Ethics and Ethical Ideologies: An Empirical Study of Managers in North Indian Large Manufacturing Enterprises Manjit Monga School of International Business University of South Australia
Dr Manjit Monga is a Research Fellow at the School of International Business, University of South Australia, Adelaide. She is currently working on a project funded by the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, on human resource management of special event volunteers. Has interest and is involved in online teaching. Research interests are in the area of business ethics, organisational behaviour, human resource management and employment relations. Contact details: Ph +61 8 8302 0425. Email:
[email protected].
Abstract Increasing globalisation of businesses has also increased emphasis on doing business ethically. In a highly diverse and competitive environment managers are faced with difficult situations and in order for them to act ethically, they are expected to have a well-developed moral imagination. This research was designed to study the ethical positions held by the managers in India, according to Forsyth’s taxonomy of ethical ideologies, using Forsyth’s Ethics Position Questionnaire. A sample of 175 managers was drawn from 12 large manufacturing organizations in the state of Punjab, India. The results indicated a high score for both idealism and relativism for the majority of managers. About 79 per cent of the managers were found to be situationists and 20 per cent were found to be absolutists. A positive correlation was found between idealism and education. The paper also discusses the possible explanations for the high idealism scores of managers and a seemingly contradictory perception of India as overall a corrupt country with widespread unethical business practices.
Ethics and Ethical Ideologies: An Empirical Study of Managers in North Indian Large Manufacturing Enterprises The issues of business ethics have become increasingly important in the globalised business environment where comparative advantage and competitive edge are central to business decision-making. In a highly diverse and intensely competitive environment, managers are faced with difficult situations and often have to take tough decisions, which are not only right, fair, and proper (Hosmer, 1991) but also effective (Hosmer, 2000). Managements are faced with ethical issues frequently and with increasing pressure on individuals and businesses both for ethical behaviour (Ford and Richardson, 1994 and Trevino, 1984), they are expected to have a well-developed moral imagination (Werhane, 1998) in order for them to act ethically. A copious literature can be found on how to define ethics, which in its simplest form involves making judgments as to right and wrong, good and bad and what ought to be and perhaps what not ought to be. In such situations people may feel the need to arbitrate in a way that makes their lives feel reasonably coherent and continuous (Midgley, 1991). As Kolnai (1977:9) says, We constantly choose on some ground what we would reject on some other ground, or conversely. This is precisely what choice means: our numerous and in part changing concerns clash mutually in various ways, and we cannot pursue them except by restricting and postponing them, by choosing to favour one and denounce another temporarily or perhaps definitely. Business ethics can be understood as practices and policies in business to determine what is ethically defensible and what is not. Hartman (1998) describes business ethics as business behaviour based on standards of right or wrong rather than entirely on principles of accounting and management. It involves putting values into practice, which guide decision making in morally complex situations. For the purpose of discussion in this paper, an individual’s set of values or personal moral philosophy or ideology are their guiding principles and ethics are the ways these values and ideologies are applied to decisions. An ethical dilemma exists when two or more values are in conflict. Jackson (1996:8) suggests that there are two kinds of difficulties we face― • •
Difficulty of identification, which is recognizing what is your duty in a particular situation, and Difficulty of compliance, which is doing your duty, once you know what it is (1996:8).
This means that when faced with an ethical issue, first and foremost, it is the ability to recognize the moral issue in order to make ethical decisions. Next come the choices that one makes in order to act ethically. A number of factors may influence the ethical decision making process. According to Hunt and Vitell (1986) the individual ethical perception of the situation is influenced by a sum of cultural, organizational and industrial environment along with personal experiences. For Trevino (1986), in organizational context both the individual and situational factors affect the decision-making.
