The CAE/masters degree debate

In a recent posting to his Certified Association Executive blog, my friend and fellow blogger Ben Martin offers his thoughts on my proposal for an executive master's degree in association leadership.  As TAIB readers know, I am passionate about the need for such a learning pathway in the association community, and so I am always eager to engage in conversation around it.  In this case, I need to correct some inaccurate information in Ben's original post, as well as challenge some of his arguments. 

The paragraphs in blue italics are taken from Ben's posting:

My friend Jeff De Cagna has made his case for an executive masters degree in association management to -- I presume -- replace the CAE certification. I think Jeff has a great idea that deserves further discussion.

Just for the record, I have made a case for an executive master of science degree in association leadership, not "an executive masters degree in association management" as Ben writes.  This is an important distinction that I will discuss further in this post.  Past efforts to sustain a master's degree in association management have failed for various reasons, including a lack of student interest, limited funding and poor relationships between collaborating organizations.  In my view, however, the greatest shortcoming of such a degree program is its lack of sufficient substance to be of either intellectual interest or practical value to anyone.  In contrast, the degree program for which I advocate would challenge learners to take a fresh look at what is happening both inside and outside the world of associations through new lenses, while also providing them with the basis for effective action in a turbulent and uncertain time.

A masters in association management should complement -- not replace -- the CAE, in my view. I would submit that, technically speaking, a masters in association management, if not accompanied by a final exam, would do less to ensure its graduates' competencies than the current CAE exam does.

Ben and I agree on his first point.  I have never called for the executive master of science degree in association leadership (to be referred to from this point forward as EMSAL) as a replacement for the CAE.  My goal isn't to take away learning opportunities for association leaders but to create more and richer opportunities.  I view the EMSAL as a pathway for association newcomers, experienced executives and even volunteers who prefer a deeper, more rigorous and more interdisciplinary learning experience over a period of 18-24 months, or as a next step in the pathway for association leaders who choose to pursue the CAE.  More than anything else, I see it as a way to develop next generation leadership thinking in the association community, something that the CAE, with its focus on baseline competence, does not do.

Ben makes an assumption that the EMSAL program will not include a final exam.  I have never discussed this issue at all, mostly because it is a level of detail that I did not think was necessary to consider in making an argument for creating the degree and also because the EMSAL is not intended as a replacement for the CAE.  But since Ben brings it up, let me express my view that, in this context, passing a "psychometrically valid" multiple choice examination does not really establish a graduate's competence, merely his or her ability to recall and regurgitate the knowledge learned in preparation for the exam.  Genuine competence is established only through actual practice, which is precisely why new doctors must first serve as interns and residents, new architects must first serve in an apprentice-type role and even new attorneys typically do not fly solo on complex cases straight out of law school.  They may have explicit knowledge that can be tested, but they do not yet possess the tacit knowledge that leads to effective real-world judgment.  And in the case of the CAE, the "first do no harm" level of capability that it is intended to evaluate is not a model we should seek to replicate elsewhere. 

Also, once you've earned a masters, you're done -- right? But with the CAE, you're required to earn continuing education units, which mandates ongoing professional development for those who want to trade on the certification. In this respect, the CAE is clearly necessary.

The EMSAL may be a learning experience conducted within a finite period of time, but if it is well designed it will set those who choose it on an authentic learning journey without end.  In my experience, the truly committed learner does not require an external "mandate" to continue his or her own professional development.  The pursuit of learning is an intrinsically motivated quest for understanding and insight, not the accumulation of CEUs.       

Many people, including me, question the legitimacy of executive masters programs. My impression is that many executive masters programs are little more than purchased papers. This stigma would need to be overcome if an executive masters in association management were launched. If the CAE isn't taken seriously, imagine the initial reaction to an executive masters that just meets once a month and doesn't include a final exam.

I'm not precisely sure to whom Ben refers when he writes about the "many people" who join him in questioning the legitimacy of executive masters programs.  In my own master's degree work on adult learning and executive development, I learned that the overwhelming majority of university-based executive masters degree programs in business and other disciplines are of high quality.  These programs are offered by leading American and European universities...just check out the last few pages of any issue of The Economist to see the variety of excellent and very specialized offerings that are available.  For the students who participate in them, these degree programs represent considerable commitments of time, attention and energy.  For the companies who send students to them, it is a significant financial investment.  Neither these learners nor their employers can afford to simply "purchase papers."  They are interested in real learning that will broaden perspectives and develop better performance on the job. 

