Neoliberalism and Management Scholarship: Educational Implications

Green, Miriam

doi:10.1007/s40926-016-0042-x

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This sampling strategy was also grounded in a key assumption: school boards with larger enrollment – and consequently larger budgets – will have greater capacity to use all forms of evidence when managing resources, as the majority of board revenue comes from grants that are mostly based on enrollment. All aspects of this methodology are consistent with research methods employed by management accounting researchers (Green, 2016).…”

Section: Framework and Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 62%

Transparent resource management

Faubert

2019

IJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Public education is an important institution in any democracy, and the significant resources invested form a critical pillar in its provision. The evidence used to manage said resources is, therefore, an important issue for education leaders and a matter public interest. The purpose of this paper is to consider the role education finance leaders in Ontario, Canada, and what types of evidence they are using, how they are being employed and how much priority is given to each. Design/methodology/approach The paper employs a review of Ontario’s K-12 education funding policies/reports, and interviews with five K-12 funding model experts/leaders – four business superintendents from school boards of varying sizes (based on enrollment) and one system leader (to introduce perspective from the two levels of governance in resource management) to understand how these experts use evidence to inform resource decision making. This sampling strategy was also grounded in a key assumption: School boards with larger enrollment – and consequently larger budgets – will have greater capacity to use all forms of evidence when managing resources, as the majority of board revenue comes from grants that are mostly based on enrollment. Findings The findings bring important definition and prioritization of evidence that inform leaders’ resource decision making in education. The results point to two tacit, normative, unacknowledged and, yet, competing evidence frameworks driving resource management. The government is the most influential, prioritizing strategic policy, performance data, fiscal context and professional judgment; values embedded in policy and research were mentioned only in passing, while local anecdotal types of evidence were given less priority. Compounding this challenge is that all sides in debates on school resource needs face issues of access to, transparency in the use of and the prioritization given to various evidence types. Research limitations/implications Governments, with the assistance of academics, should formally articulate and make public the evidence framework they use to drive resource decision making. All sides of the resource management debate need to value a wider range of evidence, notably evidence that speak to local concerns, to reduce information gaps and, potentially, improve on the effective delivery of local educational programming. Education finance researchers could help to address access gaps by distilling research on the effective use of resources in a manner that is timely, tailored to the fiscal climate and to system- or district-level readiness for the implementation of a particular initiative. Practical implications Resource management driven solely by “facts” can support student achievement outcomes and effective system operation, but alone will not satisfy local-level aspirations for education or inspire public confidence; a key ingredient for the sustainability of this public institution. The results could be used to improve the balance of “decent information” used to inform resource deliberations and establish a shared understanding across stakeholder groups to facilitate compromise. The current state of affairs has all sides in advancing claims for resource needs based on what they understand to be evidence all while portraying competing claims as uninformed, undermining public confidence in education. Originality/value The paper draws from interviews with business superintendents and a system-level funding model expert, both lesser studied leaders on this topic in the Canadian context; offers a clear articulation of the evidence frameworks at play and the priority given to each type and how they are being used; presents definition and prioritization of evidence from the perspective of leaders in the Canadian context (most of literature is from the USA) – experts acknowledge that resource knowledge is contextually contingent and insight generated from other contexts will help to advance the field.

show abstract

Section: Framework and Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 62%

Transparent resource management

Faubert

2019

IJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Obviously, the conceptual renewal (making places for OC and PR in the conceptualization of RME), we proposed and developed in the first section of this paper, and the change of practice (inclusion of employer responsibility into the RME agenda of business schools) we advocated for in the second section, cannot espouse the premises and promises of the entrepreneurial narrative. So cannot the claims and imaginations of those who ambition to advance RME by adhering to the critical turn in CSR and sustainability education, by decolonizing and indigenizing management knowledge (Turnbull, 2011;Keiha and Pio, 2015;Girei, 2017;Manning, 2018;Pio and Waddock, 2020), by suggesting that tabou objects and subjects be invited into the business classroom (Fotaki and Prasad, 2015;Green, 2016;Contu, 2020), by exposing the limitations of the dominant management education system (Antonacopoulou, 2010;Clegg et al, 2000;Clegg and Ross-Smith, 2003) and by deconstructing the taken-forgranted superiority of the market-driven (Zell, 2001;Hall, 2009;Ortiz and Muniesa, 2018) worldclass business school (Siltaoja et al, 2019).…”

