Principled moral reasoning: Is it a viable approach to promote ethical integrity?

In response to recent recommendations for the teaching of principled moral reasoning in business school curricula, this paper assesses the viability of such an approach. The results indicate that, while business students' level of moral reasoning in this sample are like most 18- to 21-year-olds, they may be incapable of grasping the concepts embodied in principled moral reasoning. Implications of these findings are discussed. James Weber is currently an Assistant Professor of Management at Marquette University. He has published articles on managerial values and moral reasoning and the teaching of business ethics in Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy: Empirical Studies of Business Ethics and Values, International Journal of Value Based Management, Human Relations, and Journal of Business Ethics. Sharon Green is currently an Assistant Professor of Accounting at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Her research emphasizes information processing aspects of decision making in governmental, auditing and educational contexts. Her publications have appeared in Accounting Review and Research in Governmental and Non-Profit Accounting.     

Limitations of ethical reasoning as an action (praxis) strategy

For both philosophers and managers, reasoning with ourselves and others can be used both as (1) a way of knowing what is ethical and (2) a way of acting to help ourselves, others and organizations behave ethically. However, for many of us, knowing is frequently not the same as acting. Four areas are addressed: (1) thirteen limitations of ethical reasoning as an action strategy; (2) how a better understanding of these limitations can strengthen ethical reasoning as an action strategy; (3) how an understanding of these limitations can serve as a conceptual foundation for exploring other ethical action strategies; and, (4) implications for experiential learning and teaching. Richard P. Nielsen is a Management Professor in the Department of Organizational Studies, School of Management, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02167. Related articles of his include Toward an Action Philosophy for Managers Based on Arendt and Tillich, Journal of Business Ethics, May 1984, What Can Managers Do about Unethical Management, Journal of Business Ethics, May 1987, and Cooperative Strategy, Strategic Management Journal 9, 1988.     

Ethical attitudes of students and business professionals: A study of moral reasoning

A questionnaire on business ethics was administered to business professionals and to upper-class business ethics students. On eight of the seventeen situations involving ethical dilemmas in business, students were significantly more willing to engage in questionable behavior than were their professional counterparts. Apparently, many students were willing to do whatever was necessary to further their own interests, with little or no regard for fundamental moral principles. Many students and professionals functioned within Lawrence Kohlberg's stage four of moral reasoning, the law and order stage. Individualism and egoism remain strong patterns in the moral reasoning of many professionals, but they influence moral reasoning patterns among students to a much greater degree.John A. Wood is Associate Professor or Religion at Baylor University.Justin G. Longenecker is Emeritus Chavanne Professor of Christian Ethics in Business at Baylor University.Joseph A. McKinney is Professor of Economics and Co-Director of Master of International Management Program at Baylor University.Carlos W. Moore is an Edwin W. Streetman Professor of Marketing at Baylor University.     

An issue in corporate social responsibility: An experiential approach to establish the value of human life

While the notion of establishing a value for human life may be uncomfortable for some, we argue that it is a fundamental requirement for many aspects of public policy. We compare a number of approaches which have been traditionally relied on to make estimations. Also, we provide an exercise which provides an unusual, but we hope provocative, perspective on the evaluation of human life. Richard A. Cosier is Associate Dean for Academics and Professor of Business Administration at Indiana University. Dr Cosier's research has focused largely on managerial decision-making, organizational responses to external forces, and participative management. His work has been published in Behavioral Science, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Management Science, Strategic Management Journal, Decision Sciences, Personnel Psychology, and other journals. Dan R. Dalton is Professor of Management and Director of Graduate Programs, Graduate School of Business, Indiana University. Widely published in business and psychology, his articles have appeared in the Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Business Ethics, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Business Strategy, Behavioral Science, and Human Relations, as well as many others.     

