IT Industry Role in Education

...now browsing by category

 

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: , , , , , , , ,

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 ACM Computer Programming Competition: Lessons for America and from IBM

Sunday, August 28th, 2011

My previous blog, The United States’ Clogged Technology Education-to-Employment Pipeline, provided a number of examples of how U.S. students, from K-12, to college to grad schools), are falling behind their counterparts in other countries across virtually all segments of STEM education. Although these deficiencies are troubling in their own right, they only begin to suggest a much bigger, much more troubling problem for the U.S. economy.

The educational system is, after all, the primary pipeline through which corporations receive the steady flow of talent they need to keep America competitive in a global economy. And since this competitiveness will be based on innovation, this talent must be fluent in the language of innovation. STEM is that language.

Although I have spoken with many people and have read and written much on the challenges facing U.S. STEM education, I never really had a chance to see the manifestation of these challenges for myself. Therefore, I was happy to travel to Orlando Florida to learn about and see the world finals round of the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) International Collegiate Programming Contest (ICPC).

This blog briefly describes the contest and its outcome, and provides my view of the implications for the U.S. Its primary focus, however, is on corporate support of these competitions and on their role in supporting the recruitment activities of their sponsors—in this case, IBM:

  • Why, for example, has IBM sponsored and funded this competition for the last 15 years, and why it has committed to continuing to do so for at least the next 5 years;
  • What value does IBM get from this generosity and what is it doing to maximize the value it derives from it; and
  • What are the implications and opportunities for other tech vendors that hope to promote STEM education and improve their own chances of recruiting the most promising graduates?

The ACM International Collegiate Programming Contest

The contest is a multi-stage competition that started with more than 300,000 students. It begins with dozens of local competitions, and progresses through six geographically-aligned regional competitions (this year, with 24,915 contestants from 2,070 universities and 88 countries). It culminates in a final competition that, this year, consisted of 315 students on 105 teams.

These teams compete not only with each other, but also against tight time constraints and limited resources (one computer and three calculators per team) in an attempt to solve eleven real-world problems. They must often deal with ambiguity, exercise judgment to assess when to submit an answer (to avoid penalties for incorrect submissions) and continually reassess their strategies to determine on which problems to focus their energies. Success, therefore, depends not only on speed and accuracy, but also on teamwork, resource prioritization and allocation, quick thinking, and adaptability.

The questions are designed with varying levels of difficulty, from a couple that require relatively moderate skills to a couple that would challenge many of the best, most experienced programmers in the world. In the end, after five hours of intense work, ten teams answered seven questions correctly, and two teams managed to answer eight, an impressive feat for college students, especially under the constraints imposed by the rules.

As has been the case in most years since the competition went international, this year’s winner’s circle was led by teams from Russia (four of the top ten teams) and China (two of the top ten, including 1st place Zhejiang University and 3rd place Tsinghua University). In fact, combined, these two countries represented half of the top 26 teams (7 for China and 6 for Russia), with two other perennially strong countries, Poland and the U.S., taking two spots apiece and another, Ukraine, capturing three.

U.S. schools, who typically make quite respectable showings, qualified 18 teams for the finals. One, North American regional champion University of Michigan Ann Arbor, took 2nd place in the world finals and three others (Carnegie-Mellon took 13th, MIT 32nd and Princeton 48th) in the top 58 (all of whom had at least 4 correct answers). The remaining 14, each correctly answering fewer than four questions, received Honorable Mentions.

As would be expected, men overwhelmingly dominated the competition, with women accounting for fewer than 10 of the 315 contestants. This year, however, a woman was part of the Zhejiang University championship team. (As I discussed in my previous blog, U.S. women, while expanding their inroads in science and especially medicine, are poorly represented in math, engineering and IT.)

Challenges for the U.S.

Although one must not try to read too much into the results of one competition, Russian and Chinese (and more broadly, Eastern European and East Asian) schools are traditionally among the winners. U.S. teams, meanwhile, typically do make quite respectable showings. Approximately 20 U.S. schools typically make it to the finals, and in eight of the last 15 years at least two U.S. universities have won medals (i.e., placed among the top 12). In fact, at least three U.S. teams medaled in four of the last 15 years, with one winning the championship and five placing second.

Respectable: yes. But as the results of this competition (not to speak of the educational statistics cited in my July 31 blog) make clear, companies that need access to the best talent must look well beyond U.S. citizens and U.S. schools. After all, non-U.S. universities, as is clear from the competition, already contain much of the world’s best programming talent. (Meanwhile, some of U.S. teams, including the Number 2 University of Michigan team, included students from other countries.) These non-U.S. students and schools promise to become even more competitive as Asian schools, in particular, continue to improve, attract more world-class professors and become more attractive destinations for the world’s most promising students.

Meanwhile, as discussed in my July 31 blog, U.S. students (with the notable exception of Asian-Americans) are moving away from STEM disciplines and U.S. universities now count on non-U.S. citizens for rapidly growing percentages of their undergraduate science and engineering classes–259,000 new undergraduate students in 2009/10 alone (not to speak of an absolute majority of their PhD candidates).

That creates a problem: The U.S. is producing fewer of its own world-class programmers and IT engineers. Meanwhile, U.S. companies are finding it increasingly difficult to bring world-class talent from other countries into the U.S. Where then will these companies find the talent they need to grow?

