From LUSEM to Lund Business School
LUSEM Lund university school of economics and management in 2021 initiated work for a new strategy for 2022-2025. Mats Benner, dean at LUSEM↗, has invited everybody within LUSEM to submit contributions to this process.
My analysis is called 'Lund Business School'. It is a vision and a 10 year strategy.
- LUSEM cannot have a 'strategy' for three years without this being part of a long-term strategy. Large or slow-changing organizations probably need a 10 year perspective. Rename LUSEM to 'Lund Business School'.
- The external evaluation RQ20 of research ↓ at Lund university notes that LUSEM lacks "a sense of urgency". Ominous and difficult to change.
- Pressure from the business community is needed to change LUSEM. And continous support from several constituents for a long-term transformation. About business and research ↓
- Reduce the number of institutions within LUSEM from six to three.
Fewer research areas will sharpen the profile. 'Business law' can be transferred to the 'Faculty of Law'. The departments of 'Informatics' and 'Statistics' should be discontinued and become 'Supporting units' for Digital learning and Quantitative learning. 'Storytelling and visualization' should become a third supporting unit.
- Make large investments in a Green Business Institute ↓. As 'green' has become the new black, a clear strategy, substantial resources and long-term perspective are required.
- Reduce dependence on accreditations. Make internal quality work more transparent. Strategy comes before communication.
- Change the delegation system for research within LUSEM. Should almost all research questions really be delegated to the departments? Seek a new balance to support the new profile.
- Reorganize the doctoral program in business administration with the goal that 50% of doctoral students will work in business and organizations.
- Boost LUSEM's digital litteracy. The ways of producing and not least communicating research can and need to be developed. Webification is a megatrend.
- 'Slow, at speed' would probably be a good mindset and a new attitude at LUSEM. That research is slow and that the university world changes slowly has many advantages, but times have changed. Be bolder.
The strategy work did not start well when Mats Benner, in early February 2021, informed that LUSEM would start three new institutes↗. The areas are popular and topic - 'Public Affairs', 'Innovation Management' and 'Sustainability Impact'. They have almost no resources, and if you wanted to know more, you were asked to contact him.
Any new 'institutes' should have been included in a long-term strategic plan if these - or other - institutes then had become part of the long-term strategy and had been related to the activities of the established departments. Today, this is obscure to all outsiders and probably most 'insiders'. It did not become more apparent when Mats Benner, in a newsletter in early April 2021 to everyone in LUSEM about these institutes, wrote "They may proliferate, may change, or be terminated."↗.
"We live in a world of profiles and priorities to make an impact, and universities are not exempted from this. We can no longer reside in the comfort of doing 'everything, equally well'. We need to describe what we do particularly well, and how we do it.
In the last research bill of the Swedish government, the issue came to the fore with the introduction of so called profile areas, where Swedish universities are expected to formulate areas where they are particularly strong, in research but also with adjacent excellence in education and outreach. Thus triggers the question: How should Lund University profile itself? And what does LUSEM do in this? The work on formulating profile areas begun already in the spring but is now taking another step, under the auspices of the university leadership but with all faculties engaged. For this we as LUSEM faculty and staff need to sharpen our understanding – who are we? Where do we excel? And with whom do we excel, as profile areas are expected to span faculty borders?
These and other issues are on the table as we speak, and we as faculty leadership welcome any inputs into the process. Another opportunity will arise in about a month’s time when all faculty and staff are welcome to a seminar on the future strategy of our school – an opportunity to discuss where we should be heading, with whom and in which way. Exciting times!"
I have taken this as an invitation to produce an analysis from the 'outside' - even though I am a doctoral student at LUSEM (Bus. Admin.) - according to the research method Case Impact Studies↗.
Time perspectives and strategies
What is possible to influence with a strategic perspective of three years (2022-2025)?