The moral authority of transnational corporate codes

Ethical guidelines for multinational corporations are included in several international accords adopted during the past four decades. These guidelines attempt to influence the practices of multinational enterprises in such areas as employment relations, consumer protection, environmental pollution, political participation, and basic human rights. Their moral authority rests upon the competing principles of national sovereignty, social equity, market integrity, and human rights. Both deontological principles and experience-based value systems undergird and justify the primacy of human rights as the fundamental moral authority of these transnational and transcultural compacts. Although difficulties and obstacles abound in gaining operational acceptance of such codes of conduct, it is possible to argue that their guidelines betoken the emergence of a transcultural corporate ethic. William C. Frederick is Professor of Business Administration, Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh. He is President (1990) of the Society for Business Ethics, former chair of the Social Issues in Management division of The Academy of Management, and was the Charles Dirksen Professor of Business Ethics at Santa Clara University in 1980–81. He is coauthor of Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics (McGraw-Hill, 1988).     

Ethics and the organizational person: Revisiting DeGeorge

In this paper I review the dispute over DeGeorge's analysis of the issue of the ethical responsibilities of engineers in large organizations. I argue that this issue is no different than the question of the ethical responsibilities of any other relevantly situated employee because engineers have no special duty to hold paramount the safety of the public distinct from that of others. I demonstrate how critics like Mankin, James, and Curd and May have misread and misinterpreted DeGeorge's position and his argument. I then identify a serious logical problem in DeGeorge, unnoticed by critics, but conclude by defending the spirit of DeGeorge's approach. That spirit recognizes the limitations of attempting to provide necessary and sufficient conditions in response to many questions in applied philosophy. John R. Danley is Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophical Studies at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. His Liberalism, Aboriginal Rights and Cultural Minorities, has recently appeared in Philosophy & Public Affairs (1991). Polestar Refined: Business Ethics and Political Economy has recently appeared in Journal of Business Ethics (1991). Other articles have appeared in the following journals: Mind, Philosophical Studies, The Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, Business and Professional Ethics, Journal of Negro Education, and Journal of Business Ethics. Articles have also appeared in Action Theory and The Ethics of Organizational Transformation, and elsewhere.     

The Significance of Gender in Predicting the Cognitive Moral Development of Business Practitioners Using the Sociomoral Reflection Objective Measure

This study constitutes a contribution to the discussion about moral reasoning in business. Kohlberg’s (1971, in Cognitive Development and Epistemology (Academic Press, New York), 1976, in Moral Development and Behavior: Theory and Research and Social Issues (Holt, Rienhart and Winston, New York)) cognitive moral development (CMD) theory is one explanation of moral reasoning. One unresolved debate on the topic of CMD is the charge that Kohlbergian-type CMD theory is gender biased. This research puts forth the proposal that the issue may be elucidated by exposing an ambiguity in “gender” (Borna and White: 2003, Journal of Business Ethics 47, 89–99; Gentile: 1993, Psychological Science 4(2), 120–122; Unger: 1979, American Psychologist 34(11), 1085–1094). We use the Sociomoral Reflective Objective Measure (SROM) to measure CMD and the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) to measure gender as a psychosocial concept, rather than as a biological classification. The results of our study indicate that high femininity, measured as a psychosocial attribute, is associated with significantly lower Kohlbergian-type CMD scores among business practitioners. Sex moderates the effect of gender on CMD, but only indirectly. Our research also reveals that education plays a significant moderating role in the relationship between gender and moral reasoning. In addition, age has a significant direct effect on CMD scores of business practitioners. Beverly Kracher is an Associate Professor of Business Ethics & Society in the College of Business Administration at Creighton University. Her research areas include moral reasoning in business, e-commerece ethics & online trust, business ethics pedagogy, and business & the environment. Her research appears in Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business & Society, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Teaching Business Ethics, Interdisciplinary Environmental Review and more. Robert P. Marble is an Associate Professor of Decision Sciences in the College of Business Administration at Creighton University. His research is in the areas of information systems implementation, artificial intelligence, and statistical modeling of business processes. He has published in such journals as the European Journal of Information Systems and Information & Management.     

Ethics in education: A comparative study

This study reports the results of a survey designed to assess the impact of education on the perceptions of ethical beliefs of students. The study examines the beliefs of students from selected colleges in an eastern university. The results indicate that beliefs which students perceive are required to succeed in the university differ among colleges. Business and economics students consistently perceive a greater need for unethical beliefs than students from other colleges. Michael S. Lane is an Associate Professor of Management at West Virginia University. He is the coauthor of Corporate Goal structures and Business students: A Comparative Study of Values, Journal of Business Ethics (1989). Dietrich L. Schaupp is Professor of Management at West Virginia University. He is the coauthor of Pygmalion Effect: An Issue for Business Education and Ethics, Journal of Business Ethics (1988).     