This brings us full-circle back to the ACM competitions, and specifically to IBM, which sponsors the competitions.

Opportunities for IBM

IBM has been sponsoring the ACM competition for the last 15 years and has just committed to extending this sponsorship for at least the next five years. Why does it devote so much money and so many of its people to this work? It hopes to:

  1. Recognize and spotlight STEM skills;
  2. Inspire more students to study and develop their problem-solving skills in these fields;
  3. Encourage and facilitate cross-cultural exchange among schools and students; and
  4. Identify some of the best STEM talent in the world, expose them to IBM and the types of problems they would work on at IBM and improve IBM’s ability to recruit these people.

IBM, as exemplified by its rapidly expanded focus on donating money, products and expertise to educational institutions, and as demonstrated by programs such as its Academic Initiative and its newly announced P-Tech high school partnership with New York City, is deeply committed to encouraging students and helping all levels of schools to improve STEM education.

But for all of its philanthropic efforts, IBM is also intent on reaping its fair share of the rewards from such efforts. It wants the best and brightest of these graduates to join IBM. This is more of a challenge than it may appear. True, IBM is clearly one of the leading and most diversified IT companies in the world. It is also consistently rated as one of the world’s top brands and one of the best companies for which to work. Still, it is generally less visible to students than are more consumer-facing brands, such as Microsoft and Google and does not offer the type of pre-IPO lure of companies such as Facebook and Twitter.

The ACM competition provides IBM with a unique opportunity to meet and to present itself to many of the most promising college-age programmers in the world. It is, therefore, no surprise that IBM leverages the competition to introduce itself to these students. It provides demonstrations of some of the company’s cutting-edge technologies and research, and populates the conference with a number of IBM employees who are alumni of the ACM competition and of some of the schools represented in the contest.

It has also set up a separate recruiting process, separate from but coordinated with the company’s primary recruiting efforts, to learn what interested contestants are looking for in their careers and to help identify how they can accomplish their goals at IBM. This year, the company went a big step beyond recruiting. In addition to monetary rewards (of up to $12,000 per team) from ACM, IBM, this year, made open job offers to the top 12 placing students—three members from each of the Top Four teams in the competition. The company will offer them jobs or internships in whichever IBM group (IBM Research, Software Group, etc.) and whichever country (subject to IBM operations in and government permissions) they choose.

IBM’s partnership with ACM provides yet another example of how a company can do well by doing good.

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, IBM, IT Industry Role in Education, STEM Careers | No Responses »
Tags: , , , ,

IBM’s Evolving Corporate Philanthropy Objectives

Sunday, June 12th, 2011

In two recent blogs, I discussed the growing trends by which companies are:

  • Integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) and Corporate Philanthropy initiatives into their business strategies; and
  • Migrating from passive philanthropic donations of cash, to active contributions of their products, and especially the expertise of their employees to the needs of their communities.

These companies increasingly recognize that reputations for social responsibility can burnish the company’s brand, attract new customers, aid in recruiting employees and improve employee commitment to the organization. Some companies use philanthropic activities to facilitate entry into new markets, improve economies in existing markets and even increase share prices. They also see this active involvement as delivering much greater and more sustainable benefits to the causes they support.

IBM is a case in point. This is the first in a series of two blogs that examine how IBM is rapidly evolving its corporate philanthropy program to align with the company’s business strategy. This blog assesses the company’s changing priorities and their linkages to some of its core business objectives. The second blog (scheduled for June 26), looks at how the company is expanding and measuring both the corporate and social returns of these programs.

Toward a Business-Aligned Philanthropy Strategy

IBM’s Smarter Planet initiative, in which the company works with communities to improve everything from their water supply to their traffic flow, facilitates what IBM views as a growing “fusion” between its business and citizenship strategies. Its efforts to address societal issues such as the environment, community economic development, education, health and literacy, increasingly rely on “IBM’s most valuable resources, our technology and talent, to create innovative programs” to assist these communities.

This has not always been the case. Although IBM has always been a major contributor to social causes, back in the mid-1980s, it often subjectively allocated contributions to causes in communities in which IBM operated and had employees. 95% of these contributions were in cash.

While struggling to get the lumbering giant back on its feet, Lou Gerstner hired a new executive to restructure the company’s social initiatives. This executive, Stanley Litow, was charged with applying the company’s philanthropic resources to address the needs of society in a way that would simultaneously:

  • Advance IBM’s own business objectives; and
  • Maximize the value of IBM’s “social investments” through donations of the company’s technology and expertise, in addition to its cash.

These focuses were further refined under current CEO Sam Palmisano, who insisted on methodically aligning IBM’s community service efforts around the company’s business expertise and on applying IBM technology and expertise, in areas including cloud, analytics and security, to societal needs. He also required quantification of the value of these investments (the value to IBM, as well as to beneficiaries) and on working more effectively with partners to better leverage and scale IBM’s efforts. As of 2009, for example:

  • 25% of IBM’s investments were in growth markets compared with an average of 1% for other companies;
  • Almost 75% of these investments were aligned around education and employee development, with most of the remainder being spread across human services, environment, health and culture; and
  • 55% of investments were in the form of technology and another 23.3% in services, with cash accounting for less than 22% .

