A Web of Deception?

Gawker continues to explore new aspects of the IIPM story today and has a post about a string of schools in Europe associated with International Management Institute [IMI], which IIPM calls its partner. Gawker noticed some curious similarities in the websites of IMI and its partner organizations namely; Barcelona Business School [BBS] and European Business & Management School [EBMS]. In fact these websites were so similar that Gawker had to conclude:

"Eerie? Hell yeah! I don't know about you, but I sure think this daisychain of interconnected institutes, each existing ambiguously on the internet with no information other than the fact that they claim to churn out a large number of high quality MBA graduates seems extremely suspicious to say the least."

The degrees offered at IIPM are actually conferred by IMI and do not come under the purview of AICTE, UGC or other state acts, a fact brought to you by the JAM article.

All this sounded really fishy, as aptly put by Gawker. So I decided to scrutiny the websites of these three institutes (IMI, BBS, and EBMS) further. Gawker had already pointed out similarities in faculty pages for IMI, BBS and EBMS. In fact they are the same word for word, except the names of the schools. None of them list any faculty with names and contact information. Here are some more facts I found:

The "Studying at IMI", "Campus" page at BBS and "Students" page at EBMS; all have exactly same content.

The teaching philosophy pages are also the same for the three schools. Check it out for: IMI, BBS, EBMS

The program descriptions are also similar (word for word). E.g. check out the description of the BBA program at the these schools: IMI, BBS, EBMS

The courses for the BBA program are also the same. The names of courses... everything is same: IMI, BBS, EBMS

Well, these schools are partners so they must be sharing the same course materials, same programs and same teaching philosophies etc. There is no big problem with that right? I guess so.

But hold on... IMI and EBMS both have same contact address, phone numbers and both have campuses in Antwerp and Brussels, as we can see from their contact pages (IMI, EBMS). So, could it be that there is just one school with two websites and two different names? Why? I don't understand this.

Now you will say, "So what? What about BBS? It is physically at a different place (Barcelona) and has a different name too." Very well. I presume it must be having different students too. I think it is highly improbable that these schools located at different places can have the same students. But guess what... different students studying at different schools have surprisingly come up with "exactly the same" testimonials [IMI, BBS, EBMS] singing the glory of these schools. Or was it that "BA graduate from Russia" simply attended all of these schools and found that they are really the same. Curiously none of these students seem to have any names or addresses.

So what? Maybe students didn't come up with good testimonials. So these schools decided to come up with their own and share. What's a little sharing among partners?

Actually I am pretty much convinced that IMI and EBMS are actually one and the same... two names, two websites... one school. Their students look awfully similar to each other as ascertained by links to the same student party pictures from both websites (here and here). Same for their Egypt tour 2004 pictures. But what about BBS then? Do they have similar looking students? Well I dunno about that, but their Turkey 2005 trip seems to have gone on exactly the same route, with exactly the same people as IMI's Turkey trip.

Now either these schools are taking the meaning of "partners" to a whole new level by sharing student photos, testimonials and all the other stuff on their websites OR they are up to some sort of a scheme here. I don't know how IIPM chose IMI as its "partner" but they surely seem to have one similar quality. Both of them are using some really suspicious information (in their advertisements - for IIPM and on their website - for IMI) to catch students and rake money.

IMI, BBS, EBMS, IIPM: all partners in a web of deception? I leave that for you to judge.

Updates:
My posts on media coverage of the IIPM story: [1] [2] [3] [4]
IIPM in the media: [I.E.] [Pioneer] [H.T.] [NDTV] [IndiaTogether] [Outlook] [Business Standard] [CNBC-TV18 online news: 1, 2] [New York Times]

Technorati Tags: IIPM, IMI, BBS, EBMS

Management-gate: What can we do?

I have expressed my feelings about the unfolding management-gate episode in my previous post ( 1, 2 ). I think all the bloggers supporting Rashmi and Gaurav (and Varna now), must think about what actions they can take? What they can do regarding this issue?

What needs to be done is that the facts must be hung high up there, out in the open for everyone to look at them and make up their mind. One way to do this is through this medium...blogs and the internet. Anyone looking for IIPM must come across the facts pertaining to this story. This will help people (probably future students, parents of students, people applying for jobs at IIPM) to make informed decision and judge the quality of the institution. Ravikiran has come up with a way to do just that! Here is his post which explains the steps to be taken.

