Responsible Management Learning Research Articles

Radicalizing Managers’ Climate Education: Getting Beyond the Bull**** Fairy Tale of Eternal Economic Growth

In this essay, I argue that we should radicalize managerial climate change education given that incremental and accommodative forms of responsible management learning and education (RMLE) are at odds with the urgency, nature, and magnitude of the climate crisis. I argue for three practices to radicalize RMLE, and illustrate them through examples from a degrowth context. First, management educators should engage in anti-paradigmatic performative politics to disrupt the reality-making of climate damaging theories, and “realize” better alternative theories. Second, as management educators, we should engage ourselves, our students, and wider stakeholders in anti-paradigmatic thought that transcends and challenges problematic mainstream management paradigms. Third, we should explore what and how we and our students can learn from radical climate movements’ civil disobedience, in order to disrupt climate-damaging practices. In this paper, I aim to provoke and facilitate urgently needed discussions about the radicalization of RMLE for climate change education and beyond. Therefore, I close this essay with an invitation for rejoinders and suggest salient implications for educational practitioners and researchers.

From corporate social responsibility (CSR) to corporate humanistic responsibility (CHR): the conceptualization and operationalization of perceived CHR

PurposeOrganizations that prioritize humanistic responsibility create an environment of value for their employees as the most important stakeholders. However, despite the numerous corporate social responsibility (CSR) models and research highlighting stakeholder considerations, the long-standing “social” aspect of CSR has inhibited its humanism responsibility. In response, this study proposes to move beyond the antecedents and outcomes of CSR to explore how perceived CSR can promote its humanistic responsibility both inside and outside of organizations.Design/methodology/approachThe authors followed Sendjaya et al. (2008) ’s methodology for developing and validating the perceived corporate humanistic responsibility (CHR) scale. Study 1 validated the CHR's content. Study 2 established the measure’ reliability, internal consistency, unidimensionality and discriminant validity. The authors describe each of the studies in the forthcoming sections.FindingsThis research has produced a comprehensive set of perceived CHR items for business leaders based on earlier CHR/humanism concepts. Through the deconstruction of CHR theory, the granular conceptualization provides employee-centric workplaces, healthy internal communication, holistic compensation, CSR-committed behaviors and holistic training and development, equipped to assess how their CHR fosters humanistic workplaces that encourage socially responsible behaviors. This, in turn, would have an immense impact on employee well-being that, in turn, flourishes societal well-being.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the perceived CHR scale's psychometric properties were confirmed using multiple tests ranging from qualitative to quantitative studies, this newly developed scale requires further investigation to explore whether internal or external relevance factors affect organizations' humanistic responsibility.Practical implicationsCSR is about caring for humans and the planet. The authors have unpacked what and how the human side of CSR operates for business leaders to advance their CHR practices and responsible management learning. The perceived CHR dimensions can guide business leaders to promote multidimensional humanistic behaviors inside and outside workplaces that transcend how to strengthen the humanistic responsibility behaviors of corporations to promote CHR by articulating how the “Social” aspect of CSR ought to function for employee well-being first.Social implicationsThis study responds to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) most aligned with the SDG 3 (good health and well-being) and SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth) by promoting humanistic workplaces with implications for United Nation's Principles for Responsible Management that encourages universities to educate students on humanism concepts in business management.Originality/valueThe originality lies in the empirical study of CHR. By incorporating the original concepts of humanism/humanistic management and CHR, the authors empirically articulate how CHR may be practically implemented as an elaborated humanistic synthesis for corporations.

Homo responsabilis as an extension of the neoliberal hidden curriculum: The triple responsibilization of responsible management education

In the responsible turn in business school education and management learning, the responsibility approach is proposed as a possible panacea against a hidden curriculum which leads to damaging business practice. The explicit promise of responsible management learning and education is that homo oeconomicus can be re-formed in the image of a responsible business subject, what we here call ‘ homo responsabilis’. We explore how a business school curriculum centred on responsibility affects key subject positions such as consumer, employee, manager, entrepreneur, investor and leader. In three responsible management learning and education illustrations at our business school, we observe three layers of responsibilization of the individual: responsibilization for self-enhancement, responsibilization for economic prosperity and responsibilization for social and environmental sustainability. We find that these three layers of responsibilization impact business school subjects in several problematic ways: excessive moral burdening of consumers, overburdening of self-managing employees and fantasmatic gripping of prospective entrepreneurs. Our contribution to critical studies of responsible management learning and education is twofold: (1) we show how explicit responsible management learning and education curricula tend to extend the neoliberal HC, and (2) we complement studies calling for re-politicizing responsible management learning and education by suggesting transformative learning ways to generate explicitly ethico-political imaginations that can help in resisting individual responsibilization in business school education.

