Introduction
The business environment has become increasingly multifaceted and unpredictable because of the unremitting changes that affect every aspect of life. This situation has led to counterarguments concerning the relevance of school curriculums in terms of shaping business practices. Various management theories have been developed in an attempt to improve the practicability of businesses in an environment that demands advancement in every facet of functionality.
However, the developed theories have assumed a rigid framework that leaves business entrants with the option of adopting a somewhat globally recognised business archetype. Seemingly, business schools have served as channels for transmission of this conventional business knowledge from one generation to another. This essay explores the links that exist between Ghoshal’s article of 2005 and the personal level of academic aspiration availed through education with reference to management and organisation disciplines.
Review of Literature
The Link between Ghoshal’s Article and Personal Level Academic Aspiration
Ghoshal’s article emphasises how rogue education has served as a tool to do away with good management practices. In his article, Ghoshal (2005) puts it clear that economics has had a great influence on the formation of other academic disciplines such as management. Ghoshal (2005) is very critical about the nature of knowledge that modern business schools instil in students. Undoubtedly, many assumptions have built the constructs of numerous management theories. These assumptions have compelled Ghoshal to view the development of management theories as inappropriate for business practices since they do not reflect reality.
Management education presents the learner with knowledge about the functions of the business whilst omitting important pragmatic concepts that entail hands-on experience. Furthermore, the discipline of economics has encroached management training. The situation has convinced learners that the purposes of businesses include profitability and competition. Inappropriate conceptual approaches have led to the development of rogue management theories that have failed to match the required managerial practice. As a result, management education has developed a culture of unethical managers who have accepted the conventionality of business management.
Ghoshal (2005) emphasises the adoption of management approaches that add other concepts, such as business ethics and morality. In his article, Ghoshal (2005) clearly states that academic research and development of management theories have resulted in undesirable practices in the management of businesses. There is a tendency of students and even authors of these theories to believe in intellectual knowledge as advanced by earlier management theorists.
He explains that many management scandals in the world occur due to the generation of half-baked management graduates who lack business ethics and morality. It is true that the current conventionally accepted management theories have ruined managerial practice. Conventionality triggers the disuse of cognitive abilities. This situation leads to the adoption of management theories that are based on assumptions.
In modern society, researchers, scholars, and practitioners have run into recognition of general business ideologies. They believe in universally accepted business practices rather than the practical ones (Browne & Keeley 2012). According to Browne and Keeley (2012), a critical mismatch is evident between societal demands and the nature of theoretical and organisational knowledge that is imparted to learners through schooling to satisfy the same demands. In his article, ‘Bad Management Theories are Destroying Good Management’, Ghoshal (2005) has vividly put it clear that intellectual knowledge has ruined realistic business expectations.
Typically, doctoral programmes that are pursued in colleges and universities have played a major role in terms of spreading conventional business knowledge worldwide. Therefore, it is definite that academic research has profoundly affected business management. Management knowledge that is taught in learning institutions assumes a narrow scope that has insufficient significance in today’s diversified and highly competitive business environment. This fact has had far-reaching effects in business conduct and general ineffectuality of management practices in modern organisations.
Browne and Keeley (2012) posit that business and management schools emphasise management practices that lead to an intensification of profits. This idea is definitely great for businesses. All entrepreneurs champion to make the greatest profits out of their business ventures. However, the management of any business goes beyond profitability. Many factors, such as business ethics and morality, among others, require prior consideration and prioritisation. Actually, these factors play a significant role in determining the profitability of a business.
Led by the need for money, intellectuals and international business researchers and scholars have developed various impractical business models. Ghoshal’s (2005) disapproval of modern management practices finds justification in modern business schools. These schools have forced students and business entrants to believe that managers are devious beings, owing to their efforts to satisfy the requirements of shareholders. In addition, business education in schools has made students believe that the propagation of an organisation demands proper supervisory roles at all levels of management. Moreover, the subject of the competition is highly prioritised to make sure that students believe that business cannot prosper without gaining a competitive advantage over other businesses in all facets of operation (Fournier & Grey 2000).
Personal level of academic aspirations form a prerequisite for independent and rational thinking. This strategy enables the development of mental faculties to prompt students to think outside the theoretical knowledge about business management. Personal level academic programmes allow instructors to explore the students’ attitudes, ambitions, and hindrances to the accomplishment of academic goals. Personal level management education ensures that students gain access to sufficient academic guidance from their instructors.
