Managing and optimising the value chain is the big thing in business strategy. Numerous innovations have taken place since businesses have started thinking about it, and such innovations revolutised the businesses. The biggest change with regard to this is perhaps how manufacturing companies moved away from production activities, and instead focused on the activities directly related to the customer experience. So, however nostalgic we may be about a team of Engineers hacking together a working personal computer out of someone's garage, Apple is the company it is by producing machines in Foxconn factories in China and by being in control of the customer experience through its design, development and retailing and channel operations. In short, the current paradigm is that the value resides with the customers.
As Higher Ed comes under financial pressure and told to be more business-like, the Education leaders have also started innovating with the education's value chain. They have drawn lessons from manufacturing companies, perhaps, and decided to outsource activities which were previously sacrosanct - the teaching itself. As if following the manufacturing playbook, large educational organisations started focusing more on brand, marketing and administration, and filled their classrooms with armies of adjunct tutors. This is indeed particularly true for private institutions and lower ranked public colleges, and popular among investors in education, which see the tutor salaries as the biggest cost for any education operation, and therefore seek to minimise it. Following this mantra, colleges today have become indistinguishable from the other offices, employing vast arrays of management staff but few tutors. When Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) started overseeing UK private colleges in 2012, their reports showed that they were somewhat surprised by how few tutors actually featured in the permanent payroll of these colleges. The adjunct model is indeed working very well.
Except that this takes the education business away in the opposite direction from where manufacturing companies wanted to go: Away from the customers (students). The value chain thinking in education is perhaps applied too literally, and dare I say this, with little thinking. If the value resides with the students, it is the interface with the students, the classroom, where the institutions should be focused on. But they are not.
Indeed, one could argue that this is for a good reason. This is because often the money is coming from the governments, donors or loan providers, creating a vast bureaucratic overload. Besides, the education institutions are spending a huge amount of money, and employing a lot of staff, in one critical touchpoint with the students - in marketing. Seen from the priority assigned to various activities, it would seem that most education institutions today are vast marketing machines.
This is perhaps a mistake. Unlike the product companies, where the customer and the payer is often the same, in education, it may be different. That someone is paying for it does not make value automatically migrate to that particular interface, if the benefits of that expenditure have to realised to the satisfaction of another person. God save the spa where I send my wife for a loving break and which decides to treat me as a customer because I am paying for it! On a more serious note, the government is funding the student for a reason, and so is the Student Loan Company: Treat the students less than par and the loans will remain unpaid. So, this conception of value creation that underlie the current operations, and organisational structure, of educational institutions seem to be out of sync with the concept of the value chain.
I shall claim that the this new managerial university model is one of the key reasons why education is becoming dysfunctional. Indeed, the education investors want more, not less of, a managerial university model: They are investing in companies which project scalable education models by 'adjunctifying' (if such a word could be invented) teaching. This is the only way they could find to liberate education from its 'cottage industry' thinking. But by doing that, they shift the organisations away from the customer experience (or redefine the meaning of customer experience, making students happy with better swimming pools or marketing package rather than good education) and more into a bureaucratic jungle. However, we can perhaps see that the smaller private colleges work better than big college chains (collapse of Corinthian Colleges in the US may just be the tip of the iceberg as far as the problems of big chains are concerned) and the relationships that underlie the operations of proprietary tuition homes in India somewhat work better in creating more student success than big industrialised private universities. While these are anecdotal observations - and indeed some serious discussions on the models of the managerial universities, both public and private, need to happen, rethinking the value chain of education and locating the activities that are critical to value creation may be a good start for an education entrepreneur.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
There is no other city like Kolkata for me: It is Home. The only city where I don't have to find a reason to go to, or to love. It is one city hardwired into my identity, and despite being away for a decade, that refuses to go away. People stay away from their homeland for a variety of reasons. But, as I have come to feel, no one can be completely happy to be away. One may find fame or fortune, love and learning, in another land, but they always live an incomplete life. They bring home broken bits of their homeland into their awkward daily existence, a cushion somewhere, a broken conversation in mother tongue some other time, always rediscovering the land they left behind for that brief moment of wanting to be themselves. The cruelest punishment, therefore, for a man who lives abroad is when his love for his land is denied. It is indeed often denied, because the pursuit of work, knowledge or love seemed to have gotten priority over the attraction of the land. This is particularly
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
Meritocracy is a convenient lie, as Socrates foretold, and it is the ballast of the social system we have built. The story goes like this. Once upon a time, we had kings and queens and their families and nobles, who got the best meat and the best mate, and everyone lived happily. But then the things fell apart as luxury corrupted the nobles and feebled the spirits of their offsprings - and the peasants and the artisans came claiming their fair share. So we had the age of revolutions in Europe and North America, when we created a new, fairer social system, under a 'natural aristocracy of men', where destiny was no longer shaped by birth but by intelligence and hard work, and anyone could make it in life. And, everyone again lived happily ever after. Of course, this did not really happen. Slavery persisted, at least for a long time. The 'fair' system mostly excluded the real peasants and workers and once they have done their duty dying for various revolutions, they were s
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.