Education System and Institutions

...now browsing by category

 

Post-Secondary Education: The Cornerstone of the High-Skill, High-Wage Economy

Sunday, September 30th, 2012

Employment prospects and salary levels improve dramatically as education levels increase. These combine to result in big gains in lifetime earnings at each progressive level of the education ladder. College grads (and especially advanced degree holders) have much higher earnings and suffer far less unemployment than do high-school graduates (not to speak of those without a high school degree. Lifetime earnings of high school graduates average about $973,000 in 2009 dollars, compared with about $1.7 million for those with associate degrees, $2.3 million for those with bachelors and $3.6 million for those with professional degrees.

Moreover, these differences are getting wider. Pay for college graduates has risen by 15.7% (adjusted for inflation) over the past 32 years, compared with an average decline of 25.7% for those workers without college degrees. And this does not even begin to account for non-economic advantages held by college graduates, including lower divorce rates, fewer single-parent families and longer life expectancies.

Higher-Education: High-Skill Holy Grail?

At first glance, given the employment, income and other disparities, it may appear that any student, with a real choice in the matter, should get at least a baccalaureate degree, and ideally, a Masters, PhD or Professional degree. In addition to the benefits discussed above, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS’) Employment Projections—2010-20 project projects that occupations in which a master’s degree or higher is typically required, are expected to grow at the fastest rate of any other education category (21.7% for masters and 19.9% for doctoral or professional degrees—especially in healthcare-related professions).

On the other hand, however, the report projects that only 3 of the 30 occupations that BLS expects to produce the largest number of job openings by 2020 are expected to require a bachelor’s degree or higher—teachers, college professors and accountants. But even these careers will face big challenges. Teacher and college hiring are both suffering from big government funding cuts that threaten to greatly reduce both the pay and the fabled job security these jobs offer. Accountants, meanwhile, are subject to the same type of offshoring pressures as a number of other high-skill jobs. And then there is the increasingly critical issue of the costs (both explicit and implicit opportunity costs) of attending college, the burden of college debt and the increasingly asked question as to whether the “return” from a college education is worth the “investment.”

This incredibly complex question entails much more than an ROI analysis. It is also highly situational, depending on factors including the student’s grades, motivation, objectives and family situation. Even if you focus exclusively on employability and salary, the answer varies greatly by factors including:

  • Which school on is talking about, Harvard or the proverbial Podunk State?
  • Cost of tuition—is it a private or public school, what type of financial aid is available, can you ameliorate expenses such as by living at home or working part time?
  • The breadth and depth of one’s personal network, which is still one of the most important determinants as to whether and what type of job one can get.

Most important, however, is the field of study. As shown in the BLS Employment Projections report, philosophy, anthropology, zoology, art history and humanities graduates are the least likely to find jobs. Those majoring in engineering, math, biology, computer science, accounting and economics are not only far more likely to find jobs, they are also more likely to get jobs in their field and earn higher salaries.

A more dated BLS report looked specifically at starting salaries for a range of liberal arts majors. Overall, liberal arts graduates of highly selective Ivy League and other Tier One schools often have reasonable success in finding jobs, almost regardless of their major—even among hedge funds and management consulting firms. Often, 80% or more of such graduates either go on to graduate school or get jobs at, or soon after, graduation.

The same is sometimes true of particularly attractive graduates of less selective programs. Morgan Stanley, for example, may obtain 25-30% of its undergraduate hires out of liberal arts programs, and then provide them with more functional training through online courses and training programs.

Community Colleges: The Other Higher Education

Higher education does not necessarily mean a four-year degree. Community colleges, often viewed as something of a poor stepchild of the university, play critical roles in educating many first-generation students who would not otherwise have a chance for a college education and play a key role as a low-cost “feeder system” for four-year schools. Just as importantly, they are often far-more attuned to the skills requirements of local businesses. Some of these schools design classes, certification programs and even associate degree programs in conjunction with, and serve as training arms for these businesses.

The single fastest projected employment growth (in terms of numbers) is for Registered Nurses. In fact, these jobs, plus those of 5 of the 30 fastest growing (in percentage terms) jobs in the country—all of which are also in healthcare—all require Associate Degrees (rather than Bachelors or advanced degrees) as their minimum educational requirements. Community colleges are also instrumental in preparing the next lower skill (and often wage) workers—those that must take certification courses and pass exams as either a formal or informal qualification for jobs.

Even many above-average paying jobs that don’t require a formal post-secondary degree of certificate often require a less formal education program, such as an apprenticeship program. In fact, occupations that require apprenticeships are expected to be the fastest growing of all jobs that require some form of on-the-job training. Some of these—especially those that require demonstrated technical competence—are among the highest paid and most difficult to fill positions in today’s job market. They are likely to occupy the same position in tomorrow’s job market..

Posted in Community/Other Colleges, Job and Career Opportunities, Skills Requirements, Workforce Trends | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Infosys Tries to Turn Autoworkers into Programmers

Thursday, April 26th, 2012

Although most of Infosys’ charitable activities are, as would be expected, focused on India, the firm also has a few global programs plus more focused contributions and work in many of the other countries in which it operates. For example, it contributed to and provided logistical support to the New York City fire department after 9/11 and continues to support educational initiatives, such as New York City’s STEM Mentoring program and efforts by local governments that need help in responding to natural disasters. Recently it launched a new, very different type of program that draws specifically on some of Infosys’ unique strengths and is intended to form the foundation for a much broader initiative.

A Second Chance for Ex-Autoworkers

As I discussed in two 2011 blogs, Infosys, along with a number of other Indian and multinational IT service companies have developed world-class training programs to bring graduates from India’s uneven college system to a common base of competence. Every one of Infosys’ computer science recruits goes through a 23-week Boot Camp at its Mysore Development Center, now called the Narayana Murthy Centre of Excellence.

It is now bringing this time-tested program to the U.S. in an attempt to retrain unemployed workers for new, high-skill jobs while simultaneously helping to address a growing shortage of skilled computer scientists and programmers. In March 2012, it launched an 18-week “Software Boot Camp” to provide unemployed Detroit autoworkers with an education comparable to a BS in programming.