Development of cognitive skills corresponds to Ghoshal’s (2005) encouragement of independent thinking. Strong cognitive abilities enable students to relate conceptual knowledge that is acquired in class with the real-life situations in the management industry. Instructors are able to nurture personal ambitions of students towards accomplishment of academic goals, thus avoiding threats to managerial fields (Feldman & Orlikowski 2011). This practice gets rid of doubts about their personal performance in management practice after their schooling.
Methodological Issues
Issues such as the nature of education and quality of instructions in business schools have led to a generation of managers and employees who believe in certain conventional ways of conducting business activities. For noticeable whys and wherefores, this belief follows some sort of pragmatism that generalises business practices in spite of embracing more specialised approaches. There is a usual tendency to believe in the empiricism of natural sciences due to persuasive education that business schools offer to students. According to Browne and Keeley (2012), human beings are somewhat susceptible to new knowledge.
They tend to stick to new-fangled ideologies without prior reflection of the consequences. In this context, students develop a strong belief in the knowledge that their trainers impart in them. As a result, they adopt any management practices that are taught in class, regardless of whether they are congruent or inconsistent with the prevailing societal demands. Since this form of knowledge finds its use in the society, it has also influenced rational abilities of unschooled persons. Management theories have generally fashioned both intellectual and normative dimensions of decision-making in the society.
Consequently, the human society has assumed profit maximisation approaches to business whilst overlooking important aspects such as ethical business philosophies. Education through personal level academic aspiration programmes provides students with opportunities to develop strong cognitive, motivational, affective, and selective processes that enable them make independent decisions based on common sense rather than conventionality (Klaas & Donaldson n.d.).
Pretence of Knowledge
Since the beginning of management practices, business schools have strived to classify business studies as a social science discipline. However, the exploration of corporate culture in organisations depicts some crucial issues with reference to monitoring and harmonising individual decisions and preferences (Ghoshal 2005). Instead, proponents of management theories have had no other alternative than to classify business studies as a scientific discipline.
Definitely, the indulgency in science provides a clear insight into social, economic, and psychological aspects of management. A great variation of thinking abilities exists amongst different individuals. Therefore, the predilections of different individuals depend on their choices and level of morality. The attempts to classify business management as a scientific discipline have led to the development of rogue management theories since the discipline also compromises between social science and natural science.
This approach to management is known as pretence of knowledge. Scholars have tried to explain management through discovery of scientific facts behind management. According to Ghoshal (2005), this trend has done away with the sense of morality and self-discipline. For instance, business leaders have the propensity to use earlier events to explain present occurrences in management.
Economics Perspective
Economics has significantly influenced the practicability of sound management practices. In an economics perspective, people are seen as rational beings who undertake certain activities to satisfy their conscience (DiMaggio & Powell 1983). In other words, people view management as an activity that entails profit maximisation. The notion of fulfilling self-vested interests and/or profit maximisation makes modern management practices too sceptical to propagate ethical businesses.
Contextually, personal level academic aspirations that are attained from business schools only teach students how they should conduct organisational management to maximise returns on investments. Essentially, this form of knowledge begins by developing reservations in students rather than self-confidence. Cottrel (2011) reiterates the development of reservations in students by saying that the practice engineers the development of weak organisations, owing to incorrectly nurtured management practices.
Students, researchers, and even practitioners should possess not only competitive knowledge about certain business phenomena, but also knowledge about how to do such activities. Therefore, instructors should instil these virtues through personal level academic aspirations. The ‘what’ and ‘how’ knowledge triggers a person’s ability to marry theory with practice in performance of managerial duties.
Implications of Literature
The Gap between Theory and Practice
There exists a questionable gap between management theories and managerial practices (Cottrel 2011). The validation of the present management theories in contemporary organisations fails to substantiate sound managerial practices. Many scholars and researchers have made significant attempts to bridge the gap between management theories and practices by venturing into illusive education and acquisition of empirical knowledge through practice.
The fact remains that these people use old knowledge that is documented in books and other references that may be irrelevant in terms of fulfilment of modern organisational requirements and societal needs. The rest of ideologies are a misconception of management reality and confrontation of empiricism and intellectualism. For instance, most scholars believe in the existence of business challenges that can find probable resolutions in management theories.
