COLUMN: Give me back my major!

From: Eric Goldstein's, "Upon Further Review," Fall '97 From: Eric Goldstein's, "Upon Further Review," Fall '97 Imagine my shock when I received an e-mail last week from the Wharton School stating that as of May 30 my major will cease to be offered. The school said the decision will only affect those students who entered in September 1995 or later. However, even upperclassmen may have difficulty finding the right classes to fulfill their majors. As the e-mail stated, students may have to take substitute classes -- in effect, watering down the program for even those supposedly unaffected students. Despite the nonchalant attitude taken by Wharton administrators, the move to a single Management concentration will lessen the value of a Wharton education. Management as a field of study is so broad and unfocused that it becomes more of an academic exercise than actual preparation for the business world. It is hard to imagine a general Management major leaving Wharton with an in-depth understanding of any aspect of business. By offering four specialized tracts, students could very neatly gain practical expertise in a certain aspect of the field. Management 101 provided the basic structure; the specialized concentrations provided the focus. What value is it to a Wharton student to take one class in entrepreneurial ventures, another in international comparative management, another in personnel management and a fourth in the management of technology? The issues facing a manager in a start-up venture differ greatly from those of a top manager of an established firm, which also differ greatly from the problems facing a multinational conglomerate. By removing the option of specializing, Wharton will be turning out management majors who are jacks-of-all-trades, but masters of none. As it is, the four management options are among the broadest concentrations offered by Wharton, since they all combine aspects of finance, accounting, law, risk management, etc. The four programs are hardly too focused. Prior to the mass e-mailing, Wharton -- from Dean Thomas Gerrity all the way down to the teaching assistants -- had been praising the value of an in-depth, hands-on education. In describing the general management concentration, Wharton's Undergraduate Student Handbook states "it is preferred that students follow one of the four specialized concentration plans?" Administrators, including Gerrity, have made it clear that entrepreneurship and multinationalism are the future of business and, consequently, the future of business education. Why, then, is Wharton eliminating them as declarable fields of study? If any concentration should have been eliminated, it should have been the general management option. It is that tract the provides the least focus and therefore the least applicable knowledge to students. The e-mail notice went so far as to suggest students can still focus on a certain aspect of management within the larger umbrella concentration. However, given the more limited class offerings, this may not always be possible. Cappelli argued the decision won't affect students' chances of landing jobs. "Employers who hire undergraduates are not looking for incredible specialization," he said. Cappelli fails to provide any proof for such a statement. But even if his hypothesis is true, is that really how academic decisions should be made? He continued by saying, "I'd be quite surprised if there are other programs of repute in the country that are this specialized." So after several years as the top-ranked undergraduate business school in the world, Wharton is now following the lead of others? What made Wharton great was Gerrity's vision and revolutionary view of the role of a business education. It appears as if the school is no longer a leader in education, but a follower. It is nauseating to hear administrators say academic programs are being cut due to financial decisions. If Wharton is really that hard up for cash, there are certainly other non-academic areas that can be cut. But is Wharton really having that much trouble funding these courses? That is hard to believe when less than one week after the e-mail was sent out, Wharton announced a $2 million contribution to the Sol Snider Entrepreneurial Center, which gave birth to the entrepreneurial management curriculum. The bottom line is a general management concentration is of little value to students. It is apparent from the comments of Cappelli and other Wharton administrators that this decision was not an educational one, but a logistical and financial one. After promoting these programs to recruit top students to Wharton, the school is now turning its back on the students it once coveted.