Faculty at business schools are pushing back on how institutions use ranking and publication metrics to guide strategy, according to findings from the Positive Impact Rating’s 2026 student-led sustainability assessment. The report says faculty responses identified “stop chasing rankings” as the top internal grievance, including “Financial Times lists” and journal-only publication incentives. The rating collected student responses and expanded faculty participation for the first time at scale, gathering 1,189 valid faculty submissions after a prior pilot. The report frames the debate as an “implementation gap” between what schools claim about societal impact and what they actually do. Faculty also urged schools to cut bureaucracy and top-down management, treat sustainability and ethics as integrated commitments rather than marketing add-ons, and reduce siloed departmental work. On the institutional change side, the report highlights strengthening external partnerships with industry, NGOs, government, and community. Business-school leaders should expect increased pressure to align faculty incentives with sustainability commitments, especially where accreditation and public accountability intersect with ranking-driven governance.