European B-Schools Push Back On U.S. Dominance: ‘We’re Redefining Leadership’

IÉSEG’s Caroline Roussel: “We are progressively embedding AI across all our courses, ensuring students develop these competencies throughout their entire academic journey, not just in isolated modules. Students learn to use AI as a strategic tool while developing critical judgment, creative prompting, and ethical decision-making”

Europe’s business schools are often framed between two powerful poles: the brand dominance of U.S. institutions and the scale and growth of Asia. But according to three leading European deans, that framing misses what is actually happening on the ground.

Rather than losing ground, they argue, Europe is carving out a distinct model – one built less on scale or signaling and more on depth, diversity, and long-term judgment. “Europe is not losing ground, it’s redefining what leadership in business education means,” says Caroline Roussel, dean of IÉSEG School of Management. José M. Martínez-Sierra of UPF Barcelona School of Management goes further, arguing that Europe is “quietly outperforming” in areas that rankings struggle to measure, particularly critical thinking and the ability to operate in ambiguity.

At the same time, Europe’s position is being reshaped by external forces. Visa friction, rising costs, and geopolitical uncertainty are pushing candidates to reconsider where they study. Across all three schools, deans report measurable shifts in applicant behavior – not just in volume, but in how candidates evaluate programs. At IÉSEG, international applications are up as much as 30% in some programs, while ESCP has seen a 60% increase in U.S. applicants to its bachelor’s of management degree.

A SHIFT IN STUDENT FLOWS

There is less agreement on whether this moment represents a lasting advantage. Léon Laulusa, dean of ESCP Business School, the pan-European school with campuses in Paris, London, Berlin and elsewhere, describes Europe as “holding steady” but still a “sleeping beauty” with untapped potential. Others see something more structural taking shape, driven by cost advantages, mobility within the EU, and a perception of relative stability compared to the U.S. and U.K.

If there is one area where all three converge, it is on artificial intelligence – not as a feature to be added, but as a force already making parts of the traditional curriculum obsolete. Lecture-based teaching, isolated case analysis, and repetitive analytical tasks are all under pressure. In their place: AI-augmented problem-solving, judgment under uncertainty, and new forms of assessment that emphasize process over output.

What follows are the full responses from each dean, reflecting a region that may be less unified than its competitors – but increasingly confident in what it offers.

CAROLINE ROUSSEL, DEAN, IÉSEG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

Most rankings still place U.S. schools at the top, while Asia is gaining momentum in scale and regional demand. If you had to be blunt: is Europe losing ground, holding steady, or quietly outperforming – and on what specific dimension (talent, research, innovation, employability) is it strongest or weakest?

Europe is not losing ground, it’s redefining what leadership in business education means. While U.S. schools chase brand prestige and Asia scales volume, Europe is building something more durable: safe, inclusive, and intellectually rigorous ecosystems where global talent can thrive without compromise.

The numbers speak for themselves. European business schools hold 6 of the top 10 Master in Management programs in the Financial Times rankings. French schools alone outperform most U.S. competitors on international diversity and research impact.

At IÉSEG, 42% of our students are international, representing 100+ nationalities – not as a branding exercise, but as a pedagogical imperative for preparing leaders in a multipolar world.

On DEI, the gap is widening in Europe’s favor. While U.S. institutions face legal rollbacks on affirmative action and Asian schools struggle with homogeneity, European business schools operationalize inclusion: women represent 50%+ of students in top European programs (vs. 35% in many U.S. MBAs), and research on gender equity, migration, and social justice remains unrestricted – a freedom increasingly constrained elsewhere.

Employability? International recruitment in Europe remains robust despite geopolitical tensions, because employers value what we deliver: multilingual graduates trained in complexity, ethics, and cross-cultural agility – not just technical skills.

Europe’s strategic bet is clear: substance over spectacle, safety over volatility, and purpose over profit alone. That’s not holding steady, that’s leading the future of management education.

We’re seeing candidates reconsider cross-border education due to visas, cost, and geopolitical friction. Is Europe benefiting from this as a stable alternative – or is it facing the same underlying pressures as the U.S. and UK? What hard evidence are you seeing in your own applicant pool that suggests this shift is structural rather than temporary?

