Introduction
The modern era learning institutions are taking school partnerships a notch higher by leveraging technology on global connectivity where partnership activities occur over digital platforms. School partnerships denote the strong alliances and affiliations between two or more learning institutions to improve service quality delivery to the learners. Historically, alliances have been positively beneficial to public and private sector institutions that link up for improvements and reciprocal partnerships in various areas, such as teaching, curriculum development and delivery, leadership, and other targeted learning activities for improving value to the stakeholders. This paper delves into the analysis of higher learning institutional partnerships between the Harvard Business School (HBS) and other institutions in Europe and beyond. The primary argument for this partnership analysis is that HBS has the capabilities to foster strong global partnerships that would foster beneficial multicultural content delivery and support to its diverse students.
This paper covers Harvard Business School, the contextual analysis of its operational environment against opportunities for partnerships. However, the primary focus is to analyze the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis showing how the organization can leverage opportunities for global partnerships. The other contents in this analysis are the targeted education setting for the proposed partnership, the vision and plan for collaborations, and the preferred approaches for communicating value among partners.
Organization and The Context
The Harvard Business School is a private research institution based in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Established in 1908 by the humanities faculty, the institution grew to become a renowned global institution with a reputation for the curriculum content on diplomacy and government service. The institution introduced the world’s first MBA program with a few inclusive students and staff (“History,” n.d.). The organization showed change orientation from the word goes, considering introducing additional programs in quick successions. Some of the remarkable programs added to the institution’s portfolio are the Doctoral Program in 1922, Harvard Business Review in 1922, the Advanced Management Program in 1945, and Harvard Business Online in 2013 (“History,” n.d.). The Harvard Business School online is, contextually, the most relevant getaway program for multiple partnerships. Moreover, it aligns with the organization’s plans for collaborating with colleges and universities in the United States.
The organization’s current partnership programs are limited to universities and colleges in the US. The Harvard Business School Online has the Credential of Readiness (CORe) program, which is extendable to the other partners (“Collaborating Colleges & Universities,” n.d.). The shared benefits from the partnerships are Business Analytics courses, Financial Accounting programs, Economics for Managers course, and other individual certificate programs. The school identifies fifteen partners among the participating universities and colleges that offer HBS online courses. Given the geographical limitation of HBS’s partnership program, the suggestions in this presentation will go a long way in shaping a new global approach for offering quality and partnered content. The key consideration for globalization is the targeted educational setting and the marketing segmentation strategies to reach as many students and willing partners as possible.
Building the Partnership: Targeted Education Setting
The targeted education setting is global project-based learning implementing the 4Cs of value delivery, creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. According to Marini et al. (2021), 21st-century skills global project-based learning promotes curriculum content delivery by incorporating extracurricular activities with class content to promote consistent outcomes with strategic competencies in global citizenship. The most appropriate partnership changes that could attract partners to the newly proposed HBS partnership program are incorporations of learner-centered and reflective approaches that promote high-quality educational outcomes (Budiarti et al., 2021). The Harvard Business School will have to promote the targeted educational setting by leading in research and practical application of the concepts. Areas that the school will need to work on ahead of the partnerships are formative assessment of the project-based learning and interdisciplinary and cultural perspectives of the project-based learning application.
The interdisciplinary aspects of project-based learning entail implementing the educational approach in all services and programs offered by Harvard Business and its partners. The school will rely on partners to coordinate the teaching workload carefully against balanced study outcomes. The remarkable uniqueness in approaches to culturally-competent project-based learning is that they can incorporate global challenges commonly identified in emerging issues. Valenzuela (2021) identified multicultural approaches to project-based learning to include calling out bullying and discrimination, welcoming refugee students, and encouraging voting and participation in local elections. In other words, the project-based learning approaches should target educational settings that churn out responsible citizens apart from imparting knowledge and employable skills.
Vision and Plan for the Partnership
The vision for Harvard Business School’s educational partnership is that the school will tap into unexplored opportunities to lead global transformation by promoting project-based learning for graduates. The justification for promoting Harvard Business School’s plans for global partnership is that the school is already doing well in the United States, even showing a capacity for further expansion. Implementing the proposed partnership will transform the current partner colleges and universities to be consistent with project-based learning curricula before expanding to Europe and other parts of the world. The proposed vision plan will follow Coombs et al.’s (2014) ideas on sustainable partnerships for international educational development. The newly proposed approaches are that learning institutions should develop partnerships that target student participation as global citizens rather than culturally defined markets (Coombs et al., 2014). Pedagogical protocols for fostering global citizenship through international educational partnerships are engagements in dialogues on shared values, widening participation with inferior partners by promoting equity and promoting meaningful social change with the educational approaches.
