Abstract
As the Stern report states, climate change is the greatest and widest-ranging market failure, presenting a hard challenge for economics (Stern Review, 2013). Facing such a big failure, modern business thought and mo-dern business education should consequently be rest-ructured. A global transformation is needed in mains-tream business education. Business schools should care about the world’s important problems as their gradua-tes play an important role as the initiators and mana-gers of the global society. At the beginning of the 21st century, a step towards transformation is taking place in global modern business and management education. PRME is one of the transformation platforms providing guidelines and a learning network to voluntary univer-sities. In this paper, a qualitative approach is used to analyze the reports presenting the organized functions and efforts of changing universities submitted to PRME in 2012. To understand the dimensions of the educati-onal transformation globally, content analysis has been conducted on 50 selected university business schools.
Introduction
The Brundtland Report brought the concept of sus-tainable development to the attention of the global business world in 1987. In the last 30 years, the huge amount of research results, scientific discussions and philosophical debates have indicated that the amount of devastation of the natural and social environment has indeed been colossal. A global transformation is needed in business understanding and mainstream business education. The main reason for the need for transformation is the globe itself. Climate chan
ge, global warming, loss of biodiversity, energy crisis, inequality between rich and poor, increased poverty, gender issues, cultural heritage loss, exploding popu-lation, human rights violations and hundreds of other social/natural disasters create new challenges, both for the business world and business schools. These are major, complex challenges for business leaders today. However, the challenges also bring opportunities, and business schools should be at the forefront of addres-sing the challenges and creating new opportunities. “The ‘catch’ is that to solve these issues we need to shift the way that society is organized” says Grant (2010) in his book Co-opportunity. He discusses a need for a different kind of economy and different kinds of governments, businesses and community (Grant, 2010). Business schools are the important drivers of the economy, government, business and the whole society. Business schools should care about the world’s important problems as their graduates play an important role as the initiators and managers of the global society. Accordingly, business schools have the intellectual capital, creativity and entrepreneurial vi-sion to contribute to big solutions globally.
As examples for the discussion in management are-as, some remarks about marketing and management can be explanatory. Peattie and Belz discuss the clash between ‘old marketing’ (i.e. mainstream Kotlerian marketing) and a ‘new’ alternative approach to mar-keting that seeks to replace it, in their Sustainability Marketing book (Belz & Peattie, 2009). The “Kotleri-an approach”, which was the mainstream underst“Kotleri-an-
understan-Business School as an Initiator of the Transformation to Sustainability: A
Content Analysis For Business Schools in PRME
Canan Madran
1- Selin Köksal Araç
2- Mehmet Emin Yüksebaş
31 Çukurova University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Business Department, cmadran@cu.edu.tr (Contact Person) 2 Çukurova University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Business Department, skoksal@cu.edu.tr
3 Çukurova University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Business Department, m.e.yuksekbas@hotmail.com
ding of marketing globally for a long period of time, is no longer able to explain sustainability in marke-ting. Related to this, the Drucker Institute mentions that there is an unfilled gap between responsibility and the Drucker philosophy waiting to be filled. While explaining the logo of the Institute, it has been said that the globe is fractured by the “Responsibility Gap”, but its pieces were connected by a bridge that symbolizes the Institute’s efforts to help close the Gap (PRME Report, 2010). Both remarks present the ea-siest metaphoric forms of debate in today’s business and management philosophy.
As philosophy transforms, consequently education transforms. By the force of the totally new philosophy, a transformation is taking place globally in modern business and management education. Muijen (2004) addressed the importance of value-learning processes to integrate corporate social responsibility in higher education. He asserted that the integration of corpo-rate social responsibility in an organization requires a transformation process on the corporate culture level. In higher education, the change of corporate culture should be started by innovating the curriculum and education processes (Muijen, 2004). To teach stu-dents to be responsible leaders of the future, business schools should not only mention to “Be responsible” but also that they should be “Responsible”. Director General of Barcelona School of Management Car-me Martinell talks about the importance of being an example of a responsible citizen to transmit responsi-bility values and attitudes as below.
“We understand that our own organisational practices should serve as an example of the values and attitudes we convey to our students.”
(PRME Report, 2012)
• Which regions of the world are leading sustaina-bility thought?
• What are the dimensions of transforming to sus-tainability in business schools?
• What are the creative ways of behaving for trans-formation?
