Abstract
The paper begins by providing a classification of the regulatory environment within which Business Schools, particularly those in the U.K., operate. The classification identifies mandatory vs. voluntary and prescriptive vs. permissive requirements in relation to the Business and Management curriculum. Three QAA Subject Benchmark Statements relating to Business and Management, the AMBA MBA guidelines, and the EQUIS and AACSB standards are then compared and contrasted with each other. The cognitive and affective learning outcomes associated with business ethics contained in each of these statements are then detailed. The conclusion is that from an international perspective compliance with relevant standards, while requiring due consideration, should be relatively straightforward. From a U.K. perspective, however, the QAA Subject Benchmark Statements provide the most rigorous standards and to meet these will require considerable development on the part of many Business Schools in the U.K. For those academics engaged in this area, however, this represents an opportunity not to be missed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AACSB: 2003, ‘Eligibility Procedures and Standards for Business Accreditation’, see http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation.
AMBA: 2002, ‘Accreditation of MBA Programmes’, see http://www.mbaworld.com.
D. Bligh H. Thomas I. McNay (1999) Understanding Higher Education. An Introduction for Parents, Staff, Employers and Students Intellect Books Exeter
Business Ethics (2003) ‘Business Ethics Classes: To Require or Not?’, Business Ethics Corporate Social Responsibility Report 17 IssueID2 20
C. Cowton (2002) ArticleTitle‘On Two-by-Two Grids: Or, the Arkeology of Management Thought’ Reason in Practice 2 IssueID1 47–51
C. Cowton J. Cummins (2003) ArticleTitle‘Teaching Business Ethics in UK Higher Education: Progress and Prospects’ Teaching Business Ethics 7 37–54
J. Cummins (1999) The Teaching of Business Ethics Institute of Business Ethics London
EQUIS: 2003, ‘European Quality Link (EQUAL) European MBA Guidelines’, see http://www.efmd.be/equis.
R. Gray D. Owen C. Adams (1996) Accounting and Accountability: Changes and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting Prentice-Hall London
M. Kelly (2003) ‘It’s a Heckuva Time to be Dropping Business Ethics Courses. MBA Programs are Downsizing Ethics Requirements at Precisely the Wrong Time’ Business Ethics Corporate Social Responsibility Report http://www.business-ethics.com/BizSchlsDrop Ethics.htm 15 October 2003
D. Molyneaux (2004) ArticleTitle‘Integrating Ethics into Undergraduate Accountancy Education: An Experience after Andersen’ Journal of Business Ethics 54 377–390
QAA, 2000, ‘Subject Benchmark Statement for General Business and Management’, (Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency), see http://www.qaa.ac.uk
QAA: 2000, ‘Subject Benchmark Statement in Accounting’ (Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency), see http://www.qaa.ac.uk.
QAA: 2002, ‘Subject Benchmark Statement in Masters Awards in Business and Management’ (Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency), see http://www.qaa. ac.uk.
SBE, 2003, ‘The Society for Business Ethics Newsletter’, Spring, see http://www.societyforbusinessethics.org
SBE, 2004, ‘The Society for Business Ethics Newsletter’, Spring, see http://www.societyforbusinessethics.org
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moore, G. Regulatory Perspectives on Business Ethics in the Curriculum. J Bus Ethics 54, 349–356 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-1824-y
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-1824-y