In a pressrelease↗ 2021 Volvo Cars writes that they plan to become a fully electric car brand by 2030. With this goal as a basis, they can then reshape their processes from competence developmen to new supply chains and sales concepts and more. IKEA says that "by 2030, everything we sell will be recycled and renewable material" - Ikea.se/hållbart↗. TetraPak is another example of a large company with a strategy in a ten-year perspective.
Changing a university or a business school takes a long time, which has several positive aspects, but that is precisely why goals are needed that have a significantly longer perspective than three years. Parallel perspectives and strategies are needed. What are the LUSEM School of Economics long-term goals? Do they have a bolder vision than a little more of most things? And smaller investments in something topic to please as many as possible and annoy as few as possible. What are the strategic choices?
LUSEM absolutely needs av ten-year vision and strategy
The RQ20 evaluation of research at Lund university
In 2020, a large external evaluation, called RQ20, of research at Lund University was presented. Pdf on LUSEM section.
It is not possible to formulate a strategy for LUSEM without having studied RQ20!
Mats Benner was one of the project leaders for RQ20 and thus has a better overview and knowledge of international higher education than many others. I have written a post in BiBB Academy↗ about the section that deals with LUSEM School of Economics. The evaluators say ...
"... There appears to be no sense of urgency at LUSEM..."
We observed with some surprise that, in a world that is changing fast, there appears to be no sense of urgency at LUSEM. (RQ20 p. 692, my emphasis)
It should be emphasized that RQ20 has a different scope than my analysis.
For Volvo Cars, IKEA, and a very large number of companies, it is an existential issue to adapt to new times in a 'well-balanced and wise way'. Time and skills - you need to 'change' employees - are among the biggest challenges to cope with. But for a university organization like LUSEM, there is no real existential threat. There are regularly new budget resources from the state and they get a somewhat variable but, a reasonably plannable share of other research funds. Human resources can only change at a (too) slow pace. The driving forces of change are unclear and must be clarified to strengthen the strategy discussion.
It is valuable that universities and colleges are "Slow",
but they must be 'Slow, at speed'.
How to make a strategy analysis for LUSEM?
For increased credibility, it would be good if LUSEM's management reported HOW they have done their strategy analysis. What are the challenges for which you want a strategy? To involve the employees within LUSEM, to some extent, they have had two 'internal public' webinars. The first was made by a person who calls herself a "qualitative researcher" and is employed at the Department of Business Administration. It is good to listen to what employees think, but it is only one part of strategy work. Her report also included a traditional SWOT analysis. However, these have limited value as they must be done in relation to which strategy one (i.e. LUSEM) chooses.
The second webinar was a lecture on basic brand building by brand consultant Mats Urde. It was mostly about general aspects and had the Nobel Foundation as a case and will not be very helpful in LUSEMs strategy work. In answer to a question from the audience and repeated by the webinar's chairman, the professor of marketing Ulf Johansson, about what the difficult questions are for LUSEM, Urde answered: that the difficult question is to have the courage to look ourselves in the mirror and ask 'who are we, what do we stand for 'and what is our 'brand promise'. It can have its weaknesses to see yourself in your own mirror compared to how you are seen in other people's mirrors. Another answer could have been: does LUSEM (its leaders) have the courage, strength, and perseverance to formulate and implement a bolder strategy than more of the same. If you look at LUSEM in a historical perspective, it is quite natural if today's LUSEM will not be tomorrow's model.
Who does LUSEMs management and board want to learn something from? Which universities, organizations, companies, and theories? A description of the world around us is also needed. The education sector is in a "disruptive" period. It is not unlikely that established universities and business schools in many fields will become less important in the future both in terms of education and research. And that students' relationships with education providers will change. An example of the latter could be a Mini-MBA↗ från London School of Economics, another that Google has trained over 200,000 in digital skills↗.
