The sub-par branding of the course as ‘Executive Post Graduate Programme’ which suggests that the course is an Executive MBA (a part-time course) has created huge problems for graduates of the course who have had to clarify time and again that they have in fact graduated from a full-time MBA course – hardly the best conversation opener with recruiters. 

AMBA has also clarified that IIMI’s two-year PGP course is not an MBA as per global standards – this course has been accredited as a Masters in Business Management – a foundation course in management concepts for freshers with 0 to 3 years work experience.

All this while, IIMI has accorded the same ‘MBA equivalent’ status to the pre-experience PGP and post experience EPGP courses.

The separation between the two courses is important as recruiters and MBA aspirants in India alike are confused why the eligibility norms and output from two ‘MBA equivalent’ programmes is vastly different – PGP recruits freshers and creates entry level talent that joins companies as management trainees while EPGP recruits aspirants with substantial work experience (5 years+) and graduates of the course join the work force in middle and senior management roles – as graduates of any Full Time MBA, outside of India would.

AMBA accreditation is the gold standard and the only accreditation service for courses (others like EQUIS accredit the institute as a whole) and all credit to IIMI’s management to have pursued this accreditation – a long standing demand of graduates of the EPGP course who wanted this accreditation to bring legitimacy to the MBA programme they had pursued.

Imagine the alumni’s surprise then when we saw the announcement of AMBA accreditation on the institute’s website – IIMI skipped mentioning anything about the Full Time MBA accreditation awarded to EPGP and MBM accreditation awarded to the two-year PGP course.

IIMI’s announcement of the AMBA accreditation on its website skips key facts

The announcement simply said IIM I had received AMBA Accreditation “for four of its full-time programmes – Two Year Post Graduate Programme in Management (both at Indore and Mumbai), One Year Full Time Executive Post Graduate Programme in Management (EPGP) and Five Year Integrated Programme in Management (IPM, 4^th and 5^th Year).

Reading this, most people would assume the PGP had been accredited as an MBA and EPGP as an Executive MBA because that is how IIMI positions the courses.

EPGP had been denied its hard won victory with some savvy editing of facts.

Can you imagine a scenario where the Rank 1 holder and the Rank 2 holder at IIMI are both awarded a gold medal? This is exactly what has happened here.

IIMI’s claim of building a meritocracy doesn’t stand after this – this is a blatant attempt to protect and prop up what is sub-par, and play down what is brilliant.

IIMI, like most other IIMs, has a long running but factually incorrect narrative of the toughest admission process in the world and the PGP being the most selective MBA course etc – this narrative, call it tradition, prejudice or mindset, seems to be the ‘unquestionable truth’ which no evidence – global rankings, news stories or accreditation seems to be able to change.

AMBA says EPGP is a full-time MBA. IIMI says its an executive course!

This is not the first time, we the alumni, have witnessed this mindset to deny EPGP its place in the sun.

At an IIMI alumni function in Mumbai last year, the institute announced with pride that the PGP placements went well this year. The fact that in the same year, a One Year MBA graduate from IIMI had bagged the highest ever domestic salary for any course at IIMI was suppressed.

In fact, there was no mention of even the average salary awarded to graduates of the EPGP course, which is significantly higher than the average salary received by PGP graduates. Visit the institute’s website and you will find the ‘placements section’ devoted purely to PGP’s placement statistics. Worst yet, you will find EPGP listed in the ‘executive education’ section.

EPGP is missing from the 2016 placement report despite bagging higher placements than all other courses over the years

In private conversations, officials cite lower interest in the course vis.a.vis PGP, perceptions among recruiters of a tougher entrance process for PGP etc. as the reasons why they are not able to make the EPGP programme a flagship offering or highlight it in their communication.

They fail to acknowledge the real reason – their own prejudice and inability to take a principled stand on this issue. This, and nothing else affects the proper positioning and marketing of the EPGP course. The One Year Full Time MBA category is well established globally (the world’s No.1 MBA is a One Year MBA) and in India. ISB in India, for instance, does a good job of positioning its one year MBA course which has been excellently received by recruiters who understand the proposition of the course because it is being explained clearly. 

If it was an issue about perceptions holding IIMI back, AMBA, UK’s accreditation of the course as a Full Time MBA would have been a godsend and a license to change things. Instead of using it to position EPGP and re-position PGP, IIMI has simply slipped it under the carpet.

