Business education in Nepal is almost six decades. Since then, both under the auspices of the government and in private ownership, management education has grown in Nepal by leaps and bounds, though not always with a firm focus on quality. Much of the growth has happened either to have another fiefdom of some well-connected academics under the government umbrella, and even more as another business proposition for earliest possible profits by the private institutes. 

 

Hence, while the good, the bad and the ugly have co-existed; and while the Nepali, the Indian, the Western and other Asian universities jostled for space in the domain of B-education, there was no independent initiative towards rating, ranking, benchmarking business education in this nation. 

 

Hence, when on July 19 last (Sravan 4), New Business Age organized the Everest Bank National B-Schools Rating-Ranking-Awards 2013 at Radisson Hotel in Kathmandu, it was rightfully hailed as “path-breaking, essential, historical and auspicious” by various front-ranking guests who graced the occasion and gave away the awards. Going beyond awards, there are larger issues that need to be looked into ahead. 

 

First, while there are a few good government institutes, it is now established that expansion of management education can largely be done efficiently and effectively by the private sector if it is done with a long-term vision and not short term profitability. Allowing permissions, resources, and standards support from the government to the better private initiatives from people with expertise and resources is the need of the hour. 

 

Second, even the monolithic Tribhuvan University, already stretched beyond limits, needs a complete re-look at its management education. Some colleges under TU should be allowed to grow into independet purely management universities. 

 

Third, the private sector in its exigency of admissions and revenue has largely focused on the input side of the education, and much lower on the output side. Hence, while aggressive admission driven branding is seen plastered all across the city, there is hardly any long-term effective communication, far less blending of experiential and virtual learning with brick-and-mortar business education. 

 

Fourth, research, even in its applied form, seems to be the biggest casualty of business education in a hurry. Applied research, market viability studies, drawing up relevant case-studies etc can make business education really market-friendly. However, except a couple of institutes, these are rarely practiced. 

 

Fifth, the tie-ups, associations and affiliations of foreign universities are a good way for positioning and marketing, but have not been used effectively for collaborative research, productive faculty and students’ exchange programs, and long-term value addition. 

 

Sixth, the synergy between business and business education is also a rarity. Hardly any concrete projects of market survey, feasibility studies etc are being given by the business bodies to management institutes. 

 

Finally, the entire process of rating-ranking-awards showed that several good institutes, suffering from the mindset of ‘me being the best’, often avoid being voluntarily benchmarked against one another and being rated by independent bodies. Good is never afraid of being quizzed. 

However, one needs to emphatically note that management education in this country, including that of tourism and hospitality niche, has taken deep roots and may perhaps come next only to India in the region, and is poised for a big leap forward in quality and sustainability.