SCHOOL DAZE

Every year, Bloomberg Businessweek devotes one issue to MBAs and the schools that love them.

In the latest, a sidebar shows the survey results from 1,320 corporate recruiters who were asked to identify most valued job skills and score each institution for delivery of those skills. The charts revealed what industries want, skills employers value, and where schools succeed. 

Oddly enough (tongue firmly in cheek), the skill on almost every industry’s list was … communication.  Of the 11 industry sectors, from chemicals to transportation, only one – consumer products – didn’t mention communication in its top three ‘most wanted’ skills.  Six of the 11 industry reps ranked communication skills as number one; 68 percent of recruiters say it’s one of the five most important skills.

Then the disconnect begins. 

Of the top ten full-time MBA programs (as ranked by the magazine), from Duke’s Fugua to Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper – including the usual Harvard, Yale, Chicago, Columbia, Stanford, and Northwestern – guess how many scored super high on communication skills?

None.

Therefore, since business schools don’t do a superb job of training its grads on communication, it seems to be the responsibility of industry to do just that.  And sure, corporate courses available through Open Sesame, SkillSoft, Harvard’s ManageMentor do an average kind of job teaching communications.  But why couldn’t it be the province of the communications department and its siblings (like marketing) to supplement the standard learning?  Why couldn’t the function set up a mentoring program to coach managers, early talent, hi-pos, and the like on the ins and outs of communications?

No budget is no excuse.  What is?

THE E*D*U*C*A*T*I*O*N OF US

The jury’s still out, as they say.

Everyone, though, agrees on one fact:  The current (and sad) state of American education.  After that, there’s zip consensus, with remedies as wide ranging as our demographics, from charter schools and online curricula to the strict disciplines and draconian demands of the early to mid-20th century. 

Our take:  No one’s right.  And no one agrees.

What bothers us most about this ongoing, never-settled argument are the implications for us, as mentors, coaches, and teachers for our professions.  A healthy debate, according to our thinking, should be about forever learning, or life-long education.  The skills and knowledge we accrue throughout our earlier business years only serves as a great foundation for continuing to feed ourselves intellectually.

Yet there’s always a but. 

All these ruminations got started when we volunteered last year as teaching assistants in an urban Midwestern elementary school.  Now we’re interacting with what might be would-be communicators and designers and marketers of tomorrow. 

It’s not pretty.  Kids can’t spell, can’t read, can’t do simple math – in spite of one-on-one work and patient repetitions and drills.    They do like to draw, and express themselves freely when asked for visual representations of concepts and numbers.  And they’re extremely voluble, looking for conversations about home and life and the world.  But not about school and education.

What does that mean for us as practitioners?  Where are the future change leaders and branding experts?  And how do we engage our staff, our teams in not only helping them learn and grow, but supporting  others in their brain- and capability-building efforts?

It’s a puzzlement.  And a very personal responsibility that begs for hearing about lessons learned – from others.