Vaccinating the Indian University education

As a part of the higher ed system I am at a loss to explain to my colleagues from US and EU about how such a supposedly high opportunity system is not anywhere close to being world class. 

Forget university rankings or bschool rankings and their cousins that don't have Indian institutions anywhere in the top list. Many (myself included) argue that such rankings are ratings are skewed in the favour of the developed nations given the yardsticks and the way data is collected. 

The undeniable fact is that Indian universities and niche institutions don't have the current will and the people to make something out of the great opportunity on global higher ed. The Chinese comparison is obvious here but a lot of India centric factors make the India model a unique proposition. 

I sincerely believe that what these institutions need today is a "vaccination" of sorts. A herd immunity that allows seamless change across all systems - student recruitment, TNE partnerships, benchmarking, design of pedagogy, etc. 

The bottlenecks for such vaccination are sadly created and maintained for some unknown reason by the democratically elected government. 

We at times forget that for our government the higher ed thing is something that plays right into vote banks wherein higher ed mostly becomes a privilege that they intend to distinguish tier supporters and votes with. 

However we are also aware that with the growing economic troubles and the way reforms processes need to be implements there is not much that the government can do to invest and change the state of higher ed on the country. 

Gross enrolment ratio and the requirement of large number of universities cannot be supported by any 5 years plan or prepared by the planningn commission. And institutions too cannot look at the government at all times. 

Vaccination process, as it is, requires everyone to take it up at the same time if a disease needs to be eradicated. Remember small pox?

Indian universities - both public and private will all have to agree to this transformation and take the bitter pills. This herd immunity will allow the Indian students access to better education and the industry with all the talent that's missing today. 

The question is- who will initiate the vaccination? Who will tell what vaccine to take? Who will administer the vaccination? And who will benchmark that the immunity is proper and continuity is maintained?

It is not the government for sure. I just know that whosoever gets this done will surely change the landscape of higher ed in this region and therefore affect major systems in the world that depends on recruitment, partnerships, and revenue from this part of the world. 

B-school rankings: let the buyers beware

I believe that the most insignificant product in the recent years, due to the improvements in information access to aspirants, is B-school Rankings.

What came out as an idea to provide the right information ranked on the basis of critical success factors for Univ and b-schools, worked well in an era of print-media revolution. People needed a common platform to see, compare and choose between b-schools or programs and then decide upon joining any one of the available ones that fit their profiles.

With the advent of social media, and in the background of the Buyer2.0 revolution, there is now a situation that a common listing (yeah! that's what rankings are at times) does not provide any additional information that this generation of buyers/users can't lay their hands on.

Even the recent perception based surveys too aren't making any more sense since the perception of the top-100 seem to be almost same (barring 3-4 cases of dropouts, inclusions, etc) for a longer period of time. Since the top-20 to 30 b-schools are the ones that are really the most sought after, and therefore the traffic generators or subscription generators for the rankings, their effective place in the perceptions don't do much over a medium time frame. So publishing a yearly ranking doesn't make any sense if the top20 or 30 will almost stay the same.

One question could be - what's the alternative? Well, to me, there need not be any alternative. If the debate that listing colleges don't help this new gen of buyers and users any more, then how are the rankings doing any better?

I believe that aspirants today have their own "algorithm" to figure out their own rankings. They are not idiots. Each of them would have a customized list of b-schools depending upon a multiple set of factors. If one needs to provide customized rankings, then the mere permutation numbers of all user-customization factors would make this task impossible (coz it may run in hundreds of thousands).

Ranking was a product of pre-Internet days wherein information asymmetry was a major advantage for publishers and therefore this was also a huge money making mechanism. B-schools and Univs also did not have any way then to fix the info asymmetry and therefore pledged their allegiance forever.

But how are you going to make rankings (publishing) obsolete? Can users disallow publishing and stop all publishing houses from releasing their rankings? Not yet. That's because hidden inside the alumni and b-schools is a reason that wins over "information asymmetry" - the "Need" to be acknowledged.