The idea to boost training and employment opportunities for Detroit-area workers was initially spawned in a discussion with the Office of the Science and Technology Policy in the Office of the President. Washington then put Infosys into contact with potential partners and generally stepped back to let these partners design and run the program. Among Infosys’s primary partners in this endeavor are:

  • Wayne County Community College (WCCC) which will provide the facilities, manage the program and provide programming instructors who, after learning the Infosys program, will deliver it themselves and ultimately train others to deliver it;
  • The Workforce Development Department, which identifies and selects candidates who have lost auto industry jobs; and
  • The Detroit Economic Growth Corporation, which recruits and works with potential employers and will run a job fair to help the graduates find jobs.

Infosys is funding the entire program (which will be free to students) and is using the same curricula, courseware, exams and instructors as in Mysore. However, its Indian and U.S. programs have a few important differences. For example:

  • The Mysore program is targeted at new college graduates that Infosys has already hired. The Detroit program is open to older, non-employees who, after graduation, will be able to take jobs with any employer (including Infosys, for any of its 13 U.S. development centers) from which they receive an offer.
  • All Mysore students have a BS college degree in a computer science or engineering-related discipline. The Detroit program will accept graduates and non-graduates, with all types of backgrounds, who pass an entry test designed to assess analytical and quantitative capabilities.
  • The Detroit program, which is targeted at older people who have work experience, has been reduced from Mysore’s 23 weeks to 18 by eliminating the “soft skills” component that help new recruits adapt to a work in a professional, corporate environment.
  • While Infosys runs the Mysore program itself, the Detroit program was designed and is managed in conjunction with partners.
  • Infosys instructors conduct the Mysore program. These instructors will come to the U.S. to teach the first 18-week program, while training WCCC Computer Science instructors (initially 3 instructors) to take over the teaching—initially with oversight of and guidance by Infosys instructors, and later on their own.

The Detroit program is an experiment that is intended to determine the applicability of the Infosys training program to older students (an average age of 41) with diverse backgrounds. Although Infosys declines to discuss the background of the current students until the course concludes, they are clearly not the relatively heterogeneous lot of new BS Engineering and Computer Science graduates that make up a traditional Mysore class.

The company acknowledges that these factors, combined with its goal of maximizing completion rates, may combine to limit some graduates’ employability as programmers. It does, however, expect that even those who may not get jobs as programmers will be qualified for IT administration and support roles.

Scaling the Initiative

Where will this program go in the future? This will depend largely on the success of the initial class plus the determinations of employers and as to whether changes are required. Some big questions include whether there should be minimum educational requirements (such as a two-year or a four-year degree), whether students should be required to have a STEM-related background and whether the program can be evolved into a scalable, self-sustaining program that can be delivered by a broad range of non-Infosys instructors across multiple locations.

There are, of course, also a number of more nuanced questions, such as the types of jobs for which graduates will be best suited and how to best tailor the curricula, courses and pedagogy to the needs of students and prospective employers. The answers to such questions must await completion and a formal evaluation of the first program, as well as the success of graduates in getting jobs, feedback from students, instructors and employers and, of course, of Infosys’s partners.

While these and many other decisions must await the completion of the first Detroit program, Infosys has already begun to plan to expand this program and to launch others. For example, it hopes that WCCC will be able to immediately scale to three—and longer term—four programs per year, each with about 100 students. It also hopes to apply this same model to other constituencies and other geographies. It is already outlining a program that will be tailored to the needs of returning veterans (probably in conjunction with the Veterans Administration) and has initiated conversations with colleges and universities in other areas, such as Boston and Northern Virginia.

Such programs have the potential of delivering huge value. They can, for example, help:

  • Individuals acquire high-value, real-world job skills in areas for which there is strong and growing demand;
  • Community colleges develop and deliver more business-aligned retaining programs;
  • Cities and towns convert unemployed workers into participants in the knowledge economy; and
  • Companies, across all industries, beef up their IT staffs with professionals with up-to-date, state-of-the-art skills that can deliver immediate business value.

The program can also help Infosys. Although the vast majority of the company’s previous U.S. hires have been experienced professionals, it is now beginning to hire fresh out-of-school (“freshers”) for its U.S. development centers. While Infosys will have to compete with other companies in hiring such people, the programs will provide an expanded recruiting pool of people trained in Infosys methodologies, some of whom may help fill the company’s 300 current U.S. openings.

The program will also provide a supply of talent to Infosys customers (albeit also to its competitors). Just as importantly, it has the potential of improving Infosys’s public image by demonstrating its commitment to training U.S. citizens to provide the type of services that have recently gone offshore.

Although it is too soon to know how the current or subsequent Infosys efforts will pan out, the concept shows great promise. While community colleges have long offered all types of career retaining program, many such programs have not been well suited to actual market needs, much less to the needs of specific employers. Many of those programs that have been targeted to demonstrable market needs have focused on highly company- or industry-specific skills.

The Infosys effort has the potential of combining the best of both worlds—the broad reach and multi-employer appeal of traditional community college programs, with the teaching of specific, real-world skills for which there is a proven business need. Just as importantly, Infosys is providing these colleges with valuable intellectual property in the form of curricula, training materials, exams and even instructors that have already been proven in the training of tens of thousands of people who have gone on to successful IT industry careers.

As I have written previously, this approach is exactly the type of bridge between community colleges and the private sector that is required to retrain America’s workers (and possibly, in the future, initially train some of America’s students) for the jobs of the future. (See, for example, my 2011 blog series on the Future of Community Colleges). One can only hope that the results show as much promise as the concept and that it sparks the creation of many similar programs—by Infosys and hundreds of other companies—in many different fields and in many different cities. It is, however, somewhat ironic that it has taken an Indian company to pioneer a program for which the U.S. has such a critical need.

Posted in Community/Other Colleges, Corporate Social Responsibility, Infosys, IT Industry Role in Education, IT Industry's Role, Job and Career Opportunities, STEM Careers, Technology's Impact on Job Skills, Workforce Trends | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Helping Colleges and Universities Educate Tomorrow’s Knowledge Workers

Sunday, November 27th, 2011

My last blog reviewed some of the IBM Almaden Co-Evolution conference’s primary conclusions around the shape of the American job market, especially:

  • The state of today’s jobs market;
  • Where the new generation of jobs will come from; and
  • The types of skills these jobs will require.