2
Ethics, Values and Personal Moral Philosophy or Ethical Ideology It is well accepted that moral philosophy or ethical ideology influences an individual’s reasoning about moral issues (Forsyth and Nye, 1990; Forsyth, 1992; Fritzsche and Becker, 1984; Hunt and Vitell, 1986; Fraedrich and Farrell, 1992) and consequent behavior. Differences in moral philosophy or ethical ideology are contended to explain differences in ethical judgments (Schlenker and Forsyth, 1977; Forsyth, 1980; Forsyth 1992). Ethical ideologies can be explained as a set of beliefs, values and attitudes, which may influence an individual’s judgment and decision-making when faced with difficult situations and ethical dilemmas. Schlenker and Forsyth (1977) suggest that individual variations in personal moral philosophies can be described most parsimoniously by taking into account the degree to which an individual is relativistic and/or idealistic. Relativism describes the extent to which individuals reject universal moral rules or principles. Idealism on the other hand, describes individual’s attitudes toward the consequences of an action and the effect of the action on the welfare of others. Highly idealistic individuals believe in moral absolutes and rely on universal moral principles or laws to evaluate the ethics of an action (Forsyth 1992). To describe extremes, some individuals idealistically assume that desirable consequences can always be obtained with the ‘right’ action and those with less idealistic orientation admit that undesirable consequences will often be mixed in desirable ones (Forsyth, 1980). Figure 1 indicates Forsyth’s taxonomy of ethical ideologies along with a brief description of the characteristics of individuals within each category. This conceptualization is based on philosophical theories of deontology, teleology and ethical skepticism (Schlenker and Forsyth, 1977; Forsyth, 1980). Figure 1—Taxonomy of Ethical Ideologies (Forsyth, 1980:176) Idealism
High Idealism Low Idealism
Relativism High relativism Situationist Rejects moral rules; advocates individualistic analysis of each act in each situation; relativistic Subjectivist Appraisals based on personal values and perspective rather than universal moral principles; relativistic
Low relativism Absolutist Assumes that the best possible outcomes can always be achieved by following universal moral rules Exceptionist Moral absolutes guide judgments but pragmatically open to exceptions to these standards; utilitarian
Forsyth’s taxonomy indicates that individuals may adopt one of four different approaches to make ethical judgments: situationism, absolutism, subjectivism and exceptionism. Inclusion in one of these groups is determined by whether a person espouses idealistic or non-idealistic values and believes moral rules are universal or relative (Forsyth, 1980:176). It also suggests that relativists and idealists both can be either low or high in relativism and idealism. Each one of the four approaches draws from a specific school of thought in philosophy of ethics. For example, the high relativism groups—the situationists and subjectivists—are individuals who endorse an ideology related to ethical skepticism (Forsyth, 1980). Skeptics believe that morality can be viewed in different ways and all kinds of skepticism criticize proponents of specific ethical principles. Ethical egoism, for example, is a skeptical ethical philosophy in which a pragmatic approach is taken to evaluate actions. 3
The ethical egoist argues that because moral standards are invalid except by reference to one’s own interests, moral evaluation must ultimately depend on personal perspectives (Forsyth, 1980:176). Fletcher advocates another kind of skeptical moral philosophy-situation ethicsand argues that morality should focus on the contextual appropriateness and not the good or the right but the fitting with the actions based on agapé or love of others (1973:186). According to this the situationists distrust the absolute moral principles and argue that each situation needs to be examined individually. The subjectivists on the other hand are high on relativism and low on idealism. They reject the idea of universal ethical principles and believe moral decisions are based on individualistic judgments and negative consequences do not necessarily make any action immoral. On the non-relativistic / low relativistic side of the typology are absolutists and exceptionists. Absolutists tend to agree with statements that are consistent with a general approach to moral philosophy known as deontology (Forsyth, 1980:176). A deontological system is based on the rules and principles which govern decisions (Hartman, 1998:6). This ethical philosophy rejects the use of consequences of an action as basis for moral evaluation and appeals to natural law or rationality to determine ethical judgments. In deontological ethical philosophy acts are judged as moral or immoral through their comparison with some universal moral rules that are absolute. The deontological philosopher Kant argued that a moral principle allows no exceptions regardless of consequences. Although no ethical ideology adopted by individuals may possess all the characteristics of a purely deontological approach, the absolutists’ emphasis on maintaining consistency with moral principles