Although the enlarging gap between the academic research and practical requirement of business is increasingly concerned by academia, there is no specific answer about how to address this issue by finding the right objects of reference and seeking the unity of rigor and relevance. By reviewing the development history of business schools in both Chinese and Western context, this study reveals the origin of business schools’ current dilemma and deterioration, and thus the necessity of reform. Based on the models of medical schools and law schools, this study discusses the foundation of uniting rigor and relevance of education and research in depth, and develops a detailed and comprehensive reform model for the future of business schools that covers undergraduate education, professional education, research-based master and PhD education, entrepreneurship education, academic research and exploration, as well as staff performance evaluation.
The Future of Business Schools: Unity of Rigor and Relevance
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 41, Issue 05, pp. 141 - 152 (2019) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2019.05.011
 Adler N, HellstrÖm T, Jacob M, et L. A model for the institutionalisation of university-industry partnerships: The FENIX Research Programme[A]. Editors: Tomas Hellström, Merle Jacob, The Future of Knowledge Production in the Academy[C]. 2000,125-139.
 Alajoutsijärvi K; Juusola K; Siltaoja M. The legitimacy paradox of business schools: losing by gaining? [J]. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2015, 14(2): 277–291.
Bartunek J M What has happened to Mode 2? [J] British Journal of Management, 2011, 22, 555–558.
Bennis, W G, O'Toole, J . How business schools lost their way[J]. Harvard business review,2005, 83, 96–104.
 Dimaggio P, Powellw W. The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields[J]. American Sociological Review, 1983, 48, 147–160.
 Financial Times. FT global MBA ranking 2018: Methodology and key.2018.
 Frederick, W C. Are business schools really necessary? [J]. California Management Review, 1963, 5(4):85-89.
 Gordon R A, Howell J E. Higher education for business[M]. New York, Columbia University Press, 1959.
 Hambrick D C. What if the academy actually mattered? [J]. Academy of Management Review, 1994, 19, 11–16.
 Jacob M, Hellström T, Adler N, et al. From sponsorship to partnership in academy‐industry relations[J]. R&D Management, 2000, 30(3): 255–262.
 Khurana R, Nohria N. It’s time to make management a true profession[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2008, 86(10): 70–7, 140.
 Khurana R, Penrice D. Business education: The American trajectory[J]. Business schools and their contribution to society, 2011, 3–15.
 Liang N, Lin S. Erroneous learning from the West? A narrative analysis of Chinese MBA cases published in 1992, 1999 and 2003[J]. Management International Review, 2008, 48, 603–638.
 Locke R R, Spender J C. Confronting managerialism: How the business elite and their schools threw our lives out of balance[M]. Zed Books Ltd. 2011.
 Macdonald S, Kam J. Ring a ring o’roses: quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2010, 44（4）: 640–655.
 Maclean D, Macintosh R, Grant S. Mode 2 management research[J]. British Journal of Management, 2002, 13, 189–207.
 Mintzberg H. Managers, not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development[M]. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2004.
 Muff K. Are business schools doing their job? [J]. Journal of Management Development, 2012, 31, 648–662.
 Navarro P. The MBA core curricula of top-ranked US business schools: a study in failure? [J]. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2008, 7, 108–123.
 Pettigrew A M. Management research after modernism[J]. British Journal of Management, 2001, 12, S61–S70.
 Pfeffer J, Fong C T. The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye[J]. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2002, 1, 78–95.
 Pierson F C. The education of American businessmen: A study of university-college programs in business administration[M]. NewYork, McGraw-Hill, 1959.
 Porter L W, Mckibbin L E. Management education and development: Drift or thrust into the 21st century?[M]. NewYork, McGraw-Hill, 1988.
 Rynes S L, Bartunek J M, Daft R L. Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2001, 44, 340–355.
 Shani A B, Mohrman S A, Pasmore W A, et al. Handbook of collaborative management research[M]. Sage Publications, 2007.
 Sillince, J A, Brown A D. Multiple organizational identities and legitimacy: The rhetoric of police websites[J]. Human Relations, 2009. 62, 1829–1856.
 Starkey K. In defence of modes one, two and three: a response[J]. British Journal of Management, 2001, 12, S77-S80.
 Starkey K, Madan P. Bridging the relevance gap: Aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of Management, 2001, 12, S3-S26.
 Starkey K, Tempest S. The future of the business school: Knowledge challenges and opportunities[J]. Human Relations, 2005, 58, 61–82.
 Starkey K, Tempest S. A clear sense of purpose? The evolving role of the business school[J]. The Journal of Management Development, 2008, 27(4): 379-390.
 Suchman M C. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1995, 20, 571–610.
 Tranfield D, Starkey K. The nature, social organization and promotion of management research: towards policy[J]. British Journal of Management, 1998, 9, 341–353.
 Van de Ven A H, Meyer A D Jing R. Opportunities and challenges of engaged indigenous scholarship[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2018, .14(3): 1–4.
 Van Aken J E. Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management[J]. British Journal of Management, 2005, 16, 19–36.
 Wilson D C, Thomas H. The legitimacy of the business of business schools: what’s the future? [J]. Journal of Management Development, 2012, 31, 368–376.
Cite this article
Wang Xiao, Li Peter Ping, Bi Zhihui. The Future of Business Schools: Unity of Rigor and Relevance[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2019, 41(5): 141-152.
Previous: The Synergy Mechanism of Temporal Leadership and Employees’ Synchronization in Innovation Teams