This blog examines some of the conference’s follow-on conclusions, particularly around:

  • The capabilities and limitations of colleges and universities in helping students learn these skills;
  • How they will have to evolve to accomplish these goals; and
  • The type of cooperation—with primary and secondary schools, businesses, non-profits and governments—that will be required for colleges and universities to prepare knowledge workers for jobs that will be increasingly defined by the combination of globalization, technology and the growth of self-employment.

The Changing Role of Colleges and Universities

Colleges and universities are generally viewed as the primary, although certainly not exclusive source of many of the skills—both functional and foundational—that will be required for tomorrow’s jobs. True, the foundations for these skills must certainly be laid in secondary and even primary schools. Businesses, meanwhile, must help employees hone and refresh these skills. Most importantly, individuals will have to take primary responsibility for attending the schools, selecting the classes, choosing an employer and selecting the combination of extra-curricular activities that will help them develop these skills. For most, however, post-secondary institutions will remain as the single most important linchpin in the individual’s education-to-employment pipeline.

Many conference participants, including a number of university professors and administrators, concluded that few schools were currently fulfilling their missions. Their indictments and recommendations were generally in line with those of Clayton Christensen’s team’s February 2011 Disrupting College report.

Thousands of colleges, suffering from a type of “Harvard-envy”, short-change students by trying to simultaneously accomplish three primary missions: knowledge creation (research); knowledge proliferation (teaching); and helping prepare students for careers. While Harvard and perhaps one or two dozen other universities have the endowments and the cash flow to fund quality required for each, the vast majority of schools lack the resources and the skills to perform each of these tasks well.

Rather than trying to do all, most schools should focus on their core missions of knowledge proliferation (teaching) and preparing students for careers. They must also do so more cost-effectively, delivering quality education in a way that students and their families can afford without going deeply into debt. This will require the use of additional, more leverageable sources of learning, such as that from peers and tutors, and especially from learning technologies—including the potentially disruptive enabling technology of online learning. This will help free instructors from creating and even delivering lectures, provide them with insight into individual student needs and allow them to focus more time on addressing each student’s unique needs.

These schools, however, must also do much more—not only to prepare students for careers, but also to make them more “employment-ready” upon graduation. This requires deeper coordination with the private sector, not only in identifying the skills that are required for success in their companies, but also in providing more opportunities for “experiential learning” in which students have the opportunity to combine classroom, book and online education with experience in working on real-world problems, both in school (as in inter-disciplinary research centers) and in companies (as through apprenticeships and internships). Schools must determine how to give credit for these real-world experiences and also to apply (once they are developed and generally agreed upon) quantifiable metrics that assess educational outcomes. They should also, according to the Institute for the Future and my own research, specifically integrate the teaching—and especially the learning and reinforcement—of variants of the Institute for the Future’s ten foundational skills specifically into college curricula.

Cross Domain Educational Collaboration

Although colleges and universities are certainly critical links in the education to employment pipeline, they are not the only contributors. Primary and secondary schools must teach basic skills and provide a solid foundation for and passion for lifelong learning. They should also extend their current missions to provide solid groundings in the types of foundational skills that all employees—especially knowledge workers—will require in the new economy.

The private sector also plays a critical, but unfortunately diminishing role in educating their workforces. But although overall private sector investment in employee education rose slightly in 2010 to $52.8 billion, or $1,041 per learner, it has generally been falling since a high of more than $60 billion in 1999. Even so, a number of companies including Boeing and IBM (both of whom presented on their employee development efforts at the conference) continue to invest heavily (see, for example, my 2009 report in IBM’s Role in Creating the Workforce of the Future).

These and a number of other companies also work closely with schools, and invest in them—from primary to post-secondary—to help them develop curricula, fund teacher and instructor training, and develop workshops and internships to provide students with real-world learning experiences. Many companies, as discussed extensively in my blog, have partnered with secondary schools to improve IT education and train teachers on effective use of technology, with community colleges to prepare prospective employees for specific jobs and with universities to develop courses, curricula and entire degree programs.

Although such bilateral partnerships are certainly important, the conference concluded these are just the start. Corporations and schools must also partner with:

  • Foundations, such as Gates and Illuminata, to define desired course outcomes and develop metrics;
  • Non-profits, such as the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (both of which presented at the conference) to create pathways to help individuals create the educational experiences required to prepare for and advance their careers; and
  • State and local governments to identify the types of businesses they wish to attract, identify the resources and skills that will be required to attract employers, encourage and help local schools provide the required education and training and ideally, create online databases that help students and workers identify jobs and careers that will be available, the types of skills that will be required, and how these skills can best be learned and developed.

Although the Federal Government could, at least in theory, play an important role in identifying, mapping resources and coordinating efforts, the reality is that most economic development and education policy is done at a state and especially a local, rather than a national level. The most effective education-to-employment pipelines will probably require close cooperation by and deep commitments from mayors, university presidents, local business executives and local Chambers of Commerce.

 

Summary

U.S. colleges and universities must undergo huge changes if
they are to prepare graduate for tomorrow’s jobs—and do so at a cost that both
the students and the county can afford. For many, it will require a fundamental
rethink of their missions and their established practices. It will also require
much closer collaboration with the businesses that are likely to hire these
graduates.

 

 

Posted in Community/Other Colleges, Job and Career Opportunities, Other Schools, Skills Requirements, STEM Careers, Universities and Grad Schools | 1 Response »
Tags: , , ,

Core Skills for Knowledge Workers in a Global Economy

Sunday, October 30th, 2011

The U.S. education system was created primarily to teach analytical, and to a lesser extent, communication skills. The vast majority of this education, especially at the university level, is segmented into specific domains. Although these domain-specific content and skills are certainly critical, many additional broad, foundational skills are required of a generation of knowledge workers that are capable of delivering high-value in a global economy.

Exactly what are these skills and why are they so important? I discussed some of these skills at a high level in my November 2009 article, Right-Brain Skills for 21st Century Jobs and discussed some of these and others in a number of articles over the last couple years.

Although nobody of whom I am aware has published a comprehensive list of such skills (as if there ever could be such a thing), I would include capabilities such as:

  • IT fluency, where familiarity and comfort with tomorrow’s tools is so deep that technology becomes the de facto, go-to tool to address virtually any business need;
  • Quantitative analytics, especially higher-level math, statistical analysis and analytics;
  • “Integrative imagination,” the ability to integrate information and ideally methodologies from disparate realms to create original new insights;
  • High-level thinking skills including focused research, information filtering and prioritization, critical and adaptive thinking, creative problem-solving and analytical systems thinking; and
  • Soft skills, such as written and oral communications, teamwork, social intelligence, leadership and cross-cultural awareness and sensitivity.

