Search results

While institutional efforts have shown modest results, AACSB statistics suggest that current practices are insufficient to increase more substantively the representation of minorities among doctorally qualified business school faculty. The purpose of this paper is to explore antecedents to the faculty representation issue – that is, the motives, concerns, and resources of US minority individuals with respect to business doctoral program entry – as a basis for improving minority faculty representation outcomes.

A small sample of doctoral program directors were interviewed to ascertain their perspective on recruitment, design and delivery of PhD programs in business and from which a survey instrument was developed. A sample of 292 US minority respondents surveyed indicated their top reasons for and concerns about pursuing a doctorate, program selection and rejection criteria, sources of information and financing, and, for those in the decision-making stage, reasons for waiting to apply to a program. The paper compares responses of those who graduated from or are currently enrolled in a doctoral program in business with those who decided not to enroll. The paper also explores factors most salient to individuals currently contemplating enrolling but who have not yet decided to do so.

Results suggest that mentorship of promising undergraduate and master's students by business faculty and current doctoral students is critical to US minority enrollments in doctoral programs; however, a school's physical location, required time and energy, and financial considerations also play a role in the decision-making process. The role of international students in diversity efforts by doctoral programs is also salient.

Previous studies in multiple disciplines note the under-representation of US minority faculty in academe. In business education, suggestions for overcoming this gap have focussed on recruitment, mentoring, and/or networks and support groups but little is known about antecedents to entry (motives, concerns, and resources of US minority individuals) with respect to business doctoral programs.

This study carries out a systematic literature review (SLR) on responsible management education (RME). A total of 174 publications listed on the Scopus database addressing RME, published between 2007 and 2022 (inclusive), have been analyzed.

The articles included in the study were searched based on relevant key terms in the title, abstract and author keywords associated with each publication. The analysis led to the identification of the most relevant sources, authors and publications that can be used to circumscribe RME. Selected studies were analyzed using the Bibliometrix R-tool.

This study shows how three interrelated levels of analysis—namely, conceptual, intellectual and social—allow researchers to further organize the data to produce rich content for the RME. The contribution of this study is twofold: first, our values-based approach helps overcome the axiological ambiguity of the principles for RME (PRME), which invoke the importance of incorporating “the values of global social responsibility” (Principle 2) but fail to define and operationalize these values. Second, the authors provide a rationale and guidance for implementing values-based RME in business schools.

This study offers a unique SLR on RME. It gives a clear picture of this field by talking about what has been done and what the future might hold for RME.

To highlight the gender and diversity in organizations (GDO) division's conference program at the 66th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (AoM).

A select group of presentations are summarized based on observation, notes, discussions, and reading of material.

Attempts to advance diversity are being made via a variety of avenues to include research, teaching, and service efforts. Presentations illustrated how important diversity is at the individual, organizational, and societal levels of analysis.

The GDO division of the AoM is making positive strides as it relates to advancing diversity. This report summarizes some of the key contributions made during this conference.

This case study examines how incentive pay programs are designed and changed over time in a financial organization that has typically relied on fixed salary compensation. Once incentive programs are introduced, pay plans change frequently, and this process allows the study of assumptions embedded in various incentive theories. Economic theories tend to explain incentives from an agency perspective, which suggests that incentives satisfy elaborate contractual requirements and vary with the risk preferences and costs of managers versus employees. Power theories, by contrast, argue that the interests and resources of various firm groups determine incentive structures. For this case study, qualitative data describing a firm’s process of changing compensation were gathered from documents, personnel manuals, and interviews with company managers. The findings suggest that instead of following from complicated cost‐benefit analyses, pay plans are often implemented within short time frames and with scant performance/effectiveness information. This evidence highlights the influence of power in efforts to change compensation structures and the importance of a multidisciplinary understanding of rewards.