PRME SIP Reporting – Strengthening Quality and Promoting Stakeholder Engagement and Voice

Insights from a PRME Chapter Africa and PRME Chapter UK & Ireland Webinar

by Dr Laura Steele (Queen’s Business School and PRME Chapter UK & Ireland); Dr Mumbi Wachira (Strathmore University Business School and PRME Chapter Africa); and Dr Jill Bogie (Gordon Institute of Business Science and PRME Chapter Africa). For any questions, please contact Laura (laura.steele@qub.ac.uk).

Preparing and submitting a Sharing Information on Progress (SIP) report is a core requirement for all Signatories to the UN-supported Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME). In May 2026, PRME Chapter UK & Ireland and PRME Chapter Africa co-hosted the webinar PRME SIP Reporting – Strengthening Quality and Promoting Stakeholder Engagement and Voice to support Signatories across their regions and the wider PRME community. The session featured presentations from representatives of three schools with a history of producing high-quality reports: Faradh Singh of the Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS), South Africa; Galina Goncharenko of Aston Business School, UK; and Oreva Atanya of Lagos Business School, Nigeria. Across the presentations, a clear message emerged: high-quality SIP reporting is not simply about meeting formal requirements. It is about developing credible, evidence-based, and context-sensitive narratives that show how institutions are embedding the Principles of PRME into teaching, research, partnerships, strategy, and culture. Key insights from each presentation are summarised below.

The webinar began with a thoughtful and engaging presentation by Faradh Singh from GIBS, who invited participants to view SIP reporting not as a burdensome compliance exercise, but as a meaningful institutional account of contribution, learning, and progress. Rather than framing the SIP as a technical task, Faradh presented it as an opportunity for business schools to tell their distinctive story of Responsible Management Education (RME), connect evidence with purpose, and recognise the people, practices, and values that give the report real substance.

Faradh’s central insight was the importance of moving “from compliance to contribution.” At GIBS, the reporting process was organised around a small core team, but with wide institutional ownership. This operating model avoided over-centralising the content, while still ensuring coherence and accountability. The team first defined what Singh called the “golden thread”: the overarching narrative that would connect institutional identity, PRME Principles, stakeholder voice, and evidence of progress. This golden thread then guided the mapping of evidence, engagement with relevant stakeholders, review processes, and final publication.

This approach is significant because it challenges a common weakness in institutional reporting: the tendency to gather data without sufficient interpretive structure. In a compliance-orientated mode, reporting can become a generic call for information, followed by late-stage “chasing” of information and the assembly of evidence without adequate context. By contrast, the GIBS approach used individualised requests, phased stakeholder engagement, and structured evidence folders. Evidence was not treated as an isolated artefact; it was linked to a coherent account of institutional purpose and progress. The report therefore became a vehicle for institutional storytelling, rather than simply an administrative submission.

Another important aspect of the GIBS case study was the attention paid to design, quality, and contributor recognition. Faradh emphasised that the final report had to “look the part,” signalling that credibility is shaped not only by the accuracy of content, but also by the accessibility, structure, and professionalism of presentation. Quality review, design and flow, PRME Commons upload, and contributor recognition were treated as integral stages of the process. Recognising contributors through names, salutations, and photographs where appropriate helped connect the narrative to the people behind the work. This reinforced a wider lesson: stakeholder engagement should not be extractive. It should be relational, visible, and generative, so that each reporting cycle strengthens the foundations for the next.

The second institutional case, presented by Dr Galina Goncharenko from Aston Business School, reinforced the importance of systems, evidence, and strategic alignment. Aston’s PRME agenda was presented as part of a wider institutional commitment to RME, sustainability, social mobility, and inclusive leadership. The school’s priorities included enhancing visibility and connection, improving curriculum quality, and building robust reporting systems. These priorities demonstrate that SIP reporting is strongest when it is embedded in institutional governance and academic practice, rather than handled as a standalone communications exercise.

Aston’s approach highlighted the practical infrastructure needed for sustainable reporting. The school undertook SDG mapping across curriculum modules, linked sustainability to research profiles and outputs, and began collecting PRME data several months before submission. Evidence repositories, structured data collection and coordination across educators, researchers, students, and partners were presented as essential mechanisms for producing a strong report. The Aston SIP included examples of teaching, research projects, peer-reviewed publications, partnership evidence, and impact stories. This breadth of material illustrates that effective SIP reporting requires both quantitative indicators and qualitative narratives. Metrics provide accountability, but reflective accounts, case examples, and visual materials help communicate meaning and institutional learning.

Galina’s presentation also stressed that stakeholder engagement continues after publication. Aston produced physical copies of its PRME report and used the “PRME Book” in meetings with advisory board members, students, international partners, and other stakeholders. This is a valuable insight: the SIP should not “disappear” once submitted. It can become an artefact that supports dialogue, reputation-building, recruitment, partnership development, and internal reflection.

The third presentation, by Oreva Atanya from Lagos Business School, placed SIP reporting in relation to mission, values, and rich regional context. Lagos Business School, a PRME signatory since 2011, has produced multiple SIP reports and frames its RME work through ethics, leadership, and sustainability. The reporting process is coordinated through the LBS Sustainability Centre, with involvement from the Dean’s Office, faculty, central marketing, accreditation, research teams, and programme managers. This cross-functional model again confirms that effective SIP reporting depends on distributed ownership.

Oreva’s contribution was particularly valuable in showing how global frameworks such as the SDGs can be interpreted alongside African priorities, including Agenda 2063. Lagos Business School’s approach links sustainability to the improvement of the human condition, responsible leadership, social justice, inclusion, work-life balance, campus safety, and wellness. Examples such as internal environmental stewardship, personal social responsibility projects and experiential learning show how the report can capture both formal programmes and lived institutional commitments.

Across the session, several transferable lessons emerged for PRME Signatories. First, institutions should begin with a clear theme before opening the reporting template. Second, stakeholders should be mapped to the PRME Principles, not just to individual questions. Third, evidence collection should be structured, timely, and purposeful. Fourth, engagement should be treated as partnership rather than information extraction. Fifth, reports should be reviewed from the perspective of the reader, not only the submitter. Finally, SIP reporting should be integrated into institutional strategy so that metrics, goals, and future commitments inform subsequent planning cycles.

Ultimately, the session demonstrated that the goal is not a “perfect” report. Rather, the aim is to produce a credible, human, and evidence-based account of progress. The strongest SIP reports connect compliance with contribution, data with narrative, and institutional ambition with stakeholder voice. In doing so, they transform reporting from an annual obligation into a strategic process of reflection, accountability, and responsible management education.

The webinar was organised and hosted by Dr Laura Steele (Queen’s Business School and PRME Chapter UK & Ireland); Dr Mumbi Wachira (Strathmore University Business School and PRME Chapter Africa); and Dr Jill Bogie (Gordon Institute of Business Science and PRME Chapter Africa). For any questions, please contact Laura (laura.steele@qub.ac.uk).