It wont be long, however, when the only participants that would participate in reading rankings would be the publishers and the b-schools themselves, with users latching onto other tools and personal algorithms to figure out best b-schools. But till then, everyone is requested to go ahead and practice the caveat emptor policy - let the buyer beware.

7 tips for Successful Higher Education Marketing

Most of what we see practiced as higher education marketing across business schools, Universities, and different institutions, are reflections of certain deep rooted but defunct marketing literature of the past.

Not much research and analysis has gone into what really should work for Higher education marketing and whether there should be a different marketing model practiced for institutions so that they are able to comprehend and implement brilliant marketing programs or campaigns.

In my personal experience, higher education marketing lags way behind even the basic marketing advancements of recent times. So if the basic issue here is to catch up with current trends and then hope to make them work, higher education marketing will always fail to produce any substantial result and learning.

There are a few components in higher education marketing:

- Internal Teams and marketing experts at an Institution

- Consumption behavior of aspirants when it comes to communications on higher education

- Changing preparatory patterns

- Student Communities

- Existing perception of the generic value of programs offered

Awareness of the above factors is missing at most times. Therefore the way these factors integrate themselves into marketing success is something that is also missed.

Most higher education marketing today is designed for a specific time span - probably for 6-12 months. This ensures that thought processes and top grading processes reflect such short-sighted behavior. What is amazing though that such a broken process is repeated year after year. Teams after teams in higher education marketing are specializing in generating short term results. The problem is that no one has any answer to shrinking marketing budgets and failing accountability in marketing returns. The very definition of Marketing returns also seems to be incorrect and therefore the post activity analysis are also faulty.

If an Institution intends to stem the rot and then work for better returns on a significant investment center, then they ought to top-grade their marketing staff and intent. Since this is an investment that the institution cannot do away with, they should take a priority attempt at getting the following things done asap.

(1) Make learning and implementing new age marketing initiatives as a standard KPI for all marketing staff:

This includes checking for such inputs during the recruitment process. Please don't hire someone just because he/she has been in the domain for some number of years doing the same mistakes you want to now avoid. Make learning systems for marketing staff and provide incentives (non-monetary) to people who attempt new marketing tools and systems. Encourage common knowledge sharing projects wherein people from across the teams can give inputs and have an external marketing change agent work closely with these teams.

(2) Go for "Zero" base marketing plans:

Most of higher education marketing plans are repeated attempts using the same components or channels and only tweaking 10-15% of the inputs depending upon the contributions from these channels in the previous year. Current marketing literature (available for reading) has already proved that given the multi-channel attribution to results from marketing, no measurement - that takes into account final conversions from a certain channel to decide on its investments - is correct. So start working with "zero" based marketing plans. Each year, draw up marketing channel based on "data" and not past usage. Get access to this data, and in today's world you may need to have a strong social media and online strategy alongside your offline marketing inputs. Please note that having a page or account in social media is not a strategy - its a joke. Identify where your buyers are, their behavior, decision making patterns, user communities they belong to, intent based point of contacts, and the time they would engage with your brand or organization. Everything - including budget allocations, resource allocation, etc needs to be strategized with new inputs from current year's research and strategy design

(3) Re-train your front line resources:

Sometimes, we use the same resources to handle campaigns that now require a different set of skill sets and mental agility plus knowledge to get the best out of. Your front line people are the biggest risk of things failing and they would be the greatest resistance that you would face while implementing new marketing systems and thoughts. Make their work more enriching by helping them participate in this entire makeover. They should know that they will affect the returns that this organization or institution would get this year, and they will be rewarded accordingly for the same. When such well defined jobs are redesigned, you will need to ensure that participation is a must.

