PRME Leads from across the UK and Ireland meet to discuss the challenges and opportunities associated with the recent changes to PRME Sharing Information on Progress (SIP) reporting.
Laura Steele, PRME Lead, Queen’s Business School & Vice-Chair and Co-Lead for Organisational Learning and SIP Reporting, PRME Chapter UK and Ireland, Email: laura.steele@qub.ac.uk
Petros Vourvachis, PRME Lead and PRME Champions Representative, Loughborough Business School, Email: P.Vourvachis@lboro.ac.uk
Introduction
The Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) is a United Nations-supported initiative that aims to raise the profile of sustainability in business and management education through Seven Principles focused on serving society and safeguarding our planet. One of the key commitments of PRME Signatory schools involves the submission of a Sharing Information on Progress (SIP) report. According to PRME, ‘the SIP's main objective is to serve as a public vehicle for information on responsible management education. In addition, the SIP can be an effective tool for facilitating stakeholder dialogue and a learning community among signatories’. Following extensive consultation and global pilot programme, in 2024 PRME introduced a new reporting framework for Signatories, colloquially known as ‘SIP 2.0’. Amongst other advantages, SIP 2.0 aims to enhance quality, consistency, and transparency in reporting. However, it also represents a significant–if generally welcome–change in approach for PRME leads and accreditation-related staff within business schools.
In 2022, PRME Chapter UK & Ireland introduced biannual workshops on SIP reporting facilitated by Laura Steele. From 2023, these evolved to address SIP 2.0. In addition, as part of the 2024-2025 PRME Champions Cycle, Laura and Petros Vourvachis of Loughborough Business School are leading a project to analyse the new SIP reports and identify best practice. In June 2024, as part of the PRME Chapter UK & Ireland Conference at Exeter University Business School, Laura and Petros held a workshop exploring participants’ experiences in relation to SIP 2.0 to date. The following sections present a summary of the key points of discussion.
Opportunities and challenges associated with SIP 2.0
Participants were first asked to consider the opportunities and challenges they had identified in relation to the shift to SIP 2.0. Key opportunities highlighted included:
Enhanced quality and consistency in SIP reporting
Previously, there were limited guidelines in relation to the content of a PRME SIP report, with the exception of a small number of core requirements (e.g., a letter from the most senior executive within the institution affirming their commitment to PRME). While this allowed for flexibility, it also resulted in inconsistency across institutions. In contrast, SIP 2.0 consists of standardised questions. Participants believed that the new approach may improve the quality, consistency, and transparency of reporting. In turn, this can build greater trust and credibility with business school stakeholders.
Increased engagement
According to participants, SIP 2.0 provides a platform to engage various stakeholders, including faculty, accreditation managers, and–not least–students. It can facilitate intra- and inter-organisational collaboration, the development and dissemination of innovative approaches to responsible management education, and the sharing of best practice. Interestingly, one respondent noted that being required to answer ‘no’ to particular questions could act as a lever for change: ‘It is a great opportunity in reporting ‘no’ and [then] use that as a driving force in our institution to achieve change’.
Integration of initiatives and improved communication
Several participants highlighted that initiatives often occur in silos and internal and external communication around responsible management education can be challenging. As one respondent stated, ‘In reality, the various initiatives happen rather disjointly in an institution - a lot depending on the passion of individuals. SIP reporting makes sense of these activities as it would be part of a coherent vision of a school’. SIP 2.0 presents an opportunity to integrate these activities, creating a more cohesive and strategic approach. In turn, this may lead to more efficient use of resources and a greater overall impact.
Participants, however, also highlighted a number of challenges, including:
Time constraints and resource allocation concerns
One of the primary challenges identified is the time required to develop a SIP report (engaging relevant colleagues, identifying what information is required, collecting and processing data, drafting narratives, etc.). Faculty and administrators already have huge demands placed their time, and finding additional space to focus on SIP reporting can be difficult. As one respondent stated, ‘the time, the realisation that I will not be able to provide a complete picture’. In addition, adequate resources, both human and financial, are essential for the successful implementation of SIP 2.0. Institutions may struggle to allocate the necessary resources, particularly given the financial constraints many higher education institutions are currently operating under. However, one participant expressed the view that the changes may result in more resources being allocated to PRME reporting if there was a realisation from senior leadership within Signatory schools that the PRME Lead is ‘no longer able to do [the SIP] in isolation. Not just a PRME rep scrambling’.
