责任管理在商学院的边缘化:对未来轨迹的思考

Nkeiruka N. Ndubuka-McCallum, David R. Jones, Peter Rodgers
{"title":"责任管理在商学院的边缘化:对未来轨迹的思考","authors":"Nkeiruka N. Ndubuka-McCallum, David R. Jones, Peter Rodgers","doi":"10.1108/ijoa-05-2024-4535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Business schools are vital in promoting responsible management (RM) – a management grounded in ethics and values beneficial to a wide array of stakeholders and overall society. Nevertheless, due to deeply embedded institutional modernistic dynamics and paradigms, RM is, despite its importance, repeatedly marginalised in business school curricula. If students are to engage with RM thinking, then its occlusion represents a pressing issue. Drawing on the United Kingdom (UK) business school context, this paper aims to examine this issue through a framework of institutional theory and consider the role played by (modernistic) institutional accreditation and research assessment processes in marginalisation of RM.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This study used an exploratory qualitative research method. Data were collected from 17 RM expert participants from 15 UK business schools that were signatories to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Management Education through semi-structured in-depth interviews and analysed using the six phases of Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The study identifies a potent institutional isomorphic amalgam resulting in conservative impacts for RM. This dynamic is termed multiple institutional isomorphic marginalisation (MIIM) – whereby a given domain is occluded and displaced by hegemonic institutional pressures. In RM’s case, MIIM operates through accreditation-driven modernistic-style curricula. This leads business schools to a predilection towards “mainstream” representations of subject areas and a focus on mechanistic research exercises. Consequently, this privileges certain activities over RM development with a range of potential negative effects, including social impacts.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study fills an important gap concerning the need for a critical, in-depth exploration of the role that international accreditation frameworks and national institutional academic research assessment processes such as the Research Excellence Framework in the UK play in affecting the possible growth and influence of RM. In addition, it uses heterotopia as a conceptual lens to reveal the institutional “mask” of responsibility predominantly at play in the UK business school context, and offers alternative pathways for RM careers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":47017,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Organizational Analysis","volume":"133 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The marginalisation of responsible management in business schools: a consideration of future trajectories\",\"authors\":\"Nkeiruka N. Ndubuka-McCallum, David R. Jones, Peter Rodgers\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijoa-05-2024-4535\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>Business schools are vital in promoting responsible management (RM) – a management grounded in ethics and values beneficial to a wide array of stakeholders and overall society. Nevertheless, due to deeply embedded institutional modernistic dynamics and paradigms, RM is, despite its importance, repeatedly marginalised in business school curricula. If students are to engage with RM thinking, then its occlusion represents a pressing issue. Drawing on the United Kingdom (UK) business school context, this paper aims to examine this issue through a framework of institutional theory and consider the role played by (modernistic) institutional accreditation and research assessment processes in marginalisation of RM.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>This study used an exploratory qualitative research method. Data were collected from 17 RM expert participants from 15 UK business schools that were signatories to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Management Education through semi-structured in-depth interviews and analysed using the six phases of Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The study identifies a potent institutional isomorphic amalgam resulting in conservative impacts for RM. This dynamic is termed multiple institutional isomorphic marginalisation (MIIM) – whereby a given domain is occluded and displaced by hegemonic institutional pressures. In RM’s case, MIIM operates through accreditation-driven modernistic-style curricula. This leads business schools to a predilection towards “mainstream” representations of subject areas and a focus on mechanistic research exercises. Consequently, this privileges certain activities over RM development with a range of potential negative effects, including social impacts.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>This study fills an important gap concerning the need for a critical, in-depth exploration of the role that international accreditation frameworks and national institutional academic research assessment processes such as the Research Excellence Framework in the UK play in affecting the possible growth and influence of RM. In addition, it uses heterotopia as a conceptual lens to reveal the institutional “mask” of responsibility predominantly at play in the UK business school context, and offers alternative pathways for RM careers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":47017,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Organizational Analysis\",\"volume\":\"133 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Organizational Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-05-2024-4535\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Organizational Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-05-2024-4535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:商学院在促进负责任的管理(RM)--一种以道德和价值观为基础的、对广泛的利益相关者和整个社会有益的管理--方面起着至关重要的作用。然而,由于现代主义的制度动力和范式根深蒂固,尽管责任管理非常重要,但在商学院的课程中却一再被边缘化。如果要让学生参与到 RM 的思考中来,那么它的闭塞就是一个亟待解决的问题。本文以英国(UK)商学院为背景,旨在通过制度理论框架研究这一问题,并考虑(现代主义)制度认证和研究评估过程在 RM 边缘化中所扮演的角色。通过半结构化深度访谈,从 15 所签署了《联合国负责任管理教育原则》的英国商学院的 17 名 RM 专家参与者那里收集了数据,并使用 Braun 和 Clarke 的主题分析法的六个阶段对数据进行了分析。这种动态被称为多重制度同构边缘化(MIIM)--即某一特定领域被霸权制度压力所排斥和取代。在 RM 的案例中,MIIM 通过认证驱动的现代主义风格的课程来运作。这导致商学院倾向于学科领域的 "主流 "表述,并注重机械化的研究练习。原创性/价值 本研究填补了一个重要空白,即需要对国际评审框架和国家机构学术研究评估过程(如英国的 "卓越研究框架")在影响 RM 的可能增长和影响方面所扮演的角色进行批判性的深入探讨。此外,它还将异托邦作为概念透镜,揭示了在英国商学院背景下主要起作用的机构责任 "面具",并为 RM 职业提供了其他途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The marginalisation of responsible management in business schools: a consideration of future trajectories

