-
T
OWARD A
B
ETTER
W
ORLD
T
HROUGH
CSR
E
DUCATION
?
-
ASTUDY INTO THE EXTENT OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY &SUSTAINABILITY
INTEGRATION IN DUTCH MBA-PROGRAMS THROUGH A QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH APPROACH
STUDENT NAME UNIVERSITY
Marwan Khalid Ogastien Jezrawi University of Amsterdam
STUDENT NUMBER SUPERVISOR
1067761 Mr. Lars Moratis
QUALIFICATION SECOND REVIEWER
MSc. in Business Administration – Strategy Mr. Mark van der Veen
SPECIALIZATION DATE OF SUBMISSION
Strategy 15 Augustus 2014
INSTITUTION VERSION
Amsterdam Business School, UvA Final version
Res
p
o
n
si
b
le Ma
n
ag
emen
t E
d
u
ca
ti
o
n
i
n
D
u
tc
h
MB
A
-p
ro
g
ram
s
2014
Univ
ers
ity
o
f Amst
erda
m
A
CKNOWLEDGEMENT
After finishing the secondary school, my plan and aim were studying Business Administration and obtaining the Master degree in Business Administration, with a specialization in Strategic Management. This present study, presents the final part of my Master study at the University of Amsterdam, therefore I would like to express my special appreciation and gratitude to all those who provided me the possibility to complete this thesis and accomplish my aim. First of all, I am deeply grateful to my supervisor Mr. Lars Moratis for his inspiring talks, meaningful advices, prompt feedback and guidance during the whole research process. His encouragement was invaluable. He has been an amazing mentor for me. Secondly, I would like to thank my second reviewer Mr. Mark van der Veen for his enthusiasm for the topic corporate social responsibility that inspired me during his classes to choose and write my thesis about it. Third, I would like to express my gratitude to all the institutions (business schools), more specific the program managers of the general MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools, that participated in the survey and made it possible to accomplish this research, since their participation was indispensable because of the small number of general MBA programs in the Netherlands. I would also like to express a special thanks to my family. Words cannot express how grateful I am to my parents, for all the sacrifices that they have made on my behalf. Their prayer for me was what sustained me thus far. My brothers, for their understanding, patience and confidence. They have always been there to energize me when needed. Finally, I would like to thank my friends who supported me during my study and research time and encouraged me to strive toward my goal. Without all those people, it would have been impossible for me to achieve my aim.
A
BSTRACT
Recent scandals in the corporate world changed a lot in the way we think about doing business nowadays. Therefore the notion corporate social responsibility (CSR) is receiving more attention than ever before, both within businesses and business schools. This study investigates an area that had previously been overlooked, namely: the extent and development of CSR integration in general MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools. A Quantitative research method (questionnaire) was used to investigate this topic within almost the entire population of general MBA programs in the Netherlands, including both public and private business schools, and research universities and universities of applied science.
Our in depth investigation explores (a) the education of CSR, based on the available courses, additional teaching methods concerning CSR, and whether the business schools are signatory for the PRME, (b) the development of CSR integration and students’ interest in CSR over the past years and the expectation for this development in the future, (c) the main drivers and obstacles for CSR integration, and (d) the main motives of business schools’ CSR initiatives and education. We find that Dutch business schools in general are educating their students in the general MBA programs toward CSR, and are generally concerned with responsible management education. When looking at the different types of business schools, we do not find large or remarkable differences concerning CSR education. Furthermore, we observe that the integration of CSR education has developed and that this development will continue in the future, at the level of Dutch business education.
This study contributes towards the academic and managerial knowledge in this field, by expanding the current knowledge base for the former with findings on corporate social responsibility education in general MBA programs at the level of Dutch business schools, and by proving comprehensive insights for the latter that might be useful in the practice to achieve further improvements.
Keywords: corporate social responsibility, business ethics, sustainability, (general) MBA programs, (Dutch) business schools, management education, business education.
T
ABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... II ABSTRACT ... III
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... V
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ... VII LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS... VIII
1.INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.2RESEARCH GAP “CSR AND THE DUTCH MBA’S” ... 2
1.3RESEARCH MOTIVATION AND OBJECTIVE ... 4
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION... 5
1.5ACADEMIC AND MANAGERIAL RELEVANCE ... 5
1.6THESIS STRUCTURE ... 6
2.LITERATURE REVIEW ... 7
3.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 17
3.1CONCEPTUALIZATION ... 17
3.2POPULATION ... 19
3.3RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY AND RESEARCH APPROACH ... 21
3.4RESEARCH STRATEGY ... 23
3.5RESEARCH DESIGN ... 24
3.5.1RESEARCH METHOD ... 25
4.RESULTS ... 29
4.1DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ... 29
4.2CSR EDUCATION LEVEL AND METHODS ... 32
4.3PRINCIPLES FOR RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT EDUCATION ... 34
4.4CSR EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT ... 35
4.4.1CSR INTEGRATION IN THE PAST AND FUTURE ... 35
4.4.2STUDENTS’ INTEREST IN THE PAST AND FUTURE ... 38
4.4.3CURRENT STATE CONCERNING CSR ... 40
4.5DRIVERS AND OBSTACLES FOR CSR INTEGRATION ... 42
4.6MOTIVES FOR CSR INTEGRATION ... 44
DISCUSSION ... 47
5.1DISCUSSION OF THE EXTENT OF CSR IN MBA PROGRAMS ... 47
5.2MANAGERIAL AND ACADEMIC IMPLICATIONS ... 53
5.3LIMITATIONS... 55
5.4FUTURE RESEARCH ... 56
REFERENCES ... 58
APPENDIXES ... 66
APPENDIX A:CONCEPTUALIZATION ... 66
APPENDIX B:GENERAL MBA PROGRAMS IN THE NETHERLANDS (HBO/WO) ... 70
APPENDIX C:INVITATION LETTER AND QUESTIONNAIRE ... 72
L
IST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables
Table 4.1: Business schools and type of MBA ... 30
Table 4.2: Level of CSR integration and teaching ... 32
Table 4.3: Division of CSR education over the program ... 34
Table 4.4: Signatory for the PRME ... 35
Table 4.5: Mean development CSR integration & types of business schools ... 37
Table 4.6: Mean development students’ interest & types of business schools ... 39
Table 4.7: Student writing CSR thesis ... 41
Table 4.8: Drivers of CSR integration into the MBA program ... 43
Table 4.9: Motives for CSR activities ... 45
Table 4.10: Three most important motives for CSR activities and types of business schools . 45 Figure Figure 3.1: Business school and MBA programs ... 19
L
IST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
A
AACSB
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business ... 13
AMBA
Associations of MBAs ... 34
C
CSR
Corporate Social Responsibility ... I
D
DUO
Executive Organization of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science ... 23
E
EQUIS
European Quality Improvement System ... 34
M
MBA
Master of Business Administration ... I
N
NVAO
Accreditation Organization of the Netherlands and Flanders ... 23
P
PRME
Principles for Responsible Management Education ... 11
U
URL
1.
