The DMS — and the Promise of Management Education
| Date | 01 March 1982 |
| Published date | 01 March 1982 |
| Pages | 18-25 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb055460 |
| Author | Stanley Lees |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
The DMS
—
and the Promise of
Management Education
by Stanley Lees
London Graduate School of Business Studies
Despite the substantial growth of formal management
education programmes during the last two decades, Bri-
tain's industrial performance has declined substantially by
most
international
comparisons.
By taking the Diploma in
Management Studies (DMS) as an example of a middle-
management
course,
the
article explores
some of the
struc-
tural constraints and conflicting expectations within
management education which can prevent managerial
thought being converted subsequently into corporate ac-
tion and,
in
particular,
some of the
mechanisms
by which
employers and educators collude in maintaining a mutual
distancing from each other.
Introduction
It is a pretty safe bet that at some time in their careers most
readers will have given serious thought to management
education as a method of improving their career prospects
or as a way of getting out of a particular organisational
dilemma. Alternatively, they will have offered the clichéd
piece of advice to someone else, to the effect that in order
to make progress in the organisational world it is a good
idea to get some management qualifications "under the
belt". Yet, at the same time, possibly everyone has had
doubts or reservations about whether management educa-
tion would, in fact, live up to the promises it offered and
fulfil the hopes which were vested in it.
A second safe bet is that at the back of most readers'
minds is an awareness that once upon a time when Britain
was both Great and prosperous (or so legend has it),
management education was quite unheard of, but now,
with economic decline and the grim warnings of further
recession, Britain can claim to have possibly one the
highest growth rates in management education and in
membership of professional associations. Of course, these
facts are not related in any way
—
neither can be said to be
the cause of the other. They are juxtaposed because, in the
public mind, niggling doubts still remain about whether
management education should not have done more to help
managers prevent or even reverse Britain's decline. If the
promise of management education is real, surely it should
have made managers more dynamic and effective in grap-
pling with the opportunities in an ever increasingly com-
petitive world. Again the answer is obvious — give it more
time.
The academic world collectively contains all that
there is to know — or so it is believed — and if enough
managers can get closer to that world, what rubs off will
help them to be more sure of their directions. If more and
more managers can be encouraged to avail themselves of
more and more courses, and if more and more wise people
apply their collective intellects to thinking about the pro-
blems of Britain's decline, then somehow thought will be
translated into action and all will be well.
When management education seriously began in the
1960s, Britain was already in the grip of a general expan-
sion in education. The myth which Robbins[1] evoked
—
namely, that education equalled the resolution of a coun-
try's problems — took some time to dispel, and there can
be very few people left who in public still proclaim the
power of education as a major instrument of economic
progress. But under the surface, beliefs are fostered which
often deny logic, reason and evidence. In the public mind,
there is vested a particularly strong belief about the power
of education and what it can do for an individual. The ac-
quisition of knowledge offers a promise, a hope, an oppor-
tunity for greater things, a chance to "rise" in the world, a
better career path through the future, a future which is
more guaranteed. These beliefs are not as a rule subject to
rational order or scrutiny, largely because they are fuelled
by a combination of fear and hope. The better test of
whether rationality rules managers' minds is to look at
their actions. During the last two decades, more and more
managers have availed themselves of management educa-
tion; more and more companies have increased their train-
ing budgets, and the nation has devoted an increasing
share of the education budget towards management educa-
tion. It would seem useful, therefore, to tease out in more
detail some of the more covert reasons for this growth.
Expectations of Management Education
If these expectations are thought of as falling into three
categories — national, organisational and individual —
then the national expectations are generally well known.
Essentially, these are that national growth and prosperity
depends on the effective and efficient management of the
organisational process of wealth creation and wealth
distribution — the latter usually defined as being in the
public sector. These arguments are fairly obvious; the
organisational and individual expectations are, however,
far less clear cut.
Legitimising
Managerial
Action
Observers of the organisational scene have long noted that
many of the burning political issues of the day tend to be
acted out not so much through the ritual of Parliament or
through mass protest, but more through controlled social
action within employing organisations. The shop floor, the
classroom, the fire station, the hospital ward — these are
the stages where such issues tend to get resolved because,
as has often been pointed out, it is to employing organisa-
tions that individuals are looking for the promises of
equality, opportunity and social justice which are enun-
ciated in the political creeds of the land.
One consequence is that managers' actions increasingly
come under scrutiny and challenge from a wide variety of
18
Personnel
Review 11,3 1982
To continue reading
Request your trial