National Knowledge Commission
हिन्दी বাংলা অসমীয়া অসমীয়া ಕನ್ನಡ
ارد و தமிழ் नेपाली মণিপুরী ଓଡ଼ିଆ ગુજરાતી

  Management Education

15th October, 2007

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

Management education has seen phenomenal growth in the past six years with the number of institutions providing undergraduate and post-graduate level courses rising to over 1700. Of these, more than 1000 were added after the year 2000. This has been possible largely due to the entrepreneurial initiative of promoters, taking advantage of the ever increasing demand for management graduates, hence management education. Unfortunately, this has also led to an exploitative and commercial environment with quality being compromised. Regulatory focus only on physical infrastructure rather than research, qualified faculty and relevance of courses has created a mismatch between supply and demand.
As a part of its consultative process, NKC constituted a Working Group of experts from academia and industry under the chairmanship of Mr. P. M. Sinha. The names of the members are listed in the annexe to this letter. Based on the Working Group’s inputs and consultations with concerned stakeholders, NKC proposes the following set of initiatives:

1. New Regulatory Framework: NKC advocates good governance rather than the prevalent system of a priori control being exercised by AICTE in this sphere. The current regulatory regime focuses on punitive actions rather than on nurturing institutions. NKC proposes that an autonomous Standing Committee for Management Education be set up under the Independent Regulatory Authority for Higher Education. Its main role would be to exercise due diligence at the point it approves a license to grant degrees/diplomas. In doing so, it would assess the academic credibility and the financial viability of the proposed institution on the basis of information submitted in accordance with the stipulated criteria. It will apply exactly the same norms to public and private institutions, just as it will apply the same norms to domestic and international institutions. It would, in addition, license agencies to take care of accreditation. Other responsibilities of the Standing Committee will be to collate as well as communicate information on Management Educational Entities (MEEs)1; set up an information exchange; conduct demand forecasting of managerial manpower and develop and maintain a low cost e-monitoring system.

2. Grading Institutions: The Standing Committee will stipulate grading norms and nominate independent rating agencies to assess and categorize MEEs. Mushrooming private MEEs necessitate a reliable rating system to help the market function better, enabling students and employers to compare different MEEs. Hence, a two stage rating process is recommended. In the first stage, rating covering infrastructure may be mandated before an MEE can admit students. The second stage would consist of rating of quality (admission process, teaching, research and publications) which shall be conducted every three years to ensure accountability. Grading norms for each of these steps should be established in consultation with experts. CRISIL and ICRA were consulted in the process and they have agreed to undertake rating of MEEs. The Standing Committee shall decide on a fair and transparent mechanism to deal with conflicting points of view between a rating agency and an MEE.





Download Recommendations


Events |Media | Presentations | Videos | Newsletter | Online Contest | Discussion Board | Sitemap |Contact Us