to obtain desired goals is similar to a deontological philosophy (Forsyth, 1980). The statements endorsed by exceptionists are more compatible with teleological ethical philosophy (Forsyth, 1980). The teleological approach proposes that the morality of an action depends upon the consequences produced by it. One is ethically bound to act in a way that produces good for the greatest number which is best represented by the utilitarian concept of greatest good for the greatest number. Literature Review The search for literature on the ethical ideologies held by managers in India revealed the sparse empirical research in the area. There are a few studies which provide insight into the values held by managers in India such as England’s (1975), in which Indian managers were a part of the larger study of personal value systems and the impact of values on behavior, along with managers from United States, Japan, Korea and Australia. The Indian sample in this study constituted of 623 managers from private enterprise organizations in India, of which about 60 per cent were employed in manufacturing companies with almost equal distribution of small, medium and large organizations (p. 91). Though England used a different typology for values, the study found that Indian managers had high degree of moralistic orientation where as managers from USA, Japan and Korea indicated large elements of pragmatism (England, 1975:10). Moralistically oriented described as ‘ those who characterize the concepts they view as high in importance as right. Their evaluation of importance is based on concerns of right or wrong and suggests a moral, ethical or normative value orientation’, (England, 1975:19). More recently Chockalingam and Deshpande (1998) conducted a study of 150 middle level managers in 2 or 3 organizations located in South India (the study does not indicate what kind of organizations and the exact definite number of the organizations studied) in which they examined demographic differences in perceived ethicality of various business practices on a 5-point Likert scale. They found significant gender, age and educational differences. The literature search revealed that largest proportion of studies focus on values and ethical behaviour in the area of marketing management. In their review of methodology in
4
business ethics research, Randall and Gibson commented that ‘it was particularly interesting to note the heavy reliance upon samples of marketing managers’ (1990:463). They attribute this to the widespread belief that marketing managers encounter more situations that result in decisions with ethical impact. Singhapakdi, Vitell and Leelakulthanit (1994) conducted a comparative study of Thai and American marketers. They found that Thai marketers are both more idealistic and more relativistic as compared to the American marketers. In other words they were situationists according to Forsyth’s typology. Chatterjee and Pearson (2000) conducted an empirical study of changing work goals of senior Indian managers who were undertaking management development courses conducted by a particular management institute in India. Their data indicated a shift in the work values of these managers. Considering India to be a collectivist society, they found that the managerial values are not necessarily linked to social visions (pg 652). Cyriac and Dharmaraj (1994) studied the influence of Machiavellianism on Indian managers and found that Niccolo Machiavelli inspires and influences them. A survey conducted by Monappa (1977) of the ethical attitudes of Indian managers found that 73 per cent of the managers tended to ignore ethics in their daily practice. Malhotra (1985) also reported ‘value erosion’ among Indian managers. For Chakraborty (1997) the economic liberalization has ushered in an era of unethical business practices. “An ethical depression began to break loose as an ethical cyclone with economic liberalization adopted by India in 1991” (p.. 1529). The latest scores released by the Transparency International (2000) rank India at number 69, in the list of 90 countries (http://www.transparency.de/documents/cpi/2000/cpi2000.html). The perception of India being overall a corrupt country, reported value erosion among managers in India and scarce empirical research in the area prompted the idea of studying the ethical beliefs and ideologies of the managers. The Present Study The purpose of the present study is to extend the work done by various researchers into ethical beliefs and values of managers in various countries. This study is designed to look at the ethical positions held by the managers based on Forsyth’s taxonomy of ethical ideologies. It presents the findings of the study, which was conducted between December 1999 and April 2000 on a sample of 175 managers from large scale manufacturing enterprises situated in the state of Punjab, in India. Punjab is situated in north India and constitutes 17 districts, covering approximately 50,362 square kilometers of area and has the highest per capita generation in country, which is 2.5 times the national average and having the lowest numbers of man-hours lost due to lockouts, strikes and disputes in the surrounding states (Udyog Sahayak, 1999). Figure 2 highlights the position of the state in the national economic scenario.
