Since its foundation in 1971, EFMD has maintained a resolute and firm belief in socially responsible management education. Over that period, European management educators have formed sound, balanced, and generally collaborative relationships with business, government, and civil society stakeholders who are often the providers of core funding for their universities and business schools. This worthwhile cooperation promotes greater social understanding, cultural progress, and improved levels of social and economic inclusion in society. This article sets the scene for EFMD’s view and principles for change in business schools aimed at improving quality and effectiveness.
Introduction
Since its foundation in 1971, EFMD has maintained a resolute and firm belief in socially responsible management education. Over that period, European management educators have formed sound, balanced, and generally collaborative relationships with business, government, and civil society stakeholders who are often the providers of core funding for their universities and business schools. This worthwhile cooperation promotes greater social understanding, cultural progress, and improved levels of social and economic inclusion in society.
Following the global financial crisis, EFMD has not only endorsed the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) but mandated goals of meaningful social and economic impact for business school research as evaluated by its EQUIS accreditation standards. It has also launched its own annual business school awards for excellence in practice. And, it has generated a very significant number of impact case studies aimed at improving the quality and effectiveness of business schools.
EFMD has always addressed its own governance and leadership effectiveness in terms of its social responsibility vision. A series of studies on the future of management education sponsored by EFMD led to the publication of an EFMD board manifesto, which advocated a more European, reflective style of business school. This included five clear principles for the future of business school education. In particular, it argued for a purposeful shift to a more balanced form of capitalism as a guiding principle for business schools. It proposed the adoption of stakeholder maximisation objectives for business school design rather than simply wealth maximisation for shareholders. This proposal had implications for programme design and research in business schools. It would require the formulation of sound principles for responsible management education involving cross-disciplinary thinking and approaches for handling ethics, moral responsibilities and sustainability issues in a much more comprehensive fashion.
It was also stressed that this critical set of principles for transformational change in business schools should be anchored on one of EFMD’s enduring core values. Namely, that business schools are humanistic organisations that embrace a wide range of societal values and different stakeholder interests in fulfilling the mission of training strong professional, societally-oriented citizens and leaders.
EFMD’s transformational manifesto strategy also resonated with growing evidence from business school students, faculty and commentators that they wanted business schools to place even more emphasis and concern on ‘people and the planet’ issues. These would include CSR, inequality and inclusive growth in topics covered in business school curricula. In turn, this allowed new business school models to be created which addressed partnerships with a broad set of stakeholders consistent with EFMD’s strong belief in socially responsible management education. This firmly embedded belief is also reflected in EFMD’s careful nurturing and support for the parallel development of smaller agencies such as GRLI (the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative), ABIS (the Academy of Business in Society), PRME (Principles for Responsible Management Education) and RRBM (the Responsible Research in Business and Management community). Note that EFMD and all of these agencies fully endorse the 17 SDGs of the UN Global Compact.
These were not the only lessons learned or initiatives addressed by EFMD. There was a real willingness and resolve among many stakeholders and deans to examine business school initiatives to tackle so-called EDIR issues (Equality, Diversity, Inclusion, Respect) particularly gender gaps and inequality in business school operations.
As a consequence, EFMD launched a series of initiatives focused on leadership effectiveness in achieving gender equality and diversity in business schools.
EFMD Initiatives on Gender Equality in Business Schools
First, EFMD has promoted dialogue and debate about gender equality in business schools through three key Global Focus papers written in the area of gender equality. These papers reflected the pioneering work of the late Professor Dianne Bevelander of Erasmus University in Rotterdam.
These three papers were:
- Gender: Ms-ed opportunities for business schools?
- Women Courageous
- Winter is … going? A gradual thaw in gender equality
Second, EFMD sponsored two important research reports. In 2016 it published an EFMD-funded report entitled, ‘The Gender Gap in European Business Schools: A Leadership Perspective’. And in 2024, it published the findings of the project EQUAL4EUROPE jointly sponsored by EFMD and the EU, which specifically addressed the urgent need for the formulation of leadership plans for gender equality in business schools.
We first present here our analysis of the important themes carefully identified in the three Global Focus articles mentioned above. Secondly, we summarise briefly the findings of both EFMD reports. These projects were based in part on case studies involving a number of European business schools as well as other supporting data sources.
What Were the Patterns and Themes Identified in the Three Global Focus Articles?
Slow Progress in Gender Equality:
- It is repeatedly highlighted that the progress towards gender equality in academic and business institutions has been slow. This includes the underrepresentation of women in leadership roles, the gender gap in faculty positions, and the persistence of male-dominated decision-making bodies.
Leaky Pipeline:
- A recurring issue is the ‘leaky pipeline’, where the number of women decreases at higher levels of academia. While women make up a significant proportion of PhD students (around 47%), their representation drops significantly as they move up the academic ladder, with only around 20% reaching full professorship.
Vertical and Horizontal Segregation:
- Patterns of segregation were noted in both vertical (different levels of academic hierarchy) and horizontal (distribution across disciplines and administrative roles). More women were in administrative roles, while men dominated faculty and high management positions.
Barriers to Recruitment, Retention, and Career Progression:
- Women face significant recruitment, retention, and career advancement barriers, especially in competitive academic environments. Gender bias, the lack of visible female role models, and the perception of academia being incompatible with motherhood are cited as some of the challenges.
Cultural and Structural Barriers:
- Cultural barriers, including entrenched masculine paradigms in business schools, and structural barriers, such as a lack of policies addressing gender issues in research, were identified as ongoing problems. The gender dimension was also limitedly integrated into research content and curricula.
