Academia specializes in reasonings: inductive, deductive, statistical, practical, intuitive, mathematical, experiential, etc. They try to make their students better thinkers and decision-makers. They may not be making their students experts in their fields—but aim to give them skills to perform better in the real world.

In the context of capitalization on the research output and the efforts of the academia it is important to develop a mature organizational field which can exploit the capabilities of all the stakeholders in the organizational field where the connectivity between who create the knowledge, who uses it and who translates the abstract knowledge. In this backdrop the role of the consultants (gurus), the researchers, the academics and the practitioners is really important.

Academia is by its very nature an artificial and theoretical space for students to learn important skills in a safe and nurturing environment. Since the real world is rarely safe and nurturing, I suspect there will always be a disconnect between an academic exercise and an authentic, and therefore risky one.

One might say that the difference between an academic exercise and a real world exercise is that in the real world exercise actual work is accomplished.

Dear Greg L Alston

Well-said

madan

More BAME female disabled and LGBTQ in senior positions, if you can see it you know you can be it #rolemodels #diversity

opportunity for part time careers

support for maternity leave

career breaks

older workers joining workforce after retirment from other careers

value teaching as equal to research and income generation

in other words, be a real world organisations and employer

Academia relating to the real world can take a relative perspective. The mutation in academic and the real world today is dynamic. Only countries and economic environment that recognises such changes will work to take advantage of the uniqueness. However, politics has also affected the usefulness or congruency. It is more pronounced in politically unstable environment. Despite the mismatch by environmental variables, one can not underestimate the relevance and connectivity between academia and the real world. It is a catalyst of innovation and creativity.

@Melanie .. what is BAME? 🙂🙄🙂

There is a big difference indeed. The conceptual/theoretical knowledge,no doubt, is very essential, but the real world,real problems cannot be tackled by discussing Case Studies in the class. There are a number of factors due to which real business world and real business issues will remain unique,and we just cant standardize their solution. Moreover, in the current dynamic environment, still we are discussing certain topics at Undergraduate level,which have become obsolete.

Melanie Jones I think academia, as the rest of society should be more inclusive but I also don't see any obstacle for a gay woman for example to apply for the position of professor. I believe the best person for the position should get it. I believe in equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome. We already tried that one and it didn't end well at all...that ism have a name...:-)

Our sexuality is just a small part of what constitutes an individual. For some people I noticed it have become an issue of self essensialisation but that is on the individual level. However of we start ( It is already going on in the social sciences for example where the left wing narrative is totally dominating) politicising academia it will most definitely put people off.

I took a summer course in gender studies as a young student, I was curious about the subject but the lecturer turned out to be an activist and she was totally biased. She said things about men that would render any man who uttered the same things about women jobless and even female students complained to the faculty. I think we should leave our political views, our sexlife and other personal things out of the classrooms. The students are there to learn about a subject and higher education is also a place where the students should learn how to be independent and critical thinkers...so if a person is biased ( We all are!) and shows it in the classroom he or she or what ever pronoun the person choses will not be a very good teacher. Im a right wing conservative ( Not alt right and not pro Trump) but in the classroom my personal views are totally irrelevant..I can write it here but in a classroom setting my views or sexual preferences are not relevant in any way, shape or form.. I like tall women with big feet but pls dont tell any one ;-)

.Im not a fan of Marx but if I was to teach sociology or economic history I will tell the students about Marx and his theories to the best of my ability and the same goes for other perspectives. I believe academia should be inclusive but not political or rather politicised because then academia fully loses its credibility and for some students it can be a distraction or even upsetting to hear about Trans, gay, Homo, Straight etc because in my experience if you are the activist type you often are an activist in the classroom or lecture hall and that is in my view totally unacceptable...but that is just my most humble view.

Best wishes Henrik

ps..I know that there is something called discrimination but that is wrong and I think we all can agree on that one ..

BAME Black and Minority Ethnic. Widely used term in UK. Look at your colleagues, are they diverse?

the initial question was how to make Academe more attractive. the pool of potential applicants increases as diversity is seen. No women on senior staff may be interpreted as not a job for women (DOI my background is the study of how people make career and life choices)

I believe very institution should be carrying out an annual equality audit of the characteristics of their staff, gender age, ethnicity, orientation. and having this annual report discussed across the organisation. it is only by looking at ourselves that we can see where changes need to be made. those inside the tent are often inclined to think there is no problem. The UK made changes following the introduction of the Athena Swan Charter, all universities in UK encouraged to benchmark. Once data began to emerge on gender of senior academic staff, the Chief Medical Officer directed that research funding flowed to those universities with at least a silver award. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena_SWAN

Dear Melanie Jones I used to live in the UK also but I never heard that terms, but I guess it also depend in which context you socialise. I have experienced racism, aimed ad me and a colleague but for me to be honest. I only worked there part time and if people are rude to me I just go somewhere else, plain and simple. Its not like I lack offers! So I think it is an issue about victimhood. As soon as you identify your self as a victim your start looking for some one to blame and when you find that person or object you seek justification for( and you will find it! ) hurting some one else. I flat out told that university ( I will not say which because Im not a victim) that I will NEVER teach there again. I refuse to be a victim and if some one is rude..well good for them! People have written some really rude things here on RG and I just recommend their "Answer" and start with dear Sir or Madam and that's it..when they go low we go high, some one once said. At all of the universities I have been affiliated with there have been women in the senior staff, sometimes even an overweight of women, and as I said I believe in the opportunity of opportunity and not in equality of outcome. But yes in some countries and in some institutions there are issues, I have been on the receiving end but as I said I refuse to be a victim. I just move on. I even got offers to teach etc via RG so if some one doesn't like me because Im a foreigner or for what ever reason I really don't care. I just tend to hold those people to a slightly lesser regard. As Morgan Freeman said about blacks blaming failure on race, he said it is just a poor excuse. For the most part I agree with him. Also why would you even like to work for an institution who looks down on you because of your gender or race? Why not go work for a university who truly appreciates you. I also dont believe in the Post modernist and neo marxist idea of group hierarchy and that your group is involved in some struggle against another group, we are all members of a variety of groups with sometimes opposing agendas and sometimes we make the choice NOT to belong to a group. I made that choice on numerous occasions and so far it served me well. If you feel truly discriminated against for what ever reason Im sad to hear but instead of seeking victimhood, try to be the best person YOU can ever be and try to reach the sky, not by eliminating the competition in form of men or what ever. If you are good people will want you, trust me and if some one is unfair to you. Go somewhere else..I did..I promise you will like it much better! Best wishes and say hi to Britain from me. I miss it from time time :-) Henrik

