Gravy Training: Inside the Shadowy World of Business Schools [Hardcover]

Stuart Crainer (Author), Des Dearlove (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 1998

This is a study of the way in which business schools have emerged from the backwater of academia that they inhabited 20 years ago, into the glamorous global industry position they occupy today. The book is based on interviews with those who run, use, work for and despise business schools.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

After more than a century, have business schools delivered on their original promise? That depends on your interpretation, say British business journalists Crainer and Dearlove. But whatever impact business schools have had, they conclude, it hasn't all been positive. Times have changed, and business schools haven't; they need to face up to the competition from consultants and the more than 1500 "corporate universities" in the United States alone. The authors' frequent put-downs of Harvard Business School and their glorification of INSEAD, the elite French business school, may suggest a Eurocentric bent. But they support their arguments with quotes from quite a few well-known North Americans in business education with serious critiques of the major schools, their teaching methods, and the competence of graduates. Greater emphasis on technology, better philosophical connections with the market they serve, and cooperative programs and projects are some of the approaches that they think can save MBA programs. Required reading for aspiring MBA students and corporate human resources managers; MBA administrators and faculty should read it but probably won't.ASusan DiMattia, "Library Hotline" & "Corporate Library Update"
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Booklist

Crainer and Dearlove are both business journalists who live in Oxford, England; Crainer previously compiled The Ultimate Business Library (1997). In this critique of business education worldwide, no school escapes unscathed. The authors question whether business schools have helped produce better managers and whether the research they carry out has helped the business community be more effective. They document a litany of complaints. Schools fail to provide any grounding in ethics or the human side of management. The Harvard case method is seriously flawed. Faculty members are recruited like athletes for their "marquee value," with little requirement that they actually teach. Too much time is devoted to outside consulting. Too much effort is devoted to securing a top ranking among the growing number of "best school" lists. Along with the criticisms, however, the authors recommend solutions. They also consider the future of business education in light of growing competition for the lucrative executive education market from consultants that conduct training seminars and from distance-learning providers. Published last year in Britain, this work has now been customized for American readers. David Rouse --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 288 pages
• Publisher: Capstone Publishing; 1 edition (September 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1900961687
• ISBN-13: 978-1900961684
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.2 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 2.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #6,453,269 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

40 of 41 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Misguided b-school bashing: Redux, August 26, 2001

By 

Peter Lorenzi (Maryland, USA) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Gravy Training: Inside the Business of Business Schools (Hardcover)

I originally wrote this review anonymously; 17 of 23 readers found the review helpful. Here is my update: The title is misleading: This is a look at full-time MBA and executive (MBA) programs at the arguably best business schools in the world. This is like claiming a study to be a study of the auto industry when all the authors studied is Mercedes Benz. The real "business" of business schools must cover the part-time and undergraduate programs. There are transparent inconsistencies: The authors bash b-schools for promoting a cult of gurus, only the authors quote and promote gurus repeatedly. They use the same gurus to criticize the very schools that hire and promote the supposed "guru". Crainer and Dearlove decry one-liners, then summarize their work with a cliched one-liner of their own: "Management is pocket science, not rocket science." They tell b-schools to be customer-friendly but not to cater to the catering needs or accommodation interests of their clients. They purport to do a global study when this is at best a modest revision of a study of the few, elite European business schools, which are generaly unlike the American business school system. They imply (p. 186) that the major business school accrediting body -- the AACSB -- only changed its name to International Association of Management Education outside the U.S., and this is not true. [NOTE: And AACSB in 2001 changed its name again -- worldwide.] They criticize business deans for lacking vision, while not realizing that the "independent subcontractor" mode of business faculty is inconsistent with "academic leadership" creating a vision for such independent experts. Business schools have been successful because they produce what businesses clearly prefer to hire: knowledge workers, managers and leaders for the global economy. Business students at all levels -- undergraduate, graduate and executive -- are learning the new culture and language of the new world economy. Even as the "new" economy declines and former dot commers return to collect their MBAs. Business is a liberal art, much like the study of a foreign language. At the undergraduate level, where most business education is done, accredited business schools demand a well-rounded, liberal arts curriculum. B-schools are generous cash cows for universities. Sure, their faculty earn a lot but they teach large course sections and generate demand for non-business courses. If as much were spent on training top business students as is spent on the college's star quarterback, we might have even more effective business schools. The fact that innovation and leadership is absent from the "top" schools is a phenomenon in all industries: the top schools become rich and self-satisfied and the real change bubbles up from those struggling, niche-building programs competing for the new customers' dollar. A well-trained manager need not be a rocket scientist, but if there are design flaws in his education, Challenger-like disasters are in the making. Business education is too big and too important to be left to a few, smug, incredibly expensive schools. And we should all be grateful that it is not...

