Out of all the degrees offered world wide, an
MBA is the most sought after degree. According to the AACSB, USA there are more
than 13,000 management institutions in the whole world which are granting
management degrees at under-graduates and post-graduate levels. Asian countries
account for 6500 institutions out of these 13,000 odd institutions. According
to the AICTE, currently India has 3,900 management institutes offering
MBA./PGDM programmes which are approved by the regulator i.e. AICTE.
Numerically, Indian management education
may be perceived big at global level, but we have serious challenges related to
quality, research, faculty, infrastructure, industry linkages and
employability. In some of the global
rankings of b-schools, mostly ISB, Hyderabad and IIM, Ahmadabad are counted
among the top 20. In spite of these
limitations, can we make India a hub for management education? During the last 20 years, countries like
Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, UAE, Spain and France
have been successful to a large extent in attracting MBA aspirants from all
over the world.
Success stories of Singapore, Dubai and
Hong Kong are not very old. Taking a cue
from these recent success stories, India can aim at becoming a hub for
management education and attract MBA aspirants from all over the world. It cannot be achieved overnight but will require
concerted efforts from on the part of the Union Government, AICTE, industry
bodies and management institutions.
National level associations like AIMS, EPSI and AIMA can also lend their
support to this endeavour.
If we have to make India a global hub for
management education, a beginning can be made by identifying top 100 management
institutions providing quality education with good faculty and
infrastructure. These top 100 institutions
can join hands together and form a consortium to market brand “India
MBA” in select 50 countries from Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin
America. They will have to formulate “Vision
2021” for Indian Management Education which will stratise collective
efforts in upgrading quality of Indian institution according to the global
trends.
AICTE was envisioned to play a role of a
catalyst regulatory body catering to the burgeoning manpower needs of the Indian
economy in the post-liberalization era.
Instead of fulfilling this role, it has become a ‘Kamdhenu’ for the nexus of corrupt politicians, bureaucrats and
businessmen helping each other in making quick money through setting up more
and more technical institutions. All
norms for infrastructure, faculty, and curriculum have been flouted. Institutions have been allowed to be set up
in difficult and remote locations, far away from industries. AICTE has given licenses to set up thousands
of management institutions without any reference to the actual manpower needs
of industry.
Business education under AICTE’s control
has grown mostly as a channel to make quick profits rather than as a serious
attempt to groom managers suitable for the Indian and global economy. Exponential growth of B-schools during
1995-2011 has resulted in the increased supply of MBAs/PGDMs, far in excess of
actual industry demand.
Growth
of B-schools in India during 1950-2011
Period
|
No. of
B-schools added
|
Average
Annual Addition
|
1950-80 (30 yrs)
|
118
|
4
|
1980-1995 (15 yrs)
|
304
|
20
|
1995-2000 (5 yrs)
|
322
|
64
|
2000-2006 (6 yrs)
|
1017
|
169
|
2006-2011 (5 yrs)
|
2883
|
577
|
It can be observed from the above
statistics that AICTE allowed a mindless expansion of B-schools during 2006-11,
a period under which both the global and Indian economies witnessed severe
recession and a slump in demand for MBAs.
It is owing to the faulty working of AICTE that we are now on the verge
of a “B-schools’ Bubble burst”. It has
already started and according to a statement of AICTE’s Chairman, Dr SS Mantha,
65 B-schools are under closure. The
Times of India has recently reported that 3 lakh seats of engineering and
management courses could not be filled up during 2011-12.
The National Knowledge Commission (NKC) has
noted the failure of AICTE in its regulatory role and suggested disbanding of
both AICTE and UGC. The NKC Report (2007-09) states that “NKC advocates good
governance rather than the prevalent system of prior control being exercised by
AICTE in this sphere. The current
regulatory regime focuses on punitive action rather than nurturing
institutions”.
The role of AICTE has also been criticized
by industry bodies for its failure to develop technical education in tune with
changes in the industry, society and the global economy. FICCI, in its report on the Regulatory
Framework for Technical Education, has said “AICTE has not been able to manage
the multiple functions bestowed upon it as per its statutory mandate”. FICCI has recommended that AICTE be dissolved
and NCHER should be set up with an objective of minimum regulatory interference
and flexible norms for the functioning of institutes.
A New
Role for the Regulator?
Nobody knows the future of AICTE since MHRD
has been trying to merge it with the proposed NCHER. Much will depend on the dynamics of the
Indian parliament when the NCHER Bill is introduced by MHRD. However, we need an effective regulator for
higher education which includes management education also. Definitely, in the current environment, a
regulator will not be expected to behave like an autocrat with a lot of
punitive powers in its hand.
A good regulator of B-schools should be a
professional agency having a positive mindset, equipped with trained
professionals having the latest knowledge in management education and also
having linkage with the Indian and global business through industry bodies and
professional associations. It should be
managed by eminent management academicians and industry professionals. They should develop a vision and mission for
Indian B -schools based on a comprehensive survey of global business
education. The regulator should
establish relationships with Ivy League B -schools and international
accreditation bodies like AACSB, EFMD and AMBA.
The question will arise about what should
be the mandate for the regulator. Should
it confine itself to developmental, nurturing roles or it should also wield
punitive powers against those B-schools which do not fulfil promises made to
the regulator, students and recruiters?
Should the regulator provide a broad framework of business education and
then leave it to the B-schools to work within that framework with scope for a
lot of freedom, experimentation and innovation? There are different models of B
-schools regulations in the world. Should
we emulate models of developed nations where the independent accreditation
agencies ultimately decide what is right and what is wrong for management
education?
For next 10 years, whosoever is the regulator
of Indian B-schools, can play the role of a gardner who does everything starting
from seedling, planting, watering and pruning -allowing every plant to grow and
every flower to blossom to their truest potential. AICTE, NCHER or any other agency designated
for the regulation of B-schools can develop a new model of governance of
institutions which is in sync with the current Indian and global realities.
Since almost all B-schools face shortage of
good faculty always the regulator can establish 20 Faculty Development Centers
(FDCs) for undertaking variety of activities in providing continuing education
to faculty of B-schools. In twenty
biggest clusters of management education viz. Delhi, Pune, Mumbai, Hyderabad,
Chennai, Bengaluru, Noida, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Kolkata, Raipur, Bhubaneswar,
Trivandrum, Guwahati etc, FDCs can be set up.
Each FDC can be attached with a reputed and well established B-school
whose faculty will offer training programmes and Ph.D. programme to the faculty
of B-schools in the neighbouring areas.
These FDCs can produce 200 Ph.Ds and train 10,000 faculty members every
year. Within the next 10 years, 2000
young faculty can be groomed to qualify for Ph.D. degree by these FDCs.
To meet the challenges of globalization,
Indian B-schools have to adopt latest technology and go for
internationalization. Both these
imperatives are difficult, time consuming and require huge funds. Individually, many B-schools may not be able
to invest hefty investment on high cost technology and international
accreditation.
The regulator can also play a very constructive
role in helping Indian B-schools to attract students from Asia, Africa and even
from Europe and America. The Ministry of
External Affairs and the MHRD can join hands to use our embassies for promoting
Indian B-schools in these markets. Of
course, we will have to work hard in augmenting infrastructure of top 100 B-schools
where foreign students can live and study comfortably. India has all ingredients to become hub of
higher education in management, engineering and medical sciences. If Singapore, UAE and Malaysia can become
hubs for higher education, India can also attract lacs of students in
management and other disciplines.