(4) Destroy status-quo

Do this regularly, and keep your team on its toes. Most marketing professionals tend to work on structures or frameworks and then stick to the same. Post this, they tend to optimize these structures into their own ways and change definitions that reduce friction in the system and status-quo. For brilliant higher education marketing, you ought to ensure that you are responsible for regular check on status-quo issues and then pushing the team to get better in designing new strategies and communications that would give great marketing returns.

(5) Integrate your marketing activities:

Your Higher Education marketing strategy cannot have separate components that have different agendas, communications, artwork, themes, etc. This is one of the major reasons why most higher education institutions fail to get great results from their marketing activities. Every component (Above-the-line or below-the-line, or even online) needs to have a central theme, and would need to have integrated components that are monitored and tracked easily. Once the marketing mix is decided, the best way to go ahead would be to find integration points across all channels in the mix, and then figure out which activity result would become the input for which channel. At the end of this exercise, you may have a system that strongly interconnected, and would not allow for any user or applicant to drop off the system without an alert coming to you.

(6) Don't copy everything about your competition:

This is a practice amongst institutions across the geography, wherein the herd behavior is a deciding factor in creating the marketing mix and mostly the BTL plan/strategy. This is one of major reasons why newspaper supplements and special editions on education institutions sell. Anyone who knows the design team behind these supplements, are aware that these are sales products, that target the very DNA of thought process (and therefore the weakness) of institutions. The whole pitch of "this is a party you can't miss coz you will look cool with others being there" - is a lie. Normally, with those special editions and supplements, there is so much Ad-blindness, that people don't remember much of what they see there.

(7) Marketing returns = "Goodwill + reputation + personal-communities":

Not all marketing people believe that marketing returns can also be attached to generating goodwill (that in turn improves the DEMAND function), reputation (that is essential in our socially connected world), and personal communities (creating ones own micro community that involves alumni, current students, and applicants). However, current research in generic marketing suggests that such things are an integral part of any organization or brand's marketing strategy and success.

You need the right team to make this happen, along with a vision to support such endeavors. Time is ripe for this kind of a change to happen, and if you are not doing this for your own institution, then you will contribute negatively to its growth. I am sure that as a marketing practitioner, you too would find this experience exhilarating that you are able to implement the best practices and advancements in global marketing for your institution.

For queries on how such a system can be designed, you can mail me and I will be glad to help.

What they should definitely teach at Indian business Schools

For all MBA grads in India, there should be a part of the curriculum that ought to "teach" them the ways of be successful in the Indian corporate scene. The survival tips of how one goes up the ladder - is something that isn't told to them, resulting in creating frustrated workers who are present across all organizations (including the top ones that go to the best institutions to hire the best talent providing the best salary packages).

What would a curriculum for this look like and how would one design the content?
For me, the content should have pretty clear definitions and actions for the students. No "case-study" thing here. Only definitions and then allow for practical classes wherein role play can be done to train the psyche of these students.

Some of my favourite aspects that I would want to see in this curriculum are:

1) How to pretend to work hard and survive plus thrive

2) How to Yap more and never work, knowing with whom to Yap more

3) How to show off and earn goodwill from your bosses

4) How to get confidence of your bosses and then never work again

5) How to manipulate discussions and client presentations

6) How to figure out the weakest link in the team and then make that bugger work like hell (while you enjoy)

7) How to LIE/Bullshit, but make it sound like such a world-class concept that you just explained

8) How to create a legacy wherein even your shitty work doesn't bother your boss, and he can't stand to hear a word against you

9) How to tread on others' hard work and confidence - as this space is like a war-zone with only one winner - and damage careers (so that they can never come in your way)

10) How to manipulate conversations during times of salary reviews, and how to blackmail your superior into submission

11) How to manipulate power equations inside the company to make your position safe and actually stronger

12) How to give gyaan to your client without adding any value to the work, and be least bothered about the project or revenue

13) How to ensure that people who have the power to stand against you are first derided upon and then fired

14) How to get to what you want - not through any hard work but by smart play and manipulation of structures, people, and your bosses

There are a lot of people who make lives of their co-workers miserable by being successful ("actually this matters a lot, doesn't it") while practicing and probably being the epitome of the above pointers.
I have seen great talent agree to some of the above points and then following the same by giving in to the rut, losing their character and soul to such foul practices.