Subtractive changes are important in strategic analysis
A research study - 'People systematically overlook subtractive changes' Adams G. S. et al. in the journal Nature 2021, Vol. 592 s. 258-261 - says
Here we show that people systematically default to searching for additive transformations, and consequently overlook subtractive transformations. (Ibid. p. 258)
It is thus typical that the management of LUSEM chose to start early with three new institutes and some new internal structural additions and that nothing was said about what could be eliminated or reduced. On the other hand, my analysis sees subtractive changes as a strategic necessity to sharpen the profile.
If you do not have access to the article, I can send it to you upon request
The silent boundaries of business models
In my PhD thesis, I have written about what I call the silent boundaries of business models↗. It is about which issues may be of decisive importance but which, for situational reasons, are seldom or not at all discussed.
Examples of this for LUSEM are which institutions will be part of LUSEM in the long term and the significance of accreditations↗ (my analysis in BiBB Academy) and the importance of rankings. When the former dean of LUSEWM, Fredrik Andersson, sent emails to all employees, these were predominantly about accreditations. Now it's much better and more varied.
How important are accreditations?
what would happen if LUSEM lost an accreditation?
Assume that a new long-term strategy leads to a reduction in the number of departments, by one merging into a larger one or that another is transferred to another faculty. For example, 'Business Law' to Faculty of Law.
Have the accreditations - which are part of the LUSEM's marketing - created a lock-in? And is it of such a nature that LUSEM does not dare to change the internal structure for fear of losing one or more accreditations?
My conclusion is that, from a strategic perspective, LUSEM must become less dependent on accreditations. It is also unclear to most people what these stand for. The internal quality work cannot possibly be guided by or even less so dependent on the accreditation organizations' evaluations.
From the LUSEM/EHL brands to 'Lund Business Shool'
In what sense is the LUSEM School of Economics an organization that can have its 'own' profile and becomes a stronger brand? Is not Lund University the dominant brand? What factors and tools does LUSEMs management have at its disposal? It would be great if these were clarified.
The brand, actually the brands, LUSEM and EHL (the Swedish acronym) are in a difficult middle ground where Lund University is by far the strongest brand. The fact that LUSEM is an essentially non-integrated pastorate does not make it any easier. Why not learn from Copenhagen Business School (CBS)↗, London Business School and several others and change the LUSEM name to 'Lund Business School' (LBS).
It would be interesting if someone - me or LUSEM - made a survey among the employees at LUSEM and in the business community about a name change to Lund Business School. My guesstimate is that many would support a change.
A change of name to 'Lund Business School' (LBS) would strengthen the new vision and the higher ambitions.
ARCHITECTURE and brand: A vision and strategy for ten years must include the buildings and the physical environment as an essential part. Lund Business School needs to strengthen its architectural imprint and impression. These issues will be highlighted in a forthcoming separate analysis, which includes a text on how the museum world views the relationship between collections, architecture, and marketing. Several pictures of facilities from other Business Schools can also give some impetus. Stay tuned.
Can unintegrated diversity really be uniquely positive?
At the webinar, see above, Urde stated, in response to a direct question, that it would be completely wrong to focus LUSEM on only focusing on Business Administration and Economics. He declared that it is precisely "the diversity that makes LUSEM unique". And in less than a second he condescendingly dismissed all thoughts of fewer institutions than today. With such a cocksure attitude Apple (formerly Apple Computer Inc.) would never have produced any cell phones.
Urde is wrong and what may be right needs to be analyzed and discussed. In French there is the expression "il faut réculer pour mieux sauter" - you have to take a step back to get further (jump better). If you have a strong long-term strategy, it is not a major issue if you "lose" in an intermediate period.
If LUSEM had been a reasonably well-integrated organization, the diversity of institutions could have been a true asset and profile-creating. But LUSEM is not close to that situation. And lacks the tools to get there. And the logic IMHO.