Since IIMI has saught the endorsement of AMBA, which takes time, effort and taxpayer’s money, it should now respect the accreditation awarded, communicate about it clearly and adopt the accreditation standards by awarding MBA degrees to EPGP graduates and MBM degrees to PGP graduates.

Start by changing the EPGP nomenclature – there is no ‘executive’ in MBA.

– An MBA graduate from IIM Indore

While the One Year MBA is winning plaudits for IIMs and is helping them finally gain global recognition that the longer running two-year pre-experience PGP programme has failed to get – this includes Global MBA Accreditation by Association of MBAs (PGP is accredited as Masters in Business Management – MBM), a ranking in Financial Times’ Top 100 MBA Courses (where PGP is ranked as an MBM), and record breaking senior level placements as opposed to entry level placements granted to PGP participants – the hearts and minds of the faculty and management seem to be with the first child – the PGP programme.

At least that’s what the letter from an alumni of the One Year MBA programme at a prominent IIM suggests. The letter from the alumni begins by saying that most of the graduates of the batch are working in reputed firms or have started their own ventures. However, a few of them were still searching for jobs with the repayment date of the hefty educational loan looming large on the horizon.

“The numerous calls that I and my course mates receive from the current batch as well as from the prospective candidates have made this letter necessary. We decided to send this letter after extensive discussions within our batch in the recent weeks,” the writer says.

The letter details how the students had conducted extensive inquiries with the previous batch regarding the course, especially placements. However, they didn’t divulge much owing it to restrictions put in by the institute. But once they joined the program, their seniors pointed out the inadequacies in placement assistance.

During the entire 12 months at the Institute, “All our requests for some placement help from the institute have met with responses ranging from empty promises to callous indifference. In the name of assistance, we were always directed towards the PGP placement cell. They neither have the resources nor the inclination to handle One Year MBA placements.

“Finally, during the end of our stay in the institute, an ad hoc placement cell for One Year MBA was formed in response to our requests. We hear that their performance is as abysmal now as it was during our time,” the letter says.

“It has simply turned out to be an eyewash as far as One Year MBA participants are concerned. We have still not understood why a premier institute that charges such exorbitant fees can’t start a dedicated placement office for One Year MBA while almost every other institute which runs a One Year MBA has it,” it adds.

The letter says that every student puts in hard earned money hoping to get a first rate education that will open up a sea of opportunities for him/her. “We don’t intend to say that the institute should be primarily responsible for getting us a job, but we definitely feel it is the Institute’s responsibility to provide the students with ‘relevant’ opportunities. We’ve seen situations where brilliant participants were forced to sit in interviews of companies from totally unrelated fields out of desperation, resulting in embarrassing rejection.” 

The letter also points to the situation where the students, having to deal with the jam-packed curriculum of the one year MBA, hardly find time to hunt for companies, though every year a select group of participants who form the placement committee have devoted themselves to the task. “When every other Institute does it, why not the IIM? And when you do it for PGP, why not for the One Year MBA?” the letter asks.

The students had tried to put across this point numerous times while they were at the institute, including at the farewell dinner. At the time of leaving they were told that the lateral placements of PGP would be merged with that of One Year MBA.

“However, we now get to hear that not a bit has changed, except for the fees of course. The current batch faces the same obstacles that we did in the previous course,” the letter says. It points out that for the past several years, placement committees of One Year MBA have toiled hard alone, while witnessing the tremendous arrangements done for PGP placements by the institute.

“Sir, imagine our plight when a prospective candidate who has gained admission to multiple MBA programs gives us a call to enquire about the institute. We are stuck between blurting out the reality of placements and speaking highly of our institute. After all, we want One Year MBA to evolve into highly sought-after course. All we manage to say is that the education provided is first class, no doubt,” the letter says.

It moots a suggestion of the institute, participants and the alumni working as a team. The letter also points out that good placements are important if the institute wants brilliant students opt for it in future. “You can’t rely on providing great education alone, especially when all other competing institutes do it,” it adds.

“We aren’t asking for jobs to be dropped into the laps of participants. But kindly provide them with relevant opportunities by starting a dedicated One Year MBA placement cell with sufficient resources similar to the structure in place for PGP currently. We assure you sir, it will be a winning strategy for us all,” the letter concludes.