Sanjeev Bansal I fully agree with you. Some things that are in the curriculum at least in my area is not relevant any more. We have the connection blockchain and supply chain that is hardly mentioned in most of the student literature...just an example. We teach Kotler despite that we know that most SMEs (Small and medium sized firms) Can or will not use causal logic ( ends driven decision making logic) which means that students already from the start have a wrong impression of how businesses are operated. I have been a businessman and consultant for 20 years..no more..Im getting old :-) And the firms who uses that kind of logic and programmes are usually larger firms. Still students when they graduate believe that companies are governed in that way. Perhaps one of the problems with academia is that most professors and lecturers never left academia, or have very little or no experience in running a business. I think in one way if you do research it can be a good thing not to have been exposed to the real world..in one respect at least but if you are to teach... how can you teach something you have no experience of. Business is kind of a special area and I think there are more areas like that where I at least think you must have a wast experience from the "real world" in order to be a good lecturer. The problem however is that academia is not attractive for business people, mostly because of low salaries and lack of challenge... I would never ever ever work full time at a university. I would last 1 year and then go back to business.. I think academia, I can do it part time or perhaps when I handed over ( Hopefully) the businesses to my children. Then I think I would consider it but as of now...Im 43..no way! Sadly I think most business people reason like me... Most of us would not even think about teaching in the first place so something is clearly wrong with me? :-) My wife say so at least... and she is always right so who am I to argue with that :-)

Henrik G.S. Arvidsson Dear Sir,I have joined teaching in a University in India a few years back,earlier I had worked in a Govt owned telecom company. Being an accounting professional(Qualified Chartered Accountant and Qualified Management Accountant),I often feel that ABCD of Accounting (a-Artificial Intelligence,Block Chain,Cloud Computing, Data Analytics) have really revolutionized the accounting and auditing world. But these are not covered in the curriculum,to the extent,these are needed. Regarding the experience of "Real World", not much experience is there,but still I think I have had the exposure what is happening in the industry, and where are the skill gaps.

Anyways,thanks for initiating a wonderful discussion.

Dear Sanjeev, but you been in the real world so you have an understanding how it works... that is the main thing. And as you stated you spotted the problematic areas...but lets imagine you did not join the telecom firm... would you then view your teaching in a different light? I think your exposure to the industry gave you a greater understanding and it also probably made you a better lecturer :-). ? Best wishes Henrik

Henrik, you have raised some genuine issues that people talk about regarding whether there is any linkage between academe and what is generally referred to in such discussions as 'the real world'. There is a link between the two and such linkage includes the fact that academe is part of reality and vice versa. Although it is also alleged that academe is mainly theory-laden, I am reminded by the famous saying from Lewin that 'there is nothing as practical as good theory'. Hence theory informs practice as academics also use practice to develop new theories and models. Interesting area...

Dear Mr. Arvidsson:

My opinion is that academia is nothing less than the sum of important ideas that work. That is to say, nobody teaches that the world is flat (although it was believed once), in businesses nobody teaches that planning is not useful, although at the beginning of the XX century not many did it. So, we teach our pupils to use the tools history has shown that work.

That being said, why so many people dispise theory?. Well, this is my opinion, but I understand there are two answers. The bad one, learning theory is not easy, it takes a lot of work. The other one, useful in underdeveloped countries, sometimes business theories work perfectly in one country, but not in others. For instance, business schools teach us to thing strategically and plan for years to come, that doesn´t work in an underdevelopped economy, where inflation makes you worry about tomorrow, not about next year.

And last, there are moments in history when the knowledge changes (Kuhn´s theory) and that is happening. We are living one huge revolution. So, many of the ideas we have been teaching may be dying and that helps think that academy doesn´t work. It has no sense, perhaps we will have to emphasize other subjects, but all the knowledge accumulated in the past will still be helpful, that has always been the case and that won´t change.

Best regards

Gustavo Concari

Dear Henrik,

I have spent the past 20 years in academia (at the college level, preparing students for healthcare professions) and have recently returned to the healthcare field. I have both a pragmatic and scholarly understanding of this issue you raise and I have been thinking about it and experimenting for quite some time.

Simply put, this issue can be reduced to a gap between knowing and doing or between declarative and procedural knowledge. To bridge this gap, I acknowledge that theories are generalized perspectives (knowing) from practice (doing). With theories it is important to know their perspectives, applications, limitations, etc. With practice, it is important to navigate the context - the people, the system, the culture, etc. Cognitive learning theories typically support the former activity while sociocultural learning theories (and others) can support the latter. Therefore, aligning teaching and learning strategies with those that are in use in practice is one step to bridging the gap.

What I'm also witnessing, now that I'm back in practice, is that we overly emphasize knowledge competencies and do not attend to the competencies that allow for success in the workplace - competencies such as adaptability, problem-solving in the moment, self-directed learning, politics, etc.

From a systems perspective, we are very good at graduating people who know how to do school and that was the point of academia - to train people to become academics. Faculty are typically people who work in academia and when we bring on faculty from industry, they often become subsumed into the academic system due to the structure of course outlines, classrooms, PPT, grading, etc.

I could continue on with this conversation, but I'll point you to Henry Mintzberg's work on management theory - he illustrates very well how academia could change to meet the needs of management education. I also recommend Jose Antonio Bowen's book Teaching Naked illustrates how to change one's teaching to better match the world we live in and Lave & Wenger's classic - Situated Learning.

Gustavo. I agree!