One of the key concerns when developing a vision for Harvard Business School’s global partnership is the possibility of uneasy alliances, especially with private learning institutions. Several scholars point out the leadership challenges resulting from international educational partnerships that fail to establish ground rules for promoting equity through collaboration (Mockler, 2013). Lumby (2009) realized that self-styled partnership activities undermine the significance of collective leadership in global alliances. Therefore, this vision for Harvard Business School’s partnership cannot underestimate the significance of collective leadership in the global school systems. Hoy and Johnson (2013) suggested community engagement through higher education partnerships, stating that institutional alliances that pair with communities and business agencies usually incorporate real-life projects pertinent to the curriculum content areas.
Implementation
Strengths
The Harvard Business School’s SWOT analysis justifies that the plan collaborative leadership and business/community alliances are implementable. Therefore, this implementation plan outlines the specific SWOT factors that will either promote or derail the partnership process. The purpose of justifying each environmental factor in this implementation plan is to show how the institution can overcome challenges while leveraging opportunities to ensure successful formation of the planned partnership. According to EMBA Pro (2022), Harvard Business School has several strengths that it will leverage to establish a competitive edge for sustainable educational partnerships across the globe. The first strength is that the organization established a robust domestic market which provides the base for negotiating other markets. The domestic market has been responsible for the school’s growth and innovative approaches, whereas the ready market can fund investments for entry into foreign markets (EMBA Pro, 2022). The school has a history of excellent management of regulations in the business environment. EMBA Pro (2022) observed that Harvard Business School has been thriving as a top learning institution despite operating in a tightly-regulated environment.
Although excellent management of regulations is an admirable strength in the US political and lobby groups’ environment, the institution will have to establish strong relationships with other lobby groups and political forces in the targeted regions for partnerships. The only advantage is that private and public partners in the targeted regions can manage the lobby and political relationships on HBS’s behalf. As Jamali and Keshishian (2009) observed, the school will need to manage alliances in diverse social consciousness, business activism, and expectation management to avoid the common alliance pitfalls between learning institutions and lobby groups or NGOs. The other advantage of promoting possibilities of the partnering success is that HBS has strong brand equity and brand awareness that it can use to negotiate partnerships. Moreover, the institution has a strong financial standing that has been responsible for its successful go-to-market track record (EMBA Pro, 2022). Therefore, it is undeniable that HBS has all it takes to negotiate global partnerships to reach extended markets.
Weaknesses
The Harvard Business School has a few weaknesses that it will have to overcome before enforcing a meaningful implementation of the partnerships with global higher learning institutions. The areas where HBS lacks capabilities or skills for handling project-based learning will give opportunities for improvement and leverage for differentiation. The rationale is that the school is already beyond average internal preparedness. Therefore, a few improvements in the areas of weakness will promote further success in the international partnership plans. EMBA Pro (2022) noted that Harvard Business School’s model is easily replicable, although they have patents and copyrights for the programs. Therefore, the proposal for a project-based learning approach comes in handy because it will be essential to differentiate HBS partnership programs, being the only programs offering such services across international partnerships.
The other weaknesses possibly challenging the proposed HBS partnership efforts are poor implementation of workplace diversity, low values on organizational culture, and low return on investment (EMBA Pro, 2022). Each of the weaknesses is solvable through the proposed international partnership approach. Poor implementation of workplace diversity potentially reduces the institution’s success in international markets (EMBA Pro, 2022). However, a partnership approach will automatically solve the diversity challenges because HBS will work with ethnic communities in the partnered regions without sending staff to partner institutions. Low return on investment undermines profitability and the possibility of attracting investors to the program. However, a differentiated program, such as the proposed project-based learning, possibly attracts foreign markets with possibilities of better returns. Low values on organizational culture are also solvable through international partnerships. HBS can use the upcoming partnership plans to restructure its organizational and power structure such that employees feel empowered in institutional decisions.
Opportunities
There are several opportunities in the macroenvironmental factors that could promote growth in HBS international partnerships. These opportunities provide further justification that the implementation plan will become successful. Although the biggest opportunity for a modern business organization is technological innovations, implementing HBS’s partnership model will ensure a leverage on service provision gaps in international education and fill them through partnerships. That implies that technology innovations are just a few factors among the many opportunities for the institution to grow through collaborative work. The EMBA Pro (2022) article suggested that HBS should grow disposable income by creating a new differentiated business model. The opportunity is justifiable with the new project-based learning approaches, which will be unique to HBS and its partners.
