Post-pandemic responsible management education: an invitation for a conceptual and practice renewal and for a narrative change
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it