My knowledge and experience of integration and conversations within an department is limited to the Department of Business Administration. My and many people's view is that conversations across "silo boundaries" are quite few, which may seen as a strategic problem. LUSEM has a "double silo problem". Partly because the departments have little collaboration and partly because within an department - I only know about Business Administration - there is remarkably low collaboration and mutual overview and interest.
Integration is basically a positive word, and is a good activity, but you must have an analysis that says what is to be integrated, how and by whom. Working with integration between the departments within LUSEM will, like the university's outreach mission, have very little value in a researcher's career. Sad, but true.
Strategy and more focus
The image is an example of 'strategic mathematics'. LUSEM today has six departments. The departments of 'Statistics' and 'Informatics' are closed down and re-emerge in parts in two new supporting units. A third such is added. With increased focus and better support, it is planned for growth and transformation to Lund Business School.
Supporting units at Lund Business School (LBS)
Lund Business School will have three units whose main purpose is to support the overall profile, including undergraduate education, postgraduate education, and senior researchers' projects. These units conduct no or only limited own research but are expected to have good insight into the areas' international development and applications.
- Digital learning
Machines, factories, and much more are designed with digital tools. But they are often marketed in various web-based formats. Webification, like AI, is a megatrend that increasingly offers new opportunities for both production and communication of research. A PDF is digital, but it is not a web technology.
- Quantitative learning
The strategy is that a transformation of the departments of Statistics and Informatics does significantly more for LUSEM / Lund Business School (LBS) as support units to the prioritixed areas than as institutions with their own agendas. This unit also includes increased competence in mathematics. The unbit can also become the hub within LBS for the development of AI applications and "big data". As a member of Lund University's AI network, I have been able to see that very little is being done in this area within LUSEM. However, there is some development within the Department of Economics. LBS must invest heavily here.
- Storytelling and visualization
Research that wants to reach a world where the competition for readers' time and attention is fierce must strengthen its narrative. No research is 'format neutral'. Professor Bengt Kristensson Uggla writes in his brilliant book 'The Battle for Reality' (2002, 2012)
... All this indicates that science will face new conditions in the future. When science to an increasingly lesser extent can deliver incontrovertible evidence, we find ourselves in a situation where science needs a scientific rhetoric to instead develop its ability to convince. (Ibid. P. 212)
Lund Business School will become more focused and integrated than LUSEM
The basis for this statement is that integration today is an illusion, a marketing story. As everyone with insight into the LUSEM School of Economics knows, it is very unintegrated and probably would not have had the departments it has today if Lund University could have 'started over anew' with Business administration and Economics as a basis.
Lund Business School will not be a legitimizing mouthpiece for the business community. On the contrary. LBS must be able to accommodate competing ideas and perspectives at all levels. The world is increasingly complicated, and teaching and research at LBS must reflect this even more than today. The failed internal integration can be more successfully replaced by new internal research, external research projects, and new forms of collaboration. LBS will also develop new formats to share its insights and resources with society. A new story can emerge.
What is an Institute - at LUSEM?
Why does LUSEM call something an 'Institute' and what does this mean in reality? There are many world-famous institutes, for example, Institut Pasteur↗, Karolinska institutet (KI)↗ och Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)↗. The institutes within LUSEM are of a completely different kind. Firstly, today they are probably primarily an external marketing designation, and secondly, a sort of title reward for one or a few researchers. Is there a common design for the concept 'Institute'? What decision-making power do these institutes have with to the established institutional structure? Is it about supporting interdisciplinary efforts?
It can be added that there are several what is called the 'Center for X or Y' within the subject Business Administration and within LUSEM and many other faculties. More and more work is needed to understand how universities are organized and how they are governed.
Green Business Institute
It was initially mentioned that LUSEM has started three new institutes. According to my analysis, 'Sustainability Impact' is the most important. However, this should be renamed 'The Green Business Insitute' (GBI). The new name is because the genuinely enormous transformation of companies and society that both the global and the local environmental problems entail - and require - has two aspects. One with great opportunities for new companies and business models and one that is more critical of what is de facto done and what works and has an impact.