Apart from posting the information on the web and making it highly visible there are a few more things bloggers can do. We can send this story to the "media" (if it hasn't already picked it up). The story must be well written, balanced and based on easily verifiable facts. I would also prefer if IIPM's side of the story can be heard (unless they want to continue their "under the radar" slander campaign). I think it is very important that mainstream media pick this story. The fact that they have not done anything so far may be due to their fear of losing ad revenues.

Then there is a matter of the legal notices sent via notarized email (whatever that is) to some bloggers by IIPM. I am not even sure if there is such a thing as notarized email or an emailed legal notice! I am not sure whether IIPM is serious about these notices. It may all be just another arm twisting tactic on their part. Check out TechMag's take on the notices. Would someone who has adequate knowledge of law throw some more light on this?

This whole issue is not about of IIPM's rankings, or quality of their program, or credentials of Arindam Chaudhuri, or about IIPM students. This is about the freedom of expression. I urge everyone to take action now...

Technorati Tags: IIPM, JAM magazine, Indian blogs

Management-gate: What went wrong?

I continue to be amazed by the unfolding saga that is management-gate. Desipundit has picked up the cause and is posting regular updates on the latest things happening across the blogosphere. A lot of bloggers are expressing their support to Rashmi (the editor of the JAM article in question) and Gaurav (just another blogger who linked to the article and in the course of events decided to resign his job at IBM). The whole blogosphere has rallied behind the cause. IIPM is now ranked #1 search item on Technorati (as of 3.17 PM, EST today) and another blogger Varna now has received an email legal notice (!) from IIPM, similar to one that was sent to Gaurav.

The question in my mind though is what next? What exactly is the cause here? What are we supporting? What needs to be done? If there is nothing to "act" then all this is mere words floating on the internet.

So what went wrong? Was IIPM at fault by having misleading or hyped up information in their advertisements? After all they can state whatever it wants as long as they pay for them, can't they? I guess the answer is yes and no! A company can hype up a product all it wants. It is up to the consumer then to demand integrity from the company, either by demanding to meet up to the description in the advertisements or by toning down the ads. I guess that's where things are going wrong.

IIPM can get away with all these hyped up advertisements because it gets students. There are literally thousands of students who would line up for admission (irrespective of what IIPM says in its advertisements). There is such a huge demand for these degrees that IIPM will get away with anything it says. It might as well promise paid trips to Mars. The problem is at some point the IIPM staff and students started believing in their own advertisements.

Now, when JAM published a fact finding article about these advertisements, it was not doing something wrong. It is not a crime to point out facts. In fact, it is a sign of vigilant democratic action. The way IIPM reacted to this is what is most outrageous about all this. The way it SHOULD HAVE reacted is by refuting the facts mentioned in the article point by point, on their website and through press releases. Appropriate legal action taken by IIPM against what it perceives as libel is also acceptable.

What is wrong is that IIPM chose to go under the radar and create fake blogs to slander Rashmi. It went ahead and pressured Gaurav by threatening his employer IBM with protests and demonstrations. This malicious response is totally against the freedom of speech. What I understand (and correct me if I am wrong) by freedom of speech is:

The freedom to express my opinion freely without the fear of physical and psychological harm against myself or my family or well-wishers.

From this perspective I say that IIPM engaged in almost criminal behavior in its response to a simple article in a small magazine. It points out how fragile they feel their reputation is and how important it is to save their "sales pitch". It almost seems like those are the only things they have ... a fragile reputation and a sales pitch... no modern campuses, not quality education... just a sales pitch.

Technorati Tags: IIPM, JAM magazine, Indian blogs

Management-gate

There is a huge crop of self declared "gurus" in India. Many in the religious-spiritual regime, others in down-to-earth things like higher education. Education gurus start "institutes" and "universities" for higher education in engineering, management or medicine. Higher education and all its ancillary industries are cash cows. There is no lack of students eager to get that B.E or B.Tech or MBA and get into the IT industry or land some lucrative management job. Students and their parents are willing to pay exorbitant amounts of money for a degree and often fail to check the quality of the institutes or programs they sign up for.

