Susan C. Schneider, Professor HRM, HEC University of Geneva, Switzerland

1. Redesigning management education toDevelop Socially Responsible Behavior:Insights from RESPONSE Project Susan C. Schneider, Professor HRM, HEC University of Geneva, Switzerland Maurizio Zollo, Professor Strategy, Bocconi University, Italy Ramesh Manocha, M.D., Ph.D., University of South Wales, Royal Hospital of Women, Australia. BAWB global forum, Cleveland, June 2-5, 2009 Track 3: Redesigning management education for the future

2. WHAT IS RESPONSE ? • 1.1M EU funding over 3 years • conducted by a consortium of business schools*, academic advisors, corporate partners and consultants. • 430 interviews in 19 multinationals, of which: • 210 senior managers • 220 stakeholders’ representatives in 180 organizations • about 1,000 managers surveyed through web-questionnaire • 93 managers engaged in learning experiments in 4 companies *INSEAD, France; Bocconi, Italy; Copenhagen Business School, Denmark; Kazminski Institute, Poland

3. RESPONSE OBJECTIVES • Understanding CSR: Why? What? and How? • Discover differences managers’ and stakeholders’ understandings/expectations. • Understanding how this might vary across cultural, legal, industry and organizational contexts. • Identify factors that explain socially responsible behavior at the individual as well as organizational level. • Test the effectiveness of different types of training approaches on developing socially responsible behavior in managers

4. What is Socially Responsible Behavior (SRB)? A pattern of discretionary decisions and actions that enhance societal well-being. See Crilly, Schneider & Zollo (2008) “Psychological antecedents to socially responsible behavior”. European Management Review, 5, 175-190.

5. What Explains Socially Responsible Behavior? SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS • Cognition: • Dec. rationale • MES • Dec. criteria • WVS • Socially • Responsible • Behavior • Do no harm • Do good • Training • Approaches • Exec ed • Hatha yoga (relaxation) • Sahja yoga • (meditation) • Personal Values: • Self transcendence • (Schwartz) • Affect • PANAS • Shame/guilt • (Watson et al)

6. The learning experiments

7. Experiment Design (high tech)

8. Experiment Design (2): Natural Resources

9. Impact of Training Approaches on SRB

10. Impact of meditation trainingon social consciousness(% = Statistical confidence level that Pre-Post Variation > 0,N = 51 across 4 experiments) Decision-making: • Why did you decide this in scenario X? • “because it enhances and protects the company economic results” decreased (95%) • “because it shows compassion and caring” increased (97%) • Prioritization of decision criteria • From “economic profit” to “social welfare” (93%) • From “Internal” to “external constituents” (90%) • From “Productivity” to “protection of natural environment” (83%)

11. Impact of meditation training on emotions(% = Statistical confidence level that Pre-Post Variation > 0,N = 51 across 4 experiments)

12. Impact of meditation training on personal values(% = Statistical confidence level that Pre-Post Variation > 0,N = 51 across 4 experiments)

13. Meditation vs. Relaxation Training • Meditation showed stronger impact on socially responsible behavior and on psychological antecedents • Decision-making: “make decisions easily” improved (99.5%) • Emotions: sadness reduced (92%) whereas happiness (99.4%), inspiration (98%) and courage (93%) increased • Values: “mature love” increased • Hatha Yoga training but also showed stronger impact • Decision-making: “it is morally right” increased more (92%) • Values: “Social justice” (95%) and “protection of the environment” (89%) increased

14. Conclusions • Developing socially responsible behavior and social consciousness in managers is possible • However, training approaches differ in their effectiveness • Standard executive education shows weak or slightly negative impact on behavior • Meditation training shows positive impact on socially responsible behavior and on social consciousness • Relaxation training (hatha yoga) shows unexpected efficacy and a different impact than meditation training • More studies are necessary to probe these exploratory findings • Key limitations: • measurement?, • behaviors over time?

15. Key Insights….. • SRB can be considered to reflect 2 different types of behavior: do good and do no harm. • Doing good and doing no harm are driven by the same reasons but are not driven by the same values, nor emotions. • Meditation and relaxation training can influence social consciousness and SRB, in different ways • Meditation appears to have a stronger impact on emotions while relaxation has a stronger impact on values. • Meditation might lead to more reflexive (intuitive) SRBs while relaxation might lead to more reflective SRBs. • Need to consider training approaches which addresses emotions and values directly. Cognitive approaches may be limited. • Implications for integrating SRB/CSR at the individual and organization level so that social responsibility becomes based in identity: “who we are” versus “what we do.”