To be fair, if what I've been reading is right, this isn't an issue that is restricted to BA, or even British businesses - in fact it's a phenomenon that started in the States.
Relying on theoretical training in business is fine to actually pass the MBA, but the assumption on the part of a subset of management is that it does away with the need for practical experience, which is a load of ****e. Working in isolation using charts and figures is one thing, but by reducing the people your workforce to resources that can do measurable units of work means you miss out on a very important layer of detail - so you could be merging two groups of people who have an animosity to one another, but you won't know about it, and expect them to work together flawlessly when you take them out of their comfort zone.
Another symptom of this management style is that you'll do whatever it takes to present a rose-tinted picture to those above you, rather than being honest about any problems you may be having - this just stores up problems that end up exploding at the time you really should be doing nothing more than dotting the 'i's and crossing the 't's at the end of the project.
There needs to be a culture of honesty at every level, from the shop floor through management right up to the senior and executive level and this means there also needs to be a non-punitive attitude from the top down, at least at the beginning of a project. If you tell the people working for you that heads will roll if there's the slightest bit of bad news early on, then they're not going to be honest with you when they and their staff are struggling and you're going to sail on in blissful ignorance until you're left with a huge steaming pile exposed to the world, wondering what the hell happened.
Fundamentally the culture among executives in the West is completely backwards. At the very top, even if you screw up completely, you'll be sent on your way with a lucrative golden parachute. OK, your reputation will be in tatters, but the money means that you'll be able to cushion that and still live extremely comfortably with some canny investments (and you'll be able to afford the accountant to do that for you). This is where Asian businesses have it right. If an executive fails, there are negative repercussions for them as well as for the company and shareholders.
I'm reminded of the story of the groundie who messed up and nearly killed a very skilled and famous pilot. The following day, not only did the pilot tell the foreman not to fire the groundie, but he personally requested him to work on his aircraft the next time out, because after making such a huge mistake, he'd work much more carefully in future. If it were up to me a failing executive would have their bonus for that year nullified and their pay reduced, then have them put them in charge of cleaning up the mess they made, along with someone competent to co-operate with them and point out where they went wrong. If they refuse this, then off they go, with no incentive.
Of course in today's climate where a CEO will refuse to sign on unless they have ****-up insurance in the form of a golden parachute such a thing would be impossible, but it's nice to dream.