From prestige to purpose: a dean’s perspective on transforming research in business schools

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine how research in business schools can be realigned with evolving public expectations that increasingly emphasize social relevance, responsibility and public value. Situated within a broader global movement toward socially responsive knowledge production, the study investigates faculty career security-related symptoms and the underlying structural and epistemological root causes shaping research priorities in management education, while highlighting the role of business school deans as institutional stewards capable of facilitating this transition through internally led interventions and coordinated external activism. In doing so, the study clarifies how business school research can become more purpose-driven while sustaining scholarly rigor and legitimacy. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual study draws on the author’s multiyear leadership experience as a sitting business school dean. The author’s analysis is therefore grounded in practice-embedded insights gathered across strategic planning processes, faculty assessments, accreditation engagements, global forums and leadership dialogues. Findings The analysis reveals three distinct manifestations of the career security paradox across the academic life course of faculty members: risk aversion in early career stages, capital consolidation at mid-career, and legacy protection in senior ranks. These faculty-level dynamics are rooted in ecosystem-level structural and epistemological forces – including organizational inertia, institutional isomorphism and epistemic conformity – that collectively privilege scholarly prestige over social purpose. Addressing these entrenched dynamics requires sustained, dean-led stewardship capable of mobilizing collective action to reorient business school research toward socially grounded engagement and renewed public credibility. Research limitations/implications The absence of formal interview transcripts limits fine-grained linguistic analysis. Nonetheless, the longitudinal depth of the reflections and the institutional access afforded by my leadership role provide a robust foundation for conceptual insight. Future research should extend these arguments through comparative, empirical and multi-perspective studies that examine the mechanisms through which purpose-driven research cultures emerge across institutional contexts. Practical implications By clarifying “the what, the why and the how” of research addressing urgent social and environmental challenges, this paper contributes to aligning management scholarship with global priorities such as sustainability and responsible business practice. It advances a practice-oriented framework that identifies micro-level symptoms and macro-level structural and epistemological conditions constraining purpose-driven inquiry, while specifying a set of concrete, dean-led institutional interventions through which research agendas can be reoriented from prestige-based to purpose-driven logics. Social implications The author argues that business education and research should not only reward scholarly excellence (“doing well”) but also cultivate inquiry that produces demonstrable and consequential social value (“doing good”). Research that advances sustainability, equity, dignity and community well-being becomes a source of public legitimacy, reaffirms the normative foundations of management scholarship, and sustains a more socially responsible model of knowledge production within business education. Originality/value This paper’s originality lies in its insider-informed analysis of the intertwined micro- and macro-level forces that constrain purpose-driven inquiry within business schools. By integrating faculty-level pressures with structural conditions and institutional logics, it elucidates the deeper sources of resistance to reform. The paper further explores how deans can integrate internal institutional change with coordinated external engagement to initiate systemic transformations that align research priorities more closely with the needs of society.