A comparison of in-company and university training programs as a means of attaining the objectives of executive development. - Page 122 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 122 of 192 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
inter-relationships of the various business organizations.
They feel that close association with faculty representatives
and, other participants contributes considerably to
their personal gain. A disadvantage of the program,
] administrators say, is in not being able to expose the !
, participants to a wider variety of industrial or commercial!
activity and to a wider variety of personal experience. I
However, they feel that this disadvantage, while certainly
i
significant, is partially offset by arranging that par- j
tieipants in any particular session come from as many j
different ’'disciplines” as possible, and from separate
geographical locations. In addition, they feel that their
own course has enabled them to supply training to 125
executives in a single year. This would have been difficult,
if not impossible, by total reliance on university
facilities. This is because of the lack of spaee in
suitable academic institutions for participants from
Monsanto Chemical, because of the wide variations In
different university programs, and because of the large
number of men to be trained.
It is the ©pinion of Monsanto officials that this
particular program does not meet the individual needs of
all of their executive personnel. Its approach, rather, Is
directed as nearly as possible at the combined needs of a
large group. Therefore, use continues to be made of
selected university programs for a few of their key
Object Description
Description
| Title | A comparison of in-company and university training programs as a means of attaining the objectives of executive development. - Page 122 |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | inter-relationships of the various business organizations. They feel that close association with faculty representatives and, other participants contributes considerably to their personal gain. A disadvantage of the program, ] administrators say, is in not being able to expose the ! , participants to a wider variety of industrial or commercial! activity and to a wider variety of personal experience. I However, they feel that this disadvantage, while certainly i significant, is partially offset by arranging that par- j tieipants in any particular session come from as many j different ’'disciplines” as possible, and from separate geographical locations. In addition, they feel that their own course has enabled them to supply training to 125 executives in a single year. This would have been difficult, if not impossible, by total reliance on university facilities. This is because of the lack of spaee in suitable academic institutions for participants from Monsanto Chemical, because of the wide variations In different university programs, and because of the large number of men to be trained. It is the ©pinion of Monsanto officials that this particular program does not meet the individual needs of all of their executive personnel. Its approach, rather, Is directed as nearly as possible at the combined needs of a large group. Therefore, use continues to be made of selected university programs for a few of their key |