Dear Marcia Docherty It seems we have thought about similar issues. I think you are right, just look at the learning triangle. Also if you can not connect theory to some sort of reality the education sort of loses its value. That also raises the issue of a previous discussion I started regarding the need for lecturers to have practical experience in the field where they are teaching.

I think my business experience makes it a lot easier for me to teach and to illustrate certain problems and to prepare the students for their future working life. Since you also have practical experience I would guess you feel the same? that your experience add some value to what you do? Mintzberg is an interesting man. I studied his work to a great extent. Im very much interested in psychology so I think that is also something that influences my teaching.

I agree that academia must have a higher degree of people from the industry so to speak. In my field ( Business) it is difficult because of two reasons. First the salaries in academia is so much lower than in "the real world" and 2 the opportunities and challenges are just not there. I prefer to work for my self and not to fold in to a structure... as I think most ppl who run their own businesses feel in one way or the other, at least if you like what you do. I love teaching but I can't see my self teaching full time even if it is fun. You are right that the structures favours a certain type of people and perhaps the system should also be more inclusive for those with business or other experience from their own area..it will for sure enhance the students learning and retention and I think in the end the students will also be better prepared for what ever is waiting for them, regardless if it is a board room of a firm or the corridors of an ER in the Bronx.

My research area ( When Im not writing newspaper articles) is actually a mix of international business and psychology...I learned all the mind tricks and means of persuasion and I even used my wife as a guinea Pig with results that so far doesn't encourage me to much since she learned to identify them :-) So sometimes theory just doesn't work in reality... not when it comes to women any way...:-)

Best wishes Henrik

There are a number of reasons why PhD academe does not relate to the real world. One is the approach that the degree is specifically designed for teaching and filling gaps in knowledge. DBA's (which is my current goal) are examples of applied degrees that seek to solve real world business issues. Literature documents (and I will look for it if requested) that if you go to a business exec and talk about Pearson coefficients and quantitative results, they will think you are speaking Chinese. What you really need is a problem solving approach that they can understand.

As far as Greg Alston's answer which posited that the real world does not provide the security that academe does, that depends on who you are talking about. That is more true of private industry, especially now with COVID. Public sector does provide security, ao I agree to disagree with that. However, what neither provides is collaboration, unless you land a job in the real world that does that-and this is a rarity. I agree with Sanjeev btw.

I was teaching NP students but the pay was so low for the time and energy spent, I had to quit. I still work in the field of psychiatry and have for 30 years, it was real world training through internships and I oversaw their work.

Re degrees, my PhD was a waste of time and money. Administration jobs in healthcare are hard to find unless you know the right people.

Thank you for the interesting post.

Kelly-I'm sorry that the PhD did nothing for you. I saw the handwriting on the wall, which is why I am going for a DBA, HR Specialization in my case.

All-let us get to the root causes of this issue-and one big one is academic politics. We can hypothesize, come up with theoretical frameworks, conceptual frameworks, grounded theory, and have conversations ad infinitum about this. But the bottom line is that it is a combination of who you know as well as what you know. Now there is an alignment between the academic and real worlds-except that in the real world who you know is valued above what you know. At least in academe, there is some of "what you know" left-because that is needed to teach students. But as competition gets tougher for jobs, which will take precedence? There is one hope, and it stems from a terrible outcome-that the economy will tank because of the upcoming COVID-SARS-2. That will get more students into the system-and then colleges will be forced to open up more jobs to handle that influx.

But as long as low wages are accepted by adjuncts, this situation will continue. Faculty will wind up with the financial short end of the stick. I speak particularly about Adjuncts, as tenured faculty, a vanishing breed, at least can make a decent living. But University administration uses the tenured excuse to deny adjuncts what they rightly deserve.

Further-as long as faculty and adjuncts give their blood, sweat, and tears to peer reviewed work that they are not paid for, and accept that as a given, we will forever be confined to an intellectual purgatory where we are taken advantage of by the publishers, which are a billion dollar business.

Now that, my colleagues, is the real world. A PhD might be worth more than the paper it is written on if they were paid appropriately for their work, and that means presentations as well, without having to pay registration fees and then see that ones work is only available to subscribers or attendees on sites like learntechlib.org.

I put this question to you-should this be allowed to continue?

Respectfully submitted.

"But [the Pythagoreans] are said to have objected to those who expose disciplines to sale; who open their souls like the gates of an inn to every man that approaches to them; and who, if they do not thus find buyers, diffuse themselves through cities, and, in short, hire gymnasia and require a reward from young men for those things which are without price." --Iamblichus (Life of Pythagoras)

Martin, that is fine for Pythagoreans-and after 9th grade, you never use a squared plus b squared equals c squared again unless you become a math teacher. We have to come to terms with the fact that we are worth the epistemology we provide in a manner which will help us to live better not only financially, but to a degree that people will then no longer say, "those that can do...and those that cannot, teach". Equity in pay is the first step in that direction.

Dear John Mendy I agree..it is an interesting area but also a sensitive one..:-) Best wishes Henrik

Dear Mr. Arvidsson,

The Academy is part of the real world; otherwise, it would be pure speculation.

The fundamental question is the form of expression: the language. But the case is, can complex things be expressed in ordinary language? In some mathematical proofs an Introduction is made by the author himself, which is may be useful for non-specialists. And perhaps between the academy and "the real world" (expression that appears in the question) there must be an intermediate space accessible to non-academics. The possibility of this space, which already exists partially, would have to be evaluated.

Dear Miquel. Sure academia is the real world.. I still have nightmares about some test in macro economics 😬 My question was more in the sense of.. is academic knowkedge always relevant or is it too abstract and not connected to reality to be used in the professional life of a normal student.. Im not talking about some one persuing a career in adademia but rather a future nurse, economist, engineer etc. I learned some good things at the university but also some theoretical things that simply doesnt work that way in real life.. like Kotler..I like the guy so dont missunderstsnd me but most firms are in reality not operated in the way universities teaches their students..I think in many ways academia makes it harder for people.. now people will kill me but I woukd be very reluctant to employ some one from a purely academic backhround in my consultancy business because from my experience ppl with a purely academic way of thinking doesnt work out..I tried it and every time clients were less than satisfied with those employees..Academia can teach you something but I also think it is a world of its own that doesnt fully overlap with reality... to make academia more relevsnt I think more teaching staff should be professionals with wast exoerience of working in their field.. outside academia.. and pls dont kill me now 😳😬🙂..I did not mean to disrespect anyone, just point out a problem that me and many others see. Best wishes Henrik

Henrik, you are correct, and it's a shame to say, but that is the basic disconnect between outside firms and academe. You said it all, and it is not disrepecting anybody except those who are in denial as to the facts.

