The recent debate ignited by Christopher Marquis’s opinion essay calling for the abolition of business schools has prompted a range of thoughtful responses from educators, professionals, and alumni. While Marquis critiques business education for fostering narrow profit-driven mindsets, several correspondents argue for a more nuanced examination of the role and impact of business schools.

Franz Heukamp, dean of IESE Business School in Barcelona, acknowledged Marquis’s concern but rejected the call to shut down business schools altogether. He emphasized the importance of educating responsible leaders who understand management’s moral dimensions. Heukamp noted that his institution integrates a focus on positive social impact into its core curriculum and employs the case method to highlight ethical dilemmas and human considerations in business decision-making. He further suggested that as artificial intelligence assumes more technical tasks, business education must evolve to guide leaders on ethical deployment, accountability, and managing disruption.

Daniel Swartzman, an associate professor at Loyola University’s Parkinson School of Health Sciences and Public Health, broadened the critique to include the influence of a profit-centered mentality beyond business schools. He expressed concern over the widespread cultural embrace of market values that students from various disciplines absorb, necessitating efforts to "unlearn" these attitudes and rethink professional responsibility across fields like public health and social work.

Others agreed with Marquis’s diagnosis of an intellectual and moral crisis in American business leadership. Reverend Shaun S. Brown from San Diego attributed prevalent corporate ethical shortcomings to the education system that feeds industry leaders and underscored the need for businesses to prioritize societal welfare over mere profitability. Brown warned that even if business schools closed immediately, it could take several generations to shift the entrenched culture away from personal greed.

Conversely, Christopher Stevens, a business professor and administrator from Spokane, Washington, challenged Marquis’s broad generalizations. Stevens pointed out that the essay’s critical views were shaped by experience at a handful of elite institutions and do not necessarily reflect the diverse realities across thousands of other business schools. According to him, many students pursue business education with goals of social and economic betterment, and the issue may lie more with specific schools than with the concept of business education itself.

Finally, Bernie Zipprich, a Wharton School alumnus diagnosed with ALS in 2020, offered a personal perspective. Using his business training, Zipprich founded a public benefit company aimed at advancing drug development for neurodegenerative diseases. He highlighted the thoughtful and innovative ethos he witnessed among peers and faculty at Wharton, arguing that while the system could improve, business education retains significant value and potential for positive impact.

The correspondence underscores a complex dialogue about business schools’ responsibilities and roles in shaping future leaders amid evolving economic and social challenges. While criticism persists, many in academia and industry advocate for reform and renewed purpose rather than closure.