IBM has steadily increased the resources it donates to charitable causes from less than $150 million in 2005 to more than $185 million in 2009. While this includes the company’s Matching Grants and Community Grants programs, it does not include the $36 million individual IBMers contribute through the company’s Employee Charitable Contribution campaign or the close to 1 million hours of their own time that current and retired IBMers dedicate to social causes of their own choosing under IBM’s On Demand Community program. Valuing these hours at a modest $25 per hour translates into an additional $24 million.

IBM is also expanding its commitments to its social programs, focusing on building longer-term, more sustainable relationships with its causes and its partners as a means of maintaining continuity, ensuring meaningful knowledge transfer, and of achieving long-term and sustainable results.

Educating the Workforce of the Future

While the increase in overall funds that IBM allocates to corporate contributions has been gradual, the change in the composition of these contributions has been dramatic. Education, for, example, grew from 67.5% to 73.4% over the last five years, while the percentage donated to cultural causes has fallen by half, from $11.2 million to 4.7 million.

The allocation of these educational contributions has shifted much more dramatically than the overall sums. While more than 55% of IBM’s 2005 educational contributions went the K-12 in 2005, 67.7% now goes to higher education.

As I discuss in detail in my 2010 report on IBM’s Academic Initiative, these educational resources are being applied much more programmatically and in a way that generates greater returns—to IBM, the schools with which it works and to students—than did the company’s previous efforts. It contributes hardware and software to computer science labs; funds scholarships, internships and interdisciplinary Smarter Planet research projects; and contributes IBM talent to help universities tune curricula and teach classes. Meanwhile, its Global Citizen’s Portfolio provides a range of tools to help fund employee’s lifetime learning, encourage them to mentor other IBMers and even prepare for new careers in teaching, government or non-profit service.

Why is IBM placing such a focus on education in general and higher education in particular? First, there is a huge need. Education is the Number One-rated corporate philanthropic priority of CEOs in general, and of IT companies in particular. It is also cited as the single greatest need by community managers. Second, IBM, like many tech companies, is already struggling to find adequate numbers of people with the skills required for today’s jobs. It sees even greater talent shortages in the future—particularly for the type of “T-shaped” people (those with a broad understanding of multiple disciplines and skills, combined with deep skills in a specific field) that will be required to develop, market, implement and manage the type of Smarter Planet solutions on which IBM is betting its future.

IBM is working, first and foremost, to help universities educate adequate numbers of people with the skills that it will require in the future, while simultaneously identifying and forming relationships with the most promising of these students while they are still in school. IBM’s need for T-shaped people, however, goes well beyond its own direct needs. It is also working to ensure that such people are available to IBM partners and customers and that these people are familiar with (and ideally have favorable impressions of) IBM and its technologies.

Improving Life in IBM’s New Growth Markets

As I mentioned, there been a big shift in the geographic destination of IBM’s charitable contributions. In 2005, for example, almost 70% of IBM’s donations went to the U.S, with Europe, Japan and Canada accounting for much of the remainder. By 2009, 25% of these funds went to emerging and developing countries, with contributions to Asia Pacific and Latin America both more than tripling over the last five years.

Why the big shift to emerging countries? Three primary reasons. First, as great the needs of the developed world, those of poorer countries are even greater. Second, IBM is becoming much more global, with about two-thirds of its revenues now coming from overseas, and three-quarters of its employees now based overseas—with particularly rapid growth in emerging countries, especially India and China.

This leads to a third, more pragmatic reason. IBM, like most other large corporations, sees much of its future growth coming from these countries. While it is already established in some of these countries, it has little presence in many of the smaller countries and, even in those in which it is well-represented, has little exposure in second- and third-tier cities.

Contributions to these countries generates exposure for IBM in preparation of marketing efforts, gives IBM employees a better understanding of the needs of these areas and helps to build IBM’s bona fides as a corporate citizen of these countries. Meanwhile, programs including Corporate Service Corps, Executive Services Corps and Smarter City Challenge provide emerging country communities with pro bono consulting to address critical Smarter Planet-related needs. These engagements deliver direct and immediate benefit to these countries while simultaneously providing them with an idea of the even greater benefits that may be achieved though broader, paid engagements. The consultants, meanwhile, provide a very human face to the giant corporation.

IBM is clearly channeling its philanthropic activities more strategically than in the past, insisting that they deliver value both to their beneficiaries, and to IBM itself. But as the company increasingly views these contributions more as investments than as gifts, it is also insisting that every given dollar worth of contribution produce the greatest possible return. My June 26 blog examines how IBM is both amplifying and measuring the returns—both social and corporate—of these programs.

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, IBM, IT Industry Role in Education | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Shared Value Creation: The Next Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility and of Capitalism

Sunday, February 6th, 2011

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate philanthropy (CP) used to be managed separately from the business. They consisted largely of cash contributions that companies viewed, at best, as an effort to give back to the communities in which they operated and their employees lived. At worst, they were seen as a subtle form as extortion that companies had to pay to appease and demonstrate their “commitments” to their communities.

This is changing. A growing number of companies now recognize that:

  • CSR and CP initiatives can deliver big business benefits to their organizations; and that
  • They can often deliver much greater value to society by contributing technology and expertise than they can by contributing just money.

