Okay, semester four ended two weeks ago and, without a significant break, semester five came around and the cycle begins again. Semester five is different, which is something I probably say each time. The reason it's different this time is I'm back doing a core module, which means 14 units and an exam. I've not done an exam in a year, but I can't say I'm concerned about it. The second intriguing thing is the core module is Managing Information (strategic IS/IT and then statistics) and the elective is Business Transformation, which means it's six months of IS/IT-enabled business transformation.

What's very interesting is it's my home territory. I've been head of IS/IT at an international company and managed IS/IT to enable and drive business transformation. I've also approached things from an external perspective in terms of consultancy engagements supplying IS solutions and associated business transformation. A number of the methods featured in the module are known to me or I recognise the methods I've used in the past as those methods as a product of actual experience (after all, the methods arise for a reason). I read the Benefits Management book some time ago and then again a year or so ago. I've managed an application portfolio within a diverse multifaceted business. I've also ran a number of agile projects.

At times, the MBA isn't about completely new subjects like economics and finance, but about adding a wider perspective and focus on things you already have a very good practitioner grounding in. This is a good thing.

The two modules have different content, but are obviously complementary. They are also very different in how they are assessed. Managing Information is exactly the same as all other core modules: TAA, ECA and then exam. Looking at it, the TAA is a relatively perfunctory question about agile projects. The ECA is a statistics question. This leaves the Benefits Management core of the module for the exam. It seems to me, at the moment, to be a module that can be managed to the assessments. I don't mean I'll trivialise it and study to the assessments only, but it does mean it's clear how to manage your time effectively and not over study. In a way, you can't over study, but I live in the real world of distance learning with a full-time job so it's something you have to consider. It's more expectations management, I guess.

Business Transformation is very different. An elective is normally TAA and then ECA. Business transformation gives this a twist. The ECA is three pieces of work that amounts to an ECA length, which is worth 75% of the final mark. It is suggested you use your own organisation as an example. The remaining 25% is based on contributions online, some of this dictated by continual pieces of 'work' after each unit and an expectations you'll just contribute to the various online resources. The continual pieces of work isn't so much an issue, it just makes the schedule of work a bit more constant which dictates your study schedule. It will be good if the interactive nature of it takes off with the promise of more interactive seminars online and the like.

Anyone who reads this blog will know where I see the issue with the business transformation assessment set-up? The fact the elective seems orientated to being valuable to 'your current organisation' as that is the suggestion in the assessment. I agree, that's a fantastic way to do it, allow the student to apply immediate value from his studies. If you are in the right type of role to maximise that return it is amazingly valuable, especially if it's a new skill for the student. Regrettably, if you're working on contracts or short-term contracts that have a particular focus you don't necessarily have the remit to do such things, as you tend to be applying your breadth of skills to solving a particular thorny, priority or strategic problem. Initial queries suggest you don't have to use your current organisation, but I still need to assess the degree to which this makes the assessment process less...natural.

It's going to be an interesting six months. I've already read a lot of the core text books for the IS/IT and business transformation material, due to natural interest, and it has allowed me to adopt different perspectives on my practitioner orientated skills and experience.

As already mentioned, the Distance Learning programme for the Durham Business School MBA, has been re-named the Global MBA. This isn't a bad thing, it's a better name, it rolls off the tongue and certainly reflects the cohort on the programme at any particular time. I'm also a big fan of being able to do electives via residential study and hope they do more of that even though I'm probably too late in the game to use it to its best advantage.

One of the other ideas that was rumbling in the background when the programme was in transition was the idea that the residential seminars would be longer. Not a bad idea. I've yet to have a bad residential experience and they are certainly one of the best parts of what was the Distance Learning programme. They work because you get to meet other students and discuss ideas. It's great to hear what other people do and how they approach things. The residential seminars were also perfectly placed in the semester process, they sat just at the point in time it was worth considering what might be on the exam and the ECA would have just come out so that could be discussed face-to-face with students and tutors. This is worth remembering, the semester process has a rhythm to it through building blocks like the TAA, residential, an on-line assignment and the ECA. The semester rhythm and the key points of value (the residential and its placement being a main one) is one of the key things you learn in your very first semester.

It would seem the Global MBA won't have residential seminars any more, instead it will have Summer School. Once I'd reduced my expectations involving California beaches and women in bikinis I started to get a handle on the detail. Initially, it wasn't that bad. There is five days worth of on-site activities, albeit one day is dedicated to career development, which isn't a bad thing in my view. Initially it seemed to be a good idea until I realised there is only one summer school in September and that one summer school doesn't match with the release of the ECA. I've had a think about it numerous times and I'm still not convinced this is an improvement to the programme.

One period of residential time is a blow in numerous ways. First, it makes the five days summer school covers a bit of a joke as you're actually losing residential teaching as two residential in a year (one per semester) meant you had six days of residential teaching now you have four (due to the career development day). That's a loss of two days. Second, it comes as double blow as the January to June semester won't have any residential time at all. No asking about the ECA at the residential because it's released on the same weekend (the Monday it finished often enough). There was a reason that happened, I believe, it allowed the distance learning cohort to discuss some ECA generalities with a key lecturer just like the full-time students would (this was particularly effective if you'd tied your studying to the modules on the residential). In a similar the opportunity for face-to-face exam advice and example questions is gone. Third, it's also a triple blow, because even for the July to December semester you can't tie it all up either as the summer school takes place a week or two before the ECA is released. This radically reduces the benefits of the residential component. It was part of the structure of the semester, a process which added a value beyond the some of its parts and allowed for expectations and unknowns to be better managed. Now it's pretty much semester independent and doesn't add any value to the first semester and adds less to the second. Are the business school even aware of how critical the placement of the residential seminar was in the overall flow of the semester? I thought that was the actual point.

I find myself looking at it and being happy I didn't study the four semester I have studied under the summer school structure and I'm a bit frustrated I'll be studying my final two (the third is the dissertation) under this structure. In a way, summer school 2010 will be my last module useful residential component! I just can't fathom the change as a value driven decision. It makes little sense. It seems to be a net dis-benefit for the student on almost every level? I can fathom the value from other angles, but they aren't student centric.

If I'm missing something I'm all for hearing it.

The final ECA has been submitted. Normally this would have happened two weeks ago, but the Strategic Marketing ECA was subject to an extension because of a late release date. That is semester four complete. Another one down. Three more to go. The next one even sees a return to sitting an exam after two semesters without any. In a very strange sort of way, I'm looking forward to it. There is a bit of a focus to things when an exam is looming on the horizon. It's also a focused challenge. It will mean I'll have to move on essays early as I like to have them out of the way before revision.

I'm glad the Strategic Marketing ECA is done, it's been an experience worthy of reality TV show clichés. There are a number of reasons for this. The difficult nature of essays involving 'your organisation or one you are familiar with', the degree to which contexts are superfluous (or not) and the difference between questions with multiple parts and those that are open-ended (essentially involving different levels of directed guidance). The Strategic Marketing essay was the worst of all three.

It basically comes down to the ECA Economics of Scarcity. You have 4,000 words and a very open-ended question. Exactly what elements of the course do you include? How much research do you put into the organisation itself? What if you organisation isn't really appropriate? You never have enough words and quite often the final work is defined as much by what isn't in the text as what is. The usual result for an essay of this type is you are never fully satisfied with what you have produced. The concern is what you've chosen to address in the way you've addressed it isn't agreeable with the individual marking the paper. I don't care what anyone says, I still insist a high degree of individual preference factors into these things. The strategic marketing essay went from me not looking forward to it (not because of the subject, just the framing of the question), to enjoying it and thinking I had it nailed, to coming back down the other side a bit and just wanting it filed and off the agenda.

Currently, I'm in the position of liking the framework I've used to structure the essay but I'd never be able to convince myself I've got the balance of content right in any other area. If this was a truly real world, practical application of what had been learned it'd be a lot clearer and easier as you'd have a practical, commercial objective.

This is one of the 'interesting' things about the MBA: value against marks. I've been satisfied with my marks so far, but it's even occurred to my the value of a module isn't directly correlated to the mark. The study of any particular subject gives you a perspective you didn't have before, or enhances one you did possess. It provides a new way of looking at things and new forms of language. All of which is very valuable. I'm just not convinced those value elements are enhanced with a higher result. Obviously, you've done something right academically, and that's good and all, but I'm not sure getting the highest mark possible translates to necessarily having gotten the most value out of it in a practical way.

The major pain now is I don't have any break between this semester and the next one, which has an official start date of next week. I'm used to finishing the essays before the exams for the most part, which gives me a month before the next start date. This means I do some basic studying and ease into thing gently. Not this time, the clock is ticking just as the current one has wound down.

Saying that, I have read a substantial amount of the core textbooks in next semesters modules, so it's possibly not that bad.

There was a period of time, probably some way through semester three (July to December 2009) up to and including the residential seminar for semester four (January to June 2010) in March , when those on the MBA Programme via Distance Learning were wondering what was going on. Things just seemed to be getting slightly sloppy and confused. It was also annoying that we seemed to be suffering a reduced elective set due to old ones being taken away and new ones taking a while to come on stream. There was also staff exits and the like. There was certainly reasons to wonder what was going on and an undercurrent of complaint was in the air.. At the residential seminar for semester four we heard about the expansion of the Distance Learning implementation of the MBA programme to allow us to do residential study in the Caribbean and a few other carrots that seemed a bit muddled.

All great, but I'm unlikely to spend a grand to do my residential component abroad at this time. Now, things are becoming clearer though, the Distance Learning Programme has been re-branded the Global MBA. The three delivery methods now being MBA Full-Time, Executive MBA and the Global MBA. The Global MBA is the distance learning option, named global because of the global nature of its student base, which is certainly true. Now, if this was a renaming alone, designed to avoid the distance learning moniker, I'd be as cynical as the next man, but it does look like some new options are coming on stream.

The main area of interest is a more blended programme between distance learning and full-time. In 2011 they are offering residential elective modules, essentially taught programmes. As far as I can tell, this means 3-4 days of on-site classes and then an essay to be completed within four weeks of the course finishing. This costs the same as studying for an elective via the distance learning method. I have a few concerns on the idea, such as whether 3-4 days is enough time to cover an elective? It may well be, as that's 2-3 units a day, and they probably do hit them hard and fast on the full-time MBA? After all, you have to get all the course into a year on the full-time delivery method. In fact, I think the students on the residential electives are signed up Global MBA students and individuals on the Executive MBA studying part-time (on-site). These on-site classes are delivered in Durham, Frankfurt and the Caribbean.