[See Figure 2 next page]
5
Figure 2—Punjab vis-à-vis India (http://punjabgovt.nic.in) Punjab’s Allaverage India average
Rank in the country
Per capita income (Rs) 19,500
6,929
First
Energy consumption 790 per capita (kWh)
283
First
Daily factory 17.5 employment per 1000 population
10.0
First
Per capita deposits (Rs)
bank 4,565
2,362
First
Per Capita Bank Credit 2,201 (Rs)
1,570
Second
TV Coverage (%) area
58.02
First
Rural Electrification 100 (per cent)
83.9
First
Registered vehicles for 10,000 people
motor 556 every
206
First
Employment in the 4.63 organised sector to total population(%)
3.84
First
Villages connected 98.8 with roads (per cent)
40.7
Second
99.00
The statistics indicate that Punjab is one of the most prosperous states in India. Steady economic and industrial growth and the lack of any empirical evidence on the ethical values held by the managers in the region, to the knowledge of the author made the state an interesting choice for the study. Methodology Sampling A list of large and medium scale manufacturing enterprises was obtained from the Directorate of Factories, Punjab, which listed 536 existing enterprises in year 1999. Since a separate list of large enterprises was not available, the large enterprises were identified with the help of the Office of Directorate of Factories. The large sector defined as organizations employing more than 500 employees at the time. The reason for selecting large-scale enterprises being that they are more open to scrutiny by the public and media and there are higher expectations from and pressure on these organizations to be good corporate citizens. Invitation for participation in the study was sent to the 35 large organizations identified earlier, of which 12 agreed to participate in the study. Forsyth’s Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ) (Appendix 1) was handed over to all managers in each of the selected organizations by the researcher (the next section explains the instrument). Managers defined as all those designated as managers in any division or 6
department in the formal hierarchy of the organization. Respondents’ anonymity was preserved but the questionnaire included an additional section, which sought demographic and organizational information (Appendix 2). For most studies a response rate of 50 per cent is adequate for analysis and reporting, a response rate of 60 per cent is good and 70 per cent or more is very good (Babbie, 1986). Of the 202 EPQs distributed 175 were returned, which is a response rate of 87 per cent. The Instrument The Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ) (Appendix 1) was developed by Forsyth to measure ethical ideologies and moral philosophies held by individuals. It comprises of a series of 20 attitude statements of which first ten form a subscale to measure idealism and the second ten measure relativism. Respondents are asked to indicate the degree of agreement or disagreement on each item on a 9 point Likert scale. The mean scores of their responses to idealism and relativism scales are taken to be their EPQ scores and that helps classify individuals as to ethical ideology. The higher the scores on the two subscales, the higher the levels of idealism and relativism. Respondents who have high scores on both scales would be situationists, those high on idealism scale but low on relativism would be absolutists, those low on idealism and high on relativism as subjectivists and those who are low on both idealism and relativism would be classified as exceptionists. The EPQ has demonstrated acceptable levels of internal consistency (Schlenker and Forsyth, 1977; Forsyth, 1980) and has been used in a variety of studies, such as Singhapakdi et al (1993), Barnett et al (1994), Rawwas, Patzer and Klassen (1995) and Bass, Barnett and Brown (1999). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for idealism scale was .683 and .825 for the relativism scale. Factor analysis further indicated that item 9 on the idealism scale did not load at all. Removing item 7 from the idealism scale increased alpha coefficient to .704 and if both item 7 and item 9 were removed from the idealism scale the alpha coefficient increased to .713. In view of the small difference in reliability, the scale was analysed in its original format. Profile of the sample group This section presents a profile of the sample group. It constituted 75.4 per cent Hindus, 20 per cent Sikhs, while ‘others’ were managers who did not report their religion. Table 1: Religion Religion Hindu Sikh Other Total
Frequency 132 35 8 175
Per cent 75.4 20.0 4.5 100.0
The highest proportion of the managers in the sample (44 per cent) were in the age group 36– 45 years, with 32 per cent in the age group 25–35 years and 21 per cent in the age group 46– 55 years. Only 2.9 per cent were above 55 years of age (Table 2).