I
NTRODUCTION
This chapter starts in section 1.1 with an introduction to the topic corporate social responsibility by revealing its importance, the role of business schools education toward it, and the increasing interest in it from the practice. Section 1.2 provides the gap that the present study attempts to address. Section 1.3 explains the motivation beyond doing this research, and the objectives that this research aims to achieve. Than in section 1.4 the research question is given that directed this research during the research process. Section 1.5 provides the academic and managerial relevance of this study. The final section 1.6 describes the readers’ guide, by providing an overview of the thesis structure.
1.1INTRODUCTION
The notion corporate social responsibility and the related concepts business ethics, and sustainability are receiving more attention than ever before, both in businesses and in business schools (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009; Wright & Bennett, 2011; Erskine & Johnson, 2012). More corporations are becoming aware of the negative impact of their operations and decisions on their stakeholders and environment (Haski-Leventhal, 2012), and many are taking initiatives to deal with this issue (Lacy & Salazar, 2005). Also more business schools are beginning to consider their essential role in this phenomenon and are striving to positively contribute to it through responsible management education (Christensen et al., 2007; Rasche & Escudero, 2010). However, there are still a lot of doubts about whether “business school education in general and Master of Business Administration (MBA) programs in particular”, educate their students well enough to be prepared and able to know how to deal with corporate social responsibility, sustainability, and ethical issues in their careers (Rasche & Escudero, 2010, p. 245), and to avoid irresponsible behavior as future leaders. For this reason, many scholars have brought the role of business schools (MBA
programs) in question, concerning the extent to which they educate their students toward corporate social responsibility (Lacy & Salazar, 2005).
Business schools have a crucial role to educate their students toward ethical values and equip them with skills and knowledge about corporate social responsibility (Rasche & Escudero, 2010; Crane, 2004; Sigurjonsson et al., 2014), because they are the most influential institutions in contemporary society (Morsing & Rovira, 2011), that can shape the students’ attitudes and awareness about corporate responsibilities (Saloner, 2013; Louche & Hudlot, 2007). In addition to this important role, there is also an increasing demand for corporate social responsibility education from the practice as well as from business students. Business leaders agree upon that corporate social responsibility needs to be a part of management education and in particular in programs for top managers, i.e. MBA programs (Louche & Hudlot, 2007; Sigurjonsson et al., 2014), and business students in general desire to have more education about the topic corporate social responsibility (Lacy & Salazar, 2005; Crane, 2004; Gardiner & Lacy, 2005; Net Impact, 2013). However the MBA students “believe that there are ethical standards that should be followed in business, but that the current ethical standards do not meet society’s need adequately” (Crane, 2004, p. 149).
1.2RESEARCH GAP “CSR AND THE DUTCH MBA’S”
The topic of incorporating corporate social responsibility in business school curricula, and in particular in the MBA programs have been studied by different researchers and through different lenses. Wright & Bennett (2011) investigated the websites of the Financial Times Global MBA Rankings top 100 in 2010, together with the AFR BOSS top 17 ranked Australian MBA programs and the seven New Zealand MBA program providers, to indentify the extent of provision of ethics, corporate social responsibility, and sustainability courses. Christensen et al. (2007) surveyed the deans and directors of the top 50 global MBA programs
provided by the Financial Times in 2006, to determine the inclusion and coverage of the topics ethics, corporate social responsibility, and sustainability in their institutions. Segon & Booth (2009) examined MBA students to describe the trends with regard to ethics, corporate social responsibility, and sustainability in MBA programs. Many other researchers have also researched this specific topic from other perspectives (Louche & Hudlot, 2007), but yet not many had done this from the perspective of local context. While there was still much to explore and reveal by conducting such studies at nation level, researchers in this field that investigated corporate social responsibility integration in business school education and in MBA programs, had often focused on global level (Christensen et al., 2007), continent level (Matten & Moon, 2004), and just some on national level (Rasche A. , 2011; Fernández & Sanjuán, 2010). For instance, business schools in some European neighbor countries were investigated separately on this phenomenon by Rasche (2011) who did it for the business schools in Germany, and Fernández & Sanjuán (2010) who did it for the business schools in Spain. However such a study was not yet conducted in Dutch business schools. The Dutch business schools and MBA programs in particular, were often included in larger researches with other business schools of other countries (Orlitzky & Moon, 2008; Matten & Moon, 2004), but not investigated separately. There was no extensive information available concerning this specific subject, and the information available was often related to this topic rather than directly (specifically) connected to it. Like Kessels (2008) provides recommendations on how business schools could have a leading role by considering corporate social responsibility in their policy, and MVO Nederland (n.d.) emphasize on the role and importance of business schools. It is therefore the purpose of this study to address this gap, and attempt to explore and reveal more specific findings concerning the integration of corporate social responsibility among the entire population of general MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools.
1.3RESEARCH MOTIVATION AND OBJECTIVE
While the main motivation for this research is addressing an area that had previously been overlooked in the Netherlands (previous section, “research gap”), several aspect made this gap more important to address, namely (a) the limited number of Dutch business schools that are signatory for the Principles of Responsible Management Education – PRME – (PRME Committee, 2014), (b) all the growing pressure from businesses and students on business schools (Crane, 2004; Sigurjonsson et al., 2014), (c) the increasing interest in the topic corporate social responsibility (Gardiner & Lacy, 2005; Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009), and (d) the revelations of interesting research findings on this specific topic (Wright & Bennett, 2011; Christensen et al., 2007; Orlitzky & Moon, 2008). These aspects arouse our interests and challenged us to address the gap of corporate social responsibility integration in MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools and reveal some insights, by discovering its status and evolvements from different perspectives as how is it integrated, why is it integrated, what are the main drivers and obstacles for those who integrate this topic, how has it developed over the past years and what are the expectation for the future concerning this development.