Many universities and 'Business Schools' want to make a name for themselves in this field, and it thus requires both significant and innovative investments within Lund Business School to succeed.
Many universities and 'Business Schools' want to make a name for themselves in this field and it thus requires both large and smart investments within Lund Business School to succeed. This is urgent if you want to be a strong influencer. Establish at least one professorship and require business experience. If LUSEM does not succeed in launching this project within a reasonable time, I suggest that the industry in southern Sweden should do it themselves. Research institutes outside the traditional academy will probably become more common. That would be interesting.
About some other areas at the department of Business Adminstration
The RQ20 evaluation raises doubts about the department of 'Informatics' research investment in e-Health. As LUSEM and not least the Department of Business Administration has a relatively low level of digital competence, it would be significantly better for 'Informatics' to cease and to become an integral part of business administration.
The digital competence within the department of business administration is worryingly low and must be strengthened. It is probably also the case that one does not even realize how serious this problem is.
'Research policy' should be moved outside Business Administration and LUSEM.
Today, the subject lies within the s 'Business administration' but does not belong there at all - it is a historical coincidence that this is the case. The subject can, as a suggestion, be moved with to the Department of History or elsewhere.
Business Intelligence and Culture
The part of Research Policy based on the late Stevan Dedijer's pioneering work in 'Business intelligence' must remain and be developed significantly, requiring additional skills and new design. Increased competence within BI strengthens Lund Business School's profile. Open Source Intelligence (OSINT)↗ is a 'new' important area which has a given place in the profile of the subject. See also an 'editorial about BI', (Pdf) by Klaus Solberg Søilen in the Journal of Intelligence Studies in Business (2021 no. 2). The subject needs its own professorship as soon as possible.
Economists need to become more broadly educated. It is vital to know the history of one's subject, not least because one then, perhaps, becomes a little more open to that today 'truths' in many cases are temporary and will soon be replaced by other insights. But culture and education in a broader sense should also have a clear place in the education of economics.
A radical reorientation of 'Informatics' could already, within a few years, significantly strengthen LUSEM's digital competence and profile. Comprehensive in-house training is needed. The field 'Research policy', which today is a subgroup at the department of Business Administration, does not belong there at all - it is a historical coincidence - and it should be moved outside LUSEM. The subject 'Business intelligence' based on the late Stevan Dedijer's pioneering work should remain, but new competence must be added.
Critical Management Studies (CMS)
RQ20↗ says that USEM is world-famous for its research in Critical Management Studies (CMS) but notes that the regrowth of researchers in the field is not great.
The expected future marginal benefit of research in this field is low, and CMS's high status within LUSEM does not mean that this should be a long-term goal.
The CMS area's most famous researcher - at LUSEM - Mats Alvesson has in several presentations said that Academia [is]: a hothouse of functional stupidity, a topic he has written↗ a lot about.
Strategy and business models
LUSEM must become better and stronger in the area of strategy. There was a heyday in business administration when Eric Rhenman and Richard Normann were active at the Department of Business Administration many years ago. Strengthening education and research in strategy is essential and new recruitments are required.
The department is also not strong in the field of innovations and probably lacks the prerequisites to become so. Hence my proposal to close down the Institute for 'Innovation Management'. The proposal is colored by my many years of effort - which has not been very successful - to increase interest at 'Bus. Admin.' for the digital and webification opportunities for production and communication of research and education. As in many American elite universities, it is necessary to have some teaching and research staff with solid experiences of innovation work and entrepreneurship. This is missing and undervalued. One should be aware that business and management is more of a practical field than a theoretical one in many respects. Which management theories helped create Apple, Spotify, TetraPak and Axis or prevented Nokia and Ericsson Mobile Phones from crashing into a wall at high speed?