The post script says the letter is “a result of the overwhelming sense of pride and commitment that we alumni feel towards our Alma mater.”

Below is the original text of the e-mail letter to the Director of a prominent IIM:

Dear Sir,

I am a One Year MBA alumnus from the 20xx-20xx batch. I hope you would be happy to learn that ‘most’ of the participants in our batch are now working in reputed firms while some have started their own ventures. But that still doesn’t account for a few who are still searching for a job with degrees in their hand while the repayment date of the hefty educational loan looms over their head.

But surely sir, I am not writing to give you an update on our batch. The numerous calls that I and my course mates receive from the current batch as well as from the prospective candidates have made this letter necessary. We decided to send this letter after extensive discussions within our batch in the recent weeks and hence please consider this a collective plea from the XX candidates of the One Year MBA 20XX-XX batch who are proud of having studied at IIM XYZ. 

When we were about to join IIM XYZ in Month 20XX, we extensively enquired with the previous batch regarding the course, especially placements. But they didn’t divulge much owing it to restrictions put in by the institute. But once inside, our seniors quickly pointed out that the placement assistance from the institute was grim. But they were also confident that with (deleted to protect anonymity), things would improve and that we were the lucky batch who would gain the benefit.

During the entire 12 months we spent at IIM XYZ, all our requests for some placement help from the institute have met with responses ranging from empty promises to callous indifference. In the name of assistance, we were always directed towards the PGP placement cell. They neither have the resources nor the inclination to handle One Year MBA placements. Finally during the end of our stay in the institute, an ad hoc placement cell for One Year MBA was formed in response to our requests. We hear that their performance is as abysmal now as it was during our time.

It has simply turned out to be an eyewash as far as One Year MBA participants are concerned. We have still not understood why a premier institute that charges such exorbitant fees can’t start a dedicated placement office for One Year MBA while almost every other institute which runs a one year MBA has it.

It is a matter of phenomenal irony that the very basic principle of business-‘customer value proposition’ which is drilled into our heads in almost all courses taught in One Year MBA, is outright forgotten when it comes to implementation from teaching. Every student puts his hard earned money in the hands of the institute hoping to get a first rate education that will open up a sea of opportunities for him/her. We don’t intend to say that the institute should be primarily responsible for getting us a job, but we definitely feel it is the institute’s responsibility to provide the students with ‘relevant’ opportunities. We’ve seen situations where brilliant participants were forced to sit in interviews of companies from totally unrelated fields out of desperation, resulting in embarrassing rejection. With jam packed curriculum of the one year MBA, the students hardly find time to hunt for companies, though every year a select group of participants who form the placement committee have devoted themselves to the task. When every other Institute does it, why not IIM XYZ? And when you do it for PGP, why not for One Year MBA?

We tried to put across our point numerous times while we were at the institute. During the farewell dinner, we made requests to improve things for future batches. When we left IIM, we were told that the lateral placements of PGP would be merged with that of One Year MBA. Like our seniors, even we left our junior batch with loads of hope. We said that they were much luckier than us.

We now get to hear that not a bit has changed, except for the fees of course. The current batch faces the same obstacles that we did in the previous course. They have our sympathies. For batches now, placement committees of One Year MBA have toiled hard alone, while witnessing the tremendous arrangements done for PGP placements by the institute.

Sir, imagine our plight when a prospective candidate who has gained admission to multiple MBA programs gives us a call to enquire about the institute. We are stuck between blurting out the reality of placements and speaking highly of our institute. After all, we want One Year MBA to evolve into highly sought-after course. All we manage to say is that the education provided is first class, no doubt.

Sir, why can’t we work as a team – the institute, participants, and the alumni.  We humbly request you to realize that good placements are important if the institute wishes that brilliant students opt for IIM XYZ One Year MBA in future. You can’t rely on providing great education alone, especially when all other competing institutes do it. We aren’t asking for jobs to be dropped into the laps of participants. But kindly provide them with relevant opportunities by starting a dedicated One Year MBA placement cell with sufficient resources similar to the structure in place for PGP currently. We assure you sir, it will be a winning strategy for us all.