Auditor independence deficiencies & alleged audit failures

Some critics of the accounting/auditing profession in the United States claim that independence-related quality control problems are the cause of an increased number of alleged audit failures. Certified public accountants (CPAs) were queried regarding independence impairment in their profession. Questionnaire results indicate a number of CPAs believe independence deficiencies exist, and some CPAs admit to personal independence impairment. Michael A. Pearson is Associate Professor of Accounting at the Graduate School of Management and College of Business Administration, Kent State University. Additionally, he is the Editor of The Ohio CPA Journal. Professor Pearson is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and a Certified Management Accountant (CMA). He has written numerous articles including, Enhancing Perceptions of Auditor Independence, Journal of Business Ethics 4 (1985), 53–56.     

TNCs and the corruption of GATT: Free trade versus fair trade

In order to enrich global corporate culture, a distinction must be made between the economic ideology of free trade and the moral ideology of fair trade. GATT has failed to make this distinction. Its sole ethos of free trade is only applicable among developmentally equivalent nations, and has been used by TNCs as a means for attaining their commercial ends in the third world. GATT's lack of commitment to an objective of fair trade necessitates its replacement. This article suggests a replacement in the form of a network of trade organizations. The network takes the form of a hub-and-spoke arrangement, in which the hub would be the Global Trade Organization, and the spokes would each represent Regional Trade Organizations.John Dobson is currently an Associate Professor of Finance at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. His primary research interests are Agency Theory and Financial Ethics. His publications include articles and letters inJournal of Business Ethics, Financial Management, Business in the Contemporary World andBusiness and Society.     

The impact of ethical ideology on modifiers of ethical decisions and suggested punishment for ethical infractions

The present study sought to determine the extent to which individuals' ethical ideologies, as measured by Forsyth's (1980) Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ), impacted the degree of punishment they advocated for differing ethical infractions, as well as their selection of non-ethics related variables that might be used to modify judgments of disciplinary action. The data revealed that individual ideology does impact both advocated punishment and choice of non-ethics related variables, but only in some measures. The data are discussed in terms of potential moderating variables that could be examined in future studies.Robert A. Giacalone is the author of over 40 management articles, as well as two books,Impression Management in the Organization andApplied Impression Management, and the Editor of a Special Issue of theJournal of Business Ethics on Behavioral Aspects of Business Ethics. In 1992, Sage Publications named him the Editor of the Sage Series in Business Ethics, a book series dedicated to ethics education for students and practitioners. Dr. Giacalone is currently Associate Professor of Management Systems at the E. Claiborne Robins School of Business, University of Richmond.Scott Fricker is currently a doctoral student in the social psychology program at the University of California-Santa Barbara. The research described herein reflects, in part, research done as a psychology undergraduate at the University of Richmond.Jon W. Beard is currently Assistant Professor of Management Systems in the E. Claiborne Robins School of Business at the University of Richmond. His work primarily concerns behavioral and organizational issues related to the management of technology. He is currently editing a book titledImpression Management and Information Technology for Greenwood Press.     

Ethics in business education: Working toward a meaningful reciprocity

This paper outlines and argues against some criticisms of business ethics education. It maintains that these criticisms have been put forward due to a misunderstanding of the nature of business and/or ethics. Business ethics seeks a meaningful reciprocity among economic, social and moral concerns. This demands that business organizations autonomously develop ethical goals from within, which in turn demands a reciprocity between ethical theory and practical experience. Working toward such a reciprocity, the ultimate goal of business ethics education is a moral business point of view through which one can live with integrity and fulfillment.To everyone who proposes to have a good career, moral philosophy is indispensible. Cicero, De Officiis, 44BC W. Michael Hoffman is Chair and Professor in the Department of Philosophy and Director at the Center for Business Ethics, Bentley College, Waltham, MA. He has received the following Grants: Council for Philosophical Studies, NEH Fellow, NDEA Fellow, Matchette. His most important publications are: Kant's Theory of Freedom: A Metaphysical Inquiry (UPA, 1979); Proceedings of the National Conferences on Business Ethics, 5 volumes (1977–1984); Business Ethics (McGraw-Hill, 1984) and articles in Journal of Business Ethics, Idealistic Studies, International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Journal of Thought, The Journal for Critical Analysis, and The Southern Journal of Philosophy.Paper presented at the 16th Conference on Value Inquiry, entitled: Ethics and the Market Place: An Exercise in Bridge-Building or On the Slopes of the Interface.     