To find the answers to our questions, we prefer to take a qualitative look at the Principles for Respon-sible Management Education (PRME) signatory uni-versities list.
“The mission of the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) initiative is to inspire and champion responsible management education, research and thought leadership globally. In the current academic environment, corporate responsibility and sustainability have entered but not yet become embedded in the mainstream of business-related education. The PRME are therefore a timely global call for busi-ness schools and universities worldwide to gra-dually adapt their curricula, research, teaching methodologies and institutional strategies to the new business challenges and opportunities. Ta-king the Six Principles as a guiding framework, any institution which is willing to integrate cor-porate responsibility and sustainability in a gra-dual but systemic manner is welcome to join the initiative? ”
(PRME, 2013) The six principles that form the basis for PRME and its mission are Purpose, Values, Method, Research, Partnership and Dialogue (PRME Principles, 2013). Purpose focuses on developing the capabilities of
and sustainable, social, environmental and economic values. Partnership underlines the importance of co-operation between business schools and the business world to deal with social and environmental issues. Dialogue focuses on supporting dialogue and debate among interested groups and stakeholders on global social responsibility and sustainability issues.
There is also another ranking of the transforming business schools and MBAs. Beyond Grey Pinstripes is the other resource provided by the Aspen Institu-te (Beyond Grey Pinstripes, 2013). When the details of Beyond Grey Pinstripes are perused, the reader can get a lot of shared information about these successful schools.
Methodology
A qualitative approach is used in this exploratory research. “Content analysis” has been conducted to analyze the reports submitted by the PRME univer-sities in the year 2012. In PRME (February 2013), there are 470 signatories, 426 participants with re-ports and 141 rere-ports from 2012. The sample of the research contains 50 judgmentally selected reports of university business schools listed in PRME. Two of the researchers conducted the analysis by sharing the 50 schools equally. The reports have been categorized, coded and counted using a structured code sheet. The categories of the content analysis were determined as the six principles of PRME. Subcategories and the co-des of the subcategories were created during the pre-test stage. Five university SIP (Sharing Information on Progress) reports were analyzed at the beginning to catch the important concepts determining the di-mensions of each principle. Three authors came to a consensus about the final 25 subcategories and codes
attached to each subcategory, as shown in Table 1. During the analysis of the reports the writers authors search for the specific concepts and applications with a similar approach. The reliability analysis of the data was measured by Cronbach Alpha (α= 0.8597). The business schools in PRME were divided into seven geographic regions. The number of business schools in each region was considered when selec-ting the sample. There were 141 uploaded reports in 2012 (50 North America, 13 South America, 58 Eu-rope, 8 Middle East and Caucasian, 8 Far East, 3 Af-rica, 1 Australia) and 50 (17 North AmeAf-rica, 3 South America, 21 Europe, 4 Middle East and Caucasian, 3 Far East, 1 Africa, 1 Australia) of them - represen-ting almost a third of the population - were selected judgmentally. To select the reports, the number of pages and the contents were also reviewed. Some of the reports are very long (with an average of 23 pa-ges) to summarize in the subcategories and codes. Accordingly, some of the reports were written in a free form, a totally different construct than the PRME grid. Another limitation of this global analysis is that there are not many schools presenting reports from regions other than North America and Europe.
Findings
The main results of the content analysis can be seen in Table 1. The table determines the principles, the subcategories to analyze the principles and the co-des to explain the action for realization of the prin-ciple. Actually, the table summarizes all the princip-les in a coded grid. The schools presented what they did for the period of 2012 by following the structure in Table 1.
