May 20, 1998

Contact person:

John D. Bigelow, Management Department. Boise State University, 1910 University Drive, Boise, Idaho 83725 (208) 385-1267 (phone) (208) 385-1857 (FAX)

RMGBIGEL@COBFAC.IDBSU.EDU

Character count: 56596 Word count: 8829

Experienced management skill teachers are a valuable, but largely untapped source of knowledge about skill teaching. and there can be considerable validity to their knowledge. In this study twenty four experienced managerial skills teachers raise and discuss issues associated with the teaching of managerial skills. Insights are provided into ten skill learning issues: (1) describing skills, (2) developing an understanding of skills, (3) teaching in a time-limited course, (4) lifelong learning, (5) orienting learners, (6) the learning process, (7) overcoming learner learning obstacles, (8) qualities needed by teachers, (9) assessing learning accomplishments, and (10) absolute vs. relative scoring.

During the past decade the number of universities offering management skills courses has been on the increase. Since the Porter-McKibbin report in 1988, there has been a sharp upturn in university interest in skill teaching. Currently university skills courses (as distinguished from corporate skill training) are supporting at least twelve skills texts--and more skills texts are in manuscript form.

There has been a corresponding increase in the numbers of individuals who are engaged in university skill teaching. Since teaching itself is a learning experience and many teachers have been teaching skills for some time, these individuals have learned much about the realities of skill teaching and how to make it work in a university context. Their views from the "inside" are of great potential value to prospective skills teachers and to anyone desirous of improving skill learning. Yet there has been little effort to date to tap the learning of these individuals (footnote 1).

The purpose of this paper is to present the results of one effort to tap the learning of a number of practicing skills teachers. The data for this paper was collected at a postconference of the 1993 Organizational Behavior Teaching Society. The method by which these learnings were collected and the validity issues associated with them are discussed in attachment A. This paper begins by identifying the issues discussed and by organizing them into a sequence. Following this, each of the issues is stated and discussed in turn.

Ten issues were raised around skill teaching. These issues can be thought of as following a natural sequence, starting with a consideration of the nature of managerial skills, moving to some of the contextual issues of teaching skills in a university setting, then to issues of designing a skills course, and finally to assessing skill learning. Table1 lays out the four steps of this sequence. For each step, the issues associated with that step are listed beneath. These issues are discussed in turn in the following pages.

-----------------------

Table 1 about here

-----------------------

"Managerial skills" have tended to be described as a collection of skills which have been identified by managers as important. This collection tends to be ad hoc and open-ended, without a sense of what skillfulness looks like in action, the relative importance of different skills, relationships among skills, or a sense of how skills impact on organizations. This description leaves much to be desired in understanding what managerial skills are.

We need a rationale/theory of skills; not just a description but a clear statement, starting with the basics of managerial performance and leading to a need for skills. Moreover, we need a taxonomy of skills, perhaps more like Bloom's educational taxonomy--not simply skills categories.

In developing a more complete description of managerial skills, we would add the following:

In attempting to understand skills we can approach them descriptively or conceptually(footnote 2). In a descriptive approach we come at the skills from the inside, from a point of view which may be different for each individual. Skill learners create their own visions of skillfulness which are appropriate for them. Alternatively, we can approach skills conceptually, in terms of those things which all descriptions have in common.

The design of a skill course depends very much on which approach to understanding skills the designer prefers to emphasize. Differences between a descriptively- and conceptually-based learning program are listed in Table 2. Teachers with a background in experiential learning may prefer a descriptive approach (see Boyatzis, Cowen, and Kolb, 1991; Boyatzis, 1992, for a description of a course largely based on self-directed change), whereas teachers with a more conceptual teaching background may prefer a conceptual approach. Current skills texts are generally based on a conceptual approach.

