Letters to the Editor

November, 2002

THE COVERAGE [August 2002] on terrorism, organizational ecology, global arbitrageurs, global labor standards, and oddsmakers regarding election results was good. More of this sort of coverage is a great idea.

L.J. HASTINGS, MBA ’40
La Canada, California

I READ WITH INTEREST THE correspondence in the August 2002 issue of Stanford Business magazine, especially the letter from Eugene Danaher.

As a ’61 MBA with lifelong business experience in the world of finance, I must admit I was ill prepared in some key areas of business dynamics. I am quite aware that the GSB is constantly upgrading and updating the knowledge base of its student body. There is still a distinct lack of understanding in the area of ethics (although Ted Kreps did try to hammer its importance at every opportunity!); the focus was and still remains to develop our Cartesian ability to analyze issues and find solutions.

We were very skilled numerically and were given the false notion that numbers and a good analysis would solve any problem. If only it were so. We were hardly made aware of the human dynamics in business and how to navigate the conflicting demands and ambitions from colleagues, superiors, and subordinates. Graduates were left to fend for themselves. In the end, we all learned in the school of hard knocks.

We can and should do better with the resources we have at the GSB. How about it?

HARI THAKUR, MBA ’61
Montreal, Canada

IN THE AUGUST ISSUE OF Stanford Business you printed a fine story about the late Tom Harrell, rightly featuring his academic and scholarly accomplishments. To many of us who were his students, Tom was more than that. He was a wonderful human being.

In 1952, I was enrolled in Bus 270, Psychological Aspects of Business. The title seems clumsy today, but Harrell, then in his first year at Stanford, made it clear that motivating employees was a prime task of management. His textbook is still part of my library.

One of my most vivid memories of his class was an IQ test he administered to us all. My score was in the range of tepid bathwater and I was deeply worried. Tom, the humanist, put me at ease by suggesting that my approach to time-limited tests was all wrong. His advice served me well during the following years at Stanford. After he retired, Tom contacted me while I was chair of the department of management and marketing at San Francisco State University. He wanted to keep his mind active and wondered if I could offer him a part-time teaching assignment. Tom taught for us for many years with great distinction. More important, we became friends.

When we met again, Tom floored me by recalling the B he gave me in 1952 and our encounter after the IQ test. Among the delights of catching up were the lunches Tom hosted at the Stanford Faculty Club. Conversation was always stimulating, and comparing our institutions was always constructive.

With Tom Harrell’s death, we are all losing a gentleman. In a time of ever-diminishing civility, may all of us who knew him refresh ourselves by recalling this man of true value.

KLAUS SCHMIDT, PhD, MBA ’53
Brooklin, Maine

From the Editor

Our Readers' Opinion

Dean's Column

We welcome letters from our alumni/ae

Share your thoughts with us online by sending them to gsb_newsline@gsb.stanford.edu or by faxing or mailing comments to:

Kathy O’Toole, Editor
Stanford Business magazine
Graduate School of Business
Stanford University
Stanford, CA., 94305-5015

Fax 650 725 6750