschools enhances people’s careers; even attainingan MBA has little effect on graduates’ salaries

52 F.R. David et al.


or career attainment.’’ Bennis and O’Toole (2005, p.98) proclaimed that:

Instead of measuring themselves in terms of thecompetence of their graduates, or how welltheir faculties understand important driversof business performance, business schools mea-sure themselves almost solely by the rigor oftheir scientific research which is largely notgrounded in actual business practice.

More recent articles also conclude that in order to getpromoted in business academia, publications in theleading journals is key; contributions to practice, inor out of the classroom, are not important (Seggie &Griffith, 2009). Reibstein et al. (2009, p. 2) said‘‘most promotion and tenure decisions depend onarticles published in leading journals and, to a lesserdegree, on teaching and service; it is time thatpromotion and tenure decisions take contributionsto the advancement of practice into consideration.’’

Some business journals publish articles deemedby practitioners to be impractical. RichardWest, Dean Emeritus of the Stern School of Business,New York University, used the terms ‘‘fuzzy, irrele-vant, and pretentious’’ to describe business schoolresearch (Gaddis, 2000, p. 55). Some journal ar-ticles are seemingly written by academics for aca-demics, and offer little to no assistance for thepractice of business. Bailey and Ford (1996, p. 8)summarize this problem, saying ‘‘business schoolsappeal to one another as scholarly communitiesthrough a plethora of academic journals that areutterly divorced from the challenges of everydaymanagement.’’ In their AACSB-sponsored report onbusiness schools, Porter and McKibbin (1987) putthat publications intended for and acceptable toother academics ‘count,’ while publications in-tended primarily toward the practitioner ‘don’tcount.’ This sentiment may still exist at some, ifnot many, universities. In his 1993 presidential ad-dress to the Academy of Management, Donald Ham-brick (1994, p. 13) criticized the lack of impact ofthe work of its members on the business communitybecause of the ‘‘incestuous, closed loop’’ nature ofacademic research and writing.

Bennis and O’Toole (2005) noted: ‘‘A renownedCEO doubtless speaks for many when he labelsacademic publishing a ‘vast wasteland’ from thepoint of view of business practitioners. In fact,relevance is often systematically expunged frommany business journals’’ (p. 99). These authors statethat young, untenured business faculty at manylarge universities are urged to ‘‘avoid work withpractitioners; concentrate your research on narrow,scientific subjects’’ (p. 100). Young business facultythat publish practitioner articles to the exclusion of

theoretical articles run the risk of being deniedtenure at some universities. Consequently, manybusiness faculty and most business PhD studentsknow considerably more about academic publishingand sophisticated statistical techniques than prob-lems of the workplace.

Discontent between the business community andacademia has become more pronounced of late asbusinesses are struggling to survive the economicrecession. Although business schools and businesseducation have been commercial successes, thereare substantial questions about the relevance oftheir educational product and doubts about theireffects on both the careers of their graduates and onmanagement practice (Pfeffer & Long, 2002). Oneneed only contrast business schools with other pro-fessional schools–—such as medicine, engineering,nursing, and law–—to see the disassociation betweencurricula and industry practice. Seth Godin (2000,p. 322) attended Stanford’s Graduate School ofBusiness, studied this issue, and said ‘‘the corecurriculum taught at business schools is irrelevant,and the utility of a business school degree is notbased on learning.’’ In contrast, law professors areexpected to be first-rate scholars, and articles pub-lished in law reviews are often cited in trials. Simi-larly, medical school professors usually publishadvanced biological research, but these facultyare often also practicing doctors.

Pfeffer and Long (2002, p. 84) note ‘‘a large bodyof evidence suggests that the curriculum taughtin business schools has only a small relationshipto what is important for succeeding in business.’’Ideally, business schools provide students the nec-essary training to compete favorably for jobs in thebusiness world. Mintzberg and Gosling (2002, p. 28),however, reported that ‘‘contemporary businesseducation focuses on the functions of business morethan the practice of managing.’’ More than a decadeearlier, Leavitt (1989, p. 40) concluded that ‘‘busi-ness schools have been designed without practicefields.’’ Leavitt also noted that ‘‘we have built aweird, almost unimaginable design for business ed-ucation that distorts those subjected to it intocritters with lopsided brains, icy hearts, and shrunk-en souls’’ (p. 39).