But what are the precise skills that will be required? How do the combinations of skills vary among occupations, industries and positions? Nobody really knows. Nor do they really know how these requirements will evolve in the future. There is, however, one thing we do know. Far too few people entering the workforce, or even that are currently in it, have a sufficient base of such skills.

These broad skills, although necessary, are not sufficient to prepare an individual for an interesting and fulfilling career. They must be complemented with deep domain knowledge in a particular field AND sufficient knowledge of a broad range of other disciplines and fields to provide an inter-disciplinary perspective enable cross-domain collaboration. This domain knowledge, however, must be built atop the core skills that are applicable to virtually any field.

But, to address the current “core skills gap” we must first answer some fundamental questions:

  • Which of these core foundational skills are most critical and most universal?
  • What are the best stages in one’s education and career to learn these skills?
  • How can they most effectively be taught and learned?
  • What responsibility for identifying and learning these skills should be assumed by the individual —and what by primary, secondary and post-secondary schools, by businesses or by other types of organizations?

Much of my ongoing research and writing will focus on these and related questions.

Posted in Skills Requirements, Technology's Impact on Job Skills, Universities and Grad Schools | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , ,

Scaling Infosys’ Educational Programs

Sunday, September 25th, 2011

Infosys, as discussed in my September 11 blog, has developed one of the IT industry’s largest and most comprehensive talent development programs. Although the program was created I India, and is by far the most mature, multifaceted and far-reaching in India, the company is now bringing parts of the program to other countries in which it operates.

From India to the World

Infosys has, for example, implemented versions of its CampusConnect program (which help colleges develop and launch business-relevant curricula and courses) in other countries in which it has Delivery Centers. It is, for example, working with Malaysian university faculties to improve IT education and with Mexican faculties to develop an IT curriculum to make programs more industry-relevant.

Just this month, it entered into an agreement with Singapore Management University (SMU) to jointly develop content, case studies and learning labs for both Infosys employees and SMU undergraduate and graduate students. They also plan to conduct joint seminars and tutorials and collaborate on currently unspecified research and pedagogy projects.

Infosys, however, is focusing the vast majority of its Out-of-India efforts on China, the county in which it has already hired 3,500 employees, with plans for another 8,500 in three years. For example,it  opened a Development Center in Shanghai and an Education Center in Jiaxing. This new Education Center, which will eventually accommodate 3,000 students at a time, will generally replicate the company’s Mysore curricula and courses, but tailor them to the specific needs of Chinese recruits. More than 650 recruits have already completed the Center’s foundation training program and another 350 in process.

The company is also beginning to work with Chinese universities. It has, for example, launched a Chinese version of CampusConnect and is working closely with local governments to extend the program to more schools in other regions of the country.

Multi-Lateral in India

Infosys is also working to scale its education programs by partnering with third parties. These partners include:

  • Individual companies, such as Microsoft, which is now participating in SPARK; and
  • Non-profits, such as NASSCOM, where it is sharing best practices with the group’s Education Council, for deployment across India; and
  • Pan-national organizations, like UNESCO, to share learnings and identify best practices that can be applied across many different countries.

The company also forges more informal cross-border relationships. For example, it regularly invites industry bodies and faculty from other countries to visit Mysore. They have hosted a range of countries, from barely emerging (like Bhutan and Rwanda) and solidly industrializing countries (such as Thailand and Colombia) to learn and deploy capabilities in their own countries.

Applying Indian Learnings to Developed Countries

Cross-border learnings on employee development and most other business processes typically flow from more developed countries (which typically have the educational institutions to create and the corporations to test and develop best practices around these processes) to less developed countries.

Perhaps, however, it is about time for more such learnings to migrate in the other direction. Companies ranging from Proctor and Gamble and General Electric Medical Systems have developed products specifically for emerging countries that have since been migrated to developed countries. There are similar opportunities for migrating business models, such as Li & Fung’s supply chain practices and Bharti Airtel’s use of variable cost, virtual infrastructures.

On one hand, it may seem strange to suggest that countries like the U.S. and England—countries that virtually invented and still have some of the best colleges and corporate talent development and management practices in the world—could learn much from India. That country’s IT services sector, for example, is prospering only because the private sector was forced to develop capabilities that the public sector was not capable of providing.

But in many senses, developed countries are now facing some of the same challenges as developing countries. These include a sclerotic education-to-employment pipeline that does not seem capable either of:

  • Preparing students with the skills that will be required in an increasingly global knowledge economy, or of
  • Reskilling current workers who must learn totally new skills to qualify for new jobs in their current industries, much less those in new growth industries.

This is certainly not to suggest that emerging country companies have some type of inherent advantage over developed country companies, either in helping schools to graduate more employment-ready students or in proactively developing the skills that current workers will need for tomorrow’s jobs. After all, Western IT services companies such as IBM, HP and Accenture, were faced with many of the same challenges as their Indian counterparts in growing the Indian talent pool. These companies addressed their Indian needs in much the same way as did the Indian IT services firms. All of these companies–both Indian and Western–are now applying similar practices to develop their Chinese labor forces.

Some Western companies–especially IBM in universities and Microsoft in secondary schools—are at least as active in partnering with U.S. schools as Infosys is in partnering with Indian schools. It is, however, a shame that such actions are not ubiquitous, across not just the technology industry, but all industries.

Given the seemingly intractable challenges faced in reforming our education system and in addressing the worsening mismatch in the skills that students graduate with, versus those needed by employers, this country’s education system seems to need at least as much help from the private sector as do those in China and India. In fact, in some ways it needs even more, since U.S. and European students are increasingly turning away from the type of STEM educations that Indian and Chinese students crave.

Perhaps many more companies, across all industries and countries, have something to learn from the Indian IT services industry’s experience in educating, developing and managing talent.

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, Infosys, IT Industry Role in Education, STEM Careers, Universities and Grad Schools | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Lessons from Infosys’ Employee Development Program

Sunday, September 11th, 2011

While India certainly has a few world-class universities (especially in technology), its overall educational system is, to say the least, limited.