If you ever had a doubt as to whether the corporate is filled with such bastards, then don't second guess. It's the probable way to survive the "Roman empire when you are in Rome" conundrum.

This post isn't about complaining. It has been a long time since I have been seeing good talent lose out to such plotting and scheming bastards - who were lucky to be trained properly (or some were born with the talent) to be BAD. These are people who make people's lives bad, at times pushing them to the limits of breakdown and therefore suicides.

So for a new b-school talent who has those dreams in his/her eyes, its prudent that the bad side of the picture is also shown as a part of the curriculum, else we will have people who will break early, and we will blame them as "weak characters" or "immature" wherein actually the broken system was responsible for the continuous banging.

I don't know if the good will win at last, but even the Gods had to resort proving a point (in Egypt, in Mahabharata, in Greek Myth, etc) and I guess being armed with the same pathetic tactics doesn't harm anyone. The idea has to be a uniform training module wherein the kids are told - "This is whats going to happen to you, and not the motivation-HR shit we taught you about", and then tell them "This is what you ought to be expecting and reacting to".

If I have a b-school, then I will definitely have this curriculum.

Does AICTE Recognize Laptops or iPads that may be used by MBA Students?

The AICTE Approval Process Handbook doesn't seem to give any idea about whether Laptop or iPads could be used by MBA students in AICTE approved Institutions running MBA/PGDM programs.

The APH (approval process handbook) is probably common for all programs irrespective of the specific requirements of different programs. This itself speaks volumes about AICTE's (mis)understanding and improvement strategies for MBA/PGDM programs - which are treated with a standard set of directions and expectations similar to Engineering and other technical programs.

One can understand the requirement for a central computer lab for other technical programs, wherein the usage of computers/PCs or related work with computers have a certain pattern. For B-school pedagogy, things are very different and expecting students to go to a central common place to engage with PCs is remarkably wrong.

Laptops were in use since the 1990s in a lot of b-schools and still are a very intrinsic part of the DNA of b-school pedagogy and personal learning system amongst students. iPads (an Apple Product) probably will take over from Laptops very soon due to a host of factors, while providing the same (or better) kind of computing power and utilities required by an MBA student.

Even in organizations, there aren't any existing central computer labs wherein people are made to sit on PCs and complete their work (yeah..probably some Insurance companies have such PCs for their junior staff, but they aren't MBAs for sure).

So if I satisfy all norms and then design a very modern infrastructure for usage of laptops/iPads for delivering learning content or for students to use them for creating content as a part of the academic process, will I not get an approval without having a "1:2 capacity computer center"?

Why is there a standard operating handbook that needs to be followed by all programs who don't share many common strains in their DNA?

When will regulatory bodies like AICTE wake up to systems and processes that are world-class and modern and that are followed across the world (US, UK, China,etc)?

Why is it so difficult to have separate and updated guidelines and norms from regulatory bodies to keep pace with the requirements of current times and technological advancements?

This is just one such thing that struck me as out of place when one looks at the APH. I am sure more such disparities and gaps would be available for AICTE to address and solve those for a better future of our b-schools.

So how will Placements 2015 look like: Assuming CAT takers of 2012

Each year, over 200,000 aspirants in India take up the Common-entrance-test or CAT to be eligible for applying to some of the best management institutions in the country.

What have been the trends that are important and related to the growth of management education in India?