3. The research: Content analyses

To achieve the primary and secondary purpose ofthis research, we performed content analyses of (1)corporate job descriptions; (2) business studentresumes; (3) business course syllabi; and (4) businesstextbooks. We examined documents from fiveAACSB-Accredited business schools located in the

What are business schools doing for business today? 53


eastern United States: Francis Marion University,University of Texas at Tyler, Georgia College andState University, La Salle University, and Universityof Rochester. We believe these schools are repre-sentative of the population of business schools, butcertainly every school has unique policies, pro-grams, students, and faculty.

3.1. Corporate job descriptions

Job descriptions reveal specific business licenses,certifications, and technical skills that companiesrequire candidates to have before applying for vari-ous positions. A total of 200 corporate job descrip-tions were examined, resulting in identification of140 specific competencies that included 63 businesslicenses/certifications and 77 technical skills. Asindicated in Table 1, these 140 required competen-cies for various entry-level jobs were organizedunder five typical majors in a bachelor of businessadministration (BBA) program. Under Managementthere were 29 unique requirements, 26 under Mar-keting, 23 under Finance, 18 under Accounting, and44 under MIS. The job descriptions were obtainedfrom websites such as monster.com and careerbuil-der.com; the various jobs were available across theUnited States and spanned all academic majors andmany industries. The job descriptions were gath-ered by graduating BBA and MBA students actually inthe job market.

Within each business major, the 140 licenses,certifications, and skills were grouped into homoge-neous sets. We will call these autonomous setsacademic tracks because these proposed groupingscould provide the basis for a business school toeither establish for the first time or modify theirexisting tracks within business majors. This keymatching information is provided in Tables 2 through6 for Management, Marketing, Finance, Accounting,and MIS, respectively. In addition, these Tables alsoprovideabreakdownbetween licenses/certifications

available versus technical skills required across allacademic tracks. Note in Table 2 that the 29 jobdescription-derived skill sets in Management wereorganized under two academic tracks: Production/Operations Management and Human Resource Man-agement. Also note that across these two tracks, 14different management licenses/certifications wereavailable and 15 different skills were cited among 40management-related job postings.

Table 3 reveals 26 Marketing job posting-derivedproficiencies organized into three tracks: Sales,Advertising, and Marketing Research. Note thatthere are only 7 license/certifications in Marketingversus 19 technical skills. For example, under theAdvertising track, we only found one certificationavailable: the Advertising Skills Certification (ASC).Note the Microsoft certifications and skills underMarketing Research. These are useful proficienciesfor jobs across several majors and tracks but weincluded them only here since they were mostcommonly associated with Marketing jobs.

Table 4 provides 23 Finance proficiencies groupedinto three tracks: Corporate, Banking/Insurance, andInvestment/Brokerage. In direct contrast to the Mar-keting breakdown, note that there were 20 Financelicenses/certifications available versus only 3 tech-nical skills found among the 200 job postings. Thisinformation suggests Finance curricula in schools ofbusiness should perhaps include or expand coverageof license/certification content areas.

As illustrated in Table 5, the 18 Accountingjob description-derived proficiencies were groupedinto three tracks: Tax, Financial, and Business Ser-vices. The breakdown was 8 license/certificationsand 10 technical skills. Three technical skills–—QuickBooks, Turbo Tax, and Quicken–—showed upquite often in the job descriptions, yet Accountingcurricula at the sample business schools do notprovide coverage of these software packages.

Table 6 reveals 44 MIS licenses, certifications, andtechnical skills organized into three academic tracks:


Table 1. Profile of participants and variables

Business area #Resumes

#Job

descriptions

#Coursesyllabi

#Textbooks

#Licenses/Certifications

#Skills

Management 50 40 20 4 14 15

Marketing 45 44 17 4 7 19

Finance 28 51 14 4 20 3

Accounting 18 26 15 4 8 10

MIS 20 39 15 4 14 30

MBA 39 0 19 0

TOTAL 200 200 100 20 63 77


Website Design/Support, Network Security/Support,and Database Management. There were 14 MISlicenses/certifications and 30 proficiencies foundin the job postings. All but one of the licenses/certifications were within the Network Security/

Support track. Job postings require various technicalskills in the Website Design/Support and DatabaseManagement areas.