Despite these limitations, Indian and Western IT services firms have managed to build a million-person IT services industry that is the envy of the world—rapidly progressing from providing basic, low-cost services, to delivering not only world-class development capabilities, but also sophisticated business consulting and process reengineering skills.

How were these companies able to shape such a limited supply of human resources into a world-class talent development machine? By directly assisting engineering institutions and business schools and, especially, by taking over many of the educational tasks that are typically handled by educational institutions.

Although all of the major firms—both Indian and Western—are assuming similar roles, Infosys is clearly one of the leaders, both in how it partners with educational institutions and in its own employee development program.

Pre-Employment Education

Infosys’ employee development process begins well before it actually hires a person. In some cases, the process can track back to its corporate philanthropy programs, as with programs such as SPARK (one-day introductory experiences for high-school engineering students, hosted at Infosys development centers) and Catch Them Young (a two-week program in which 9th-grade students learn the basics of information technology). Through these programs, which have touched more than 320,000 students in the last 3 years, Infosys has also donated technology, including almost 1,000 PCs, to schools.

The company’s primary work with educators and students, however, focuses on colleges and universities. Its CampusConnect program, for example, helps Indian colleges develop and adapt courses and curricula that teach more “industry-relevant” skills. The company develops curricula, courseware and methodologies which are published on its CampusConnect portal. The program trains faculty to deliver these courses through activities including:

  • Bringing college student and faculty groups to Infosys centers for training and exposure to Infosys practices and technologies;
  • Funding train-the-trainer programs and two-to-three-month faculty sabbaticals on an Infosys campus; and
  • Sponsoring regional meetings and monthly Webinars to inform faculty of new developments and provide opportunities for them to communicate and establish communities among themselves.

Students who don’t have access to the program through their colleges and universities can access the CampusConnect portal themselves, where they can download and work through Infosys courses on their own. Since its launch in 2004, the program has worked with more than 6,500 faculty members in more than 500 colleges and universities, reaching more than 135,000 students.

Although the vast majority of the company’s campus outreach efforts are targeted at engineering institutions, it has smaller, more focused programs intended to reach those in other disciplines. B-school Connect, for example, is intended to help business schools create bridges between theory and actual business needs and particularly to show the critical roles that IT plays in management, such as by helping them create topics in business analysis. Project Genesis, meanwhile, is intended to help science, commerce and liberal arts majors develop analytical and communication skills required for careers in Business Process Outsourcing.

All of these university programs, not to speak of the company’s own in-house programs, also have a critical sub-theme and objective—to help students and employees develop confidence in their own abilities and to improve their ability to make contributions to their employers.

These campus programs are not specifically tuned to teaching skills that will benefit Infosys or to directly promote Infosys as an employer. This being said, however, they do provide visibility into the company and, through its engagement with institutions, helps the company attract promising students. They can also lead to internships, both domestically and internationally through the company’s InStep program. These internships often lead to full-time jobs.

The company, in fact, typically relies on its 500 CampusConnect partners for up to half its new recruits. These partner schools however, are primarily second- and third-tier colleges and universities. After all, the tier-one schools, such as the Indian Institutes of Technology, with which we have become so familiar, don’t really need all that much help. Moreover, their graduates are more likely to go to graduate school, than they are to seek direct employment.

Learning the Infosys Way

Infosys begins its formal employee education process as soon as it hires a new graduate.

Each new engineer is enrolled in the company’s 23-week residential program (there is a separate, shorter program for new BPO recruits) at the company’s Mysore Development Center. All go through a basic software engineering course before being assigned to deep dives. Software engineers, for example, will typically focus on a particular application (particularly SAP, Oracle or Microsoft) or technology (Java, Mainframes, cloud, mobility and so forth). New business analysts, meanwhile, will go deep into a particular cross-industry domain (such as finance, human resources or procurement) while project managers focus on project management techniques and Infosys processes.

This, however, is only the first step in a career-long continuous education process. Roughly 95% of those who successfully complete the Mysore program are then assigned to specific groups where they begin to learn how to apply these skills to the needs of Infosys’ clients. Each employee gets regular reviews and options for different career paths. They are also required to take continuing education courses and meet defined certification criteria.

The company currently offers 1,500 such courses in each of the technologies and business domains on which the company focuses, plus a growing number of courses in soft skills, such as communications and presentations. But while most initial training focuses on technology and soft skills, they become increasingly exposed to iness-based courses, in areas such as business value and specific functional and industry processes, in their later years with the company.

In fact, each employee must meet all the milestones and complete all of the certifications required for their current roles before they can be considered eligible for a promotion. These promotions can be either vertical (more responsible positions in their current role) or lateral (such as from software engineering into consulting or technology architecture).

As expected, Infosys provides selected fast-track employees with special attention. Identified leaders are enrolled in the Infosys Leadership Institute, which provides highly customized assessment, personal development and mentoring programs. This program, however, covers only about 850 of the company’s 130,000 employees and is limited to three tiers of employees:

  • Tier One, who currently lead departments;
  • Tier Two, who are likely to lead departments in three to five years; and
  • Tier Three, who are likely to become Tier 2 employees in three to five years.

All employees, meanwhile, are encouraged to provide some contribution to India’s educational system. SPARK classes, for example, are taught by more than 10,000 Infosys volunteers in a given year. Volunteers also play key roles in Catch Them Young and other programs conducted at Infosys Development Centers. The company also helps employees who would like to make deeper commitments, as by paying 50 percent salary to those who dedicate their sabbaticals to teaching at educational institutions or working at non-profits.

As expected, the vast majority of Infosys’ efforts are dedicated directly to working with Indian schools and Indian employees. But, as I discuss in my next blog, it is expanding a number of these programs to other countries. It is also partnering with non-profit institutions and other companies to scale its programs, both in India and around the world.

Posted in 21st Century Careers, Corporate Social Responsibility, Education System and Institutions, Infosys, IT Industry Role in Education, Technology's Impact on Job Skills | 1 Response »
Tags: , , , ,

The Future of Community Colleges

Thursday, August 25th, 2011

Online College Courses has just released its list of Ten Predictions for the Future of Community Colleges.

Although the list certainly does discuss (correctly) the importance of online education, it goes far beyond the group’s primary focus to emphasize a number of other critical changes that, as we had discussed in our 2010 series on the future of community colleges.