Indeed, this statement is true since management theories represent a number of methodologies for solving managerial issues. However, many of these scholars and researchers have never stepped in the doors of the practical world to encounter the actuality of the business environment. Perhaps, practical knowledge can trigger empirical reasoning towards the formulation of workable solutions to management problems.
On a different dimension, college educators of business management and related disciplines have miniature knowledge about the practical business world (Feldman & Orlikowski 2011). Tutors are not conversant with real-life challenges to which management practices are subjected. For some reason, this statement is true. Most of the world professors and business specialists are developed in a classroom environment. This situation presents the learner with limited opportunities of practice.
Thus, college education instils more conceptual problems that can easily find solutions through the application of the existing management theories (Ghoshal 2005). Consequently, business schools have resulted in the generation of pessimistic scholars who have fears of reality. However, personal level academic aspirations can improve the performance of graduates since they create a strong sense of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy develops the capabilities of students to acquire practical skills about various business phenomena. This virtue further results in determination that prompts people to face challenging situations with inherent courage.
Management Specialisation Issues
Contemporary business systems have become increasingly complex and vastly diversified. Unfortunately, most educational programmes offer a wide scope of management knowledge to students. In his article, Ghoshal (2005) clearly explains that narrow specialisation in business schools has hindered sound management practices. Ideally, management disciplines are vast in the sense that the subject can be subdivided into various closely related sub-disciplines.
However, the conceptual frameworks for the sub-disciplines classify them as dissimilar subjects. Amazingly, curriculum developers and instructors require students to undertake several of these subjects. This situation has narrowed specialisation in certain management studies. As a result, students acquire too much information from different fields of management.
According to Feldman and Orlikowski (2011), such knowledge is unnecessary for conducting successful management in business. Instead, students should be encouraged to specialise in certain management disciplines in which they have grown profound interest. Management specialisation is a special provision in business learning that allows students to choose management disciplines of interest such as project management, consultancy, and business development among others. This practice enables students to acquire in-depth knowledge about specific management fields that are crucial for managing organisations.
Pretence of knowledge has led to ignorance of crucial information about business ethics and morality. Management, as a discipline in business schools, is affected by social and economic factors. The exclusion of ethical and moral business subjects will definitely influence the process of acquiring sound management knowledge (Friedman 1970; Dacin, Munir, & Tracey 2010).
The process of making management decisions requires a high sense of self-discipline and respect for all stakeholder groups. The pretence of knowledge leads to unethical choices since formulated decisions favour some groups at the expense of other stakeholders. In this context, instructors and academicians should take business management as a holistic subject that demands careful incorporation of ethical concepts during the instructional process.
The Ideology-Based Gloomy Vision
Foreign disciplines such as economics have profoundly changed the inclination of business management in theory and practice (Katkalo, Pitelis, & Teecey 2010). In addition to economics, assimilation of other disciplines such as psychology and sociology in business management accounts for the generation of cynical entrants into management practices. In most cases, the form of schooling takes place in a theoretical rather than practical world. As a result, learners acquire conceptual approaches to management through managerial theories.
This state of affairs deprives them of the opportunity to seek empirical knowledge from managerial practices. The result is the generation of graduates who have developed fear of the real business world, owing to naivety and inadequacy of responsibility (Feldman & Orlikowski 2011). Ghoshal (2005) is right when he reiterates Feldman and Orlikowski’s (2011) views that modern business schools instil cowardice in students, rather than strengthening their skills to face real problems in the business world.
As the complexity of the business environment elevates, the accomplishment of performance goals requires knowledge about the challenges and probable methodologies that can solve such challenges promptly through appropriate organisational change (Dudley 2011). Nevertheless, determinism has become the core formation of today’s strategic management practices. Ignorance of knowledge about opportunism in business schools has also lessened the understanding of management. This situation has delayed the creation of value for organisations. The situation has in turn strengthened the ideology-based gloomy vision.
Practice Relevance
Business Schools and Accountability of Management Practice
In my judgment, there is a need for change of academic organisation in business schools. Ghoshal (2005) strongly believes that there is an impending necessity for change to restructure business schools and/or reform their traditional approaches to management practices. Business schools encounter many challenges in the process of administering managerial instructions.