The PhD program in business administration needs to be radically redesigned
A goal should be clearly stated that a maximum of 50% of those who start their PhD-studies 'should' be interested in a career in Academia. Courses and resources must be adapted to this goal. This refocusing would enrich research as well as co-operation with the business community and organizations. // I have several times heard leading figures in the business world say that a PhD in business administration has a more negative value than a positive one. This is, for many reasons, not good. // Bureaucracy and lead times in the various phases of the PhD-studies must be reduced.
According to the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education's rules, a dissertation must, among other things, contribute to the development of knowledge in the area and support the learning of others↗. This is significantly wider than the theoretical boreholes that have a high status at the Department of Business Administration in Lund.
The postgraduate education in business administration is characterized by an 'old-fashionedness' in its view of science and education, the first rule of which is that it may not be discussed. And especially not by the doctoral students. A renewal can advantageously be based on the analyzes in Bengt Kristensson Ugglas' book 'A quest for truth - The theory and practice of science' (2019).
There is a long and dominant tradition where one unilaterally identifies science with abstract 'theories' - as opposed to 'practices'. Given the strong grip that the model theory-practice has had on Western thinking about knowledge, it is tempting to regard science as pure theory, which may indeed result in practice (and which in turn can have social effects), but whose very essence still is predicted to be purely theoretical. (Ibid. p. 146)
His reasoning above and in other parts - for example, his historical analysis that technology precedes science - strengthens my view that knowledge development is broader than theory development in general and in an educational context in particular. This should be discussed within LUSEM and lead to rule improvements, and there is an urgent need for a more significant variation.
Tycho Brahe had no binoculars, we have HTML and the Internet
LUSEM has a Committee for Postgraduate Education whose agenda is only to address issues that are relevant to all of LUSEMs six departments. Thus, it primarily has a filtering function that rejects what does not affect everyone. It would be better with a 'Research committee' that captured interesting issues and invited others to discuss new ideas and possibilities. I do not expect this will happen.
What is the 'right' delegation of research issues?
The management of LUSEM must review the delegation system for research and gain greater influence over the selection of research areas.
A CEO of a listed company can in principle get involved in whatever issue he or she wants in the company. Should research increase or decrease, should the company buy or sell units, should the company change its business model, its customer offerings, etc. But the Dean of LUSEM and his management team have far fewer decision-making areas.
All research questions are delegated to the individual departments and within these, individual researchers have great freedom to choose their own research areas. If LUSEM's profile is created by its research (as a central ingredient), it is thus very little LUSEM management can do to design a clearer profile. Creating a profile means that some things must be strengthened and that other things must be put on hold or phased out. A conglomerate has basically no known profile.
LUSEM needs to clarify how to strengthen its profile. The basic challenge in that work is not greater presence in social media.
Who decides the strategy for LUSEM?
6 islands LUSEM is not an independent legal entity. It is part (a faculty) within Lund University with six departments: Business administration (by far the largest), Economics, Economic history, and the relatively small Business law, Informatics, and Statistics.
Decision-making in the world of higher education takes place in a very different way than in a larger listed company, much more so than is believed in the business world. The new strategic plan for LUSEM should be presented to the Faculty board↗ before the end of 2021. This is a committee dominated by representatives of the School of Economics' six departments. The chairman is external, lacks postgraduate education and is the CEO of a small company in the furniture industry. This gives LUSEM's dean increased decision-making power. LUSEM also has a Advisory board↗ with representatives from businesses and public organizations. LUSEM also has an International Advisory Board↗ and an Alumni Advisory Board↗ and a Senior Management Council↗.
It is very difficult for most people and almost impossible for an external analyst or an external stakeholder to understand how visions and strategic plans are formulated in this group of committees and advisers. It can be assumed that there is a certain pressure to reach consensus, which has advantages, but this also makes certain types of changes more difficult.
In 2020, LUSEM came in 75th place on the Financial Times 'ranking list of 'Business Schools'. In 2021, 14 places were lost and LUSEM landed at place 89↗.