The list includes, but is not limited to the:

  • The growing need for community colleges as an alternative to the exploding cost of attaining four-year degrees;
  • Changes that will be required to meet the needs of rapidly growing numbers of non-traditional students;
  • Increased coordination with local businesses;
  • Growing focus on identifying and preparing students for high-demand jobs, regardless of whether or not these jobs require degrees;

The list is well worth checking out.

Posted in Community/Other Colleges, Education System and Institutions | No Responses »
Tags:

The Drawbacks of Specialized MBAs and Business Masters

Sunday, December 19th, 2010

Three of my recent posts have devoted a lot of virtual ink to profiling (The Trend toward Specialized MBAs), explaining (B-School Sub-Specialization), and to portraying (The Draws of Specialized MBAs and Business Masters Programs) some of the potential opportunities and advantages of what I see as one of the most important and fastest growing changes in business education in the last couple decades—the explosive growth in the Specialized MBAs and related business masters’ degrees.

But for all the momentum toward, and the strengths and promise of these programs, they also have limitations and face some daunting obstacles. This post briefly highlights some of these challenges and explains what I see as the likely long-term role of these programs.

Do Specialized Masters’ Deliver on their Promises?

Specialized masters’ programs promise much. They claim to provide short, intense and relatively low-cost/low-commitment approaches to preparing students for specific jobs. And since the programs are so focused, they have the potential of combining theoretical education and practical skills in ways that will give graduates a leg-up in competing for jobs in a tough economy.

Although the potential benefits are great and the arguments are compelling, the jury is still out on the value these programs actually deliver. Among the biggest questions are:

  • How well prepared are graduates? Although education may be focused and intense, these programs tend to attract and admit younger students with less business experience, and often admit people that do not have the grades that would qualify them for admission into traditional MBA (much less Executive MBA) programs. Just as importantly, few of these programs attempt or are able to provide the type of holistic education that is required of general managers or imbue graduates with the breadth of a multidisciplinary perspective—so-called T-shaped skills (in which a person has deep skills in an area of specialty and higher-level familiarity in a number of complementary fields)—that a growing number of companies are looking for and that are arguably required in today’s complex environment and multifaceted organizations.
  • Do they improve graduates chances of landing better jobs? The results are mixed. Although programs with solid reputations and established relations with corporate recruiters appear to have placement records similar to those of tier-two general MBA programs, less established programs often have difficulty on two fronts. First, many companies—including those that traditionally recruit large numbers of MBAs—don’t yet understand these programs. Second, even those that do, often don’t recruit at lesser known schools. This can force graduates to take much more initiative and work much harder to get their foot into the door. They may also find it difficult to demonstrate the value of their degrees, especially in organizations that do not have defined openings in the specific specialty. Also, while specialized degrees may be of value in getting into specifically defined fields, they make it much more difficult to enter broader fields, such as consulting.
  • What are graduates’ long-term career prospects? Another unknown. On one hand, specialized expertise may allow recruits to prove themselves and progress more rapidly than general MBAs in their specific fields. On the other hand, such specialized educations may be a disadvantage in qualifying or being considered for other positions. Specialized programs may also pose additional risks. These programs typically attract younger applicants with limited business experience. What happens if a graduate’s interests change? Or if jobs within a chosen field­­—such as banking or real estate—disappear?

Trend or Fad?

These questions all lead to a bigger and ultimately, more important question. Are Specialized Business Masters’ a long-term trend, or a short-term fad? Will they deliver the type of education and gain the type of market traction required to give graduates not just an immediate advantage in landing a job, but also in building a sustainable career?

Although some observers, such as the authors of the fascinating recent book, Rethinking the MBA: Business Education at a Crossroads (which I will discuss in future blogs), generally dismiss such programs, others, such as CNN, contend that specialized programs may eventually consign traditional one-size-fits-all MBA degrees “to the dustbin of history.”

I come down firmly in the middle. It is certainly true that traditional MBA programs are facing rising criticism and, as will be discussed in a future blog, undergoing big changes. Moreover, a growing number of favored recruiters, such as consulting firms, hedge funds and investment banks, are reducing the percentage of MBAs they hire in favor of very bright Bachelor’s grads (and in some cases, highly specialized PhD’s) and are encouraging more of their most promising people to stay with the firm, rather than pursue an advanced degree.) Even so, such programs—especially those of Tier One schools—are likely to remain the largest source of strategy consultants and fast-track general management candidates for years to come.

This being said, these positions will always account for a very small percentage of the total demand for business graduates. As I see it, once specialized programs begin to prove themselves, and the best schools are recognized, students and the employers will come. Students will be attracted by the combination of shorter (typically 12 month) time commitments, relatively lower costs and the opportunity to prepare for specific jobs. Employers will be attracted to students who can deliver immediate value in positions for which they have immediate needs—especially if they continue to command lower salaries than MBAs.

This being said, acceptance will differ greatly by degree, by school and even by country. Specialized programs, as discussed in my B-School Sub-Specialization blog, are relatively well established and accepted in Europe. The U.S. is a different story. Although a few degrees, such as those in information technology, taxation and especially accounting, have already achieved long-term traction, most still suffer from limited recognition and considerable confusion (both among employers and prospective students). Even when these constituencies understand the concept, few currently understand the real value of such programs relative to traditional MBAs.

What will be required for to achieve this recognition? First, schools (ideally in close cooperation with likely recruiters), must determine which specialties are most likely to yield the best job prospects, the relative need for general management versus specialized education and the tradeoffs between theoretical education and hands-on, real-world training. Second, schools must effectively (and ideally, cooperatively) communicate the value and roles of these programs relative to alternatives—especially MBAs (as the recently formed Specialized Programs in Graduate Business consortium is attempting to do).

As explained by Al Cotrone of the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, “a broad-based general management education will enable MBA graduates to one day be able to rise to the top of their organizations. But they have to get into the field first.” If specialized programs do indeed prove to be a valuable aid in getting that first job, they are likely to become and remain very popular—especially over the many years in which U.S. jobs are likely to remain tight.

