Leading through change: Ten years of Learning and Teaching transformation

Background

In September 2015, 19 intrepid and curious souls congregated at Chartered ABS headquarters in the City of London for the first stage of a journey of discovery relating to the role of the Leader in Learning and Teaching (LLT). Drawn from a broad variety of business disciplines and institutions – Research intensive, post-1992 and in between – one of our first discoveries was that, partly because of a shared passion for learning and teaching (L&T), we got on very well.

A hard core of twelve of that group has met up annually since the conclusion of that first LLT programme, for mutual support, mentoring, and general discussion of the state of business schools, L&T & HE. In the intervening decade, the group have acquired several doctorates and professorships, some have been appointed Dean / Associate Dean L&T, and three have retired. In October 2025, we were generously hosted by Chartered ABS for an anniversary gathering to reflect upon how L&T has changed over those ten years.

Context

In 2015, business schools, like their host universities, were expanding. Borrowed millions were being invested in resource centres and accommodation. Students from across the globe were recruited; their fees represented the return on that investment for institutions, with business degrees among the most popular attractions. The challenge was managing that expansion. Concurrently, the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) was giving new prominence to L&T across the sector. Institutions for the first time had targets relating to teaching, together with published outcomes.

Ten years later, the context is different. Real cuts in UK fees have made overseas fees the key income stream, but one which is threatened by market changes and an increasingly hostile attitude to immigration. Repaying borrowings has led to resource constraints, staff cuts, and rising SSRs, with the challenges of teaching those marginal students increasingly apparent. Meanwhile, the universal availability of AI tools since 2022 challenges the viability of some established assessment and is forcing universities - business schools especially - to reconsider the skills and attitudes they seek to impart. This is driven by the impact of AI in workplaces changing the ways that business operates, as well as the changes to learning, teaching and assessment.

Our reflections address these contextual changes and the evolution of business school strategies over the decade.

A new prominence for L&T

Although the TEF itself appears to have almost disappeared from universities’ strategic discourse, it seems to have legitimised L&T within business schools, except in the most research‑driven institution in our group. Annual L&T conferences have become institutionalised and the Scholarship of Learning and Teaching (SoTL) has increasing prominence in the sector. Education professorships in business schools have also increased, with members of our group amongst the number, the LLT programme having been part of the case for promotion. The continuing increase is attested by the frequency of requests to the to sit on appointment panels and provide references. Whilst L&T professorships offer recognition for L&T professionals there is still much work to be done to improve L&T career routes, and in many institutions there remains disparity in esteem and influence compared to those who have come via more traditional routes.

A focus upon the easily measurable

A focus on measurable outcomes is part of the spirit of our era, despite research since the 1960s showing how metrics can be gamed. Easily observed outcomes in T&L, such as pass rates and grades, are vulnerable, and their impact on a school’s earnings incentivises actions to enhance those outcomes. Grade inflation and increases in plagiarism and AI informed cheating are real challenges in this context. These behaviours have grown in the last decade and there is no clear evidence of a commensurate increase in the management of academic practice. The danger is that employers, especially overseas, may cease to regard a UK degree as proof of competence, threatening schools’ business models. Teaching quality is harder to measure, which may explain why experiments to improve it continue. For motivated students, the environment is richer than ten years ago, though staff energy is often drained policing those for whom learning is incidental to gaining a qualification or working.

Business school strategies

As a group, we have been struck by the degree of isomorphism in business school strategies, and how this has increased over the past decade. Courses, modular content, structural elements such as the reversion from semesters to trimesters, and intellectual content all show striking similarities. One danger is conservatism, as tutors lack incentive to include new material. A strategic management specialist among us noted that many strategy modules would be familiar to a student from the early 1990s and differ little at level 6 from the A‑level syllabus. Leading consultancies and firms, however, employ more advanced models and frameworks. Business schools no longer appear to lead practice, but observe corporate behaviour and attempt, with a lag, to explain it. Codification of practice is legitimate scholarship, but it is imperative that knowledge be shared promptly with students. We are not convinced this occurs widely in the sector. The pressure on schools to achieve accreditation means that conservativism becomes embedded, as it offers the 'easy' route to gaining accreditation. Being maverick makes this journey harder; consequently the variance in the sector reduces & innovation is stifled.

The next 10 years

In a volatile environment, UK business schools have coalesced around a set model that is showing its age. We believe strongly that there is a place for specialisation in the business school universe, and that astute business school leaders will be looking for a future beyond the current isomorphism.

Teaching and learning, now established as a legitimate focus within business schools, is a potential vector for differentiation. Experimentation there may require alternatives to the prevailing results-driven paradigm, although one which might enhance educational quality in the medium term.

AI is a particular contributor to environmental volatility. Business schools, like their parent HEIs, have yet to form strategies that deal with its actual and potential impact on work and employment. Shaping teaching and learning for an AI-enabled world represents a particular and immediate challenge, but one which offers opportunities for innovation and differentiation.

Photo: Participants of LLT 2024-25, with facilitator Sally Everett CMBE.