Table 1. The Results of the Analysis on PRME Principles Subcategories Number of schools reported (n = 50) Contents of Codes Principle 1 ‐ Purpose Purpose 1 49 To provide a sustainability & responsibility & ethics oriented education Purpose 2 34 Transformation of the main theme of the university Purpose 3 44 To develop the capabilities of students about Sustainability & responsibility & ethics Principle 2 ‐ Values Values 1 26 Strong personal and corporate ethics Values 2 25 Corporate social responsibility of the university Values 3 20 Critical approach to values Values 4 33 Critical evaluation of curriculum Principle 3 ‐ Method Method 1 38 Applications in the classroom Method 2 28 New teaching methods Method 3 27 Partnerships for education Method 4 31 New modules Method 5 19 Guest speakers Method 6 34 Addendum applications except courses Method 7 33 Programming of new courses Method 8 34 Adapting of existing courses Principle 4 ‐Research Research 1 42 Publications Research 2 35 Projects Research 3 28 Research Center Research 4 30 Knowledge sharing for stakeholders
The answer to the research question “What are the creative ways of behaving for transformation?” is can be summarized as programming new modules and establishing a center focusing on sustainability such as Doing Business in a Culture of Sustainability, the Role of Business in Society, Energy Management and Marketing, and the Center for Sustainable Value. We put our special comments that we have derived from the sample reports in Table 2 (Appendix 1). The first column summarizes our comments on the “remarks” that we have gathered from the reports directly. The question “Who is doing what in different regions of the world for transformation?” was not so easy to answer because the majority of the PRME signatory universities basically come from 2 main regions; the USA and Europe. Therefore, we made the compari-son of the principle executions between these two main areas (Appendix 2). Significant differences bet-ween the USA and Europe can be seen in values, met-hod, research, and partnership principles. US schools show a difference in methods, which can be explai-ned by the continuous creative efforts of teaching and mentoring in the country.
To provide another regional analysis, we have analy-zed the Turkish schools exclusively , to get an unders-tanding of the current situation in Turkey. Some com-ments on the Turkish Universities in PRME (Sabancı, Koç, Bilgi, Gediz Universities) can be seen in Table 4 (Appendix 3). These comments can be used as a ge-neral guideline for other universities to make a more detailed strategy for sustainability transformation. In Turkish schools almost no new modules have been observed, rare multidisciplinary and creative courses have been announced and a strong orientation of the “modern management philosophy” has been repor-ted as a general understanding.
The number of pages in the reports submitted to PRME is an important area of discussion. Reports around 20-30 pages (N=50 Min:3 Max:78 Mean:23.4) give the least required information about the dimen-sions of the transformation in the school. Fewer than this shows less pace and content of transformation, conversely, more than this shows more effort.
Conclusion
The qualitative research outcomes allow us to make some comments about the research questions as fol-lows.
What is the general understanding about sustai-nability, social responsibility, and ethics issues em-bedded in the business school mission/vision? Schools make efforts to teach sustainability and res-ponsibility issues. However, only half of the schools reflect full personal and corporate ethics in their cor-porate mission.
Which schools are the leading transformers to sus-tainability?
European and US schools are represented in large numbers on the list. Many good examples can be fo-und in these regions but successful transformational schools can also be observed from other regions of the world such as theBusiness School Sao Paoloin Brazil.
What are the dimensions of transforming to susta-inability in business schools?
The PRME principles reflect the dimensions pro-perly as:
Purpose. Business schools mostly focus on educating about sustainability and developing the capabilities of students about sustainability but there is a lack of effort from schools’ management for the whole trans-formation.
Values. Critical evaluation of the curricula on susta-inability and responsibility has mostly been achieved by the universities but there is still a long way to go. Method. New applications in classrooms and new courses are important improvements as methods of dealing with sustainability and responsibility issues. However, a more challenging method is of course cre-ating totally “new modules”.
Research. Universities do a significant amount of re-search focusing on sustainability and responsibility issues, but more collaboration is needed for research centers or projects.
Partnership. There is significant amount of partners-hips with mainstream stakeholders, such as business-men and the public sector. However, more effort is needed to work with NGOs.
Dialogue. Media usage is the weakest link in the transformation process of business schools in susta-inability and responsibility issues. The strong influen-ce of the media should be used in the dialogue betwe-en the stakeholders and the global public in gbetwe-eneral. The transformation of the business schools needs more pace. There is still too much to do in the trans-formation challenge for sustainability and social res-ponsibility.
References
Belz, F.M., & Peattie, K. (2009). Sustainibility Marketing A Global Perspective. John Wiley and Sons, p. 17. Beyond Grey Pinstripes (2013). Retrieved January 20,
2013 from http://www.beyondgreypinstripes.org/
Grant, J. (2010). Co-opportunity: Join up for a sustai-nable, resilient, prosperous world. John Wiley & Sons, p. 5.
Muijen, H.S.C.A. (2004). Corporate Social Responsi-bility starts at University. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 235-246.
