Search results

The purpose of this paper is to encourage re‐reading and re‐evaluation of a series of educational polemics published in the UK in the 1960s and 1970s, the Black Papers. These works proposed, for the most part, avowedly conservative views on education: condemning so‐called “progressive” teaching methods and the re‐organisation of secondary schools in the UK (especially England) into non‐selective comprehensives. It is argued, however, that much said and written about the Black Papers since has concentrated only on selected “high profile” contributors, to the neglect of other contributors, often anonymous, whose comments were sometimes more measured/thoughtful.

The work proceeds first by re‐visiting the facts surrounding the writing of the Black Papers and their critical reception. It then analyses the nature of the contributors and describes selected essays not usually referred to when the Black Papers are discussed by historians and others.

The work finds that the Black Papers are often infuriatingly and unhelpful polemical in nature but that much written about them since has concentrated only on selected contributors, ignoring others who were more measured.

The work is perhaps the first critical re‐reading of the Black Papers in any depth in several decades. It does not simply dismiss them as hysterical rants by ill‐informed authors and suggests that they re‐pay careful attention, despite their often polemical nature.

The purpose of this study is to provide a polemic on the evolution of universities and business schools over the past two decades. During this period, universities have increasingly adopted a self-interested stance using business-like practices and behaviours to justify their transformation. The authors provide recommendations aimed at enhancing universities’ contributions and relevance to society, increasing their sustainability broadly defined and better positioning them to help solve wicked problems in a post-COVID-19 world.

This polemic analyses prior literature relating to the evolution of universities and uses this to generate a framework for ways forward for their improvement.

The authors argue that the evolution of universities into entities with missions and operations designed to mimic business and commercial imperatives has yielded undesirable outcomes including the muddling of the core mission of universities, alienation of key stakeholders and an excessive focus on income growth. Business schools face a tension between forging their own, unique identities and simultaneously striving to meet university university objectives. We term this “the Business School identity paradox”. The authors contend that the way forward requires senior management to re-discover the essence of what it means to be a university, re-establish collegial decision-making within universities that includes built-in feedback loops and a fundamental emphasis on developing graduates with an enlightened perspective that goes beyond technical skills.

This paper is novel in that it analyses the evolution of the “Enterprise University” some 20 years after this term was first coined and in a radically changed environment following the COVID-19 pandemic. This analysis is also forward-looking as the authors re-imagine universities and business schools by identifying opportunities for renewal and improvement in their focus and societal impact. The authors also develop a schema that identifies major influences on universities and business schools, the impact of COVID-19 and strategies for them post-COVID-19.

There has been a growing call from within the operations management (OM) academic community for research of more managerial relevance. This has implied a greater emphasis on empirical research: surveys, cases, and action research. But in fact these types are quite different. However, the great majority of empirical OM work published is based on postal surveys and/or interviewing executives, where research method selection is made for reasons of practical convenience and academic expectation. Given the level of complexity involved in understanding the OM perspective of business issues then the emphasis should be placed on plant‐based research. Conducting research on‐site and investigation through the analysis of relevant data, issues, developments and events ensures relevance and a validity essential to making an impact on business practice. There are obstacles to increasing the amount of plant‐based research which is carried out, such as practical and personal difficulties, a mistaken concern over research rigour, and academic institutional inertia. Each of these needs to be overcome if OM research is to influence business practice more in the future than it has in the past.

In this chapter, the author examines benevolent sexism as a form of performative kindness. Taking a feminist polemical approach, the author illustrates how being a ‘good girl’ requires submitting to occupy a subject position that attracts benevolent sexism. Benevolent sexism focusses on gendered discourses, such as what women wear and how they act, and it can be mistakenly construed as kind or flattering attention. Such gendered discourses are designed to keep women compliant and conforming to gendered roles, while limiting their voice and agency. A case study is presented which draws on biographical and popular press resources to illustrate how three highly placed American female political leaders, Francis Perkins, Federal Labor Secretary (1933–1945), Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State (2009–2013), and Kamala Harris, Vice President (2021–current), contend with sexism and public interest in their mode of dress and role as mothers. The author demonstrates how these women are punished with hostile sexism, historically and contemporarily, requiring them to tenuously negotiate between accepting benevolent sexism to avoid hostile sexism.

This chapter aims to outline some reasons for the lack of impact of CMS with the intention of provoking debate and inciting action.

The approach is that of an essay, in which argument verges on the polemic.

Refers to public domain knowledge and evidence is adduced rather than cited precisely.

No original field research is introduced, though anecdotal evidence is cited.

The practical implications if the argument in this chapter is accepted could involve a wholesale revision of syllabi and content in business education.

The central argument is that scholarship exists not only in its own right but as a basis for credentialising social action and establishing societal priorities in pursuit of the Good Society.

Very little is new that has not been said before and not listened to.