Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intellectual ...

Rajendra Chetty
7. Ethics and decision making in organisations
Ethical choices in <strong>the</strong> academe are <strong>of</strong>ten between right and right, and not only <strong>the</strong> dichotomous right
and wrong. Given <strong>the</strong> need for a consideration <strong>of</strong> students, faculty needs to shape its strategy for
<strong>the</strong>m around customer satisfaction, humane treatment, human values, efficiency, competency and
respect. Management that creates and sustains co-operative stakeholder relationships and a genuine
commitment to ethical principles will have a competitive advantage over o<strong>the</strong>r institutions.
Management, academics and students need to take ethics more seriously. All curriculum, financial,
resource allocation and strategic decisions should be based on an ethical imperative. Kant
encapsulates ethical behaviour succinctly: ‘act so that you treat humanity, whe<strong>the</strong>r in your own person
or in that <strong>of</strong> ano<strong>the</strong>r, always as an end and never as a means only’ (Kant 1969:54).
8. The co-creation paradigm
Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2000) maintain that <strong>the</strong> co-creation paradigm is a consumer-centric view
that contrasts with <strong>the</strong> company-centric view. Essential factors <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> customer-centric paradigm that
should underpin relationships in <strong>the</strong> teacher training sector are:
The student is an integral part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system for value creation;
The student must be active and should influence how value is generated;
Creative students should be allowed to transcend <strong>the</strong> boundaries <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir training; and
There are multiple points <strong>of</strong> exchange where <strong>the</strong> student and <strong>the</strong> academics can co-create value
ra<strong>the</strong>r than single point extraction <strong>of</strong> value from <strong>the</strong> student.
Student passivity is characteristic <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> traditional paradigm. Greater information access enables
more informed decisions, a global view, <strong>the</strong> growth <strong>of</strong> student networks, experimentation with skills
and teaching styles and heightened activism in social issues. Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2002:1)
assert that <strong>the</strong> key strategy to counter passivity is constant feedback.
9. New horizons through students’ eyes
Teacher training must shift from content-based training to skills and experiences. To co-create value
and optimal student experiences, academics must focus on student competencies and strategies to
harness <strong>the</strong>m through mentoring and radical pedagogies. Student competencies include <strong>the</strong>ir
knowledge and skills, willingness to learn and experiment and ability to engage in dialogue around
larger educational and social issues.
Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2002:2) also identified four building blocks for co-creating value, which
are beneficial in <strong>the</strong> shift towards a holistic Teacher Education model:
Management must engage with students in an active and ongoing dialogue;
Access to all forms <strong>of</strong> information and knowledge as well as transparency <strong>of</strong> information; and
Risk reduction – students can make more informed choices about risks and can take on more
responsibility for <strong>the</strong>m.
The strategic development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sector using Hoebeke’s (1994) strategy would enable us to step
outside internal perspectives <strong>of</strong> power, traditional frameworks, narrow notions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concepts
‘teacher’ and ‘education’ to get a clear view <strong>of</strong> new horizons through students’ eyes. There is a need
for a student feedback-influenced-design instead <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> narrow lecturer-traditional-framework.
The aim <strong>of</strong> Hoebeke’s (1994) framework is an understanding <strong>of</strong> workers’ contribution to <strong>the</strong> work
system. The paradigm shift actively debunks <strong>the</strong> justification for a meritocratic class society in which
<strong>the</strong> abstract and complex thinkers are seen to have <strong>the</strong> ‘right’ to manage or even direct o<strong>the</strong>rs. Every
component <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty has a role to play in <strong>the</strong> strategic development and a shared understanding
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> new Teacher Education is vital. The shared understanding would include:
The shift towards a holistic Teacher Education training model;
An interrogation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> notions <strong>of</strong> ‘education’ leading to a deep understanding <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concept; and
Transcending faculty boundaries for students.
120