Engineers and management: The challenge of the challenger incident

The Challenger incident was a result of at least four kinds of difficulties: differing perceptions and priorities of the engineers and management at Thiokol and at NASA, a preoccupation with roles and role responsibilities on the part of engineers and managers, contrasting corporate cultures at Thiokol and its parent, Morton, and a failure both by engineers and by managers to exercise individual moral responsibility. I shall argue that in the Challenger case organizational structure, corporate culture, engineering and managerial habits, and role responsibilites precipitated events contributing to the Challenger disaster. At the same time, a number of individuals at Morton Thiokol and NASA were responsible for the launch failure. Differing world views, conflicting priorities of the engineers and managers on this project, and the failure of either engineers or management to take personal moral responsibility for decision-making contributed significantly to the event. Patricia H. Werhane is the Wirtenberger Professor of Business Ethics at Loyola University of Chicago. She is one of the founding members and past president of the Society for Business Ethics and editor-in-chief of Business Ethics Quarterly. Her publications include Ethical Issues in Business, coedited with Tom Donaldson, Persons, Rights, and Corporations, and Adam Smith and His Legacy for Modern Capitalism forthcoming with Oxford University Press.     

A Business Ethics Experiential Learning Module: the Maryland Business School Experience

In this paper we describe the principal activities of the initial implementation in May of 1996 of one of the Experiential Learning Modules (ELMs) entitled Business Ethics (UMCP 1995, p. 7) that is part of the full-time MBA program at the College of Business and Management (Maryland Business School) of the University of Maryland at College Park (UMCP). Additionally, we briefly consider the location of this Business Ethics ELM in the curriculum of the Maryland Business School's full-time MBA program. We also outline how the Business Ethics ELM was developed. Further, we provide a discussion and a short conclusion.     

Ethical perspectives on the foreign direct investment decision

This paper examines the foreign direct investment decision from an ethical perspective, and considers the moral agency involved in such decisions, with emphasis upon the corporate decision-maker. Historical capital allocation models once regarded as both financially and ethically normative are shown to be deficient in today's environment. Work of modern western philososphical and theological ethicists is included in analyses of the applicability of selected ethical approaches or metaphors to multinational foreign direct investment decisions and the corporate manager's role and responsibility as corporate decision-maker and moral agent. The ethical perspectives reviewed can serve as an aid to the individual manager's determination of what constitutes a responsible exercise of decision-making power. Marjorie T. Stanley is Professor of Finance, M. J. Neeley School of Business, Texas Christian University. She was visiting Professor of Finance and Scholar in Residence, Institute for Business Ethics, DePaul University, 1986–87. She has related publications in, e.g., Ethics and the Multinational Enterprise (ed., Hoffman, et al), Journal of International Business Studies, California Management Review, The Financial Review, and Management International Review.     

Religions's moral compass and a just economic order: Reflections on Pope John Paul II's encyclicalCentesimus Annus

The purpose of Pope John Paul's encyclicalCentesimus Annus (CA) is to propound the foundations of a just economic order and to sketch its essential characteristics. As such he essentially provides an orientation or moral compass for the political economy rather than a precise road map. This article first reviews the principal components of CA and then analyzes and evaluates its central contentions on both cultural and economic grounds.S. Prakash Sethi is a Professor of Management and Associate Director of the Center for Management, Baruch College, The City University of New York. He has published twenty books and over 130 articles in scholarly and professional journals in such diverse areas as business and public policy, corporate strategy, and international business.Paul Steidlmeier is associate professor at the School of Management of Binghamton University in the State University of New York system. He has written a number of articles in leading journals and has publishedPeople and Profits: The Ethics of Capitalism (Prentice Hall, 1992). Recent work has focused upon institutionalist aspects of Business and Society issues and problems of intellectual property and the social responsibility of business in developing countries (China).     