The purpose of this study is to address and fulfill the gap by conducting a quantitative research to explore, portray and reveal the extent of corporate social responsibility integration in Dutch MBA programs. Regardless of the type, private or public, and whether it is a university-based or a non-university-based business school, we included and looked into all the institutions in the Netherlands that offer a general MBA program. With this research and the available time we had, we endeavor to provide some objective insights about the status with regard to the presence and education of the topic corporate social responsibility in the entire population of MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION
With the aforementioned thoughts in mind, the research question that directed this study during the research process and helped us explore and describe the state of affairs of corporate social responsibility integration in the MBA programs of Dutch business schools is described as follows: “to what extent do MBA programs of Dutch business schools integrate CSR in their education?”. To enable better understanding, this research question will be completed by sub-question concerning how corporate social responsibility is integrated, why is it integrated, what are the main drivers and obstacles for this integration, how has it developed over the past years and what are the expectation for this development in the future. In the next chapter, these questions will be described in detail.
1.5ACADEMIC AND MANAGERIAL RELEVANCE
The relevance of this study lies in its investigation of an area that was not investigated yet. Through this we contribute to both, the academic field as well as the managerial field, by (1) exploring an area that was not yet intensively explored in the Netherlands, while some other European countries had done so already (Rasche A. , 2011; Fernández & Sanjuán, 2010), (2) responding to the call by Matten & Moon (2004) for more research across countries concerning corporate social responsibility education, (3) providing findings and insights gathered from almost the entire population of existing general MBA programs in the Netherlands (80%), through a quantitative research method that offers an objective description concerning corporate social responsibility integration in Dutch MBA programs, (4) revealing general and more specific insights on the matter, as is suggested by Nicholson & DeMoss (2009), by focusing and distinguishing among the different existing types of business schools in the Netherlands “public vs. private business schools, and university based vs. non-university based business schools”, (5) partially fulfilling the need as is suggested by
Christensen et al. (2007) for more quantitative research in this field, (6) expanding the current knowledge base, by adding findings of one country (The Netherlands) to the platform of existing knowledge and ideas of this field, (7) offering descriptive statistics, that may help business schools to compare their self with others and get motivated to seek for further improvements of corporate social responsibility integration in their programs as well as curricula, (8) providing an overview for the managerial field on what they can expect from the current students of Dutch MBA programs with respect to corporate social responsibility, and finally (9) enriching this field in the sense of offering the status of corporate social responsibility integration in Dutch MBA programs and making it possible for scholars to compare and link this with or across other MBA programs in other countries (Haski-Leventhal, 2012).
1.6THESIS STRUCTURE
The thesis is structured as follows. Chapter 2 (Literature review), offers an overview of a structured evaluation of the existing relevant literature to the topic corporate social responsibility integration in business schools and MBA programs, and it reveals the foundation on which this study is built upon. This all is completed by the inclusion of several remarkable aspects from the literature, such as the importance of corporate social responsibility and the role of business schools. Chapter 3 (Research Methodology), provides an extensive clarification and justification on the methodological parts that were applied deliberately to this study, during the research process. Chapter 4 (Results), presents the important findings that were gathered through our data collection. Finally, the thesis will end with the chapter Discussion and reflect back to the findings of the study, offer managerial and academic implications, describe the limitations of the present study, and provide avenues for future research. The list of References and the Appendixes are placed at the end of this thesis.
2.
L
ITERATURE REVIEW
Recent events, such as the ethical scandals, financial crises of 2007-2010, and the growing concerns about the negative impacts on the environment and human being, have underlined the need for businesses to become more conscious of the effect of their activities on the natural environment and human being (Doh & Tashman, 2012; Kitthananan, 2010). The world nowadays is facing different kinds of environmental and economic disasters (tragedies), partially as consequence of social irresponsible business activities and decisions (Kitthananan, 2010). These social irresponsible activities and decisions in turn, are often the result of different aspects, one of them is the unethical behavior of today’s executives and leaders (i.e. decision makers) of businesses toward people and planet (Segon & Booth, 2009). Executives and leaders with such misconduct, have often been freed from any moral responsibility during their education, and are often educated in a very narrow shareholder value ideology (Ghoshal, 2005; Matten & Moon, 2004), which places shareholders above all the other stakeholders (Sharma & Hart, 2014).
Many of today’s executives and leaders responsible for these activities are graduates of “best” business programs (Cavanagh, 2009), but they still exhibit unethical behavior toward the natural environment and human being. Business schools have an fundamental role in this (Ghoshal, 2005; Rasche & Escudero, 2010), because they are the key provider of business education (Matten & Moon, 2004; Sigurjonsson et al., 2014), and since they are usually considered as “agents of change for both students and the social context in which they operate” (Doring, 2002, p. 139), they have the opportunity to equip their students with skills and knowledge about social responsibility, and shape their behavior and attitudes to become the future leaders that not only want to make money for the business and shareholders, but also contribute to a better society at the same time (Saloner, 2013; United Nations Global Compact, 2007).
Liz Maw (CEO of Net Impact) mentions a clear statement in the rapport Business As Unusual 2013, namely “with the right elements in place business education (MBA programs) can support students in creating the breakthrough change we need to transform our lives, our organizations, and our world” (Net Impact, 2013, p. 8). The integration of the topic corporate social responsibility in business school programs, is seen as a potential driver to develop tomorrow’s leaders and equip them with competencies and capabilities which enable them to make more responsible decisions toward people and planet (Segon & Booth, 2009; Smith & Lenssen, 2010; United Nations Global Compact, 2007). Smith & Lenssen (2010) argue that in order to enable the future business leaders deal with the increaingly complex social and enviromental issues as an integral part of stratgy and operations, business schools must equip them with different knowledge, skills and competencies than in the past, namely through corporate social responsbility integration.