Dear Thomas Hotz I try not to offend people but sometimes you need to see the truth..Academia is in deep trouble. I cant even imagine any of my business colleagues to teach... first salary is low and second they know that what they would teach would not be correct and they have to conform in to a structure that is not really accepting of new ideas.

This is why student still sit with version 56 of Marketing - Management...For me it was a complete chock to get out in to the "real" world...things was not exactly the way it was described in the literature...and that is an understatement..Unless academia can change it will no longer be relevant...I

will teach my children when it is time to go to university to be highly critical and explain to them that theories doesn't always describe reality nor are they always relevant unless you want to stay in academia and look at the way others are conducting their work. Academia is good at producing academics but terrible when it comes to producing students fit for a working life outside the walls of the university. I think the leadership in many faculties and universities should be replaced by those with knowledge in the field they study/teach...

One can be really good at writing academic articles but is it a skill needed in most professions? My guess is, not..maybe more hands on skills are better needed and a clearer understanding of reality. I think yes, if you want to educate future professors..nothing needs to change, NOTHING! but if you want to educate the students for a life outside the university, EVERYTHING must change...

I noticed that pure academics and those more like me, to be honest, we dont speak the same language and as long as the universities are dominated with those who never left and never leave academia. Then there is no place for people like me and you and in the end we either dont even think about teaching because in all honesty the salaries suck! And even if some one would agree to the salary they will for the most part dont stay for long since they will not feel at home, nor will they get promoted because management is dominated by those who never left and they rather promote one of their own. You will never see me as head of a faculty...it will never happen. Not that I'm very much interested in the position but even if I was they would never hire me because I dont speak their language, I dont fit in, Im to commercial, to focused on efficiency etc...

To hire me or some one like me ( I can only speak for my self) would be like unleashing an elephant in a China -shop..but in all honesty I think for the future of academia I think that is what universities should do.. A revolution now and then is refreshing...dont you think? I honestly think hands on knowledge that can be used in the REAL world and language skills like German, Spanish or French is more important for a UK student than knowing Kotler backwards and forward.. Now I can see my friend list cleanse it self as some one said... I think it was Clint Eastwood who said " Speak the truth and watch your facebook friend list cleanse it self" Lets see how many followers I lost by the end of the weekend :-) Best wishes Henrik.

Well, you haven't lost me. I had thirty years in the public sector before I retired, got my MPA while working in NYC. As to money, depends on where you go. Issue is the tenured professors out there that stay until they drop. That leaves little room to promote adjuncts, and Universities feel they can save money by keeping them. Once again, I went for a DBA rather than PhD as this is the practical way of getting around it. But I just found out that my school (totally online) pays half as much for full profs as their brick and mortar counterparts do. But with COVID, I still believe the academic world will change to online or hybrid-and we will see what happens there. It's politics, my friend-knowing somebody will get you a better job. What you know will be transmitted to students, not them. I am looking for that first Adjunct job right now, and I see handwriting on the wall. Forget about first tier Universities, who maintain snobbishness which hurts the profession. Shame on them-and if I lose academic elites thereby, so be it. They should know better. The only way we will get around this is if we all, as colleagues, band together as a team to fight the inequities in the system. Simply accepting it is exactly what they want in Admin. But there are havens still, and there are people out there who are tired. I feel it, and recommend if you haven't heard of it of the Delphi Project at https://pullias.usc.edu/delphi/about . They are doing something for Adjuncts.

Yep, I feel like a bull in a China shop right now, after four months in the program. I fell into a Research Mentorship, the first of its kind for online, by a groundbreaker, and I have started to present (you can see my paper on here). I can tell you it is scaring the hell out of some people. But a few others are delighted. So there is help-but academe, like Rome, will not be built in a day.

The real problem is that academics spend their lives seeking knowledge at the expense of many other aspects necessary for life.

And what, P. Contreras, do you mean by "competency based education"? I posit that such education should include connections to the real world and how to help students succeed there. SME only goes so far. Respectfully submitted.

Issac-Good point. And whose fault is that? Well, academics mean well-but they are programmed pedagogically to the point where they lose track. Do schools assist in getting them back on the real world track? Not in doctoral programs, where they recommend self-isolation to study and tell them to block time for it thus potentially cutting themselves off from families and friends who don't understand. It is tough for the young ones, a little easier for the adult andragogue who has had real world experience, but not too much with academic pressure.

Dear P. Contreras I agree and perhaps also a clearer division between those who wants to do research and those who teaches... perhaps the lecturers should have more of a hands on competence? Best wishes

More than perhaps, Henrik. Hands-on is necessary. However, I think that exceptions can be made for exceptionally intuitive individuals with purely academic experience who have a feel for the real world due to their own experiences. I think though that this is admittedly rare.

Dear Isam Alkhalifawi and Thomas Hotz I agree...also sometimes you need that elephant and Thomas being one can be a good think. I never wanted to be like every one else..What is the fun in that? Conformity destroys all forms of creativity and progress... Im a right wing conservative but if something is failing it needs to be changed..thats it..and as long as people cant see that academia lost its attraction they are in my view blind. I also think as I said before that in order to be a good lecturer you need experience from the field in which you teach...

I also think that this is reflected I the fact that many of the truly great thinkers had their issues with academia, Freud, Jung, Nietzsche , Even Carl Rogers had his moments... perhaps this shows that academia more or less kills those who are too good? So maybe even if all you want is to conduct research, if you are too innovative you will end up in a conflict and eventually leave..because changing an institution takes more than one man to do....sadly. But I promise...in 15 years time I might think about taking a position as head of faculty...any university who is interested? Pls send me a direct message *mailbox still empty* :-) Best wishes and remember I said this with a friendly smile on my face...