29 of 36 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Shallow, contradictory, misleading and disappointing., October 3, 1999

By 

Peter Lorenzi (Maryland, USA) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Gravy Training: Inside the Business of Business Schools (Hardcover)

This is not a book about the business of business schools. It is a look at full-time MBA and executive (MBA) programs at the arguably best business schools in the world. This is like saying this is a study of the auto industry when all you have studied is Mercedes Benz. The real "business" of business schools must cover the part-time and undergraduate programs.

The authors bash b-schools for promoting a cult of gurus, only the authors also promote and quote gurus at every turn. And they use the same gurus to criticize the very schools that hire and promote them. The authors decry one-liners, only to close their work with a cliched one-liner of their own ("management is pocket science, not rocket science."). The authors tell b-schools to be customer-friendly but not to cater to the catering needs or accommodation interests of their clients. The authors purport to do a global study when this is at best a modest revision of a study of the elite European business schools. They imply (p. 186) that the AACSB only changed its name to International Association of Management Education outside the U.S., and this is not true. They criticize business deans for lacking vision, while not realizing that the "independent subcontractor" mode of business faculty is inconsistent with "academic leadership" creating a vision for such independent experts.

Business schools have been successful because they produce what businesses clearly prefer to hire: knowledge workers, managers and leaders for the global economy. Business students at all levels -- undergraduate, graduate and executive -- are learning the new culture and language of the new world economy. If b-schools were not the cash cows for universities that universities make them to be, or if as much were spent on training top business students as is spent on the college's star quarterback, we might have even more effective business schools. The fact that innovation and leadership is absent from the "top" schools is a phenomenon in all industries: the top schools become rich and self-satisfied and the real change bubbles up from those struggling, niche-building programs competing for the new customers' dollar. A well-trained manager may not be a rocket scientist, but if there are design flaws in his education, Challenger-like disasters are in the making. Business education is too big and too important to be left to a few, smug, incredibly expensive schools. And we should all be grateful that it is not...

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Business schools need detailed self-examination, December 7, 1999

By 

Bill Godfrey (Mt Stuart, TAS Australia) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Gravy Training: Inside the Shadowy World of Business Schools (Hardcover)

An analysis and expose of business schools and their flaws, with a prescription for directions that they should take. Essentially written as an exposé and an entertainment, with something of the breathless 'gee whiz' quality that seems to go with the genre. At the same time, it marshals a formidable body of facts and opinion in support of its thesis and is challenging and thought-provoking. It should certainly give those connected with business schools some cause for reflection.

The main thesis is that Business Schools have lost their way as educators or contributors to the art of management, while continuing to run a profitable, though often inefficient business. The main beneficiaries are the alumni who are able to wave the icon of an MBA to attract large rewards, although there is little evidence that they perform better as managers than those without the label. They in turn support the business schools with contributions, thereby completing a mutually beneficial reinforcing loop.

The authors go into some length on the fallacies of the case study method, which remains the favoured teaching method. Among the critical fallacies are:

the fallacy that there is a 'right answer'

the fallacy that the sorts of financial and analytical data typically provided give an sufficiently complete insight into the dynamics of the issue (the neglect of the human element)

the fallacy that the professor 'knows' and the student 'learns' (an issue that is discussed at great length and with great pungency in Vaill: Learning as a Way of Being)

the fallacy that working with a series of case studies has much to do with the critical skill of preparing for life-long learning (see, among others, Cunningham, Ian: The Wisdom of Strategic Learning)

The authors argue that 'the end result is that top managers are notably dysfunctional when it comes to personal skills' and that many are notably poor at learning. 'Despite Argyris' work and insights, business schools have nurtured a faith in problem solving.'

Interesting and often entertaining though the analysis is, the most important substance in the book is in the last two chapters, which look to the future. The authors argue that the advance of technology (including the capacity for various forms of distance learning and electronic integration of learning with work), plus the turbulence that is forcing business to recognise the centrality of continuous learning and knowledge acquisition provide two powerful drivers of change. Business schools must stop regarding themselves as the sole preserve of knowledge and learning and must become part of networks of learning.