MBAs: broaden your horizon
pharmafile | November 5, 2009 | Feature | Business Services |Â Â MBA, careersÂ
Last month in Pharmafocus we looked at how the MBA has developed into an important part of the potential senior manager’s toolkit. It is not obligatory by any means as a route to the top – among the chief executives of the top 10 pharma companies worldwide, only two have MBAs – but it is becoming more common, and European business schools are increasingly coming to the fore.
In the Financial Times 2009 league tables, nine of the top 20 business schools are in the US, three in the UK, three in Spain, two in China and one each in France, India and Switzerland, so eight of the top 20 are in Europe.
In the German speaking countries, the two consistently top-rated schools are Mannheim, 100 km from Frankfurt in south-west Germany, and IMD in Lausanne, Switzerland. Pharmafocus talked to the schools and to alumni to see how they differ from schools in the UK and the US.
The pharma industry is a significant employer of both schools’ graduates. Ralf Buerkle, communications director at Mannheim Business School, says that around 10-15% of their alumni go into the pharmaceutical industry, working for Novartis, Pfizer and Roche, amongst others.
It’s a similar story at IMD, according to Suzy Laurent of the school’s MBA communications team. In 2008, 12% went into pharma, up noticeably from 2007, when it was 9%, as the recession started to bite and pharma became an increasingly attractive alternative to investment banking or consulting.
Both schools teach entirely in English, which may surprise anyone who thought business schools outside the US and UK taught in local languages. The language of business is now English and so too is the language of the business school. It is hard to see how it could be any different. In the current class at Mannheim, 69% of students are not German and come from 17 different countries.
Generalist versus Niche approach
The two schools take a generalist approach to management, unlike some schools in the US and India which are starting to focus on niches like the pharma industry.
“Our programmes are general management programmes and do not focus on selected industries,” explains Ralf Buerkle of Mannheim. “However, we have conferences in which business experts from various industries give insights on their specific markets.”
Adds Suzy Laurent of IMD: “The IMD MBA is a general management program focused on leadership. We do not focus on any specific industry, but the pharma industry is certainly an interesting one from which to learn.
“We have cases on the pharma industry that are taught in the core courses and this year we have had international consulting projects with Novartis, Roche and AstraZeneca. In these projects, teams of four or five participants, supported by a faculty advisor, spend eight weeks working with the company on a strategic issue, and present their findings and recommendations to senior management.”
So what are the most important differences in approach, course content or culture between the Anglo-American colleges and continental European ones? Ralf Buerkle points to four key differences.
“We have much smaller classes. As a result, the selection process is highly individual, and interaction between the students and the faculty is very intensive.
“Case studies are just one part of our teaching methods, but not the dominant one. We also focus on group work, simulations, lectures and guest speeches.
“Ethics and corporate social responsibility are important elements of all our MBA programs. Social projects and courses in ethics and CSR are mandatory.”
Suzy Laurent also points to course duration and a different student make-up as key differences:
“IMD is a one-year programme and many other European schools are also 12 to 18 months. US schools tend to be two-year programmes. At IMD we have older participants (average age 31) and a more intense programme (participants spend as much time in class in one year as in many two-year programmes) so we believe the education fits the development needs of our participants both in terms of learning and in terms of time away from work.
“European schools tend to have a greater percentage of international participants. At IMD 98% of our participants are from outside Switzerland, while at US schools about 30% come from outside the US.
This all means that the course work is much more globally focused, says Suzy Laurent: “European schools tend to use more international case studies and course materials, US schools tend to use more US-based course materials.
“In terms of teaching approach, IMD uses a mix of case studies, lectures, simulations and group projects. We try to use the teaching method most appropriate for participants to learn the content. Other schools may focus more on case studies or lectures.”
Alumni perspective
Alumni of European business schools tend to agree with these analyses, so it would seem the schools are walking the walk as well as talking the talk. Briton Paul Holmes graduated from IMD’s 2008 programme and is now the senior manager at Amgen (International).