Well, if it is in Business, take me along with you, Henrik LOL. As for the great thinkers, wasn't Einstein failed in math when he was a youth and told he'd never get anywhere? I'd like to run that pedagogue out of town on a rail. Research is nice, but working in the system with decent pay is best-because they way the system is based now, you are not paid for it unless grants or external awards come along. To get a grant, you have to be on the faculty of an accredited institution-enterprising students are out of the ballgame on the assumption that they don't know enough. What is your email btw? Mine is [email protected]. Anybody else is welcome to comment to me privately there. Tom H

Thomas [email protected] 🙂 Haha yes..lets try to find a job... Im still waiting for offers.. my inbox is still empty with the exception of the usual junkmail 🤣

Thomas Hotz, (1) i would not reduce Pythagorean teachings to one equation -- there are many Pythagorean sentences, one of them is "Whatever we see when awake is death, and when asleep is a dream"; (2) i use a**2 + b**2 = c**2 every day, and i am not math teacher -- knowing how to calculate the distance between two points in a three-dimensional space is very useful in many areas of human endeavor; (3) price of anything ought to be determined by the buyer and the seller -- no need for a third party to interfere with the voluntary transaction.

Dear Martin...there are very often a third party involved in transactions done in one of my businesses namely a freight forwarder... they take commission but they also give you a lot of more income...it is called specialisation and if a student of business for example study supply chain and logistics and doesn't understand the dynamics of the markets..something you will not learn unless your teacher have experience you will not fully understand the business..:-) Best wishes

In professional degrees (medical, nursing, engineering, law, etc.), teacher experience is essential. In other programs (history, philosophy, etc.), perhaps, not.

Henrik G.S. Arvidsson, in "no need for a third party to interfere with the voluntary transaction," i used the word interfere in the sense "to interpose and take part in something without having the right to do so" -- in other words, there is nothing wrong with a third party being involved in the transaction if both the buyer and the seller agree to transact via the third party.

Dear Henrik G.S. Arvidsson , I allow myself to react on the first idea of ​​this discussion namely, that why on the need to make

the more attractive academic world. I believe that the data available on the number of universities, higher education establishments, research center, patents, publications, international conferences, and of students enrolled in the different training offers (all levels combined : BS, MSc and PhD) around the world highlight the social and societal interest of the academic sector.

The attention paid by the business sector or the real world to the ranking of universities, to publications in high impact factor journals, the analysis of citations and the researchers' H index, the introduction of the "Research and Development "in companies, and the financial implication of companies in patent applications leads to the observation that the paradigm of social differentiation between the academic world and that of business or real world seems to be on the verge of disappearing to give way to that of real and lasting cooperation between these two worlds.

The congruence or incongruence between academia and real world can be elasticaly or inelasticaly defined by the forces controlling the following :

Government

Economics

Religion

Culture and

Degree of mutation in above listed point.

Madan Batra Dear Madan. Spot on.. I agree...:-)

Attractive for who, Henrik G.S. Arvidsson . We at least need to know the target or intended beneficiary is, an first confirm that they indeed do not find the current configuration unattractive, then obtain some insights about that which they do not find attractive.

Since life is about choices, we may need to weigh the costs and benefits of attempts to make academia attractive.

I do not believe academia is the passport to prosperity (in business or otherwise). In fact not every business mogul is or was well educated to the standards of university degree. A good example is Richard Branson and Bill Gates (dropped out of college to start business). We go to school to gain knowledge and know the world we live in for better choices in our lives. Such choices are meant to better the world we live in by putting into use the knowledge gained. Sometimes, we gain knowledge to help others gain as well. For example, with a PhD, you contribute more to the academia. If you start a business and do no go far, do diagnostics within the business environment including your management styles and the market. The problem might not be on the knowledge gained in college or degree awarded. If you are teaching and you find no institution is providing a good pay as you would wish, try side-hustle (moonlighting).

P. Contreras, thanks for clarifying. You are talking about Independent Study, most exemplified by my University online in fact. However, there has to be a direct link between business related topics or other industries you wish to pursue and the course involved. That is a step in the right direction, but more direct ties and relationships have to be established between business/real world and academe for the latter to be trusted by them IMHO.

And thanks for the compliment, but I am a student at NCU right now, though a precocious one. LOL

Tom H

James Mutua-Sadly, I agree that academe is not the passport to prosperity. So why are the institutions advertising that they are? I believe you know the answer. Academic institutions desire their own prosperity, and the issues are that this is at the expense of Adjuncts and students. But-academe SHOULD be the passport to prosperity to both students and faculty. Epistemology is not valued the way it should be financially. It is no shame to ask that it should be, any more than it is for the real world to ask for their fair (and in many cases, unfair) share of the wealth. Anybody that believes that academe is somehow above the real world in not doing so are sadly misguided. It's time for a change. Respectfully submitted.

James-I should clarify that epistemology is valued financially by academe which charges for it-not by businesses who look down upon it, including publishers.

Kheepe- I believe there are only benefits to be derived from making academe more attractive. What do they have to lose? Right now, they are losing plenty by not doing so. As to targeting groups, students are the obvious ones. See what's out there. But the hypothesis- that they find it too expensive and not geared towards the real world,-will be there as contrasted to the ones that are not tuned into the situation enough to state that it is fine for them. For the ones that don't have utilitarian values regarding their wish to make a better life for themselves out there-and that is what academe espouses to hook the students-well, if they are just in school to see if they can get the degree, these will be positively disposed, especially if they are getting financial aid. For the older student, financial aid is neglected or non-existent, even if it is necessary. Academe will tell you to get loans. That is the equivalent of "go fish", an American playing card game. Anyway, these are my thoughts.

Hermann Gruenwald: The fact that undergrads are removed from the real world has been around for time immemorial. It was that way in the 70's when I was an undergrad. Part of the change should be for undergraduate institutions to form more links with the real world. Career Services is and should remain an important component of that. Co-op programs used to be available back then where students worked one day and went to school the other four while full time. I have no idea where that is now. Assuming what you are currently saying about undergrads is true, what a shame-but should we really blame all of them?

