THE rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT is undeniably transforming the landscape of business education. As these technologies become more sophisticated and accessible, MBA programs are grappling with how to effectively integrate them into the curriculum. At the core of this challenge lies a fundamental question: How can we harness the power of AI to enhance learning outcomes while still preserving the integrity of the educational process?
Recognizing the need for proactive exploration of this matter, I recently piloted an approach with my MBA advisees as they embarked on their action research capstone projects. My goal was to provide a structured framework for AI usage that would maximize its benefits while minimizing potential pitfalls.
To lay the groundwork, I first developed a set of custom Generative Pre-training Transformer (GPT) models using ChatGPT. These chatbots were trained on a curated dataset including relevant academic literature, ethical guidelines, and project-specific resources. By preloading the models with vetted information, I sought to create guardrails for the AI’s outputs and align its knowledge base with course objectives.
One of my advisees, Juan (not his real name), offers a compelling case study in the thoughtful application of these AI tools. Juan approached his project with a blend of openness and caution, leveraging the chatbots as thought partners rather than substitutes for his own critical thinking.
Juan’s journey began with careful preparation. He prompted the AI with a selection of key resources, such as our college code of ethics and nonsensitive materials that provided context for his AI use. This ensured that the tool had the necessary context to provide relevant and ethically grounded guidance.
As Juan progressed through his research, he used AI to help structure his thinking and manage his workflow. He engaged the chatbots in brainstorming sessions, using their outputs as springboards for further reflection and analysis. When the AI suggested a particular methodological approach, Juan didn’t simply accept it at face value; instead, he critically evaluated its merits and limitations, often seeking my input as his adviser.
Importantly, Juan maintained a clear boundary between AI-assisted ideation and independent execution. While he leveraged the technology to help outline his paper and manage his time, the core insights, arguments, and written content remained firmly under his authorship. He used AI as a sounding board, but never as a substitute for his own judgment.
Human element
Throughout the process, two aspects of Juan’s experience underscore the enduring importance of the human element in graduate business education. The first was the vital role of adviser consultation. Our regular check-ins provided an opportunity to review Juan’s AI interactions, offer guidance on interpreting and applying the tool’s outputs, and ensure that his usage remained in service of, rather than a replacement for, his own intellectual growth. This human-to-human dialogue acted as a crucial quality control mechanism and learning accelerator.
The second was the capstone oral defense, in which Juan had the opportunity to articulate his research journey, findings, and personal growth as a critical thinker and professional. This forum provided a powerful venue to demonstrate his competencies we seek to cultivate in our MBA graduates. No AI tool, however sophisticated, can substitute for the depth of understanding and ownership demonstrated in this type of face-to-face intellectual discourse.
Juan’s case, while encouraging, also highlights the need for ongoing vigilance and adaptation as AI becomes more enmeshed in business education. The line between tool and crutch is a fine one, and not all students may navigate it as responsibly as Juan did. As educators, it’s our responsibility to develop robust frameworks and support systems to guide students in the responsible use of these technologies.
Looking ahead, I believe the successful integration of AI in MBA programs will hinge on three key priorities. First, we must design curricula that leverage these tools to enhance, rather than replace, critical thinking skills. Second, we must double down on the human components of the educational experience, from personalized advising to immersive learning opportunities. And third, we must foster a culture of integrity and ethical decision-making that equips students to navigate the complex moral terrain of an AI-powered business landscape.
The challenges are significant, but so are the opportunities. With creativity, rigor, and an unwavering commitment to core educational values, I believe we can chart a course that realizes the promise of AI while safeguarding the essential human skills at the heart of graduate business education.
Patrick Adriel H. Aure, PhD (Patch) is the founding director of the PHINMA-DLSU Center for Business and Society, and assistant dean for quality assurance of the DLSU Ramon V. del Rosario College of Business. He is also the president of the Philippine Academy of Management. His email: [email protected]
Be the first to comment