Abstract

Three significant trends can be identified recently in the higher educational sector. First, the promotion of lifelong learning or personal development, career advancement and the general enhancement of the has recently almost become an international movement, occurred primarily in advanced industrialised countries. Adult and continuing education, which used to be a poor cousin of higher education, has become a rising star. Second, educational programmes are now offered not only by conventional universities and higher educational institutes but also corporate universities. There has been a phenomenal increase in the number of corporate universities, from 400 in the early 1980s to around 2,000 now. Established initially in the U.S., corporate universities have expanded into Europe and even part of Asia. There have also been many examples of corporate universities collaborating with conventional universities to offer educational programmes for employees working both within and outside different corporations. Third, with the increasing popularity of the Internet, Web-based higher educational programmes are getting more and more popular. Through different educational technology platforms, students can now study their chosen educational programmes any time anywhere.

While the three trends discussed are seemingly unrelated, they are the outcomes of similar factors such as the impact of the growing knowledge economies, rapid technological advancement, pervasive forces of globalisation, and aging population. This paper will portray an emergent model of higher education developed out of these trends, with potential problems and issues analysed and discussed.

Keywords: Higher education, lifelong learning, corporate universities, Internet, Web-based learning, knowledge economies

Introduction

This is an exploratory study identifying and examining major global changes that have recently occurred in the higher educational sector. Three obvious trends can be identified, viz., the international trend of promoting lifelong learning, the increasing popularity of corporate universities, and the widespread acceptance of web-based educational programmes. While seemingly unrelated to one another, these recent trends emerged in the higher educational sector are found to be the outcomes of similar factors－particularly rapid advancement of technologies and pervasive forces of globalisation－within an emerging context of the knowledge economies. Taken together, these three trends are indicative of the development of a new model of higher education. This paper attempts to portray the emerging model of higher education and to identify potential problems and issues embedded in such a model.

Recent Developments in Higher Education

Three significant trends are found to have taken place recently in the higher educational sector, suggesting the gradual emergence of a new model of higher education. First, there has been an international movement promoting education as a lifelong process for personal development, career advancement and the general enhancement of the quality of life. While 'lifelong learning' is not a new concept the origin of which can be traced to an Act bearing that name passed in the U.S. as far back as in 1976, such a concept has gained a phenomenal level of international popularity since the beginnings of the 1990s. A Lifelong Learning Law was enacted in Japan in 1990, with a similar act passed in South Korea in 1996. In fact, the year of 1996 was named by the European Union (EU) as the European Year of Lifelong Learning (Chan, 1999: 1). In this same year, the fourth meeting of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Education Committee was held in Paris to discuss around the theme of

"Making Lifelong Learning a Reality for All" (OECD, 1996:3). A year later in 1997, a call was made in the Fifth International Conference on Adult Education held by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) for a worldwide commitment to adult and continuing education in the perspective of lifelong learning for all (Chan, 1999: 1). In 1998, Taiwan published a White Paper on 'Towards the learning Society’ and named the year 'the Lifelong Learning Year'. Adult and continuing education, which used to be a poor cousin of higher education, has almost become a rising star.

Second, there has been a phenomenal increase in the number of corporate universities worldwide. While there were about 400 corporate universities in 1988, the number has grown to around 2000 by the end of 2000 (Gerbman, 2000: 102; Meister, 2001: 1). By bringing all training activities under one roof, corporate universities are established to foster the alignment of the companies' training activities with its business strategies. In fact, corporate universities are not a new idea; General Motors in the U.S. pioneered the concept as far back as in 1927. Several corporate universities sprang up in the late 1950s, including the Crotonville Management Development Institute established by General Electric and the Disney University developed by Walt Disney, both of which were in the U.S. Only recently in the 1990s had the number of corporate universities begun to surge. Originated in the U.S., the corporate universities have found their way into Europe and Asia. Examples of corporate universities established in Europe include ABB Academy, Ericsson Management Institute, Lufthansa School of Business, Daimler-Chrysler University, and Isvor Fiat (Wagner, 2000: 93). In Asia, a notable example is the Aspire Academy of Acer recently established in Taiwan.