Europe is benefiting as a stable alternative, and the evidence we’re seeing at IÉSEG suggests this shift is structural, not temporary. Hard evidence from our applicant pool at IÉSEG confirms that this shift is well underway. In 2026, we have seen a +30% increase in international applications for our Bachelor programs and +25% for our Master programs.

What is particularly telling is not only the volume, but the diversification of our recruitment markets. While we continue to see strong demand from traditional regions such as China, India, and Europe, we are also experiencing growing interest from Latin America, North America, Southeast Asia, and Africa — markets that have historically been more oriented towards the U.S. or the UK.

The motivations expressed by candidates are consistent and increasingly explicit: visa accessibility (including Schengen mobility and clearer post-study work opportunities in France), cost competitiveness (with European programs typically 40–60% less expensive than comparable U.S. options), and a perception of greater geopolitical stability.

Beyond these structural drivers, we are also observing a shift in candidate profiles, with a growing number of applicants bringing prior academic or professional experience, reflecting a more deliberate and long-term approach to studying in Europe, especially for post-graduate candidates.

Does Europe face pressures? Absolutely: rising living costs, bureaucratic complexity, competition from Singapore or Dubai. But the difference is how schools are responding. At IÉSEG, we’ve launched international immersions, expanded dual degrees, and invested in AI to maintain accessibility and quality.

Many schools claim to be integrating AI, but often at the margins. What is ONE core element of your curriculum or delivery model that you believe will be obsolete within five years because of AI – and what have you actually replaced it with so far?

One element becoming obsolete is traditional lecture-based teaching focused on memorization and standardized case studies. This no longer reflects how managers will actually work. With AI, students can generate analyses, summaries, and strategic recommendations instantly. The real challenge is learning to work on real-world business problems using AI tools critically. Not just to produce answers, but to question them, refine them and make decisions based on them.

At IÉSEG, we are progressively embedding AI across all our courses, ensuring students develop these competencies throughout their entire academic journey, not just in isolated modules. Students learn to use AI as a strategic tool while developing critical judgment, creative prompting, and ethical decision-making.

This transformation extends to our Career Program. Corporate assessments are increasingly AI-driven – we see this as a lasting trend that will continue to expand. We are proactively adapting our career preparation to anticipate these changes and keep our students ahead of the curve. Thus, we have developed an AI Career Module (100% created in-house) designed to empower students in autonomous AI use. Available to 100% of students and soon mandatory across all Career Programs, it integrates AI-powered job search strategies and interview preparation; prompting techniques for company research, application optimization, and strategic positioning; AI-enhanced mock interviews simulating real corporate recruitment processes.

The obsolete element: passive knowledge transfer. The replacement: active AI-augmented problem-solving and decision-making across curriculum and career preparation.

José Manuel Martínez-Sierra: “Our approach to AI has not been restrictive, but integrative. Rather than attempting to limit its use, we have focused on embedding it into the learning experience with clear guidelines that prioritise critical thinking, ethical use, and transparency”

JOSÉ M. MARTÍNEZ-SIERRA, DIRECTOR GENERAL AND PROVOST, UPF BARCELONA SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

I would argue that Europe is quietly outperforming, particularly in a dimension that most rankings fail to capture: depth of thinking and impact over speed of output. European programmes continue to develop graduates who can operate in conditions of ambiguity, navigate complex regulatory environments, and work effectively across cultures. These are not easily quantifiable attributes, but they are increasingly critical in a fragmented and uncertain global context.

Europe’s strength lies in its educational philosophy: a stronger emphasis on critical thinking, interdisciplinary perspectives, and long-term judgment rather than purely technical or short-term outputs. This creates professionals who are not only capable of solving problems, but of framing them correctly in the first place.

Where Europe remains weaker is in signalling employability. We have not yet translated these deeper capabilities into a language that recruiters can quickly interpret. In highly competitive hiring environments, where decisions are often made in seconds, this becomes a structural disadvantage. There is a clear opportunity here: Europeans need to better codify and communicate skills such as complex problem framing, ethical reasoning, and decision-making under uncertainty.

