Many executives love to learn for a life time, but dislike to be taught by a business-agnostic professor. Such peculiar preferences place distinctive demands on an instructor embarking on executive education. It is clearly not 'business as usual'. Teaching approaches that work well with university students may prove ineffective when used with executives. In light of these challenges, the instructor has to tailor his approach to the clients' needs by making conscious choices along three important dimensions.

Clarity versus Ambiguity

Many university professors are eager to imbue students with an inquisitive spirit. As a consequence, they tend to avoid black-and-white replies. Answers usually start with 'it depends' and include qualifiers such as 'usually' and 'likely'. At leading institutions such as the London School of Economics and Polit ical Science (LSE), an instructor of ten encourages students to challenge him if they do not agree with his reasoning.

In contrast, many executives, who are used to corporate hierarchies, expect authority. They want clear directions and answers to their questions. Such thought patterns are particularly prevalent in Asia and in the German-speaking world, as well as among certain professions (e.g. engineering). Executives have instructor prototypes in their mind, which are the perceived traits that distinguish a strong teacher. If the instructor appears soft and fuzzy, he will be deemed weak by many executives. Frequent use of qualifiers may be seen as a sign of insecurity, and executives will think: "He is not an expert". If participants are to learn how to become comfortable with ambiguity-a key mindset in our rapidly changing world-the teacher should negotiate with the client a clear mandate to change the culture ahead of his assignment. In this case, he also needs to set the right expectations at the beginning of his class. Experiments have shown that students tend to use rapid cognition. Judgments derived from watching a new teacher for two seconds in a silent video clip did not differ markedly from evaluations based on one semester of teaching. Given that most executive education programmes are significantly shorter than conventional degree courses, there is less time to change a negative first impression. To ensure a good start, educators, like doctors, should use orienting comments to structure the session (e.g. "First, I will debrief the Work Interest Schedule and then discuss how motifs change during a person's life").

Lecture versus Interaction

Many executives, who face a volatile business environment, are not used to sitting passively in a classroom. As a consequence, their academic attention-span is even shorter than that of university students in the Internet era. Thus, executive educators should use monotonous lectures as sparingly as possible. They will establish better rapport with managers if they give them ample oppor tunities to par ticipate in the education spectacle.

Many professors use their stack of PowerPoint slides as a memorising and protective device. It helps them avoid interaction with participants, which they fear might reveal gaps in their knowledge. It surely takes courage to lead a discussion without the help of the computer, but participants will appreciate the experience. As a first step, instructors should decrease their dependence on machines and start to freely elaborate on core themes using a limited number of overhead transparencies. Those can be used more flexibly than full-fledged computer animated presentations, which automate the lecture to a large extent. Ideally, managers should complete a number of questionnaires before the programme. The results can then be debriefed in plenary sessions. This way, participants can apply teaching contents to their situation. To complement the plenum, facilitators may be engaged to work with participants in small breakout groups. I also use many other tools, such as cases (including mini-cases), video clips, role plays, group exercises and simulations. My favourite is a clip from a movie with the actor Al Pacino, which I use to analyse effective leadership behaviour.

The quality of questions inf luences the outcome of the debate. To elicit rich responses, instructors must use open-ended inquiries frequently. Thus, they should start their questions with 'what', 'how' or 'why' and employ verbs such as 'tell', 'describe', 'explain' and 'elaborate'. For example, instructors might say: "Please describe a situation when you were led effectively. How did it feel? Why was the leadership behaviour effective?" An executive educator must also be an active listener. He plays back responses to participants to ensure that he understood them correctly.

For executives, training means time off from work during which they expect to be entertained, too. Since they are used to word-class shows from various media, their expectations are very high. Some executive educators are veritable actors, screaming, weeping and hurling themselves on the ground. Even if such extravagance may be deemed inappropriate, instructors should still add drama and humour to their delivery.

Prof Dr Schlevogt engages senior corporate leaders

Theory versus Practice University

professors often start their lectures with definitions, then introduce theories and cite the empirical evidence. They love to recount debates among researchers, which illustrate many different angles. Executives, in contrast, do not care much about abstract theories and who said what. They are thirsty for concrete guru advice straight from the horse's mouth, which will work for them. The content must be sufficiently practical so that they can implement it on their next working day after the seminar. To address this specific need, instructors should always focus on strategic issues that are of most concern to executives and make the content operational by outlining a framework with concrete action steps, summarised in a so-called killer chart. The recommendations must be simple, but not simplistic. Instructors should imagine they have to share their recommendations with clients during a 30-second elevator ride.

Prof Dr Schlevogt serving as Program Director of the Nestlé Global Leadership Program

Traditional professors should think twice before citing their own academic research, since it might not be sufficiently actionable. Referring to administrative work in the university as evidence of managerial experience will backfire. Executives will argue that their leadership challenges differ significantly from the chores of a university officer who operates in a relatively stable bureaucracy. To compensate for the shortcoming, academics may use their sabbatical and other opportunities to function as 'professors in residence' in corporations.

Effective guidance does not stop in the classroom. For executives, training is a rare chance to step back and discuss their challenges with an outsider in a risk-free environment. Educators should therefore devote time during breaks to listen to the problems of participants and engage in what I call 'speed counselling'.

Educating executives is the litmus test of teaching effectiveness. The instructor must project authority and conf idence, engage his audience i n an entertaining fashion and offer practical advice. In many aspects, it is more an art, which relies on tacit knowledge, than a science. But fortunately, professors can improve their effectiveness by making the right instructional choices.

The rewards are worth the toil. Educating movers and shakers, especially top government leaders and CEOs, is a great opportunity to create tremendous impact. When you deliver well, you can become the agent of the change that you preach!