Many corporate universities have entered into partnership with conventional universities and higher educational institutes to offer their employees customised executive training programmes or, in some cases, programmes leading to higher degrees. Whirlpool Brandywine Creek Performance Centre, corporate university of Whirlpool Corporation in the U.S., entered into alliances with Indiana

 University, University of Michigan, and INSEAD in France to offer over 30 executive training programmes to Whirlpool's employees (Meister, 1998a: 186-190). British Airways, in partnership with Lancaster University, offered its employees a new Master in Business Administration (MBA) in 1999, based on an old programme which has been running for more than 10 years (Vine, 1999: 18-19). Some corporate universities have gone even further by offering educational programmes to outsiders. Disney Institute, for instance, invited serious outside executives to learn the Disney way of doing business. Saturn, Arthur D. Little, and Motorola also threw their campus door wide open to interested parties. There are, however, more cautious corporate universities restricting their programmes to outsiders including only the companies' suppliers, distributors and dealers, and customers, in the hope of achieving significant improvement throughout the entire value chain (Landau, 2000: 20). Some "brand-name" universities─especially ones with active continuing education departments like the University of Michigan─are using the corporate university as a point of distribution to deliver their brand name virtually (Harvard Management Update, 1998: 5)

Third, web-based educational programmes have gained widespread international acceptance with the increasing popularity of the Internet since mid-1990s. Through connecting to different educational technology platforms comprising networks, hardware, and software applications, people can now study their chosen educational programmes any time, anywhere. These programmes range from short-term professional training to full-blown vocational and higher educational degrees such as MBAs, provided by conventional universities, commercial companies, corporate universities, professional bodies or some forms of combinations of these different parties. Dell, Oracle, and Motorola Universities, for instance, offer many of their short-term training courses through Web-based tools to customise learning experiences to satisfy individual needs and perferences (Meister, 1998b). In the U.K., the University for Industry (Ufl) aims at offering programmes to train particular vocational skills for various industries, through the e-learning network supported by a series of local hubs

(PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2000, Annex 1: 1). Well-known examples of conventional universities in the U.S. providing full-blown web-based degree programmes include the University of Pennsylvania which offers an on-line MBA degree and the University of Phoenix other on-line degree programmes (Power, 2001). In April 2000, even Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) announced a 10-year US$100 million initiative, known as the MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) project, to create public Web sites containing lecture notes, problem sets, syllabi, examination papers, simulations, and video lectures for most of its 2,000 courses (Frestier and Agencies, 2001). While MIT would initially not going to charge users of their materials placed on the Web and to give credits and grant degrees through web-based learning, the President of the University did not rule out the possibility of MIT seeking to develop profit-oriented Web programmes in the future (Sappenfield, 2001). Even in China where the information technology infrastructure is not as developed as in the U.S., universities such as Tinghua is offering classes across the country over the Internet (The Economist, 2001).

There are many examples of collaboration between commercial educational providers, publishers, media companies and conventional universities offering e-learning programmes. UNext, an education business headquartered in the U.S., has worked with a consortium of universities including the business schools of Columbia, the University of Chicago, the London School of Economics, Stanford, and Carnegie Mellon to offer on-line business courses through the newly formed Cardean University (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2000, Annex 1: 1). Another example is the partnership of Pensare, a company based in California, with prominent business schools including Wharton at the University of Pennsylvania, Fuqua at Duke University, and INSEAD, near Paris, to put their materials online (The Economist, 2001). Professional bodies such as American Management Association has also joined forces with PrimeLearning.com to develop web-based training programmes for their members (Marshall, 2001: 46). There are also examples of public-private sector collaboration. The Open University of Catalonia (UOC), based in Barcelona and funded by a mix of public and private capital, operates a network of spin-off businesses and joint ventures offering on-line courses at bachelor, master, and doctorate levels. Similar initiatives, with substantial capital support from both state and industry, have also been launched by the governments in Finland and Norway (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2000, Annex 1: 1-3). Collaboration in offering Web-based programmes has occurred between educational and commercial entities, public and private sectors, across geographical areas offering products focussed mainly on business studies which target at the local, regional and, in some cases, even the global market.

Why Have These Trends Emerged?