The concept corporate social responsibility is often considered as an umbrella that usually includes different concepts, such as business ethics, sustainability, and sustainable development (Haski-Leventhal, 2012; Doh & Tashman, 2012). It has many definitions and they all consistently refer to the five core dimensions: voluntariness, stakeholder, social, environmental, and economic (Dahlsrud, 2008). The most frequent used definition of corporate social responsibility, that includes all the dimensions mentioned, is provided by the Commission of the European Communities (2011) and is defined as follows: corporate social responsibility is a concept whereby companies “integrate social, environmental, ethical, human rights and consumer concerns into their business operations and core strategy in close collaboration with their stakeholders, with the aim of (a) maximizing the creation of shared value for their owners/shareholders and for their other stakeholders and society at large, and (b) indentifying, preventing and mitigating their possible adverse impact” (Commission of the European Communities, 2011, p. 6).
The importance of this topic and its associated areas is continually growing in businesses and practice in general (Doh & Tashman, 2012). In addition, there is also an increasing interest and attention for it in business schools and among students (Erskine & Johnson, 2012). A study by Net Impact (a nonprofit organization for students and professionals working for a sustainable future), among 3.372 MBA students of 108 business schools concerning the presence of social and environmental topics in their MBA programs, reveals a significant amount of students (85%) indicating that learning about social and environmental business is a priority for them in their MBA program (Net Impact, 2013). Moreover, the majority of students (91%) felt that social and environmental issues are very important or essential to a business’ long term success, and many mentioned that finding an impact job is a top priority for them (Net Impact, 2013). Besides this remarkable interest, leaders from the practice believe that business schools should assist students, i.e. the next generation of business leaders, in understanding ethics through its inclusion in the education curricula, because they believe that the workplace is not where ethics are learned, and students should therefore have strong ethical standards before entering the workplace (Sigurjonsson et al., 2014). Leaders also request business schools to reshape the ethical knowledge and capabilities of the current practicing leaders (managers) through re-training and continuous education (Sigurjonsson et al., 2014). However, in contrast to all this increasing interest among businesses, business schools, and students, the field of academic research on the integration of corporate social responsibility and the related areas in business school curricula is not yet that extensive (Doh & Tashman, 2012). Christensen et al. (2007) and Wright & Bennett (2011) argue that there is still a debate on the role of ethics in the business school’s MBA classrooms.
The existing literature on the topic corporate social responsibility education (Christensen et al., 2007; Matten & Moon, 2004; Doh & Tashman, 2012; Nicholson &
DeMoss, 2009) offers many relevant and interesting insights. Researchers that investigated the inclusion of the topic corporate social responsibility in business school curricula, used different perspectives and approaches, and found different interesting findings. Christensen et al. (2007) examined the top 50 global MBA programs on how they address the topics ethics, corporate social responsibility and sustainability separately in their MBA program. They approached this through a qualitative research method, by interviewing the deans (or directors) of the MBA programs involved about the inclusion and coverage of these topics. Interesting findings that were found based on their investigation were that (1) 84% of the business school investigated, require at least one or more of these three topics to be covered in their MBA curricula and one-third require coverage of all the topics in their curricula, (2) several business school used innovative and unique approaches to integrate these topics, and (3) student involvement is a potential driver of changes in teaching techniques and methods.
Almost similar research was also conducted by Matten & Moon (2004), but from an European perspective instead of global perspective. They examined the extent and the way in which European business schools address the broad topic of corporate social responsibility. They used a qualitative research method and surveyed school leaders, corporate social responsibility teachers and researchers to gather information. Compared to Christensen et al. (2007), Matten & Moon (2004) found that (1) 47% of the investigated European business schools offered corporate social responsibility or the related areas through optional modules and 38% embedded these topics in existing modules and courses, (2) many business schools are seeking for new ways on integrating corporate social responsibility into the system, and (3) most important driver for corporate social responsibility is the initiatives of individual faculty members. In line with Christensen et al. (2007), this study also found that students have a significant role that can be considered as driver for corporate social responsibility education.
Doh & Tashman (2012) surveyed 103 business school faculty members, to investigate whether their business schools integrate corporate social responsibility and its related areas well across their curricula. In contrast to the findings of Christensen et al. (2007) and Matten & Moon (2004), they found that the internalization of the topic corporate social responsibility and its related areas is far from extensive, in the sample they examined, their respondents reported that the topics were not well integrated across their curricula. They also found that unique identities and cultures of schools could influence the integration of the topics.
Business schools often strive to share the best insights and knowledge from the current understanding of the topics corporate social responsibility, business ethics, and sustainability with their students, but still fail to integrate these topics in their curricula and with each other in classes (Doh & Tashman, 2012; Sharma & Hart, 2014), to educate the current students to become the future leaders with ethical behavior and an eye for corporate social responsibility. The United Nations Global Compact introduced in 2007 the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME), (United Nations Global Compact, 2007). These principles are meant as guidelines for business schools to improve their curricula, with respect to the education of students toward sustainability and corporate social responsibility (Escudero et al., 2007). Rasche & Escudero (2010) argue that the – six – principles “act as a walking stick assisting those institutions which are willing to promote and champion responsible management education” (p. 246). Business schools that become signatory for the PRME, declare willingness to progress in the implementation of the six principles by (1) developing the capabilities of students to be future generators of sustainability value for business and society at large and to work for an inclusive and sustainable global economy, (2) incorporating into their academic activities and curricula the values of global social responsibility as portrayed in international initiatives such as the United Nations Global Compact, (3) creating educational frameworks, materials, processes and environments that
enable effective learning experiences for responsible leadership, (4) engaging in conceptual and empirical research that advanced our understanding about the role, dynamics, and impact of corporations in the creation of sustainable social, environmental and economic value, (5) interacting with managers of business corporations to extend our knowledge of their challenges in meeting social and environmental responsibilities and to explore jointly effective approaches to meeting these challenges, and (6) facilitating and supporting dialogue and debate among educators, business government, consumers, media, civil society organizations and other interested groups and stakeholders on critical issues related to global social responsibility and sustainability (United Nations Global Compact, 2007, p. 4). It is proven that business schools, which signed for the Principles for Responsible Management Education initiative and adopted these principles, are more able to educate their students to think in terms of sustainability and corporate social responsibility in their careers (Haski-Leventhal, 2012).
