Simona Grande, Francesca Ricciardi, Eusebio Scornavacca, Andreas Erich Wald
{"title":"Challenges of integrating sustainability in management education: A 25‐year review of institutional logics, paradoxes and sensemaking","authors":"Simona Grande, Francesca Ricciardi, Eusebio Scornavacca, Andreas Erich Wald","doi":"10.1111/ijmr.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although sustainability has been championed in management education for over 25 years, its integration remains uneven, fragile and contested. Existing literature mirrors this fragmentation—often descriptive, celebratory or narrowly focused, offering limited insight into the organisational processes that shape integration. Synthesising 70 peer‐reviewed articles, this systematic review asks: What explains the complexity and contested nature of sustainability integration in management education through inter‐, multi‐ and transdisciplinary approaches, and with what implications? We identify three predominant rationales underpinning integration: (1) skills/employability—preparing graduates for market demand in sustainability competencies; (2) standards alignment—compliance with frameworks such as Principles for Responsible Management Education, the Sustainable Development Goals and accreditation requirements and (3) moral/ethical—commitments to societal and environmental responsibility. Using institutional theory, we interpret these as manifestations of coexisting civic, market and professional logics. We further surface nine recurrent tensions that shape implementation and leverage paradox theory to group them across four domains: organising (stability vs. change; autonomy vs. control), learning (breadth vs. depth; conventional vs. transformative learning), performing (aspirations vs. resource constraints; rigour vs. relevance; neoliberal vs. public purpose) and belonging (disciplinary silos vs. integration; pluralism vs. coherence). Finally, mobilising sensemaking theory, we examine how educators and institutions actively navigate competing logics and paradoxical tensions through iterative processes of sensegiving, sensebreaking and sensemaking. By integrating these perspectives, the study advances an integrative, organisationally grounded framework that helps explain why sustainability integration remains complex. In doing so, the review reframes sustainability integration from a pedagogical add‐on to an ongoing organisational transformation, with implications for research, policy and practice in management education.","PeriodicalId":48326,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Reviews","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Management Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.70034","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Although sustainability has been championed in management education for over 25 years, its integration remains uneven, fragile and contested. Existing literature mirrors this fragmentation—often descriptive, celebratory or narrowly focused, offering limited insight into the organisational processes that shape integration. Synthesising 70 peer‐reviewed articles, this systematic review asks: What explains the complexity and contested nature of sustainability integration in management education through inter‐, multi‐ and transdisciplinary approaches, and with what implications? We identify three predominant rationales underpinning integration: (1) skills/employability—preparing graduates for market demand in sustainability competencies; (2) standards alignment—compliance with frameworks such as Principles for Responsible Management Education, the Sustainable Development Goals and accreditation requirements and (3) moral/ethical—commitments to societal and environmental responsibility. Using institutional theory, we interpret these as manifestations of coexisting civic, market and professional logics. We further surface nine recurrent tensions that shape implementation and leverage paradox theory to group them across four domains: organising (stability vs. change; autonomy vs. control), learning (breadth vs. depth; conventional vs. transformative learning), performing (aspirations vs. resource constraints; rigour vs. relevance; neoliberal vs. public purpose) and belonging (disciplinary silos vs. integration; pluralism vs. coherence). Finally, mobilising sensemaking theory, we examine how educators and institutions actively navigate competing logics and paradoxical tensions through iterative processes of sensegiving, sensebreaking and sensemaking. By integrating these perspectives, the study advances an integrative, organisationally grounded framework that helps explain why sustainability integration remains complex. In doing so, the review reframes sustainability integration from a pedagogical add‐on to an ongoing organisational transformation, with implications for research, policy and practice in management education.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Management Reviews (IJMR) stands as the premier global review journal in Organisation and Management Studies (OMS). Its published papers aim to provide substantial conceptual contributions, acting as a strategic platform for new research directions. IJMR plays a pivotal role in influencing how OMS scholars conceptualize research in their respective fields. The journal's reviews critically assess the state of knowledge in specific fields, appraising the conceptual foundations of competing paradigms to advance current and future research in the area.