PS: This letter is a result of the overwhelming sense of pride and commitment that we alumni feel towards our alma mater.

Regards,
XYZ

Kiran Majumdar Shaw, the Chairperson of IIM B spent considerable time on the institute’s achievements – big and small, speaking at IIM B’s 41st convocation. She talked of how the B-School was ranked in the Top 30 Masters in Management (MiM) programmes by FT, she talked of the FT executive education ranking awarded for part-time programmes. But she did not mention the One Year MBA’s meteoric rise in the Financial Times Global MBA Ranking.

IIM B’s One Year MBA (EPGP) rose a massive 20 ranks – from a 82 rank to a 62 rank in the Financial Times Global MBA ranking in 2016. FT’s Global MBA ranking is the among the most prestigious and comprehensive ranking of MBA courses and ranks the Top 100 MBA (top 1%) courses out of almost 10,000 MBA courses across the globe. Consequently, B-Schools consider a spot in the Top 100 a huge honour.

A student we spoke to said, “What happened was hurtful. This was a critical achievement that went unannounced. Despite the EPGP leading on all fronts – our placements are higher than that of PGP, our global ranking is as an MBA, not an MiM, our class is drawn from experienced professionals, not freshers – the course is getting step motherly treatment.”

Alongside this omission, the Chairperson’s speech also missed on critical details about the MiM ranking gained by the institute. She said, “IIMB has also been ranked among the Top 30 Business Schools in the world on the Financial Times’ prestigious Masters in Management Rankings for 2015.” What did she miss? The fact that FT ranked IIM B’s pre-experience two-year Post Graduate Programme in the MiM ranking – and not in the MBA ranking. MiM’s are courses for students with 0-3 years work-ex – but IIM B claims the PGP programme is an MBA level programme.

The Director Sushil Vachani, also did not clarify these aspects in his speech.

Why was EPGP’s success on FT’s Global MBA Ranking and FT’s bench-marking of the two-year PGP as an MiM skipped?

Speaking anonymously, an IIM B student told us,  “IIM B does not want to disturb the status quo – in popular imagination the two-year course is an MBA and the MiM ranking for PGP and MBA ranking for EPGP would raise some uncomfortable questions. Questions they probably don’t want to address because it could affect the brand of the two-year programme.”

Another student we spoke to felt this was part of a larger issue – “What happened was hurtful. This was a critical achievement that went unannounced. Despite the EPGP leading on all fronts – our placements are higher than that of PGP, our global ranking is as an MBA, not an MiM, our class is drawn from experienced professionals, not freshers – the course is getting step motherly treatment.”

Another student we spoke to however had a different view. She said, “Not wanting to admit that IIM B’s One Year MBA course does not figure in the world’s top 10-20 courses could be the reason behind the omission. For IIM B it could be embarrassing that while its PGP does not qualify in the MBA ranking, its One Year course is still sometime away from a top slot in the ranking – this flies in the face of the perception within India that IIM B is as one of top B-Schools globally. 

Seen in the context of the comments made by students, IIM B Director Sushil Vachani’s speech comes across as ironical. Speaking at the convocation, the Director said, “You can, and must, confront norms that have become entrenched and hold us back as a society, such as corruption or discrimination. You have an obligation to help those who are less advantaged, and help level the playing field for those who are powerless. Whether you work in corporate India, or start your own venture, or focus on advocacy in an NGO, or opt for public service with the government, you have the power to change the culture and norms that provide or deny opportunities, that promote or deter equality, that enhance or suppress freedom, and that make us a stronger or weaker nation.”

The Association of MBAs (AMBA) is the international impartial authority on postgraduate business education, established in 1967. AMBA’s accreditation service is the global standard for all MBA, Doctoral and MBM programmes in more than 110 countries. 

As per AMBA’s accreditation standards, an MBA course must admit students with 3+ years of work experience while an MBM can admit candidates with 0-3 years work experience. So students with less than 3 years of work experience are eligible to pursue an MBM only, not an MBA. 

While it is impressive that XLRI’s courses have got AMBA accreditation, what is not, is the attempt to gloss over the fact that it is only the One Year MBA at XLRI (PGDM-GM) which has received Full Time MBA accreditation from AMBA.