Just as many others (Ghoshal, 2005; Crane, 2004; Matten & Moon, 2004; Wright & Bennett, 2011), Smith & Lenssen (2010) are also proponents of mainstreaming corporate social responsibility in business school curricula. According to them corporate social responsibility should be deeply embedded throughout the business school day-to-day operations and business school curricula. They argue that business schools must change, not so much radically as is argued by Ghoshal (2005), but much more incremental change, in the sense of giving a fuller account of what business is about and not just placing the emphasize on teaching the students toward maximizing stakeholder value (Smith & Lenssen, 2010). Both (Ghoshal, 2005; Smith & Lenssen, 2010) aim to clarify that business schools cannot solve “today’s problems with yesterday’s thinking” (Visser, 2011), which is based on maximizing stakeholder value ideology, instead they should put the emphasize on the broader purposes of the firm in their education, and educate students toward these purposes. Because it has been
found by a study of top business schools in the United States, that business school education not only fails to improve the students’ moral character, but also weakens it (Segon & Booth, 2009; Crane, 2004). Besides this, Hühn (2014) argues that MBA programs, which are probably the most successful academic business programs over the last 50 years, influence the theory and practice of management with regard to ethics negatively, due to their structure, pedagogy, and underlying epistemic assumptions. He states that the three elements together (structure, pedagogy, and underlying epistemic assumptions of MBA programs) make students not only unable to deal with ethics, but also unwilling to deal with it.
The literature demonstrates different arrangements and also contradictions among the findings of different scholars about the inclusion of corporate social responsibility in business school curricula (Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009). In line with Christensen et al. (2007) and Wright & Bennett (2011), the state of affairs regarding ethics, corporate social responsibility, and sustainability education in business school’s MBA programs are still unclear. But one clear conclusion that can be drawn, and on which most scholars like Matten & Moon (2004), Wright & Bennett (2011), Crane (2004), Smith & Lenssen (2010) and many others agree upon, is that integration of corporate social responsibility and the related areas in business school curricula is an imperative that should be carried out. However many business schools have been criticized on this front (Orlitzky & Moon, 2008), in the sense that they do not take ethics education seriously as a part of their business curricula (Gioia, 2002). Rather they focus more on specialty electives and hard business courses which are more economic centered like accounting, finance, corporate governance, and strategy (Ghoshal, 2005; Gioia, 2002).
Gioia (2002) who had turned the lens on business educators and brought their role and possible culpability in the corporate scandals into question, argued as an insider in the business education “game” from a critical perspective that in debates about “a place for a class on ethics” in the core of MBA programs (p. 143), ethic sessions are often downgraded
compared to more significant business topics, and the main reasons that they are not completely voted out is because of several explanations (1) the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) requires ethics, however the AACSB is not specific about the degree required with respect to ethics education, “so programs get the minimum perceived to satisfy the mandate” (p. 143), and (2) the second one is related to the business school rankings. Business schools focus mainly on the criteria to get into the ranking, while in these assessments of business schools, ethics education is not measured, and this makes that business schools ignore it.
Moratis et al. (2006) argue that business schools are facing dual challenges, the challenge of importance to integrate corporate social responsibility into their curricula and the challenge to use innovative approaches to educate students, “therefore they should explore and developed this topic and simultaneously search for new learning methods that contribute to the development of effective management learning environments” (p.229). From a students’ view, it is clearly noticeable that also students nowadays consider the topic corporate social responsibility as an essential aspect that should be a part of their education, because it could contribute to learn something of value (Crane, 2004). According to the CEO of Net Impact, “students’ demand to make a real difference in the world is clear”, but we are not sure whether business schools changes are keeping pace with this demand (Net Impact, 2013, p. 8). “Students are demanding a new kind of education, and holding schools to a higher standard than before” (Net Impact, 2013, p. 8).
The field of responsible management education, in the sense of educating today’s students to become tomorrow’s responsible leaders, has received much attention from scholars over recent years in some communities (Rasche A. , 2011), but there is still need for more research across nations (Matten & Moon, 2004), because it is still difficult to draw definitive conclusions from the current literature about the current role of corporate social
responsibility and the related areas in business schools curricula (Doh & Tashman, 2012). There is still a debate on the role of ethics in the MBA classrooms, and there are many doubts on whether MBA programs educate their students well enough to be prepared and able to know how to deal with corporate social responsibility, sustainability, and ethical issues in their careers (Christensen et al., 2007; Wright & Bennett, 2011; Rasche & Escudero, 2010). The literature on this topic should be more expanded, not only by doing research in more nations (Haski-Leventhal, 2012), but also as suggested by Christensen et al. (2007), by using different research approaches to avoid the limitations of the current research and to gather new insights.
As identified, previous researchers suggested that there is a clear need for more research across more nations and through different research methods. These suggestions arouse our interest about the extent of integration of the topic corporate social responsibility in the Dutch education system, and especially in the MBA programs of business school in the Netherlands. After evaluating some prior work of different scholars that conducted almost a similar study on global level (Christensen et al., 2007) and continent level (Matten & Moon, 2004), we are interested in addressing this research at local context. Through a quantitative research method, we strive to reveal some objective insights about the status of integration of the topic corporate social responsibility in MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools. The research question that guides this study described as follows: “to what extent do MBA programs of Dutch business schools integrate corporate social responsibility in their education?” The sub-questions that complete this research question, to enable better understanding better from different lenses are describes as follows:
- Is corporate social responsibility taught to the MBA students?
- If so, is corporate social responsibility than embedded in different courses across the program or is it offered as a standalone required (compulsory) or elective course?
- Which additional teaching methods are deployed to educate the MBA students toward corporate social responsibility?
- How are these courses and teaching methods divided over the first and second half of the MBA program?
- Are Dutch business schools that offer and MBA program familiar with and signatory for the PRME? If so, how far are they in implementing these principles?
- How has the integration of corporate social responsibility into the MBA programs, and students’ interest in corporate social responsibility education, developed over time and what are the expectations for this development in the future?
- What factors/actors are considered as the main drivers and main obstacles for the integration (education) of corporate social responsibility in the MBA programs? - What are the main purposes (motives) of the business schools’ corporate social
responsibility activities (education and initiatives)?