The international call for lifelong learning since the 1990s is an obvious outcome of the gradual emergence of knowledge economies in the more advanced industrialised countries, demanding people to possess not only a higher level but also different types of knowledge and skills. Even with the adoption of policies in many countries to expand enrolments gradually and improve the quality of initial schooling, there has always been a time lag involved in raising the skill levels quickly. With the knowledge economies having a strong information technology flavour, a new focus of education and training policies is needed to develop human capacities to realise the potential of the "global information economy".

With the gathering momentum of globalisation and trade liberalisation, large-scale corporate restructuring is the frequent headlines in many countries which are experiencing high levels of unemployment, marginalisation and even social exclusion of the unprivileged. This phenomenon, coupled with the aging of the population, the growing cultural and ethnic diversity, and the changing nature of work, creates a context in which continuous upgrading of knowledge and skills will play a more significant role for people to stay in gainful employment. It is felt that the best way to meet these challenges is to promote lifelong learning to strengthen the capacity of labour markets, firms, and individuals to adjust to changes (Tuijnman, 1999: 2). Promoting lifelong learning is to support the transition to "learning societies" in which equal opportunities are available to all, access is open, and all individuals are encouraged and motivated to learn, in both formal and informal education throughout the progress of life (OECD, 1996: 15).

Factors that are contributive to the international trend of promoting lifelong learning also underpin the increasing popularity of corporate universities. The emergence of knowledge economies has created an urgent need for companies to continually update employees' skills in response to new opportunities, new competition, and new technology. However, there is always a time lag under the government education system to provide the economy with the required new knowledge and skills, making businesses complaining about the "products" coming out of the national schools (Meister, 1998a: 10). This situation, coupled with the increasing short shelf life of knowledge, has forced corporations to take on the role of educators themselves.

Another reason for corporations to increasingly assume the responsibilities for servicing the educational needs of working adults is because of the dissipation of job security, as implied in the old social contract between employers and employees. Under the new psychological contract, employers are expected to provide learning opportunities for job-related skills and continued employability for employees in place of job security. Working adults are demanding a higher degree of flexibility, more convenience, and the option to pursue education at a distance in order to fulfil their continuous learning needs (Meister, 1998a, 9, 213). Many employers are willing to satisfy such demands as they can become employers of the choice and are able to attract employees of better quality.

The forces of globalisation have also facilitated the growth of corporate universities. As companies globalise, there is a need to spread common culture and values, and drive changes across the whole organisation (Wagner, 2000). Corporate universities can serve this exact function of strengthening and reinforcing core values of the organisation by offering customised training programmes to employees working for the same company in different parts of the world. With corporate universities pursuing the link between a company's training activities and its business strategies, employees' competencies can be leveraged to achieve the company's missions and values, speed up changes, and foster the process of globalisation.

Undoubtedly, technological advancement is behind the recent burgeoning of Web-based educational programmes. With the international trend of convergence of computer, communications, and consumer electronics products, access to the Internet can now be made not only with PCs but also through a wider choice of devices, including mobile phones, interactive TV, and game consoles. With the development of broadband technologies fostering faster connections and transmission of data, more interactive and content-rich Web experiences can also be obtained. Technological advancement, coupled with growing individual and corporate interest in continuous professional development (CPD) and lifelong learning, has fostered the development and popular acceptance of e-learning educational programmes.

The analysis made above has brought to light the fact that the increasing importance of lifelong learning, growing popularity of corporate universities and widespread acceptance of Web-based educational programmes are not unrelated trends. They are the outcomes of similar forces such as the gradual emergence of knowledge societies, globalisation, aging population and technolgical advancement. Development of any one of the trends in the higher educational sector discussed above reinforces the others. For instance, the international trend promoting lifelong learning stimulates companies to establish corporate universities to take on the role of educators and develop Web-based learning programmes. The growth of Web-based educational programmes has, in turn, sustained the popularity of corporate universities and the viability of the concept of lifelong learning.

The Emerging Model of Higher Education

The increasing importance of lifelong learning, growing popularity of corporate universities, and widespread acceptance of web-based educational programmes converge to suggest some salient developments in the higher educational sector. First, the higher educational sector is no longer monopolised by the government but has gradually been subject to the influences of private commercial companies and other parties. Closely related to the first development is the trend of companies entering into alliances or partnership to offer products of higher education. Finally, there has been a gradual move away from offering comprehensive mass education toward the provision of individualised learning pathways. Higher and adult education is getting more customised and personalised, tailored to the needs of individual learners.