7
Table 2: Age Age 25-35 years 36-45 years 46-55 years Above 55 years Total
Frequency 56 77 37 5 175
Per cent 32.0 44.0 21.1 2.9 100.0
Table 3 presents the educational profile of the sample group. About 90 per cent of the managers were university degree holders with professional qualifications like Master of Business Administration and Engineering and only 9.7 per cent were not university graduates. Table 3: Educational Profile Education Non graduates Graduates Postgraduate including PhD Engineers MBA Total Missing Total
Frequency 17 45 44
Per cent 9.7 25.7 25.1
55 13 174 1 175
31.4 7.4 99.4 .6 100.0
Table 4 indicates the positions held by the managers in the formal organizational hierarchy. The highest number belonged to middle management, which is 45 per cent, and the senior and lower managements having similar numbers. Table 4: Position in the Organisational Hierarchy Management Level Lower Middle Senior CEO Total Missing Total
Frequency
Per cent
40 79 42 13 174 1 175
22.9 45.1 24.0 7.4 99.4 .6 100.0
8
Analysis and Discussion Ethical Ideologies The SPSS (Statistical Program for Social Sciences) was used to calculate the idealism and relativism scores. In order to be able to classify the sample as situationists, subjectivists, absolutists and exceptionists, median scores for both idealism and relativism were calculated and four categories were created as done by Barnett et al (1994) and Forsyth and Nye (1990). High Idealism and High Relativism score = 46–90 Low Idealism and Low Relativism score = 0–45 The data indicated that managers are both highly idealistic and highly relativistic. There were 99.4 per cent managers with high idealism scores and 81.8 per cent who had high relativism scores. Only 20.6 per cent had low relativism scores. Table 5 presents the cross tabulation between religion and idealism and relativism. These figures also indicate that religious beliefs have not distinguished the moral philosophies espoused by the sample population. Table 5: Cross-tabulation between religion and idealism/relativism Religion Hindu Sikh Others Total
Idealism Low 1 0 0 1
.8% .6%
High 131 35 8 174
99.2% 100% 100% 99.4%
Relativism Low 24 18.2% 9 25.7% 3 37.5% 36 20.6%
High 108 26 5 139
81.8% 74.3% 62.5% 74.9%
Table 6 indicates the frequency of ethical positions held by the respondent managers according to Forsyth’s taxonomy. 78.9 per cent of the managers were found to be situationists, 20.5 per cent absolutists and only one manager was found to be a subjectivist. Table 6: Ethical Positions Ethical Position Situationist Subjectivist Absolutist Exceptionist Total
Frequency 138 1 36 0 175
Per cent 78.9 0.6 20.5 0 100.0
Further analysis within the high idealism category revealed 72.6 per cent managers had a very high score of idealism between 71 and 90. The incidence of high idealism amongst the managers is an interesting finding and possibly in contradiction with the widely held perception that India is by and large a corrupt country where unethical business practices are widespread. For example Chakraborty (1997) cites a number of studies, opinions and a range of articles to emphasise the need for academic engagement in business ethics in India, to create the foundation for the ultimate survival of human society through business.
9
The coexistence of incidence of high idealism amongst the managers and the apparently contradictory perception of widespread corruption and unethical business practices can be explained through the concept of ideal and real culture in sociology. In sociological thought, any society has two kinds of culture—the ideal culture and the real culture. Ideal culture reflects the highest virtues and standards of a society and real culture refers to actual behavior (Hess, Markson and Stein, 1992:49). When asked to describe our culture we are likely to give an answer based on ideals rather than actuality. Soares (1981) in his study found a strong need among Indian managers to look and to paint an acceptable image of themselves. Nederhof (1985) explains this as an issue of social desirability, which is the tendency of respondents to deny socially undesirable traits and to claim socially desirable ones. Ideals are not always easily realized in everyday life and there is often a gap between what ought to be and what is. The real culture often includes justifications for actions that fall short of our highest goals which in this case may include situational factors and differences in individual perceptions, as explained by Hunt and Vitell (1986), or the power of immediate pressures over ideal expectations explained by Hess et al (1992). This is not to say that it is impossible to maintain ideal standards of behaviour consistently. Some people may be able to do this. Using Forsyth’s typology, the absolutists (20.5 per cent of our sample) are more likely to do so. Keeping in mind that this study does not include the behavioural aspect of application of the moral philosophies, there could be a discrepancy between ideal moral standards and the actual behaviour, because of situational factors. This explanation seems to fit with Forsyth’s typology of ethical ideologies. There were 81.8 per cent of the managers who had high relativism scores (Table 5), and 78.9 per cent who were found to be situationists (Table 6). Acording to Forsyth (1992: 462), situationists eschew universal moral principles (high relativism) but still insist that one should produce positive consequences that benefit all involved (high idealism). This is in line with the idealistic skepticism of Fletcher’s situation ethics, which means that morality should focus on ‘contextual appropriateness’ (1973: 186). This indicated that the majority of the sample of managers rely less on universal moral rules and more on individualistic analysis of each situation while making moral judgments. Cultural anthropologists like Barrett (1984) state that we have multiple selves and that we behave differently depending on the situation we confront. Trevino and Nelson (1999) also emphasize the role played by situational factors in an organizational context. They state that although internal factors like individual moral development are important, ethical conduct depends, to a large extent on