Transcript

The Central and Eastern European Teachers Program was initiated in response to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Initially, the response by the Swas to bring some students over here into the MBA program. And a few of them went back, and many of them stayed, and enjoyed the great benefits of the MBA education here in the U.S. or in Europe.

So we reviewed it after about a year, and in 1991 decided that we would try to build capacity within Central and Eastern Europe, in terms of trying to strengthen the schools of management, which were trying very hard to make the conversion from a planned economy over to market economies. Their schools were based very much on Marx's economics, and so it was really quite an opportunity to try to build capacity so that not just fifty or so students could come here, but many could experience good management education in their own countries.

That initiative started in '91. We had the first group come here in 1992 for six weeks. It was a group of 70 academics, from Riga down to Sofia, and from Berlin all the way to Moscow. A number of institutions were involved. They were here for six weeks. The next summer, they came back for four more weeks, during which they studied in their specialties. In the second round, some went to MIT. Some were here at Harvard. Some were at Wharton, some were at Stanford, some at Northwestern, some at Kellogg. That worked out very well, in terms of the sort of experience they had. In fact, to some extent, too well, because a number of them went back and discovered that they were very valuable in their own countries, and joined companies, and headed up Volvo dealerships, and did all kinds of wonderful things. . . .

This program for sure drew on the experience of the ITP, but even more importantly, on the spirit. So it was very much in the spirit of, "What can we do to try to help build local capacity?" . . .

The challenges were somewhat language. I think they were far more the same challenges ITP experienced, and that is, trying to change, in a substantial way, a school within an existing university. And trying, in the case of Central and Eastern Europe, where rectors or presidents are elected for three years by the faculty, to try to get them to embrace what is a 10- or 15-year change strategy. Especially given they had big budget problems. They had a lot of their students shifting over towards business, but none of the budget was shifting over. They had a set of issues of a here-and-now sort that made it difficult for them to make the sort of sustained commitment. So that would be one of the primary challenges.

The second one was that some of these academics would go back to their countries. And without the sort of support by the rector, or the sort of budgetary support or even compensation that reflected the new value would, in time, grow discouraged about their institutions, and go into the private sector. That, I think, was better than having MBAs come here and stay here. At least the leadership capabilities were available in their own countries. But holding on to outstanding faculty was a real challenge. . . .

Your question about how do you measure success is such an important question. I think the first measure that came to my mind, as I saw your question, was the extent to which, for Harvard Business School, it was an opportunity at a critical time. The wall came down November of '89. It was an opportunity for us to do something visible that showed that we were going to be part of that transition, however small. We were not unaware of the importance for Europe and for the United States. And for individual faculty here—and certainly for me, and Jim Heskett, Gary Loveman, Earl Sasser, the people involved—it was a splendid opportunity for us to do something that had real meaning and real purpose.

For the individual faculty who came here, the participants, it opened up many new opportunities, both within academia and outside. It all depended which institution they were from. And for some of the institutions they're much stronger today. We should not take credit for it. A lot of that came from the commitment of their own people, their own rectors and deans. But the Budapest University of Economic Science, or the Academy of Economic Science in Bucharest, or the Academy of National Economy in Moscow, or Warsaw University, and the Center for Management Training—there are so many that today are much stronger, by virtue of the effort they made, and we helped to contribute to. .. . .

There's a been a continuation of this commitment of the School towards teacher training, and the strengthening of local capacity. In 2000, Howard Stevenson invited me to a meeting—I thought as a spectator. And suddenly I found out that indeed he was about to announce a new program to bring faculty not only from throughout Latin America, but also other parts of the world to the School for a two-week program, again, on thinking about how people learn, about teaching methods, on how do you move beyond the transfer of content towards the development of skills, and the exploration of attitudes and world view?

And then he announced that I would be the co-chair. This is not the first time I've been invited to meetings and been surprised by the agenda, but this was one I welcomed, because we had had such good experience with the Central and Eastern European Teachers Program. And to do it now throughout Latin America, with the support of Howard and Gustavo Herrero, the Research Director, was a great opportunity.

That program has had 600 faculty from throughout Ibero-America, and elsewhere come here during the period 2000 to 2008. A similar program was started up in 2005 for people from Singapore and Greater China. That has had about 400 people here in the interim. And then a third program, the the European Entrepreneurship program, has brought another 400. So we've had about 1,300, 1,400 academics here since the year 2000, for anywhere from eight to fourteen days, talking about, thinking about the purpose of education, the scope of education, the methods of education, around course design, around case writing. And that has been just a continuation of a tradition that has, I believe, provided a sense of purpose, and spirit, and soul to the Harvard Business School.

A fourth program is an offshoot of it, and it's interesting. Some of the people we had from South Africa went back to their universities, and decided that they should create a teachers' program. That has been conducted for four years now in Johannesburg for academics from throughout Sub-Sahara Africa. So this tradition that started way back in 1923, or 1925, has been carried forward in different forms—but always with that same commitment towards trying to strengthen schools of management throughout the world.