Search results

Out of 24 public business schools in Egypt, the purpose of this paper is to focus on three in order to investigate how responsible management education is perceived and exercised by academics there.

A total of 168 academics were contacted and interviewed in 42 focus groups. The length of each focus group was about 45 min, and all of them were conducted in Arabic because the majority of respondents are not fluent in English. The authors used thematic analysis to determine the main ideas in the transcripts.

Based on data analysis of the perceptions of academics concerning business education, research and management process at the target business schools, the authors of this paper found that responsible management education is not considered a priority in the work agendas of the Egyptian public business schools. Furthermore, the authors believe that besides issues with the general acceptance of the need for responsible management education, there are functional, procedural and edu-academic barriers that these schools need to overcome first before proceeding with implementation and expecting positive outcomes.

This research maybe subject to criticism because the authors address only the perspectives of academics in the chosen business schools while neglecting other academic partners, particularly those in managerial positions, such as rectors and heads of departments. Future researchers may use the same research questions to investigate a managerial level perspective to depict a more holistic picture of the situation. Moreover, including Egyptian private business schools may also enrich the findings. In fact, the authors suggest that scholars from different academic disciplines such as sustainability management, business ethics, higher education, sustainability and cultural diversity work together to produce more interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary research on the global responsibility themes business schools have to manage.

This paper contributes by filling a gap in sustainability, HR management, business ethics and higher education literature in which empirical studies on responsible management education and the responsible practices of academics have been limited so far.

Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to explore why critical reflexivity should be promoted within mid‐career management education programmes and articulate the benefits of a deliberate research orientation for such programmes. Design/methodology/approach – Having considered meta‐issues concerning the content and context of management education and research, the article identifies the categorical, methodological and contextual challenges which confront manager‐researchers and those facilitating mid‐career programmes. It argues that managers need to develop awareness of the different epistemologies and an understanding of their personal ontological orientation and methodological preferences in order to maximise the pertinence and added value of their research. Findings – The paper delineates the curricular, pedagogical and organisational challenges inherent in the promotion of critical reflexivity and research within mid‐career programmes. Originality/value – The paper outlines how a deliberate linkage of research and teaching can be forged in order to help managers surface and interrogate the knowledge, norms and values which frame their beliefs and actions. Consequently, it is of practical help to both academics and manager‐researchers.

This paper argues that business and management schools continue to operate a gender blind approach (or at best gender neutral) to management education, management research and the development of management theory. This echoes a pattern repeated in the practice of management, which closes down and inhibits opportunities for management to be “done differently” and for organisations to be different. Reflecting on the author's experiences within two business schools and on their empirical research carried out over six years, the paper provides substantive arguments for the authors' position relating to the masculine nature of management, the place of academic women in management, the male dominated processes of management education and management research and the need to place gender on the agenda in management education. The paper concludes with a call for an “unlearning” and a “rethinking” of gender blind management education and provides some examples of how this might be achieved.

This paper aims to examine when and how the main management paradigms have emerged and prevailed in Finnish management research. It seeks to offer a country‐specific case on the diffusion of management paradigms in the field of management research.

This paper is a historical study that uses quantitative content analysis as a methodology. The data consist of research proposals funded by eight of the largest Finnish funding agencies during the period 1937‐2007. The results obtained from these data are compared to the emergence and prevalence of the paradigms in Finnish academic management education, as depicted by course descriptions obtained from the study guides of eight main Finnish academic institutions that provide graduate level education in management.

Management research and management education do not seem to follow the same patterns of adopting different management paradigms. Management paradigms seem to experience upswings in their patterns of use, on average a decade earlier in management research than in education.

As the position of formal scientific management knowledge varies greatly across countries and historical periods, the study contributes to this line of research by giving a descriptive account of the paradigmatic development of management research schemes in Finland which can be compared and contrasted to the development of management research in other countries. The relevance of the study for management theory‐building is in contemplating the relationships between the actors creating, diffusing and using managerial knowledge.

This paper aims to provide insights into the evolution of the concept of interdisciplinarity in management science and management education.

A range of recently published (1993‐2002) works, which aim to provide practical advice rather than theoretical books on pedagogy or educational administration, are critiqued to aid the individual make the transition into academia. The sources are sorted into sections: finding an academic job, general advice, teaching, research and publishing, tenure and organizations.

The paper finds that in the evolution of management education and management science interdisciplinarity took different forms: synoptic and instrumental. Both forms resulted from different knowledge strategies of competing and cooperating disciplines. It concludes that in The Netherlands instrumental versions of interdisciplinarity in management research and education prevailed.

The paper studies the evolution of interdisciplinarity in management education and management science in the Dutch higher education context. It assumes that the pattern of evolution differs from country to country.

Interdisciplinarity is a complex concept. This study provides practical insights into the dynamics of interdisciplinary collaboration.

Much has been written about interdisciplinarity in science and education. However there is hardly any empirical and historical research on this topic.

Examines police management education and research practices from an observer’s perspective. Believes that with changes in management education and research practices police managers should be able to respond better to the issues they face. Highlights the anti‐intellectual subculture and the emphasis on practice and experience within the Australian police education proglrams. Supports the change to an organisation which values theory, reflection and critique. A more holistic approach to management is required. The choices of research methodology should be considered more in the quest for more valid and useful information.

This paper argues that UK business and management schools continue to operate a gender blind approach (or at best gender neutral) to management education, research and the development of management theory. This echoes a pattern repeated in the practice of management, which closes down and inhibits opportunities for management to be “done differently” and for organizations to be different. Our aim in this paper is to critically scrutinise and enable a consciousness raising in ourselves and our audience by highlighting what we understand as gender blindness within management, management research and education. However, the issue of whether this gender blindness results from “not seeing”, “being unaware”, “suppressing gender” or “gender defensiveness” remains problematic. We conclude with a call for an “unlearning” and a “rethinking” of gender blind management education and provide some examples of how this might be achieved.

The reforms in business schools based on the Ford and Carnegie Foundation reports (Pierson, 1959; Gordon and Howell, 1959) have been very successful in embedding management in a research-based body of knowledge, thereby elevating the academic status of business administration. These reforms, however, did nothing toward making management more socially trustworthy or management education more responsible. In the light of the pressing economic, social and environmental crises the world is facing, the feeling is spreading that not only business and economics but business schools also need to change fundamentally, if they want to be a provider of solutions to these crises and thereby keep and regain their legitimacy. The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis of the fundamental challenges facing the role of business schools and their contributions in the areas of education, research, managing faculty, and role of the business school. It presents suggestions what responsible management education for a sustainable world could and should look like.

The paper builds on the existing literature on the needed changes in business schools and has been written as part of a large international project, the 50+20 initiative (www.50plus20.org), which was developed by a broad coalition of organizations with the World Business School Council for Sustainable Business (WBSCSB), the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (GRLI) and the UN Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) at its core and 16 business schools and organizations from all around the world as supporters (Muff et al., 2013).

Business schools need to transform themselves fundamentally, if they want to be a provider of solutions to the crises of responsibility and sustainability and thereby keep and regain their legitimacy.

The paper pulls together insights from a diverse area of literature and develops practical conclusions.