This is a great idea. In fact, it's so great I wish it had been part of the programme since I joined. As a student, with only three semesters left, and one of those being the dissertation, I'm not in a perfect position to take full advantage of it. I only have one elective left to select, since I'm studying the fifth (of six) in the form of business transformation next semester (July to December 2010). I could squeeze one of these residential electives in, but that would mean studying Managing Social Marketing Campaigns as my sixth elective. I'm not sure about that. It has significant applicability if I remain in the public sector, but I'd have to think about it. The advantage of doing it this way? It provides more face-to-face time with people on the Global and Executive MBA programmes, which is always a good thing. It also gets an elective done via what, I presume, is a more intense method. It depends what other new electives come on stream for 2011, if a new one comes up that is very interesting I'd probably still take that over the current residential option.

Still, this is a magnificent addition to the programme, without a doubt. As I say, it's so good I really wish it had been an option a year or so ago as, being so close to Durham.

I've talked about the looming dissertation before, in the sense that the work has the potential to be overly academic and that's not overly what I'm on the MBA journey for. Still, it's part of the course, and a lot of it has had value so far, so I'm confident the dissertation will. Hopefully. It's still a year away, but if I can see something on the horizon, even a distant one, I like to address it and put some analysis and thought into it so I've broken down some of the issues before it's sitting on my desk looking at me all threatening like.

A part of this strategy is my current evening reading, which consists of 'Researching and Writing a Dissertation: An Essential Guide for Business Students' by Colin Fisher, a book specifically focused on the MBA student facing their first dissertation. This is the only book I've started to read on the subject but I get the sense that it's a pretty good one and seems to cover all the bases. Is it helping? Yes, for the most part. It helps because it turns a 100% unknown quantity into a known quantity, even if you don't like some of what you are reading. It's a big piece of work that is going to take some thought. Literature reviews. Assessing a framework for the piece. Quite detailed critical analysis on existing articles. Research and analysing it. It is reminding me why I'll never do a doctorate. Obviously, all the research comes in numerous types. Various theories and approaches on everything it brings up. Do you use your framework to direct your dissertation or be a bit more free and bring it into focus at the end? All sorts of stuff. Filling the vacuum is good. Knowledge is good.

It is very helpful to start early! But not just because of the dissertation itself, it strikes me that Fisher is a very good thing to have absorbed for the ECA work throughout the course?

Basically, an ECA is an academic piece of work, not really a practical report (though some frame their questions as such, which I think is incorrect), focused on critically analysing and applying the material of the course (frameworks, studies, ideas and concepts) to a context. At times, this context can be almost superfluous, it just acts as a thin context to focus some of the criticism and examples. This isn't that different to a dissertation, which is the application of academic theory and thought to a business problem or enquiring question. In the ECA you don't have to write up a literature review unless specifically asked, but you will do a miniature literature review in preparation for the ECA. In a similar way, you will select and use frameworks and tools in the ECA that you should probably critique for good measure (one reason why it's not a practical report as suggested in many of the questions). You also need to reach a robust conclusion. All of this is in Fisher, in good depth, and with a practical slant, all you'd do for the ECA is strip back the bits you don't need but certainly take on the ethos of the approach and its context.

In short, Fisher gives you a window into the sorts of things that I think are required in an ECA but is so badly communicated by and large. It starts to add even more clarity of the ECA game. As a result, I think people should start reading a good dissertation text early, like in their first semester, and then take the approach it espouses and apply it to the context of the ECA. As it happens, I've been doing pretty good, and I can certainly see dissertation elements in my ECA work, but it would still have been handy to have this knowledge in my head from day one.

I'm moving onto the third essay and it's probably the most problematic one. It's problematic for reasons I've discussed before, which magnifies the funny old ECA game. Basically, as soon as an examined coursework assignment asks you to critically evaluate something 'in your own organisation', or 'an organisation you know well', I think things get tricky if you don't immediately have that contextual experience. In this case it's a critical evaluation of a marketing strategy.

So, the first problem is the current organisation I work for isn't a valid candidate. I could probably get hold of the marketing strategy, but its a County Council which makes it less interesting for me and I'm not sure I want to get into seeking a high mark with an example so far removed from actually marketing products or services that are purchased (either by businesses or consumers). That shouldn't be a problem, but I'm not interested enough in that slant on it to challenge the issue. The second problem is none of my historical employments are great candidates as they never really had a marketing strategy written down or even one that was largely consistent in the sense of an unwritten framework (not good enough for this assignment anyway).

What you are faced with then is how far does the 'or an organisation you know well' stretch to? The Strategic Supply Chain ECA got around this problem by making it a 'case of your choice', which keeps the direction nice and clear. If you have an example from your career good. If you can find a detailed enough case, that's also good. Interestingly, speaking to the lecturer during the Strategic Marketing seminar, when someone put forward the question they don't really have any valid examples they've actually experienced, he said finding a case was fine and he could supply some. I was sent one by him and it provided a company and a case, but there was actually surprisingly little meat to it. Anyway, use of cases is good, but it's all part of the funny ECA game that they just don't phrase the question in the clearest way possible.

The issue of not having relevant experience was queried for the Strategic Supply Chain essay and the answer concentrated on the 'supply chain chosen being important for real life information' and that it may be a supply chain 'you have access to through your professional setting' or 'experienced as a customer' but 'it is not expected that you will provide a detailed account of the supply chain you have chosen to analyse'. The reason for this is the 'descriptive problem'. This is because it's the ability to synthesis and put forward arguments regarding the module materials and the relevant literature. The rest is just context. In fact, at times, I question how critical the context is, as I suspect you'd get more marks for criticising something, say SWOT or some other tool, then you would anything you could add pertaining to the context (such as the use of SWOT to the context). Not only that, utilising the context to such an extent it makes course material irrelevant can result in you getting a mark you disagree with, so the lesson seems to be course content over context (and shove it in some way anyway). I also sometimes wonder if the best strategy is even to put criticisms in that don't apply to the case just so they are present.

The narrative is the course material, not the context.

I was going to go with my practical experience of trying to grow the business around a specific software product, it did involved identifying customers, assessing their needs and wants and segmenting the market, etc. Lots of good stuff, but it doesn't feel rich enough. As a result, I'm going to use a case. I'm going to vouch for Research in Motion.

I've made this choice for a number of reasons. I'm interested in the smartphone market and being interested is always good. There is quite a lot of information about RIM on the web, plus their website is good. It's also true that US firms have to file details with the Securities and Exchange Commission that can feed into certain theoretical models that will have to appear in the essay. The strategy essay also featured RIM, so some of the groundwork is done. I don't feel entirely confident using a 'case', as I don't actually have a 'marketing strategy' to evaluate. It'll exist as a document that I don't have. I can only go back to the fact we've been told cases are fine. It also suspect it doesn't require a 'detailed account' of the marketing strategy just like the Strategic Supply Chain essay doesn't demand a detailed account of the chosen supply chain.

That's the plan, anyway. I have to admit, I'm really wanting to get them out of the way now.

One of the 'interesting' things that came to a bit of a head at the last residential seminar, was the funny old ECA game. Well, it would be funny, if you weren't paying such a lot of money to join 'the table'. The problem comes in two forms: the asymmetry of information between the academics and the students over requirements and expectations and the fact any communications designed to mitigate that asymmetry of information just seems to make the problem worse.

Let's consider two different philosophies.

When I started the MBA in mid-2008 the message was clear. Reference everything. Fair enough. More importantly, it was about including the academic theory. Also fair enough. This message was put forward so much it was almost smothering. This philosophy took hold in the first TAA, due to getting 80% for my Managing People TAA which was pretty much an exercise of connecting referenced sentences (and it was creative only in that sense). That is an astronomical mark in postgraduate MBA terms. Then you have an ECA in which the issue of being descriptive was repeatedly drummed into you as a cardinal sin, to the extent students were scared away from certain sources, such as Mintel, despite them being fine when used in the correct context in the correct way. You get emergent behaviours when a message comes across so consistently and strong. Then you had the collusion message, which tends to cut off discourse surrounding ECA activities so early you might as well not start. An ECA was about 'examplification'. It's an academic reality.

Then there is the other world, introduced at the residential this semester. Four semesters in. In this world the ECAs are creative, exciting, involve aspiration and should be fun. It's about putting your personality into the work. It's about speaking to people and putting primary research (actually contact with people) first and the secondary research (the theory and papers) well...second. It's about getting together, discussing each others work. Possibly even reviewing each others. It may even involve swapping assignments when part of the question is to critique an earlier part so you can critique a partners rather than your own. It's about mixing it up creatively. An ECA was aspirational and inspirational, to an extent it seemed to be an 'ECA world' that belonged to some idealised 'US drama' about university.

It's worth noting the second world was portrayed by two academics now out in the real world, working in entrepreneurial affairs and having a very practitioner focus to balance out their academic achievements. When the discussions arose to get to the bottom of the two messages it gets interesting. It gets interesting because there was some admission that the University might have overstated the situation during a certain time window due to previous problems with low marks (and potential failures) due to people being too descriptive. In short, the academic body in the University had their own emergent behaviour and 'overcompensated' for past events. I only have one source on this, but it was honestly given to a group of students. Seems believable? As I can fully understand experienced, real world practitioners making that mistake quite easily.

You also learn that it's known some of the questions they ask on the ECAs are...less than ideal. Yes they are a bit fake. Yes they seem to involve a lot of complete fancy and fabrication in order to generate material to put through the 'theory mill', but we're going to keep using the questions anyway. Yes, it asks you to write a business report, despite everyone knowing (hopefully) that it's the last thing they want as a business report wouldn't be full of theory 'examplification' and criticism. It might also be said, in some cases, the students are coming from different places and going to different places than what used to be the case for an MBA. In fact, some of them can involve a heck of a lot of jumping through hoops to show your knowledge of theory through context never mind trying to be inspirational and creative as well, as that seems to take you so far away from the question you'd worry the marker might think you'd drifted. Despite all these reservations the 'less than ideal' questions are still used.