-----------------------

Table 2 about here

-----------------------

Each approach has important advantages and disadvantages. A descriptive approach is likely to lead to greater ownership of the skill learning process and a greater influence on subsequent behavior. Moreover it is more likely to enhance the person's ability to manage his/her own learning. However, individuals may choose "safe" learning topics, such as time management, and avoid riskier ones such as conflict management. Moreover, the descriptive approach relies on the individual's self-awareness and learning abilities to drive the learning process. Since low-skill individuals often also lack learning skills, they may face a double disadvantage in such a course.

A conceptual approach provides greater assurance that learners will cover a range of topics which is identified as important in representative managerial situations. Bringing in outside expertise increases the scope of understanding of managerial skillfulness provided to learners, and provides knowledge of action alternatives which may not have occurred to learners on their own. It provides a learning process for learners who may lack the ability to structure their own learning environment. It is more familiar to a college environment. It provides greater uniformity to the learning process, providing a basis for the college to make claims about the nature of their graduates. However, conceptual skill learning is often not internalized, even when practiced. Moreover, learners often do not learn to manage their own learning.

A Hybrid Approach? The assumptions underlying the descriptive and conceptual approaches are so different that it seems difficult to imagine how the two can coexist in one course. We're familiar with course designs emphasizing a conceptual approach, with readings, content exams, and skill practice in which research-based skill guidelines are applied. We are also familiar with courses designs emphasizing a descriptive approach, in which learners set their own learning agenda, learn from experiential exercises, keep journals, and provide their own assessment of their progress, often leading to a "pass-fail" grade.

A hybrid course design would need three components. The first would be a conceptual component, in which learnings from others are provided. It would, for example, have readings in which the results of research on skillfulness are presented. Moreover, skill learners would be expected to become conversant with this material; not simply treat it as a resource. The second would be a descriptive component, in which learners would assess their own strengths and weaknesses, establish a schedule of learning activities, and record their skill learning progress. The third would be a "connecting" component, in which learners consider the learnings of others, consider the implications for their own behaviors, and identify those areas in which others' behaviors set a desirable standard for their own skill development. For example, a learner might assess how he/she typically deals with conflict, look at other alternatives provided by research, and decide if this is an important area for expanding his/her behavioral repertoire. This process might be formalized by asking learners to write a paper in which they systematically consider implications of readings for their own skill development, then outline a learning plan.

A hybrid course sets a high standard for the kind of learning which will occur in it, and would require an exceptionally diverse instructor to carry it forward. Perhaps this is one reason why it is difficult to find actual examples of such a course. The hybrid notion indicates a direction in course development which, if pursued, could lead to significant improvements in course effectiveness.

Colleges attempting to develop qualities sought by business constituents may hope that these qualities can be primarily obtained within a single course. This amount of time would be sufficient to provide a conceptual awareness around important skill topics, but is by no means enough to provide in-depth skill learning on each. In truth, in a single course we can hope to sensitize learners to the skills, provide some basic skill learning, reward changes in performance during the course, and encourage their continued practice.

If one accepts the course slot constraint, one must choose how to best use it. One alternative is to cover a wide variety of skill topics at an "awareness" level, in the hope that the knowledge attained will stimulate later skill learning. Another alternative is to cover a few critical skills in depth. A course based on this alternative might focus on interpersonal or influencing skills in a managerial context, or on skill universals, which are present in any effective performance; e.g., seeking a "win-win" solution, active listening, and leaving the other responsible. A third alternative is to combine the first two: cover some skills at an awareness level and others in depth.

Examples of courses based on all three alternatives can be found in universities. However, none of the three are entirely appealing, since all compromise the goal of dealing with critical managerial skills in depth. Of the three the first would seem the least satisfying, in that it retreats entirely from the goal of actual skill learning. The third seems to offer the least dissatisfying compromise in that the course can focus on critical skills and establish a skill learning process. Scope can be provided by covering less critical, but difficult to learn skills at an awareness level.

