Mainstreaming Corporate Social Responsibility at the Core of the Business School Curriculum

Goyal

2019

SAEB

The present study identifies and prioritizes the barriers pertaining to implementation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies in Indian service industries. The 10 most important barriers related to CSR implementation have been first identified and then evaluated for the ranking process using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) based methodology. The outcome of the study clearly presents that lack of top management commitment, lack of significant benefit of CSR, and financial constraints are the most important barriers in effective implementation of sustainable CSR initiatives among organizations belonging to the Indian service industry. These results may be used by decision makers to understand and these barriers, and identify critical success factors for the CSR process, which will help them to ensure that CSR is effectively implemented in their respective organizations.

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing CSR barriers in the Indian Service Industry: A Fuzzy AHP Approach

Goyal

2019

SAEB

“…Key critiques of business schools have ranged from the failings of the management theory taught by business schools (Ghoshal, 2005) and how they prepare students for the future (Cornuel, 2007;Starkey & Tempest, 2005), to how business schools are, or are not responding to the challenges arising from societal issues, such as sustainability (Boyle, 2004;Schoemaker, 2008) and responsibility in management education (Cornuel & Hommel, 2015). Recent debates on the role of business schools have highlighted the need for greater societal engagement and for incorporating sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR) into business schools' remit, and in particular embedding it in the curriculum taught in business schools (Hommel & Thomas, 2014;Jamali & Abdallah, 2015). In this paper we explore the organizational and strategic factors that influence whether sustainability becomes successfully embedded in business schools, which have explicit sustainability commitments.…”

Section: Decoupling Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other researchers have suggested that business schools are reaching a "tipping point" (Hommel & Thomas, 2014:7), which will see business schools change, and redefine or rebuild their legitimacy by addressing and integrating CSR and sustainability in the business school curriculum (Hommel & Thomas, 2014;Jamali & Abdallah, 2015). While earlier work has identified potential determinants of sustainability implementation in practice (Matter & Moon, 2004), this paper contributes to the debate through an analysis of the combinations of organizational and strategic characteristics that mean business schools "walk their talk" (Rasche & Gilbert, 2015:248) and tightly couple, rather than decouple their espoused sustainability commitments from their actual practice.…”

Section: Decoupling Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business School Legitimacy and the Challenge of Sustainability: A Fuzzy Set Analysis of Institutional Decoupling

Snelson‐Powell

Grosvold

Millington

2016

AMLE

Business schools face growing institutional pressure to respond to the sustainability agenda, especially since the financial crisis highlighted the need to educate business leaders who engage with issues beyond a profit imperative. While business schools increasingly signal their engagement with global issues, such as sustainability, there are also suggestions that they decouple their espoused commitments from their practices. Rather than institute actual change and include sustainability in organizational activities, business schools may merely indicate that such change is taking place. This study examines the key organizational and strategic conditions under which business schools decouple their sustainability policies from practices. We draw on interviews with 40 deans of UK business schools and analyze the data using fs/QCA, a method that investigates combinations of individual conditions. We find evidence to suggest that tight coupling is associated with small, prestigious business schools and that decoupling is associated with business schools that are large, wealthy or lacking in expertise. We discuss the implications of these findings for business school legitimacy and institutional theory.

“…Such diversity in the adoption of sustainable business education can be explained in part through the various strategic, structural and cultural barriers faced by proponents in different settings (Solitander et al 2012). For example, research shows that the legitimacy of sustainability topics is often disputed (Hommel and Thomas 2014), and that sustainability is routinely misunderstood and underappreciated among business school educators (Jamali and Abdallah 2015). And despite the pressure from accreditation agencies to embed sustainability across business school programmes, clear templates for the design and implementation of sustainability education are hard to come by (Rasche and Gilbert 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Centres and Fit: How Centres Work to Integrate Sustainability Within Business Schools

et al. 2018

For nearly as long as the topic of sustainable business has been taught and researched in business schools, proponents have warned about barriers to genuine integration in business school practices. This article examines how academic sustainability centres try to overcome barriers to integration by achieving technical, cultural and political fit with their environment (Ansari et al. in Acad Manag Rev 35(1):67-92; Ansari et al., Academy of Management Review 35 (1): 2010). Based on survey and interview data, we theorise that technical, cultural and political fit are intricately related, and that these interrelations involve legitimacy, resources and collaboration effects. Our findings about sustainability centres offer novel insights on integrating sustainable business education given the interrelated nature of different types of fit and misfit. We further contribute to the literature on fit by highlighting that incompatibility between strategies to achieve different types of fit may act as a source of dynamism.