In an in-depth conversation, Daviender Narang, Director, Jaipuria Institute of Management, offers a grounded perspective on how India’s management education landscape has evolved over the past two decades and where it still falls short. Drawing from his experience in building institutions and leading international capacity-building initiatives, Narang underscores the urgent need to move beyond exam-centric learning towards real-world decision-making, leadership and ethical responsibility. He argues that the future of management education lies in balancing strong foundational learning with domain depth, embedding research into institutional culture and preparing business schools to play a meaningful role in addressing India’s social and economic challenges.
Edited excerpts:
How has management education in India changed over the past two decades and where do you think it has not changed enough?
Over the last twenty years, management education in India has seen visible and positive change. Business schools have expanded rapidly, new specialisations have emerged and technology has become an integral part of teaching and learning. Classrooms today are more interactive, case-based learning is common and industry exposure has increased through internships, guest lectures and live projects.
However, what has not changed enough is the focus on real managerial capability. Many programmes still emphasise examinations, grades and theoretical coverage over decision-making, leadership and execution skills. While students learn ‘what management is’, they are often underprepared for ‘how management actually works’ in dynamic and uncertain business environments.
Having built and led multiple business schools, what are the most common gaps you see between MBA curricula and real managerial capability?
The most common gap lies in the difference between knowledge and application. MBA students are well-versed in concepts but often lack confidence in applying them in real-life situations. Skills such as people management, ethical decision-making, handling ambiguity, negotiation and stakeholder communication receive limited structured attention.
Another major gap is attitude and professional maturity. Many curricula assume that these qualities develop automatically, whereas they need deliberate mentoring, reflection and feedback. Real managers succeed not only because they know finance or marketing, but because they can lead teams, manage conflict and take responsibility under pressure.
With specialisations like Business Analytics and BFSI gaining ground, how should institutes balance domain depth with foundational learning?
Specialisations like Business Analytics and BFSI are essential and timely, as they respond to industry demand and employment trends. However, these domains should be built on a strong foundation of core management principles such as strategy, economics, organisational behaviour, ethics and communication.
Management institutes must avoid turning MBA programmes into narrow technical courses. A good balance can be achieved by ensuring that the first part of the programme builds managerial thinking, while the later part develops domain expertise. This ensures that graduates are not only skilled professionals but also adaptable leaders who can grow across roles and industries.
From your experience in international capacity-building projects, what lessons can Indian management schools adopt to strengthen faculty and institutional quality?
One important lesson from international projects is the central role of faculty development. Global institutions invest continuously in training their faculty in pedagogy, research methods and industry engagement. Teaching quality improves when faculty are supported, not overloaded.
Another lesson is the emphasis on institutional systems rather than individuals. Strong academic governance, transparent processes and long-term vision help institutions sustain quality even as leadership changes. Indian management schools can benefit by moving from personality-driven models to system-driven excellence.
What structural changes are needed to make research central to management education in India?
To make research central, institutes must first recognise and reward research meaningfully. Faculty appraisal, promotions and workload policies should value research output alongside teaching. Without institutional incentives, research will always remain secondary.
Additionally, research must be contextual and practice-oriented. Encouraging collaboration with industry, government and social sectors can make research more relevant and impactful. Doctoral programmes, research funding and mentorship structures also need strengthening to create a sustainable research culture.
As an academic and administrator, How do you define the role of a business school in addressing social and economic challenges?
A business school today cannot remain confined to classrooms and placements alone. Its role extends to shaping responsible leaders who understand the social and economic context in which businesses operate. Issues such as sustainability, inclusion, ethics and governance must be integrated into teaching and institutional practices.
Business schools should act as thought leaders and problem solvers, engaging with local communities, startups, policymakers and industry. By doing so, they contribute not only to employability but also to nation-building and long-term economic development.
Management education in India stands at an important crossroads. The future belongs to institutions that combine academic rigor with practical relevance, domain expertise with broad-based thinking and professional success with social responsibility. The challenge is not just to produce managers, but to develop leaders who can shape a better and more inclusive future.
Published by