Based on our in depth exploration of the extent of corporate social responsibility integration in MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools in general we will also, where relevant, distinct between the types of business schools and look at the main differences between “business schools related to research universities and business school related to universities of applied science”. In addition, we will also make a distinction between “private and public related business schools” where relevant. Based on this, we aim to provide a comprehensive framework concerning the extent of corporate social responsibility integration in the different types of Dutch business schools that offer a general MBA program.
3.
R
ESEARCH METHODOLOGY
After an orientation in the scientific literature on the topic corporate social responsibility integration in MBA programs, we built up our research methodology with the thoughts in mind to avoid the limitations and repair the deficiencies of prior research, by following the suggestions of the scholars and build upon their recommendations with respect to the need for particular research methods in this field (Christensen et al., 2007; Matten & Moon, 2004). Therefore the research methodology we applied during the research process of this study consisted out of several methodological parts that all together enabled us to conduct the research process systematically, and to provide relevant and reliable findings. The following sections of this chapter discusses these methodological parts separately to offer (1) clarifications on each part, (2) justifications on why some methodological parts were deliberately chosen, and (3) to provide a comprehensible overview of the methodology to enable replication by other researchers.
3.1CONCEPTUALIZATION
The foundation of this study laid on the idea of investigating the extent of corporate social responsibility integration in MBA programs of Dutch business schools. Although this might be clear to some extent, the concepts “business school(s), MBA program(s), corporate social responsibility, and the extent of integration” could carry various meanings and could be interpreted differently among scholars, managers, and humans in general (Mueller, 2004). Matten & Moon (2004) and Van Liedekerke & Demuijnck (2012) experienced almost similar methodological issues across European countries, when they investigated corporate social responsibility education in business schools across Europe, and the development of business ethics as a field of training, teaching and research in four European regions, respectively. Therefore to be specific in what we study and to avoid any possible methodological issues
with respect to potential confusions on definitions, misunderstandings and obscurities on the terms used in our research (Mueller, 2004), we developed theoretical definitions for the key concepts in our research and built the entire study upon these standardized theoretical definitions. These definitions clarify our thoughts on what we exactly mean with the concept when one of the words “business school(s), MBA program(s), corporate social responsibility, and the extent of integration” are used in this study. Below we only provide the definition of each concept, and in Appendix A: Conceptualization, we provided an extensive explanation and description of each of these concepts.
- Business schools: refer to the concept that entails “public/private” higher education institutions, that are related to a “research university/university of applied science”. - MBA programs: refer to the concept that comprises the traditional MBA programs
(full-time and part-time) and the Executive MBA programs (part-time), which have a general focus.
- Corporate social responsibility: refers to the concept that entails the five elements that are embedded in most definitions of the term corporate social responsibility “voluntariness, stakeholder, social, environmental, and economic”. Therefore we built upon the definition provided by the Commission of the European Communities (see p. 8), which includes all these elements in describing corporate social responsibility. - Extent of integration: is a concept that refers to all the forms of integration with
respect to corporate social responsibility courses, and in addition to the business school’s corporate social responsibility initiatives, actions, and orientations. Thus in line with Christensen et al. (2007) “the definition of integration varied, and covered everything from general statements about intent to specific statements with detailed evidence of integrative activities” (p. 354).
3.2POPULATION
Although the process in most research is determining the population first, than the sampling frame and finally a representative sample of cases or respondents, selected based on a probability sampling technique (random selection) which keeps sampling error (over-representation) in check, eliminates sampling bias (equal probability of inclusion), and increases the representativeness of the sample to enable generalization of the findings from the sample to the population (Bryman & Bell, 2011), we approached this methodological part differently. Instead of going through this process to finally select a representative sample that reflects the population accurately, we focused on the entire population of the relevant MBA programs for this study, offered by business schools in the Netherlands. Regardless of the type of business school, public or private higher education institution, and whether it is university of applied science or research university, we aimed to include all the “General MBA programs”, offered in the form of a “Traditional MBA” or “Executive MBA”, by one of the aforementioned institutions (business schools) in the Netherlands. To make this specific selection more comprehensible, we provided in figure 3.1 a schematic overview of the complete available variety in the offer of the MBA programs in the Netherlands (this overview was build based on the information gathered on business school and MBA programs, see Appendix A: Conceptualization). Within this variety our main and extensive focus was on the total number of general MBA programs, except the Online MBA form.
Figure 3.1: Business school and MBA
programs
Business schools
- Private higher education institutions - Universities of applied science
- Research universities General MBA programs Traditional MBA Full-time 1 or 2 years Part-time 2 or 3 years Executive MBA Part-time < 2 years Online MBA Specialized MBA programs Tradtional MBA Full-time 1 or 2 years Part-time 2 or 3 years Executive MBA Part-time < 2 years Online MBA
This form of enumeration and inclusion of the entire population of general MBA programs (Online MBA omitted), is called “census” (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The reason of this deliberate complete inclusion, is because of the fact that there were only 30 business schools in the Netherlands that offer a general MBA program, in the form of a Traditional MBA or Executive MBA (See Appendix B: General MBA programs in the Netherlands), and if we want to provide interesting and reliable – significant – findings that can be generalized to the population of general MBA programs in the Netherlands, we were obliged to include them all because of the small number of offer. A question that may arise here by peers or reviewers about this is “why is the research than narrowed to only MBA programs or why were not the specialized MBA programs included too to expand the population?”. The reasons why we choose for these programs in particular, is because (1) MBA programs are often considered as the “flagship” of business and management education (Baruch, 2009; Williams, 2006), however there are still a lot of doubts about whether they educate their student toward corporate social responsibility (Rasche & Escudero, 2010), (2) researchers are continue debating on the actual role of corporate social responsibility in MBA classrooms (Christensen et al., 2007), and (3) research on this particular matter is not yet that extensive (Doh & Tashman, 2012; Christensen et al., 2007). The reason why we only focused on the general MBA’s rather than to include the specialized MBA programs too, is because the latter are tailored to one discipline and could have a to narrow orientation which focuses on one particular field (discipline). This could mean that in some specialized MBA programs corporate social responsibility it not that important or relevant as in others, or even as in the general MBA’s. In addition, enrollment in the general MBA programs still exceeds that of the specialized MBA programs across all AACSB accredited business schools over the last two years, 2012-2013 (McLeod, 2013), which implies that the interest in the general MBA programs is still more compared to the specialized MBA programs, 179.994 and 109.726
enrollments respectively. Therefore is it more interesting to investigate and reveal some facts about them regarding corporate social responsibility integration.