Now, I know that it's possible to combine both world views. After all, they are both about applying context to the theory, just from radically different perspectives. The problem was it was such a turnaround in philosophy and pitch that it didn't sit well within the established modus operandi. If it was just me, I'd have put it all down to me misinterpreting the issue in my early days on the program, but it wasn't just me, and I'm very representative. There was also some extremes in the second aspirational pitch that just seemed destined to put you on a track to being given the dreaded under 60% mark or the barely over 50%. The feeling of having 'just passed'. That's possibly wrong, it's possible the overly strong message from the first two semesters kicking in again. Who knows? In truth, the second philosophy sounded more like the aspirations you'd have for your dissertation, but for every ECA (which is a bit of a stretch I think).

In truth, the asymmetry of information around the ECA is a problem. The attempts to communicate to minimise the problem never seems to work. Is it the students? Possibly, but then we're dealing with intelligent, experienced students with careers who, at least for a core, are used to change and ambiguity. It does make the whole process a game. I haven't even begun to include the personalities of the individual lecturers, which means one person demands every other sentence to be a reference the next one sees that as a negative. One persons pet theories over another, etc. Or the fact the tutors in each module may have significant variations.

It's a game. You play the game and as you go along the journey you selfishly strip away everything of value from the process and apply it in the real world and to change your own attitudes and approaches which is where the value comes in. The randomness of it would seem to make it hard to get a distinction. Possibly the process feels different when it's much more intensely interactive on the full time course and the psychic distance between tutors and students is vastly reduced. It also isn't necessary, as not all the ECAs have questions that magnify the problem even further. It just seems a bit careless, the process could be more orientated to the customer and less ambiguous (which doesn't mean less rigorous). The variables in the game could certainly be reduced.

In the meantime, one keeps rolling the dice.

I've been doing a bit of thinking for myself and discussing the dissertation with fellow students and the business school in order to plan my end run strategy. There is an option, theoretically, for me to not do a dissertation, and instead do two more electives and a business report (and drop Methods of Inquiry). You can tell it's not advised, it's also not an option for students who started after a certain date. It also feels wrong not rising to the challenge to do the dissertation and even more odd having MBA after my name and not being able to say what I did for my dissertation. I'm also aware it's not the doing it that concerns me, it's having a valid, practical and achievable idea due to relative career instability. It's just a bit of an unknown at the minute, with no feeling of progressing to a solution. I'm sure it'll sort itself out with a bit of effort.

Anyway, the business school tells me that many students do the Methods of Inquiry module last, followed immediately by the dissertation. I did query the fact that you have to have a dissertation topic submitted 6-months in advance of doing the dissertation module. This is because a tutor has to be assigned. They were of the view all that what was needed at that point was a topic area, an example given being Human Resources. Not a full proposal. I'm still not 100% convinced on this, but it may actually make some sense? If you submit a topic area six months before doing the dissertation, you should have your tutor in second half or final third of Methods of Inquiry just in time to do a proposal as the ECA for that module? I've also checked my old introductory material, and in the various study schedules for finishing the MBA in 2-4 years it always has Methods of Inquiry in the slot immediately preceding the dissertation.

Anyway, if it holds true, it gives me a strategy for completing.

Basically, in semester five (July 2010 to December 2010) I'll do Business Transformation and Management of Information. That's an elective and a core. They both have IT elements and the second part of Management of Information is the statistical methods that may well be used in my dissertation, should it involve a quantitative element. I'm really looking forward to Business Transformation. In semester six (January 2011 to June 2011), I'll do Methods of Inquiry and another elective. Not sure what that might be at the moment, it may be Project Management, or a new one should the business school finally get some of the promised new electives out. Semester seven (July 2011 to December 2011) will be the dissertation. I want to complete in 2011. I just can't bring myself to still be studying the MBA in 2012. Not sure why.

While I still have some small reservations about not doing Methods of Inquiry a full six months before the dissertation, the six months run into option seems to make sense in my mind. It also gives me another six months to change my mind about the dissertation if it proves particularly problematic, or my work arrangements may have changed to make a work-based dissertation more likely.

I think the chances of me choosing not to do a dissertation is infinitesimally small.

I've known since the beginning of the MBA that the dissertation was the elephant in the room. I say this because there was, and still is, a number of risks associated with it. The first is that I'd not be in an employment situation that stable and interesting enough to provide a basis for the dissertation. The second was that the dissertation itself would be too academic. The third is I'm not 100% sure my reasons for doing the MBA align with the idea of the dissertation. I'm perfectly happy to be wrong on the third one.

I hope I am wrong on the third one.

One of the hardest days on the residential seminar was Sunday due to the Methods of Inquiry session (the module with all the research methods in). The delivery of the session was very good, but the overall intent of the dissertation just confirmed all the negatives about the dissertation. The goal seemed to be to build upon academic theory that had gone before, ask a series of hypothesis and then use various research techniques to test those hypothesis. Not a surprise really, it's a research-based university, but It just seemed very academic. Yeah, I know, not that surprising. I didn't decide to do the MBA for academic reasons, I'm taking a very practice-based approach to it and it's working on that basis. The dissertation just came across like the academic pain that I need to suffer in order to pass the course.

That's all good, but a literature review? Give me a break. I can't seem to put this into a framework or through a practice-based filter that turns it into something remotely useful? Hence, it just remains a task that is a burden and only useful if you're going to be an academic. Okay, it teaches you to be critical about existing ideas, I get that, but if you haven't got that from your MBA already, or didn't have it in the first place (but that may be my career background), then something weird has happened. I'm not sure you need the literature review to learn that skill, it's just something that is done in academic circles to further the academic field, it has very little practice-based usefulness. I understand the usefulness of the more academic and rigorous papers, I use them and read them to balance out the Harvard Business School practice orientated stuff, but that doesn't mean I want to write one. I'm not even remotely considering doing a PhD for numerous reasons, this being one of the major ones.

Can the dissertation be given more of a practice-based spin? Possibly, to a degree. The restrictions on giving it a practice-based spin are obviously the fact that it has to be grounded in academic theory, further testing hypothesis-based ideas around an academic theory or two. So it seems. That seemed a common, recurring theme. You also have the literature review. The other problem relates to how supportive you're employer is, as some of the more practice-based ideas are easier to pull off if it is being done for an employer that considers the dissertation part of your work (though not 100%, of course). The more distant your dissertation becomes from your current employer the bigger the chance it'll become more academic. This isn't as true in the full-time MBA, because they assign students to organisations to do their dissertation on a business problem, but that's hard to do with 'time constrained' distance learning students (unless it happens to be your own organisation).

I'm also having to consider restructuring my course plan. I've always planned on taking Methods of Inquiry the semester before my dissertation. While this is possible, a certain interpretation of the MBA guidelines suggests doing it six months before starting your dissertation 'module' and after a discussion in the Methods of Inquiry session on Sunday, this seems practical. I want to finish in 2011. I just need to finish in 2011. That means doing my dissertation July to December 2011 and that means doing Methods of Inquiry July to December 2010. In short, next semester. When you throw in the fact some of the statistical methods are in Management of Information a part of me thinks I might just do two cores next semester and get them out of the way. That's back to two 14 unit modules and one with an exam (and the other a larger ECA).

Will I be able to give the dissertation a practice-based focus to balance out the academic naval gazing? At the moment I'm not so sure, so the dissertation remains the elephant in the room and I need some serious convincing I'm going to remotely enjoy it. Bit of a pain.

There has been a bit of a drama over the Strategic Marketing ECA, namely that it has been revealed 1.5 weeks later than it should have been. This isn't overly an issue for me as they have extended the deadline accordingly, but it is a bit worrying. It's a bit worrying because it's the first time it's happened to me. I also understand from the Facebook chatter that it's not the only ECA that has been subject to delays. I sense a whiff of things being a bit stressed, disorganised or both within the Distance Learning Office at the moment, but then they have lost a 2-3 key staff. I suspect there will be a series of complaints raised at the residential if this hasn't already happened.

The other thing that's revealing is the nature of the Strategic Marketing ECA that finally was released. It's the basic 'analyse the marketing strategy of your organisation or one you are familiar with'. No case study. If that was always going to be the question I'm at a loss why it needed to be delayed? It's a default question, the type they must have in stock as a possible all the time. I can only assume there was another question, possibly with a case study, that didn't come up to standard, got delayed, had issues or something and they've fallen back on MBA questioning 101. I did feel like I'd been short-changed a bit when I read the question. It felt a bit lazy.

The fact the question is a 'of your organisation' question makes it a very random question. It's random because your ability to answer the question with a rich 'case' is highly dependent on where you currently work or have worked recently. These things can be compensated for, but that takes time and effort someone living and working in an 'appropriately rich case environment' doesn't have to apply. It also creates another problem which makes me wary: the individuals involved in the marking regime can't rely on having a common context for the 'case' being analysed as everyone will be writing an essay using a very different context. This also creates issues on how to write the paper as you have to include enough of that context in your word count, while with a commonly supplied case study you still need to do this, but potentially not as much. Let's face it, the 'case rich environment' is expected to be a company (a) with a marketing plan and (b) numerous products at different stages of the cycle and (c) is business to consumer not business to business. The paper doesn't demand that, but let's say it's the one that would offer the best environment for putting the various bits of material to best use. The organisation I work for now and the ones I've worked for in the past have been a degree or two away from those criteria (all of the business to business for a start).

I'm going to utilise my experiences working for a small start-up trying to get its product to market, a posh way of saying the first critical sales, and see if that seems to have legs. I know it should, but I also know these MBA papers can be a strange business.

The ECA work is going well so far, though I've had a week which hasn't seen much actual effort spent on them at the keyboard, and I'll be away at the residential this weekend. Still, the framework and material for the Small Business Management ECA is coming along fine, and I've written the first draft of the opening and content for section (a) (of a-d). This is a good position to be in as it's your material, content, frameworks and arguments that are important to define and have sorted even if you've not written any of the final word count.

I've got a few goals at the residential. I'm looking to nab another key text or two when I'm at the Business School as they are notoriously bad at transferring their books to Queen's Campus Library for collection. I'm also looking to glean a bit of information regarding an initial strategy for the Strategic Supply Chain Management and Strategic Marketing papers when your organisation ain't appropriate. Still think I'm looking forward to the Strategic Supply Chain Management one the least.