Thomas Hotz thanks for the answer. I do not think you addressed my question, but I gather that there may be some nuances to the question and the discussion that i do not understand. For starters, I thought the question was about "making academia attractive." Reading through the discussion threads, I get the impression that the issue is about "academically oriented" higher education and not necessarily academia.

That being the case, it sounds like the "problem" you are looking for solutions to address, is specific to a geographical area. Some countries have an exact opposite problem to yours. They need to make "academically oriented higher education less attractive," and make "vocational education more attractive.

Academia is very great spectrum of different institutions and levels of learning.

The real world is a tough place, where survival is the first imperative.

The whole thing is mainly about socialization; academic socialization, if successful, means to enter the rule system of scientific office early and mental adjustment is required. The longer people stay in academia, the more difficult will it be to adapt to the real world. There are some disciplinary differences, but this is the general rule. The old Krupp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krupp opined, that he is not against studying per se (i.e. short studies), but that too long studies soften too much, with respect to practice. It is this 'heady neurosis' that can make academia boring, in terms of study and action, i.e. relating to the real world.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my university education, the best professors were not the 'academics' (those with most formal legimitmation), but those, who did also something else (before or while holding office). The mentioned legitimation problem is, of course, greater in public state institutions than in private institutions, which have more freedom to appoint somebody.

_______________________________________________________

I would prefer a much more open approach to academic legitimation and selection procedures,

but the 'church-like' appointment tradition (venia legendi, venia docendi) is still very strong.

Henrik G.S. Arvidsson my suggestion: Pay higher salaries in academia than in industry!

Academic is not a restrictive area it is a certainly wide gap & as such it is not restricted to certain selected areas .We all know that intelligence of human beings working quite good direction other than his professional norms & as such the contribution of individual in their respective areas just as literature, Science, Medical profession , legal activities & scientific research ,contribution in fine arts & such other related contribution offer & automatic line of attraction .

In this line some years back I have expressed similar nature of contribution which I submit herewith for your perusal

Multiple degrees & selection of academic areas to be carried out only in progressive manner just as Medical ,Legal, Academic for college & high school level , & such other areas the person in his qualification & or even academic areas they should carry out their plan in such progressive manner for that respective areas they can contribute in professional manner in order to meet the challenge of 21 century .

This is my personal opinion

Frank-I agree 110%!!

Kheepe- Certainly, regional and international demographics should be taken into account. I am speaking about the U.S.-that definitely needs work towards more attractiveness, so let us clarify. Now which areas are you aware of that need "less attractiveness" and why?

As to your other point-if you see Henrik's original post-there were two questions-not one. I spoke to the second question- "Is there an incongruence between academia and the real world?" The answer to that IMHO is a resounding yes.

Now that this has been brought out, pls talk more about areas that you have delineated in furtherance of a response to Henrik's first question. Thanks!

I am 4th year of my PhD in Mechanical Engineering, so I am really not that much experienced! But, I am working with multi-institutional projects which helps me to make insight of academia.

About " Is there an incongruence between academia and the real world?". I think "YES!". I like to explain with some examples in the Field of Engineering,

1. Industry and Academy difference: Industry works in real world where academy works in books, papers and grades which doesn't necessarily linked to real world. Because of this Practice, right now, specially in the field of Engineering, Industry is way ahead of academy!

2. Unnecessary Knowledge: I don't think, the "Knowledge" acquired during Academy life worth more than 10%! I got 3.94, but most of the Knowledge I learnt was never in use for real life! This is also a practice. So, institution doesn't also care if the knowledge is ever used, instead I pass the course or not!

3. Commercial Software: This goes with 3. No one in engineering field doesn't necessarily need to know simple things like "What is Regression, how to formulate matrix for regression etc". Its a one like command in Matlab! Go use it, and you can say Data analytics in CV! So, why even studying Numerical Methods at all??

4. Too narrow Knowledge Band: This is the problem I am facing! When doing PhD, the 99% things that encapsulate Mechanical Engineering doesn't have any use. Instead just a very small fraction of it! You invest years to make a small contribution to the "Knowledge for a certain Community" and you get PhD. So, a PhD doesn't need to know anything about the World at all! Just a very small piece and a member of a very small community! What does it worth? I still don't know!

...

I can't propose any solution! The world is changing too fast, technology is taking over, and may be when complete automation and universal basic income will show up, fields like Engineering may become "Obsolete".

Dear Adnan: You present a very interesting perspective about PhD in your field. At a very generic level, any doctoral program is about an in-depth learning about how to create knowledge—one small piece at a time. It may not make you an expert in your field, but it gives you an ability to understand the parts that you become interested in—later in life. Very sincerely, it is not a waste of time. Do not be discouraged. Madan

Adnan and Madan-You both are talking about traditional PHD's, which should be suited for academe only as the purpose is to find knowledge gaps and teach. Applied degrees are meant to solve issues directly related to the real world-DBA's for business, Psy.D's for psychology in directly dealing with therapeutic issues. While Phd's in Clinical Psychology still practice as they did before the PsyD was developed, the training is still for research and teaching. Research does not translate to the real world unless you are able to translate it to them. That is why I think applied degrees are better than PhD's. A word to the wise.