external factors such as the expectations of the authority figures, one’s position in the organizational hierarchy, what the colleagues are doing, the reward system and the roles that an individual is asked to play. The significance of the situational factors or contextual factors in ethical decision making and ethical behaviour imply that ethical behaviour is not necessarily the outcome of individual goodness, of moral beliefs and values one espouses. In the context of work organizations, though one may have a clear idea about what decision should be made and what action should be taken in an ideal situation, the organizational constraints and role of the individual may cause one to act differently and possibly below one’s moral standards. This once again fits into Forsyth’s typology of situationism, which emphasizes on individualistic analysis of each act in each situation. Forsyth’s (1992) suggestion that situational factors may moderate the relationship between ethical ideology and moral behaviour got empirical support in Barnett et al’s (1994:477) study which found that situational factors may at times strengthen or weaken the relationship between personal ethical ideology and behavioural intentions and ethical behaviour within organizations. The lack of empirical research in the area of business ethics in India implies a possible difference between the perceived and real situation. Chakraborty (1997:1537) states,
10
‘Research and consultancy by academia in the field of business ethics has not yet occurred. Even if some signs of research being undertaken are available now and then, no publication arising from such work has come to our notice except Monappa’s book mentioned earlier, and this was long ago.’ Though this paper cites a number of studies conducted on managers in India like, England (1975), Cyriac and Dharamraj (1994), Singhapakdi, Vitell and Leelakulthanit (1994), Chockalingam and Deshpande (1998), Chatterjee and Pearson (2000), it is not possible to draw clear conclusions. This situation asks for more empirical research in the area. On the non-relativist side of the taxonomy, only 20.5 per cent managers were found to be absolutists. This ideology purports the idea that by following universal moral rules best possible outcomes of any action can be achieved. Forsyth (1980:177) believes that although no ethical ideology adopted by an individual may posses all the characteristics of a purely deontological approach, the emphasis on maintaining consistency with the moral principles is similar to deontological philosophy. These managers are more likely to rely on universal moral principles and rules when making moral judgments. The results also indicated a positive correlation between idealism and education. Which means that higher the education, higher the incidence of idealism. The managers with more education are more idealistic as compared with managers who have lower level of education. Table 7: Correlation between education and idealism Idealism
Idealism 1.000
Education .503**
Pearson Correlation Education Pearson .503** Correlation **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level
1.000
This finding is consistent with the findings of Chockalingam and Deshpande (1998:29) who surveyed middle level managers in organisations located in South India. Greenberg’s (1990) study of employee theft found that justice perceptions are more salient for educated workers than for semi-skilled workers. Studies by Jones and Gautschi (1988), Browning and Zabriskie (1983), Lane, Shaupp and Parsons (1988) also indicated a positive relationship between the level of education and perceived ethicality. This correlation can be explained through the association of education with cognitive thinking as suggested by Chockalingam and Deshpande (1998:26) that increasing educational level is likely to be associated with cognitive processing. Rest and Thoma (1985) had also found education to be a determinant of moral reasoning. However, no significant correlation was found between relativism and the level of education. This paper has presented the espoused ethical ideologies of managers of large manufacturing enterprises in the state of Punjab, India. However, the results are to be viewed with caution. It should be kept in mind that personal moral philosophy does not necessarily lead to moral behaviour in accordance. Though Forsyth (1978) has presented evidence of the influence of ethical ideologies adopted by people on their moral judgments, another study by Forsyth and Berger indicated that ethical ideology does not predict ethical behaviour (Forsyth, 1980:182). It would have been desirable to study actual behaviour in relation with the espoused values of the managers to fill in this gap, but given the time and resources it was not possible to do it.
11
The sample is restricted to large manufacturing enterprises only. The literature review and findings of the study point towards need for empirical research in the area as rightly indicated by Chakraborty (1997).¹ ¹ One point in particular to note is that there appears to be a problem with the idealism sub-scale in the EPQ in relation with this project, which may have implications for future research. The value of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the idealism scale was low as compared to the values reported in other studies. For example in the study conducted by Rawwas and Patzer (1995) on sample from Hong Kong the alpha coefficient for idealism was .83 and for the sample from Northern Ireland it was .85. Barnett et al’s (1994) study of the American population had the alpha coefficient for idealism valued at .82. Factor analysis revealed that item 9, which is, “It is never necessary to sacrifice the welfare of others”, did not load at all on the idealism scale. It was also found that removing item 7, which is, “Deciding whether or not to perform an act by balancing the positive consequences of the act against the negative consequences of the act is immoral”, from the idealism scale increased the value for the alpha coefficient to .70. Further research is suggested to explore the reliability of the idealism subscale in the EPQ, if applied to Indian population in its present form.