Clearly, there are many disreputable purveyors of phony academic degrees on the Internet today.  Perhaps this is an element of Ben's concern about the EMSAL.  On the other hand, it is also hard to envision how the EMSAL would have any "stigma" attached to it if it were offered by The Center for Association Leadership in conjunction with an outstanding academic partner such as Georgetown University that already has an executive master's of leadership program.  In addition, I'm talking about the less common "master of science" degree, which generally has a greater level of intellectual rigor than the more ubiquitous master of arts degree. And the "executive" format of meeting on one weekend per month is used frequently in both master and doctoral level programs (including the Georgetown program mentioned above) in order to accommodate working professionals, so there is no departure from accepted practice there. 

It's also noteworthy that one of our country's premiere masters programs, the MBA, now has an optional certification attached to it, the CMBA. This is, no doubt, the free market reaction to the pervasive suspicion about executive masters programs I mentioned above.

My take on the current state of the traditional two-year MBA degree is rather different from Ben's view.  At this time in its history, the degree still may be considered "premier" by some, but it is actually under active reconsideration by academic, consulting and corporate leaders alike.  Henry Mintzberg of McGill and INSEAD, author of the recent book, Managers Not MBAs, says "...I think that [in business schools] there's a promotion of an approach to managing that is disastrous in many areas."  Marketing guru Seth Godin, a Stanford MBA himself, writes on his blog:

An MBA has become a two-part time machine. First, the students are taught everything they need to know to manage a company from 1990, and second, they are taken out of the real world for two years while the rest of us race as fast as we possibly can.

Even Jim Collins, author of Good to Great and a former Stanford MBA instructor, has questioned the viability of the degree.  During his talk at the Fast Company Real Time Phoenix conference in the fall of 2000, I heard Jim openly wonder whether business schools were teaching things that did more harm than good.  It is also interesting to note that only one of the 11 Good to Great CEOs actually had earned an MBA.

So, in my view, if there is suspicion to be placed in this situation, it is on the traditional MBA degree itself.  Personally, I question whether the addition of an external certification really changes much for anyone concerned, but in my mind it certainly doesn't change anything for the association community.  While some in our community may believe that the MBA is sufficient preparation for 21st Century association leadership, I do not share that view.  The profound and unique challenges of our work demand a different kind of preparation, and I believe that the EMSAL is the best option for delivering that kind of depth and breadth of learning.

Even if a masters is introduced, I believe the CAE should remain part of an association executive's academic journey.

Alas, at this point I see no evidence that the EMSAL or comparable specialized degree for association leaders is anywhere on the horizon.  But I am not giving up on this effort and I hope you will join me in it.  Thanks so much to Ben for his help in continuing to drive this conversation! 

Comments

[Anonymous]

Jeff - You write that "Genuine competence is established only through actual practice, which is precisely why new doctors must first serve as interns and residents, new architects must first serve in an apprentice-type role and even new attorneys typically do not fly solo on complex cases straight out of law school. They may have explicit knowledge that can be tested, but they do not yet possess the tacit knowledge that leads to effective real-world judgment." Doesn't the CAE program have nonprofit professional experience requirements that do the same thing? If so, it seems reductionist to reduce the CAE simply to passing an exam.

[BetsyBoyd-Flynn]

Regarding the travel component, I agree that travel is not NECESSARILY an insurmountable hurdle, but could be an effective barrier to all but the CEO-ranked professionals (who else would have funds at their disposal to undertake such travel, let alone the tuition required?), which goes back to the other question of when in a career this degree might be pursued.
And Jeff, no worries on the MA comment - I was horrified once to look at a graduation program and see someone attaining a doctorate in education from whose dissertation related to the use of photocopies in education. Yikes. Who knows - it might have been a searingly important study - but fluff degrees do exist, and even worse, as you say, some courses of study can take one away from vital knowledge, rather than closer to it.