Dear Henrik G.S. Arvidsson

Biologists have discovered that amphibians (frogs) see the world in a special way. They can distinguish moving objects well, but they can't distinguish stationary objects at all. The scientific vision of academic scientists is similar to that of amphibians. They distinguish well the subject of their academic discipline, but poorly or not at all distinguish the subjects of other academic disciplines. Therefore, academic scientists often say that I am not an expert in such and such a field of knowledge. The real world consists of chunks of knowledge that academic disciplinary scientists have cut the world into. Therefore, the real world is much more interesting than its image in the disciplinary academic picture. To eliminate this disadvantage, it is necessary to expand the horizon of the scientific worldview. Tools for expanding the horizon of academic disciplinary worldview are present in academic science. These tools are: interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches. However, even in this case, it is not possible to fully decipher the image that opens up to the researcher from a new horizon of scientific worldview. This is prevented by the image of an ideal object that is used for scientific modeling. The situation is improved when the researcher uses systems thinking and a systems approach to expand the horizons of the academic worldview. In this case, the model of the ideal object changes to the model of the system, and the approaches that expand the horizon of systems thinking are called: systems interdisciplinary, systems multidisciplinary, and systems transdisciplinary. The systems world becomes more attractive and interesting than the disciplinary and academic world. You can read more about the methods of expanding the academic worldview here:

Mokiy, V.S. (2019). International standard of transdisciplinary education and transdisciplinary competence. Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 22, 73-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/4480

Mokiy, V. (2019). Training generalists in higher education: Its theoretical basis and prospects. Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 22, 55-72. https://doi.org/10.28945/4431

Best wishes

Vladimir

Academia is too attractive: there are tens, if not hundreds, of applicants for one academic position (personal experience); and the influx of cheap labor (PhD students) seems inexhaustible (personal experience). Monetary inflation, public propaganda, and philanthropy aside --- are there any market forces putting upward pressure on salaries in academia?

Martin-there is no upward pressure as I know it on academic salaries, but truth be told, it depends on where you land a job. Full profs in business get $125/year on the avg, not bad. However, the same profs at my school get $68K. Yecch! But the tradeoff is that they are not required to publish at my school. The publish or perish syndrome is inimical, and it is a vicious cycle, especially considering those Academic Processing Fees. There is a movement for this to be paid for by the schools, but it's slow going. I understand USC threatened to pull their people from publishers if they didn't relax that requirement. Five publishers were approached on that. One (don't quote me, but I think it is Elsevier) said go ahead, and called their bluff. The others though are trying to work with them. So that is something. Now as to cheap labor-agreed, but what of COVID now, plus the fact that the birthrate is the lowest in years, cutting down on those influx of students? Counter that with any real tanking again of the economy, and whoever is alive may choose to go back to school. But right now, they are laying off adjuncts and tenured profs (so much for tenure) so that hasn't happened yet.

There is also the "incest rule", which I despise, mainly that you can't get a job at the same school you graduate from in order to consider diversity etc etc. Having profs who went through the system as students is the very thing they should be doing. These profs have the added ability of providing shortcuts, hints etc to students as they went through similar issues when they were in that area. New profs coming on board have to learn the system, and if they have academic baggage they bring that with them, such as the excuse of some of them for bullying students-"it happened to me". That is no excuse, in comparison a parent can excuse verbally abusing a child because it happened to them? Hazing rituals are criticized for students in for example fraternities, but its ok for the profs to haze students this way? Food for thought, and too much of that may cause indigestion.

Exactly this is the question we put own selves practically each day. And it is very good question. Again, I will take care about it from my personal point of view and my international experiences. There are several different ways to deal with this. Some of them I rejected to use but on the other hand I have to say about the all of them, everyone from methods can be the right one if is in accord with the target of the University. And here is the biggest problem hidden. The most of Universities I visited haven’t any clear vision or marketing defined target. And from this reason they aren’t able to select the right and adequate method for teaching.

We must use interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches.

Firstly, yes, Indeed! There is a gap between the two sides, and it will remain so. The quantity and quality will differ, and the contingency theory explains it.

Secondly, a port of academic and practice structures is based on myths. I am writing a book on academic preferences, protocols, procedures and progress. Hence, I leave it here this point.

Thirdly, the copy-paste strategies of universities (remember institutional theory) keeps them in check to stay on with their cohorts. The industry and practice follows situational dynamics, which varies from individual to the highest integration.

Fourthly, hegemony of some systems colour the true progress. I am anticipating decline in the MBA education because every fade and fashion has time, and the time of it has come. I also anticipate change in this stampede for publications in so-called top journals that have become cliques. In short, a lot will change.

Best

Tariq

Curriculum must match the expectations and requirements. Right person should teach. Teaching should not be commercialized

Dear Oliver.

In our far past, even in times of Christian seminars, and later also, there was and there are Universities with focus on making money. (Beside other effects.) So, there will be in our future again. I have comparison between the state Universities and private ones too. Both systems bring with them some advantages and some disadvantages. It’s hard to say which one is better. What I can see as the basic problems for both of them is:

a) Teachers grown directly from the students across their assistance, and they didn’t be in touch with the real world, nor practice. They live in a cage of their University and don’t see there is a real world behind its walls. And in such cases, there is typical that the whole live aim for them is to become a professor. They don’t understand they can to have something else as a live dream, or target.

b) On the objective level, the Universities make their position for them unfixed. In a past when somebody spoke about Sorbonne, it has a name of medical education. Oxford has a name of governmental services. Moskov has a name of international diplomatic relations, etc. In presence with broadening number of faculties Universities dissolve its names on one hand, and because there are not able to build by marketing approach a new name on the other hand, they are losers.

Dear All, things like "interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary" all sound great, but I feel they are too sophisticated. And yet it is so simple:

1. Same salaries in academia as in industry

2. More permanent positions

Commercialization what I meant is cheap selling of degrees, diplomas and certificates. Now many online courses are like that.

Regards, I personally consider that there are three problems with the articulation between the academic and the real world of business:

1. The tasks performed do not correspond to worksheets or business processes, but rather to the formation of isolated concepts or applications.

2. The false belief that students must be filled with homeworks to learn. It is better to confront them to real situations in competitions or any type of performance.

3. Definitively, evaluation systems. Due to these privilege memory and last minute review, instead of the multidimensionality of intelligence in the subject.