Acknowledgements I am very grateful to Associate Professor Chris Provis and Dr Howard Harris of University of South Australia for their encouragement, their valuable comments on this manuscript and for providing financial assistance to conduct the survey from Group for Research on Employment and Workplace Change (GREWC) and Australian Centre for Automotive Management (ACAM). I also wish to thank Dr Zeljka Sporer for her critical comments and her help in data analysis.
References Babbie, E. 1986 The Practice of Social Research. Belmont : Wadsworth Publishing Company Barnett, T., Bass, K. and Brown, G. 1994 ‘Ethical Ideology and Ethical Judgment Regarding Ethical Issues in Business’, Journal of Business Ethics 13, 469–480 Barrett, R.A. 1984 Culture and Conduct: An excursion in anthropology. Belmont CA: Wadsworth Bass, K., Barnett, T. and Brown, G. 1999 ‘Individual Difference Variables, Ethical Judgments and Ethical Behaviour Intentions’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 9 (2), 183-205 Browning, J. and Zabriskie, N.B. 1983 ‘How ethical are industrial buyers?’ Industrial Marketing Management, 12, 219–224 Chakraborty, S.K. 1997 ‘Business Ethics in India’, Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1529-1538 Chatterjee, S.R. and Pearson, C.A.L. 2000 ‘Work goals and societal value orientations of senior Indian managers: An empirical analysis’, Journal of Management Development, 19(7), 643–653 Chockalingam, V. and Deshpande, S.P. 1998 ‘Do demographic Correlates of Ethical Perceptions Generalise to Non-American Samples: A Study of Managers in India’, Cross Cultural Management, 5 (1), 23–33 Cyriac, K. and Dharamraj, R. 1994 ‘Machiavellianism in Indian Management’, Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 281–286 England, G.W. 1975 The Manager and his Values: An International Perspective. USA: Ballinger Publishing Company Fletcher, J. 1966 Situation Ethics. Philadelphia : Westminster Press Fletcher, J. 1973 ‘Situation Versus Systems’. In P.E.Davis (Ed) Introduction to Moral Philosophy. Ohio: Merrill Ford, C.R. and Richardson, W.R. 1994 ‘Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature,’ Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 205–221 Forsyth, D.R. 1980 ‘A Taxonomy of Ethical Ideologies’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(1), 175–184 12
Forsyth, D.R. 1992 ‘Judging the Morality of Business Practices: The Influence of Personal Moral Philosophies’, Journal of Business Ethics, 11, May, 461–470 Forsyth, D.R. and Nye, J.L. 1990 ‘Personal Moral Philosophies and Moral Choice’, Journal of Research in Personality 24, 398–414 Fraedrich, J.P. and Farrell, O.C 1992 ‘The impact of perceived risk and moral philosophy type on ethical decision making in business organizations.’ Journal of Business Research, 24, 283–295 Fritzsche, D.J. and Becker, H. 1984 ‘Linking management behaviour to management philosophy- An empirical investigation’. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 166– 175 Greenberg, J. 1990 ‘Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561–568 Hartman, L.P. 1998 Perspectives in Business Ethics. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Hess, B.B., Markson, E.W. and Stein, J.P. 1992 Sociology- Brief Edition. USA: Macmillan Hosmer, L.T. 1991 The Ethics of Management. NSW: Irwin Publishers Hosmer, L.T. 2000 ‘Empirical Research in Business Ethics’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 10 (1), Jan, 233–242 Hunt, S.D. and Vitell, S.J. 1986 ‘A General Theory of Marketing Ethics’, Journal of Macro Marketing, 6(1), Spring, 5–16 Jackson, J. 1996 An Introduction to Business Ethics UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd Jones, T.M. and Gautschi, F.H. 1988 ‘Will Ethics of Business Change? A survey of future executives’, Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 231–248 Kolnai, A. 1977 Ethics, Value and Reality. London: Athlone Press, University of London Lane, M.S., Schaupp, D. and Parsons, B. 1988 ‘Pygmalion effect: An issue for business education and ethics’, Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 223–229 Malhotra,A. 1985 ‘Value Erosion among Indian Managers’, Business India, Jan, 14–27 Midgley, M. 1991 The Origin of Ethics. In A Companion to Ethics, Edited by P. Singer, Chapter 1, Oxford : Basil Blackwell Monappa, A. 1977 Ethical Attitudes of Indian Managers. New Delhi: All India Management Association Nederhof, A.J. 1985 ‘Methods of Coping with Social Desirability Bias: A Review’, European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 263–80 Randall, D.M. and Gibson, A.M. 1990 ‘Methodology in Business Ethics Research: A Review and Critical