Without doubt, the ECAs are one of the core elements of the MBA. They are the core of the process in a number of ways. First, they account for 50% (core) or 100% (elective) of your final mark in any particular module. Second, they are the point at which you practically apply your knowledge to a context. Third, they are one of the principal differences between doing an MBA and just reading books on the subject. Fourth, depending on the nature of the question asked they can be interesting or a complete pain in the arse.

Since I have three to do this semester, albeit with no exams hovering on the horizon, it's either going to be a lot of work, but fun, or one 3-month period of pain. Two of the ECAs have hit the learning environment, the third seems to be delayed for a week, which makes me think they are thinking up something fiendish.

Small Business Management went through a mini positive to negative to positive cycle last night. Broadly speaking, a venture capital firm are funding a management buy-in of a small, private family firm and this context is to be used to cover such issues as succession, small business growth, venture capital and entrepreneurship (in the context of small businesses). The initial panic was seeing the research root, as finding that root is pretty critical. It basically involves locating the content in the course material pertaining to the question, as that acts as a firm root which hopefully lead to verdant branches of studies and other material pertaining to the question. If you don't find the root, it's much harder to find relevant studies and articles in the mass available. After 90-minutes of work yesterday, I think I've got the chapters and course material content for my root. I think so anyway, sometimes there is a bit of vagueness in the question, but it's looking good. Certainly good enough to follow the branches and see what results. The interesting thing about the Small Business Management ECA is it specifically asks you to fit four areas into your report, which is always good, as you can then divide the end product into 800 words here, 1200 there, etc.

The Strategic Supply Chain Management ECA is a bit of a different beast. The question isn't as fine grained, being split up into only two parts. It tasks you with selecting and critically analysing a supply chain of your choice and then in the second part identifying some improvements based on saving costs, relationships, etc. Now, the issue with questions like these is it's much easier if your current work environment provides a relevant context for the question. If I was still working for the OBC Group I potentially could have stretched it, possibly. It's ideal if you're working in a manufacturer with an extended supply chain. Regrettably, the 'of my choice' bit ain't going to come from my current work environment. This means I have to default to a case study, which raises two problems. The first is finding a case study of a supply chain that provides enough information and enough interesting points of analysis (and the details necessary to use the models and tools). The second is finding a case study that doesn't go on to answer the second half of the question for me. You'd think that'd be a good thing, but it never feels right and I've never tested the resulting mark in that scenario. This could be a thorny one, so I'm doing it second and I'll see if anything comes up during the residential seminar. There is a case study of Wal Mart in the course material. It may be there for a reason, but I suspect their supply chain is pretty good already. We shall see.

The delayed Strategic Marketing one is the one to watch. The chances are it'll be case study based, which always stand the chance of being a complete pain. The risk is the case study is a bit brief and lacking in information and then they combine this with a stipulation not to research the company to a ridiculous degree outside the case study. It tends to leave you a bit frustrated. I also tend to not like case study questions, no doubt because they do sometimes provide you with some information but no real context of being there and absorbing and experiencing the moment. It's a story written afterwards.

The next task is to download FreeMind as a way to plan out and create a skeleton of the ECA from the disparate different sources. I need a better way to martial ideas and links to studies and articles, etc. That's it. A proportion of my spare time for the next three months accounted for.

So, I submitted my Tutor Assessed Assignments (also known as Formative Assessments) a couple of weeks ago. They are basically the 'make sure you are studying and taking things in' assignments. It's good that they are there as a check, at times they can even be a useful dry run for the ECA, but it is a mixed bag on that front.

This time, I had a marking incident in that I got a result back I wasn't happy with and the tutors reasoning failed to convince me I deserved the mark. It was generic to the point of useless, and felt a bit rushed, and had too many generic statements like the oft quoted and irritating, without context, critically evaluate statement. I tend to believe it's the tutors job, with any mark that isn't a 100%, to have you nodding your head in recognition for the shortfall. The difficulty is, the reason for the short fall can be quite random across modules and sometimes the reason is the exact same reason that got you the 81% (Outstanding) result in another. Since the TAA only got 56% (Satisfactory), significantly below my marker of 65% (Very Good) or higher , it was even more important. So, I put forward my argument and, as agreed, I got the more useful feedback a week later.

Having gained some distance from it as time has passed I think I've re-learned a few things. The first, is it's possible to try and be too clever on the TAA. The second is to remember to push in course material even if the question leads you another way.

The module was Small Business Management and the question was to 'select a franchise concept of your own choice and write a report in which you come to a critical evaluation of the concept from the perspective of a potential franchisee.' There was three parts to it: an introduction of the franchise concept, an assessment of the franchisee's dependence and an appraisal of the advantages and disadvantages of the franchise concept. Note, it seemed pretty clear it was the advantages and disadvantages of THE franchise concept, not the general concept of franchising. I took the whole question to be in the context of critically evaluating the chosen franchise concept for the franchisee. I chose Domino's Pizza, they where very helpful. This meant I focused my analysis on introducing the Domino's Pizza concept and its issues, the dependence of the franchisee in the context of Domino's Pizza and the advantages and disadvantages of, you guessed it, the Domino's Pizza offering. I even included examples of further reading from numerous 'Journal of Business Venturing' articles. It did mean I didn't list in that 're-write but basically re-iterate the course material' way the advantages and disadvantages of franchising from the text book because they were generic advantages and disadvantages a core of which didn't apply to Domino's Pizza (and the ones that did were mentioned, though possible obscured in the way I answered the question) or I felt there was more important fish to fry (such as issues restriction entrepreneurship in the contract in terms of marketing, operations and financial structure).

Basically, I read the question and forgot that no matter what, make sure the course material is front, centre and visible. Normally, I do this, as I'm using a model or framework for the analysis, but no such thing was present, it was just an extensive list of pros and cons. It probably didn't help I answered the question like an ECA (the examined essays) in essay format. I should have just constructed the TAA as if each point to be addressed was a question, as I do suspect the obfuscation of my answer (though not that bad) didn't help.

Personally, I still think it's a 60% plus, but I can't be arsed to argue it out. I didn't literally follow the format of the question which I do accept as my main mistake (just from the point of view not making it difficult) Deep down I know the point is to bring in course material, I just didn't feel some of it was right for the context (and the question did suggest the context was important). As I say, if it was a model of analysis it would have been used, I spent a bit of time trying to search for one to use, it just didn't occur to me when writing the assignment to put a bit more force, and literal visibility, to those pros and cons on page XXXX handily pointed out in my more advanced feedback. Hell, it's not like I wasn't aware of that list, the book was quoted in my answer and references. The feedback also included a real world example about Domino's Pizza that I could have mentioned, there stores always being in run down areas, which I'm not sure is universally true and is anecdotal on the markers part (and it's not in the domain of a TAA to research the truth of that).

Ironically, despite all this, my conclusion was apparently 'comprehensive' and 'very useful for the franchisee', the mistake I made was thinking that was the point of the exercise.

As the last days of February pass by, the end of the first phase of the semester is reached: the TAA deadline. A strange interlude then exists for two weeks before the ECA's are released and the 3-month rush to hand in the examined papers begins.

I completed two of the TAA's in one sitting and the third in two sittings. That was a good way to do it, as it meant they didn't hang around for too long. It was particularly good getting the first drafts done in a single session, especially since those drafts held up very well. I never can avoid editing as I go. It'll certainly be the way I'll do them in the future. It's going to be interesting to see how this influences the ECA's. In a similar manner, some other students seem to sit down and do each of their ECA's in one sitting, while I develop, stir and marinate over weeks. Since I'll be doing three of them this semester, leaving about a month for each, I certainly don't want the writing process to hang around for weeks on end. We shall see. It'll come down to the content of the ECA's, as the nature of the questions can vary considerably and thus some can involve significantly more effort than others.

At the moment, the electives are a mixed bag. The Strategic Marketing module is interesting, as it is a subject I naturally drift to, but the core text book is awful. It's not that it isn't full of content it just seems to be written in a way that forces you to disengage with the text. Not that great for a marketing text. Strategic Supply Chain Management has been a bit of a surprise, in that some of the module is very interesting, such as supplier relationships and trust. The core text with this module is also pretty hard going, but does contain a lot of interesting information on procurement processes, which aren't overly an interest of mine but I think it's good to know something about in a 'wider context' fashion. I really enjoyed the TAA related to Small Business Management, which involved analysing a franchise opportunity (and Domino's Pizza were very helpful), but parts of the module are a bit too theoretical, being research on small businesses instead of it being focused on the practical aspects of running one. The practical side is in the module, but for me, it should have been everything in the module.

So far, none of the three electives this semester compare to the brilliance of Change Management, which was interesting, it organised the narrative of its content well (which you'd hope it would considering the subject matter) and the session during the residential seminar was brilliant. Still, a good ECA can be a game changer, so we'll see.

I've already started thinking about what to do next semester as I have a variety of options. Do I do my two remaining electives or do I do an elective and the last remaining core with an exam? A part of me thinks I'll do two more electives and one will certainly be Business Transformation, the other is a bit of a mystery as the reduced elective set we now face is lacking a bit of inspiration. I could do Business Transformation and the Managing Information core in the hope that more of the new electives are released? I'll probably query the release schedule of the new electives to see if anything will be released for the first 2011 semester or not. If not, I'll certainly just do two electives. The issue will be what to do along with Business Transformation? I'm really looking forward to Business Transformation though.

The strangest feeling at this point, is I can see the end in sight? This is strange, as there is still three semesters to go after this one. I'm not really that close to the end. I'm just over half way. I think it comes down to the fact the end can be comprehended. Two electives, the remaining core, Methods of Inquiry and then the dissertation. It doesn't seem that bad does it? Hell, the dissertation semester is so close to the end it almost doesn't count as a semester. I certainly feel like the crest of the hill has been reached.

As for March? I'll face the ECA starting pistol, the results for semester three and, at the end of the month, the residential seminar. I always enjoy the residential and I'm hoping to go for more of it this time, possibly sampling a few elective options.

I usually spend a good while obsessing over MBA assignments. This is a good thing for the most part, especially on the marked assignments. It can also absorb a lot of time. Due to the existence of Facebook you get an idea of how other members of the MBA cohort are doing their assignments. A few sit down and finish them in one sitting, often ridiculously late in the game. While there is a lot of context missing, such as how they studied and prepared up to that point, finishing them in a short burst of time had some appeal.

So, I thought I'd give it a go with the tutor assessed assignments (TAA).

