MBA Channel is a good example for this new way of work: a colleague and I are writing from Sydney in Australia whereas others deliver pieces from the US, are based in London or in parts of Germany. Editorial conferences take part via Skype at times that suit as many of the participants as possible.

Flexibility has become one of today’s keywords and the more flexibility is demanded from us, the more we seem to demand it from others as well. When I got a Christmas present that I wanted to swap for a different product and it was made difficult despite being well within the 30-day-return policy, I was taken aback and turned to online offers. Here I found the same product for a fraction of the price with the same return policy offered, only difference I would not have had to argue for it – just send it back.

When I was annoyed with the company, I forced myself to sit back and rethink: Would this have bothered me the same way a few years back as well? Or have we really become that demanding of around-the-clock-flexibility?

It seems we all have and I believe that this flexibility will also be the keyword shaping the way the MBA is taught in 2015. 

Already we are seeing more and more business schools turning their backs on the two-year full-time MBA that forces students to leave their work place and take on an increasingly expensive education whilst not having any income. Since the global financial crisis many seem to rethink this model and to prefer securing their positions whilst studying. 

Virginia Tech’s Pamplin School of Business is one example of a business school that has reacted to this trend transferring from a full-time MBA degree to offer only part-time MBA programmes after receiving less and less applications for the full-time version year after year whereas the part-time offers are flourishing. 

And only recently the Financial Times commented in an article about the rise of this flexible MBA that “with the increase in one-year, pre-experience Masters of Management programmes, students and schools are opting for curriculums that do not involve slowing down career momentum, wreaking havoc on potential earnings and taking a gamble on the job market two years down the line.”

The same also goes for employers that are not prepared any more to renounce good talents for two years to either take them back – more educated but with the substantial knowledge gap of having missed two years in the company – or even worse lose them to their competitors. More and more employers want to rather bind young employees to their company and prefer granting more flexibility instead of letting people go. 

This all might not count for the top-tier schools like Harvard, Stanford, Wharton or the likes, but certainly for lesser known and smaller business schools that want to attract top talent by offering the flexibility that seems to be the way to go in 2100. 

Also read: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d362da60-8541-11e4-ab4e-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz3MuquA1zC