A conceptual framework for understanding the learning processes integral to the development of responsible management practice

PurposeThis paper aims to examines responsible management (RM) practice and the learning processes that underpin its development. It presents a conceptual framework to highlight the relationship between the learning experience of the individual and their capacity to develop responsible practice.Design/methodology/approachThis conceptual paper synthesises knowledge from studies of how managers learn for ethical and responsible practice. A scoping review of peer-reviewed academic papers was conducted using key search terms that included “responsible management learning” (RML), “ethics”, “Human Resource Development (HRD)”, “responsible management (RM)”, “responsible leadership (RL)” and “work-based learning”. Analysis resulted in development of a conceptual framework of RML processes.FindingsThe review of studies concerned with how individuals learn to manage “responsibly” identified a range of learning processes that are necessary for the development of responsible practice. These learning processes are presented in a conceptual model that offers insights for the design of HRD interventions. Learning for responsible practice is presented as occurring in learning spaces where the learner/manager experiences a combination of learning processes. These are found to include situated, social and experiential learning that is “transformative”, potentially “troublesome” and “reflexive” such that learners develop responsible values and practices.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper contributes to the field of management development by focussing on the intersection between what is known about how individuals learn for ethical and responsible practice and the implications for work-based learning pedagogies. The paper will be of interest to HRD professionals tasked with fostering a responsible and ethical culture within organisations.Practical implicationsFor HRD practitioners, this paper highlights the importance of work-based learning intervention design. What is suggested is that not all HRD interventions are likely to provide the learning conditions required for the development of “responsible practice”. A review of research into RML points to the need for interventions that offer a deep, personal, situated and transformative learning experience. There are organisational implications that arise from the type of learning found to develop responsible practice. For example, facilitating managers skills and awareness of how they learn such as: developing reflective practices and supporting developmental/collaborative networks that examine existing workplace practices. HRD professionals will need to recognise the need to support individual's learning for responsible practice given that it may entail questioning existing practice, and confronting troublesome knowledge, such as recognising where areas of irresponsibility exist. This may have implications for wider HR practices such as line management support, reward and performance management.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to the field of management development by focussing on the intersection between what is known about how individuals learn for ethical and responsible practice and the implications for work-based learning pedagogies. The paper will be of interest to HRD professionals tasked with fostering a responsible and ethical culture within organisations.

Teaching management in the context of Grand Challenges: A pragmatist approach

This article builds on the pragmatist approach of Grand Challenges to derive pedagogical strategies for management education, especially for courses that aim to prepare students to face the unprecedented context of multi-crises. The notion of Grand Challenges, used to frame the multiple problematic situations that characterize the context, echoes the flourishing literature on responsible management learning and education, which claims an urgent need to rethink management education to deal with issues of increasing inequality, human rights, and climate change. The responsible management learning and education literature encompasses three pedagogical approaches, including a pragmatist approach. We rely on Dewey’s pragmatist philosophy of education to enrich this approach and develop pedagogical strategies for preparing students to intervene in the context of Grand Challenges. We suggest a view of knowledge as tool for transformation and of the classroom as a community of inquiry working to intervene in problematic situations. We illustrate the strength of these pedagogical strategies through an account of an educational experience in a course of Design and Management of Social Innovation.

Reactive and proactive pathways to sustainable apparel supply chains: Manufacturer's perspective on stakeholder salience and organizational learning toward responsible management

This research explores stakeholder salience and sustainability learning efforts of apparel manufacturers operating in an emerging economy. An organizational view of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) is conceptualized to delineate mechanisms that facilitate the implementation of supply chain sustainability. Data is collected from survey responses from 156 apparel manufacturers operating in India. Findings suggest that stakeholder salience in pressuring apparel manufacturers to embrace SSCM practices generates reactive pathways to sustainability implementation at the firm-level. Results also show that firm-intrinsic efforts of organizational members aiming to learn about sustainability shape proactive pathways toward SSCM. Our paper shows evidences that reactive pathways appear to be less effective than proactive ones. This paper contributes to the literature by detailing how different SSCM practices adopted by apparel manufacturing contribute to enhanced supply chain environmental and operational performances of contemporary apparel supply chains. It also enriches the firm-intrinsic view of stakeholder salience in SSCM by outlining the relevance of internal and external stakeholders in pressurizing manufacturing firms within the supply chain. Lastly, it strengthens the view of intra-firm learning toward sustainability in SSCM by drawing from the construct of ‘responsible management learning’ to propose an integrative notion of organizational learning toward responsible management (OLRM).

A Humanistic Narrative for Responsible Management Learning: An Ontological Perspective

Why has responsible management been so difficult and why is the chorus of stakeholders demanding such responsibility getting louder? We argue that management learning has been framed within the narrative of economism. As such, we argue that managers need to be aware of the paradigmatic frame of the dominant economistic narrative and learn to transcend it. We also argue that for true managerial responsibility, an alternative humanistic narrative is more fit for purpose. This humanistic narrative is based on epistemological metaphors and ontological insights that integrate the latest insights from evolutionists suggesting that humans only survived by being responsible. This understanding has consequences for responsible management learning in that it focuses on dignity literacy, balance orientation, as well as creativity and innovation for the common good. We argue that managerial learning within a humanistic paradigm is more likely to lead to ethical and sustainable business conduct.

What on Earth Should Managers Learn About Corporate Sustainability? A Threshold Concept Approach

The Earth is facing pressing societal grand challenges that require urgent managerial action. Responsible management learning (RML) has emerged as a discipline to prepare managers to act as responsible leaders that can effectively address such pressing challenges. This article aims to extend current knowledge on RML in the domain of corporate sustainability (CS) through the application of threshold concepts, novel ideas which provide a doorway to new knowledge and transform a learner’s mindset. Specifically, after conducting a systematic review of the management literature, we identify 33 CS threshold concepts that are useful for mainstream managers and practitioners in their RML process. We group them into six CS threshold concept themes that can help managers understand the complexities and interconnectedness that characterize CS. Finally, we map CS threshold concepts with key competences for effective RML. Therefore, our contribution relies on translating existing CS theoretical frameworks into transformative, specific, understandable and applicable pieces of knowledge that might help mainstream managers to embed CS principles in their daily management practices.

Achieving Responsible Management Learning Through Enriched Reciprocal Learning: Service-Learning Projects and the Role of Boundary Spanners

Through its focus on deep and experiential learning, service-learning (SL) has become increasingly popular within the business school curriculum. While a reciprocal dimension has been foundational to SL, the reciprocality that is emphasized in business ethics literature is often on the relationship between the service experience and the academic content, rather than reciprocal learning of the service providers (students) and the recipients (organizations and their managers), let alone other stakeholders. Drawing on the notion of enriched reciprocal learning and on Aristotle’s typology of modes of knowing, we (1) revisit reciprocal learning by illustrating what kinds of learning occur for server and served in four SL projects from a project course in CSR, and (2) emphasize the role of boundary spanners from the project organizations in making this reciprocal learning happen and translating the various types of student learning in ways that are useful for their organizations. We find that when boundary spanners are particularly engaged at making the projects impactful, they contribute to making the learning experiences of students, managers (including themselves) and sometimes other stakeholders useful, multidimensional, and ultimately rewarding.

Varieties of Responsible Management Learning: A Review, Typology and Research Agenda

Over the past two decades an increasing number of research papers have signalled growing interest in more responsible, sustainable and ethical modes of management education. This systematic literature review of peer-reviewed publications on, and allied to, the concept of responsible management learning and education (RMLE) confirms that scholarly interest in the topic has accelerated over the last decade. Rather than assuming that RMLE is one thing, however, this review proposes that the literature on responsible management education and learning can be divided into four distinct categories: (1) Teaching Responsible Management; (2) Organizing for Responsible Education; (3) Responsible Individual Learning, and; (4) Responsible Organizational Learning. Although the literature on RMLE has grown, work on how managers learn responsible management in organizational or workplace settings, particularly without the intervention of external educational providers, is minimal. The Special Issue of the Journal of Business Ethics is the first to address this significant lacuna. The vast majority of published peer-reviewed research is related to organizational provider-centric organizing for responsible management education. Each category is explored and the implications of organizing the literature this way for the field of RMLE are discussed. Finally, an agenda for future research and theory development on RMLE is proposed.

A Humanistic Ontology for Responsible Management Learning

Why has responsible management been so difficult and why is the chorus of stakeholders demanding such responsibility getting louder? We argue that management learning has been framed within the structural confines of corporate governance. Corporate governance in turn has been developed within the frame of agency theory (Blair 1995; Eisenhardt 1989). Agency theory in turn is based on ontological assumptions that do not provide for responsible actions on behalf of management (Jensen 2001; Jensen and Meckling 1976; Jensen and Meckling 1994). As such, we argue that managers need to be aware of the paradigmatic frame of the dominant economistic ontology and learn to transcend it. We also argue that for true managerial responsibility, an alternative humanistic ontology is more fit for purpose. This humanistic ontology integrates the latest insights from evolutionists suggesting that humans only survived by being responsible. This understanding has consequences for leadership practices, business strategy, as well as corporate governance (Pirson 2017; Pirson and Lawrence 2010). We argue that managerial learning within a humanistic paradigm is more likely to lead to ethical and sustainable business conduct.