A skill learning course is embedded in a larger college/university sociocultural context which can impact positively or negatively on a learner's evolving skillfulness. Moreover, the university experience itself is embedded in a learner's larger life and career, which can be expected to continue far beyond the university experience. We know that most of peoples' skillfulness is developed through learning by experience in these larger life contexts. The kind of learning experience which occurs in these other contexts, however, may run counter to development of managerial skillfulness. Traditional education, for example, can have a "deskilling" effect on learners, in effect teaching them to be passive, rationalistic, and individualistic. It follows that if our goal is to produce net enhancements of learners' skillfulness, we must attend to the larger context in which skillfulness is developed.

There are a number of ways by which skill learning may be extended from a skills course to the larger learning environment. Incorporating the development of lifelong learning skills into a course is one possibility, and is discussed in issue #4 below. Two other possibilities:

a) Life application assignments. Most current skills texts do include a number of application assignments which require learners to apply their learning outside the class. For example, a learner may be asked to use active listening in a conversation with a friend, or to use conflict resolution guidelines in dealing with a difference with a friend. Since many managerial skills are in a broader sense "life" skills, there are many opportunities to make this link. Through repeated applications of this type, learners may become accustomed to using skill principles in their larger life context.

b) "Reengineering" the university program. Some universities have undergone a systemic rethinking of their programs, and have attempted to redesign their programs from the top down, starting with what they are trying to accomplish. The results may lead to a different relationship between skill learning and the program. For example, the University of Central Florida's "Business Education 2000" identifies 19 skills grouped under teamwork, communication, creative thinking, and adapting to change. These are introduced in the introductory course of the undergraduate program, and are developed in subsequent core courses. Central Missouri State University has undergone its own rethinking, and revised the teachers role around Alverno College's "assessment as learning" model. Throughout the program learners undergo regular assessment activities, which include skill assessment. The assessments are used as the basis for developing or modifying learning plans to fit the particular learning needs of individuals. Boise State University plans to incorporate skill learning throughout its MBA program. Skills will be taught through a program of mini-activities over the two year period of the MBA. These activities will take place both within other classes and outside; e.g., a Saturday morning workshop.

Skills will decay unless the person keeps practicing. Learners have opportunities to practice, since many managerial skills are "life" skills, which can be used in a variety of non-managerial and extra-organizational settings. Unfortunately, university courses can have a deleterious effect on a learner's ongoing, self-managed learning in two ways. First, learners may become accustomed to learning as something which is managed by someone else and not by oneself. Second, many university courses have become compartmentalized, encouraging learners to think of courses in very bounded ways. Learners may develop a short-term view of classes and think primarily of what they have to do to finish a particular exercise, project, or class. Learners may inadvertently be encouraged to view each class as a thing in itself, contained between a beginning and end date, and in a time compartment which competes with other courses. Once a course is completed the text is sold, the notes put away (or discarded) and the person moves on to other activities. It is essential for skills teachers to encourage learners to transcend this frame of mind and to view the course as the onset of a lifelong, ongoing, and self-managed developmental process.

Lifelong learning can be supported by: (a) stating it as a goal of the course and as a part of the vision of a skillful manager, (b) providing readings and cases about self-managed learning, (c) putting at least some part of the skill-learning process under individual learner responsibility, (d) treating self-managed learning in the same framework as other skills, and by (e) conducting an end-of-course session on next steps in moving from the class context to a life context in their ongoing learning (e.g., Quinn, 1990, pp. 321-325). For example learners may be asked to write a learning plan and to return to it in five year intervals to reassess their growth. Lifelong learning is a good candidate for a cross-course emphasis, since teachers in many disciplines recognize the need for it. Wick and Leon (1993, Part II) provide some materials helpful to individuals wishing to develop their own ongoing learning processes.

Research into managerial skills has tended to focus more on the "what" than the "why". Consequently, while we can tell learners what skills they will need, it is more difficult to convey to learners why these skills will be important to them. If learners lack a broader understanding of managerial skills and their impact on organizations, they are less likely to make a personal investment in the course, to actively participate in the learning process, or to continue learning beyond the course.

