Sustainability Management Teaching Resources and the Challenge of Balancing Planet, People, and Profits
Abstract
Over the past decade, there has been a notable increase in discussions surrounding the integration of global sustainability issues and responsible management practices into the business school curriculum. What we have yet to see, however, and what we would like to begin with this essay, is a meaningful discussion regarding the overarching goals of sustainable and responsible management education as they relate to the available teaching and learning resources in this domain. To achieve this, we first identify the tensions between teaching sustainability to change the world for the better and those aimed at making companies better off. We propose a balance between these two aspirations. We then turn to the thoughts of academic practitioners in the field with a survey of 169 management and sustainability instructors. Results indicate that respondents use papers, cases, and videos to teach courses in this field, while textbooks and electronic resources (i.e., databases, simulations, and apps) are only marginally utilized. The respondents are only moderately satisfied with most of the available teaching resources and the integration of existing resources within general curricula. The results show some interesting differences between postgraduate and undergraduate courses, and also between junior and senior instructors. In this essay, we argue that the moral enthusiasm for teaching in the sustainability domain must not take away from precise analysis of problems, solutions, their implementability, and their interconnected complexity. As such, we propose a set of five recommendations for the design and selection of sustainability management teaching resources that will effectively address issues related to planet, people, and profits.
REFERENCES
- 2014. Profits with purpose: How organizing for sustainability can benefit the bottom line. McKinsey on Sustainability and Resource Productivity, Vol. 2: 5-15. Retrieved from: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/profits-with-purpose-how-organizing-for-sustainability-can-benefit-the-bottom-line. Accessed on July 21, 2017. Google Scholar
- 2016. Starting at the source: Sustainability in supply chains. McKinsey on Sustainability and Resource Productivity, Vol. 4: 36-43. Retrieved from: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/starting-at-the-source-sustainability-in-supply-chains. Google Scholar
- 2012. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States. Food Policy, 37(5): 561–570. Google Scholar
- 2012. The effect of internal barriers on the connection between stakeholder integration and proactive environmental strategies. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3): 281–293. Google Scholar
- 2013. Putting a dollar value on food waste estimates. Posted on December 20, 2013 at 2:20pm. Retrieved from: http://blogs.worldwatch.org/nourishingtheplanet/putting-a-dollar-value-on-food-waste-estimates/ Accessed on November 26, 2016. Google Scholar
- 2015. Responsible management education for a sustainable world. Journal of Management Development, 34(1): 16–33. Google Scholar
- 2014. The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11): 2835–2857. Google Scholar
- 2016. Big Data, management, and sustainability strategic opportunities ahead. Organization & Environment, 29(2): 147–155. Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2016. Presentation titled, “The State of Food and Agriculture: Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security.” Published online on October 17, 2016. Retrieved from: http://www.slideshare.net/FAOoftheUN/the-state-of-food-and-agriculture-2016-67283022. Accessed on November 4, 2016. Google Scholar- 2000. Underfed and overfed: The global epidemic of malnutrition. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute. Google Scholar
- (In press). Economic development matters: A meta-regression analysis on the relation between environmental management and financial performance. Journal of Industrial Ecology. Available ahead of print online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.12573/full. Google Scholar
- 1997. Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, 75(1): 66. Google Scholar
- 2016. Poverty, business strategy, and sustainable development. Organization & Environment, 29(4): 401–415. Google Scholar
- 2011. The top ten reasons why businesses aren’t more sustainable. Ivey Business Journal, January-February. Retrieved from: http://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/the-top-ten-reasons-why-businesses-arent-more-sustainable/. Google Scholar
- 2016. The base of the pyramid promise: Building businesses with impact and scale. Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
- 1995. Business and society: Strategy ethics and a global economy. Richard Irwin. Google Scholar
- 2011. Does it pay to be good ... and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. SSRN Working Paper Series. Google Scholar
- 1995. Green and competitive—Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 73(5): 120–134. Google Scholar
- 2002. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy+Business, 26: 54–67.2. Google Scholar
- 2010. Business and public policy: Responses to environmental & social protection processes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
- 2016. Investing for a sustainable future. MIT Sloan Management Review, May 11st. Google Scholar
- 2015. Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability. A review of research from win-wins and trade-offs to paradoxes and beyond. Organization & Environment, 28(1): 54–79. Google Scholar
