There are alternatives! Navigating tensions in critical management education

Daniel S Lacerda & Yasaman Sadeghi

Management Learning2026https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076261422427article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Business schools have been accused of reproducing management practices that lead to global crises, sparking calls for greater sensitivity to critical management education. However, while there is much academic work on the need for critical pedagogy, documented practical experience of how this works in the classroom remains scarce. Drawing on our experience in designing and teaching a course that deconstructs naturalized “management commandments,” we reveal three interwoven tensions that help explain this limitation: institutional pressures, relational challenges, and personal vulnerabilities. Our analysis shows how integrating reflexivity with an exposure to experiences of alternative organizations helps to bridge these tensions, making critical management education both accessible and relevant. Our contributions are twofold. First, we illustrate how critical management can be practiced in the classroom by anchoring the scrutiny of mainstream naturalized practices in the emergence of alternative organizations. Second, we demonstrate that the tensions and contradictions of the neoliberal university are not merely obstacles, but generative forces that—when met with reflexivity—can foster deeper engagement and broaden the scope of management education.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076261422427

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{daniel2026,
  title        = {{There are alternatives! Navigating tensions in critical management education}},
  author       = {Daniel S Lacerda & Yasaman Sadeghi},
  journal      = {Management Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076261422427},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

There are alternatives! Navigating tensions in critical management education

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.