The proposed implementation plan is that the institution should consider tapping into evolving customer preferences through international partnerships. That implies the upcoming partnerships will provide flexible curriculum development opportunities appropriate for the various target markets. This opportunity is also a justification for the implementation of project-based learning, which provides a culturally-appropriate curriculum for teaching skills and real-life experiences. However, as Hands (2010) put it, collaboration can provide the needed resources for understanding evolving global challenges in the education sector. Most importantly, HBS will have to look into the culturally-appropriate curriculum designs that provide answers to stakeholders’ learning gaps. The HBS institution has opportunities to tap into e-commerce and social media-oriented service delivery models (EMBA Pro, 2022). Using technology to promote online and virtual learning opportunities can be possible if HBS partners with international suppliers and partners for the learning opportunities. Amey et al. (2010) insisted on crossing boundaries by trying new approaches to educational content delivery for community and college partnerships. HBS will create more profitable business models by reaching out to online markets in its new business model.
Threats
The Harvard Business School’s implementation process will be vulnerable to a few macroenvironmental factors that can derail its partnership development. The biggest threats to the proposed partnership opportunities, reflected in the company internal business environment, are the international geopolitical differences that threaten business expansion due to protectionism (EMBA Pro, 2022). Although HBS plans to enter the international markets through partnerships, its presence is prone to political action, as mentioned by lobby groups and political forces above. Nino-Zarazua (2016) stated that education policies and development have been vulnerable to the international aid architecture where lobby groups fund educational programs and influence policy-making approaches. Therefore, HBS’s presence can be thwarted in a market where lobby groups/funders promote protectionism policies to lock out the institution. Therefore, government regulations and bureaucracy will add to the threats facing HBS’s global partnership projects.
Values and Policy Considerations: Organizational Strategies
The upcoming partnership project will require HBS to consider the globally-acceptable values in line with the international educational policies that could impact the new business model’s delivery outcomes. Bryan and Henry (2011) suggested that partnership approaches delve into community principles culturally wise and promote culturally-sensitive engagements with students, teachers, or other stakeholders. Therefore, the most critical value for HBS to uphold in its global approaches to educational partnership is the school-family-community partnership characterized by the principles of democratic collaboration (Bryan & Henry, 2011). The other value to be considered is sustainable leadership values showing concern for cultural differences and empathy towards the marginalized communities. Hargreaves and Fink (2005) proposed the sustainable leadership approaches where leaders promote distributed responsibility and justice in the face of global diversities. That would imply that HBS promotes inclusion in terms of access and the organizational structure for leaders and subordinate staff. Lumby (2009) agrees with Hargreaves and Fink (2005) on the need for sustainable leadership for HBS. Leaders uphold professional, ethical conduct through harm avoidance to customers and protect stakeholder diversities.
The policy considerations for the new approaches will be diversity and inclusivity, where strategic partnerships will promote empathy through robust philanthropy activities and responsible marketing. Most of the proposed concerns for the project-based learning policies meet the ethical concerns that are likely to impact business approaches in the new global markets. For instance, empathy and social care through philanthropy are ideas commonly fronted by experts on international educational partnerships. Srivastava and Oh (2010) observed the growing interest in how educational organizations can partner to finance education and content delivery to marginalized communities. Moreover, Novelli (2010) observed that the new geopolitics of educational aid target equality in educational outcomes for every child/student across the world. The new HBS business model will draw global attention if the institution supplements differentiation appeals with robust philanthropic missions.
Evaluation
The three indicators for measuring partnership effectiveness between Harvard Business School and the other global partners are commitment, mutuality, and implementation outcomes. The HBS project will evaluate commitment indicators by analyzing the roles played by each partner in accomplishing strategic partnership goals (Harvard Family Research Project, 2017). HBS will consider the implementation a success if it can find institutional partners who link the new business model to the global markets. Therefore, HBS will evaluate committed partners regarding who they represent, how they represent the segmented markets, and how they contribute to the overall partnership effectiveness (Harvard Family Research Project, 2017). The second indicator is mutuality, a factor evaluated through examinations of leadership balance in crucial positions and how the evolving structure and partners strengthen with time.
Mutuality indicators are visible where partners become truly evolved in leadership and contributions towards curriculum development and business model marketing. As Harvard Family Research (2017) suggests, partnership structure and membership changes can indicate something is wrong, especially if the changes smother partnership evolution. HBS will evaluate how critical leadership balance promotes inclusive decision-making for collective efforts toward partnership success. Therefore, the third key indicator to be evaluated closely with the second is implementation outcomes. The HBS will need to evaluate how commitment and mutuality promote the project’s popularity and global acceptance.