Need for clearer guidelines
Participants expressed that there was a need for clearer guidelines in order to understand the expectations of PRME and align their efforts accordingly. As one respondent stated, ‘[There is a] lack of clarity around terms in general and what is being asked for with objects/narratives with the several fields to fill out’. Another called upon PRME to ‘be clearer about the purpose of this exercise. Is it about the report driving real change or just showing where we are on our journeys. It would be a lost opportunity if we don’t focus on the first’. With clarity can come more focused and effective implementation of responsible management education principles, policies, and practices. One respondent, for example, stated that they wanted to ‘understand what “sufficient” effort’ looked like in terms of completing the SIP questionnaire. Another noted, ‘we are finding it challenging that terms are not defined more (e.g. dialoguing). Is completeness a criterion or should we just give a sample of activities?’.
Balancing breadth and depth
Following from above, ensuring that the content of the SIP report is sufficiently comprehensive without overwhelming stakeholders with information is another challenge. In addition, institutions must strike a balance between creating detailed, high-quality reports and maintaining a manageable workload for the individuals and teams involved.
Consistency across institutions
According to participants, achieving consistency in reporting standards and practices across diverse institutions globally is a significant challenge. Differences in regional contexts, institutional priorities, and available resources can lead to variability in how PRME SIP 2.0 is implemented.
Engaging stakeholders in SIP 2.0
Participants were also asked, ‘As business schools, who are our key organizational stakeholders in relation to RME and sustainability? How might we be able to use SIP 2.0 to engage them?’. One respondent argued that the first aim should be to engage PRME Leads in SIP 2.0: ‘It is mainly to convince and engage ourselves…’.
There was general consensus that the previous SIP reports (‘SIP 1.0’) had not been utilised as much as they could have been as a tool for communicating with different stakeholders. One participant stated, ‘We need to get better at engaging our stakeholders with the report. Currently, it’s only used by a few in the business school and others at the PRME community’. Another added, ‘It is challenging to engage stakeholders outside the business school within the university. They think PRME does not apply to them’. In addition to using SIP 2.0 to inform faculty, professional services staff, and senior university leadership about PRME, it was suggested that the content may be of interest to students:
Prospective students/Gen Z/Gen Alpha are becoming far more concerned and aware about sustainability and sustainable development matters than previous generations. SIP 2.0 could therefore be used to showcase the work Business Schools are doing. Could BS's therefore create an accompanying summary report to be uploaded to the website to communicate to both internal and external stakeholders?
In addition to Schools disseminating links to their respective PRME SIP via email, in reports, on webpages, etc., it was suggested that stakeholders could be engaged ‘through forums and workshops for and with organisations’.
What does an ‘excellent’ PRME SIP look like?
Finally, participants were asked to consider what an ‘excellent’ SIP under the new reporting framework might look like. While some were unsure, others suggested that it should be ‘honest’, ‘transparent’, ‘open and real’, ‘informative’, and ‘impactful’ while also being sufficiently ‘concise’ (there was a risk of ‘information overload’). In addition, they wanted to see reports that ‘addressed the challenges, not just the wins’ and that celebrated successes but did not slip into blatant ‘self-promotion’. One respondent stated, ‘Leadership tends to push for a more rosy picture of what we’re doing (i.e. how to avoid greenwashing within my own institution? How to make leadership understand it’s about the journey?)’. In summary, there was a strong sense amongst participants that ‘excellent’ SIPs should demonstrate balance–balance between breadth and depth, as well as identified strengths and areas for development.
In conclusion, while PRME SIP 2.0 offers significant opportunities to enhance the quality and impact of responsible and sustainable management education, it also presents challenges that Signatories must navigate. By addressing these concerns through strategic planning, intra- and inter-organisational collaboration, and stakeholder engagement, they can maximise the value of their efforts and contribute meaningfully to the global PRME community.
To keep up-to-date with initiatives and events related to SIP reporting, please sign up to the PRME Chapter UK & Ireland mailing list or follow the Chapter on LinkedIn.
The authors wish to thank participants at the workshop on ‘PRME SIP 2.0: Enhancing Quality and Maximising Stakeholder Value’ held on 20 June 2024 for their valuable insights.
コメント