Consequently it is important for learners to develop a larger "vision" of what managerial skills are, of skill mastery and excellent management. This vision goes beyond a broad understanding in that it is personalized: Individuals see themselves in the vision; not simply skillful others. Learner visions can be developed by providing a view of managerial skills which places them in a coherent framework which links skills to effective organizational performance. Some possible frameworks may be found in Chapter 10 of Boyatzis (1982), Chapter 1 of Quinn et. al. (1990), and the "interpersonal skills" section of Nicholson (1994).

It should be made clear that the vision of a skillful manager will not be realized within the limited timeline of a skills course, (as was discussed earlier in issue #3). However, if learners commit to an ongoing self-managed learning program, their vision will be realized in time.

If the "orientation" step described above is carried out successfully, learners are ready to engage in skill learning. The establishment of an effective learning environment can be quite involved, and experienced skill teachers can provide useful information on how to do this (e.g., Whetten and Cameron, 1991, pp. 19-27). In any event it is important to understand how skill learning takes place, since the dynamics are not the same as in more cognitively-oriented courses.

Skill learning is like learning a physical skill: one starts by practicing basics, then moves to higher order skills, and then to more realistic situations (e.g., simulations, life experiences, or role plays) in which there exist multiple, possibly conflicting issues, ambiguity, and minimal cueing. This is not a linear sequence, but more a layering, or "spiral" process, in which learning moves from basics, to higher order, to realistic situations, and back again. For example one may start with foundation communication skills such as listening and clarifying, then move to higher order skills such as negotiation and conflict management, and then to more complex managerial situations in which these skills are arrayed to deal with a particular set of issues. Since learners have been implicitly engaged in skill learning prior to college, there is some debate as to the best level to focus on in a skills course. Some instructors prefer to focus on basics, others prefer to focus at higher levels.

Practice is essential in learning skills. It is needed in order to affect learners' subconscious programming and to make skills automatic. However, individuals do not automatically learn from experience. Reflection, integration, and interpretation are also needed. Learning requires additional effort on the part of the learner. One way of structuring this learning process is by applying Kolb's (1984) learning cycle. The learner repeatedly goes through this cycle with a series of experiences. In doing so, the learner not only develops his/her capacity to act skillfully, but also gains a better understanding of what is meant by a skillful performance, and develops his/her ability to engage in self-managed learning.

In going through this cycle, learners should not simply be attempting to implement skill guidelines, but should be developing their ability to grapple with and make sense of situations. In order to do this they must first develop insight into what they are doing as they engage with situations. What are the goals, values, and assumptions which govern their behavior? Are they effective? What are they feeling? Where are feelings coming from and how do they affect their behavior? Development at this level is essential for skill development.

A second part of learning to deal with situations is to draw on what has been learned by others and applying that learning to the situation; e.g., what is known about effective skill practice, what others have learned about how change is introduced or implemented, how resistance to change is viewed, or how people are motivated (Coghlan, 1993). Learners who are able to draw on learnings of others and incorporate them into their practice theories will vastly accelerate the learning process.

Skill learning requires learners to adopt an active learning style involving self-assessment, risk-taking, and self-discovery, and to deal behaviorally with situations with which they may have difficulty; e.g., situations requiring assertiveness, listening, conflict management, giving feedback, or delegation. There are, however, at least three obstacles learners must overcome in order to engage in skill learning:

Faced with these obstacles, some learners find it preferable to develop a world view in which the need to develop one's skills-- and therefore to confront these difficulties--is discounted. They may assert that it is the technical side of business which is important, and that they will not have much need for "soft" skills in their own career. Given this view, it is only logical to give minimal, instrumental compliance to the course: One finds out what the teacher wants, and reflects it back for the purpose of receiving an acceptable grade.

