Allow me to share the weaknesses of us, those who accidentally carry the vocation of education.
First point, the majority of educational business owners originate as teachers, so we have two fatal weaknesses:
- Very high self-respect
- Very many of us are rookies regarding financial management
Precisely because of self-respect, when a crisis occurs and there is a need to negotiate over money, tuition fees, debt deferral, salary reductions, working with banks, or with parents, we usually let self-respect and ego override wise decisions. When we ought to be decisive, we should just be decisive; why be offended when labeled an “educational merchant,” and when we ought to be strong in managing cash flow, we cannot manage to do so or “do not have the heart” to do so. And like that, it is no different from “cutting the blood vessels in the wrist and dipping into a bathtub full of water” to commit suicide slowly and peacefully.
And also because of being rookies regarding financial management, many times we do not understand what depreciation is, that cash flow collected in advance is a liability rather than a profit, or bargaining fiercely over disadvantageous terms in facility lease contracts.
Through the recent crisis, I saw that becoming even clearer. There were educational business owners who recounted: “I accidentally paid the facility owner for several months, even deposited 6 months, and paid 1 year in advance because I wanted peace of mind.” On the principle of cash flow management, no one should deposit more than 1–3 months, nor is there any reason to pay 3–6 months at a time. They told me: “If I didn’t do that, I wouldn’t get a nice location to rent, brother.” I advised them: “In that case, you should firmly refrain from renting rather than ever accepting such a massive risk.”
There was a school owner who was very proud during the pandemic season to pay full salaries to staff by borrowing bank money and not collecting tuition for online learning. To me, that was an extremely risky romantic decision. Suppose the pandemic lasted a few more months, or a chain crisis erupted, where would those schools find the money at that time? If they were financially decisive, that certainly would not happen. If tuition fees were not paid, then at the end of the school year, parents and the school would part ways. As for parents who were genuinely affected, we would grant tuition fee reductions altogether. But cutting our own blood to sell—never!
Many of our educational business owners also have two very bad traits:
a) weak solidarity; and
b) fear of authorities.
After the recent COVID-19 event, I truly absorbed the lack of solidarity among our educational enterprises. We are selfish, badmouthing each other much more than helping each other. Attending very many meetings and gatherings with private educational business leaders, from university to K-12, I mostly saw that we do not respect one another, can always point out each other’s flaws, and criticize much more than unite. In short, only one’s own school is the best, while another lady/gentleman’s school has “a lot of problems,” from curriculum to teachers. How bizarre!
For example, a school experiences a major crisis. Other schools ought to empathize and support because no one wants an accident to happen. On the contrary, hardly any schools shared or empathized. Instead, some were even secretly happy because a competitor went down. There was even 1 very large school that was extremely insensitive; while people were in total chaos, it went around boasting that it did better, unintentionally or intentionally “adding fuel to the fire” of that crisis. Very repulsive!
During the recent COVID-19 period, private schools almost went bankrupt due to being closed for a prolonged period while not being allowed to collect tuition for online learning. Yet no large educational organization dared to gather together to raise a joint voice. The executive director of one of our schools said: “Brother, death is imminent, yet except for us, does anyone dare to say anything? When I contacted them, I received nothing but polite refusals. Everyone is hesitant to mess with the Department and the Ministry.”
We rallied together to create a collective petition, but for a long time only a few small and medium organizations dared to sign. None of the large educational groups dared to sign. (There was a very big group leader who even came up to boast at that time that they were doing well and occasionally sniped at brothers a few times while brothers were gasping for air). A leader of a medium-sized educational complex had just signed, only to frantically request to withdraw their name the next day because they were disciplined by their owner.
Discussing back and forth, several large educational groups could never finish the joint petition to the government. Not because they could not do it, but out of fear of displeasing the authorities. Once written, it was put away. When asked, they said: “Well, speaking directly to those gentlemen is better.” Fearing displeasing Department/Ministry leaders more than fearing company bankruptcy!
If intellectuals have such courage, who can they teach?
Furthermore, one cannot bring a “tycoon” spirit into education. A tycoon with money can do very many things: trade motorcycles, do stocks, do real estate, banking, stone mining, etc., all can cross over into other industries. However, to cross over into education, “just you wait.”
You cannot haughtily ride a Mercedes, glide into the gate of a private university owned by you, with employees bowing deeply saying “Greetings, Mr. Chairman.” That image has never been accepted in education. Intellectuals, whether rich or poor, have high self-respect. They might not speak out, but they will certainly hate it very much. Sometimes cursing quietly “that nouveau riche,” without the owner knowing at all.
A place of education, yet many male/female owners behave like someone who only has money, ready to raise their voice (not to mention using vulgar language) to direct school leaders like a child. I once witnessed a famous tycoon taking his university principal to a meeting. That tycoon, after finishing his part, turned around and jerked his chin to ask his principal: “How about this woman giving her opinion?”
In a business, the owner or general director is the biggest and has the right to change company strategy. In a university, being that drastic might cause faculty members to resign entirely. Operating a private university with an autocratic style will sooner or later lead that school downhill. The ivory tower is a place gathering large, easily hurt egos, and it is not always about money. If one cannot drop the “owner” ego to work with them, do not dream of doing education.
However, there are many tycoons who, out of love and desire to do education, invite public school principals to work and hand them a blank check. This is also immensely disastrous.
Public school principals, especially those from prestigious schools, rarely have to travel hundreds of kilometers roaming the roads for enrollment; rarely have to stand speaking before thousands of students to introduce their school and “swallow their ego” to invite applications; rarely have to bear the pressure of profit and loss; and sometimes are not used to reading financial reports for any purpose; never have to lay off staff in mass; and also rarely humble themselves patiently to recruit talent. Those difficult things they have never had to go through. Now forcing them to do everything is far too difficult for them!
There are also quite a few great intellectuals who, out of love for education and wanting to change education, meet together to form a university with the aspiration of invigorating public intellect. But those gentlemen completely forgot that Vietnam is not like the US, so no one goes around spending money to sponsor someone else’s private university, even if it is non-profit. Those gentlemen can finish applying for a license and open the initial school, but struggle for so many years unable to build the school, nor mobilize capital to develop.
Finally, the Board of Directors consists entirely of 70-year-old gentlemen sitting with each other, nitpicking words in documents. When told to transfer to others to invest, many gentlemen “beg for the past,” clutching the license forever. Truly: “Decayed firewood the old lady keeps under the bed; Whoever touches it: her precious agarwood.”
In summary, doing education is not for rookies. Initial investment is very large, with current policies only fattening up the team owning real estate and hoarding land. Society is not generous enough, respectful enough, or ready to refrain from crushing those who do education. Arbitrary and heavily qualitative policies make educational investment very difficult. Private educational investors themselves are weak in capital, business operating knowledge, as well as solidarity, while fearing authorities more than tigers. Private investment in education has only just begun. The road is still very long! Educational brothers and sisters, let’s unite!
Well then:
“Having bound the vocation of teaching to oneself
Then do not blame the Department nearby or the Ministry far away
Success is not because of us
That word ‘luck’ is worth three times the word ‘talent'”
(Adapted from Tale of Kieu)
THE END.
Nguyen Quoc Toan
Part 1: Education Has Never Been Super-Profitable
Part 2: Investing in Education Is Not for Rookies
