Recently I was asked to participate in an “Advisory Committee” to discuss the Accounting & Finance curriculum at a local junior college. I had never considered this element of involvement or volunteerism in my work, so I eagerly accepted the invitation. Prior to the meeting I was not completely void of any prior student interaction as I had always hosted groups of interns during scholastic breaks. I always hosted a team and had them doing very hands on work.

For the “Advisory Committee”, I found that they were interested in reviewing the current curriculum and getting recommendations for how the program should be structured for the future. So with that goal in mind, why was +/- 30% of the attendees current staff and another +/- 30% current students or tutors? Is this 60% of the “Committee” really going to shape the future of the program? Off on the wrong foot already. Since the meeting had been called by the Dean of the Business program I would think that he, along with some mediation support, could easily facilitate the meeting. Especially when we are talking about developing a JC-level curriculum.

The productivity of the meeting just continued to go downhill. There was one “local businessman” in the group who seemed to be extremely vocal about what elements the program should have. Here’s a brief summary of the meeting…..
1. The “Committee” determined that adding Quickbooks to the curriculum was “essential”. Really? How about a class that gives an overview of all the key software platforms that are used in Corporate America….SAP, Hyperion, Oracle, MAS, etc.
2. When looking to identify text chapters to eliminate since the count was too high, I suggested they eliminate the chapter covering Bonds. Unless you’re looking to go into Municipal finance or larger corporate treasury functions, it’sreally not a necessary chapter for your target group. But no…”it’s absolutely necessary because it covers NPV…”. How about a lesson that covers all the financial ratios and the manner in which they are applied?
3. The text also had 5 of 27 chapters tied to costing. How about consolidating and offering an extended lesson that covers all the different costing methods, along with a few case studies. After all, this is Southern California & the manufacturing environment is eroding. “No, these chapters are essential to a students understanding of cost accounting”. Last time I checked, there were specific classes also offered for this topic.
4. The committee was supposed to be discussing the topic of how to better market the program. That part of the discussion was literally 3-4 minutes. Again, this was supposed to be shaped by the 60% that represented “insiders”?

So, in the end, this became more of a poorly planned focus group rather than the “Advisory Committee” it was marketed as. What was interesting is that the staff really didn’t seem open to change, was not interested in educating students on the “soft skills” necessary in a finance department, or helping to create a larger awareness for understanding the story behind or cause for the numbers. Basically, a program that will just generate a bunch of “crunchers”…..

Thanks for reading . . . .

Jeffrey Ishmael