In groups, learners who are uncomfortable with the course may support each others' views, leading to the emergence of a culture which can significantly affect the kind of learning which occurs in the course. Since learners are frequently in communication with others who have not yet taken the course, such cultures can take on a certain momentum across class cohorts. It is important for a skill teacher confronting this kind of situation to see beyond this posture, and not simply conclude that "this is the way learners are."

An effective skills course, then, can only occur if learners decide that the outcomes of the course are valuable enough and the obstacles manageable enough to warrant investing energy in the course. Developing a clear learner vision, discussed earlier, is an important way of establishing the value of the course.

The teacher should begin the course with some manageable challenges in which learner success is likely. This can be done by starting with skills which are relatively straightforward, but have high face validity; e.g., communication or delegation. By achieving some early successes, learners will learn that they can develop their skills and will be encouraged to take on some more difficult skill topics. Role plays are effective at both demonstrating what skillful performance is and putting learners into the picture. Role plays enable learners to see, in class, that some approaches work better than others and gradually this helps them develop a sense of what "skillful" means.

It is important to establish a climate of supportiveness, psychological safety and trust, in which learners can be confident that their weaknesses, if revealed, will not be used against them. For example, learners are likely to make many mistakes in the process of skill learning; e.g., by polarizing or "blowing up" in a conflict, by "telling" when they need to be listening, or commanding when they need to be collaborating. It is important to communicate to learners that such mistakes are an expected and positive part of the learning process, that course assessment is based on learning--not avoidance of mistakes--and that they can expect to continue making mistakes and learning from them throughout their professional life.

Establishing a supportive learning climate can be difficult, since many learners have long learned to be dishonest with authority figures. If such a climate is established learners are more likely to face their fears and move forward. Learners should know that there can be tremendous learning if they trust the process.

As the demand for skills courses increases, many faculty are being drawn into skill teaching for the first time. Lacking training, these faculty may attempt to teach a skills course in the same way as one would teach a more academic course. Often too there is a "J" learning curve as a new teacher moves into a skills course, wherein initial attempts at skills teaching are met with limited success. At this point a new teacher may be tempted to move to older, more comfortable practices. Thus, there is a need not only for skill training, but also ongoing support, especially for new skills teachers.

Skills teachers should have a functional knowledge of both basic OB concepts and how to structure an effective skill learning process. In implementing a class they should be able to establish a supportive learning environment. A part of this involves consistent demonstration of congruence between what is said and done. They should be able to coach and provide feedback, to intervene with individuals and teams in ways which help people help themselves and learn to solve their problems. They do not necessarily need to have mastered the skills involved, in the same way that a coach does not need to be a superior athlete--indeed, if they are willing to recognize their weaknesses and develop along with learners, they are in a position to model good learning process and establish a relationship with learners as a learning partner.

These capabilities required to teach a skills class are not difficult to develop. In moving into skills teaching, however, the prospective teacher may have to give up the comfort of a formerly established teaching approach and to relearn to teach using a different approach. During this process the teacher may feel keenly the personal risk of trying new things, making mistakes, and being "on stage" with learners in a different way.

As with any course, skills courses need to have some sort of assessment process which assesses the status of a learner's skills, both for the purposes of contributing to learner/teacher/program development and for programmatic purposes. While the instructor acts predominantly as a coach, he/she must at some point make the transition to an assessor of accomplishment. The real challenge is to create a learning environment wherein the learner is evaluated supportively and in a way that meshes with the larger academic system (Ferris, 1993; Friedman, 1993).

Since course goals involve development of management skillfulness, it would be preferable to appraise learners' skillfulness in actual or simulated managerial situations. Current implementations of this approach, however, are time consuming and complex to administer, and may require training of the assessor. Moreover, instruments such as that provided by Development Dimensions International can be quite costly. Currently most skills teachers rely on other, less demanding indicators of learning accomplishment. At present four types of indicators are in use, and each is discussed below.

Multiple methods of assessment offer a way of overcoming the inaccuracies of the different approaches described above. At some point the learner and instructor must attempt to put the different assessment pieces together to obtain a more coherent overview or profile of learner's skillfulness.