Section: Being Responsible By Countering the Entrepreneurial Narrativementioning

confidence: 99%

Post-pandemic responsible management education: an invitation for a conceptual and practice renewal and for a narrative change

Ramboarisata

2021

JGR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This essay makes the point that the corona crisis should motivate business schools and scholars to reflect on their interpretation of responsible management education (RME). It suggests both a conceptual and a practice renewal of RME, by respectively highlighting the relevance of the constructs organizational climate (OC) and professorial roles (PR) and calling for an enactment of business schools’ employer responsibility. It also argues that beyond mere techno-pedagogical and strategic developments, business schools’ post-pandemic challenges should encompass a narrative change. Design/methodology/approach Review of recent studies on the neo-liberalization of business schools and the implications of the latter on management educators and management education. Findings The corona crisis carries the risk of putting center stage and amplifying the entrepreneurial narrative in business schools. Such a narrative is deeply rooted in neoliberal assumptions. However, the corona crisis is also an opportunity to renew RME and to favour critical studies, encourage moral imagination and embark collectively on systemic activism. Originality/value Like other recent work, this paper reflects on what RME should mean and how business schools should set and fulfill their RME agenda in the aftermath of the corona crisis. To complement those former work, this paper proposes that the constructs of OC and PR be invited into the conceptualization of RME and insists that business schools acknowledge their employer responsibility.

show abstract

“…Deliberative democracy requires the state to oversee and regulate CSR and other political powers of corporations, making them accountable by democratic means (Frynas and Stephens 2014). This is a dialectic that has been in play over recent decades, particularly after the advent of neoliberal practices and the privatizations encouraged by governments in the UK and in other countries since the 1980s, reducing the role of the state in areas previously regarded as being the state's responsibility rather than being allowed to be opened up to market forces (Green 2016).…”

Section: Philosophical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neoliberalism, in a nutshell, has promoted values of economic efficiency and the "financialization" of many aspects of society hitherto governed largely by different values (Green 2016). With neoliberalism, values such as care and support for the vulnerable, kindness, the value of all things other than those financially calculable have been superseded by market values.…”

Section: Neoliberal Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Citizens would now have to take responsibility for themselves without being able to rely on the state for services and for financial and other help in times of need. As predicted as early as the beginning of the twentieth century by Max Weber (1978, cited in Brown 2005, this has led to a redistribution of wealth and power and to a substantial increase in economic inequality and in poverty and insecurity for many (Green 2016). As Brown (2005: 46) has explicitly put it, what is the case in the USA (applicable also to the UK and other countries) is "the ghastliness of life explicitly ordered by the market and measured by market values," without the underpinning of moral or political principles (Green 2016).…”

Section: Neoliberal Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Theoretical Developments in Corporate Social Responsibility

Green¹

2020

The Palgrave Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a complex subject, as are theoretical developments within it. It is multidisciplinary, as are many disciplines in the social sciences. Perhaps because CSR is a relatively new area within the field of business and management (Crowther and Lauesen 2017), dealing, as will be seen, with a variety of issues and approaches, it spans many fields, theoretical perspectives, and research methodologies. One of the dialectics in writings on CSR has been between a "functionalist" approach, often seeing CSR policies as one among other corporation policies, and effective to a greater or lesser extent. A radical approach on the other hand regards corporations as being always mindful of the bottom line. CSR policies would then be tools to achieve that goal, be it with effective socially responsible outcomes or possibly as simply branding exercises to gain legitimacy and consumer support. With recent global developments, there are again different views as to the directions CSR will take. With the corona virus pandemic and the climate change crisis, broader questions have been brought into focus regarding the roles of the state and of international institutions, and their future relationships with corporations. The hitherto neoliberal ideology and practices which had weakened many governments in favor of private companies, including their taking over public services, is now under challenge. Environmental disasters and Covid-19 have exposed the need for strong governmental action both nationally and also through global cooperation. This raises questions about the future roles of corporations and other private organizations, and therefore of CSR, the ways in which it will develop, and the possible effects on societies world over.

show abstract

Neoliberalism and Management Scholarship: Educational Implications

Cited by 7 publications

References 41 publications

Transparent resource management

Transparent resource management

Post-pandemic responsible management education: an invitation for a conceptual and practice renewal and for a narrative change

Theoretical Developments in Corporate Social Responsibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About