The matching information provided in Tables 2through 6 could benefit any business school that


Table 3. Corporate job description-derivedmarketing skill setswithin three academic tracks (Sales, Advertising,and Marketing Research)

Licenses/Certifications Skills

Sales Sales

! Certified eMarketer (CeM) ! Point of Sales (POS) Software! Marketing Skills Certification (MSC) ! Customer Relationship Management (CRM)! Professional Certified Marketer (PCM) ! ACT! By Sage

! Microsoft Outlook

Advertising Advertising

! Advertising Skills Certification (ASC) ! Microsoft Publisher! Desktop Publishing (DTP)! Adobe Photoshop & Illustrator! Adobe InDesign & Flash! Adobe Dreamweaver! Search Engine Marketing (SEM)! Quark Xpress

Marketing Research Marketing Research

! Microsoft Certified Application Specialist (MCAS) ! Access! Microsoft Office Specialist (MOS) ! Microsoft Excel! Microsoft Office SharePoint Service (MOSS) ! Microsoft PowerPoint

! Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)! Statistical Analytical Software (SAS)! R software & language

Table 2. Corporate job description-derived management skill sets within two academic tracks (Production/Operations and Human Resources)


Production/Operations Management Production/Operations Management

! Certified Supply Chain Professional (CSCP) ! Lean Manufacturing! Certified in Production & Inventory Management (CPIM) ! Kanban! Certified Six Sigma Black Belt (CSSBB) ! ISO 9001 and ISO 14000! Business Process Management (BPM) ! Project Management! Certificate ! Occupational Safety & Health

Administration (OSHA)! Certified Quality Technician (CQT)! Project Kickstart Pro 5! Microsoft Project (MSP)

Human Resource Management Human Resource Management

! Certified Compensation Professional (CCP) ! Human Resource Information System (HRIS)! Work-Life Certified Professional (WLCP) ! Team Building! Certified Benefits Professional (CBP) ! Interpersonal! Professional Human Resources (PHR) ! Public Speaking! Certified Human Resource Professional (CHRP) ! Writing! Global Professional in Human Resource (GPHR) ! Leadership! Senior Professional in Human Resource (SPHR) ! Computer! Chartered Human Resources AnalystCertification (CHRAC)

! Associate in Management (AIM)


desires to more closely align its courses and curriculawith post-graduation job requirements. The job de-scription analysis definitely suggests that businessstudents nearing graduation needmore than commu-nication skills, computer skills, interpersonal skills,and listening skills on their resume. They need to beproficient, licensed, or certified in something specificwithin their major. Well, are they? To answer thisquestion,wegatheredandanalyzedresumes, syllabi,

and textbooks to assess the degree to which postgraduation job requirements are being provided byexisting academic curricula at those institutions.

3.2. Student resumes

After compiling the list of licenses/certificationsand skills, the degree of congruence betweenbusiness school focus and business community needs


Table 5. Corporate job description-derived accounting skill sets within three academic tracks (Tax, Financial,and Business Services)


Tax Tax

! Certified Public Accountant (CPA) ! QuickBooks! Accredited Business Accountant ! Turbo Tax! Accredited Tax Preparer ! Quicken! Accredited Tax Advisor ! Lacerte

Financial Financial

! Certified Management Accountant (CMA) ! Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)! International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)! Microsoft Dynamic SL! Deltek GCS

Business Services Business Services

! Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) ! Peachtree Quantum! Certified Patient Accounting Management (CPAM) ! Property Automation’s Tenant Pro 7! Certified Clinic Account Manager (CCAM)

Table 4. Corporate job description-derived finance skill sets within three academic tracks (Corporate, Banking/Insurance, and Investment/Brokerage)


Corporate Corporate

! Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) ! Financial Statement Analysis! Certified Financial Planner (CFP)! Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC)! Certified Financial Management (CFM)! Chartered Asset Manager (CAM)! Hyperion Financial Management (HFM)

Banking/Insurance Banking/Insurance

! LSU’s Graduate School of Banking Diploma! Chartered Life Underwriter (CLU)! Life, Accident, & Health (LANH)! Property & Casualty (PC)