This question can be raised for any course in which learners enter at differing levels of accomplishment. It goes beyond grading and to the question of what we want to accomplish in our courses: Are we primarily concerned with development of human potential, presuming there is a place for everyone which best fits their strengths and weaknesses? Or are we primarily concerned with enabling all learners to accomplish a uniform standard of excellence? Moreover, it is possible that at least some skills change only slowly, over a period of years. If a person's skillfulness is a result of his/her evolutionary state, is it ethical to even make a grading judgment?

To choose either a uniform standard or development as a basis for grading is likely to leave teachers feeling uncomfortable at some point. For example, if we choose to emphasize absolute standards, are we comfortable giving an "A" to a highly skillful person who has perhaps backslid during the course, and a lower grade to a person who entered the course with a low skill level, but has gained a great deal? Alternatively, if we choose improvement, are we comfortable with giving an "A" to a person who is only marginally skillful, but was even less so at course's start, and a lower grade to an obviously gifted learner who has gained little from the course?

Teachers desirous of rewarding skill learning will want to comprehensively assess learners' skills at course's start and end. However, there are difficult resource and methodological problems which must be solved before this can be done, and few teachers have been able to make this design work. There are a number of reasons why this can be the case:

Some teachers have used self-assessment on a pre- and post- basis, giving learners a sense of what they have accomplished in the course. To use this as a basis for grading, however, would introduce an extrinsic motivation for biasing the self-reports in favor of learning, and could reduce the value of the assessments for self-learning.

Regardless of the difficulties of determining the amount of course learning, the criteria of meeting standards and of absolute accomplishment are not essentially in opposition to each other. One can acknowledge both kinds of learning in a course by: (a) establishing skill standards which all learners are asked to meet, (b ) conducting a preassessment which provides an early sense of where individuals stand in relationship to these standards, (c) providing additional learning projects for advanced learners which take them beyond the advanced standards, and (d) acknowledging advanced accomplishment through provision of certificates or letters, and absolute accomplishments through grading. The preassessment could also serve as the basis for a "testing out" procedure: if a person demonstrates that he/she already meets the target standards of the course, the course could simply be waived. Testing-out programs are seen in some universities, but have yet to be extended to skills courses.

This article has provided an "inside" view of skill teaching by airing a number of issues which have been on the minds of teachers. Some of these issues are ones with which one would expect teachers to be concerned; e.g., teaching approaches, learning motivation, and grading. Some useful insights were provided on these topics; e.g., that there are at least two approaches to understanding and teaching skills, that learning challenges should be gradated as a way of drawing learners into the course, and that non-behavioral indicators predominate as a means of assessing learning because they are more feasible than behavioral assessment.

Other issues, however, were less expected. There was some feeling that the most basic construct of our course--managerial skills--is poorly understood and needs development. We are keenly aware that our courses are uniquely different from other courses, and that great care must be given to getting learners on a skills wavelength. We see the task of skill learning as one which exceeds the capacity of a single course, and are searching for more systemic and long term processes to carry on skill learning beyond our classes.

Knowledge of skills, teaching, and skill assessment is still developing. For this reason we appreciated the opportunity to get together to share our concerns and experiences. While becoming an effective skills teacher takes work, it is worth doing--and help is available.

* Thanks to Joe Seltzer, Chris Clements, David Coghlan, Peter Couch, Renee McConnell, William Ferris, Ralph Mullin, and Richard Boyatzis for their written comments prior to the post-conference. A special thanks to Joe Seltzer who was the original initiator of this project.

1. Dave Whetten has done some early work here, first by establishing a skills network in the mid-80's (now defunct) and later using a "focus group" format.

2. Mel McKnight suggests there is a third approach, in which the components of a skillful performance are empirically synthesized. He summarizes this approach in his JME article, "The Nature of People Skills".