Unconscious Gender Bias:
- Unconscious gender bias was highlighted as a pervasive issue affecting recruitment, promotions, and leadership opportunities. Both men and women are found to exhibit unconscious bias, leading to systematic disadvantages for women in terms of hiring and career progression.
Lack of Female Role Models and Leadership Representation:
- A consistent theme across the papers is insufficient female role models in leadership and within teaching materials. Business schools were found to have few women in prominent leadership roles or represented as protagonists in case studies.
Importance of Structural and Individual Change:
- The papers stress the need for both structural (institutional policies, gender parity in leadership) and individual (personal empowerment, addressing unconscious biases) changes to create long-lasting gender equality.
Gender Equality Plans (GEPs) and Institutional Response:
- Efforts like the EQUAL4EUROPE project aim to address these imbalances by implementing Gender Equality Plans (GEPs) within academic institutions. These GEPs focus on recruitment policies, decision-making processes, and integrating gender perspectives in research and teaching.
What were the findings and emphases from the two EFMD reports on gender equality and the construction of gender equality plans in business schools?
Highlighting Gender Imbalances in Leadership:
- EFMD has consistently highlighted the significant underrepresentation of women in leadership positions in business schools. For instance, the 2016 Financial Times ranking showed that only 12/100 business school deans were women.
Emphasising the Impact of Unconscious Bias:
- EFMD recognises that unconscious gender bias plays a significant role in governance and leadership, affecting recruitment and decision-making. It emphasises the need for business schools to address these biases to foster gender equality actively.
Advocating for Structural Changes in Leadership:
- EFMD stresses the need for business schools to implement structural reforms, including gender targets in governance, leadership, and decision-making bodies. The absence of such reforms perpetuates the male-dominated paradigm in business school governance.
Promoting Gender Equality Plans (GEPs):
- Through initiatives like the EQUAL4EUROPE project, EFMD has promoted developing and implementing Gender Equality Plans (GEPs). These plans aim to address the gender gap in leadership and decision-making by setting gender targets and improving female representation.
Addressing Vertical Segregation in Leadership:
- EFMD highlights the pattern of vertical segregation in academic institutions, where women’s representation diminishes as they move up the career ladder. This issue is particularly pronounced in decision-making bodies, where men dominate leadership positions.
Pushing for Role Models and Female Leadership Visibility:
- EFMD advocates for more female role models in leadership positions to challenge the male-dominated governance structure in business schools. They argue that increasing the visibility of women in leadership can inspire future leaders and shift institutional biases.
Calls for Gender-Parity Leadership:
- EFMD and its partners in EQUAL4EUROPE argue for a conscious effort to achieve gender parity in leadership roles. Gender equality is seen not only as a justice issue but also as a means of improving decision-making and diversity of thought in governance.
Reflections
It is important to note that recent reports from GMAC, AACSB, as well as the British Academy of Management (2022), among others, have made similar observations about the relatively slow progress of change in gender equality and diversity in business schools. There is an overarching sense that structural changes and formal gender diversity audits and plans should now be much more urgently implemented. It is now time to ‘walk the talk’ to achieve socially just levels of equality and diversity in business schools.
References
Bevelander D. and M. Page (2016) Gender: Ms-ed opportunities for business schools? EFMD Global Focus 10(3) pp.18-21
British Academy of Management (2022) Equality, Diversity, Inclusion, and Respect in Business and Management Higher Education Institutions
EFMD (2016) The Gender Gap in European Business Schools: A Leadership Perspective
EQUAL4EUROPE (2024) interim report
Ginès, A. and Cochrane, V. (2022) Winter is … going? A gradual thaw in gender equality. EFMD Global Focus 16(1) pp.66-71
Page M, van der Steege, M. and Coetzer, D. (2022) Women courageous. EFMD Global Focus 16(2) pp.56-61
Eric Cornuel has been President of EFMD Global since 2000. An alumnus of Sciences Po Paris and HEC Paris, he earned his PhD from Paris Dauphine University. His influence extends to co-founding and governing various international organisations, such as PRME, CEIBS, GRLI, HigherEd, and ITP. Celebrated with awards like the Magnolia Award and the Légion d’honneur, his publications include ‘Business School Leadership and Crisis Exit Planning’, released by Cambridge University Press. Eric holds fellowships at esteemed institutes and has been honoured with Doctorate Honoris Causas from Koźmiński University and ESCP Business School.
Matthew Wood is the editor of Global Focus, an international business magazine and the flagship publication of EFMD. Prior to his various roles at EFMD, he was a project manager with the UK-based charity Operation Raleigh (in Namibia) and he has also held management positions in advertising (with the Omnicom Group) and in the service industry.
Howard Thomas is an Emeritus Professor of Strategic Management and Management Education at Singapore Management University (SMU) and former dean at leading business schools, including SMU, Warwick Business School (UK) and the College of Business at UIUC (Illinois, USA). As a highly respected consultant, author and scholar he has been awarded fellowships by the Academy of Management (AOM, USA), the Strategic Management Society (SMS, USA), the British Academy of Management (BAM), the European Academy of Management (EURAM), the Academy of Social Sciences (AcSS, UK), the Institute of Directors, (UK) and, most importantly, the Learned Society of Wales (LSW). He was also President of SMS while dean at Illinois. He has chaired leading professional educational organisations such as AACSB (USA), GMAC (USA), and CABS (UK). He has also received Lifetime Achievement Awards from BAM (UK) and the European Foundation of Management Education (EFMD), and a number of honorary doctoral degrees during his distinguished academic career. He is currently a senior advisor to the President and managing director of EFMD.