Investment/Brokerage Investment/Brokerage

! Certified Funds Specialist (CFS) ! INTEX! Certified Annuity Specialist (CAS) ! Calypso (Calypso Technology, Inc.)! Chartered Investment Counselor (CIC) ! Cornerstone’s Power Investment Tools! Chartered Alternative Investment Analyst (CAIA)! FINRA’s Series 6, 7, 24, 63, and 65! NASAA’s Series 66 (combines Series 63 and 65)! Certificate in Investment Performance Management (CIPM)


was assessed in three ways. First, 200 BBA and MBAstudent resumes were reviewed to determine theextent to which licenses/certifications were includ-ed on these documents. A total of 161 resumes fromBBA students nearing graduation were reviewed,along with 39 resumes from MBA students close toreceiving their degree.

Content analysis of the student resumes revealedthat the vast majority of graduating BBA and MBAstudents lack experience in the license/certificationand skill areas identified in this research; indeed,95% of the sample resumes gave no mention ofany license/certification or technical skill listed in

Tables 2 through 6. Almost without exception, stu-dents were not trained in the specific areas neededby businesses. Students who submitted the resumeswere not interviewed, so it is possible that some ofthese individuals might possess a certain skill set notlisted. As these technical skills and license/certif-ications take substantial time and effort to achieve,however, we believe most–—if not all–—studentswould include proficiency on their resumes if theypossessed that credential.

No student, of course, would need proficiency inall the license/certification and skill areas cited intheir major/track. Indeed, proficiency in a single


Table 6. Corporate job description-derived MIS skill sets within three academic tracks (Website Design/Support,Network Security/Support, and Database Management)


Website Design/Support Website Design/Support

! WordPress! Cascading Style Sheets (CSS)! HTML and XHTML! Asynchronous JavaScript XML (AJAX)! Search Engine Optimization (SEO)! Simple Object Access Pool (SOAP)! Website Management System (WMS)

Network Security/Support Network Security/Support

! Cisco Certified Entry Networking Technician (CCENT) ! Crystal Reports! Cisco Certified Network Associate (CCNA1) ! JavaScript, Java EE, and Java SE! CCNA1 Routing & Switching Certification ! Geographic Information System (GIS)! Cisco Certified Design Expert (CCDETM) ! Citrix Software! Software Quality Engineer Certification (SQEC) ! ARIS! Certified Software Business Analyst (CSBA) ! Linux! Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE)! Certified Network Administrator! Certified Network Engineer! Project Management Professional (PMP)! Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP)! Certified Identity Theft RiskManagement Specialist (CITRMS)

! Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP)

Database Management Database Management

! CompTIA A+, Network+ Certification ! Structured Query Language (SQL)! MySQL! Advanced Access! Advanced Project Management! Transportation Management System! Data Warehouse Management! Data Mining! Business Intelligence and ReportingTools (BIRT)

! Business Objects XI! Extended Spreadsheet Database (Essbase)! Oracle Database! Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)! Hibernate! SAS and SPSS


technical skill area or license/certification set maybe sufficient to land an excellent job. But, senioraccounting majors were not proficient in Quick-Books, and thus gave no mention of QuickBookson their resumes. MIS majors were not proficientin WordPress, a widely used website design tool.Marketing majors had used SPSS, but too little toinclude it on their resume.

3.3. Course syllabi

Next, to assess the degree of disparity betweenpost-graduation jobs requirements and pre-gradua-tion training, we examined 100 business coursesyllabi: 81 from BBA courses and 19 from MBAcourses (see Table 1). Almost without exception,no licenses/certifications or technical skills neededto obtain entry-level business jobs were mentionedin the 100 course syllabi examined. The syllabispanned Management, Marketing, Finance, Ac-counting, and MIS, and were derived from AACSB-International Assurance of Learning documents,individual faculty, and university websites.

Follow-up conversations with business professorsconfirmed that courses being taught are not aimedat licensing or certifying students in anything. Pro-fessors generally said that knowledge of theory,associated with the respective business majorareas, would enable students to study on theirown outside of class to obtain desired licenses orcertifications. Professors were often unaware of jobdescription-derived licenses and certificationsavailable in their respective areas.