3. Dennis Patzig provided a contemporary list of challenges requiring skillful responses, which includes the following: dealing with increasing labor militancy and attempting to get worker's share of corporate earnings and protect personal liberties; sensitive to social and environmental issues; deal with diversity; adapt to rapid change; embrace the novel and unexpected; manage ambiguity; manage complexity; negotiator; innovator; communicator; facilitator; trainer; rapid response to changes and problems; broad span of control in flat organization; organize around outcomes--not tasks or functions; operate in fluid organizational structures; managers of networks over distance; member of and manage learning organization and leader without power who empowers others; "manager" of self-directed work teams; managerial skills (develop others, flexible, problem solver, motivator); responsible for own career and lifetime learner in Darwinian work space.

4. These exercises are available from John Bigelow by request. For those conversant with the internet, they may be downloaded from the FTP site addressed WAM@COBFAC.IDBSU.EDU, under the file name "SKILLEX.MSW", a Microsoft Word file.

5. The authors thank one of the reviewers for the latter two suggestions.

Prior to the conference a letter was sent to a number of individuals known to be involved in skill teaching and/or who had expressed interest in the post-conference. In this letter they were asked to identify what they saw as critical issues in skill teaching and to communicate their thoughts to the organizers. Fifteen people provided written responses, eight of whom could not attend the postconference itself. The non-attending contributors are listed in the title footnote. The responses were summarized and the results sent to all who had signed up for the postconference.

Fifteen people attended the postconference, and are listed as authors of this paper. This group met for several hours on the afternoon following the conference. Notes were taken by John Bigelow, who also taped the session.

The discussion followed a regular format: An individual would raise an issue, and others would contribute by either helping to define the issue or by talking about their experiences and efforts to deal with it. The group would then move on to another issue. There were some exceptions and digressions from this "issue-discussion" format, but all in all the group adhered pretty well to it.

Some editing was done by John Bigelow in order to fill in lines of reasoning which were implied, but not directly stated. In addition a number of skill exercises were described, but were not included in this paper for the purpose of brevity (footnote 4).

Validity

The postconference was successful in drawing contributions from skills teachers with considerable collective experience. Most had taught skills for three or more years (up to 17 years). Both graduate and undergraduate program teachers were present, and some were leaders in developing or revising their programs. Several had written on skills topics and/or were currently exploring themes such as emotional requirements of management or the impact of individual differences in learning. Both males and females were solidly represented in the discussion. All in all, over 100 years of teaching experience were represented. Consequently the contributors to this paper may, because of their experiences and work in skill teaching, be considered as experts on the topic. Note that all were skill teachers in a business setting, and other skill programs (e.g., nursing, teacher education, and social work) were not represented.

The statements in this paper, therefore, can be argued to be valid in the sense that they represent the experiences of this set of expert contributors. There are, however, at least three counterhypotheses to the validity of this knowledge. The first concerns agreement: What if different experts disagree? There were no major disagreements in our discussions, though there were some differences in approach and experiences. For example, some teachers experienced less resistance from learners than others, and different approaches to skills teaching were used. To ensure that any possible disagreements were identified a draft of this paper was circulated to all contributors, who were invited to point out any disagreements they had.

A second counterhypothesis to the validity of expert knowledge is that even when experts agree, their views may simply represent "common wisdom", which may or may not be true. The business literature is full of common wisdom which has been overturned. The reader should be advised that this is a possibility here--as it is with all knowledge, scientific or otherwise. Still, we would argue that the views presented here do represent progress in making sense of the phenomena of skill teaching. Thus, it would be to the advantage of individuals wishing to learn more about university skills teaching to understand what is said here. Even if our understanding changes, it is likely to change incrementally rather than drastically, leaving much of what is said intact.

A third counterhypothesis concerns external validity: Perhaps the statements made in this paper hold true in a certain context but not in others. Again, one can never be certain that there is not some context in which a particular bit of knowledge will fail to hold. Although the group contained international representatives, its composition was predominantly Western, and the validity of this paper is most certain in Western contexts.