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.
No comments:
Post a Comment