- More IIMs: there are 13 of them and probably more would open soon

- All IITs, NITs, and FMS - institutions that were taking other/own entrance tests are now taking scores from CAT for selection purposes

- Multiple campuses of other private institutions (IMT, NMIMS, IMI, etc) and increase in the intake of other b-schools like S.P Jain

- Maturity of the market forces, wherein MBA is now a more focused and proper decision and not any longer the natural step after engineering or graduation

I would like to separately mention another factor adding to the above list - that of the economic conditions and its relevant effects in businesses and organizations who used to be the star recruiters in many b-school campuses.

A sound mind will always ask a question - Is there something wrong with management education model as a whole, and how can we look at forecasting whats probably going to happen for all the passing-out grads in the coming years?

The answer to whether the MBA education model is passe now is - NO. Definitely it no longer represents the growth story of education sector in India any more, but it still re-produces some good talent into the corporate sphere, contributing to the sustainable growth in various sectors. There has been a obvious change of perception and people taking up management education have now accepted the hard realities - that one doesn't come out of an MBA college and buy a Ferrari. Is there a better option other than MBA for creating industry ready professionals? I don't think the outdated undergrad programs are anywhere near to answer that question/problem.

So can we forecast atleast, to ensure that we know what would happen to the grads passing out of MBA/management institutions in the coming years? How will placements 2015 be if we consider profile of people taking up CAT 2012? The following math attempts to answer these questions

Let us consider that in the present economic scenario, it will take more than 8-10 years to see brilliant growth across the world economies (even that's a big Bet and being nonsensically bullish), not much will change in the next 5-7 years, in terms of job opportunities and job-designs available for MBA grads (I am not only taking the top 10 or 20 b-schools, but also the major chunk of good b-schools in India)

To calculate the probabilities, I will be using the Bayes theorem (for multiple probabilities attached in this case)

Formula:
P(A1 | B) = [P(A1)* P(B|A1)]/[[P(A1)*P(B|A1)] x [P(A2)*P(B|A2)]]

Let's define each probability:

P(A1) - Probability of more freshers getting offers

P(A2) - Probability of more work-exp people getting offers

P(B|A1) - Probability of Economic Slowdown/Job-Market Slowdown when there is a probability of more freshers getting jobs

P(B|A2) - Probability of Eco-slowdown when there is a probability of more job offers for people with prior work-ex

The rough segmentation of Freshers:Work-ex for CAT 2011 was about 30:70

Which also would be the representation across the better b-schools around the country.

Let us consider the batch-composition as the ultimate factor to calculate the probabilities of more freshers or work-ex people getting offers.

Therefore,

P(A1) for people who took CAT 2011 will be - 30%

P(A2) will be - 70%

Let us assume that when there are more freshers who get offers, the probability of economic slowdown will be less, and more for the situation wherein the work-ex population get more offers.

Which means,

P(B|A1) - 20%

P(B|A2) - 80%

So, the probability of more freshers jobs when there is a consistent probability of economic slowdown expected over the next 4-5 years, will be denoted by P(A1|B)

Therefore,

P(A1|B) = (0.3*0.2)/[(0.3*0.2) + (0.7*0.8)]

= 9.6%

Case 2:
Let's now consider that for CAT 2011, there were 70% freshers and 30% work-ex aspirants, thereby changing the P(A1) and P(A2) respectively, keeping the probabilities of "B" for A1 and A2 consistent.

So the new P(A1|B) = (0.7*0.2)/[(0.7*0.2)+(0.3*0.8)]

= 38.8%

So the math tells us that there wont be good amount of jobs designed for freshers available to MBA grads in the coming years (About 10% probability), considering that about 70% of CAT applicants will have prior work ex.

The above is only an indicator. There is bound to be argument that this calculation at best throws out only the probability, and hasn't considered other factors like - industry requirements, innovations across certain industry and the speed of the same, technological advancement and its affect on irreversible losses of various job designs, etc. The good thing is that the scope to calculate proper trends and probabilities for this can only improve from here.

The top IIMs - Are they suffering from ELOC?