“For me, IMD’s focus on leadership and understanding behaviours is what stands the programme out from other schools. These are skills which will benefit me greatly in any industry throughout my career. The common denominator in any business in the future will be people and learning how to work across cultures and behaviours is something IMD excels at.
“I chose IMD because of its personal focus. Other schools seemed too much of a ‘factory’ – get hundreds of students in, teach them and ship them out into the market. IMD wasn’t like that. They focused on each student very closely. I thought if I was spending a lot of my own money, I wanted the most attention I could get.
“With such a small number of participants (90) and the ‘pressure-cooker’ nature of the programme, so much more teaching and learning time was packed into the year than at equivalent MBA programmes. IMD has calculated they fit 90% of a two-year programme into the curriculum in one year.”
John-Kenneth Billingsley is now director, Global Vaccine Policy & Partnerships at GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. After graduating from the IMD programme in December 2002, he worked at the Novartis global HQ in Basel. To him, the rationale and benefits of MBAs are about career moves and opportunities.
“MBAs can be a ‘door opener’: they often facilitate major jumps in one’s career with respect to function, industry and geography. The better the MBA, the better the opportunity to make major career moves.
“Some of the better MBA programmes have a highly international mix of students, and in today’s global economy, those who can work effectively in international teams and across national boundaries have a distinct advantage over those who can’t.”
What stage in your career is it best to do an MBA?
“It is seen as a passport to success and many people in their 20s want to be successful quickly,” say Paul Holmes of Amgen, “However, you might not have the maturity in your mid-20s to realise the true benefits of an MBA in the context of your life. Many probably just see it as a tick-box for a successful business career but at IMD, the MBA has given me a new perspective on life and what a career means, which I probably wouldn’t have seen in my 20s.”
John-Kenneth Billingsley has a slightly different view: “I believe it is best to seek an MBA relatively early in one’s career. It’s much easier to make big career jumps before one has become “pegged” as a particular type of specialist.
“Early in one’s career, I believe one generally has more of the flexibility and energy required to succeed in a full-time MBA programme – and to put up with some of the headaches arising from programme demands.
“I believe three to four years of professional experience beforehand is ideal, for enhanced understanding and appreciation of how to manage successfully the transition from management theory to implementation.
“For some MBA programmes such as IMD, given the type of programme and typical class profile, individuals would be advised to have a couple of more years of experience to be able to operate successfully at the more advanced professional level of the other MBA candidates.”
What are the key differences between US and European MBAs?
Paul Holmes of Amgen says, “I had an eye-opening experience at the MBA fair in Paris several years ago with an admissions person at a US top 10 school. I asked how the school stood out internationally. I was shocked to hear, “Well in truth, what have non-US companies done that has been ground-breaking in recent years?”
“I don’t believe for a second a top EU school could ever have such a position because of the make-up of their international student bodies and awareness of the wider world. If there is a time when we should be aware of how interconnected the world is and how reliant countries are on each other, it is now more than ever.”
Finally, what do you learn that will benefit you? “At a programme such as IMD, where face-to-face group work plays a central role, one also learns a tremendous amount about the ‘softer’ side of business – for example, how to recognise, confront and overcome interpersonal conflict to achieve results,” says John-Kenneth Billingsley.
And what about the future? If the Rolls-Royce options of schools like Mannheim and IMD are starting to populate middle and upper management, a European initiative may make the MBA more noticeable across organisations. The Bologna accord, harmonising masters’ degrees across Europe, takes effect in 2010, and may lead to a tipping point where the MBA feeds into HR processes as an easy way to screen and select staff. So if an MBA is a rarity in today’s executive suites, that may not last much longer.
External links
Related Content
Pharma companies ‘among happiest places to work’
Five pharmaceutical companies have placed in a top 50 of the happiest companies in America …
Promoting diversity in the pharma industry: 10 female pharma rising stars
While some parts of the pharma industry can be dominated by men there are plenty …
UK ‘lacks the skills’ for future drug development, ABPI warns
A shortage of skilled professionals threatens to undermine research and development of new medicines in …