Assessment’, Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 457–471 Rawwas, M.Y.A. and Patzer, G.L. 1995 ‘Consumer ethics in cross-cultural settingsEntrepreneurial implications’, European Journal of Marketing, 29 (7), 62–78 Rest, J.R. and Thoma, S. 1985 ‘Relation of moral judgment development to formal education’, Developmental Psychology, 21, 709–714 Rokeach, M. 1973 The Nature of Human Values. New York: The Free Press Schlenker, B.R. and Forsyth, D.R. 1977 ‘On Ethics of Psychological Research’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 369–396 Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S.J. 1994 ‘A Cross-cultural Study of Moral Philosophies, Ethical Perceptions and Judgments- A comparison of American and Thai Marketers’, International Marketing Review, 11(6), 65–78 Soares, F. 1981 ‘Values of Indian Managers, the Basis of Progress’, Indian Management, October, 32–38 Trevino, L.K. 1986 ‘Ethical decision making in organizations: A person situation interactionist model,’ Academy of Management Review, 11, 601–617 Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A. 1999 Managing Business Ethics- Straight Talk About How To Do It Right. USA: John Wiley & Sons
13
Udyog Sahayak 1999 Large and Medium Scale Industries in Punjab. Directorate of Factories, Government of Punjab Udyog Sahayak 1999 Punjab at a Glance. Directorate of Factories, Government of Punjab Werhane, P.H. 1998 ‘Moral Imagination and the Search for Ethical Decision Making in Management’, Business Ethics Quarterly Ruffin Series, 1, 75–98 Williams, R.M. 1968 Values. In, E. Sills (ed), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan
14
Appendix 1 The Ethics Position Questionnaire Instructions: You will find a series of general statements listed below. Each represents a commonly held opinion and there are no right or wrong answers. You will probably disagree with some items and agree with others. We are interested in the extent to which you agree or disagree with such matters of opinion. Please read each statement carefully. Then indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree by placing in front of the statement the number corresponding to your feelings, where: 1= completely disagree 2= largely disagree 3= moderately disagree 4= slightly disagree 5= neither agree nor disagree
6= slightly agree 7= moderately agree 8= largely agree 9= completely agree
1. A person should make certain that their actions never intentionally harm another even to a small degree 2. Risks to another should never be tolerated, irrespective of how small the risks might be 3. The existence of potential harm to others is always wrong, irrespective of the benefits to be gained 4. One should never psychologically or physically harm another person 5. One should not perform an action which might in any way threaten the dignity and welfare of another individual 6. If an action could harm an innocent other, then it should not be done 7. Deciding whether or not to perform an act by balancing the positive consequences of the act against the negative consequences of the act is immoral 8. The dignity and welfare of people should be the most important concern in any society 9. It is never necessary to sacrifice the welfare of others 10. Moral actions are those which closely match ideals of the most perfect action 11. There are no ethical principles that are so important that they should be a part of any code of ethics 12. What is ethical varies from one situation and society to another 13. Moral standards should be seen as being individualistic; what one person considers to be moral may be judged to be immoral by another person 14. Different types of morality cannot be compared as to “rightness” 15. Questions of what is ethical for everyone can never be resolved since what is moral or immoral is up to the individual 16. Moral standards are simply personal rules which indicate how a person should behave and are not to be applied in making judgments of others 17. Ethical considerations in interpersonal relations are so complex that individuals should be allowed to formulate their own individual roles 18. Rigidly codifying an ethical position that prevents certain types of actions could stand in the way of better human relations and adjustment 19. No rule concerning lying can be formulated; whether a lie is permissible or not permissible totally depends upon the situation 20. Whether a lie is judged to be moral or immoral depends upon the circumstances surrounding the action.
15
Appendix 2 1. 2. 3. 4.
Name of the Organisation Age Gender Designation – Lower management, middle management, senior management or CEO 5. Educational/ Professional Qualifications 6. Religion
16