Many companies, for example, now recognize that reputations for social responsibility can burnish the company’s brand, attract new customers, aid in recruiting employees and improve employee commitment to the organization. Some even claim that their CSR and CP activities have increased their share prices by attracting incremental new investments from the growing number of Social Investment Funds.

This, however, is only the tip of a value proposition that can go much deeper—a value proposition that can directly help the corporation enter new markets, improve economies in existing markets and create totally new business opportunities. In fact, Michael Porter and Mark Kramer, in their January 2011 Harvard Business Review article, argue that companies must recast narrowly defined CSR and CP programs around a proposition for creating shared value—an approach designed to deliver as much value to the company as to society. They insist that a structured approach to Shared Value Creation (the latest non-intuitive buzzword for efforts intended to deliver both business and societal value) can, for example, yield:

  • Big cost savings, as in the $250 million savings (a $2.71 return on every dollar it spent on these programs from 2002 through 2008) that Johnson & Johnson attributed to its employee wellness programs (not to speak of demonstrated improvements in employee attendance and productivity);
  • Big revenue gains, as in the $18 billion that General Electric derived from the sale of Ecomagination products in 2009, a category of offerings that is expected to grow at twice the rate of total company revenues over the next five years (an issue that I will discussed in my February 20th blog on GE’s Smart Grid strategy); and
  • Big improvements to employee leadership development and retention, as with IBM’s Corporate Service Corps (as I examined in my January 23 blog and accompanying report), which deploys teams of high-potential employees on 30-day projects to help emerging countries address some of their most pressing societal needs.

Porter and Kramer, in fact, go further, much further. Not only do they view Shared Value Creation as the next evolution of CSR and CP, they also view it as the next evolution of capitalism—a more sophisticated form of capitalism that “arises not out of charity but of a deeper understanding of competition and economic value creation.” It is a form of “self-interested behavior” that creates economic value to the company, by the very process of creating societal value. A form of behavior that will also help mend badly frayed corporate and capitalist reputations and facilitate a more productive relationship between business and governments.

This “Harvard School” view of Shared Value Creation appears diametrically opposed to the “Chicago School” view in which Milton Friedman famously equated the spending of shareholders’ money for any purpose other than to advance the interests of the business as a form of “theft.”

Perhaps, however, these views are not as philosophically opposed as they may appear. After all, even Friedman was not opposed to all corporate giving. He admitted that corporate philanthropy could be justified if it served a business objective, such as increasing customer loyalty, improving employee teamwork and motivation or strengthening the marketing of a company’s brand.

But whichever side of the supposed philosophical divide on which one may fall, the issue is becoming increasingly moot. A rapidly growing number of very large, and very influential corporations (including virtually all of the largest technology companies) have instituted large CSR and CP programs and most have conceived and are managing these programs in way that is intended to create shared value. And this does not include the hundreds of small companies that have built their entire business models around addressing societal needs or the growing number of social entrepreneurs who are creating hybrid organizations that blur the line between for-profit and non-profit organizations.

In other words, regardless of whether you consider social value creation to be a new generation of capitalism, or just a new generation of corporate social responsibility, one thing is clear. More and more companies—and especially technology companies—are becoming convinced that they can, do quote another well-known economic philosopher, Benjamin Franklin, “do well by doing good.”

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, IT Industry Role in Education | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

IBM Corporate Service Corps: Integrating Business Objectives and CSR

Sunday, January 23rd, 2011

This is a summary of my January 2011 report “IBM Corporate Service Corps: Integrating Business Objectives and CSR”. For more information on this report or to purchase it for $995, click here.

IBM has one of the strongest talent development programs and one of the strongest corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs in the technology industry. What do you get when you combine them? IBM’s Corporate Service Corps (CSC)—a great example of how companies can do well by doing good (see my May 2010 report for a view of another IBM initiative, this one or integrating its university CSR and internal talent development initiatives.)

IBM’s Corporate Service Corps is a leadership development program, inspired by the U.S. Peace Corps. It is intended to put IBM’s most valuable resource—its people—in places that can most benefit from their expertise, and provide these employees with experiences from which they can gain broad leadership and cross-cultural experience. It provides select, high-potential employees with intense experience in working with global teams on short-duration, high-intensity projects in emerging countries. It is also a big expansion of IBM’s CSR efforts that turns social volunteerism into a life learning experience.

CSC Objectives

The program, which was launched in 2008, deploys small, 8-12-person multi-disciplinary teams to provide pro bono consulting—helping emerging country government, nonprofit and non-governmental organizations develop specific plans for addressing some of their most pressing societal needs. These can range from upgrading a government agency’s IT environment and processes, to developing a supply-chain management process for getting agricultural products to market, to improving the quality of a community’s public water supply. While each project is different, each is intended to result in practical blueprints for solving problems that are limiting a country or a community’s growth and their peoples’ ability to contribute to that growth.

Although CSC is absolutely intended to deliver broad societal benefits to emerging countries, it is first and foremost a corporate leadership development program. Its goal, however, is not so much to teach specific business skills as it is to instill the qualities individuals require to become leaders in a globally integrated business. Participants are given deep, intensive exposure to emerging markets and diverse cultures and experience in forming and working in multi-cultural, multi-disciplinary teams. They are expected to return with improved cultural literacy, better appreciation for the strengths and limitations of different cultures and work styles, and especially greater adaptability and global teaming skills.