With the participation of commercial providers focussing on the satisfaction of individualised learning needs, higher education has gradually become a commodity to be purchased in the open market. Technological advancement and the forces of globalisation have worked together to foster the development of the higher educational sector into a global industry, producing different commodities to be consumed by various customers. The "value chain" of the global education industry has also become increasingly disaggregated, with different components in the chain "produced" by various providers and niche vendors. The extent of the disaggregation of the higher education “value chain” is found to be most elaborate in the U.S., where different kinds of companies are engaged in "producing" various components in such a global industry.

Generally speaking, the value-chain of the higher educational sector can be segregated into four major segments, viz., technological platform, content, support, as well as marketing and sales. In building a technological platform, infrastructure companies are engaged in building communication infrastructure such as Local or Wide Area Networks and local information technology infrastructure. Application Service Providers are playing a significant role in providing through the Internet technological tools and services such as e-learning and software applications. Content providers participate in the design and production of modules and courses for different kinds of customers. There are many different types of content providers, ranging from professors in conventional universities, publishers, and media companies. As for the support segment in the global education industry, it can be further segregated into smaller components, including the provision of advice in the college selection process, on-line admission and applications; tutor support; on-line textbook distribution; and external assessment service. In the support services segment, there are also companies providing on-line libraries, e-learning portals, student activity/portals, and campus-based portals. Finally, companies can also be engaged in marketing and selling the content for different consumers. In most cases, technology platform providers or content providers will also assume such a role of marketing and sales.

In the emerging knowledge economies, the model of mass education monopolised by the government is being challenged, as such a model is not able to provide the new economy with the required novel knowledge and skills in good time. There has been a high demand of personalised and customised education to satisfy different needs of individuals. Education has also become a lifelong pursuit. The provision of comprehensive one-off initial mass higher education is gradually replaced by the offering of just-in-time learning, which is subject to the control of the learners themselves. Higher education is also being seen more as a process than about the content, with its value chain becoming increasingly disaggregated. Products of higher education include not only formal qualifications but also learning experiences for individual learners, "produced" by the conventional universities and higher educational institutions as well as commercial companies, corporate universities, and even professional bodies. A comparison of the major characteristics of the higher educational sector in industrial societies and knowledge economies respectively is given in Table 1 below.

An extreme form of the emerging model of higher education can be illustrated by the “e-University” project currently being implemented in the U.K. Such a project is an initiative undertaken by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and other UK funding bodies in February 2000 to establish a globally-competitive provider of internet-based higher education targeted at both the local and overseas markets. It is a national move supported by the U.K. government to capitalise on the UK higher education (HE)'s expertise in new technologies and on its reputation for quality to secure a significant share in the markets accessed by major virtual and corporate universities in the United States and elsewhere. The main objective is to enable such a virtual learning initiative to reach a scale and quality that challenge the best in the world (HEFCE, 2000).

Under the e-University project, a holding company with the title eLearning Holding Company Limited owned by the HE sector was incorporated on 25 June 2001. All UK higher education institutions were invited to become members of the holding company in April 2001. The venture will not trade under the name of eLearning Holding Company and a separate branding exercise will be carried out. The holding company will confer a licence upon an operating company, as a joint venture with the private sector, to undertake all activities of the e-University. The academic purpose and integrity of the enterprise are safeguarded by the establishment of a Committee for Academic Quality, comprising different expert panels, to define criteria in designing and developing learning materials, providing learning support services, and to lay down an agreed set of guidelines for the quality management process. A technology platform will be established to provide appropriate infrastructure based on an open architecture and to offer tools and services to various related parties via the Internet. The content to be sold as products to different markets will be supplied from various sources, including outside institutions with their existing materials, institutions commissioned by the e-University to produce materials from scratch, and joint ventures between e-University and partner providers to produce materials as a form of joint investment. Various support services will be offered including the provision of advice for programme selection, interactive tutorial support, design of assessment systems, and on-line library services. While associated initially with some of Britain’s premier educational institutions, the e-University will promote its own name and its own brand recognition in various markets.

