Institutional pressures and the adoption of responsible management education at universities and business schools in Central and Eastern Europe
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Authors
Preuss, LutzElms, Heather
Kurdyukov, Roman
Golob, Urša
Zaharia, Rodica Milena
Jalsenjak, Borna
Burg, Ryan
Hardi, Péter
Jacquemod, Julija
Kooskora, Mari
Manzhynski, Siarhei
Mostenska, Tetiana
Novelskaite, Aurelija
Pučėtaitė, Raminta
Pušinaitė‐Gelgotė, Rasa
Ralko, Oleksandra
Rok, Boleslaw
Stanny, Dominik
Stefanova, Marina
Tomancová, Lucie
Publisher
WileyType
Journal articleTitle / Series / Name
Business Ethics, the Environment & ResponsibilityPublication Volume
32Publication Issue
4Date
2023-07-05
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Business schools, and universities providing business education, from across the globe have increasingly engaged in responsible management education (RME), that is in embedding social, environmental and ethical topics in their teaching and research. However, we still do not fully understand the institutional pressures that have led to the adoption of RME, in particular concerning under-researched regions like Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Hence, we undertook what is to our knowledge the most comprehensive study into the adoption of RME in CEE to date (including 13 countries: Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia and Ukraine). We find that, with regard to RME, isomorphic pressures seem to shape teaching and research in different ways, which suggests that the idea of a holistic approach to RME, promoted by, for example, the Principles of Responsible Management Education (PRME), needs to be revisited; rather, different trajectories of organizational engagement may emerge for each principle. As a contribution to institutional theory, we discuss how a highly fragmented organizational field—like RME with its multiple dimensions—impacts on notions of actor centrality, where actors achieve centrality with regard to some dimensions of the field but fail to do so for others. In particular, we found that the European Union holds centrality in the area of RME teaching, but not in RME research. Our findings thus suggest that the concept of field centrality needs further clarification.identifiers
10.1111/beer.12566ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1111/beer.12566
Scopus Count
Collections