Skip to main content

Critical Juncture III: The 1959 Foundation Reports—Throwing Out the Baby with the Bath Water?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 441 Accesses

Abstract

In 1959, independent reports were released by the Carnegie Foundation and the Ford Foundation evaluating business schools in the USA. Both reports were scathing in their criticisms of the status quo. There was a glaring lack of scholarship and research on the part of business school faculty. Academic rigor in undergraduate business programs lagged behind other university degree programs. Less than half of business school faculty members held earned doctorates.

University administrators were embarrassed by these reports, and they moved to correct the problems. Rigor was increased in academic programs. New doctoral-qualified faculty members with both training and interest in research were hired. However, these new faculty members were no longer hired based on business experience; they were hired based on their ability to participate in newly-developing academic guilds, not business guilds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bloom, A. (1987). The closing of the American mind: How higher education has failed democracy and impoverished the souls of today’s students. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bok, D. (1986). Higher learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bossard, J. H., & Dewhurst, J. F. (1931). University education for business: A study of existing needs and practices. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collini, S. (2012). What are universities for? London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, C. A. (1998). MBA: The first century. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. H. (1959). Higher education for business. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (1994). What if the academy actually mattered? Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C. (1963/2001). The uses of the university. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khurana, R., & Penrice, D. (2011). Business education: The American trajectory. In M. Morsing & A. S. Rovira (Eds.), Business schools and their contribution to society. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khurana, R., & Spender, J. C. (2012). Herbert A. Simon on what ails business schools: More than ‘A problem in organizational design’. Journal of Management Studies, 49(3), 619–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroos, H. E., & Drucker, P. F. (1969). How we got here: Fifty years of structural changes in the business system and the business school. In P. F. Drucker (Ed.), Preparing tomorrow’s business leaders today. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, S. (2015). Emperor’s new clothes: The reinvention of peer review as myth. Journal of Management Inquiry, 24(3), 264–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, L. C. (1928). The collegiate school of business: Its status at the close of the first quarter of the twentieth century. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1(1), 78–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, F. C. (1959). The education of American businessmen: A study of university-college programs in business administration. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, L. W., & McKibbin, L. E. (1988). Management education and development: Drift or thrust into the 21st century? New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1776). Wealth of nations, Book I. London: Methuen & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starkey, K., & Tiratsoo, N. (2007). The business school and the bottom line. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, B. (1993). The modern university: The three transformations. In S. Rothblatt & B. Wittrock (Eds.), The European and American university since 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Miles, E.W. (2016). Critical Juncture III: The 1959 Foundation Reports—Throwing Out the Baby with the Bath Water?. In: The Past, Present, and Future of the Business School. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33639-8_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics