Institutionalising intra-organisational change for responsible management education

Abstract

Higher education institutions are attempting to incorporate responsible management education (RME) into both their philosophies and their curricula. This phenomenon is most pertinent to and most prevalent in business schools. This paper proposes a six-stage model, derived from relevant change management and institutionalisation models and literature, which business schools could adopt to institutionalise RME as an intra-organisational practice. It identifies various endogenous and exogenous factors which influence RME institutionalisation and proposes specific change management practices which could be adopted by business schools to overcome challenges, including resistance, to such change efforts. The model acknowledges the complex and diverse nature of RME itself, which has made it difficult for business schools to adopt a unified approach to its institutionalisation. The need for such a model stems from the ever-increasing salience of RME, resulting from a number of drivers, including the pervasiveness of corporate scandals over time, which has led to growing calls to develop 'ethical' business managers. Our proposed model extends our understanding of RME institutionalisation within business schools by adopting a change management approach. It also provides a practical way forward for business schools to change their institutional DNA, through the adoption of a six-stage systematic solution for RME institutionalisation.

The Principles for (Ir)Responsible Management Education: An exploration of the dynamics of paradox, the hidden curriculum, competencies and symbolization

“…In summary, the ‘institutionalisation’ of RME (Beddewela et al, 2020) requires a fundamental change to both curricula (formal) and philosophy (informal curriculum). Competency frameworks offer a pragmatic tool by which ‘institutional entrepreneurs’ (Beddewela et al, 2020) can drive forward discussion and practice, which will be strengthened if informed by a paradoxical lens. For example, it would bring insight into differing worldviews of the role of BSs in society.…”

Institutional pressures and the adoption of responsible management education at universities and business schools in Central and Eastern Europe

“…Various interpretations of RME have led to different, not always consistent ways in which RME is being understood and adopted in business schools and universities (Beddewela et al, 2021; Doherty et al, 2015). In a recent review of the RME literature, Abdelgaffar (2021b) classifies prior work into (1) RME purpose, (2) intended outcomes, (3) strategies and (4) challenges (similarly, Dyllick, 2015).…”

Institutionalization of Organizational Change Outcomes in Development Cooperation Projects: The Mediating Role of Internal Stakeholder Change-Related Beliefs

“…According to these studies, before a change is institutionalized, it is associated with predictable elements grouped into three phases: mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization (Curry 1992;Kezar 2007). Beddewela et al (2020) also proposed a six-stage model for change institutionalization that comprises the jolt, theorization, mobilization, sense-making, diffusion, and institutional establishment. According to these authors, the sixth stage, institutional establishment, entails complete diffusion of changes across the organization and is concerned with formalizing and integrating the changes into the organization's formal policies.…”

“…To date, a number of studies have used current change institutionalization frameworks to investigate various change scenarios in diverse organizational contexts, with varying results and recommendations: for example, the institutionalization of project interventions in local governments (Waiswa 2020), responsible management education (Beddewela et al 2020), natural resource-based innovations in universities (Cinar 2020), transdisciplinarity in university policy (Baptista et al 2019;Riveros et al 2022), responsible innovation (Owen et al 2021), community engagement in higher education institutions (Murrah-Hanson and Sandmann 2021), and enterprise resource planning (ERP) (Pishdad and Haider 2013), to mention but a few. Our synthesis of these studies identifies a number of important elements and actions for change institutionalization in different contexts: (i) changes in organizational structure, reward or incentive systems, and behavioral norms; (ii) mandatory top leadership support and championship; (iii) alignment of the change intervention with the existing organizational structure; (iv) participation of internal and external stakeholders; (v) integration into organizational values; (vi) strategic and operational planning.…”

“…Our synthesis of these studies identifies a number of important elements and actions for change institutionalization in different contexts: (i) changes in organizational structure, reward or incentive systems, and behavioral norms; (ii) mandatory top leadership support and championship; (iii) alignment of the change intervention with the existing organizational structure; (iv) participation of internal and external stakeholders; (v) integration into organizational values; (vi) strategic and operational planning. In this study, we drew from the processual approach to change institutionalization based on the models by Armenakis et al (1999), Beddewela et al (2020); Buchanan et al (2005), and Cummings and Worley (2009) to develop the study's conceptual framework. The processual approach is a useful lens for the examination of change institutionalization because it emphasizes the "flow of events in a wider spatial, temporal, and political context" (Buchanan et al 2005).…”