Information on the total number of existing MBA programs in the Netherlands, wasn’t available yet. Therefore, we were obliged to identify all the business schools in the Netherlands first, to be able to determine the total number of existing MBA programs. Information on the business schools and the programs included was gathered through the Accreditation Organization of the Netherlands and Flanders (NVAO), Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), Association of MBAs, the Executive Organization of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (DUO), Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, MBA-Monitor, and by some other additional desktop-research to make sure that all relevant MBA programs were considered.
3.3RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY AND RESEARCH APPROACH
According to Saunders et al (2009), the term research philosophy “relates to the development of knowledge and the nature of that knowledge” (p. 107). The adopted research philosophy during a study is based on the researcher’s view (assumptions) on the nature of reality and the view (assumptions) on what constitutes acceptable knowledge of that reality during the research process (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Saunders et al, 2009; Flowers, 2009).
The major streams that could be considered when thinking about research philosophy are ontology and epistemology (Saunders et al, 2009). Ontology describes the researcher’s view (assumptions) on the nature of reality, in the sense of whether the reality is considered as an objective reality that really exists or a subjective reality created in the minds (Flowers, 2009; Saunders et al, 2009). Epistemology describes the researcher’s view (assumptions) on what constitutes acceptable knowledge and how this should be gained, also here a distinction is made between an objective view in which knowledge is gathered based on facts,
observations, and figures, and a subjective view in which knowledge is generated based on subjective meanings, details of situation, experiences, feeling, and interpretations (Flowers, 2009; Saunders et al, 2009). Both streams contain differences that have an inter-dependent relationship that influences the way in which a researcher thinks about the research process.
Despite the variety of considerations and research philosophies within these considerations, we had an objective ontological and epistemological position and adopted the corresponding – philosophy of positivism – (Saunders et al, 2009). The reasons for considering the objective position as most appropriate, is because we were concerned with what is really going on (objective ontology view) regarding the – extent of corporate social responsibility integration in Dutch MBA programs –, and that the knowledge on this matter is collected and analyzed based on procedures and methods (objective epistemology view).
The reason why we adopted the philosophy of positivism, related to the objective ontological and epistemological position (Saunders et al, 2009), is because it entails the principle that (1) were considered as crucial for answering the research question of this study, (2) enable generalization of the findings, (3) make it possible for other to replicate this study, and (4) ensure that our biases were minimized during the research process. These principles are that (1) the social world (matter) exists objectively and is independent, (2) research must be conducted in a way that is value free “objective”, (3) knowledge arises through collection of facts, which are considered as the building blocks for theory “inductivism”, (4) only phenomena and hence knowledge that can be observed is considered as knowledge, and (5) knowledge is gathered based on (quantitative) methods and procedures using measurements and statistical analysis (Flowers, 2009; Bryman & Bell, 2011; Saunders et al, 2009). In the practical reality a research question rarely falls into only one philosophical domain (Saunders et al, 2009), therefore we acknowledge that principles of alternative philosophies may had influenced this study too, however adopting the philosophy of positivism was the main aim.
Based on our assumption that there was no information available yet about the extent of corporate social responsibility integration in Dutch MBA programs, we applied an inductive research approach. This implies that our starting point was collecting data and developing theory (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Saunders et al, 2009), in the sense of developing knowledge in this particular field about Dutch MBA’s and corporate social responsibility integration. Exiting theory on this specific topic was used to support this process.
3.4RESEARCH STRATEGY
As described in section 1.3 (Research gap “CSR and Dutch MBA’s”), the purpose of this study was to explore and describe an area which is not yet investigated in the Netherlands (inductive approach), namely the current status of corporate social responsibility in the entire population of general MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools. Therefore, this study has an exploratory and descriptive character, which implies that it seeks to generate (new) insights on what is happening regarding the matter (exploratory character), to “portray an accurate profile of the situation” (descriptive character), (Robson, 2002, p. 59).
The research strategy that we applied during the research process to accomplish the aforementioned purpose and to answer the research question(s), was a quantitative research strategy. Although a variety of aspects like our research consideration (objective ontology and epistemology), research philosophy (positivism), and research purpose partially influenced our choice to apply a quantitative research strategy (Saunders et al, 2009), because these are the aspect on which quantitative research builds, there were also a variety of other practical considerations that entered into the process and influenced our decision to conduct a quantitative research rather than a qualitative research. The main reasons for this deliberate choice were that (1) the current literature suggests that there is more need for quantitative research in this field (Christensen et al., 2007), and we wanted to contribute and partially
fulfill this gap by conducting a quantitative research at nation level, (2) this research method provides more objective data rather than subjective “qualitative data based on interpretations and feelings” (Bryman & Bell, 2011), and since we were concerned with what is really going on regarding the matter instead of what we think, and adopted the philosophy of positivism which has a very strong objective consideration, this research strategy was considered as more appropriate, (3) it contains the methods that we needed to conduct this study, in this case it was a survey, which “freezes” the context and investigate it based on predetermined questions, (4) it has a focus on measurements, which is very useful because it enabled us to detect and provide fine differences (variations), correlations, and comparisons between several concepts that were described in section 3.1 Conceptualization, based on the total number of general MBA programs, and finally (5) it has a clear linear research process, which enables replication, generalization (Bryman & Bell, 2011), and which provided us a clear structure in collecting, processing, and analyzing data. This all together made the quantitative research strategy more suitable to apply in this study, rather than a qualitative research strategy.
3.5RESEARCH DESIGN
Although the choice of research strategy is usually influenced by several aspects, the chosen research strategy in turn influences the choice of the research method applied, in the sense that it narrows the selection by classifying them in survey method(s) and experiment method(s), (Jupp, 2006). Whereby survey method(s) are more applicable for exploratory, descriptive, and partially explanatory studies, and experiment method(s) for explanatory studies (Baarda & De Goede, 2006). The choice between these two methods which are concerned with data collection influences the sequel process which is about measurements and statistical analysis. The following subsections describe the aforementioned aspects based on what this study applied during the collection, proceeding and analysis of the data.
