Business schools face mounting criticism as their traditional focus on profit maximization increasingly clashes with society’s evolving expectations. Harvard Business School professor Ranjay Gulati believes the problem runs deep. “Business schools have fallen behind the curve,” he explains. “They’re still teaching frameworks from decades ago while companies face entirely different challenges.”
This disconnect isn’t just theoretical. When PwC surveyed 4,702 CEOs last year, 73% reported feeling pressure to address social issues that traditionally fell outside business responsibilities. Yet most MBA programs devote minimal curriculum time to sustainability, social impact, or ethical leadership.
The problem stems partly from business education’s historical development. Business schools emerged in the early 20th century with a singular focus – teaching management techniques that maximize shareholder returns. This narrow vision persisted despite society’s changing expectations.
“We’ve created generations of business leaders who view profit and purpose as inherently opposing forces,” says Judy Samuelson, executive director of the Aspen Institute Business and Society Program. “That false dichotomy damages both business and society.”
The costs of this outdated approach appear increasingly clear. Trust in business institutions remains stubbornly low, with Edelman’s Trust Barometer showing only 55% of Americans trust businesses to do what’s right. Meanwhile, companies face unprecedented pressure to address climate change, inequality, and other complex challenges their leaders received little training to handle.
Reform efforts face significant obstacles. Academic tenure systems reward specialized research publications rather than practical teaching innovation. Rankings methodologies emphasize graduate salaries over broader impact metrics. And some faculty resist curriculum changes that challenge traditional economic assumptions.
But promising signs of change are emerging. The University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business now requires all students to complete impact projects addressing real-world problems. At MIT’s Sloan School, students must take “U-Lab,” where they explore their personal purpose and values before making career decisions.
“These changes aren’t about abandoning business fundamentals,” clarifies François Ortalo-Magné, dean of London Business School. “They’re about ensuring those fundamentals reflect today’s business realities.”
Some schools venture even further. The Rotman School at the University of Toronto redesigned its entire curriculum around “integrative thinking” – teaching students to hold competing ideas in creative tension rather than seeking simplistic either/or solutions. This approach better prepares graduates for complex modern challenges that defy conventional analysis.
The reform movement extends beyond academics to include experiential learning. Columbia Business School launched an “Empathy Lab” where students develop emotional intelligence by working with diverse community members. Stanford’s Graduate School of Business requires students to complete “Critical Analytical Thinking” seminars that challenge their assumptions about business’s role in society.
Business leaders increasingly support these changes. “I want to hire MBAs who understand profit as a means, not an end,” says Marc Benioff, Salesforce CEO. “We need leaders who see business as the greatest platform for change.”
The implications extend beyond individual careers. Business schools shape how entire generations understand capitalism’s purpose and potential. When curricula neglect ethics, sustainability becomes an afterthought rather than core strategy. When leadership courses ignore stakeholder perspectives, graduates enter the workforce with dangerous blind spots.
Faculty resistance remains a significant barrier to further progress. Many professors built careers researching traditional business frameworks and lack expertise in emerging areas like climate finance or responsible AI. Others worry that emphasizing social impact might dilute business education’s technical rigor.
“It’s not either/or,” counters Rebecca Henderson, Harvard Business School professor. “Teaching business as a force for good requires more rigor, not less. Students must master traditional disciplines while developing broader systems thinking.”
Financial incentives also impede change. Business schools
