RMER Conference: “Responsible management education is not an abstract concept”

Dear Ms. Trittin-Ulbrich, the theme of the RMER conference was “Reclaim, Resist, Rethink: Sustainability and the Future of Responsible Management Education”—how did this theme actually play out at the conference?

As educators and researchers in the field of responsible management education at universities, we are currently facing great uncertainty. Political attacks, budget cuts, or AI: there are many challenges that need to be overcome. Nevertheless, this conference was generally marked by optimism, intensive collegial exchange, and an overall very positive atmosphere. Participants shared their challenges and also offered many insights into what it might take to overcome this crisis in responsible management education. The fact that over 85 participants from all over the world (India, Malaysia, South Africa) came together in the end also shows that the topic is far from as dead as it seems!

Regarding the buzzword “reclaiming”: Was there a specific moment, statement, or project at the conference that made it particularly clear to you that the foundations of responsible management education are coming “back to life”?

A particularly memorable moment for me was the keynote address by Prof. Berta Martín-López, who highlighted the connection and bond between people and nature. Experiences, impressions, personal connections: All of these have a major influence on our actions, but they’re difficult to quantify or measure. That doesn’t make these seemingly “soft” aspects any less important. Just because we can’t measure—and therefore quantify—these things doesn’t mean they don’t have a major influence on our actions. This is exactly how we need to make responsible, sustainable action tangible. This idea became particularly vivid for me when students presented the results of the student-led “Design Jam” workshop during the conference opening using prototypes they had built themselves. That moment showed me: Responsible management education is not an abstract concept; rather, it must be lived, experienced, and made tangible through real-world impact projects. That is precisely the core of PRME—and that is exactly what we experienced at the RMER conference.

Where and how was resistance addressed at the conference? What does resistance to responsible management education actually look like?

We currently encounter resistance not only in the form of open rejection, but often also in the form of unease or passivity. There are several typical forms we encounter in higher education that I’d like to mention here:

First, there is structural resistance, such as a lack of incentives for sustainable research, rigid accreditation requirements, or the dominance of neoclassical economics in curricula. Then there is cultural resistance: The assumption that “responsibility” and “profit maximization” are incompatible—or that ethics in management education is “too soft.” And finally, there is individual resistance, which can manifest itself, on the one hand, in faculty members who refuse to adapt their courses, or, on the other hand, in students who reject sustainability issues as “ideological.”

In the two panel discussions at the conference, however, we gained important insights into how we should deal with institutional barriers and structural resistance, and what “collective action” between universities or faculty members might look like—for example, within the PRME initiative or through the UN Global Compact.

With regard to dealing with individual resistance from faculty or the student body, we were particularly able to learn about artistic and creative pedagogical approaches at the conference, as presented in a wide variety of sessions in Track 11. These approaches can help overcome cultural and individual biases and reach students.

Which new approaches, methods, or teaching concepts for responsible management education particularly impressed you at the conference—and why?

In general, I felt that the concept of “co-creation” played a role in many of the projects presented—the participatory nature of responsible management education was impressively demonstrated to me.

And speaking of the conference in general: Was there a “moment of connection” that particularly stands out in your memory?

The keynote address by Prof. Sylvia Grewatsch from Brock University in Canada provided us with a wonderful moment of connection. During the conference dinner, she had the participants work in table groups on a concrete intervention idea to improve the “management education” system. Reflecting on what such a systemic intervention might look like in practice has inspired me in retrospect. I also thought it was wonderful that students studying at PRME universities in German-speaking countries are now trying to connect through the newly founded PRME Alumni Network DACH. This network was launched at the conference and is organized on LinkedIn.

With regard to the lasting impact of the conference at Leuphana, we would be interested to know to what extent the conference topics will subsequently influence responsible management education here and which ideas can be put into practice.

The conference presentations should inspire us insofar as they emphasize the powerful impact of participatory, dialogue- and creativity-oriented teaching formats. Management education is not “too soft” simply because it draws on innovative formats—rather, these formats make it more tangible. On behalf of all the organizers, I would like to thank all participants for these important insights, and the State of Lower Saxony for its financial support through the Lower Saxony Vorabs program.