3.4. Business textbooks

Finally, four business textbooks in each of the fivebusiness major areas were examined to assess cover-age of business license/certification/skill contentareas as posted in corporate job descriptions. Asindicated in Table 7, the textbooks selected all had2009 or 2010 copyrights and were deemed by respec-tive faculty to be mainstream and widely used. Wefound that business textbooks largely do notmentionthe available license/certifications. There are a fewexceptions, such as accounting textbooksmentioning


Table 7. The sample textbooks

Author(s) Title Publisher* Year

Management

Certo Modern Management: Concepts and Skills PH 2009Katz/Green Entrepreneurial Small Business M/I 2009Krajewski/Ritzman/Malhotra Operations Management PH 2010Boyer/Verma Operations and Supply Chain Management SW 2010

Marketing

Boone/Kurtz Contemporary Marketing SW 2010Lamb/Hair/McDaniel Marketing SW 2010Price/Ferrell Marketing SW 2010Zikmund/Babin Essentials of Marketing Research SW 2010

Finance

Ross/Westerfield/Jordan Fundamentals of Corporate Finance M/I 2010Welch Corporate Finance PH 2009Saunders/Cornett Financial Markets and Institutions M/I 2009Berk/DeMarzo/Harford Fundamentals of Corporate Finance PH 2009

Accounting

Nilolai/Bazley/Jones Intermediate Accounting SW 2010Spiceland/Thomas/Herrmann Financial Accounting M/I 2009Harrison/Horngren/Thomas Financial Accounting PH 2010Libby/Libby/Short Financial Accounting M/I 2009

MIS

Haag/Cummings Management Information Systems M/I 2010Kroenke Using Management Information Systems PH 2009Valacich/Schneider Information Systems Today PH 2010Laudon/Laudon Management Information Systems PH 2010* PH represents Prentice Hall; M/I represents McGraw-Hill/Irwin; SW represents South-Western.


CPA and CMA licenses, and finance textbooks men-tioning CFA, CFM, and CFP certifications. However,the sample business textbooks examined did notprovide substantial coverage of the respective 140skill sets identified. We should note here that somefaculty do not use textbooks and some supplementtexts with course packets; so, in this study we havenot assessed all conceivable pedagogical sources oflicense/certification or technical skill materials.

4. The disparity remains

Our findings suggest an ongoing gap between what isbeing taught in business schools compared to what isactually needed by companies. Since only five busi-ness schools were surveyed, these results may notbe representative of all business schools. As men-tioned earlier, some business schools do a betterjob than others in aligning curricula with post-graduation job requirements, as reported annuallyby publications such as U.S. News & World Report.

The disparity between academic focus andcorporate needs has an unintended benefit. Anybusiness student today who takes the initiative,on their own, to acquire specific business license/certification/skills may have a distinct competitiveadvantage over students who rely solely on theiracademic training to acquire specific competenciesneeded to get various jobs. For example, Internation-al Accounting Standards (IAS) are not being taught inthe sample business schools, nor are they coveredinmost accounting textbooks; yet, all corporations inthe United States must adopt these standards by theyear 2014. So, a self-motivated senior in accountingcould acquire proficiency in this area and have asignificant competitive advantage over other tradi-tionally educated applicants competing for the samejob. Similarly, WordPress is not being covered in MISclasses among the sample institutions. Studentscould independently choose to study this techniqueand then apply for relevant jobs associated withwebsite development and promotion, or open theirown business providingwebsite design services. Busi-ness faculty could encourage and support such ‘ontheir own’ studying; matching information providedin Tables 2 through 6 can help guide these efforts.

5. The new business school

The categorization of post-graduation job licenses,certifications, and technical skills identified in thisresearch regarding business majors and suggestedtracks could prove useful to business schools whichdesire to more closely align their curricula with

corporate needs. The new business school of thefuture will feature minimal disparity pre-and-postgraduation needs of students.

The business schools comprising our sample didnot offer tracks within majors, but tracks organizedas suggested herein could aid in providing studentswith more marketable skills and serve to reducedisparity between curricula and corporate needs.Simple inclusion of track information on a student’sresume couldmake that personmoremarketable forvarious jobs. Tracks within majors could also enablebusiness schools to better tailor courses of study tobusiness community needs. Business schools thatalready provide tracks within majors could comparetheir existing tracks to those suggested in Tables 2through 6.