Then there is the ancillary business of coaching classes. The IITs (Indian institutes of Technology) and IIMs (Indian institutes of Management) are government funded institutes which are ranked highest in their respective fields. To get into one of them you have to take very competitive entrance exams. So there are coaching classes to help you prepare for these exams. The other institutes either have their own entrance exams or use the scores for the entrance exams for IIT and IIM, as a basis for admission. So there are more coaching classes to prepare you for all sorts of other entrance exams.

Naturally there is a lot of competition among the institutes to bag students. So the institutes tend to spend a lot of money on advertisements. With a huge advertisement budget and other significant chunk probably going into the pockets of these education gurus (who are the founders of these institutes), there isn't much left to improve the quality of the programs themselves. So some of these institutes tend to boast a little in these ads, hype about their campus, their program, use faulty rankings here and there. Indian media since it is so occupied with important things like Hollywood, Bollywood, cricket etc., does not bother to check the veracity of these advertisements appearing in their papers.

But what happens when someone calls the bluff? What happens when a small magazine publishes a fact checking article about the claims of a management institute in India? The drama unfolding this weekend gave us the answer and the answer is yet to unfold completely.

How? When? Where?... Check out the details on this post by Amit Verma. It all started when JAM published an article exposing the false claims made by IIPM, a management institute with campuses in many cities in India, in the full page ads that appeared in newspapers. Another blogger Gaurav linked the article in his blog post. The institute (and it is not clear whether it is the current students, the management or alumni) launched a hideous assault with fake blogs created only a few days ago to discredit the article. Instead of responding to the alarming facts raised in the article, they choose to attack the editor of the article, Rashmi, by posting lewd comments on her blog. They also pressured Gaurav by bullying him to remove his posts from his blog, sending him stupid legal notices (via email!) and threatening demonstrations in front of IBM (Gaurav's employer). Gaurav has since resigned his job at IBM (see related post on his blog).

The "management-gate" scandal is still unfolding. Lots of bloggers have voiced their support for Rashmi and Gaurav by posting comments and posting about the story on their blogs. IIPM so far has not responded to any of the specific facts mentioned in the JAM article. The kind of responses the fake bloggers posted on Rashmi's blog and the way IIPM bullied Gaurav is really disgusting. It is hard to understand why they would do such things which would only result in damaging their reputation further.

For these institutes, the degrees are simply products to be marketed by advertisement. The "pitch" is all that matters. The quality is irrelevant. Anything that undermines the "pitch" then is a big threat and must be crushed by all means. Unfortunately so far, their game plan seems to be working.

Technorati Tags: JAM, IIPM, India, Management schools, Indian blogs

Starbucks challenge: Sweet success second time

This is an update on my first post about the Starbucks challenge.

I tried it again this time and it was sweet bitter success. This time too the barista told me that they were not brewing the fair trade. But I asked if they could French press a cup for me and he instantly agreed. I had to wait for a while to get my coffee though, since they couldn't find it at first. But after a couple of minutes I had a huge cup of nice hot (and strong) fair trade coffee in my hands! I have to say that no matter how small a thing this is... it really felt good to drink that coffee. I don't know whether it is because I made them do something they don't typically do (They had to go back and get a new pack of "cafe estima" for me!) or whether it is the joy of supporting something good. Whatever it is it feels good! It was a bit expensive though and I am not sure if I can afford it all the time. But the local Webster's cafe and bookstore offer fair trade coffee for a lot less than snobby Starbucks.

I got a comment for my previous post about how much fair trade coffee Starbucks actually sells. I grabbed a brochure about 'social responsibility' from Starbucks yesterday. It says that in 2004 "fair trade certified" coffee accounted for only 1.6% of their coffee purchase. That's not really a big chunk. I didn't know what the deal was with other coffee chains about selling fair trade coffee though. So I went to Seattle's Best website and found out that it is owned by Starbucks since July 2003! Call me a coffee dummy... but I didn't know that. Seattle's best has 2 blends that are certified fair trade.

In the end taking the Starbucks challenge turned out to be a great learning experience. Thanks CityHippy and green LA girl.

Technorati Tags: Starbucks, Seattle's Best, Starbucks Challenge, Fair Trade, Coffee
Del.icio.us: Starbucks Challenge