[SusanBWaters]

It seems to me that the debate about the quality of executive degrees doesn't depend on the schedule of course attendance (that is what makes these degrees "executive" degrees in the first place), but on the rigor of the coursework and degree requirements themselves. Programs with a robust curriculum and that require thesis, oral defense and comprehensive examinations are just as rigorous as those that are provided on a full-time basis. Likewise, full-time programs lacking these characteristics are no more rigorous than executive courses that don't have these requirements. I believe that comprehensive examinations validate that students have grasped the body of knowledge in the curriculum. The requirement for a thesis and its oral defense demonstrates that the student can apply the theories to real situations and make the learning experience live.

As to the place of the teaching, students will travel for week-end study if the course seems worth it. I recently finished a doctorate in management in Cleveland, while living in California. Classmates came from places as far away as Jamaica, Honolulu and Ghana. It is a sacrifice to travel for school, but the airplane time is invaluable and focus on course work is complete when the student is immersed in study, without the distractions of everyday home life.

However people strive to continue learning, the important thing is to open your brain to new knowledge, and to use that knowledge in ways that improve your thinking processes.

[Jeff De Cagna]

Betsy, you raise interesting points in your comment. A couple of further thoughts:

+I'm proposing that the EMSAL be affiliated with a DC area university for a couple of reasons, and none of them has anything to do with DC being "the show," although I am intrigued by the analogy. First, on a simple factual basis, the DC association community is the largest in the country so there is a critical mass of potential participants here. Second, easy access to DC from the Northeast corridor increases the potential audience quite easily. Third, given the intensive executive format, which would be one weekend per month, it is not out of the realm of possibility that the program could accommodate participants from other parts of the country. Indeed, executive certificate programs at Georgetown already have non-DC area participants, as do other master and doctoral level programs around the country. Finally, I would be delighted if multiple EMSAL programs emerged around the country, in much the same way that the Sloan Fellows Program exists at the London Business School, MIT and Stanford. For right now, however, I'd like just one!

+In terms of when in their careers participants would begin the program, I'm prepared to leave that question open for the time being. I imagine some level of professional experience in associations would be desirable, say 5 years, but it could be more or less. It is an important question and I think it deserves careful consideration.

+With regard to the program capstone, I'm thinking about a three-step process: 1) a thesis on an interdisciplinary association leadership topic, 2) an oral defense of the thesis, 3) the direct application of the ideas presented in the thesis to the actual work of an association. This approach would be the ultimate in translating theory into practice. It would increase the rigor of the experience but would also ensure the relevance of the learning to actual organizations. This is my current idea, but I remain open to other options.

+Betsy, my indictment of the MA is not about any individual's degree, but the ubiquity and ease with which they are awarded. For example, at Harvard, when faculty members without a prior link to the university achieve tenure, they are routinely awarded an A.M. (master of arts) to establish their relationship with the university. I have no doubt that you worked very hard to earn your degree. My issue is with a system that tends to diminish its standing.

I understand that there is skepticism of new professional degrees, but if we do anything, it should be directing some of that skepticism toward the MBA. The MBA degree is a program that, in all candor, may not actually teach what business leaders need to know and, in some areas, may actually do more harm than good. That is something about which we should all be concerned.

Betsy, thanks again for your comment! I appreciate your views and I hope you'll help me advocate for the degree. Keep raising questions as well! :>)

[Betsy Boyd-Flynn]

Allow me to be a voice coming out of the Western wilderness...if an EMSAL degree were offered as a joint venture between The Center and Georgetown, for example, how would anyone outside the DC area participate? I realize such a program must be piloted somewhere, but you might find advocates for your proposal in other states if that proposal included a way they might partake at some point. (I am once again struck that working in DC is like "the show" in major league baseball - you're not really a player till you go there - but many of us who are committed to this profession cannot move there, or don't want to. And won't ever. I'd hate to think that our professional attainment would be capped by geography!)

And another question - at what stage in a career would you envision people undertaking this course of study? Once they have attained a CEO position? Ten years into the career? 15?

Beyond coursework, what would the capstone of such a course of study be, if not an exam? A thesis?

None of these questions are meant to suggest I think the EMSAL is a bad idea - I'm a reformed academic, so I like the idea of learning for its own sake, but I confess I share a good deal of the skepticism you cite for professional degrees. I think their value varies hugely with the source. But that's just me, with my less-than-rigorous MA. (Just kidding - I'm not insulted by your comment above - more amused by it).