E-Magazine
Some of our experts in the field have given their thoughts on the Hazenberg et al Debate Piece You say 企業家 and I say Entrepreneur: Let’s call the whole thing off? If you would like to join the debate please email chris@isbe.org.uk and your comments will be placed on the website.
Responses by:
Troy Heffernan
Peter Sewell
R-E-S-P-E-C-T Find out what it means to me
Troy Heffernan
Struggling to keep the musical theme going in the title of my rejoinder for the debate piece presented by Hazenberg, Mangezi and Seddon, I was led to the words of Aretha Franklin. Respect is a key issue in international business of any dimension, and whilst Hazenberg et al do raise one or two points worthy of consideration (i.e. over reliance on Chinese students) I see their article showing little respect to the role culture plays in international partnerships. Further, I see a lack of understanding of the key goals of the PMI2 programme, which, by all accounts is an effective and efficient use of public funds. Consequently, as Hazenberg et al work was a debate piece, they have achieved their fundamental objective – to stimulate debate.
As rightfully pointed out by Hazenberg et al, China’s role in world affairs is increasing exponentially, and there is little debate that China will be the world power in the short to medium term. Now couple this situation with the cultural distance that exists between the UK and China. On any measurement scale this is huge! Consequently, one of the benefits of developing partnerships (entrepreneurial or other) at a university level is to enhance cultural understanding; and is it not admirable for universities to try and lead the way here. China has a very rich and complex culture which we in the UK need to understand, just as much as China needs to understand ours. From a cultural perspective we can say China has made some mistakes, and still does, however, what were the opium wars? Therefore, I disagree with the view of Hazenberg et al that these PMI2 activities are a waste of money, as they develop cultural understanding which is critical for a harmonious world.
Now to the micro debate; I would like to raise two points regarding the debate piece. Firstly, with regards to the financial benefits of the PMI2 programme. As grants go, this funding from the British Council is minute; however, the outcomes of the PMI2 programmes to the UK economy, in most cases, will be bigger than the inputs. This could be in the form of new university programmes, enhanced articulation agreements etc. The second point relates to the whole PMI2 programme itself; Hazenberg et al seem to allude to the fact that the PMI2 relates to just China, in fact there are over 10 countries that the PMI2 target and China is not one of their three priority countries this year.
In conclusion, I see developing business and cultural links with China as critical to enhancing UK competitiveness in the future. This world is becoming increasingly global and the countries that will excel are those that can effectively and sensitively deal with other cultures not divorce themselves from this fact because of issues that are not PC under our culturally tinted microscope. A quote from the bible might also help here…'Let Him Who Is Without Sin Cast the First Stone'. I don’t think, and in their last paragraph Hazenberg et al agree, that the UK can throw too many stones… So, well done to the British Council for encouraging cultural interaction in China, as well as many other places around the globe! And thank-you Hazenberg et al for presenting a topic worthy of debate.
Dr Troy Heffernan, Reader in Marketing, International Programmes Director, Plymouth Business School
A response to: You say 企業家 and I say Entrepreneur: Let’s call the whole thing off
Peter Sewell
Although momentarily amused by the title of this debate piece, I was dismayed by the conclusions the authors arrived at and disagree with them strongly. Although they begin by acknowledging the importance of China, their argument that the small investment in PMI2 funding is a ‘sub-optimal’ way of spending tax payers’ money is, I believe, demonstrably not true. In actual fact these modest sums are a very good investment, if a good investment can be defined as a large return for a small financial input.
Typically, the amounts of money that projects receive, through the British Council are very small. The work performed by university staff, both here and overseas, to deliver the various objectives is significant, however the benefits that accrue to the participating universities and the broader UK economy are important. In our experience these benefits include for example, important added value to the universities involved, with the opportunity to enhance their international reputation and profile. In addition staff and students in both countries have the chance to improve their awareness of the cultural and educational issues present in other countries. This aspect in particular has already proved beneficial in our own institution, encouraging us to develop similar relationships with universities in other developing countries such as, India, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.
Whilst it is certainly wise for universities not to rely too heavily on one particular country for its overseas students, a point that my university has acknowledged in its international strategy for some years now, there continues to be a growth in interest in overseas education from China and there are plenty of Anglophone universities in other countries, that would happily receive these students if we in the UK turn our backs on them.
Finally, whilst it may be true that the impact on employability or entrepreneurship activity in the UK is minimal as a consequence of these PMI2 projects, the broader social, cultural and economic benefits for the UK, China and indeed other countries are potentially very substantial.
Dr. Peter Sewell, Senior Lecturer Employability & Career Development, University of Central Lancashire