Helping subordinates with their personal problems: A moral dilemma for managers

When subordinates ask their managers for help with their personal problems, it creates moral dilemmas for their managers. Managers are contractually obliged to maintain equivalent relations between their subordinates and that is compromised when one subordinate makes this kind of request. By applying deontological principles to this dilemma, additional options are revealed, and the moral duties managers owe their subordinates in these situations are clarified. Dennis J. Moberg is associate professor in the Department of Organizational Analysis and Management, Leavey School of Business Administration, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA 95053, USA. He is a Fellow of SCU's Center of Applied Ethics. His present research focus is on applying ethical principles to employer-employee interactions. Related articles are The Ethics of Organizational Politics, Academy of Management Review 6, 1981, 363–374, and An Ethical Theory of Peer Relations in Organizations, available from author.     

Ethical Theory and Business Practices: The Case of Discourse Ethics

By focusing on the reasoned debate in the discourse-ethical approach to business ethics, this paper discusses the possibilities and limitations of moral reasoning as well as applied economic and business ethics. Business ethics, it is contended, can be looked at from the standpoint of two criteria: justification and application. These criteria are used to compare three approaches: the Integrative Business Ethics, developed by Swiss philosopher Peter Ulrich, the Cultural Business Ethics of the Nuremberg School in German business ethics, and the concept of “Good Conservation” by Frederick Bird. It is argued that discourse-ethical approaches can be called upon for justifying moral principles. Improving the chances of their application, however, necessitates a good understanding of lifeworlds and culturally developed institutional settings. Bearing this in mind, further research perspectives stressing a linkage between discourse-ethical and critical approaches in social sciences are suggested.Dr. Thomas Beschorner is head of the research group “Social Learning and Sustainability” at University of Oldenburg, Germany and currently Visiting-Professor at McGill University, Montreal, Canada     

The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost

It is generally assumed that common stock investors are exclusively interested in earning the highest level of future cash-flow for a given amount of risk. This view suggests that investors select a well-diversified portfolio of securities to achieve this goal. Accordingly, it is often assumed that investors are unwilling to pay a premium for corporate behavior which can be described as socially-responsible.Recently, this view has been under increasing attack. According to the Social Investment Forum, at least 538 institutional investors now allocate funds using social screens or criteria. In addition, Alice Tepper Marlin, president of the New York-based Council on Economic Priorities has recently estimated that about $600 billion of invested funds are socially-screened (1992). MOSES L. PAVA is Associate Professor of Accounting and the Alvin Einbender Chair in Business Ethics at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests include financial reporting and business ethics. He has recently published articles in the Journal of Accountancy, Management Accounting, The Financial Executive, and Journal of Applied Business Research. His first book, The Shareholder's Use of Corporate Annual Reports, was published in 1993. JOSHUA KRAUSZ is Gershon and Merle Stern Professor of Banking and Finance at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests are in the areas of financial analysis, ethics and social responsibility, financial accounting, options and derivatives, price behavior, capital budgeting and taxation. He has published in The Review of Economics and Statistics, The Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Accounting Horizons, Applied Economics, The Journal of Extractive Industries Accounting, and The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business.     

Cognitive moral development and attitudes toward women executives

Research has shown that men and women are similar in their capabilities and management competence; however, there appears to be a glass ceiling which poses invisible barriers to their promotion to management positions. One explanation for the existence of these barriers lies in stereotyped, biased attitudes toward women in executive positions. This study supports earlier findings that attitudes of men toward women in executive positions are generally negative, while the attitudes of women are generally positive. Additionally, we found that an individual's level of cognitive moral development correlates significantly with attitudes toward women executives. Limitations of the present study and implications for ethics and diversity training in organizations are discussed. Debbie Thorne is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at The University of Tampa. She earned her doctorate in 1993. Her research has been published in conference proceedings and in The Journal of Teaching in International Business and The Journal of Business Ethics.Linda Howell Everett is an Associate Professor of Management in the Master of Arts in Organizational Management program at Trevecca College, Nashville, Tennessee. Her research interests include business ethics, decision making, risk, and mergers and acquisitions.Carol Danehower is an Assistant Professor of Management in the Fogelman College of Business and Economics at The University of Memphis. Her research interests include gender issues, employee motivation, and employee benefits.