PRME (2013). Retrieved January 9, 2013 from http:// www.unprme.org/index.php
PRME Principles (2013). Retrieved January 9, 2013 from http://www.unprme.org/the-6-principles/in-dex.php
PRME Report. (2010). Peter F. Drucker & Masatoshi Ito, Graduate School of Management. Retrieved January 13, 2013 from http://www.unprme.org/ sharing-information-on-progress/index.php?sort =country&dir=asc&start=360
PRME Report (2012). Barcelona School of Manage-ment. Retrieved January 16, 2013 from http://www. unprme.org/reports/PRMESI PReport2012.pdf Stern Review (2013). Retrieved January 12, 2013 from
Appendix 1
Table 2. Comments and Remarks on PRME Reports
APPENDIX 1 TABLE 2 Comments and remarks on PRME reports Comments Some remarks from the reports Religious background presents a more social, ethical and responsible understanding to the business & management perspective. Christian school Catholic school Christian tradition and humanistic principles Servant leadership Inspired by humanist and Christian traditions A whole transformation of the philosophy, mission and vision of the management school is presented, but rarely. Transformation framework Transformational school, Thinking for the new global order Principle 7: Addendum Principle Is Denmark prepared for the future? Concrete sustainable philosophy Business schools using the current path to the new challenge. Leadership in the 21st Century: A Paradigm Shift School of Business Center for Social Value Creation Business from a higher perspective Schools present creative areas, tools, partnerships for the sustainability, ethics and responsibility issues. Student as a responsible producer Ethics and Sustainability Day Center for Environment, Energy and Sustainability Studies Sustainability Index Bacchus Mentoring Programme Schools put Society and Social understanding on the base. Government, Business, Society Center Community based learning and research Social entrepreneurship & social environmental responsibility Managing sustainable development
Appendix 2
Table 3. Comparison Between USA and Europe in PRME Principles APPENDIX 2 TABLE 3 Comparison between USA and Europe in PRME principles Categories (Principles) Codes USA (%) Means of Principles (%) EU (%) Means of Principles (%) Purpose To provide a sustainability & responsibility & ethics oriented education 94 84 100 92 Transformation of the main theme of the university 70 76 To develop the capabilities of students about sustainability & responsibility & ethics 88 100 Values Strong personal and corporate ethics 64 65 47 43 Corporate social responsibility of the University 58 42 Critical approach to values 58 33 Critical evaluation of curriculum 82 52 Method Applications in the classroom 88 77 66 50 New teaching methods 70 42 Partnerships for education 82 38 New modules 64 71 Guest speakers 52 33 Addendum applications except courses 100 47 Programming of new courses 82 57 Adapting of existing courses 82 52 Research Publications 94 79 81 60 Projects 70 81 Research Center 76 42 Knowledge sharing for stakeholders 82 52 Scientific organizations & meetings 76 47 Partnership Partnerships with the NGO’s 88 90 42 69 Partnerships with the business sector 100 85 Public sector/other universities partnership 82 81 Dialogue Speeches and events for the business world & public 100 61 81 52 Media usage 23 23
Appendix 3
Table 4. The Analysis for Turkish Universities in PRME
APPENDIX 3 TABLE 4 The analysis for Turkish Universities in PRME Categories (Principles) Codes Number of schools reported (n = 4) Comments Purpose To provide a sustainability/ responsibility/ethics oriented education 4 As they sign PRME they have this purpose automatically. Transformation of the main theme of the university 1 Hard to change To develop the capabilities of students about sustainability/responsibility/ ethics 1 New techniques needed Values Strong personal and corporate ethics 1 Is not strong discussion currently University corporate social responsibility 1 A new area for Turkish Higher education Critical approach to values 0 Absence of critical thinking habit Critical evaluation of curriculum 2 An easy beginning Method Applications in the classroom 2 High quality education New teaching methods 2 High quality education Partnerships for education 1 Need for more collaboration in education New modules 0 Need for new modules Guest speakers 1 Not in sustainability talks Addendum applications except courses 1 No creative additional techniques Programming of new courses 3 An easy beginning Adapting of existing courses 3 An easy beginning Research Publications 3 An initial beginning to learn Projects 2 Needs improvement Research Center 2 Needs improvement Knowledge sharing for stakeholders 1 Rare stakeholder collaboration Scientific organizations & meetings 4 An initial beginning Partnership Partnerships with NGO’s 3 Beginning phase Partnerships with business sector 2 Needs more collaboration Public sector/other universities partnership 3 Beginning phase Dialogue Speeches and events for business world & public 3 Conference and seminar announcements Media usage 1 Rare usage of media
