From Asia to Europe

To quote the overused “Keep it Simple (Silly)” – I suspect that, if our school had aligned their curriculum planning with this philosophy, we might not be in such a keep-one’s-head-above-water predicament.

4 modules over 8 weeks, back to back with another 4 modules over eight weeks. Professors who assign reading and assignments as though we students are theirs exclusively – a fully normal approach except that this workload is multiplied by four. An expectation (c’mon!) that all work can be accomplished at a master level of thought.

An excellent ‘comprehensive introduction’ on paper though this amounts to a 16 week scramble in real life. Now that I’ve had more time to reflect on Friday’s programme evaluation meeting, I’m rather shocked that, after hearing about last year’s core complaint of a ridiculous workload, only peripheral solutions were put in place. (ie. change the introduction week.)

While I agree that it is an issue to bring students of varied, often non-business backgrounds onto the same page, the school is setting a dangerous precedent in creating an initial atmosphere of ‘task work’. In the last 6 weeks, my top daily concern is time management. With the rush of expectations, each assignment (loaded with potential for depth of understanding) is simplified and only basic effort is put forth. I feel like an executive assistant for the irritating CEO that can’t say ‘no’. My first weeks of business school have been approached as, essentially, clerical work.

I fear that the school, in only its second year, may be undermining its ‘world class’ goal to be tops of the Entrepreneurship education charts by creating an attitude of mediocracy. They are spreading themselves too thinly. Assembling 39 students from across the world and applying them to a business boot camp is no task for the novice. Furthermore, demanding ‘group work’ (multiply project timeline by 10) for three of the four modules ignores delicate cultural implications that must be addressed slowly. Last year, 2 students burnt out and went home. This year, it continues to be a recipe for implosion.

The real issue is, as I see it, idealism vs. realism. The programme CV is, idealistically, golden. Knowledge and experience across the board, perfect for the entrepreneurially-minded. In reality though, it doesn’t work.

I believe that part of this lies in their ignorance towards work expectation vs. work organization. While it may appear as though a student has the ability to ‘pick and choose their battles’, they infact, do not. This is dire reality of group work: one individual becomes accountable towards a whole greater than themselves. One cannot extract him/herself from the whole and choose to ‘sit out this battle’, or at least, ‘half-ass’ it, without painful consequences. Furthermore, and considering the upbringings of 39 people from around the world, there is an excruciating amount of time dedicated towards finding middle ground – which, at this early point in the game, often does not occur. Frustrations ensue, and as a result, people get efficiently smart. As such, East groups with East, and West with West. The very nature of Entrepreneurship, which relies heavily on built connections, is defeated before it is given fair chance.

And so again, to quote the overused: K.I.S.S.

I shall go punch out once I finish this note.

Exhaustedly,
Laura

Tags: Swedish Living

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007 at 12:40 am and is filed under Swedish Living. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.