Business schools have become an easy target as the butt of jokes about the causes of the current economic crisis. A recent segment on The Daily Show, an American satirical television programme, explored the theme of being MBAs to blame for the crisis and the MBA oath as a possible remedy. Its presenter feigned surprise that not all students were willing to sign up to an oath that said: "I will act with utmost integrity and pursue my work in an ethical manner." No doubt the view that MBAs would have difficulty in making such a commitment is more widespread and yet it seems such a straightforward commitment to make. So in answer to the question, 'why an MBA oath', one response surely must be: 'Why not?' Why should it be so difficult for MBAs to commit to behaving ethically?

Inconvenience

There are various reasons why an MBA oath can be difficult in practice. In essence, these are implementation challenges that can be overcome. More fundamental is the view that it is not necessary – that there is no need for an oath expressing MBA commitment to ethical behaviour. Proponents of the MBA oath view it as a long-overdue initiative, necessary to make management a true profession. They point to the abundant evidence of managerial misconduct – by MBAs among others – showing why an oath is needed. For example, Joel Podolny, the former dean of Yale University (and former professor at Harvard and Stanford business schools), writes of a need for radical change in business schools including, but not limited to, greater attention to ethics teaching and the adoption of an enforceable code of conduct or oath.

Fact is, so deep and widespread are the problems afflicting management education that people have come to believe that business schools are harmful to society, fostering self-interested, unethical and even illegal behaviour by their graduates. (Podolny, 'The Buck Stops (and Starts) at Business School,' Harvard Business Review, June 2009.

While many arguments are advanced in favour of the MBA oath, the most basic is the argument of management as a (putative) profession committed to a set of professional values that have been demonstrably absent in recent years. While I can only briefly summarise this argument here, I refer readers to more detailed accounts available elsewhere, most notably by Podolny (in the HBR article mentioned above) and by Harvard Business School professors Rakesh Khurana and Nitin Nohria ('It's Time to Make Management a True Profession,' Harvard Business Review, October 2008).

Khurana and Nohria observed that managers have lost legitimacy with a widespread breakdown of trust in business in the last decade, a claim endorsed by Podolny and supported by an HBR survey included in his article, as well as many other sources. Khurana and Nohria wrote they "believe that business leaders must embrace a way of looking at their role that goes beyond their responsibility to the shareholder to include a civic and personal commitment to their duty as institutional custodians … it is time that management finally became a profession."

As part of what it means to be a profession, management requires codes of conduct – an MBA oath would be one example:

True professions have codes of conduct and the meaning and consequences of those codes are taught as part of the formal education of their members.

They position these codes as operating consistent with a social contract. Society consents to managers being allowed to engage in their profession and in return managers commit to being worthy of society's trust and to acting with integrity: Through these codes, professional institutions forge an implicit social contract with other members of society: Trust us to control and exercise jurisdiction over this important occupational category. In return, the profession promises, we will ensure that our members are worthy of your trust – that they will not only be competent to perform the tasks they have been entrusted with, but they will conduct themselves with high standards and integrity.

Khurana and Nohria's view is that misconduct in business – which has been all too apparent of late – would be reduced if management was more of a profession, because moral behaviour is an integral part of the identity of professionals and this is an identity that they are motivated to protect.

Having addressed the core objection that an MBA oath is not needed, we can turn to the various objections that may be raised around its implementation. The wording of the oath is obviously crucial and some argue that the MBA oath initiated by Harvard Business School students this year is too broad in scope or potentially ambiguous in some of its provisions (for example, "I will strive to create sustainable economic, social, and environmental prosperity worldwide"). Schools with more internationally diverse student bodies such as Insead also may have a greater difficulty in securing agreement, not only around a particular set of words but with the idea of making such a commitment if the oath is seen as espousing a culturally-specific set of values. However, these problems are hardly insurmountable. There are many examples of global organisations that have identified and articulated their values – values that their members are expected to follow. (Rosabeth Moss Kanter, 'Transforming Giants,' Harvard Business Review, January 2008).

Another implementation problem is who should administer the oath. A voluntary, student-led initiative has the advantage of providing the choice of whether to participate, but it also runs the risk of failure, if not derision, if it is inadequately supported.

A further implementation problem is how to respond to violations of the code. Podolny insists that schools should withdraw degrees for violating codes of conduct, with the decision made by a committee responsible for the code and monitoring adherence to it. This wouldn't prevent the ex-MBAs from managing businesses, but there would be consequences.

Behaviour change

Assuming the case is made of the need for an oath and that these implementation problems can be overcome, one might well ask whether it would make any difference. Would it change behaviour? Theory and research from sociology and social psychology suggest that it could and, more broadly, there is the example and experience of professions such as medicine and the law. Equally, it need not be a major undertaking and so could well be worth trying in light of the criticism of business practice and the blame ascribed to business schools specifically. One might also argue that it is worth doing because it has intrinsic value in and of itself, as an articulation of what the organisation stands for and in contrast to the moral relativism – the "anything goes" – that exists absent any organisational commitment to values. Finally, it need not be the only response by business schools to the current challenge to their legitimacy. An oath should form part of a broader initiative to strengthen attention to ethics and values, including greater attention to ethics in programme applicant selection criteria, as well as throughout the curriculum.


- The writer is Insead Chaired Professor of Ethics and Social Responsibility. Views expressed are his own

Keep up with the latest business news from the region with the Emirates Business 24|7 daily newsletter. To subscribe to the newsletter, please click here.