Although the program entails a lot of additional work (30-day in-country assignments plus extensive preparation and post-return requirements) in addition to the employee’s day job, participation is seen as both a privilege and a reward. It is a validation of one’s accomplishments in the company and as a steppingstone to advancement within the company. This makes the program extremely popular and selective—attracting about 10,000 applicants for the first 400 positions.

CSC Results

Although there is certainly plenty of anecdotal evidence to validate the program. IBM, being IBM, requires more formal evidence that its goals are being met. Harvard Business School assistant professor Christopher Marquis designed and conducted a formal survey of participants and recipients and evaluated the results as part of a case study on the program. His findings: CSC is “effective and executing on its goals and mission” (of providing a unique—and highly scalable and cost-effective—leadership development experience, societal benefits to emerging countries and improving employee’s perception of and commitment to IBM). IBM claims the program also delivers some additional side benefits, as in improving IBM’s brand in new and emerging markets and even in creating some new sales opportunities for the company.

In some ways, there is little that is really new in CSC. It combines two relatively common corporate practices—the use of overseas postings as an executive development tool, and encouraging and funding employees to perform volunteer work. The big difference is that IBM has integrated them into a fundamentally new form that delivers these experiences to far more executive candidates than would be previously possible, and does it in a cost-effective way that delivers additional benefits to the company.

CSC Futures

IBM will absolutely continue, and modestly extend the program. Its ultimate value, however, is likely to transcend IBM. Some of IBM’s customers, including Novartis, Federal Express and Dow Corning are already learning from and have begun to implement similar programs. Meanwhile, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding with IBM to create the Alliance for International Corporate Volunteerism (ICV). The alliance will expand upon the CSC model to facilitate participation by many other companies and create corporate responsibility networks that integrate activities of corporations, governments, international organizations, foundations and other participants. USAID will also serve as a delivery coordinator for some of these projects, thereby increasing the chances that CSC’s consulting recommendations will deliver their intended value.

Posted in Corporate Social Responsibility, IBM, IT Industry Role in Education, IT Industry Trends, Skills Requirements, Workforce Trends | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Accenture Contributes Its Professional Development Skills to Non-Employees

Sunday, October 3rd, 2010

Accenture has always considered professional development to be one of its core competencies. It recruits tens of thousands of new employees each year, puts them through intense training programs and follows up with ongoing, career-spanning, personalized professional development and mentoring regimes. In 2009 alone, it dedicated nearly $800 million to these efforts.

The company is now extending its commitment to and skills in training and professional development beyond the walls of its own company to thousands of people—250,000 by 2015 to be exact—who do not, and probably never will work for Accenture. Its newly announced Skills to Succeed initiative is intended to help disadvantaged people from all around the world to develop the skills they will require to get good jobs or to start and build their own businesses (and thereby create jobs for themselves and others).

Accenture, both itself and through its foundations, is funding this initiative through a commitment of more than $100 million in cash, in-kind donations and employee time, over a three-year period. It considers this effort to be so important that it has developed a global operating model to align all aspects of the company and foundations’ corporate citizenship efforts around Skills to Succeed. In fact, it has established a goal that 80% of all the company’s corporate citizenship activities will be aligned around this initiative by the end of 2010.

However, while Accenture itself manages and delivers training to its own employees, Skills to Succeed training will be delivered almost exclusively through independent non-profit partners that have proven skills in and share Accenture’s commitment to skills training, and that can “drive change and achieve scale” across multiple countries and continents.

Building the Skills to Succeed Initiative

Accenture launched the first stages of this program in mid-2009, with a $48.3 million contribution—primarily of in-kind skills (such as consulting, hardware, software and office space), secondarily cash and, to a small extent, pro bono contributions of employees’ time (as in teaching, mentoring and so forth). It aligned its efforts around three primary objectives:

  • Employment Building, which is the initiative’s primary focus and is intended to train and prepare disadvantaged people for secure jobs that pay well above local average salaries. It begins by providing training in skills required for these jobs to employment-ready individuals (generally, from high-school juniors and community college students to unemployed workers who are looking to be retrained for new jobs and industries). While much of this training focuses on IT skills (an area in which many NGOs have current programs and skills), Accenture plans to address many types of skills that are “at the intersection of business and technology”. These may include IT operations, programming, engineering drafting and accounting/finance. The program also helps prepare these trainees for actual jobs (such as by placing them in part-time jobs or internships while they are still in school) and actually capture new jobs (as by helping them develop resumes, plan job-search campaigns and secure and prepare for interviews).
  • Business Building, which is intended to help entrepreneurs create new employment opportunities such as by helping them strengthen their leadership skills, develop business plans and strengthen capabilities including financial operations, hiring and customer service; and
  • Market Building, in which Accenture helps governments, NGOs and companies build access to markets where current market infrastructures are not sufficient. Examples include a partnership with the U.S. Agency for International Development to improve rural farmers’ access to information on agricultural and marketing practices.

One of the first and largest efforts was in Brazil, where Accenture partnered with two local agencies (Rede Cidada and the Committee for the Democratization of Information) to establish Conexão (the local membership organization of Youth Business International), which provides free technology training to unemployed people and free consulting to small, promising entrepreneurs. The program was a huge success, training 13,500 young people (3,500 of whom have already been hired) and supporting 124 entrepreneurs.