To better serve their students and the businesscommunity, the sample business schools should re-vise their mission to become more practitioner-oriented. There is need of a change in overallphilosophy and mission to shift emphasis from theo-ry to practice. This is not an either-or proposition;there simply needs to be more balance betweentheory and practice, with intrinsic and extrinsicrewards for practice being commensurate with re-wards for theory. This fundamental change shouldbe discussed among all business faculty and admin-istrators to ideally achieve consensus regarding astrategic plan for the future.

To the extent that our findings are applicablebeyond the sample schools, schools of businessshould revise their curricula to provide more train-ing on technical skills needed for graduates to getjobs. Business course descriptions in college cata-logues need to incorporate an emphasis on practicalbusiness licenses, certifications, and technicalskills. Various business courses need revising toprovide training whereby students who completethe course are prepared to take a particular licenseor certification exam, or are markedly proficient insome specific business skill. Within newly designedcourses, pedagogical tools such as seminars, work-shops, guest speakers, and class exercises could beaimed more at bridging the gap between academicsand business community needs. Leonard (1992) andBeatty, Larny, Peacock, and Saladin (1996, p. 56)said that ‘‘academics must be willing to share theresponsibility of crafting the content of courses withexecutives, and executives must do more than tell afew war stories, give the current state of recruiting,and run out the door.’’

Another positive change that schools of businesscould make is to design and offer new courses thatspecifically train students in license/certification/skill areas deemed most critically needed in theirgeographic service area. For example, there could



be short courses on SPSS, HTML, WordPress, Quick-Books, and other such technical areas listed inTables 2 through 6. Business schools could offermore internship opportunities, to provide studentswith actual work experience in particular businesslicense/certification areas. While it is one thing tohave knowledge, it is quite another to have bothknowledge and experience in particular skill setsdesired by corporations. As an example of structure,students might receive 1-3 credit hours, plus com-pensation from the employing organization. Someschools already have internship programs; othersshould invest in the endeavor.

Business schools of the future should also strivefor smaller classes in effort to reduce the disparitybetween academic focus and corporate needs.While some business schools already offer smallclasses, the overall trend toward voluminous lecturehalls precludes the type of clinical instruction thatone sees in architecture, medical, or other profes-sional schools. By definition, large classes makesome practitioner-oriented pedagogy difficult; con-sider, for instance, group work, experiential exer-cises, student oral presentations, visits to areabusinesses, and even answering students’ questions.

Prior research suggests that business schoolsshould hire more faculty who have business experi-ence and credentials. As noted by Pfeffer and Long(2002, p. 90), ‘‘the shortage of faculty with a doc-torate in business means more business schools arehiring from social science departments such as psy-chology and sociology.’’ For many years, social sci-entists have derived power from the scarcity ofterminally qualified business faculty. In someschools of business, social scientists have significantor dominant influence over policies and norms as perresearch, curricula, promotion, and tenure.

Also, to more closely align academic focus withcorporate needs, business school accrediting orga-nizations such as AACSB—International could supportand advocate the kinds of changes being proposed inthis article. AACSB is largely operated by school ofbusiness deans. AACSB’s strict requirements regard-ing Assurance of Learning, for example, couldencourage–—if not mandate–—schools of business tomore closely align business school training and busi-ness community needs. If this does not happen soon,then non-AACSB schools of business that becomepractical/skills-oriented may gain competitive ad-vantages over traditional schools of business thatmaintain the status quo of high disconnect betweencurricula and practice. Already, there are a growingnumber of short courses being offered by consultingfirms and corporations to fill this void. And, likely,there will be more and more non-accredited onlineinstitutions and smaller colleges offering exactly

which licenses/certifications and skills corporationsneed, rather than what the Academy desires.Such innovative institutions could pose a substantialthreat to the prosperity of traditional businessschools, as society today needs and seeks bothknowledge and training from professional schoolgraduates.