Posted in Universities and Grad Schools | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Draws of Specialized MBAs and Business Masters Programs

Sunday, December 5th, 2010

My three previous posts on MBA programs examined the challenges that B-schools are currently facing, how a growing number of programs are responding to these challenges by developing specialized programs and then by drilling down into the ways in which some programs were migrating into increasingly narrowly defined sub-specialties as a means of targeting specific market opportunities and more effectively differentiating their programs from those of other specialized schools

The Growth in Specialized Business Masters Programs

This trend toward specialization continues to grow, with the vast majority of new degree programs now being specialized. While the trend, as suggested in the below Figure, is still growing in the U.S., it is already very well established overseas. (The University of Manchester, for example, now offers 26 specialized business masters degrees.) And interestingly, these programs appear to be more popular among women (48.4% in U.S. and 47.0% in international schools) than are the general programs (37.1% and 37.4%).

Figure: AACSB Member Master’s Degree Programs (2008–2009) number of schools offering at least one program in each category

Business Master’s Degree Programs U.S. International
General Master’s Degree (MBA) 454 160
Specialized Master’s Degree 298 140
Business Master’s Degree Enrollments U.S. International
General Master’s Degree (MBA) 151,215 89,200
Specialized Masters Degree 39,250 56,670
Source: Association to Advance Collegiate, Schools of Business

In fact, what began as a means by which small, second-and third-tier regional schools could tout pragmatic advantages relative to their larger, better known, more highly-ranked counterparts, has as discussed in my blog on sub-specialties, is even beginning to spread into some of the tier-one B-schools, including MIT, Carnegie-Mellon and Northwestern.

Why this growth? At a high level, business masters programs continue to be viewed as golden tickets to rewarding careers. The number of business masters conferred in the US has grown every year since 1969/70 (with exception of 1985/86, when the number slipped by 0.45%). When one digs a bit deeper, however, one finds that enrollment in traditional, full-time, two-year MBA programs has, at best, held its own over the last decade. All of the growth has occurred among non-traditional programs, such as part-time and executive MBAs, and especially specialized masters programs. Moreover, according to the fascinating new book, Rethinking the MBA: Business Education at a Crossroads, the health of full-time programs is effectively confined to the top 20-ranked U.S. B-schools. Full-time program enrollment in Tier Two schools (ranked 21-36) have fallen 17% over the last 8 years and lower ranked schools have fallen even more sharply. One-year degrees—driven largely by specialized programs—are already established as the de facto standard in Europe (although two-year programs continue to grow rapidly in Asia and Latin America).

Moreover, unlike the case in most recessions when MBA applications increase, applications are now falling. And so is demand for traditional MBAs. Hiring of new MBA grads has fallen dramatically during the recession and many of the traditionally favored employers (particularly financial services and consulting firms) have been forced to retrench. (Moreover, as discussed below, many of these firms had been reducing the percentage of MBAs in their hiring since long before the recession.)

Where is the growth? Canadian and European schools continue to see significant growth in applications and Executive MBA applications are up slightly. The real growth, however, is in specialized programs—especially those in accounting, finance and healthcare.

The Attractions of Specialization

This growth is largely a reflection of long-term global trend toward specialization. It is, however, being fueled by multiple factors affecting each of the three primary business education stakeholders: schools, employers and students. Schools (particularly local/regional schools and those below the top tier), are, as discussed in my October 24 post on B-School Challenges, are being buffeted by forces including falling enrollment in their core two-year programs, increased competition (both for applicants and for attracting qualified instructors) from European and Asian schools and challenges in placing graduates in attractive positions. As evidenced by their rapid adoption of specialized programs, they increasingly view specialization as the most attractive option.

Different schools, however, are taking different, and often multiple paths to specialization. Most programs, as discussed in my November 7 and November 14 posts, focus broadly on preparing students for jobs in traditional disciplines (such as accounting, financial management, IT management, brand management, supply chain management and human resource management) that are common across multiple industries and regions. New programs are being continually added (or existing programs tuned) to prepare graduates for the large numbers of jobs that are anticipated in fields including sustainability, compliance, risk management and business ethics. Other programs are targeted much more narrowly, as around the needs of specific and often local industries (including energy, wine, biotech and one of the most popular—healthcare).

Just as importantly, as explained by Michael Knetter, Dean of the Wisconsin School of Business, “the industry has been producing too many generalists relative to what is needed.” “The student satisfaction ratings and placement outcomes that we saw out of our specialized programs were far superior to what we found in our general management program.”

A growing number of prospective employers appear to agree. Although many companies do not yet understand or recruit from these programs (which I will discuss further in my upcoming December 19 post), some of those that do see much value in graduates that have specific education, proven interest, hands-on experience (as through internships) and, in some cases, deep technical and analytic skills, in specific industries and functions. This allows these graduates to make immediate contributions with little additional training—a particular value to companies (especially smaller and mid-size companies) that rely on “just-in-time” hiring for a specific job, rather than bringing in large classes of new graduates. These companies are also attracted by these graduates’ salary requirements, which are often closer to those of a bachelor’s degree in business, than those with a full, two-year MBA.

The Value to Students

Schools are looking to specialized business masters programs to attract more and different types of students (and better appeal to recruiters) while employers view them as a means of filling current openings with moderately-priced people that can deliver immediate value. In the end, however, for these programs to succeed in the market, they must attract students.

As I discuss in my next blog, the jury is still out as to whether these programs do or will yield better placement rates (much less cost/salary tradeoffs) than do more traditional business programs. However, they do present a logical and compelling case for improving a graduate’s prospects relative to less specialized and intensively trained (not to speak of higher priced) MBAs and less intensely focused (albeit lower priced) business bachelor degrees. This is particularly true since many of these programs tend to provide greater opportunities to balance theoretical education and real-world engagement (both through more hands-on and experiential courses and highly targeted internships and work/study programs) than to other business programs.

Just as importantly, specialized masters degrees also dramatically lower the financial bar for obtaining a graduate degree. They often cost less than half as much as a full MBA from a comparable school and slash the opportunity cost from two years to one. Such considerations can be particularly compelling both to students and their parents—especially during a recession and painfully slow recovery

Although such programs are definitely not for everyone (again, see my next blog, they do hold particular appeal, and promise particular value to certain types of students. Examples include:

  • Students with clearly-defined career objectives and self-starters who want the opportunity to chart their own paths;
  • Early-or mid-career employees looking to change careers (such as by leveraging math or IT skills into financial analysis), deepen skills in their current industry or function (such as brand management in specialty retail) or leverage technical careers into more generalized management career paths (as with the many business programs tailored specifically to the needs of mid-career scientists and engineers);
  • Undergraduate business students looking to deepen their technical skills or undergraduate technical students looking to integrate a management perspective atop their technical skills before entering the job market;
  • Students with less-than-stellar undergraduate records who may not qualify for top-tier MBA programs and will find it easier to distinguish themselves in a more differentiated, often less competitive environment; and
  • Those looking to complement current or contemporaneous masters degrees (general MBAs as well as degrees in fields ranging from education and architecture to sustainability and IT) as a means of improving or focusing their career prospects.