The IIMs are the high watermark of management/professional education in our country and each year thousands of aspiring applicants (with aspirations to join some of the best organizations in the world) try to get a seat into these coveted institutions, to join the illustrious list of alumnus who have represented Indian Inc across the world.

Amongst the early IIMs, the 3 well established ones are located in Ahmedabad, Bangalore, and Kolkata. Three more were built - Lucknow, Indore and Kozhikode.

Now are you hit with an idea I was - that the first 3 are better than the next 3? Has your brain started to already compartmentalize the institutions into two different categories already based on some bias and perception, which is introduced by means of mere grouping of these into two different sentences?

The IIMs were an initiative by the Govt of India (Min of HRD) to produce professional talent required for the industry and to support the growth of this country in sectors other than agriculture.

Similar requirements also gave birth to the IITs - the respected brand across the whole world. Alumnus of IITs are present in some of the top leadership positions in organizations the world over.

The perceptual issues that have plagued the IIMs since the time there was a huge rush amongst Indian students to get an MBA/PGDM qualification, has (according to me) kind of rubbed into the establishment themselves.

In the last couple of years, the number of IIMs have grown to 13 (7 more added to the already existing 6), and somehow there was well documented resentment and doubts across-the-board when these new ones were launched.

Questions like - "will the IIM 'brand' now fade away?" or "what will be the quality of the person passing out of No1 and No13 when compared by an employer?" started doing the rounds and were lapped up by everyone. Even the applicants who want to get into an "IIM" for a better life (money, status, etc) started magnifying the same issues through discussions, blogging, etc.

So have the first batch IIMs (the first 6) become a victim of "external locus of control" by being forced to compare themselves within their own franchise?

Over the last few decades, B-school Ranking systems have always ranked the fist 3 IIMs (Ahd, Blore, Kol) as Nos.1,2,3 respectively. The rest of the 3 IIMs came in the top ten at most time but not necessarily in the first 6 positions. There were other b-schools that made applicants wonder whether really some magic happens at the top-3 IIMs thats missing in the next 3.

No one asked "why?" is there such a thing existing.

Similarly, when the new IIMs came in, a very similar story unfolded. Various private institutions were ranked way above the new IIMs and these new ones were placed much lower than the first 6.

Which meant two things:
- Perception of these IIMs suffered as they were new and therefore definitely couldn't produce the same pedagogical strength of the first 6
- There is nothing called as the IIM brand as there are clear divisions amongst the early 6 and the latest 7 institutions

I believe that the ELOC is something that has hurt the IIMs badly and definitely the governing bodies of these places are responsible for the same. A system like the IIMs exist in a place like India and not the US, that has representations from IIM faculty or research collaborations at all times. In those Universities (like Harvard, Univ of Penn, etc), there is a clear sense of belonging to the top school, which isn't present for the very stakeholders at the top IIMs. They actually represent a system or a franchise, and that's something that creates a dissonance.

The whole system of ranking IIMs against each other, perceptual difference amongst alumnus and students, etc have created the kind of environment wherein this identity-crisis has flourished. Over the next decade, this can worsen if left to the whims and fancies of people who would love to have the status-quo maintained.

There is no reason for IIMs to be ranked or be worried about who is No.2 or No.10. The trouble is that the current selection procedures also point towards bias in selection of the IIMs by applicants through the present system. What's the future for the new IIMs? Will they be always branded as the also-rans who didn't have the might and power to be counted amongst the established elite? Are the first 6 IIMs elite and not to be touched? Why can't they look at making this a collaborative system and make "IIM" an actual brand (and not "IIMA" or "IIMC" as separate brand names)?

It has to begin with breaking away from the status-quo that's been forced upon them by us (who else?), and then they need to figure out ways to collaborate so that the same pedagogy, the same kind of standards, the same kind of research, faculty, and value is added to each student who joins any IIM. Even the 14th one, if and when its inaugurated.