Extant research suggests that schools of businesscould alter their tenure and promotion guidelines toencourage and reward practitioner-based researchand consulting from faculty. At too many universi-ties, what goes on in the classroom–—as well asconsulting–—is not nearly as important to tenureand promotion as how many articles the facultyperson has published in top journals. Reibsteinet al. (2009, pp. 2-3) state:

It is time that promotion and tenure decisionstake ‘‘contributions to the advancement ofpractice’’ into consideration; if it is acceptedthat part of the purpose of business schools is toadvance the practice of business, this should bepart of the consideration for tenure, salaryincreases, and recognition.

Schools of business should seek a balance betweentheoretical research using student subjects, labora-tory investigations, and mathematical models andpractical or applied business research using data andsubjects from actual businesses. It would also behelpful for journaleditors andpeer reviewers to insiston all articles providing discussion related to impli-cations for practitioners. Bartunek (2007) reportedthat 34% of recent articles in Academy of Manage-ment Journal did not mention implications for prac-tice. Ghoshal, Arnzen, and Brownfield (1992) andBeatty et al. (1996, p. 55) noted that the linkagebetween research and teaching assumes that re-search ‘‘will lead to knowledge useful to businessand that such knowledge will flow back into compa-nies through business school graduates and continu-ing education programs.’’ Certainly, it would be astrange pharmacy or dentistry school whose researchoutput was primarily intended to be only of interestand use to fellow academics, rather than practicingpharmacists or dentists. Articles published in journalswidely read by businesspeople actually provide freeadvertising for schools of business, to an audiencethey presumably serve (in addition to students) andseek support from: businesses.

To facilitate transition from old school policies tonew school practices, it would be helpful for busi-ness textbook authors to embrace some of thelicenses/certifications and skills identified in thisarticle and incorporate content that offers studentsproficiency in these areas. There definitely exists a



niche, if not large, market of school of businessfaculty who desire right now to provide more prac-tical content for their students. Many faculty wouldgreatly appreciate having the opportunity to adopt atextbook aimed at providing practical proficienciesto students. Truly adopting a practitioner themecould provide a distinct competitive advantage totextbooks.

The new business school might also feature anexecutive in residency program and/or a faculty inresidence program whereby corporate executivesand business faculty, respectively, spend a semesterworking inside the other’s domain. Beatty et al.(1996) discussed this exchange concept at length,yet few schools have incorporated the idea, likelyfor financial reasons. Certainly, there are businessfaculty and business executives who would beinterested in participating in a well-designed ex-change program. Oftentimes, practitioners of busi-ness have knowledge of certain phenomena longbefore academics do; further, faculty over the yearshave rightly complained about lack of adequateaccess to real-world data. It is clear that coopera-tive efforts between faculty and practitionersare essential in order for relevant research to beconducted.

Over the last 50 years, business schools havegenerally rejected the so-called trade school modelin order to gain ‘respectability and approval’ ontheir campuses by conforming to the norms andbehaviors of arts and sciences departments. Some,if not many, business schools today need to modelthemselves a bit more closely after their profession-al school counterparts in order to simultaneouslymeet the needs of their students and corporations.If medical, dentistry, law, architecture, nursing,pharmacy, education, and other professionalschools on campus can focus on real-world practice,then business schools can, too. Some businessschools have guidelines specifically preventing fac-ulty from moonlighting via consulting engagements.More engagement between business faculty andpracticing managers may, however, be a good thingrather than a bad thing. Such interactioncould result in more classroom coverage of jobdescription-based proficiencies as needed forobtaining jobs today.

6. The bridge between theory andpractice

Certainly, there are many other changes that someschools of business need to make in order to simulta-neously meet the needs of both students and thebusiness community. More closely aligning academic

tracks within majors, and courses within tracks, withthe 140 specific license/certification/skill areasidentified in Tables 2 through 6 would be a great startto reduce disparity between academic focus andcorporate needs. Hopefully, this article provides in-centive and direction for business faculty and admin-istrators to discuss needed reforms in schoolphilosophy and policies. Whenever concepts are be-ing discussed in accounting, finance, marketing,management, or MIS classes, there is a basic assump-tion of practical utility to managers and organiza-tions; otherwise, the concept would not beworthy ofcoverage. If schools of businesswill make some of thechanges proposed herein, all stakeholders will bene-fit, especially students who desperately need profi-ciency in the specific license/certification/skill areasto be considered for today’s corporate jobs.