Hence the e-University concept is not simply an electronic version of a conventional university. It is an innovative e-business with its operations based on a wholly Web-oriented, open standards model. Products marketed include not only academic awards but also total learning experience for different types of end consumers, including individuals and institutions. There are individual learners seeking for an academic award, studying to satisfy continuous professional development requirements or simply studying for interest without the intention of seeking a qualification. There are also multinational corporations developing in-house training programmes and materials and regional governments developing new academic programmes. Individuals can pay the full price for completing an award with the whole package including the use of the technology platform, reception of advice on programme selection, award coherence, and learning support. Alternatively, consumers might choose to pay for just one or a few of the services offered, disaggregating the price of receiving higher education. While the e-University project can be seen as the new model of higher education developed to its extreme, such an example can illustrate very well the fundamental changes that are now occurring in the traditional system of higher education.

Problems and Issues

It is obvious that the emerging model of higher education comes with many merits. Shifting from a supplier-led to a learner-demand orientation, the new model of higher education is able to provide individuals with a higher degree of flexibility and address a greater variety of their needs. Compared with the provision of mass education under the traditional paradigm, such a new model of higher education is better suited to the emerging knowledge economy to satisfy the constant and urgent demands of new types of knowledge and skills. With the acceptance of the fact that job security is a thing of the past, the idea of one having the control of what, when, and how to study as a lifelong pursuit for accredited academic awards or sheer learning experience to sustain employability is intrinsically appealing. Web-based educational programmes, offered by one or a combination of conventional universities, commercial providers, corporate universities, and professional bodies, are able to provide opportunities for learners such as people with disabilities who otherwise could not be able to take advantage of higher education. For some, the new model of higher education is a means to help increase social inclusion.

For those who see the merits in the emerging model of higher education, the only problems are the practical difficulties in its implementation. One of the obvious concerns is quality assurance and how it can be assured, with so many different parties involved in “producing” the products of higher education. Another issue relates to the current lack of agreed international standards to facilitate Web-based educational programmes. There are many organizations

working towards developing acceptable international standards. For instance, the IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee introduced the broad definition of ‘learning objects’ as the grain size of the smallest unit of learning materials to ensure their interoperability and reusability. There has also been a strong advocacy for the definition and use of XML standard for representing the structure of courseware components. The work of various bodies is converging and the publication of the Shareable Courseware Object Reference Model (SCORM) recommendations by the US Defence Department in January 2000 was party designed to encourage commercial courseware providers to adopt a compliance policy (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2000, Annex 3: 16). However, a set of acceptable international standards is yet to emerge. With various parties being content providers, there are also problems of programme coherence, qualification recognition and articulation.

However, even with the problems mentioned adequately tackled and the emerging model of higher education smoothly implemented, there are still many who are sceptical about the new model and apprehensive of the threats imposed opon the traditional universities. Conventional universities are now only one kind of vendors among many to offer higher educational programmes. They have lost their monopoly of higher education and, with it, the captive market. Individual faculty of conventional universities can now be seen as content providers who can market their knowledge not only to universities but also to other service providers. Many universities and higher educational institutions are forced to adopt a full-fledged business model in their operation to survive.

It is understandable that there are worries as to whether higher education should become a global industry with a multitude of parties engaged in producing different products to be consumed in an open market. The emerging model of higher education does represent a mark deviation from its old counterpart under the traditional paradigm. In a market-driven model of higher education, the commercial world’s basis of competition applies. Competition is therefore based on price, achievable quality, and responsiveness to the practical needs rather than freely within the accepted philosophies and values of higher education, as defined and upheld by the academics. The roles played by professors and academics in higher education have significantly been reduced, now being purely content providers to leave the counseling and other support roles to other parties participated in the value chain. With the emphasis on satisfying the skill demands of industries and businesses in the growing knowledge economies, some are fearful of the signs of higher education being vocationalised.

The new model of higher education offering Web-based programmes is a double-edge sword. On the one hand, it can be seen as a means to help increase social inclusion, bringing the disabilities and people with inconveniences into the higher education net. On the other hand, such a model may be seen as contributive to the marginalisation or exclusion of the disadvantaged who cannot afford to buy any Internet devices and pay to connect to the Web. There is even the risk of the Web-based programmes further reinforcing the digital divide. As the President of MIT, Dr. Charles Vest, commented on the OpenCourseWare project to put teaching materials on-line, “[It] is the perfect marriage of American higher education with the capabilities of the World Wide Web”. Yet many are anxious to see how successful such a marriage is going to be.

