MGTDEV-L Archives

April 1997

MGTDEV-L@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bric Wheeler <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Management & Executive Development Discussions <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:46:49 -500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (63 lines)
The following message was posted on the TRDEV-L listserv.  Thought
you might be interested.
 
*************************************************
 
Date:    Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:18:22 -0400
From:    Stan Malcolm <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Executive Development Idea...
 
I got into a conversation with a friend the other day, and this is
what resulted.  I'd like your reactions, if any.
 
It seems to me that Executive Development requires a fundamentally
different approach from the traditional design and delivery activities
of a corporate training department.
 
For one thing, you (Training Dept.) aren't likely to be the subject
matter experts.  Even if you are SMEs in areas that matter to execs,
they're not likely to perceive you as such.
 
Second, let me tell you a useful anecdote from Aetna.  When Aetna Ed
took on an Exec Ed role, they surveyed their audience.  The result I
found most interesting was this:  Almost without exception what
executives said they wanted for themselves was INFORMATION - but what
their executive staff needed was EDUCATION.  Talk to their staff and
you heard the same thing: they wanted information for themselves but
education for their staff.  My advice to my Aetna Ed colleagues was
that whatever you give them, you had better call it INFORMATION!
 
Overall, it seems to me that the Executive Education role is much more
one of  brokering and even "travel agent."    It's up to you to find
out what the information/experience gaps are at the executive level,
then find out who has the information to help close those gaps.
Information sources could be consultants of course, or programs, but
they could also be executives at other (non-competitor) companies who
have faced, or are facing, similar challenges.  Your role is as
"match-maker."  That role might include some preliminary research to
confirm the match, planning to bring the parties together, and
facilitation once they are together.  Note that there's no "training"
role at all, but I suspect a hekuva lot of learning would result.  Not
only would the executives learn, but by playing the facilitator role
you could learn too - learning that could be valuable to you in terms
of other activities you sponsor.
 
Does this make any sense at all?  Does it mesh with experiences you've
had?
 
- Stan
        Stanley E. Malcolm, Ph.D., Principal
        Performance Vision
        17 Caffyn Drive, Marlborough, CT 06447
        860-295-9711,  FAX 860-295-1313
        e-mail [log in to unmask]
 
------------------------------
 
Bric A. Wheeler, Director
Center for Management Development
Richard T. Farmer School of Business Administration
Miami University, Oxford, Ohio  45056-1675
     Voice:  (513) 529-2132;  Fax:  (513) 529-6992
Net: [log in to unmask]; http://www.muohio.edu/~wheeleba/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2