A comparison of in-company and university training programs as a means of attaining the objectives of executive development. - Page 98 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 98 of 192 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
He found that it assists them in ". . . widening perspec-i
tives, increasing tolerance for the points of view of
i others, and building respect for the function of manage-jment."^
His survey of faculty reactions resulted in the
I?|
same conclusion. University faculties, he comments, say:
i They see developed in discussion classes a greater
patience with apparent absurdity, a growing willingness
to listen as men become familiar with hearing strange ideas from other men they respect, a revival
or even acquisition of the ability to read, to think and to express one's self, both strongly and l u c i d l y . 37
Both in-company and university programs, alike, are
designed generally to expose their participants to the
views, ideas, and concepts of others. However, a univer-i
sity program quite obviously has far greater possibilities j
for accomplishing this, inasmuch as it has as participants
individuals from many different companies and industries.3^
The principal characteristics or factors of intellectual
conditioning are tolerance, objectivity, a code of
ethics, a high level of moral conduct, a high degree of
integrity, a sense of fair play, the facility to observe
things in their proper perspective, the ability to comprehend
the relative significance of facts and conditions, and.
^Andrews, "Is Management Training Effective? I. Evaluation by Managers and Instructors," loc. cit.
37ibid.. p. 88.
3®Andrews, "Is Management Training Effective? II. Measurement, Objectives and Policy," loc. cit.
Object Description
Description
| Title | A comparison of in-company and university training programs as a means of attaining the objectives of executive development. - Page 98 |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | He found that it assists them in ". . . widening perspec-i tives, increasing tolerance for the points of view of i others, and building respect for the function of manage-jment."^ His survey of faculty reactions resulted in the I?| same conclusion. University faculties, he comments, say: i They see developed in discussion classes a greater patience with apparent absurdity, a growing willingness to listen as men become familiar with hearing strange ideas from other men they respect, a revival or even acquisition of the ability to read, to think and to express one's self, both strongly and l u c i d l y . 37 Both in-company and university programs, alike, are designed generally to expose their participants to the views, ideas, and concepts of others. However, a univer-i sity program quite obviously has far greater possibilities j for accomplishing this, inasmuch as it has as participants individuals from many different companies and industries.3^ The principal characteristics or factors of intellectual conditioning are tolerance, objectivity, a code of ethics, a high level of moral conduct, a high degree of integrity, a sense of fair play, the facility to observe things in their proper perspective, the ability to comprehend the relative significance of facts and conditions, and. ^Andrews, "Is Management Training Effective? I. Evaluation by Managers and Instructors," loc. cit. 37ibid.. p. 88. 3®Andrews, "Is Management Training Effective? II. Measurement, Objectives and Policy," loc. cit. |