There tends to be a disconnect with pure academics, that is academics with no or very little experience of work in a business organization. That is why I think it is best for an academic to have direct experience of professional life in his field, and even later on to do a sort of internship to refresh their knowledge of 'reak life'. I know a lecturer in Operations Management who took a couple of years off to start his own manufacturing business. He said the experience made him realize how little he had understood the challenges faced by manufacturers. It transformed his teaching

The reason there is an incongruence between academia and real world is because in many institutions the teachers do not have the real world experience, they use case studies to teach which is not that interesting and relevant sometimes. I think it should be mandatory for teachers to have real life experience so they can provide excellent teaching environment and experience to their students. Academia and real work go together, we can not teeat them separately. r

Sayeda Zain I could not agree more! I think there must be a clearer distinction between research and teaching. For teaching I think it is necessary to have experience from the real world so to speak..for research.. I don't see the importance in the same way. However if you want to write student literature, you should have real life experience. If you want to be a professor and do research, I don't even think the same type of people can be found in research as in managerial position in firms...so when it comes to researchers ... perhaps lack of business experience doesn't matter so much...it can even be nice with different perspectives, as long as there is room for more than one perspective :-)

Thank you, Sayeda Zain and Henrik G.S. Arvidsson

Teaching profession typically is underpaid. I hope teachers with experience get paid better. Wishful thinking! Madan

Dear Madan Batra I agree.. I could never afford teaching full-time. Even if I wanted to, its just not worth it. The pay sucks to be honest esp if you compare it to the other world...:-) Best wishes Henrik

The origin of every practice in the "real world" could be traced back to a theory or to, at least, a concept or idea. I believe there are many reasons for such incongruence between academia and real world; i mention here two of them. One reason is the communication style and content between academic people or scholars and executives; this does not motivate both parties to engage in prolonged discussions so as to find out a common playground or platform to operate within jointly. A second reason is that universities and colleges are still not inclined to appreciate a fresh PhD holder with 10 years of professional experience in senior positions for example; however they tend mostly to hire a PhD holder with 2 or 3 years of teaching experience although a varied academic staff would be a competitive advantage.

Academia focused on real-world applications and solutions and put theory into practice is always beneficial, useful, and attractive to community.

Please see my answers below. If you wish to discuss them further, I am happy to do so.

How do you view your education in relation to your working life?

• Very little of my formal education prepared me for life in the real world. Most of the relevant parts had to do with interpersonal activities rather than the knowledge imparted.

Do you feel your education was relevant?

• No. I enjoyed learning a number of things, but I apply very few outside of statistics and some operations theory.

How do you feel about academia and the real world?

• Academia is a world unto itself. It stands apart from those who apply the theories it generates. It is also a safe harbor for continued teaching & expression of grossly failed theories which further distances academia from the rest of the world.

I teach at a local college in an applied technical field that is directly related to the area's primary industry. Because of this, I don't see the same disconnect between academia and the "real world." My students are often employed in that very industry and bring a multitude of practical experiences as well as "real world" expertise to our classes--they are amazing. And my 35 years in the industry allow me to teach them with that same perspective.

I am quite sure teaching a different school would be "worlds" apart.

Dear Paul Wagner I agree with you. I think there is a variation between different schools and different fields and there is also the element of personality. I also think students should be subjected to both hands on as well as more theoretically minded teachers. Something I liked at my old Alma Mater was that at least then they used Professors emeritus when it came to teaching. They provided a different perspective compared to younger colleagues. I Think there should be a mix, With teaching I think at least in my field there is an overrepresentation of those that never left academia and who lacks practical experience but I think that in some areas experience is important whilst in other areas there is little or no need for experience. If you teach about black holes for example, we don't have so many professors who actually visited a black hole and Im quite sure of this. In business it is different for the most part. I also think, this is my highly subjective belief which I can not prove or disprove that in the field of research hands in experience is not as important as in teaching. Also I found it very rewarding to meet the older professors because they could add a different dimension to the area, they seen it evolve from a researchers point of view so I think there is a lot to say on this topic. We need people who are hands on but we also need older professors to put things in to a historical context, something they often do better than people my age...but again..we are back to experience..Best wishes.

Simple comment. The best hope for the world of business/ academia is to infuse the academic space with more business professionals; people who see the practical side of the problem. They are better suited in many circumstances, to ask the right questions and chase the right problems.

The reason for the conflict between academic life and real life

Lack of knowledge

Olufesobi-I would add to this that retired individuals with previous business experience are also just as valuable as currently employed people. The professional students who don't have the exp are the issue for the PHD-academe lacks there as the degree is meant for academe. Period. That is why I say that the applied degrees, such as the DBA's, are very important in dealing with this instead.

Azjar-You mean lack of real life knowledge-employment or just in general, because sadly, you have that too. Academe only tends to reinforce the latter, I am afraid-and they take advantage of that.

There are more practical areas with greater proximity between real life and the Academy, such as business and business. Even so, there are views in this area that favor theoretical models, whose role in helping to understand reality is undeniable. In areas with greater distance from real life, the Academy has to strive to be attractive. There is no lack of means, such as the use of cinema - which is increasingly abundant today.

Roberto- Business does not have the patience for theoretical models that academes are trained in. They want results as quickly as possible. The roles of theories in understanding reality is undeniable to you and academics not trained in business dealings-not business leaders unless they themselves also possess an academic background.

I believe Academia should make connection between theory and practice and focused on real-world applications and solutions. In fact, theoretical knowledge has its merits, but it would make sense in today’s technology-driven world for both theoretical and practical know-how to be allowed to complement each other.

Mahfuz- Well said.

Congruence cannot be achieved for universal system, need to have separate system as per the expected outcome of the learners. It is learner-centric.

Management research without the potential for application in practice isn't very useful. However, from my point of view, what is lacking is not the missing link of practice and theory, but the ability of many practitioners to transform a practical problem into theoretical frameworks. Simple approaches, as, e.g., Five Forces, are still highly popular, but usually reduced to their visual appeal.

In management research, popular science journals, as, e.g., the Harvard Business Review, present theories in a practically-oriented and simplified manner. To me, this proves that practitioners are willing to accept theories and concepts as long as they directly relate to their situation. However, they are rarely considering problems from an abstract perspective to apply frameworks.

Jan-Abstract perspectives do not matter to real world execs unless they have already had academic training and have transitioned or took it while at their jobs. As soon as we all realize that they are not interested in academics unless they talk plain English to them, we will all be better off. But PhD's are not trained to do so-and that is because the degree aligns with academe, NOT with the real world in and of itself, no matter what Universities say otherwise in order to get students.