Purpose

Business schools are vital in promoting responsible management (RM) – a management grounded in ethics and values beneficial to a wide array of stakeholders and overall society. Nevertheless, due to deeply embedded institutional modernistic dynamics and paradigms, RM is, despite its importance, repeatedly marginalised in business school curricula. If students are to engage with RM thinking, then its occlusion represents a pressing issue. Drawing on the United Kingdom (UK) business school context, this paper aims to examine this issue through a framework of institutional theory and consider the role played by (modernistic) institutional accreditation and research assessment processes in marginalisation of RM.

Design/methodology/approach

This study used an exploratory qualitative research method. Data were collected from 17 RM expert participants from 15 UK business schools that were signatories to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Management Education through semi-structured in-depth interviews and analysed using the six phases of Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis.

Findings

The study identifies a potent institutional isomorphic amalgam resulting in conservative impacts for RM. This dynamic is termed multiple institutional isomorphic marginalisation (MIIM) – whereby a given domain is occluded and displaced by hegemonic institutional pressures. In RM’s case, MIIM operates through accreditation-driven modernistic-style curricula. This leads business schools to a predilection towards “mainstream” representations of subject areas and a focus on mechanistic research exercises. Consequently, this privileges certain activities over RM development with a range of potential negative effects, including social impacts.

Originality/value

This study fills an important gap concerning the need for a critical, in-depth exploration of the role that international accreditation frameworks and national institutional academic research assessment processes such as the Research Excellence Framework in the UK play in affecting the possible growth and influence of RM. In addition, it uses heterotopia as a conceptual lens to reveal the institutional “mask” of responsibility predominantly at play in the UK business school context, and offers alternative pathways for RM careers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The IJOA welcomes papers that draw on, but not exclusively: ■Organization theory ■Organization behaviour ■Organization development ■Organizational learning ■Strategic and change management ■People in organizational contexts including human resource management and human resource development ■Business and its interrelationship with society ■Ethics and morals, spirituality
期刊最新文献
Antecedents of effectuation and causation in SMEs from emerging markets: the role of CEO temporal focus Does spirituality at work promote work-to-family enrichment among Indian female employees? Unlocking work engagement: harnessing social capital, proactive personalities and POS in newcomers’ organizational socialization The university as an intellectual capital catalyst for sustainable organisations: conceptualising the nexus Green leadership and innovation: catalysts for environmental performance in Italian manufacturing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1