What would it mean if LUSEM for 2022 ended up outside the top 100?
The Business community and management research
Is the (local) Business community interested in the LUSEM School of Economics research? Do 'managers' read research from LUSEM, other universities, or perhaps only indirectly via sites such as Harvard Business Review, FT, and others?
My view is that the business community - which is a very heterogeneous group - is primarily interested in primary education and contacts with intelligent students. 'They' don't know very much about the research at LUSEM but have a picture, albeit diffuse, that LUSEM has several good researchers. Having some contact with universities is generally seen as sympathetic.
It does not matter much for a manager if interesting research results originate from Lund or Stockholm University, Harvard Business School, or Google Research. The challenge is to find exciting analyzes and translate these into their businesses.
The LUSEM School of Economics probably desires to add more value and relevance than today to the Businesses and Organizations. Then it will need more straightforward goals, be more transparent, and these will have to become known in larger circles.
Implementation of the Lund Business School vision and strategy
Several proposals in this analysis of LUSEM's long-term strategy obviously require discussions with other faculties and top management within Lund University. Companies are quite often faced with challenges where you need to accelerate and brake simultaneously. Related examples may be Ericsson and Volvo Cars, which need a different kind of engineering expertise than previously contributed to great success. This transformation requires that you include reasonable conditions for those who need to be retrained or leave the company.
Another structure of LUSEM - Lund Business School - provides new opportunities for collaboration with other departments and universities in Sweden and the world. And with businesses, organizations, and the general public. It is time to write a new story.
Signs of rise and fall
LUSEM's management emphasizes that it - like other universities with elite ambitions - has 'eminent research' as a prioritized goal. Good, but in a strategic analysis, this is as if a company says that 'profit' is a prioritized part of their strategy. In a strategy, one must clarify the conditions and ways to achieve these goals on one's wish list.
For an organization like LUSEM, something dramatic rarely happens, making it more difficult to identify signs of what is getting better, and what is slowly declining. What should you measure and what signs should you note?
Reference status↗ is a key concept in my PhD thesis. It is based on an older concept of 'cognitive authority' coined by Wilson (1983) but is broader and modernized. The Swedish encyclopedia NE had a high Reference status in paper format, but today the digital version has a significantly lower Reference status for several reasons (as explained in the thesis). However, the case with Reference Status is that it can "hang on" (too) long, which paradoxically counteracts the renewal work. What builds and undermines LUSEMs Reference status?
Many teachers, researchers, and representatives of several institutions will protest loudly if any part of my analysis or vision were to be realized. Or if they even start being discussed. But one of the advantages of external consultants is that they can put forward new and partly uncomfortable analyzes and proposals. Usually, and hopefully, some ideas trickle down in due time.
Your comments are invited. Send to email@example.com . Or +46 70 576 20 15. Nothing will be published without your permission.
- It's a good idea to change the name and your suggestions seem relevant to me. // Professor, Business Administration, France.
- Very interesting contribution to the strategy debate at LUSEM. Your engagement is refreshing. // Professor, Business Administration, UK.
- I have read your suggested strategy, which I found focused and well argued. // Bendik Bygstad. Professor, Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo and professor at theNorwegian School of Economics, NHH. (BB is one of the RQ20 reviewers of LUSEM)
- A change of name to Lund Business School is not a bad idea. // Professor in Bus. Adm in central Sweden.
This analysis, which is updated from time to time, is also available in Swedish - Strategi för Ekonomihögskolan i Lund. Intro to this analysis, and links will, starting Q1 2022, be sent to quite a few stakeholders within and outside the LUSEM School of Economics.
Share this page: Over 90% of all web users do so with Google Chrome. Chrome has updated its content sharing feature. The icon is in the browser menu bar. is the icon for sharing in Windows.
This feature is also excellent for disseminating research↗.
Published: December 31, 2021 Updated: May 22, 2022