While all specialized business master programs have their own specific draws, proponents and detractors, two of the first, most proven and still most popular specialized business master programs—those in accounting and finance—offer particularly demonstrable benefits:

  • An MS in Accounting, for example, provides a means by which aspiring CPAs can bridge the gap between their undergraduate coursework and the 150-credit-hour requirement for the CPA;
  • An MS in Finance can provide the technical and analytic skills required to land a highly competitive position in financial services. These programs have also been instrumental in helping mathematicians, computer scientists and physicists leverage their skills into new careers as “quants” (quantitative financial analysts).

But for all the attractiveness and potential benefits of specialized business masters, they are not, as mentioned, for everyone. Many of these programs also have some serious drawbacks. These are the topics of my next post.

Posted in Job and Career Opportunities, Universities and Grad Schools | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Business School Sub-Specialization

Sunday, November 21st, 2010

My previous post provided an overview of the trend toward specialized MBAs. It showed the veritable explosion in horizontal specialties, the pace at which B-schools—especially second-tier and regional schools—are spawning such programs and the pace by which students (over 20% so far) are flocking to them.

While this type of specialization may well help these schools differentiate themselves from those with more generalized programs, how will the specialists differentiate themselves from the rapidly growing number of other specialists?

This post looks at how all type schools, from small, specialized regionals to some of the worlds’ largest and most prestigious schools are taking specialization to new levels and into important new areas.

Growth in Industry Specialized Programs

Although most specialized MBAs are focused on relatively horizontal disciplines, a growing number of schools (led by BEM Bordeaux’s Wine MBA) are building programs to prepare graduates for jobs in industries with large concentrations of companies in their areas. Rutgers (New Jersey), for example, offers an MBA in pharmaceutical management and University of Oklahoma has an energy concentration and Suffolk University (Boston) offers one in healthcare. Suffolk University (Boston) offers one in healthcare and, not surprisingly, Scotland’s Queen Margaret University has an MBA in Golf and Country Club Management.

Not all industry-specific programs are designed for local industries. University of Tennessee–Knoxville, for example, offers an aerospace MBA in which twenty percent of its curriculum is unique to that industry. It also offers an executive MBA (PEMBA) that is targeted exclusively at physicians, addressing issues including government regulation and HIPPA. Southern New Hampshire University, meanwhile, has a program in sports management and Concordia University’s Molson School (at the behest of the Montreal-based International Air Transport Association and the International Civil Aviation Organization, created an International Aviation MBA.

Many such programs leverage or provide joint degrees with other schools within the university. Although joint degree programs (such as the venerable JD/MBA) have been around for decades, schools are increasingly integrating their curricula into truly inter-disciplinary programs. University of Oklahoma’s energy program, for example, was created and is taught in conjunction with the university’s engineering school and results in joint MBA/MS degrees. Boston College, meanwhile, leverages the college’s highly regarded divinity school to offer a joint MBA/MS in church management and pastoral ministry.

Emergence of the Techno-MBA

But, with all this diversity, we have begun to see the emergence of another cross-disciplinary specialization that is beginning to sweep across all types of universities and MBA programs. This is the emergence of so-called techno-MBAs that integrate business and technology training. Although many such programs are outgrowths of information management specializations within an MBA program (how to manage and effectively use IT to deliver business value), a growing number of programs are intended to prepare managers to run technology-based businesses. The effort generally began in the mid-1990s when Queen’s University School of Business (Ontario, Canada) created a program intended to transform career scientists and managers into managers.

Many other B-schools, including those of Boston University, Northeastern, University of Washington, Purdue and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have followed suit, often by integrating work across their business, engineering and science schools. Some tailor these programs to the technology of and unique business needs of specific industries. University of Pittsburgh’s Katz school, Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper School and MIT’s Sloan school, for example, all offer programs build specifically around bio-tech.

University of Pennsylvania (through a combination of its business and engineering schools) goes even further with its Executive Masters in Technology Management (EMTM) program. It offers specialties in areas including biopharm and biotech, IT and telecommunications, nanotechnology and materials science and energy, sustainability and the environment.

Tier-One Specialization Programs

Those who recall back to my previous post may remember the generalized dictum that it is primarily tier-two and regional business schools that are offerings specialized MBAs. Most of the tier-one schools are redefining their curricula to provide broader, more holistic educations. But, as I mentioned in the previous section, some of these schools (such as Penn and MIT) do offer specialized techno-MBA and joint-degree programs. These schools and programs, however, are not alone. Northwestern’s Kellogg, Berkeley’s Hass and MIT’s Sloan schools now offer specialized MBAs, majors, or dual degree programs in areas like real estate, sports management, biosciences, electronic commerce, and health care.

University of Michigan’s Ross School, although it does not offer any specialized MBAs, works closely with other schools within the university to create specialized electives and dual degree programs that are tailored to the needs and desires of the student. It, for example, currently has 20 such programs that combine MBAs with degrees in disciplines including area studies (China, Russia, Middle East, etc.), engineering (construction, manufacturing, naval and so forth), education, architecture, medicine, music and urban planning.

University of Chicago’s Booth School, meanwhile, is taking its own, very individualized approach to specialization. Although it does not offer specialized degrees per se, the school has leveraged its deep analytical and quantitative capabilities to create world-class reputations in fields including economics and finance. It is now applying similar quantitative methodologies to other fields—especially marketing. Although Booth has long taken a data-driven approach to marketing, it recently reached an agreement with Nielsen, under which Booth will become the academic clearinghouse for the company’s Homescan and ScanTrack databases and gain exclusive academic access to its MonitorPlus database. Its goal is to use this unique access to effectively reinvent marketing and to establish Chicago as the leader in and home of the next generation of data-driven marketing.

So, B-school specialization appears to be here to stay. But what will it mean to schools, to students and to the companies that recruit these budding specialists? That is the focus of my next blog.

Posted in Universities and Grad Schools | 1 Response »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Older Entries