It went well and I got the first draft done today in about five hours. What was even more noteworthy is I actually enjoyed it. The goal of getting it completed, the knowledge it wouldn't be hanging around for several weekends in a row. All good. In truth, the preparation and the writing can't be separated. What I did this semester is focus on the TAA before I even cracked open the study materials. This meant I studied with a focused awareness of the questions and how the topics in question were distributed through modules one to four. In short, rather than the TAA just focusing what I learned it focused how I studied. This seems to have translated into me being more prepared for the essay, who'd have thought? It wasn't a specific, more intense effort, it's just you pick up what is necessary as you have it in mind. I'll also admit to focusing my efforts a bit more, rather than cramming in too much, and brought in more real world examples. You only have 1,500 words. It's not a mark that contributes to the final result.

The other TAAs present a few wrinkles that the Strategic Supply Chain Management one doesn't have. The Strategic Marketing module requests that you analyse a few different sales forecasting methods, ideally in the context of 'your organisation or an organisation you are familiar with'. I know why they do this and I agree it's great. The problem is if the question just happens to put you in the situation of your current organisation not being applicable and one you are familiar with not helping either (like a past one or a supplier, etc). It's also a bit of a pain finding any studies or discussion of the topic. Tricky one that. I can hit the second part which is about product development and market penetration.

The Small Business Management one isn't to bad, but I need a franchise to analyse. Domino Pizza have sent me through their franchise contract, and they have the usual investor information on the web. I'm going to try and get the franchise pack they send to interested parties. That'll take a call or two I suspect (my first contact gave me the necessary names).

The conclusion? Subject to the marks coming back and telling me this was a disastrous way to do it. I like this method better. I think in the past I've spent too much time on them for no more a guarantee of a 'reward'. This is inevitable as you gauge effort for things over time. Taking the one I did today as an example, it doesn't feel significantly better or worse than the others I've done. We shall see.

After some random cursory reading of the various text books, I've come to the conclusion Small Business Management is going to be very intriguing; Strategic Marketing is a more detailed study of the topics covered in the core module, and that's fine, as I tend to see a level of marketing in everything I do; Strategic Supply Chain Management may well turn out to be a bit of the pain. There are parts of Strategic Supply Chain Management I like the look of, such as trust in supplier relationships, but while it's interesting on some level to understand the supply chain purchasing processes of larger companies, it's not immediately and directly relevant. Everything has some relevance, I'm all for the value of holistic learning, bu, out of the three, it's third place.

I've also revised my study schedule. Instead of doing the units for each module in parallel, I've decided to end run the first 1 to 3 (and the 4 for Small Business Management) units of each module in the first three weeks. Small Business Management first, followed by Strategic Marketing and then Strategic Supply Chain Management. The reason for doing this is simple: the formative assessment (the TAA) task is based on the content of these first three units. The 'end run' approach allows me to start considering the TAA for any particularly module up to a week or two early. As an example, I'm studying 1 to 4 of Small Business Management currently, which is proving a pleasure as it's well structured and effectively interwoven with the text book (and studies). I'm doing this with the TAA question in mind: the critical evaluation of a particular franchising concept. I'm thinking of using Domino Pizzas as a my case, I've begun some initial enquiries regarding this.

The TAA run has begun and they all have to be in on the 1st March. The above schedule allows me to have completed all the units needed for the TAA by w/b 18th January giving me plenty of time for the assignments, though I'll also be studying the remaining four units for each module in time for the release of the examined assignment released on 15th March 2009.

The Small Business Management units have proven intriguing. As usual it's taking what you perceive to be the case via experience, and refining it through a wider perspective, theories and academic models to provide a much firmer understanding and wider perspective. The material on the disparity between marketing as taught and marketing for the small business was enlightening, a mixture of experience confirmation and new ideas. I could view the material through the filter of having been involved in a micro-company and marketing and sales activities within a specific sector. You get the usual result, some good ideas on what was potentially done right, and things you could have done better. It again makes you realise what achievements and experience can be mined from your CV and how to sell it in the wider context.

In fact, the current spurt of studying has allowed me to refine what the MBA does into a single sentence: It takes knowledge created out of enacted experience, challenges you to processes it, producing proactive learning formed on a base of wider and deeper understanding. This is what's it's doing for me anyway. It's genius and great. It's worth a holiday or two a year.

The materials for semester four have arrived this week in two instalments. Thus the study process begins. In truth, it doesn't begin until the first full week of January, but the mental preparation has started. I've already blocked out the study schedule in Excel. One of the unfortunate effects of the assignment structure is you have to study the first so many units for each module in order to be able to do the TAA. As a result, the first four weeks is a unit from each module, and then I kick into two units from a module a week, focusing on a module in turn until each are completed. As usual, I plan to have encountered all material before the ECA. I don't like studying new material while also focusing on examined essays.

I'll also start to get to know some of the text books, reading a few chapters and getting a feel for the subjects. I'll also investigate the TAA assignments so I can make sure I absorb what I need to know to answer that assignment, and capture any 'out of experience' knowledge or real world data I need to accrue before I can tackle it.

It's a diverse range of subjects this year: Strategic Marketing, Small Business Management and Strategic Supply Chain Management. I think they are all going to be useful. They represent a series of topics I've touched on before in practicality without any of them being the focus of my role. This is inevitable in a career that has been much broader than it is deep. I've done some marketing work and ran a campaign while working for a small entrepreneurial start-up, only four staff, with a unique method of developing enterprise web applications. This experience will also filter into Small Business Management, of course. I've been in charge of IT strategy and operations at an international SME focused on logistics, shipping and business travel, elements of the Strategic Supply Chain Management module will feed into that practical experience. The bits I've scanned regarding strategic supplier base management and trust all got me nodding my head if not because of knowledge of the theories and subject, but because of my practical endeavours in the past in terms of supplier relationship management. It also helps to provide a grounding with respect to such activities in much larger organisations.

It's exciting as I'm not sure what effect each of the modules is going to have on me. This is particularly true of Small Business Management. The success of the MBA isn't so much the letters after the name but how it changes you as an individual and the Small Business Management module is an unknown quantity in this regard. I also like the marketing subject, as so much in life involves marketing these days, facilitating and driving change always involves a dose of marketing.

The one I'm least convinced about is Strategic Supply Chain Management. While I have some interest in the concept of managing suppliers as part of your competitive strategy, I'm not so interested in becoming an anal expert on the strategic re-focusing of purchasing departments (it also gets a bet repetitive after the new strategic focus of HR, the new strategic focus of IT, the new strategic focus of Marketing). The most I'm hoping to get out of it is a good awareness of that part of an organisation, specifically how it might filter into any ERP related products, etc. Anyway, this elective might be hit and miss. The text book seems very American, which is odd, despite being labelled as not for sale in the US in ridiculously prominent text. It also a bit dry in the parts I've read.

It's also going to be a busy year, back to the pace of doing two cores. The three written papers in the second half of the semester is going to be the interesting bit depending on the nature of the questions. The critical point will be whether the questions are of such a nature you have a distinct advantage working in an organisation which can be used as a practical example to align to the theories. The other issue is I seem much more tired on an evening these days, so we'll see how the 2 hour evening slot holds up. I may use an hour at work during the day.

When I finish this semester I'll have received enough credits to be awarded a PGCE, this is cut off point number two. Not only that, it's the last viable cut off point before an end run to the full MBA. There is very little point aiming for the next break point as you have to do the project and everything. I want to finish. Still, in terms of managing the process, I will have reached the PGCE point by my original schedule (I'd planned to only do two electives a semester originally).

I was thinking about the MBA today, something that comes into focus when it comes around to paying for the next semester. I'm paying for it myself, I can't help but question it every time the wallet gets opened. Obviously, being able to pay for the MBA is a product of a time and place and sacrifices are being made to do it (most notably holidays for the most part I suspect). It's also a product of the fact I did a degree.

I don't know what is going on in higher education these days. I can't attest to being on top of all the political arguments or the business ones. I know having a globally respected University education system is a good thing. I know the opening up of the higher education to those who can achieve it is critical for the success of the country. That's it. I'm not going to suggest I know how to achieve this. What I do know, is back in 1989, if I was facing the equivalent bill for higher education that students face today I would not have my degree and in all likelihood I'd not be doing the MBA today. I'd have a different life, one I can't imagine.

This is a bit ironic, as when Labour talks about social mobility, and because of that the need to have more people in higher education, I'm the perfect example. None of my family had gone to University. I was the first to go. My father was essentially an unskilled labourer when you could actually earn a very good living in a variety of roles with little skills, but that ceased to be true after an 80's recession or two. I never questioned my ability to go to University, I just did it. It happened naturally. If my parents had concerns about it socially or financially they never mentioned it. Not even once. It was totally free for me to attend University and I received a grant. I was able to survive on that due to not having to pay my parents for food, lodgings and whatever else. The result was me becoming middle-class in financial terms.

I wonder how the modern day version of me goes to University these days? How do they justify the debt to themselves? If I'd had to finance the MBA through debt I'd have not done it, and that's with a bit of experience behind me and as such a higher theoretical earning power. Ten to twenty thousand GBP of debt on exiting University? Not sure I could have done that, it would have worried me constantly. I certainly know my parents could not have financed it. Is it that society has changed? Has the 'gap' become so big that the current version of me doesn't exist? And instead we have an 'everyone is middle-class' thing going and the 'working class verging on poor'?

I don't know, I just know that my life would have been different for me if University education had not been free.

Semester four is problematic. The main problem with it is a financial one, as I'll be breaking my own financial rules with respect to funding the MBA. The financial rule was quite simple: any particular semester should be affordable within the year it's paid for. The balance of payments over the course of the financial year (January to January) should be positive. This isn't that bad if employment continues in short order past the current project, but obviously it's a bit more annoying if it doesn't. I just never wanted to use savings to do it and I'm still not sure I do. Semester four is certainly a line in the sand and if continuing means breaking that rule again in semester five I'll almost certainly halt my studies for a period. I did consider doing this for semester three, but I took the risk of keeping things ticking over with an single elective.

The financial side of things is confounded by where I am in the study process. I'm following an 'easy win' strategy of always hitting the break points. I don't intend to drop out. I want to finish even if finances mean it'll take a bit longer. At the same time, minimising risk at any particular time is sensible. I hit the PGCert break point at the end of semester two. In order to hit the PGDip break point in semester four I have to do three electives to bring me to 120 points. I can't do less electives and I can't do my last remaining core to get it out the way and minimise the costs in semester four. Three electives it is. If I'm going to spend the money that I can't cover in the same year, at a time when I may have a break in income early the following year, it's going to be to achieve a sensible break point. One advantage the three electives in semester four issue has is I'll be back on track once I've finished the semester.