Those not familiar with the myriad B-School accreditation possibilities can find the nuances confusing.  While some accreditations (e.g. EQUIS and AACSB) are given to an institute as a whole, the AMBA is not. It is given only to a specific course. 

The Economic Times dated May 13, 2015 quoted Fr. E. Abraham S.J. director, XLRI as saying, “We are extremely happy to announce that our MBA and MBM provision has been awarded accreditation by AMBA’s International Accreditation Advisory Board. XLRI with its singular philosophy of Magis, i.e., pursuit of excellence in all endeavors, has continually focused on three inter-related areas: academic excellence, personal values and societal concern.”

It would be hard for any student or recruiter to decode this statement and understand that the two-year PGDM(BM) course has got MBM accreditation and the One Year Course has got MBA accreditation.  

To get clarity on the statement we got in touch with XLRI’s Chief Brand & Sustainability Officer Sunil Varughese. We asked which course at XLRI has been accredited as an MBA by AMBA? He replied, “All our courses have been accredited by AMBA”.

This is how the interview proceeded:

OneYearMBA.co.in (OYMBA): But AMBA accredits courses and not B-Schools and it awards MBA and MBM accreditation to specific courses. Which course at XLRI has been accredited as MBA and which as an MBM?
Sunil Vurughese (SV): Yes…so our two-year PGDM (BM) and two-year PGDM-HRM have been accredited as MBMs and One Year PGDM-GM and PGDM Part Time have been accredited as MBAs.

OYMBA: So the PGDM-GM, the One Year MBA has got Full Time MBA accreditation and the part-time PGDM a part-time MBA accreditation?
SV: Yes.

OneYearMBA.co.in (OYMBA): Will the global MBA accreditation for the One Year Course and global MBM accreditation for the two year course impact the positioning for your courses – will the two-year course now be positioned as an MBM and the One Year Course as an MBA?
Sunil Varughese (SV): Not necessarily. This is only for AMBA. In Indian market this won’t impact. Historically mostly freshers apply to two-year course so the two-year course will continue to remain an MBA in Indian market.

OYMBA: In that case why apply for AMBA accreditation?
SV: Foreign students look at it differently – with AMBA they will consider coming to India.

OYMBA: But don’t Indian students deserve to know the differences between the two courses? Shouldn’t they know which course is an MBA and which an MBM as per global accreditation?
SV: It will take time. The One Year MBA is a new product and market will take time to appreciate the difference of the talent coming from this course.

OYMBA: But are institutes doing enough on their part to clarify the differences to students and recruiters?
SV: Onus is on students. Students should check the websites. We will put up AMBA accreditation there. Due diligence has to be done by students. Recruiters can also judge the difference and are smart enough to see the difference between an experienced graduate and a fresher. We need to give the market more time. From our end, we have made the One Year MBA (PGDM-GM) a flagship course and are doing our best to clarify differences in one-on-one meetings with recruiters. Infact as opposed to IIMs, where placements are left to students, we have hired two placement officers for the One Year course.

OYMBA: But do you see a problem from a marketing perspective when two entirely different products, an MBA and an MBM, are both branded and positioned as MBAs? Most recruiters hire on the basis of set requirements. If the requirement is for an MBA, recruiters perceive anyone with the qualification as equally capable. With the vastly higher pay packages for One Year MBA grads vs the salary for hiring a fresher, the choice then often comes down to salary instead. Isn’t that a problem?
SV: The onus of clarifying the difference between MBA and MBM and following it in our nomenclatures has to be borne by all institutes. We alone can’t change everything – all institutes have to work together.

So is XLRI saying that only foreign students should benefit from pursuing an MBA that meets global standards? Are Indian students second class citizens who don’t deserve the best quality education? This smacks of a colonial mindset and borders on segregation and racism.  

During colonial rule, thousands of Indians lost their lives demanding freedom from segregation. It is ironical that Indian students are receiving step-motherly treatment in independent India. 

Their lives and careers hang in critical balance. With high fees ranging between Rs 16-25 lakh for the One Year MBA and zero effort to clearly market the One Year MBA and Two-Year MBM as two distinct offerings, B-Schools in India are playing with the careers of their alumni. Many of these students are middle class and have saved their salary over many years to pursue the MBA course – this apathy is sufficient to wreck lives. (Image courtesy shienelopez)