The Menace of Misinformation: Faculty Misstatements in Management Education and Their Consequences

Abstract

In this essay, we explore the misinformation that management professors give to students in the classroom. Although faculty do not intend to deceive students with this misinformation, nevertheless, it can have damaging consequences, including undermining students’ well-being and limiting their aspirations. We discuss two general types of misleading statements: misinformation about the economic model (e.g., that money and material possessions lead to happiness) and misinformation about what matters in life (e.g., that career success is the most important component in the fabric of life). Most of this misinformation is deeply rooted in our materialistic culture and economic system, and a belief in profit maximization as a predominant goal. Last, we discuss ways in which faculty can escape from providing this misinformation and help students find fulfilling paths in life.

Reframing the Purpose of Business Education: Crowding-in a Culture of Moral Self-Awareness

“…Some have linked such behavior to a self-serving moral relativism propagated in elite MBA programs (McDonald, 2018;. Unfortunately, the business culture of brutal and brazen self-interest that continues to fuel such high-profile scandals as these will persist until leading business schools decide to make a clear break from promulgating the standard misconception of professional success as profit, power, and celebrity (Giacalone & Promislo, 2019). Instead, business schools should explore re-defining success in terms of the degree of What is most striking about these elements of what might well be called a good life, in the Aristotelian sense of self-actualization, is that they do not refer to happiness in the usual hedonistic and quantifiable utilitarian sense.…”

Making Management (More) Relevant: Breaking Down Disciplinary Walls and Pursuing Neglected Independent Variables

“…To ground such projects, we suggest drawing on existing research that identifies the organizational importance of such systemic variables. Management education scholars may draw inspiration from feminist pedagogy (e.g., Luke & Gore, 1992;Marshall, 1999;Shrewsbury, 1997) and the pedagogy of the oppressed (Friere, 1970;Wieler, 1991) (Giacalone & Promislo, 2019;Rhodes, Wright, & Pullen, 2018). Building on literature reviews, scholars of pedagogy could fashion significant learning experiences (Fink, 2013) for the business classroom.…”

“…Similarly, such reviews could draw on the economics literature, inspired by research such as Restakis (2010) on the healing role of economic cooperatives; Roulet and Bothello (2020) on the degrowth movement at the grassroots level and beyond; Sassen (2014), on how the primitive accumulation of late capitalism has led to brutal expulsions in all corners of the globe; and even Gluckman and Hanson (2019), on the unintended consequences of human innovation and technology. Classroom consideration of current economic models with regard to enhancing life and career satisfaction may follow (Giacalone & Promislo, 2019;Rhodes et al, 2018). Building on literature reviews, scholars of pedagogy could fashion significant learning experiences (Fink, 2013) for the business classroom.…”

Untangling Faculty Misinformation From an Educational Perspective: Rejoinder to “The Menace of Misinformation: Faculty Misstatements in Management Education and Their Consequences”

“…As Ghoshal (2005) points out, " [O]ur theories and ideas have done much to strengthen the management practices that we are all now so loudly condemning" (p. 75). We commend Giacalone and Promislo (2019) for their thought-provoking article in which they point to some of those problematic ideas in management education such as the adoration of materialism and competition or the notion of the economic model as a natural law.…”

“…With such an approach, students are challenged to deeply question their own values and also to deconstruct underlying assumptions of management, for example, the notion to see people as a company's asset (e.g., Lawler, 2005). Thus, the reflective level goes beyond Giacalone and Promislo's (2019) approach to deal with misinformation as students are themselves responsible for questioning faculty's statements as well as their (mis-)conceptions.…”