| Much has been at stake in Europe since the continent's bold decision in 1998 to harmonise the degrees awarded in higher education. At stake are more than just standards: a market worth 600bn euros in fees and gouvernment subsidies; plus the bonus of educating the next generation of European business leaders.
Despite the best intentions, each country is following its own path, and in France, there has been a bitter dispute. The core of the dispute centers on the length of the programmes. Under current regulations, a bachelor's degree can be 3-4 years and a master's degree 1-2 years. The Financial Times, which recently published its inaugural ranking of European rankings of European Masters in Management programmes shows that stand-alone masters can be anything from 10-24 months.
Changes in Spain and The Netherlands highlight that it is now permissible to have either a three or four year bachelor programmes. However in Spain, masters can be either one or two years; in the Netherlands, a masters is one year.
What is clear is that the market will decide not the institutions such as has already taken place in the European MBA market where candidates have a choice of either one or two year MBA programmes. Which programme is better is open to intense discussion.
It is a question of preference. Some MBA candidates value the two year programme not just because it is longer and hence more can be learned but because they can profit from an internship between the two years.
Former MBA students and now active members of the WCW Alumni network worldwide have told Fei Long that this advantage was a golden opportunity to 'try out' a future employer. It also provide them with a financial supplement to help pay for studies in the second year.
Andrew Scharf at WCW has stated that 'MBA students recognize how hard it is to move across business practices. The internship offered by major schools is one of the best ways to make this leap'.
Statistics from the WCW Research team document that the number of MBA students who shift direction from their previous career path is +65%.
Proponents of the one-year programme are equally as vociferous. Programmes such as INSEAD, the ground setter of this concept, have successfully played on MBA student desires to only be in school for one year. Why? They do not want to be away from work for an extended period of time; their company is sponsoring their studies; or either financial or family concerns.
For the Masters, only time will tell whether the 24 month masters at HEC and ESC-EAP will prove more attractive with potential degree candidates than the 12-month programme currently on offer by LSE or Bradford.
What WCW has gleaned from the evolving trends is that cost matters. Many potential candidates simply do not want to spend more money than they must. An 'extra' year must deliver added-value either in terms of support network, education, or career placement to make it a worthwhile ROI.
Another issue confronting the masters in Europe is subsidy. In general, European students are subsidized by X10,000 per year for university study. Governments will find it quite difficult to persuade students to pay for their own master's programme. Cost was one of the principal drivers behind the Bologna Accord signed in 1999 and to which 45 European countries comply.
There is even talk that the master's will compete with the MBA market. The Association of MBAs in London, recently, accredited 11 masters in management degrees, which carries the acronym Pemm (pre-experience masters in management). Five schools in France, four in the United Kingdom, and one from Belgium and the Netherlands have received their accreditation.
Jeannette Purcell, chief executive of the association is pleased by this trend and believes that further accreditation will take place. However, she states: 'I honestly do feel the MBA, will retain its distinction'. | 