This success led to more than 80 additional programs so far, with more than 15 NGO partners in both developed and developing countries. Examples include:

  • United States, where Accenture is working with Genesys Works to train inner-city high school students in skills including IT, engineering drafting and accounting and is placing them in part-time jobs during their senior years. Accenture executives also teach business preparedness skills to students in community colleges;
  • United Kingdom, with Youth Business International, to help disadvantaged young people find and get appropriate educations or occupational training and mentor them on skills required to become successful entrepreneurs;
  • India, with the Dr. Reddy’s Foundation, to train disadvantaged young people in business process outsourcing and technology skills;
  • Philippines and Cambodia, partnering with Passerelles Numériques to help underprivileged students build the skills they need to obtain IT jobs; and
  • Several countries in Africa, where it is working with Enablis to build the skills of young entrepreneurs.

Accenture’s Objectives and Methods

The concept for Skills to Succeed was born about 18 months ago during a full-scale assessment of the company’s corporate philanthropy efforts. It was looking for a single unifying effort that addressed a critical, global societal need; that reflected the company’s values, culture and character; and in which Accenture had skills that would enable it to contribute unique skills and expertise, in addition to money.

Its initial efforts in partnering and launching the program, combined with the successes it achieved and the lessons it learned, validated its commitment to the initiative and prompted it to set an ambitious goal—that of training and preparing 250,000 disadvantaged people (anyone from high school juniors to older people who need retraining for or who hope to create their own sustainable, well-paying jobs). Although Accenture is open to all types of NGO partnerships and skills training programs, it assesses each opportunity in terms of its ability to:

  1. Cost-efficiently achieve significant, sustainable, demonstrable and measurable results;
  2. Harness the energies of Accenture and the enthusiasm of its people; and
  3. Be scaled to train large numbers of people and leveraged across multiple states and countries.

But while Accenture is open to examining many different types of programs and partnerships, one thing is not negotiable—its objective. Accenture and its executive committee are fully committed to Skills to Succeed. The company is wrapping virtually all of its corporate philanthropy programs and contributions into this program and is committing all levels of Accenture employees to actively contribute to these efforts. It is also beginning to engage customers and partners in this program, as by working with them to place interns and program graduates.

But for all of Accenture’s commitments and efforts, the company understands that that achieving its 250,000-person objective within five years is a big challenge. It is committed to investing $100 million or more of its resources and the capabilities of its people to the program and is rapidly scaling its efforts. It has, for example, already added 80 new initiatives and is actively evaluating others. The means of accomplishing its goals are flexible. The objective, of preparing a quarter of a million people for rewarding jobs, is not.

Posted in 21st Century Careers, Accenture, Community/Other Colleges, Corporate Social Responsibility, Education System and Institutions, IT Company Strategies, IT Industry and Companies, IT Industry Role in Education, IT Industry's Role, Skills Requirements, STEM Careers | 2 Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Funding the Community College Solution

Sunday, September 19th, 2010

Okay, perhaps use of the term “Solution” is a vast exaggeration. But two things are clear. First, as described in my August 8 blog, The Community College Contribution, community colleges play a vital, probably irreplaceable role in our society and our communities. They give millions of people, particularly lower-income minorities and immigrants, unprecedented opportunities to climb the socio-economic ladder and provide many of the office workers required to man administrative and supervisory ranks, the health-care workers required to ensure broad and economical delivery and the manufacturing workers needed to manage today’s computer-controlled processes.

Second, as I discussed in my August 22 blog, The Community College Crisis, this system is in a state of crisis. Many of these challenges are attributable to the tremendous expectations we have of the system and burdens we place on it to address the limitations of the country’s secondary education system. These pressures are being exacerbated by the Great Recession and especially by the huge cutbacks in government funding of these schools.

The county, as President Obama explained in July 2009, has no choice. The community college has suffered through “decades of federal neglect” where “community colleges are treated like an afterthought—if they’re thought of at all.” We MUST find a way of addressing these challenges—and of paying for them.

Better Colleges Require More Money

The bad news is that nobody really knows how to fix our community college system. The good news is, there is no shortage of ideas. Recommendations as to how to address these challenges and help community colleges deliver on their true potential come from a range of sources and cover virtually every aspect of these institutions’ missions.

Some, such as the American Association of Community Colleges and especially the Community College Research Center, focus exclusively on and provide detailed research on all aspects of the colleges’ missions. Others, including the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institution and the Kaufman Foundation address a broad range of policy-based issues, but each have designated education research focuses.

These, along with a wide range of other research organizations, universities, government bodies and NGOs have published numerous studies with specific recommendations for helping community colleges improve governance and better address one or more of their five core missions:

  1. Transfer Education, to educate students who plan to transfer to a four-year institution to pursue a BS/BA degree;
  2. Career Education, to prepare Associate Degree graduates to directly enter the workforce;
  3. Developmental Education, to provide remedial education for high school graduates who are not academically ready to enroll in college-level courses;
  4. Industry Training, which is contracted for by companies to provide training for specific jobs; and, to a lesser extent
  5. Continuing Education, which typically consists of non-credit courses for personal development and interest.

