A state of drift 2

On Saturday, November 5, I wrote an article with the same title. It was about a possible conflict of interest between the Asian Institute of Management, better known as AIM, and the National University over the public participation of two of AIM’s leading professors in entrepreneurship, Ed Morato and Andy Ferreria, in the entrepreneurship programs of both institutions. I wrote this two weeks after I had stumbled upon a National University supplement, singing the praises of AIM. It was, after all, a public document, this newspaper, thousands had seen it before I wrote about it. Since then, here is what has happened.

One, I received by e-mail a letter from Edwin V. Fernandez, dean, National University School of Entrepreneurship. He says essentially there is no conflict of interest because the National University caters to a very different market than AIM. AIM caters to the very rich and National University gets its students from, more or less, the other social extreme. AIM offers entrepreneurship as a masteral and National University offers it as an undergraduate course. Also they – Fernandez, Ferreria, and Morato – discussed this for two years and found no conflict of interest. Besides, none of them, not any one of the three, is on the payroll. None of them is making any money from this venture. They are doing this out of love of entrepreneurship and the drive to see it democratized.

Okay. Still, from my own business point of view, this is a conflict of interest. I don’t think professors associated with a university, especially AIM, are free to squander their name and time without first getting the special permission of AIM. This is perhaps an issue that AIM should take up with you. It affects them more than it affects you. They pay their professors well. They encourage them to take consulting jobs and make more money. But does it mean they are free to take on jobs with other institutions? Does it mean the other institutions are free to market their offerings on the basis of connection to AIM? Does AIM allow you to use its name so freely? Should it?

Like I said, all this just tells me that things have to change. How, when, where, why, I don’t know. I am not a member of the board of trustees of AIM. This issue is theirs to handle now. By the way, I am forwarding a copy of your letter to me to Fr. Ed Martinez, SJ. Also, thank you very much for your prompt and polite response. I truly appreciated it. Simply could not write about this sooner because of overwhelm in other portions of my life.

Two, AIM president Roberto de Ocampo invited me to lunch where he explained that he was not in the USA on vacation. He was there working on relationships with other American universities for AIM. Also, he reported that they had created a committee to study whether there was conflict of interest or not. Did the university have a policy that governed these matters? Head of that committee was Father Ed Martinez, SJ. Lunch was good. Thank you, too, Mr. De Ocampo, for the very kind response.

Then there is the third mysterious response. Prof. Ed Morato has sent a copy of a letter he was supposed to have sent me to every member of the faculty, I was told, but I never received my copy by e-mail. I think that for me to react to something written to me I should receive it first. Now this is a standard that is apparently difficult to adhere to in this country. Someone still forwarded his letter to me expecting me to give my comments, expecting them to be mean. I did not read it because it did not come from him. I simply dumped it in my junk mail box where it eventually got erased. Until I receive my letter from Prof. Ed Morato, how can I react? I write this simply to let everyone know I have not received his letter at all. Those are the facts.

All these reactions are confusing my issue. I basically said that AIM was in a state of drift, going nowhere, bobbing up and down, moving left to right, being carried by the stagnant water beneath. Now a slight breeze from me has made them move a little. I don’t know if something will happen, if principles will arise from this, what exactly will happen next, when it will happen. Very easily, nothing much will come out of this and the state of drift will continue. The supplement came out on Oct. 3. It is almost Dec. 3. We have a committee to investigate. That’s better than what we had before, but will it take us out of the state of drift? Maybe not. Then all we have to do is look forward to the next article of the same title. Get my drift?

* * *

Please send your comments to lilypad@skyinet.net or visit www.lilypadlectures.com.