Theoretical Management Abstracted

College Professors like myself or how myself used to be have spent countless hours preparing and sharing our interpretation as to how management types should perform, respond, behave, and talk in what we euphemistically call the “real world.”

And, I have always wondered what the actual “real world” is to tell you the truth because I do not really know that myself even though I have used that same phrase repeatedly.

According to our Online Free Dictionary, the “real world” means: the realm of practical or actual experience, as opposed to the abstract, theoretical, or idealized sphere of the classroom, laboratory, etc.

As I reflect upon this definition of “real world,” I am now puzzled by the notion that Professors like I used to be think we are intelligently gifted when we share abstract, theoretical, and idealized STUFF to those students who are paying “big bucks” to hear this nonsense because they perceive it is going to help them in the “real world.”

How does abstract, theoretical, and idealized stuff help anybody?

In my humble opinion, the only time that abstract, theoretical, and idealized stuff helps anybody is when they are possessed with a high IQ like Einstein and Walter O'Brien who actually had a higher IQ than Einstein.

I remember one of early conversations with this gentleman whose job it was to buy and refurbish and sell companies. Sometimes, he would buy companies and sell off non performing divisions the finance his acquisition debt.

On this occasion, he was attempting to purchase Burlington Industries for the sole purpose of acquiring the denim division and his plans were to sell off the rest for pennies on the dollar.

Our subsequent discussion (debate or argument) revolved around the employees who would lose their jobs and the damage that would do to those families, the children, and the small entrepreneurs who operated in the community providing services to those who worked at Burlington Industries.

The businessman with whom I was having this conversation told me that theoretically as he had laid it out on paper, no one was going to lose their job and if they did the impact on the community, theoretically, would be minimal.

My guy did not buy Burlington Industries as he was outbid by a similar company out of Canada who we later found out had the same theoretical predictions as my debater had and believe it or not but hundreds lost their jobs, families got divorced, children ended up on drugs, and the small store operators (barber shops, grocery stores, hardware, etc) closed down and the City of Burlington in which Burlington Industries was located and took it name (or vice versa, as I am not sure on this point) became a ghost town of sorts although there were other businesses located around that eventually picked up the slack.

And, no I did not read this in the newspapers... I saw this first hand because I used to live on the outskirts of the City of Burlington in Alamance County and my job with a local Community College had me working with the Executives of Burlington Industries developing classes for their workers. The workforce literacy program that my colleagues and I put into place there became the role model and standard for the rest of the State until Burlington Industries shut down and shut its doors.

Colleges and Universities all over the United States and I presume other countries as well, continue to teach the abstract, theoretical, and idealized stuff to their students... and, those same students pay to sit in the same chairs as others have sat before them to hear the same stuff that will provide them so little viable information about the “real world.”

My concerns may not be valid for other disciplines outside of management and they are not totally applicable for Accounting and Finance majors at both the undergraduate or graduate levels but when a higher level of education is pursued, and with all majors, it is predicated upon the theoretical.

But, Management is a different character altogether and assumes its theoretical stripes from the getgo.

In my Zenger Miller (which is now Achieve Global) training for first line supervisors, each trainer or facilitator uses the same 3 prong approach when asking that simulations be performed by the employee students.

There is the observer

There is the laborer

There is the manager

The facilitators can fabricate any kind of scenario that they need to in order to teach a concept with a likely scenario being: How to deal with difficult employees.

Each person on that team has an opportunity to practice all 3 positions and there is discussion between the 3 members after each session is played out.

The designers of the course and this approach obviously have perceived and believe that this is the best way to teach... and, it may be valid up to a point; but, for me, it gives a false sense of understanding and confidence for the future.

Let me explain this way.

Navy Blue Angel Pilots, sit together in a room and talk through exactly how each one of them is going to maneuver their craft from the beginning to the ending of their show... and, it is this mental/verbal practicing that imprints action onto their brains that they subsequently follow almost intuitively.

However, if these Navy Blue Angel Pilots got into an “aerial dogfight” with foreign pilots would they perform as well as they do in their exhibitions?

Good question, right?

There is really no way of telling... why?

• We do not know the factors of the environment where they conflict might take place
• We do not know the training of the foreign pilots
• We do not know their personalities or how they may perform under stress
• We do not know their level of skill and talent
• We do not know their level of experience in “aerial dogfight”

Predicting how managers are going to perform under different scenarios is a casino “crap shoot” at best and we as educator Professors should know that better than anyone... and yet, as teach as if it is absolute and we have exams and quizzes with questions designed to measure student retention of that absolute.

In my opinion, nothing could be farther from the truth.

We teach the right way to incorporate ethics into management operations and yet there are times that those ethical teachings may need to be abandoned in order to achieve company objectives relative to the implementation of a strategic plan or policy. This tactic does not mean we are an unethical person or that we will continue to be unethical in the future... no, it just means at that point-in-time, we had to be unethical.

How would a student be questioned on that management outcome on a quiz, test, or final exam?

Most of my colleagues that I taught with would never have tried to test on that scenario but that type of question was how I based my teaching in the classroom because that is the kind of world the student was likely to encounter once they graduated.