Although recommendations differ for each of these areas, there tend to be common treads across virtually all. Many recommendations, for example, entail some combination of:

  • Better and more systematically integrating academic and technical curricula in conjunction with apprenticeship programs that provide real world experience (as pioneered by so-called “career academies”;
  • Increasing and improving counseling programs to improve career planning and help students select courses that are most appropriate for their goals. (This, however, assumes that classes are available, which is becoming increasingly rare.)
  • Greatly expanding the use of IT tools to improve pedagogy and learning outcomes, engage students through multimedia and educational games, facilitate distance learning and give students much greater flexibility in when and where they learn;
  • Creating specific goals and success metrics and continually measuring progress toward achieving these goals; and
  • Increasing funding and increasingly allocating these funds on the basis of success in achieving and making progress toward defined, measurable objectives.

Money is becoming increasingly problematic. As discussed in my last blog, The Community College Crisis, state and local governments—which typically account for about 60% of community college funding—are slashing public school funding and contributions (which account for less than 5%) are also generally falling. This leaves three funding sources.

  1. Tuition. While rising, tuition account for only 20% of school budgets. Moreover, increases are constrained by the need to keep community colleges accessible to lower income students;
  2. Business funding of specialized courses. Given that business contracts currently account for less than 10% of community college revenues, it will be difficult to grow contracts fast enough to make a meaningful dent in funding shortfalls. Even so, private sector partnerships can yield an additional, even greater benefit, as by allowing colleges to continually track emerging business needs and adapt their programs to ahead of these needs; and
  3. The federal government. The federal government currently accounts for only 10% of community college funding and provides  less money per student than it gives to public four-year schools and in some cases, even for-profit colleges. Surprisingly, however, the feds are stepping up to the plate.

With a Little Help from Government Friends

There is no question that the federal government has short-changed the nation’s community colleges over the last several decades. For example, it allocates only 10% of its total post-secondary education funding budget to community colleges. This is despite the fact that these schools enroll 35% of all post-secondary students. Moreover, since many of these funds are based primarily on enrollment, without regard to whether their students earn degrees or get good jobs, this funding often skews community colleges’ incentives toward inputs and processes, rather than outcomes, like student success. A February 2009 Brookings study called on the federal government to address these deficiencies by instituting four primary reforms:

  1. Institute a new focus on national goals guided by an accountability system that tracks and reports outcomes, such as completion of a minimum number of credits, earning a degree, and landing a good-paying job;
  2. Double federal funding from $6 billion to $12 billion (from about 20% to 30% of their total budgets) to help community colleges achieve these goals and fund much needed upgrades to their infrastructure, technology, and faculties.
  3. Reformulate the basis on which federal funds are awarded so that, over time, the majority of funds will be based not on the basis of enrollment, but on the colleges’ performance on the above goals; and
  4. Stimulate greater innovation in community college policies and practices to enhance educational quality.

The federal government seems to have gotten the message. In July 2009, President Obama highlighted his commitment to addressing these needs by announcing his Community College Initiative. The $12 billion plan is intended to improve educational facilities, increase and improve the utilization of technology and boost graduation rates—producing 5 million more community college grads by 2020. This is big money, considering that the feds have traditionally provided community colleges with only $2 billion in direct support per year—about one-tenth what it spends on public four-year schools.

Although the plan will eliminate the role (and an estimated $9 billion in costs) of private banks in managing the federal student loan program, it will dramatically increase the role of the private sector in other ways, as by encouraging them to help colleges improve remedial-education and counseling programs, and develop online curricula. The proposal would also increase funding of, reduce barriers to qualifying for and increase student access to Pell grants. Congress, meanwhile, is considering legislation that could pump an additional $500 million into the creation of open, online courses.

Moreover, as I mention in my previous blog, community colleges are also likely to benefit from new Department of Education rules that will free up additional aid dollars by cutting aid to a number of for-profit schools.

The community college crisis is also attracting attention and help from other sources. Although charitable contributions are generally falling along with the economy, a growing number of charitable foundations recognize and are seeking to at least partially address community college shortfalls. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, in particular, has pledged up to $110 million (of its $3 billion overall education fund) to community colleges and has recently earmarked $12.9 million to organizations that that are having success in improving community college graduation rates, developing tools to facilitate Web 2.0-based faculty collaboration and creating new IT-based learning tools. And this is in addition to the Foundation’s participation in a twelve-foundation group that has committed $500 million to improving learning outcomes—largely through the use of IT-based tools—across all types of educational institutions. Hopefully, such investments, combined with foundations’ growing focus on quantifiable results, will impose some of the discipline that community colleges will need to succeed in a world that will be characterized by tighter and tighter budgets.

Posted in Community/Other Colleges, Creating the 21st Century Workforce, Economic and Political Forces, Economic Forces, Education System and Institutions, IT Industry and Companies, IT Industry Role in Education, IT Industry's Role, Political Forces, Societal Forces | 1 Response »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

IBM’s Plan to Transform University IT Education And Spur Student Enthusiasm in the Process—Summary

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

This week’s blog is an overview of the findings of my new report, “IBM’s Plan to Transform University IT Education: And Spur Student Enthusiasm in the Process” in which I examine how IBM’s university alliances have evolved to emphasize education in areas that transcend IT skills, and the long-term benefits that IBM is likely to derive from this approach.