Having experienced a semester studying one elective, it has given me some pointers on how to handle three. One thing I do know is three electives is going to be pretty similar to studying two cores. There may be no exam but the ECA is a bit more work. You also have to consider that even though the electives have less modules, you can't start the ECA work until they are released midway through the semester anyway. However you do it have three months to finish the ECA work. What I'm going to do is download the ECA assignments for my semester four electives and use them to get an idea of what I'll need to translate from the module into essay format. I realise they may vary the ECA assignments and the essays may not be exactly the same, but the theories that have to be critically analysed through a case study or practical experience lens will be. The aim is to study with electives very much an ECA frame of mind from the very beginning.

At the moment I'll be doing, Strategic Supply Chain Management, Strategic Marketing and Small Business Management. What my final two electives will be I'm not sure. In a way I'm crossing my fingers for a few more coming available.

In the last week I've had received two sets of marks, both my Management of Change TAA and my final results for Managing in the Competitive Environment and Managing Finance. All the marks are similar, solid results. They are in the official, very good range, representing a good understanding of the issues, a well researched hypothesis and substantial conclusions. It's true, I'd love to hit the top 30% of the marking range, but I've never done it yet, 80% on a TAA aside. I have to remind myself, as the MBA staff do, these are very good results, and I'm certainly pleased I survived the Managing Finance Fiasco of 2009. I'm just striving for perfection. In fact, just like my first semester, I did a bit better on the subject I thought I was going to be weakest on. This also means I've accumulated the credits for a PGCert qualification.

The on-site seminar was on this weekend, though I only went for one day, which was a bit disappointing. I did enjoy the one day immensely. It's just great talking to people and discussing ideas. It seemed even more of a laugh this time and the Management of Change seminar was excellent. It's probably the single, best use of on-site seminar time I've ever experienced. You could tell it was going well as he lecturer had got the dreaded Monday slot, a time when people are thinking of trains, planes and auto-mobiles home and flagging a little, yet he managed to pull of a very group-based tutorial structure. These can often die quite quickly even earlier in the weekend. It was very good. In fact, he managed to do the quintessential thing the on-site seminar should do, make you more excited about the material due to engaging with it in a more discursive fashion rather just at home reading books.

The ECA should now be available, but it isn't. I suspect the format of the Management of Change ECA will be very similar to the TAA, but cast a much wider net. Instead of looking at change that you have managed or experienced via one model, it'll be doing the same thing but through wider theories and models. We went through a core of such research during the on-site seminar along with where they fit with each other and how they coincide or conflict. I'm quite looking forward to it if the question is around those lines, it has been on previous occasions. It's a subject I'm familiar with and have been heavily involved with in practice, so it's very interesting to align the practical with the research and come out the other side. Needless to say the ECA is now the focus between now and December, a bit of a lighter work load considering I've only got one and no exam.

I also seemed to spend a core of the day pimping The Wire, personally I'm surprised more people on the MBA hadn't watched it. It's under-appreciated that's what I say.

The Management of Change TAA is done after one last little edit by me today. It'll get the once over from my editor, Louise, who spots the grammatical errors I've got so used to seeing I'll never spot, it'll get turned into a PDF and sent to the tutor. The trouble is it just doesn't sit right with me at the moment, and the reason for that is it felt too damned easy.

The problem is the set assignment sounds very descriptive, but experience tells me descriptive is akin to death in these things. That is what it asks for though, an analysis of your organisation, or one you know well, through the descriptors provided by Burke and Litwin. It even signposts what should be in the sections by asking specific questions (one related to each descriptor) and points you to the chapter in the text book. The chances I've gone on the wrong track are minimal.

Yet it just feels different. Not enough references at the end or citations in the text. We shall have to wait and see. Still, if the approach isn't perfect, at least I'll be able to use it as a vehicle to get it right for the actually ECA. It is the whole point of the TAA exercise, after all. It doesn't stop me wanting high marks though.

The Management of Change elective has proved to be an interesting one, and the TAA is potentially going to be interesting as well. As I speculated last time, the Management of Change elective is intriguing because it takes something I've learned quite a bit about through raw experience of being responsible for successful change and it allows me to view it through the lens of wider theory and practice. This is always a good thing.

The elective follows this trend by setting the task of analysing your current organisation or one you know well utilising the Burke and Litwin (1992) model in order to assess how and where organisational change might be focused. They key being to understand the causal relationships and the nature of change in the diagnosis. I quite like the Burke and Litwin model, as I like the areas it focuses on, as well as the fact it focus on casual interactions. It matches with my hard won experience, you could say.

What's going to be particularly interesting about the TAA is I'm going to focus on a period during which I was bringing about significant change, as well as being in an organisation undergoing significant change due to its external environment and changes internally both organisational and through agendas in IS and IT. I was principally involved in this and what I learned through experience, you have to remember this was my first role in charge of IS and IT Strategy (for an international SME), was the causal and interconnected relationships are key. In this case some of them didn't exist, as an example there was no HR policy to speak of or HR staff, this meant utilising HR tools and procedures to support and engender change wasn't a serious option without a lot of work in that area. The Burke and Litwin model allows for these relationships to be understand and grasped in a diagrammatic fashion.

I'm going to try and position myself in that time and place again, and put the 'situation' through the Burke and Litwin lens and see what comes out the other end. It will be interesting I think. The only problem I can see with it at the moment is a lot of the areas will effectively be empty. Not literally empty, but the detail will effectively be they had little process in that area (the HR policy being a good one). Still, that's fine, it'll just feed into my conclusions.

We shall see. Quite looking forward to it, anyway. The work starts next week. The first task being to read the actual article written by Burke and Litwin, rather than just the appraisal of it in the textbook (albeit written by Burke).

The materials have arrived late because I signed up late. I'm doing one elective this semester so all should be well, but I'd still rather have got a couple of weeks head start which is what I usually have. I spent the last week reading Managing Change by Jick and Peiperl, which was a really interesting book. I got 5 books out of the library a week ago and that book and two others prove to be good representations of the subject (according to the overview of the units in the elective). I suppose this hit rate is to be expected since I did an Amazon search on the subject and then tried to find them in Durham University Library.

The Managing Change elective represents the key choice you make with electives: do you go for stuff you've done or something entirely new? In this case it's the former, but this doesn't make the subject useless or an attempt to get an easy win. When working for an international SME covering IS strategy and operations you tend to learn by doing, as the SME is the quintessential 'doing environment'. While you may be highly self-reflective and ponder why as well as how, the chances are those around you aren't. You also find yourself wearing many hats, which in larger organisation would involve multiple people. What happens is you tend to learn MBA subjects through hard won experience, along with methods like ITIL, Benefits Management and Change Management. If you're setting out IS strategy, implemented IT projects to realise strategy and managed operations you've learned these things or failed. If the MBA is delivering, the studying of an elective you have practical experience in should still deliver. Change Management is still a very interesting elective from my perspective, as it allows me to align my experience with models and theory (often seeing what you effectively did lines up surprisingly well), potentially enriching your language with respect to the subject and give you other perspectives your hard won experience may not have covered. This is especially true of people tempered in SME environments, in which the language of subjects as a value mechanism is not only rarely used, but often counter-productive.

The ability of the MBA to take hard won, practical experience and combine it with a wider academic perspective tends to create something greater than the sum of the two parts. The people it doesn't do this for, for whatever reason, tend to be the ones that drop out.

The studying is further stressed by the fact I'll not have much time in W2 or W3 (the Staycation 2009 period) to hit the study materials really hard. In a way I do have a head start with wider reading, and I plan to make a lot of headway through the official textbook of the course during those two weeks. I may even have it mostly read by the end of W3. Since you soon learn that the textbook is the main text not the module materials in a lot of cases, this should also be a good start. The module material tends to be more a navigation tool for the various topics. At the same time, I'll need to have units 1-4 read before I do the TAA, and this will demand reading supplemental material like studies and articles. It should all be fine as most people do 3 electives in a semester. The plan is to hit things hard in W4 and W5 and then start contemplating the TAA. The usual goal of having all modules encountered by the on-site seminar will still hold.

The elective still feels odd. The fact the module only has eight units gives the appearance of it being much shorter, I suspect this is compensated for by additional reading. At the moment I'm thinking it'll be no more extra reading than I did for core modules. This may be because I need not have done so much for the cores, rather than doing too little for the electives. It still feels strange not having an exam on the semester schedule.

The original plan was for semester three to effectively be a wipe-out, focusing study in other areas. This was due to a simple matter of funding. Things were improving on that front, but didn't seem to be improving as much as I'd have liked or in an acceptable time scale. The trouble with that theory was it meant I was going to follow the relatively intensive six semester study path (three years), but finish in 3.5 years. This seemed like a double hit. As a result, I decided to compromise and I'm studying one elective this year to keep my hand in and to see how an elective pans out over the semester study cycle.

I'd have rather done two, as this would have meant I was on schedule for the slightly less intense seven semester (3.5 years) study cycle, but I couldn't persuade myself to do it. The money not spent will hopefully not go anywhere, and this represents a more managed risk. It will also mean I can still hit the Postgraduate Diploma after two years if I have the resources for three electives in semester four (3 being normal for a six semester run).

I am going to be starting about a week behind, effectively more than a week when you consider I usually start studying circa 2 weeks early, but one elective with no exam shouldn't be an issue. I've chosen the Management of Change elective as it is an elective I wanted to study and it's on the on-site semester this year, so I figured I might as well do it now. It'll also round out my practical experience with a wider context, theoretical knowledge and new tools.

Could I still finish in six semesters (3 years)? Well, finances aside, it would mean studying two electives and one core module in a semester at some point in the future. If I was willing to do that I could still complete in three years. This is one reason the elective work load is of interest to me.

The Durham Library Catalogue has been consulted and inter-site requests have been made. Exciting.

Keep you posted.

