Management development and business ethics: A view from the U.K.

This article is written in the context of current British interest in management training and development, in which an emphasis on competency is viewed critically, as technically oriented, with little attention paid to ethics and moral values. It is suggested that a concern for ethics in management development can be expressed in terms of four requisite management attributes or qualities: theoretical knowledge and understanding; affective qualities; personal and interpersonal skills; and self-knowledge. Following Kohlberg's work on moral development, the cultivation of these attributes is viewed as a life-span process involving three broadly defined forms of management development practice, each appropriate to different circumstances and stages in a learner's career. It is concluded that the conventional teaching of theory, learning from experience and counselling/mentoring, are equally important in the contribution which management development can make to the resolution of ethical dilemmas in business practice.Patrick Maclagan is a lecturer in organisational behaviour and managerial ethics at the School of Management, University of Hull, U.K., where he is also on the Steering Committee of the Social Values Research Centre, His current research concerns the relationship between management development and ethics in organisations.     

The organizational context for moral development: Questions of power and access

In this article it is argued that much research into processes of moral learning and development in organisations has been conducted under somewhat controlled conditions, and that these do not permit testing of individuals' thought and action under more extreme circumstances. Therefore in practice one needs to acknowledge the effect of the actual organisational context. Three aspects or issues concerning the effect of this context on interventions are identified: first, systemic factors, especially corporate culture, impact on individual behaviour; second, consultants and developers may have difficulty when working with people at different levels of moral development; and, third, differential influence among members of an organisation affects the possibility of, and the enactment of, moral development programmes.Each of these considerations is discussed while employing conceptualisations based on Kohlberg's ideas. However the question of influence and power is not one which has been addressed to any significant extent by writers in this particular area. The essential argument in this article is that this must be done if the full potential of research into moral development in organisations is to be realised.Patrick Maclagan is Senior Lecturer and director of Research in the Department of Management Systems & Sciences, School of Management, University of Hull, U.K. His current research interests concern managerial behaviour and management learning with reference to ethics in organisations.     

Corporate social responsibility as a participative process

Corporate social responsibility is frequently defined primarily in terms of the social and environmental impact of systemic organisational activity. This misses the point. To be applicable, corporate responsibility should be understood as a process , through which individuals ' moral values and concerns are articulated. Moreover, there are important grounds for asserting that such a process should be participative, involving employees (and perhaps other stakeholders). It seems inconsistent not to respect such groups' right to an opinion, while at the same time purporting to be ethical and responsible; also, a better alignment of organisational policy and employees' values holds possibilities for enhanced motivation and work performance. Through such a participative process, matters of social responsibility may be identified in the expectations and moral claims of an organisation's stakeholders. Such claims constitute prima facie obligations to which those responsible for corporate policy should attend, and where such demands conflict then dialogue is required in order to establish an appropriate course of action.     

Moral dilemmas,moral reasons and moral learning: interpreting a real case in terms of particularistic theory

The core of the paper consists of dialogue from a true case where an employee experienced moral dilemmas following a disquieting directive from his manager. The case is considered from the perspective of Dancy's particularistic theory of moral reasons (with some insight also from Ross's theory of prima facie duties). This case was chosen not to illustrate the theory, but rather to test the assumption that an approach to moral judgement based on Ross and Dancy has general applicability. It is suggested that, in its simplest form, that approach approximates to the manner in which people in organisations, without prior knowledge of ethical theorising, would ordinarily deal with comparable situations, and so it can be relatively easy to learn given practice. Based on this case, some insight is also offered into individuals' moral learning, including their need for personal qualities such as assertiveness and independence of mind. In that context a reciprocal relationship between Dancy's approach and Werhane's thinking on moral imagination is suggested.     

Conflicting obligations,moral dilemmas and the development of judgement through business ethics education

Learning to address moral dilemmas is important for participants on courses in business ethics and corporate social responsibility (CSR). While modern, rule‐based ethical theory often provides the normative input here, this has faced criticism in its application. In response, post‐modern and Aristotelian perspectives have found favour. This paper follows a similar line, presenting an approach based initially on a critical interpretation of Ross's theory of prima facie duties, which emphasises moral judgement in actual situations. However, the retention of a modern element is suggested, with an invitation to hypothetically universalise detailed proposals for action, following Hare. This further step may reassure students/managers who seek additional closure in their decision‐making. Some pedagogical implications are also briefly raised regarding the use of case material and the need to recognise questions of social interaction and personal character as features of dilemma resolution in actual organisational contexts.     

Varieties of Moral Issue and Dilemma: A Framework for the Analysis of Case Material in Business Ethics Education

This paper builds on a number of ideas concerning the nature, management and representation in case studies, of moral issues and dilemmas as experienced by people in organisations. Drawing on some cases used in teaching business ethics, and utilising a checklist of questions derived from the more general theoretical analysis, suggestions are offered regarding the contributions which such cases can make in developing students' understanding and potential for performative competence in real life situations. The distinction between issues and dilemmas is emphasised, and different types of issue are identified. The status of self-interest as an issue, and as contributory to personal dilemmas, is given particular attention. The paper also addresses the distinction between cognitive and non-cognitive attributes required by individuals if they are to deal with such situations. Within the cognitive category attention is paid to the contribution of ethical and other theory, and to the need for moral imagination and judgement.     

Does a ‘care orientation’ explain gender differences in ethical decision making? A critical analysis and fresh findings

Over the past two decades there has been a great deal of research conducted into the question of gender differences in ethical decision making in organisations. Much of this has been based on questionnaire surveys, typically asking respondents (often students, sometimes professionals) to judge the moral acceptability of actions as described in short cases or vignettes. Overall the results seem inconclusive, although what differences have been noted tend to show women as 'more ethical' than men. The authors of this paper believe that attention should be paid to the insight, from Carol Gilligan and others, that women are more inclined than men to subscribe to an 'ethic of care', and that once this perspective is adopted a pattern is discernible. In a critical examination of previous research we pay particular attention to the detailed content of cases used in surveys, and the statistical analysis of findings. We advocate greater reflection on the results of quantitative surveys and sensitivity to different possible interpretations of findings. This we do with our own exploratory study, conducted with UK undergraduate students of accounting, the findings from which seem to support the original hypothesis that where a 'care' orientation is invited, women do indeed react differently to business ethics issues than do men.     

Hierarchical control or individuals' moral autonomy? Addressing a fundamental tension in the management of business ethics

There is a fundamental tension in business ethics between the apparent need to ensure ethical conduct through hierarchical control, and the encouragement of individuals' potential for autonomous moral judgement. In philosophical terms, these positions are consequentialist and Kantian, respectively. This paper assumes the former to be the dominant position in practice, and probably in theory also, but regards it as a misplaced extension of the more general managerial tendency to seek and maintain control over employees. While the functions of such control are recognized, the arguments in favour of individuals' moral autonomy are pursued from both a Kantian and a social–theoretic perspective. Reference is made to Kohlberg's research on moral development that provides an insight into how individuals, through participation in debate with colleagues, might become more effective moral agents within organizational settings. This is contrasted with a managerial perspective, which pays lip service to individuals' right to such genuine involvement. The paper considers psychological manipulation and the legitimacy of managerial authority on matters of ethics, as opposed to in the purely technical context. The wider societal significance of such hierarchical power in organizations constitutes an important background to the paper. It is concluded that genuine, non-manipulative, participation by employees (and others) is the way forward for the ethical management of business ethics.