3.5.1RESEARCH METHOD
The research method that was applied to collect data was a survey in the form of an internet based – self-completion questionnaire –, the questionnaire is shown in Appendix C: Invitation letter and questionnaire. The survey had a cross-sectional design, which implies that the collection of data was done at a single point in time – May/June 2014 (snapshot) – and based on a large number of cases, which in this study were the entire number of general MBA programs in the Netherlands (as is described in section 3.2 Population). The aim of this cross-sectional survey procedure was to collect quantitative data, in order to detect patterns and associations, determine frequencies, means, variations and conduct comparisons (Bryman & Bell, 2011), between predetermined aspects related to the integration of corporate social responsibility in the respective MBA program.
Although the quantitative research strategy applied in this study narrowed the choice in research methods (e.g. experiment or survey), important characteristics of the survey method caused the preference to use the cross-sectional survey in the form of a self-completion questionnaire as research method in this study. Since we were concerned with exploring and describing the extent of corporate social responsibility in the general MBA’s through an objective lens (quantitative research strategy, philosophy of positivism), by including the entire number of the general MBA programs and investigate them at one point in time, the cross-sectional survey in the form of a self-completion questionnaire was considered as most appropriate because (1) it enabled us to freeze the context, in the sense of designing a questionnaire with pre-formulated questions that investigate the matter based on particular (specific) aspects, (2) it simplifies the analyzing process of the large number of generated data, in the sense that the data is already structured when it is received and can therefore be used as input for statistical analysis and evaluations, (3) it is quick to administer (Bryman & Bell, 2011), in the sense that it can be sent easy through email and in large
quantities, and in our particular case this was very useful considering the time we had, (4) it is very convenience for respondents (Bryman & Bell, 2011), because they can complete the survey when they want, and since our respondents “MBA program mangers” (as described below), are very busy persons, this was very useful, finally (5) it eliminates the tendency for respondents to be more likely to exhibit desirable behavior (Bryman & Bell, 2011), because it gives the option of anonymity (Malhotra & Birks, 2006), and since we were dealing with a topic (extent of corporate social responsibility integration) that could be sensitive for some respondents, this was very useful to generated data with a minimum of respondent’s bias.
The target audience to which the URL-link of the questionnaire (internet based) was administered through email were the MBA program managers of the respective program. This group of respondents was chosen due to the fact that (1) they are the most involved in the development of the MBA program, (2) they know the program better than anyone else, and (3) they are the decision makers about the future direction of the program. We accessed this group as followed, first we gather their contact information (based on our list of existing MBA programs, see Appendix B) through the business school’s websites, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Google search. Second we called each program manager to tell them about the study and ask for their help to participate in the survey. The third step, was sending them the invitation email with the URL-link of the questionnaire. We followed these steps, calling each individual program manager before sending the invitation email, because we expect that when we inform the respondents first through a personal approach it could increase the response velocity and response rate. However, in both techniques our story to convince the person to fill in the survey, contained the purpose of the research, how the person might be able to help, the amount of time needed, that response are anonym and confidential, and how the results will be used. Obviously a word of thanks and appreciation was always pronounced and a promise was made that the results will be revealed to the ones that have participated. In
addition, we offered the possibility for the program managers to get invited to our seminar (that will be hold after the research is accomplished), to present to results of our study.
The survey was developed based on orientations in surveys of prior research taken at global and region level, and based on brainstorm sessions with the my supervisor and with colleagues. The existing questions of prior research were not entered into the survey of the present study, but used as inspiration material to develop own question that are specifically developed to investigate the Dutch MBA programs (system) and portray the matter of the extent of corporate social responsibility in the Dutch MBA’s as accurate as possible.
3.5.2MEASUREMENT, SCALING, AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Due to our quantitative research strategy, we were required to operationalize the important concepts (besides the ones described in section 3.1) to enable measurement of the extent of corporate social responsibility integration. Therefore, as it can be seen in Appendix C “questionnaire”, we translated each construct into a measurable term in order to be able to collect data and conduct statistical analysis. The translation (i.e. operationalization) was done based on single-item indicator(s), which implies that one question is asked to measure the construct (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The levels of measurement that were used to answer the questions were the nominal, ordinal or interval scale, i.e. Likert-type (Van Dalen & De Leede, 2009). The complete questionnaire can be seen in Appendix C: “questionnaire”.
The performed statistical analyses to enable description of the current extent of corporate social responsibility are (1) univariate analyses based on descriptive statistic commands such as frequencies and descriptive to determine the number of respondents included “N”, proportions “%”, mean and total, (2) bivariate analyses based on contingency table tests to search for patters of association based on frequency counts, and (one-sample and independent) t-tests to find relationships by comparing means among the different types of
business schools. Each of these tests was intended for analyzing a particular concept. In short, conducting a descriptive analysis was meant to get an overview of the important characteristics of the generated data. The t-test and cross table were used to make comparison between groups’ means and proportions. In the next chapter (Results) the result of these tests are described.
4.
R
ESULTS
Due to the small population of general MBA programs offered by Dutch business schools, we were required to put a lot of effort and use additional techniques in order to obtain as much as possible data on the existing programs during the data collection phase. Therefore, as outlined in the subsection Research method (3.5.1), we accessed our target audience – program managers – by calling them first and subsequently sending them the invitation email with the URL-link of the questionnaire. This motivated en convinced the respondents more to fill in the questionnaire due to the personal approach. In addition, to ensure that the questionnaire is completely filled in we used “the force response” technique, which requires a question response before allowing the respondent to continue with the questionnaire. Because of this, the response we received (and thus our statistical analysis) don’t contain any missing values and are therefore valid and representative. The final technique we decided to use as an additional to increase the response is extending the available time to fill in the questionnaire from 3 weeks to 5 weeks. This gave the respondent more flexibility and convenience to respond. All this methods influenced the response positively and contributed to a higher response rate. This chapter presents the results of this phase, based on appropriate and applicable statistical analysis (as given in 3.5.3 Statistical analysis). It starts first by providing descriptive statistics and goes afterwards further with analyzing the data related to the extent of corporate social responsibility integration.
4.1DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
As is mentioned in section 3.2 Population, we identified 30 business schools that offer a general MBA program that is eligible for our study. However, during the data collection phase we found out that 4 programs belong to business schools (program managers) that already were included, and are only provided by other existing business schools based on a