The official start date of semester three of the MBA ticked over in the middle of the week. Regrettably, funding issues have meant that I'm not studying any modules this semester. This funding issue looks like it's going to be resolved, but not resolved in time. This is a bit of a pain, as it breaks momentum and adds another six months on to the graduation date. The biggest problem is psychological momentum, not so much in terms of the study regime, but in terms of opening a big gaping window to start second guessing and questioning if the whole expensive exercise is worth it. It doesn't help that this enforced gap combines with the PGCert break point, a recession and a 1,001 articles on MBA pointlessness. I have Twitter to thank for bringing those to my attention. I'm quite confident I will continue, as I do enjoy the process immensely, but the psychological wolves are certainly at the door.

The first choice was whether to take an official study break and effectively cease to be a student for six months. I considered this, but since it is a complete, 100% break I decided not to. It would mean getting completely cut off from the University. While this has the advantage of me not using up one semester of the 10 I have to complete, I felt it was too much of a disadvantage in terms of losing access to the University (some of the reasons why follow). If my lack of study extends I can consider a break then, but one semester isn't the end of the world in terms of the study deadline. I also believe the baying of the psychological wolves would be much louder if I did make a complete break at this point. It's the possible effect on my three year self-imposed deadline that's irritating me.

The question is what to do in the six months so they aren't wasted?

I'm going to pursue some easy win qualifications. The targets at the moment are the ITIL Foundation certification and Preparing to Teach in the Lifelong Learning Sector. These two qualifications are relatively cheap, effectively just the exam cost in the case of the ITIL Foundation and add qualifications that further rubber stamp my broad range of experience in my career as well as acting as door openers. I've managed ICT operations extensively and learned a lot of the ITIL best practice through practical experience (there is also a lot of sensible strategy, business analysis and MBA subjects in their like marketing and finance) and I've done plenty of training courses as part of strategy implementations. If at the end of this semester I can have these two qualifications on my CV it won't feel as big a waste.

I intend to unofficially study the MBA despite not actually having any modules. The text books for any modules or electives I intend to take are all available at the University (reason one for not losing access) and as such I should be able to gain a very strong head start on anything I subsequently sign-up to. This should be pretty comprehensive in fact and save a lot of time later. The critical question is: will it allow me to scrape back this semester? It may, but there is every chance it won't. This is due to the way the semesters are organised, no matter how much study time I put in now, it doesn't make much difference to the fact the ECA only comes out for the second half of the semester. As a result, taking on more modules because of 'advanced study' doesn't help when I suddenly have more ECA work to do in the second half. The only way I could do this is if I knew the ECA question in advance and do preparation work. It may be possible to get a good sense of the ECA work on electives and if it varies much.

I can continue going to MBA related events. This includes speakers and on-line events. These have been very interesting and had value. I may also go to the on-site seminar even though I'm not studying anything, it gives me a chance to catch up with people and I can check out electives I'd like to do. The checking out of electives is a very good use of on-site seminar time, but it does depend on what electives are 'on display' at the next seminar. It can vary quite a bit. I'm local, it's a trip down the road at little cost to me, especially for the weekend activities, so it'd be stupid not to.

I also feel the need to use the extra free time to do something not study related, as it has been pretty intense for the last year. I'm just not sure what.

The second semester is now officially complete. The two written assignments, the final pieces of work, have been posted to DUO. It's now just a matter of sitting and waiting for the results. It's a mixed bag this semester. I'm not 100% happy with the written assignments, but then I never am, so I'm not sure what that says. I labour over them excessively, but I still feel I miss something quintessential in how I approach them. Then we had the whole finance exam fiasco. I've rolled my dice and we'll see what the results are in October.

The semester hasn't been as enjoyable as the first one. While the first one had a lot of stress due to the whole semester cycle being new, this one just wasn't as enjoyable. The strange thing is it's not because of the subjects. I found them more interesting than last year. A part of it is probably driven by the fact the novelty has worn off. A large part of it was outside pressures. Seeing the small start-up I was involved in slowly 'die' in terms of trading its products was stressful. Interesting, and valuable experience, but stressful nonetheless. Then a period 'between roles', which you would think would free up my time, which it did, but looking for work takes a lot of time, and you start to feel guilty doing anything else. Not a fantastic environment for study. In a strange way, having the schedule of regular work, even though it means less time, was more study friendly. But then I've always been of the view I'm more productive in my spare time when busy with interesting work in my career. Same principle applies to the MBA, I guess.

I've not been the only one. I know of two people who are dropping out at the PGCert break point due to not enjoying the experience. The main reasons being financial along with the loneliness of it, as well feeling their psychological contract has been broken in terms of the support from the University. It's certainly true it's largely a singular endeavour, despite the collaboration tools being available, but then I don't find it that bad as a range of the MBA cohort are always on Facebook. It depends on what spheres you're operating in. I can understand their issues with the University, as while I don't have any serious complaints, I can accept a certain remoteness. This also depends, as sometimes it's just a matter of getting on the phone and speaking to the DL office (excellent) or your tutor. I know I rang my Managing People tutor twice and she was great. Her e-mails were also very informative. At the same time, other tutors might as well have not existed, but neither did I push the issue. If I'd really needed to I'm sure it would have been fine. If you expect the University to come to you it ain't going to happen.

It's mixed feelings at the moment as everything is in flux. I'm considering two fixed-term contracts which means I may be able to revise my decision to not study in the second half of 2009. It's all a bit up in the air at the moment as neither have moved to contract signing (though they will). I'm considering either doing one elective or suspending studies for a semester. Need to decide early next week. The good news is, when I do start to study, I can have a whole two semesters completely free of exams. Always good news, though each elective does involve a much more involved 4.5K written assignment. Currently, not having an exams is a good thing, though I've not seen an elective ECA yet.

At the end of the day, I have to remember I'll hopefully be able to add more letters to my name in October. Never a bad thing.

I went to a convention today. Okay, it wasn't a science fiction, media or gaming convention (like Game Expo that's on this weekend), but one at Durham Business School. This is one of the advantages of being on the MBA programme, or having been on the programme (to be fair), as they occasionally run such events. Quite often, they are single speaker affairs on the evening, but this time it was a whole day of speakers from about 10:30. It was a Continual Professional Development focused event, which can be risky affairs in terms of how interesting they are, but this one was brilliant, the speakers being particularly good.

There was five talks, but I had to leave early so I missed the last one. The talk on building a portfolio career was very good, and an excellent way to work, but very hard to pull off in practice. Sahar Hashemi, who founded Coffee Republic, was very normal and funny and her talk was quite personal. The personal branding talk was intriguing, it got me thinking quite a bit on that front. In fact, that was a bit of a theme running through the whole thing, to one degree or another, they all touched upon knowing your personal brand and matching it to you career and life in general. The talk from the director of the recruitment consultancy was pretty good, but just reinforced my dislike for that process. It's necessary, but it'll never be something I particularly find appealing. The sign it was a success: it's got me thinking on numerous fronts about numerous things in a very self-reflective manner. Nothing completely new, but certainly some interesting new perspectives. Very good.

There was also another interesting element to the day, and that was what I learned about the Executive MBA experience. Basically, Durham runs three MBA programmes, which deliver the same content but in different ways. They run the full-time MBA which is a one year programme, the part-time Executive MBA which is two years, and involves committing to more on-site study in blocks of time, and then the Distance Learning programme. As you go from full-time to Distance Learning you replace organised on-site study and intense interaction with the cohort with flexibility and self-management and less interaction with the cohort.

It was interesting to see how the other half experience the programme.

The first element, which was very obvious, was the bonds formed between the cohort. These bonds are very different to the ones formed on the Distance Learning programme. They same students come together over the two year period for the same lessons, in the same blocks of time and also do group assignments together including an adventure away day and the board room experience. It was obvious the members on that programme at the convention knew each other better, interacted better and would no doubt have lasting contacts with these people once they left. This is process isn't as strong with the Distance Learning programme. It's present, but the lack of that 'intensity' together means less bonds are formed I think. Aa people person whose just fascinated with people and gets a lot from general interaction, I was a bit envious of that element of their programme. They pay about half again as much for it, and you have to be able to afford the time, but it was very interesting to see, and will deliver a lot of value for them in the future.

The second element was how they interacted with individuals involved in delivering the course. As an example, one of the speakers wasn't a lecturer but was involved in certain parts of the programme, such as being a Chairman in the boardroom experience, and it was obvious the Executive MBA students had a relationship forged with him and benefited from his knowledge to a much greater degree.

All this isn't unexpected, but seeing it in action was very interesting. It was to me anyway, always being fascinated with how groups of people interact to within certain situations and to achieve certain objectives. I still believe it should be possible to narrow the gap between the Executive MBA and the Distance Learning experience with various social networking tools and virtual environments, but this doesn't seem to reach critical mass.

Overall though, a great day. It was much better than I thought it would be.

The exams are over for the semester and it was very much a tale of two exams, and raises some interesting questions about how these things are approached, specifically with regards to what students should expect in terms of exposure to uncertainty.

Take the Competitive Environment module. The Competitive Environment exam followed the typical Durham MBA strategy, whether officially or through de-facto operation. The material covered at the on-site seminar is invariable exam related. This makes sense, and it is also born out of the module structure, meaning the TAA covered the first half so it makes sense to focus on later topics at the seminar (also the focus of the exam). The exam followed the same approach established over the last five years in terms of structure and question topics. This means a student's exposure to uncertainty is minimised. You don't know exactly what's going to be on the paper, but you can make a good guess and revise around the topics accordingly. In this Competitive Environment was the same as Managing People and Global Environment in semester one. This is useful because there is a lot of material to cover in each module, along with wider reading on each of these topics, applying experience and fitting it all into 2 hours on the day.

Now take the Managing Finance exam. Everything seemed to follow the usual model. We went through a lot of revision topics at the on-site seminar. These subjects did a good job of showing that the topics would be similar to the previous five years of exams. We then followed the usual strategy of using 5 years of past papers as a revision model. There was no indication that we should have expected a different level of uncertainty to any other exam. Regrettably, when in the exam room it was discovered the exam had changed quite significantly in terms of structure, question length and how topics were distributed.

I realise exams change. They change due to the standards of outside bodies or the wishes of new module leaders. I'm sure there are other reasons as well. No problem with that. What I question is whether students should discover quite radical changes in exam structure when they open the paper on the day? What is the reason or advantage in keeping it a secret? It makes no sense. The Durham MBA exams allow virtually zero time for serious contemplation, thought and reflection, so having to adjust to new structures and question lengths is challenging without advanced warning. After all, six months from now the next Finance students will be fine because they can look at last semesters paper. I've not even brought in the problem of allowing students to revise from past papers without even indicating they aren't representative.