In comparative terms, Asia is leading in scale and responsiveness to regional demand, while the United States continues to dominate in brand and global perception. Europe’s edge is in educating top talent, impact and purpose, but unless we become significantly more effective at articulating that value, we risk being underestimated despite our strengths.

It would be naïve to suggest that Europe is insulated from the same pressures affecting the United States and the United Kingdom: visa uncertainty, rising costs, and geopolitical tensions are global phenomena. However, Europe is increasingly perceived as a more stable and desirable destination, since the second Trump administration took office. In some cases also as more accessible alternative, among other reasons due to its well-fare and the presence of world-class public universities and their business schools.

We are seeing growing inbound interest from candidates who are actively reconsidering traditional destinations such as the U.S. and the U.K. That said, the shift is not toward “Europe” as a homogeneous option, but toward very specific ecosystems: countries and institutions that offer a clear and credible value proposition, particularly in terms of post-study living and employment opportunities.

The most notable change in our applicant pool is behavioural. Candidates are engaging earlier, conducting more thorough comparisons, and asking more demanding questions about return on investment, career outcomes, and geographic mobility. This suggests a more structural shift in decision-making criteria rather than a temporary reaction to external shocks.

Another important signal is the diversification of candidate profiles. We are seeing individuals who previously would not have considered Europe at all, as well as candidates who are applying more strategically across regions rather than defaulting to a single market.

In this context, the institutions that will benefit are those that can demonstrate tangible outcomes: employment data, career trajectories, and clear pathways into the labour market. Transparency is becoming a competitive advantage. Simply rebranding or adjusting marketing narratives will not be sufficient; candidates are increasingly sophisticated and will reward substance over positioning.

Many schools claim to be integrating AI, but often at the margins. What is one core element of your curriculum or delivery model that you believe will be obsolete within five years because of AI – and what have you actually replaced it with so far?

When I arrived 5 years ago from Harvard University, I initiated our AI Strategy, recruiting faculty already working in future strategies and creating the adequate platforms: an AI Task Force and the AI Business Transformation Institute, amongst others.

Our approach to AI has not been restrictive, but integrative. Rather than attempting to limit its use, we have focused on embedding it into the learning experience with clear guidelines that prioritise critical thinking, ethical use, and transparency.

One of the most important shifts is recognising that certain traditional tasks, such as case study analysis performed in isolation, are rapidly losing their pedagogical value as core differentiators. If an AI system can generate a technically sound analysis in minutes, then the skill we should be developing is not analysis alone, but the ability to interrogate, challenge, and refine that output.

This is why we are placing increasing emphasis on judgment under pressure in environments where AI is present. Students must learn how to make decisions when supported by, but not dependent on, intelligent systems. This includes understanding the limitations of AI, identifying biases, and knowing when not to rely on automated outputs.

We are also experimenting with new forms of assessment that are harder to automate: live problem-solving, collaborative decision-making, and contexts where the process matters as much as the outcome. Additionally, there is a growing focus on meta-skills: learning how to ask better questions, how to frame problems effectively, and how to integrate human and machine intelligence.

Looking ahead, some elements of traditional curricula may indeed become obsolete, particularly those that prioritise repetitive analytical tasks. However, what will gain relevance are the uniquely human capabilities: judgment, creativity, ethical reasoning, and the ability to operate in complex, uncertain environments. The institutions that adapt fastest will not be those that simply “add AI” to their programmes, but those that fundamentally rethink what it means to be educated in an AI-augmented world.

ESCP Dean Leon Laulusa: “We are moving beyond the traditional ‘T-shaped’ model to what we call a ‘W-shaped’ mindset: multiple areas of expertise, successive learning cycles, and lifelong growth. In practical terms, this means one thing: the boundary between business and engineering education is disappearing”

LÉON LAULUSA, DEAN, ESCP BUSINESS SCHOOL

If I’m very direct, Europe is holding steady, but it is still in many ways a “sleeping beauty” with strong untapped potential.

Its greatest strength is clearly talent. According to the French public institution Campus France’s latest report, Europe remains the world’s leading host region for international students. Between 2017 and 2022, the number of students in individual mobility in Europe grew by +57% (vs + 27% globally). What is striking is not just the volume, but the intensity of intra-European mobility. Students don’t just come to Europe, they circulate within it: 89% of European students who go abroad stay within Europe, the highest intra-regional rate worldwide. At ESCP, we see this every day across our six campuses, where students don’t just come to Europe, they experience it as a connected academic and cultural space.