Communication Plan
Managing relationships with business partners in the upcoming HBS business model will require robust communication with a swift exchange of information to reach markets before competitors wind off and replicate the HBS model. The importance of good communication in partnerships like the upcoming HBS’s is that institutions get to strengthen their relationships by maintaining healthy partnerships (Eunson, 2016). The proposed plan will include communication through research, reports, proposals for project improvements, and digital platforms to exchange important messages regarding the project’s progress. Public communication will be available on the business’s online platforms, whereas organizational communication will be available through circulars and reports.
The communication plan should also incorporate intercultural communication approaches that use each unique culture’s contextual model to pass appropriate messages to the students’ various backgrounds (Eunson, 2016). Such a plan includes proposed conflict management approaches that HBS could use to iron out differences with partners in Europe and Beyond. They are negotiation, meditation, and arbitration. According to Eunson (2016), conflict management approaches involving third parties provide advice but no legal enforcement. However, it would be preferable to handle conflicts between HBS and the global partners because litigation could attract geopolitical disinterests that lock HBS out of the newly acquired markets. Most importantly, HBS should consider using social media to reach out to as many clients as possible. Social media should be a platform for marketing and communicating useful information under the new business model proposed in this plan.
Conclusion
Harvard Business School (HBS) is an established learning institution, a reputable brand that most learners proudly associate with in the United States. Although a strong brand globally, the institution uses a replicable business model that implies anybody can soar to the heights without paying intellectual property rights to the organization. Therefore, the new educational strategy, the project-based learning approach for international partnership, will facilitate an expanded global presence for the institution. Other than the factors mentioned in the SWOT analysis, HBS can leverage social responsibility through diversity and philanthropic activities to popularize the new partnerships. Business globalization will be useful in solving macroenvironmental weaknesses like low-value organizational culture, lack of workforce diversity, and low returns on investment. Most importantly, the HBS organization should consider an appropriate model culturally for promoting curriculum content delivery.
References
“Collaborating Colleges & Universities.” (n.d.). Harvard Business School Online. Web.
Amey, M. J., Eddy, P. L., & Campbell, T. G. (2010). Crossing boundaries creating community college partnerships to promote educational transitions. Community College Review, 37(4), 333-347.
Bryan, J., & Henry, L. (2011). A model for building school–family–community partnerships: Principles and process. Journal of Counseling & Development, 90, 408-420. Web.
Budiarti, M., Macqueen, S., Reynolds, R., & Ferguson-Patrick, K. (2021). Global Project Based Learning as an Approach to Teaching the 4Cs in Schools. Journal of International Social Studies, 11(1), 33-62.
Coombs, S., Potts, M., & Whitehead, J. (2014). International educational development and learning through sustainable partnerships: Living global citizenship. Springer.
EMBA Pro. (2022). Harvard Business School SWOT analysis & matrix / MBA resources. Web.
Eunson, B. (2015). Communicating in the 21st century. Wiley.
Hands, C. M. (2010). Why collaborate? The differing reasons for secondary school educators’ establishment of school-community partnerships. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(2), 189-207.
Harvard Family Research Project. (2017). Evaluating partnerships: Seven success factors. Web.
Hoy, A., & Johnson, M. (2013). Deepening community engagement in higher education: Forging new pathways. Springer.
Jamali, D., & Keshishian, T. (2009). Uneasy alliances: Lessons learned from partnerships between businesses and NGOs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(2), 277-295.
Lumby, J. (2009). Collective leadership of local school systems: power, autonomy and ethics. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(3), 310-328.
Mockler, N. (2013). The slippery slope to efficiency? An Australian perspective on school/university partnerships for teacher professional learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 273-289. Web.
Nino-Zarazua, M. (2016). Aid, education policy, and development. International Journal of Educational Development, 48, 1-8. Web.
Novelli, M. (2010). The new geopolitics of educational aid: from cold wars to holy wars? International Journal of Educational Development, 30(5), 453-459. Web.
Srivastava, P., & Oh, S. A. (2012). Private foundations, philanthropy and partnership in education and development: Mapping the terrain. Public Private Partnerships in Education, 30, 460-471.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2005). Sustainable leadership. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
Valenzuela, J. (2021). Ending project-based learning units with a call to action. Edutopia. Web.
“History.” (n.d.). Harvard Business School. Web.