In my view, and I'm sure other people differ, it was a betrayal of trust based on the de-facto procedure, and increasing the students exposure to uncertainty that won't exist for any other semester (as past exams will be visible).

Even if you ignore all that, the Managing Finance exam had a strange question on it about agile projects, though it did involve some finance elements. As expected by a lot of those sitting the exam, the whole question was from the Managing Information paper exam and wasn't even supposed to be on the Finance exam. I have to admit, I am very confused how the management processes can allow (a) a significantly different exam structure to be introduced to the students only when they open the exam paper and (b) a question from another paper gets onto the paper and makes its way through to the exam sitting.

So, it certainly was a tale of two exams, or to be more accurate, a tale of three exams and then one other. In my view, the finance exam seemed to be a bit of a management disaster both in terms of expectations and practical implementation. I was lucky as Section A had become the theory section and I was fine with that (though I missed the 2-3 100% theory questions I could do in the old Section B). I also have the ECA to raise my mark. What I do know is it will increase the failure rate, and how they account for putting on a question from another paper I have no idea.

Okay, it's Sunday, and my semester two exams are on Monday and Tuesday. I'm pretty relaxed about them, which is a good thing. I like it when I reach that Zen state of feeling like I'm prepared. Don't get me wrong, it's not plain sailing, it all depends on the questions and if they pull a fast one. I'm still concerned that I'm at the lower end of the word count (a big hindrance to that 70+ mark I believe), as I just can't fit in as much as I'd like in some cases. I could still revise more and have an even greater understanding, but you have to be practical. I feel confident I'll pass and the rest is a bonus. Good place. I'll still have a last minute stress point, but I just want to get them out of the way now.

I was thinking this morning, during that surprisingly lucid phase between 0530 and 0700, about how certain text books become key to certain subjects. I suspect this might be different for everyone, either due to personal preference or just through the books they happen to pick up. I thought I'd give a text from each module I've done so far that I've found amazingly useful.

The Managing People module has an abundance of material. It's probably the same for every module but due to the nature of the 'research focus' of the module you tend to be inundated with texts and studies. This is due to it being a Durham University research area, and no doubt due to it being laden with political and psychological language and as such tends to fire up opinion. The book I found the best was Strategy and Human Resource Management by Boxall and Purcell. The reason I liked it is it had a very strategic approach, provided a great overview of many different arguments (and thus links to other books and studies) and also managed to break them down with a bit of a more practical bent and apply them to overall strategy and how HRM fits into it. Since I tend to be someone who likes an holistic understanding, and the application of multiple skills and areas of understanding to solve problems to achieve objectives, rather than becoming the expert in one thing, it appealed to me. It's certainly worth a read.

The Finance book that has been very good, is Corporate Finance: Principles and Practice by Denzil Watson and Antony Head. It is a very good text for the second part of the finance module once you move out of the analysis of financial accounts. It covers the role of the financial manager and everything that pertains to it an excellent, fluid way that just brings everything together. It also has one other major benefit: it was the book the module leader used for most of his revision notes and supporting questions. This suggests he views it as a key text as well and as such that's a double bonus. It compliments the module material and builds on them superbly. It has lots of great diagrams that if remembered, and often this is easier than blocks of text, give a great way of showing and describing things. I'd recommend anyone doing the finance exam, reads this book mostly from cover to cover, since the exam is on the corporate finance part of the course.

It's interesting that both these books tend to take the academic theories, apply them to the real world a bit and question some of the academic positions. This is good, as in truth academic positions are often slightly artificial and odd, as if holding them and debating them has value in and off itself, and often in truth neither position is a perfect understanding of the real world anyway.

While the Economics text provided is very good, I also found Economics by Lipsey & Christal a perfect companion to it. At times it's how subjects are introduced and the order they are explained in that is critical. This is especially true if you are narrative learner, reliant on the narrative, flow and story of a subject to get a handle on it. While struggling with this module in the early stages, the Lipsey and Christal book just re-arranged some of the areas and introduced them in a different way, as well as providing different explanations. This allowed it all to slip into place. It's not perfect, it goes into extra detail in some areas, which can be a hindrance, but it's certainly worth having as a companion as the economics module is studied. It also has some great diagrams and graphs that show things better than the module material and texts and show extra reading if included in exam questions.

In terms of strategy and operations I thought the books provided as text books were very good, this is specifically true of the strategy text, but then it's been a major text in this area for many editions. It was the text book for the strategy elements of my Information Technology degree way back in 1992 to 1993. My recommendation for competitive environment is Principles of Marketing by Philip Kotler et al, as it's pretty much the text book for the marketing section of the course and includes all the critical areas in a very detailed fashion. It also has some great diagrams for explaining things, specifically an excellent diagram on the whole marketing process. It's an excellent book, full of great examples from the business world. Anyone studying the Competitive Environment module should get this book. I'd also recommend reading around a bit on marketing, it's the focus of 2.5 questions on the exam, and by picking up extra text books and studies you can get some great diagrams to explain things. It's also true the inter-functional coordination question (the .5 of the 2.5) isn't covered in the module materials much at all and thus demands extra reading. There are some excellent studies available with models for framing your answer.

It's worth noting that in all the above cases I've not purchased these books, but got them on loan from either Durham University or my local library. I don't live in a collegiate town, so most libraries of town size or bigger should have them. It also shows that demand for these texts, despite them being key references, ain't that high in Durham either. In all cases I've had them on 3-month loan and renewed them throughout the semester.

Also, I've linked things to the exams a bit here due to them being on my mind currently, but all these books are great for just enhancing knowledge of the various subjects, specifically in a more holistic, applicable way. While the exams are critical to getting those letters after your name, I believe the application is even more important.

Revision is going quite well, but I've finally come to understand the big risk factor of this semester: the finance exam. It's not to do with the nature of the subject, or it is, but only relation to how the exam is structured. I've mentioned this before, but as I get deeper into it the true fiendish nature of it is becoming apparent. This is ironic, as I've actually found the subject quite enjoyable and not as bad as I thought.

The reason the finance exam is possibly the most difficult on the Durham MBA (though I've not seen Managing Information) is because of its structure and its unpredictability, and these two things are related. The structure is difficult because Section A is five questions (of eight) each 12-minutes long, while Section B is one question (of four) and this question is one hour long. This creates unpredictability. This creates floating topics which could be a one hour question or a 12-minute question? Or both? The other difficulty is the 12-minute questions demand quite a bit of info that needs pushing into that 12-minutes. This may be more unique to me as I tend to write at the lower end of the word counts, so when it's shortened to 12-minutes I don't have much leeway. The other thing is the 12-minute questions can act as spot, out of the blue questions on quite specific areas of the course, rather than general arguments. It creates a lot of special case situations.

You then have to throw in the maths side of the exam, which has all the above factors with the added factor of memorising equations, some of them quite long. The other thorny factor is it's possible to structure the questions to mix the maths with the theory thus making it less possible to adopt a strategy that leans towards written or mathematical questions. This isn't all bad, there is generally a mix in previous papers, but it's all too possible you might hit a friendly subject mixed in with maths so you have to absorb both.

All this tends to mean you have to study a lot of material in exhaustive detail which in turn may well produce a lot of material you didn't need for the exam. You may also revise a topic and just not have covered a very specific part of it in enough detail and then get that as the 12-minute one.

It has some predicables, but far less than any of the other exams I've done or studied so far. It truly is a fiendish construction and is starting to ramp up the fear factor.

On the Competitive Environment things are totally different, it's the usual 5 questions that don't vary vastly from year to year so the experience is much more predictable. I've got sample answers for these questions and I'm reading the various topics, but I'm going to have lower the priority on this exam a bit, based on its apparent predictability, due to the nature of the finance exam. Next week shall have a heavy finance focus.

How the people who did Finance before Economics could say the Economics one was harder I have no idea.

It's now 14 days to the exam and 28 days until the ECA work has to be submitted. It's a strange feeling this year. Last year it was less confusing, the feeling was one of abject fear of the exams. It really did influence every single moment of decision and thought right up until sitting them. It's not as oppressive this year, the trouble is I'm still not decided whether this is a good thing. I still don't feel like I'm prepared enough, I just don't seem to be panicking about it. A part of this may be because I know I will be prepared subconsciously due to the experience factor of having sat one set of exams. Another part of me thinks the relative relaxed attitude is a strange false sense of security and I'm going to be punished for it.

Personally? I think I preferred the abject fear. It was simpler and ensured you didn't underestimate the situation.

I'm actually a bit further along than I was last year, I think. On the finance side I've covered all of the topics from the on-site seminar, though not necessarily memorised them. The trouble is it's hard to predict which of those varied topics will come as 12-minute questions and which ones will be 60-minute questions. At the moment I'm hoping for Working Capital Management and Dividend Policy to be options for my 60-minute question, epic questions of doom. I'd do either of those. The chances of them being focused on the theoretical, written end of the scale is also quite high. The Dividend question,when it's appeared in previous years has been an essay question. I so hope the dividend question is an essay question. The Working Capital one is strange, as I'm not sure it's featured in previous exams much at all, whatever the question length.

The main concern with the finance is I still haven't moved on doing practice calculations, need to get a move on that one. I've only just got the scientific calculator. One of the funniest things about the on-site seminar was the realisation by a group of people how lacking they'd become in basic maths (such as re-arranging equations) and how to use a scientific calculator. It's not rocket science, but that moment when you realise how 'out of touch' this stuff has become is weird.

The focus on the next few days will probably be on preparing specimen answers for Marketing (done really) and the Operations Management questions on section B of the Managing in the Competitive Environment exam. At the moment I'm finding it hard to write comprehensive revision notes for these topics and I seem to be mentally focusing on writing specimen answers. Not sure if this is a good idea. I suspect it may be experience from last year telling me the flow of the specimen answer may provide more value for my time. Having those out the way would be good as I can start assigning the Competitive Environment exam to just a read and absorb status. I'd like to be in that state for both by next week.

As I say, the fear factor of last semester was much preferred. At the moment I'm relaxed, I occasionally think the relaxed state is going to result in a 'defining moment of unprepared-ness in the exam', but at the same time it doesn't seem to bother me that much. Weird, but true. A key factor might be how things progress this week and what still needs to be done in the final week.