IBM started its Academic Initiative in the 1950s when it helped universities create Information Science programs. It extended this program around specific IT and engineering skills and then, in 2003 added a Service Science, Management and Engineering (SSME) initiative.

This SSME initiative went way beyond the university efforts of IBM—as well as most other vendors—that traditionally focused on “hard” science and technology skills, such as around programming, database design, electrical engineering and physics. SSME, in contrast, emphasizes the needs for universities to encourage multi-disciplinary education and the need to develop T-shaped skills, which combine deep skills in one or more fields, plus a high-level understanding across many others. IBM worked with universities to help professors expand the focus of their own courses and departmental curricula and, most importantly, to coordinate curricula across multiple schools within a university.

It, for example, encouraged and helped schools refocus engineering education around real-world problems and train engineers to work in multi-disciplinary teams. It also challenged business schools to evolve their traditional focus on management of manufacturing companies (which now accounts for less than 20% of developed-country economies) to developing a similarly rigorous management science around services (which already account for about 60%). Some 40 universities have are going further, creating truly integrated curricula that cross traditionally sacrosanct boundaries—integrating courses across schools including management, information science, engineering and social science. A few have even begun offering new cross-school degree programs around SSME-related themes.

Smarter Planet—Using SSME to Change the World

IBM’s huge, corporate-wide Smarter Planet initiative is, in many ways, the application of SSME to critical, real-world problems. SSME, after all, is an effort to create a science around decomposing and recomposing service-based processes, optimizing service supply chains and value chains and creating interdisciplinary research centers to design and optimize complex “service systems”—combinations of people, organizational networks and technologies that are aligned around a specific objective, such as designing and managing more livable cities, more effective healthcare systems and more efficient energy networks.

This effectively transforms SSME from an academic discipline into an instrument for addressing societal needs. It provides universities with the tools required to create education tracks and, eventually, degree programs around social goals—thereby attracting and making it easier for students who want to “change the world”. Moreover, IBM’s efforts to help shape educational curricula across Smarter Planet initiatives now transcends traditional information science, engineering and business schools to reach into areas including mathematics, architecture, healthcare management, public service, urban studies, and others.

Although such programs may not attract those students who are driven to become hedge fund managers or musicians, they do have the potential of attracting and providing “employment-ready” educations for millions of other students with similarly strong drives in other fields.

Engineering a Path to an IBM Job

Virtually all corporate university education programs share a common goal—to facilitate the education of students with the skills and perspective required to address the talent needs of the sponsor corporation, its customers and its partners. It’s easy to see the direct benefit that IBM can gain from programs that teach System z mainframe skills, that Intel can gain from multi-core architecture design programs or that Wal-Mart can derive from the University of Arkansas’ supply-chain optimization program.

But what benefits will IBM gain from encouraging universities to launch broad, non-vendor specific programs like SSME, healthcare management and transportation system design? The company’s logo isn’t on or necessarily associated with these programs, nor is IBM the first place most newly-minted graduates would look for a job to solve world hunger—unless, perhaps, you know about IBM’s Smarter Food program and its projects to increase agricultural yields, improve sustainability, reduce waste through the optimization of supply chains and improve food inspection processes.

That’s where some of IBM’s multiple university outreach programs fit in. The company has 4,000 University Ambassadors, typically IBM domain experts, who volunteer to work with universities to engage with faculty members, develop classes around real-world problems, deliver guest lectures, participate in seminars and otherwise engage with professors and students. The company also provides education tools, such as its INNOV8 Business Process Modeling (BPM) simulation game and is adapting many of its other courses to new learning methods, as through support of community portals and wikis, discussion forums, blogs, and Facebook and Twitter communities.

It also has an active university research program through which it funds professors and graduate students to conduct specialized research and all types of fellowship and internship programs in which it works with professors to identify high-potential students. It also partners with universities on IBM’s annual Battle of the Brains competition, the most recent of which attracted more than 28,000 students from 2,000 universities worldwide. These competitions engage interdisciplinary teams to tackle real world problems. The theme of these competitions? Would you guess they are typically aligned around one of IBM’s 21 (and growing) Smarter Planet themes?

IBM will certainly not attract or hire all of the graduates from SSME and Smarter Planet-theme programs. Nor does it want to. Although it hopes, and is positioning itself to identify and recruit some of the most talented graduates, its ultimate objective is to seed the world—its businesses, governments, NGOs and universities—with people who think about the world’s needs (and solutions) in much the same way that IBM does, who have been touched by IBM Ambassadors and programs, who understand IBM products, and who recognize that IBM is dedicated to addressing the same types of needs as are they.

This all leaves me with two questions. When will other corporations recognize the long-term payoffs of this broader approach to partnering with universities? And, how will they reach professors and students in the myriad fields that will be increasingly reshaped and redefined by IT?

Posted in 21st Century Careers, Business Trends, Corporate Social Responsibility, Creating the 21st Century Workforce, Education System and Institutions, Globalization, Immigration and Offshoring, IBM, IT Company Strategies, IT Industry and Companies, IT Industry Role in Education, Job and Career Opportunities, Skills Requirements, STEM Careers, Technology's Impact on Job Skills, Universities and Grad Schools, Workforce Trends | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Older Entries