To conclude their article titled ‘‘What Are Busi-ness Schools Doing for Business?’’, Dickinson,Herbst, and O’Shaughnessy (1983, p. 51) noted that‘‘professors routinely suggest. . . corporationsshould be responsible to society, but few prestigiousacademics have suggested that business schoolsshould be more responsive to their environments.’’In writing the present article, we do not claim to beprestigious academics. But, we do encourage busi-ness schools that have large disparity between cur-ricula focus and corporate needs to initiate reformssuggested herein, to be more responsive to theirenvironments.

We believe the gap between academic focus andbusiness community needs will eventually bebridged at most colleges and universities. For lag-gards, however, business students–—on their ownand of their own volition–—should consider becominglicensed or certified in one or more of the areasidentified herein. Too many graduating businessstudents today come to their first jobs long ontheory and short on know-how. We envision a differ-ent future, in which academics and practitionersregularly enter into each other’s world withoutneeding to cast aside their own world. Studentsare, in fact, the bridge between theory and prac-tice, between academics and practitioners. Meetingstudents’ needs as outlined in this article couldcreate a lasting bridge to the day when we cananswer ‘‘What are business schools doing for busi-ness?’’ by detailing ‘‘What business schools are doingfor students.’’

References

Bailey, J., & Ford, C. (1996). Management as science versusmanagement as practice in postgraduate business education.Business Strategy Review, 7(4), 7—12.



Bartunek, J. M. (2007). Academic-practitioner collaboration neednot require joint or relevant research: Toward a relationalscholarship of integration. Academy of Management Journal,50(6), 1323—1333.

Beatty, B. L., Larny, R. E., Peacock, P. R., & Saladin, B. A. (1996).The faculty-in-residence program. Business Horizons, 39(1),55—64.

Bennis, W., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost theirway. Harvard Business Review, 83(5), 96—104.

Dickinson, R., Herbst, A., & O’Shaughnessy, J. (1983). What arebusiness schools doing for business? Business Horizons, 26(2),46—51.

Ellson, T. (2009). Assessing contribution of research in business topractice. Journal of Business Research, 62(11), 1160—1164.

Gaddis, P. O. (2000). Business schools: Fighting the enemy within.Strategy and Business, 21(4), 51—57.

Ghoshal, S., Arnzen, B., & Brownfield, S. (1992). A learningalliance between business and business schools: Executiveeducation as a platform for partnership. California Manage-ment Review, 35(1), 50—67.

Godin, S. (2000, September). Change agent. Fast Company, 38,322.

Gordon, R., & Howell, J. (1959). Higher education for business.New York: Columbia University Press.

Hambrick, D. C. (1994). What if the Academy actually mattered?Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 11—16.

Leavitt, E. J. (1989). Educating our MBAs: On teaching what wehaven’t taught. California Management Review, 31(3), 38—50.

Leonard, E. W. (1992). MBA: Is the traditional model doomed?Harvard Business Review, 70(6), 128—137.

Mintzberg, H. (1996). Ten ideas designed to rile everyonewho caresabout management. Harvard Business Review, 74(4), 61—68.

Mintzberg, H., & Gosling, J. H. (2002). Reality programming forMBAs. Strategy and Business, 26(1), 28—31.

Mintzberg, H., & Lampel, J. (2001, February 19). Matter ofdegrees: Do MBAs make better CEOs? Fortune, 143(4), 244.

Pfeffer, J., & Long, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Lesssuccess than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learn-ing and Education, 1(1), 78—95.

Porter, L. W., & McKibbin, L. E. (1987). Management educationand development. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Reibstein, D., Day, G., & Wind, J. (2009). Guest editorial: Ismarketing academia losing its way? Journal of Marketing,73(4), 1—3.

Seggie, S. H., & Griffith, D. A. (2009). What does it take to getpromoted in marketing academia? Understanding exceptionalpublication productivity in the leading marketing journals.Journal of Marketing, 73(1), 122—132.


business horizons

Documents

bcollege of business

business horizonsarticle

business jobs

business school focus

school of business focus

business schools havebeen

resumes of business

david aa school of business