Research and innovation are more nuanced. Europe represents around 20% of global R&D, versus roughly 29% for the U.S., so there remains a gap. Still, Europe remains highly visible academically, with a strong presence in global rankings and a long tradition of intellectual leadership.

Where I see real progress is in innovation. Europe has historically trained outstanding scientists who sometimes circulate globally before returning: Nobel Prize Philippe Aghion, Thomas Piketty, Olivier Blanchard or Jean Tirole. Today that dynamic is evolving. The ecosystem is maturing, with 28 new European unicorns in 2025 (nearly double the number created the previous year), and a stronger ability to scale talent locally.

And we should not forget employability. European schools perform extremely well, dominating the FT MiM ranking (85 schools) for example, and outcomes are tangible. In France, for example, over 90% of international graduates say their studies helped them secure their first job. This is a very concrete measure of impact.

So Europe is not losing ground. It is evolving, and I believe, quietly strengthening its position, particularly through its ability to combine academic excellence with diversity and mobility.

Europe is clearly gaining momentum, but not by accident.

We are seeing this combination of factors: stricter visa environments in some countries, rising costs, and broader geopolitical uncertainty, naturally prompt some students to reassess where they study.

Europe benefits from a number of structural advantages: more accessible tuition levels, strong academic freedom, and a harmonised degree system that makes mobility easier. There is also a more proactive policy environment, with clear ambition at a European level to attract international talent: such as the EU’s first Visa Strategy announced in 2026, alongside the European Executive’s ambition to attract at least 350,000 non-European students annually by 2030.

At ESCP, we see this shift very concretely. While it is still too early to confirm whether this represents a structural shift, we are clearly observing a trend in our applicant pools that is likely to persist in the near term. Over the past two years, candidate numbers have grown steadily, including so far in our recruitment for 2026. We also notice that the profile of those driving this growth has begun to evolve between 2024 and 2025.

For example, our Bachelor programme saw a 60% increase in applicants from the United States. We also recorded an uptick in candidates from India, a market that has traditionally favoured the US and has been significantly affected by recent constraints on H-1B visas.

Within Europe, we are similarly seeing more candidates across our programmes choosing to remain within the region rather than pursuing education abroad.

This is also why we are investing in initiatives like Designing Europe, which brings together academic, business, and policy perspectives to reflect on Europe’s role in a rapidly changing world. It reflects our belief that business education must engage directly with the major economic, technological, and geopolitical questions shaping the future.

Artificial intelligence is resetting expectations. According to the QS World Future Skills Index, 87% of companies already face, or will soon face, a skills gap between what they need and what their workforce actually has.

At ESCP, we do not believe that a specific element of our curriculum will become obsolete. Rather, the challenge is to evolve our model in a coherent way. With our strategic plan Bold & United 2026–2030, we are breaking down traditional silos by creating deep connections between our historic business school, our forthcoming School of Technology, focused on AI, Big Data, Cybersecurity and Digital Sciences, and our School of Governance, which addresses the importance of geopolitics in today’s business landscape.

Because the real shift is here: employers are no longer looking for specialists with a single track. They are looking for hybrid profiles that combine management, technology and governance. We are moving beyond the traditional “T-shaped” model to what we call a “W-shaped” mindset: multiple areas of expertise, successive learning cycles, and lifelong growth.

In practical terms, this means one thing: the boundary between business and engineering education is disappearing. As engineers learn management, business students must now understand science and technology. Not to become engineers, but to understand technology at a fundamental level.

And we are already acting on this. Through our partnerships with OpenAI and Hugging Face, and with over 200 active AI projects and 9,000 students trained in generative AI, we are moving our community from users of AI to makers of AI.

That, for me, is the real transformation.

DON’T MISS A FRENCH ‘GRAND ÉCOLE’ INVESTS IN AI TO REBUILD THE MBA CLASSROOM – RISKS INCLUDED

© Copyright 2026 Poets & Quants. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Poets & Quants, please submit your request HERE.