However, regardless of financial, time, and human resource constraints, business schools should champion for the generation of dependable graduates by reshaping the structure of the prevailing instructional curriculum and environments. According to Fournier and Grey (2000), management studies demand not only empirical knowledge but also the development of skills through hands-on experience.
Furthermore, the administration of instructional processes requires professional teachers who have passed through real situations in one or more management fields. Specialisation requires instructors to provide students with options that are more rational and flexible to enable them select management courses of their own interest. This form of learning will enable them acquire sufficient knowledge on focused management courses, and hence increase their competency in such disciplines.
Secondly, researchers, instructors, and academics should emphasise the need for assimilating morality and ethics in managerial instructions. It is a fact that many business schools have begun offering social responsibility programmes alongside business management courses. Essentially, social responsibility is crucial for the development of management skills.
Nonetheless, this aspect alone is insufficient for the nurturing of all-inclusive management practices. Business schools should bring other complimentary disciplines such as business ethics and morality on board to strengthen management education. An organisation represents a system of knowledge (Browne & Keeley 2012). However, the workability of organisational systems entirely depends on the mental faculties of workers who are deployed to perform differentiated performance functions.
Lastly, appropriate managerial practices should encompass any developed concepts to fit certain business conditions instead of accepting conventionally crafted management theories. People gain better abilities to perform certain actions through practice. Ghoshal (2005) emphasises that the nature of abilities is developed and not conventionally adopted in modern business schools. Therefore, business schools should desist from persuading students to believe that business management is a conventional process that every organisational system should follow to accomplish performance goals. Developed concepts are sociable and legitimate for management practice, owing to their nature of pluralism as opposed to homogeneity that is associated with conventionality.
Conclusion
The business environment will continue to be complex in terms of management requirements. Apparently, increasing complexity will demand management theories that are more robust in practice rather than in theory. Therefore, management researchers and scholars should develop conceptual approaches that can find applications in the changing business environments and/or the increasing societal needs.
For instance, despite the assimilation of social corporate responsibility practices in the field of management, management researchers should also find ways of assimilating business ethics and morality in an attempt to design all-inclusive management theories. Furthermore, the encroachment of economics in the discipline has created false impression that people invest in businesses to gain profit and/or enjoy competition. This approach is not entirely right in proper management. In fact, profitability is crucial for businesses.
However, there is a need to pay respect to consumers and other stakeholders of the business by ensuring that they acquire services through well-thought means to build other virtues such as reputation and customer loyalty. The purpose of practicable management theories is to create superior morals and ethical responsibility in students so that business schools can generate respectable entrants into managerial practices. Therefore, business schools need to ensure that their curriculum decisions, choices, and students meet the practical demands as expected in managerial practices and organisations.
References
Browne, N & Keeley, M 2012, What Are The Value And Descriptive Assumptions? Pearson, Boston.
Cottrel, S 2011, Critical Thinking Skills: Developing Effective Analysis and Argument, Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Hampshire, UK.
Dacin, T, Munir, K & Tracey, P 2010, ‘Formal Dining At Cambridge Colleges: Linking Ritual Performance And Institutional Maintenance’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 53 no. 6, pp. 1393-1418.
DiMaggio, J & Powell, W 1983, ‘The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organisational Fields’, American Sociological Review, vol. 48 no. 2, pp.147-60.
Dudley, B 2011, Executive’s Letter, Sage, London.
Feldman, S & Orlikowski, J 2011, ‘Theorising Practice and Practicing Theory’, Organisation Science, vol. 22 no.1, pp. 1240-53.
Fournier, V & Grey, C 2000, At the Critical Moment: Conditions and Prospects for Critical Management Studies, Sage Publications, The Travistock Institute.
Friedman, M 1970, The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits’, The New York Times Magazine, pp. 211-212.
Ghoshal, S 2005, ‘Bad Management Theories Are Destroying Good Management Practices’, Academy of Management Learning and Education, vol. 4 no. 1, pp.75-91.
Katkalo, S, Pitelis, N & Teecey, J 2010, ‘Introduction: On the Nature and Scope of Dynamic Capabilities’, Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 19 no. 4, pp. 1175-86.
Klaas, P & Donaldson, L n.d, Underfits Versus Overfits in the Contingency Theory of Organisational Design: Asymmetric Effects of Misfits on Performance, Sage, London.