The Future to Come

There is little dispute about the growing importance of higher education with the gradual emergence of the knowledge economies. The success of the knowledge economies is, to a great extent, hinged on how best the demand of the required knowledge and skills is met. Three obvious recent trends can be identified in the higher educational sector, including the growing importance of lifelong learning, increasing popularity of corporate universities, and widespread acceptance of Web-based educational programmes. These trends converge to indicate the emergence of a new market-driven model of higher education, which is significantly different from that operated under the traditional paradigm.

The higher education sector has developed increasingly into a global industry with different parties engaged in “producing” various components along the value chain, for assembly into the “end products”. Conventional universities are no longer monopolising all aspects of providing higher education. It is now commonplace to have collaboration among universities and commercial providers to offer learners customised programmes according to their individualised learning pathways. Operated with an e-business partnership model, the e-University project being currently implemented in the U.K. can be seen as the new model of higher education pushed to its extreme. What are some of the major problems that will emerge under the new model of higher education operated within a market-driven context based on an extreme form of consumerism? This paper has identified several of them. The major ones being the potential degeneration of the content of higher educational programmes into nothing more than just skill-based knowledge and the potential reinforcement of the digital divide by offering educational programmes on the Web. The far-reaching impact of the changing model of higher education on our future certainly warrants a closer examination of the potential problems and issues identified.

References

Chan, Alice. 1999. "The Lifelong Learning Festival: An Echo to the UNESCO Fifth International Conference on Adult Education", Paper presented to the Lifelong Learning Forum organised by the Federation for Continuing Education in Tertiary Institutions (FCETI) on 26 June 1999.

Forestier, Katherine and Agencies. 2001. “MIT to Put All Courses Online Free” South China Morning Post. 7 April, 2001.

Gerbman, Russell V. 2000. "Corporate Universities 101" HR Magazine, February, pp. 101-106.

Harvard Business Update. Corporate Universities: The New Pioneers of Management Education. Article Reprint No.U9810B.

Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). 2000. "e-University Project" HEFCE Circular Letter: 2000: 04/00 (Http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/CircLets/2000/c104_00.htm) (Accessed on 19 April, 2001).

Landau, Meryl D. 2000. "Corporate Universities Crack Open Their Doors" Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 21, Issue 3, May/June, pp.19-23.

"Lessons of a Virtual Timetable" The Economist, 17 Febrary, 2001.

Marshall, Jeffrey. 2001. "Distance Education Embraces the Web" Financial Executive, March/April. pp.46.

Meister, Jeanne C. 1998a. Corporate Universities: Lessons in Building a World-Class Work Force. Revised and Updated Edition. U.S.: MacGraw-Hill.

Meister, Jeanne C. 1998b. “Extending the Short Shelf Life of Knowledge” Training & Development, June. pp. 52-59.

Meister, Jeanne C. 2001. "The Brave New World of Corporate Education" (Http://chronicle.com/free/v47/i22/22b01001.htm) (Accessed on 2 May, 2001).

OECD, 1996. Lifelong Learning for All. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Power, Carol. 2001. "Cyberschools Takes Off as Colleges Go Internet Route" Irish Times. 13 April, 2001.

PricewaterhouseCoopers Report. 2000. Business Model for the e-University. (Http://www.hefce.ac.uk) (Accessed on 19 April, 2001).

Sappenfield, M. 2001. “Internet as Portal to Ivory Tower In Bold Education Gambit, MIT Opts to Put All Courses Online and Give Free Access” Christian Science Monitor. Boston, Mass. 6 April.

Tuijnman, Albert. 1999. "International Perspectives on Lifelong Learning", Paper presented to the Lifelong Learning Forum organised by the Federation for Continuing Education in Tertiary Institutions (FCETI) on 26 June 1999.

Wagner, Stacey. 2000. "Putting the 'U' in Europe" Training and Development, May pp. 93.

Vine, Philippa. 1999. "Back to School: How Does the US Concept of the Corporate University fit into British Corporate and Academic Culture" The Bristish Journal of Administrative Management, March/April, pp.18-21.