Interactive Executive Education

Interactive Executive Education

What Works, What Doesn’t

and Why


My Experience

•
15 years
–

first global teams in 1993

•
Multiple cultures
–

US, Latin America, Asia,
Central Europe

•
Varied context
–

EMBA to company offsite

•
Cross
-
cultural, multinational

•
Situations where I did not speak students’
language

Executive Education?

•
Mature students

–
Hold or have held responsible position

–
Manager or professional

–
Usually 45 or older

•
Presently working

–
Not able to study full time

–
Intensive study

•
Varying duration

–
Single course or offsite training program

–
Full EMBA

Executive Student Characteristics

•
Experienced

•
Short attention span

•
Critical

•
Want whatever they get to be clear and make
sense

•
Want practical knowledge

•
Want to use their experience

Interactive?

•
Teams

•
Foundation of course design

•
All or part of the course activity

Considerations

•
Learning objectives

•
Language

•
Experience level

•
Geography

•
Commonalities

•
Work/organizational objectives

•
Larger program objectives and constraints

Types of Interactive Learning

•
In classroom

•
Web
-
based

•
Off
-
site

•
Simulation/exercise

•
Case
-
based

•
Self
-
created

International Considerations

•
Language

–
Students have common language

–
Same as instructor

•
Location

–
Education center (EMBA)

–
Offsite (hotel or conference center)

–
Web
-
based)


International Considerations (cont.)

•
Time

–
Coordinated (synchronous) or uncoordinated

–
Duration

•
Relationship to work

–
Relevance

–
Work demands (mobile telephones)


Web Technology

•
Real
-
time, synchronous
—
still in the “dream” stage

–
Technology inadequate to support (1,3,6,10,15…)

–
Webex
, Adobe Connect (Macromedia Breeze),
Microsoft Net Meeting

–
Chat (MS Messenger, Yahoo Buddies, ICQ)

–
Video or teleconference

•
Asynchronous
—
actually works

–
Viable, effective

–
Email (or Lotus Notes)
–

commonly used

–
Blackboard or other posting system


What Works?

•
Cases

–
Time sequenced (A
-
B
-
C…, e.g. P&G Japan)

–
Role play (board committee, e.g. Otis)

•
Deliverable

–
Formal or informal

–
In
-
class


What Works?

•
Team building

–
Face to face time (language or cultural differences)

–
Commitment, role effectiveness

•
Self
-
created

–
If enough in common (same company or group)

–
Within larger context (final exercise)


What doesn’t work?

•
Simulations (does with MBA or undergrad)

–
Game

–
Not use experience, capabilities or imagination

•
Synchronous distance
–
especially across time
differences.

–
Work time or off time (e.g. streaming English)

–
Technology limits group size

–
Language response
–

processing time (chat)

What doesn’t work? (cont.)

•
No deliverables

–
Lose interest

–
Distracted

•
Extended time

–
Work interferes

–
Lose interest, teams disintegrate

What Helps?

•
Tight time schedule & organization

–
Push schedule

–
Definite commitment

•
Role play or job related

–
Clear roles

–
Consistent with tasks and deliverables

•
Company support

–
Not interfere

–
Give credence (accelerate career, cohort)

What Hurts

•
Teaching

–
Instructor owns outcomes

–
Right answers

•
Loss of interest

–
Lacks relevance or “canned,” cases not real

–

Goes on too long

–
Vague tasks or deliverables

–
Not use experience and capabilities

•
Work interference

–
Time conflicts

–
Work deadlines

–
Mobile telephones, laptop computers